Simulation of the Scale-up Process of a Venturi Jet Pyrolysis Reactor
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
-The problems statement is not clear.
-The literature needs to be enriched with recent studies, especially the nano-technology applications.
-More information should be provided about the future plans.
-The conclusion section needs to be re-written in an attractive way, rather than the current one.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
The authors have conducted process modelling of venturi jet pyrolysis reactor. Overall, the paper is written well. There are some minor corrections which the authors should consider:
What software/programming language did the authors use to model the system? This information seems to be missing. There seems to be no connection between nano/micro sized cerium oxide and the entire manuscript. I think authors can better delete that information and only focus on modelling of Venturi reactor. Again in Fig. 4, what software did the authors use to obtain temperature distribution? What is the significance of the present study? This needs to be highlighted in the abstract. Has the authors compared the results with experimental results? The validation study is required to establish accuracy of the model. The authors also need to properly include literature references in the specified field such as: Computational Materials Science 89, 36-44 2014; Metals 7 (3), 83, 2017.Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
This nice piece of work has to be published. Nevertheless, the present article requires a more meticulous presentation. From line 130 up to line 161, some findings are not properly/clearly presented. The authors either place a-priori statements or do not explain/comment the findings sufficiently well.
1. Line 131. Since ln(A) = -8.40354, then A = 2.240727 10-4. A zero is missing.
2. Lines 139-140. “these results are relatively accurate”. This is not enough. Statistical significance is required by including, for example, multiple correlation coefficient, standard error of estimate, and degrees of freedom. You may consider an ANalysis Of VAriance (ANOVA).
3. Eqn 14. For this formula it appears that it cannot be derived from Eqn 12 using ρ = 1038.449, n = 10/5 = 2. Is it a new type of formula or it can actually be derived from Eqn 12? Please, clarify.
4. Line 150. A formula “P=1.62u2-1.55u-0.97” is presented with no explanation; for example, the term “u” is not commented, at all. Have the authors developed a new formula, or is it already given in the literature? If so, please, include the reference. Otherwise, some comment is actually required. The interested reader should be able to relate the findings of this formula with the Pressure values presented on Table 3. In any case, please, clarify.
5. Line 212. The equation presented in the Conclusions section is not derived in the main text nor even discussed upon how it can be deduced. More explanation is required.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
