Power Consumption Influence Test of Castor Disc-Cutting Device
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
There are some mistakes in the manuscript.
The study lack of innovation, there are some studies about the power consumption during the harvesting process,such as the rice stalk, cotton stalk and so on. The study only analyzed castor stalk cutting process,but the mechanism of energy consumption is not clearly analyzed.
There are some mistakes in the manuscript.
1 How to change the and edge angle, there is no information.
2 The main purpose of the study is not clear.
3There are many English mistakes, such as p1 line20 as 1.20375 J.
4 P2 line 26”Castor oil, as an important chemical and strategic raw material material ”
5 p2 line 33”At present, there is no mature castor harvest equipment in the domestic market”, what is the meaning of domestic market.
6 Please check the EQ(11)
7 Fig4 is not clear, please revise it.
please revise the manuscript ,then resubmit it.
Author Response
On behalf of my co-authors, we thank you very much for giving us an opportunity to revise our manuscript; we appreciate editor and reviewers very much for their positive and constructive comments and suggestions on our manuscript. We have studied reviewer’s comments carefully and have made revision which marked in the paper. There are few studies about the power consumption during the harvesting process of castor. We carry out research according to actual situation of castor harvesting to provide a reference for the research of castor harvesting machinery. Please see the attachment for the main corrections and the responds to the reviewer’s comments.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
The manuscript titled “Power consumption influence test of castor disc-cutting device” concerns the cutting process of castor and determined the structural parameters of the key component of castor disc-cutting device.
The ideas in the manuscript are very interesting, and the research results obtained have some potential applications in the field of material machining. This manuscript is well structured and well written, which is easy to follow. The figures and tables are neat and easy to understand. The methodology is thoroughly explained and the work overall seems to be skillfully performed. I believe this work provides valuable information for those with interests in materials processing and machine manufacturing.
Generally, I think this manuscript can be accepted for publication after minor revision.
It is recommended to take notice the following:
(1) The expression of section "material" is unclear. It is suggested to supplement the characteristics of test materials, such as average stalk height, to eliminate the influence of individual differences on test results and ensure the repeatability of the test.
(2) Missing section "Discussion" before conclusion, which can further extend the study into a comparative analysis with the past study, pros and cons of suggested designed device.
(3) Angleβ wasn’t masked in Figure 1 and explained in the equation (1).
(4) Pay attention to the unification of specific nouns in the equation, For example, the Fe in equation (1) and equation (3)
Author Response
On behalf of my co-authors, we thank you very much for giving us an opportunity to revise our manuscript; we appreciate editor and reviewers very much for their positive and constructive comments and suggestions on our manuscript. We have studied reviewer’s comments carefully and have made revision which marked in the paper. There are few studies about the power consumption during the harvesting process of castor. We carry out research according to actual situation of castor harvesting to provide a reference for the research of castor harvesting machinery. Please see the attachment for the main corrections and the responds to the reviewer’s comments.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Reviewer 3 Report
Notes in the attachment.
Comments for author File: 
Comments.pdf
Author Response
On behalf of my co-authors, we thank you very much for giving us an opportunity to revise our manuscript; we appreciate editor and reviewers very much for their positive and constructive comments and suggestions on our manuscript. We have studied reviewer’s comments carefully and have made revision which marked in the paper. There are few studies about the power consumption during the harvesting process of castor. We carry out research according to actual situation of castor harvesting to provide a reference for the research of castor harvesting machinery. Please see the attachment for the main corrections and the responds to the reviewer’s comments.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
1. There are also some grammar mistake in the manuscript, please check it.
2. You should continue to improve the part of introduction. The authors should list the literature related to the study.
3. You should explain the relationship of the study and the disc design.
4. Fig4 should be revised again.
5. What is the purpose of Fig 6? The authors should explain it in detail.
6. The part of 4.4 should be revised again. You should explain the results of the study,not your study purpose.
7. The sample was taken back to the lab. I want to know if its characteristic changed ,such as moisture, Yield and so on.
Author Response
Dear Editors and Reviewers:
Those comments are all valuable and very helpful for revising and improving our paper, as well as the important guiding significance to our researches. We have studied comments carefully and have made correction which we hope meet with approval. Revised portion are marked in the paper. The main corrections in the paper and the responds to the reviewer’s comments are as flowing:
- Response to comment:There are also some grammar mistake in the manuscript, please check it.
Response: We are very sorry for grammar mistake in the manuscript. The mistake grammar and garbled statement of this paper have been checked and corrected.
- Response to comment:You should continue to improve the part of introduction.
Response: Thank you for your valuable suggestion. The section of ‘Introduction’ has been rewritten. For details, please refer to section 1.
- Response to comment: You should explain the relationship of the study and the disc design
Response: We gratefully appreciate for your valuable suggestion. In this test, The waved-type cutting disc designed based on the material characteristics of castor stalk, can give full play to the function of sliding cutting and clamping. But the shear angle of cutting disc is in dynamic change, which is not convenient to be used as a factor for quantitative analysis. Because of the above reason, We referred to the cutting angle of agricultural materials, selected the appropriate sliding angle parameter range in the preliminary design process. The section of cutting disc design is added in the paper to detailed the structure parameters of the cutting disc. Then the influence of parameters such as cutting disc thickness and edge angle on the power consumption of evaluation index is studied. For details, please refer to section 2.3.1.
- Response to comment: Fig4 should be revised again.
Response: We gratefully appreciate for your valuable suggestion. Fig4 has been revised.
- Response to comment: What is the purpose of Fig 6?
Response: Thank you for your valuable suggestion. The verification test is not sufficiently show in Figure 6. The Fig 6 has been deleted.
- 6.Response to comment: The part of 4.4 should be revised again.
Response: We have made correction according to the Reviewer’s comments. The section of 4.4 have been revised again.
- 7. Response to comment: The sample was taken back to the lab. if its characteristic changed ,such as moisture, yield and so on.
Response: The water content of castor stalk decreased with the quadratic function after taking samples, which was consistent with the changing law of water content of agricultural materials. Refer to relevant literature, the moisture content of the sample was balanced in the constant temperature and humidity equipment to reach the moisture content at the time of sampling during the test. At this condition, there is little difference in stalk material characteristics. Castor fruits were fully ripened at the time of sampling, and the yield was not affected by time.
Once again, thank you very much for your comments and suggestions.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Reviewer 3 Report
The authors introduced my comments to the article.
Author Response
Dear Editors and Reviewers:
Thanks very much for your kind work and consideration on publication of our paper. On behalf of my co-authors, we would like to express our great appreciation to editor and reviewers.
