Single Inductor Multiple Output Auto-Buck-Boost DC–DC Converter with Error-Driven Randomized Control

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

It is a very interesting article, but the author tries to provide too much information. Therefore, the article is difficult to understand. I suggest the authors remove redundant information and focusing only on the essence of the article. Chapter 2, for example, is too extensive and detailed. The information in this chapter should be provided in the form of brief information in the introduction. Figures and tables are mix up, making it difficult to analyze the topic (fig. 7, tab, 1, fig. 8) and (fig. 10, fig. 12). Figure 14 is to small and illegible. The description for Figures 1 and 2 are poorly presented, no clear explanation.

Author Response

Dear Anonymous reviewer;

We appreciate your valuable advises and comments on this paper. We revised the submitted paper in accordance with your comments to make it as clear as possible.  The attached file contains  your comments and our corresponding answers. 

Shiho Kim

Corresponding authors

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

 

 

I suggest to the authors to put all the figures from Figure 14, from practical experiment a little big bigger to be more visible the respond of the system.

Also, will be nice to see also the level for measurements from Figure 14, because like how it is now it is not possible to read the value of the voltages.

Another recommendation is to use at the references more actual article( after 2018).

Rows 142, 145: the authors put an unnecessary point after Figure

In some cases the authors are using in the text for defining the components  or voltage or current the initial letter written with italic and some places are written normal, see  a example at row 316.

Author Response

Dear Anonymous reviewer;

We appreciate your valuable advises and comments on this paper. We revised the submitted paper in accordance with your comments to make it as clear as possible. The attached file contains your comments and our corresponding answers.

Shiho Kim

The Corresponding author

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

The paper presents the “Single Inductor Multiple Output Auto-Buck-Boost DC-DC Converter with Error-Driven Randomized Control”. The topic is interesting and aligned with the MDPI Electronics. As a contribution to improve the paper, I would like to recommend the following points.

1. The figures must be presented in-line with the text and not side-by-side.
2. Why several outputs? What is the application of this topology? What is the advantages compared with the state-of-the-art?
3. The topology is not new. It is a boost in “series” with a buck. Therefore, results in a buck-boost. Compared with the traditional “buck-boost” it has much more controlled devices. What is the advantage of using this structure?
4. As presented, it seems that the topology can operate in bidirectional mode, but this analysis is not performed in the paper. Why represented for bidirectional mode, but it is not explored in the paper?
5. In figure 13 is not clear where is the ground. Please, clarify it.
6. In this figure reduce the size of “V/div” and use the symbol of “micro” instead od “u”.
7. The quality of the results presented in figure 14 must be improved.
8. Figure 14 shows results during the operation in transient-state. These results are very interesting and should be presented in more detail, for instance, to visualize the voltage ripple for each situation.
9. How the efficiency was measure? It was used any specific equipment?
10. A photography of the developed hardware must be added and must be describe in detail since it is very relevant to try to justify some of the sentences presented.

 

Author Response

Dear Anonymous reviewer;

We appreciate your valuable advises and comments on this paper. We revised the submitted paper in accordance with your comments to make it as clear as possible. The attached file contains your comments and our corresponding answers.

Shiho Kim

The Corresponding author

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

I do not have any comments