Hybrid optimal-FOPID based UPQC for reducing harmonics and compensate load power in renewable energy sources grid connected system

T. Anuradha Devi; G. Srinivasa Rao; T. Anil Kumar; B. Srikanth Goud; Ch. Rami Reddy; Mbadjoun Wapet Daniel Eutyche; Flah Aymen; Claude Ziad El-Bayedh; Habib Kraiem; Vojtech Blazek

doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0300145

Peer Review History

Original SubmissionDecember 25, 2023
16 Jan 2024 Decision Letter - Dhanamjayulu C, Editor PONE-D-23-43516Hybrid optimal-FOPID Based UPQC for Lessening Harmonics and Compensate Load Power in Grid Associated Renewable Energy SourcesPLOS ONE Dear Dr. Ch Rami Reddy, Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process. ============================== ACADEMIC EDITOR: The reviewers recommend reconsideration the manuscript with revision and modification. I invite the authors to resubmit the manuscript after addressing the comments raised by the reviewers. ============================== Please submit your revised manuscript by Mar 01 2024 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file. Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript: A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'. A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'. An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'. If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter. If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols. Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option for publishing peer-reviewed Lab Protocol articles, which describe protocols hosted on protocols.io. Read more information on sharing protocols at https://plos.org/protocols?utm_medium=editorial-email&utm_source=authorletters&utm_campaign=protocols. We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript. Kind regards, Dhanamjayulu C, Ph.D & Post.Doc Academic Editor PLOS ONE Journal Requirements: When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements. 1. Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The PLOS ONE style templates can be found at https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=wjVg/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=ba62/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf. 2. Please note that PLOS ONE has specific guidelines on code sharing for submissions in which author-generated code underpins the findings in the manuscript. In these cases, all author-generated code must be made available without restrictions upon publication of the work. Please review our guidelines at https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/materials-and-software-sharing#loc-sharing-code and ensure that your code is shared in a way that follows best practice and facilitates reproducibility and reuse. 3. When completing the data availability statement of the submission form, you indicated that you will make your data available on acceptance. We strongly recommend all authors decide on a data sharing plan before acceptance, as the process can be lengthy and hold up publication timelines. Please note that, though access restrictions are acceptable now, your entire data will need to be made freely accessible if your manuscript is accepted for publication. This policy applies to all data except where public deposition would breach compliance with the protocol approved by your research ethics board. If you are unable to adhere to our open data policy, please kindly revise your statement to explain your reasoning and we will seek the editor's input on an exemption. Please be assured that, once you have provided your new statement, the assessment of your exemption will not hold up the peer review process. 4. Please provide a complete Data Availability Statement in the submission form, ensuring you include all necessary access information or a reason for why you are unable to make your data freely accessible. If your research concerns only data provided within your submission, please write "All data are in the manuscript and/or supporting information files" as your Data Availability Statement. Additional Editor Comments (if provided): The reviewers recommend reconsideration the manuscript with revision and modification. I invite the authors to resubmit the manuscript after addressing the comments raised by the reviewers. [Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.] Reviewers' comments: Reviewer's Responses to Questions Comments to the Author 1. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions? The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented. Reviewer #1: Yes Reviewer #2: Yes Reviewer #3: Yes Reviewer #4: Yes ******** 2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously? Reviewer #1: Yes Reviewer #2: No Reviewer #3: Yes Reviewer #4: Yes ****** 3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available? The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified. Reviewer #1: Yes Reviewer #2: Yes Reviewer #3: Yes Reviewer #4: Yes ****** 4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English? PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here. Reviewer #1: Yes Reviewer #2: Yes Reviewer #3: Yes Reviewer #4: Yes ****** 5. Review Comments to the Author Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters) Reviewer #1: 1. The authors contribution of the paper must be present in bullet points and must be emphasized after introduction section 2.Included literature survey but represent it in a tabular form which looks interesting for the readers clearly 3.Provide the proposed controller parameters in a tabular form 4. The paper covers an interesting field of research. Explain what is the novelty according to already published works 5. Provide the test system simulated parameters in a table 6. What is the Role of FOPID controller how is it advanced than the traditional controller 7.Add a list of abbreviations at the end of the paper 8. Cite some latest papers in the research area of the work carried out Reviewer #2: The authors present very interesting topic of the research about FOPID based UPQC for Power Quality improvement however few comments are suggest for the overall improvement of the work carried out 1. Abstract must be very concise and limited to the novelty. Mention the proposed optimization technique 2. Check for Fig.1 some of the parameters are missing in the block diagram 3. Flow chart of the proposed system can be improved with a better Quality 4. Include the structure of FOPID controller after the text and also provide the gains of the proposed controllers in a table 5. cite all the mathematical equations in the text 6. Proof reading is required 7. The following works will help the authors:10.1109/ACCESS.2023.3317980, https://doi.org/10.3390/su151813716, https://doi.org/10.3390/s23167146, https://doi.org/10.3390/axioms12050420, https://doi.org/10.3390/su15065209, https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/4242996 8. Title can little bit modified as word lessening can be avoided and reframed with the other. Reviewer #3: Very good work and flow of the paper was excellent. A small suggestion, include comparision tables after the graph of every cases will helpful which method is best. Some of the figures are not clear , e.g.fig.46, fig,47 Some of the figures and references not indexed inside the text. Reviewer #4: the idea is good written but it needs further improvements like: 1. The contribution is not illustrated in an introduction. Make it in points. 2. Implementation of optimization techniques utilized is not validated. Explain in detail how to implement your model with optimization. 3. Make a deeply comparative analysis between different controllers and different optimization techniques in terms of objective function, control parameters, and computation times. 4. Articles may be used in literature like: 10.1109/ACCESS.2023.3317980 10.3390/axioms12050420 10.3390/su15065209 10.3390/su15043710 ****** 6. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files. If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public. Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy. Reviewer #1: No Reviewer #2: No Reviewer #3: Yes: Dr.K.Srinivasan Reviewer #4: No ******** [NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.] While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step. Attachments Attachment Submitted filename: LOR.docx Attachment Submitted filename: Recommendation.docx https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0300145.r001
Revision 1
17 Feb 2024 Author Response Reviewer 1 The authors contribution of the paper must be present in bullet points and must be emphasized after introduction section Response: We thank the reviewer for the comment we have presented the key points of the proposed system after the introduction section in the updated manuscript. We are adding the same here for your reference. A novel hybrid optimization-based FOPID controller was developed to improve PQ in integrated microgrid systems in order to mitigate these problems. That is both the Coati Optimization Algorithm (COA) and Osprey Optimization Algorithm (OOA) are combined to make a hybrid optimization CO-OA algorithm. Hybrid optimization reduces the time of the decision-making process and allows to focus their time on the analyses. Designed to increase PQ in a hybrid RES-grid connected non-linear distribution system. A hybrid RES based Grid with a load model was designed as per specific ranges, in between load and hybrid RES an UPQC is linked for PQ management. The pulse generation of UPQC compensator's switches is done through the use of the FOPID controller, which compares the actual value and reference value to generate the pulse signal of the switches. FOPID controller's parameters are tuned by using an innovative hybrid optimization algorithm. A low error function is used to choose the best optimal values. The proposed mitigation performance is analysed under sag, harmonics, interruption, and swell conditions. Moreover, the outcomes are compared to some other existing models to confirm the efficacy of the proposed model 2.Included literature survey but represent it in a tabular form which looks interesting for the readers clearly Response: We thank the reviewer for the valuable suggestion made. We have updated the literature survey and also represented in the tabular form. 3.Provide the proposed controller parameters in a tabular form Response: We have updated the controller parameters as per the suggestion made. For a quiz glance we have added the table for your reference. Table. Controller parameters I mean gains Parameter Ranges µ 0.0455 KD 0.0427 KI 2.9161 KP 0.0284 λ 0.0313 4. The paper covers an interesting field of research. Explain what is the novelty according to already published works Response: In the proposed methodology, the HRES system is utilized to provide essential power to meet load demand in load side. The first contribution provides the information about system design so only, I mentioned in contribution part. And, the UPQC device is used to compensate power quality issues in the system. Similarly, the second contribution is the objective of proposed method which used for mitigating power quality issues. The integration of RES in UPQC dc link capacitor is increase in the system which solved by applying control techniques of series and shunt active power filter. The control techniques were adjusting the series and shunt units to manage the dc link capacitor of UPQC. The unstable condition of UPQC may produce the stability issues because of this scenario condition, the UPQC dc link capacitor also maintain through the series and shunt active power filter control strategy. The novelty of the work is designing a UPQC-PQ and PQ theory controller to enhance the PQ issues in the system. To enhance the PQ theory controller, FOPID controller with hybrid optimization technique is initialized which provides the best control parameters. Based on controller parameters, the stable operation and PQ issues are mitigated in the system 5. Provide the test system simulated parameters in a table Response: We have updated test system parameters as per the suggestion made. For a quiz glance we have added the table for your reference. Parameter Specification DC link voltage 700-800V Linear load 4kw Non-linear load 6kw Battery 4 kW PV 214 W/panel [I = 5.9A, V = 60V] Irradiance 1000w/m^2 Temperature 〖25〗^0 Grid 4.375 kW [I = 35A, V = 125V] 6. What is the Role of FOPID controller how is it advanced than the traditional controller Response: Following steps are required during the design of the controller: 1. KP is regulated for minimizing steady-state error and rise time 2. Kd is regulated for minimizing the settling time and overshoot 3. Ki is regulated for eliminating the steady-state error. 4. μ,λ are fractional order parameters 7. Add a list of abbreviations at the end of the paper Response: We thank the reviewer suggestion. We have abbreviated the terms at the first usage in the text instead as the keeping separately. 8. Cite some latest papers in the research area of the work carried out Response: As per the comment made we have updated latest research papers in the updated manuscripts Ganesan, S., David, P. W., Balachandran, P. K., & Colak, I. (2024). Power enhancement in PV arrays under partial shaded conditions with different array configuration. Heliyon. Srilakshmi, K., Rao, G. S., Swarnasri, K., Inkollu, S. R., Kondreddi, K., Balachandran, P. K., & Colak, I. (2024). Optimization of ANFIS controller for solar/battery sources fed UPQC using an hybrid algorithm. Electrical Engineering, 1-28. Reviewer 2 The authors present very interesting topic of the research about FOPID based UPQC for Power Quality improvement however few comments are suggest for the overall improvement of the work carried out 1. Abstract must be very concise and limited to the novelty. Mention the proposed optimization technique Response: We thank the reviewer for the valuable suggestion made. We have rewritten the abstract and also included the optimization technique used to tune the FOPID controller designed for mitigating the Power quality issues. 2. Check for Fig.1 some of the parameters are missing in the block diagram Response: As per the reviewer suggestion we have modified the block diagram of the proposed system in the updated manuscript 3. Flow chart of the proposed system can be improved with a better Quality Response: We have replaced the flow chart with a better Quality 4. Include the structure of FOPID controller after the text and also provide the gains of the proposed controllers in a table Response: As per the suggestion made we have included the FOPID controller diagram as well as controller gains in Table. 5. cite all the mathematical equations in the text Response: We thank the reviewer for the suggestion. We have cited all the mathematical equations in the updated manuscript 6. Proof reading is required We thank the reviewer for the suggestion. We have done the proof read and also verified grammar with an English expert 7. The following works will help the authors:10.1109/ACCESS.2023.3317980, https://doi.org/10.3390/su151813716, https://doi.org/10.3390/s23167146, https://doi.org/10.3390/axioms12050420, https://doi.org/10.3390/su15065209, https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/4242996 Response: we have included the following manuscript which helped authors to update the manuscript with latest papers 8. Title can little bit modified as word lessening can be avoided and reframed with the other. Response: Title has been modified in the updated manuscript Reviewer 3 Very good work and flow of the paper was excellent. A small suggestion, include comparison tables after the graph of every cases will helpful which method is best. Response: We have included the comparative values in the tabular form in terms of THD and Power factors. The other results values are presented in the text because tabular forms increases in the manuscript. Some of the figures are not clear , e.g.fig.46, fig,47 Some of the figures and references not indexed inside the text. Response: We thank the reviewer for the suggestion made. We have updated the manuscript with good quality figures and also cited in the updated manuscript Reviewer 4 The idea is good written but it needs further improvements like: 1. The contribution is not illustrated in an introduction. Make it in points. Response: We thank the reviewer for the suggestion made. We have now included the contribution of the work in bullet point after the introduction section as below � A novel hybrid optimization-based FOPID controller was developed to improve PQ in integrated microgrid systems in order to mitigate these problems. That is both the Coati Optimization Algorithm (COA) and Osprey Optimization Algorithm (OOA) are combined to make a hybrid optimization CO-OA algorithm. Hybrid optimization reduces the time of the decision-making process and allows to focus their time on the analyses. � Designed to increase PQ in a hybrid RES-grid connected non-linear distribution system. A hybrid RES based Grid with a load model was designed as per specific ranges, in between load and hybrid RES an UPQC is linked for PQ management. � The pulse generation of UPQC compensator's switches is done through the use of the FOPID controller, which compares the actual value and reference value to generate the pulse signal of the switches. FOPID controller's parameters are tuned by using an innovative hybrid optimization algorithm. � A low error function is used to choose the best optimal values. The proposed mitigation performance is analyzed under sag, harmonics, interruption, and swell conditions. Moreover, the outcomes are compared to some other existing models to confirm the efficacy of the proposed model. 2. Implementation of optimization techniques utilized is not validated. Explain in detail how to implement your model with optimization. Response: We thank the reviewer for the following comment. We have validated the Controller gains/parameter in the Table. Hybrid optimization parameters Parameter Ranges Iteration 100 Dimension 5 T 0.01 Search agent 30 Table. 1 Controller parameters I mean gains Parameter Ranges µ 0.0455 KD 0.0427 KI 2.9161 KP 0.0284 λ 0.0313 3. Make a deeply comparative analysis between different controllers and different optimization techniques in terms of objective function, control parameters, and computation times. Response: We thank the reviewer for the suggestion made. The following figures clearly shows the comparison of convergence in proposed and existing algorithms like the Aquila Optimization Algorithm (AOA), Pelican Optimization Algorithm (POA), African Vulture Optimization (AVO) and Ant Lion Optimization (ALO) Algorithm. If the relevant sequence converges for specified initial approximations, an iterative process is said to be convergent. Figure 46: Analysis of convergence comparison In the proposed hybrid algorithm, the 18th iteration to overcome the error is 130. In existing methods, AOA attains the 10th error state in the 7th iteration, POA attains the 40th error state in the 5th iteration, AVO attains the 35th error state in the 10th iteration and ALO attains the 9th error in the 15th iteration. Compared to existing methods, the proposed method effectively performs. 4. Articles may be used in literature like: 10.1109/ACCESS.2023.3317980 10.3390/axioms12050420 10.3390/su15065209 10.3390/su15043710 Response: we thank the reviewer for sharing the recent papers in the same area of the manuscript which added more inputs in revising the manuscript Attachments Attachment Submitted filename: Reviewer 4.docx https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0300145.r002
23 Feb 2024 Decision Letter - Dhanamjayulu C, Editor Hybrid Optimal-FOPID Based UPQC for Reducing Harmonics and Compensate Load Power in Renewable Energy Sources Grid connected System PONE-D-23-43516R1 Dear Dr. Ch Rami Reddy, We’re pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been judged scientifically suitable for publication and will be formally accepted for publication once it meets all outstanding technical requirements. Within one week, you’ll receive an e-mail detailing the required amendments. When these have been addressed, you’ll receive a formal acceptance letter and your manuscript will be scheduled for publication. An invoice for payment will follow shortly after the formal acceptance. To ensure an efficient process, please log into Editorial Manager at http://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/, click the 'Update My Information' link at the top of the page, and double check that your user information is up-to-date. If you have any billing related questions, please contact our Author Billing department directly at authorbilling@plos.org. If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper to help maximize its impact. If they’ll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team as soon as possible -- no later than 48 hours after receiving the formal acceptance. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org. Kind regards, Dhanamjayulu C, Ph.D & Post.Doc Academic Editor PLOS ONE Additional Editor Comments (optional): The authors have revised the properly for reviewers concerns Reviewers' comments: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0300145.r003
Formally Accepted
12 Mar 2024 Acceptance Letter - Dhanamjayulu C, Editor PONE-D-23-43516R1 PLOS ONE Dear Dr. Rami Reddy, I'm pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been deemed suitable for publication in PLOS ONE. Congratulations! Your manuscript is now being handed over to our production team. At this stage, our production department will prepare your paper for publication. This includes ensuring the following: * All references, tables, and figures are properly cited * All relevant supporting information is included in the manuscript submission, * There are no issues that prevent the paper from being properly typeset If revisions are needed, the production department will contact you directly to resolve them. If no revisions are needed, you will receive an email when the publication date has been set. At this time, we do not offer pre-publication proofs to authors during production of the accepted work. Please keep in mind that we are working through a large volume of accepted articles, so please give us a few weeks to review your paper and let you know the next and final steps. Lastly, if your institution or institutions have a press office, please let them know about your upcoming paper now to help maximize its impact. If they'll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team within the next 48 hours. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org. If we can help with anything else, please email us at customercare@plos.org. Thank you for submitting your work to PLOS ONE and supporting open access. Kind regards, PLOS ONE Editorial Office Staff on behalf of Dr. Dhanamjayulu C Academic Editor PLOS ONE https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0300145.r004

Open letter on the publication of peer review reports

PLOS recognizes the benefits of transparency in the peer review process. Therefore, we enable the publication of all of the content of peer review and author responses alongside final, published articles. Reviewers remain anonymous, unless they choose to reveal their names.

We encourage other journals to join us in this initiative. We hope that our action inspires the community, including researchers, research funders, and research institutions, to recognize the benefits of published peer review reports for all parts of the research system.

Learn more at ASAPbio .