Experimenting and Optimizing Design Parameters for a Pneumatic Hill-Drop Rapeseed Metering Device
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The pneumatic precision seed metering device is an essential component of the rapeseed precision seeding machine. In this study, the CFD simulation method was used to numerically simulate the internal flow field of the suction hole, and the movement distribution of the internal flow field with various shapes was specified. Through the seed filling test, the structure of the suction hole was optimized, and through the seed discharge test, the effect of the working parameters on the seed arrangement performance was investigated. This study has excellent guideline value, and the quality of the paper as a whole is good. The following modifications are suggested to enhance the manuscript:
（1） Whether the seed will be damaged during contact with the seed plate and population.
（2） The suction hole mesh is divided in Section 3.3, and the maximum surface size is set to 5 mm. Exists any justification for this? According to the principle of the finite volume method, the finer the mesh, the higher the precision of the solution. Balance the calculation efficiency and accuracy with the calculation time, whether the calculation results under different number of grid conditions should be compared, and judge the independence of the results with the grid.
（3） In the introduction, the author describes the existing research results of others, but the depth of analysis is insufficient; therefore, it is necessary to conduct an in-depth analysis closely related to the paper's research content in order to demonstrate the originality of this paper's research.
The formula in the text is incorrectly expressed. For instance, in the formula 1 for , b and a should not be italicized. Please verify that the format of the entire text is correct and that the expression is uniform.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Please read the attachment.
Comments for author File: Comments.pdf
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Reviewer 3 Report
In this study, the key structural parameters influencing the performance of the planter plate have been analyzed and determined, and the planter plate's structure has been optimized to improve the performance of the precision seed metering device. The authors presented a work with a clear methodology of system development and implementation. In general the work is well structured. However, I believe that the some important details in the study need to be given before the manuscript can be published. I have listed my comments and suggestions below.
Comments and Suggestions:
1. Although the results in theory and test studies were satisfactory, comparative results of similar studies were not discussed. I think that a one-paragraph discussion should be added to the article to indicate the difference between the study and other similar studies in the literature.
2. Any faults and warnings indicated by the system? Limitations of this study? I think it would be better if an explanation could be added to the article about these issues.
3. I think the work is very important. Thank you for contributing to the scientific literature on the subject.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report
Please read the attachment. Thank you.
Comments for author File: Comments.pdf
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 3
Reviewer 2 Report
Dear Editors and Authors:
- This manuscript is exciting and is in the final stages of being finalized. The reviewer would like to help the authors finish it as soon as possible. However,the authors had not added the point-to-point response letter although the reviewer kindly requested in the previous review report. Again, the reviewer strongly requested that the authors carefully re-read the manuscript and provide the point-to-point answers.
- Please provide the point-to-point responses for the single comment in the previous review reports (please read the comments in Review Reports -Rounds 1 and 2). The reviewer needs to follow and check the details of your revised manuscript.
- Please re-answer questions which are not detailed and incomplete.
- Please provide the revised manuscript files as advised below:
+Revised manuscript (tracking changes)
+Revised manuscript (clean)
+ Cover letter to reviewers (point-to-point response)
+Other supplement documents.
Waiting for resubmitting.
Thank you for understanding.
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
