Actuating a Magnetic Shape Memory Element Locally with a Set of Coils
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Good quality paper. It presents results of a study that is in progress, but having significant interest as presented in the paper.
Author Response
We submit attached a list of corrections and clarifications as required by the reviewers.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
In the present manuscript, the authors have studied local actuation in magnetic shape memory element. They have employed two different ways to apply the localised magnetic field and investigated the resulting effect. They have also used FEA simulation to complement their experimental experiments.
The manuscript is nicely written with sufficient amount of new results. Hence, it should be published. I have however a query for the authors. Magnetocrystalline anisotropy energy is pivotal for magnetic field induced strain in magnetic shape memory alloys. FEA simulation performed by the authors didn't consider this. In addition, different martensitic variants in the martensite phase lead to different magnetic field induced strain. I am not sure how this is addressed within the FEA simulation. Can the authors provide some more details on these two issues?
Another minor issue is the small length of some sub-sections, e.g., 4.2 and 4.3.1. The authors may consider an alternative strategy to get rid of such small sub-sections and merge the text to other sections/sub-sections.
Author Response
We submit attached a list of corrections and clarifications as required by the reviewers.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
The manucript "Actuating a magnetic shape memory element locally with a set of coils" has been reviewed.
It deals with the activation of a shape memory element with magnetic field (modeling and experimental).
The manuscript is almost clear, however the quality of the presentation must be improved as well as, in general, the scientific soundness.
It can be considered for publication after the following major revisions.
Due to the high number of acronyms a nomenclature table is recommended.
General comment: change in the whole manuscript the form "we present... we use..." with has been presented and so on.
Line 61-67: change in font size.
Only a marginal description of the material has been provided. In this form the manuscript is more suitable for the Journal "Actuators" rather than of "Metals".
Conclusions are weak and moderately supported by the results.
References (all) are not in compliance with the journal's requirements. They are dated and few in number. Please add more, for example DOI: 10.4028/www.scientific.net/KEM.605.23; doi.org/10.1016/j.jmmm.2019.02.087; 10.1109/TMAG.2015.2451952.
Author Response
We submit attached a list of corrections and clarifications as required by the reviewers.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 3 Report
Accept in present form
