Method for Measuring Interface Pressure of High-Voltage Cables
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Dear Authors,
Thank you very much for the interesting paper.
The paper presents a study regarding study on method of measuring the interface pressure of high voltage cable. Authors say, that interface pressure is generated between the conductor and the insulator, what affects the performance of the cable. The calculation and testing of mentioned pressure was studied due to the lack of a unified formula. Authors present a method for calculating and measuring cable conductor interface pressure. One is to apply the friction between the cable components to solve the calculation and experiment method of the pressure, and the other is based on the equation of pressure. The effectiveness of the method was verified by physical test and simulation analysis.
Comments and questions:
- Introduction should be expended to information what role plays interface pressure and what effects, negative effects, can occur if the pressure is too big or too small. Please complete.
- Line 98, table 1, I think the information, collected in the table, are from literature. If yes, please add references in title of tale 1.
- Authors study effect of pressure, which is caused by high temperature. They present many formulas. I think, some information about temperature coefficient should be presented, too. The coefficient describes relation between temperature and volume changes of the conductor.
- Fig. 6 – simulation of the cable. I see that arc – part of circle – is divided to some lines section. I understand that it is caused because simulation has to divided arc to lines. But if I can see, it means that maybe simulation mesh should have more triangles to simulate. I can see the same on Fig. 7. For example, Fig. 11 has enough triangles. Is it the same simulation with the same used mesh?
- Fig. 8 – please describe the axis using units of the properties.
- There are two times Fig. 8. Please review number of figures.
- Second Fig. 8 – please add units of the properties.
- The same comment to Fig. 9.
- Fig. 12 – add please some description of the axis X and Y with the units.
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Editorial comments
Line 18
correct the hyphenation
Line 31
usually there is no dot behind the number, and later also on each number of head lines
Line 32
write electric energy instead of electrical energy; check this in the entire pulication
Line 55
incomplete sentence
Line 73
the second method is mentioned, but the first method is missing
Line 76
is the sentence beginning with “And” a part of the former sentence?
Line 78
the expression “this method” is not clearly related to one method
Line 85
correct the spelling concerning capital letters
Line 88
correct the spelling concerning capital letters
Line 93
correct the sentences
Line 95
here are two methods, but in the following line is written “this method” and it is unclear which of the two methods are intended
Line 98
the structure of the table 1 can be improved to identify better the category and main methods
Line 103
correct the spelling concerning capital letters
Line 109
head line should be on the same page as the paragraph
Line 130
correct the spelling concerning capital letters
Line 137
variables should be written in italic
Line 143
correct the spelling concerning capital letters
Line 144
equation is not readable
Line 145
use subscript for the indices; check this in the entire contribution
Line 158
number of the equations should be right-adjusted; check this in the entire contribution
Line 162
check the format and structure
Line 204
Should the number of the Section 2 instead for 3?
Line 219
see comments to line 204
Line 219
add a dot behind section number and correct the following sentence
Line 241
in former chapters the number of experiments is given in numerical value, here the number of experiments are given in words; use one mode
Line 245
incomplete sentence
Line 276
use a space between number and unit, here 2 m; check this in the entire contribution
Line 280
all terms in equation (15) requires a unit, here kN, but the second term shows no unit
Line 280
the unit should not be written in italic; check this in the entire contribution
Line 280
is it important to use the term positive pressure? or depends the direction of the pressure only on the direction of the coordinates?
Line 293
in context the elastic modulus of copper is 109 GPa in table 1 108 GPa
Table 3
the header of table 3 should have the same wording for A and B
Line 317
check the sentence which starts with “And”
Line 343
tables should be on one page
Line 357
sentence has no relation to former or later sentences
Fig. 10
again three-dimensional figure is complicated to understand, two-dimensional figure is enough
Line 393
check the hyphenation
Line 404
check the hyphenation
Line 446
check the sentence and the wording
Line 466 and so on
the year is in most references in bold, but in all; check all references
Technical comments
Line 19
Is YJLW03 a Chinese cable notation?
Line 137
usually the pressure is denoted with a small p and not with a capital P
Line 144
the variables in the equation requires mor explanation; e.g. what means the index i?
Line 143
what are the directions x and y related to the cable?
Line 150
the last sentence can be delated
Line 160
explanation for d is missing
Line 163 – 169
the context should use the same definition as shown in Fig. 3
Line 174
what is the meaning of neutron?
Line 177-181
the variables u and w are not shown in Fig. 4
Line 186
Equation (6) and (7) are identical; one of them should be wrong
Line 187 – 193
Equations are not traceable due to lack of information about the used variables
Line 214
It would be helpful if Fig. 5 is more explained.
Chapter 2.4
Here a figure of the halves could contribute to the understanding of the experiment
Fig. 6
A two-dimensional figure seems to be clearer than the three-dimensional one
Line 258
a reference to the material is required if inner and outer radius is mentioned. It is correct that the inner radius of the insulating material is smaller than the outer radius of the conductor?
Fig. 7
the figure could be improved to get a better readability
Line 264
what is the meaning of this sentence?
Fig. 8
the figure should be improved and the description of the x- and y-axis should be added
Line 281
explain the variables in the equation and see the editorial comments to line 280
Line 297
the calculation of the conductor cross section seems to wrong
Line 300
the statement should be more explained
Table 4
an explanation of the values in table 4 should be given and not only a reference to the further equations which are also not clear
Line 325
what is the meaning of the average value?
Line 327
The numbers show three decimals behind the dot, is this reasonable regarding the uncertainty of the simulation?; check this also in the next tables
Chapter 3.3
This chapter requires more and clear explanations and interpretations of the results and the meaning of the numbers. As it is the reader can not follow the statements in this chapter.
Fig. 11
This figure requires more explanation about the results of the simulation
Fig. 12
There are no information about the x- and y-axis
Line 379
again what is the meaning of the average value and was this value calculated?
Line 393
see comments line 327
Line 414
head line means experiment 2, in the table is mentioned experiment one
Table 10 and 11
it would be more convenient for the reader if in the tables are the two figures which are used for the calculation of the difference and also some comments to the difference in particular the value in the range above 80 %
Table 10 and 11
the header of the tables shows always “Geometric interference Normal Stress” in more or less all columns; here is an explanation necessary
Line 431 and so on
Conclusion is more a short description of the research, but less a list of the main results and their interpretation; here an improvement is necessary
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
Although the topic is very interesting, the paper needs extensive improvement.
- The introduction part needs complete overhaul. There is no specific flow which the reader can follow and understand what is being presented. The sentence structure and grammar needs to be improved
- The abstract part needs to clearly mention the contributions and outcome
- Some details in section 2.3 are too basic for a research article. The authors need to focus on their contribution rather than presenting basic physics.
- The experimental and simulation methods need a revisit to make it easy for reader to understand.
- Line 320--Figure 8 shows meshing and not experimental tensile force
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 3 Report
Thank you for addressing my comments.
This manuscript is a resubmission of an earlier submission. The following is a list of the peer review reports and author responses from that submission.
