Development of a Magnetorheological Damper with Self-Powered Ability for Washing Machines

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

In general, the article is interesting, but requires minor corrections and clarifications.

Minor corrections:

1. It is advisable to cite literature in the field of damping vibrations of buildings or vehicles, e.g .:

   Erkus B., Johnson E. A.: Dissipativity analysis of the base isolated benchmark structure with magnetorheological fluid dampers. Smart Materials and Structures, vol. 20, no. 10, 2011.

   Makowski M., Knap L.: Investigation of an off-road vehicle equipped with magnetorheological dampers. Advances in Mechanical Engineering, Vol. 10(5), DOI: 10.1177/1687814018778222, pp. 1–11, 2018.

   Stone E. J., Cebon D.: Control of semi-active anti-roll systems on heavy vehicles. Vehicle System Dynamics, vol. 48, no. 10, pp. 1215–1243, 2010.

2. The relationship (1) magnetic flux is incorrect. Please correct this to get the unit [Wb] or [Tm ^ 2].
3. The equation (2), why is considered only half the width of the cylinder (pm-lm) / 2.
4. The equation (5), no description of the Ac variable.
   
5. What is the relationship between E1, E2 and P1, P2 (eq. 6,7-10).
   
6. What electrical parameters were used for the calculations presented in Fig. 5.
7. In equation (14) there are twice BaSY, and in table 2 is given aS_J aS_Ty, why.
8. Have tests been performed on the damping system without energy harvesting.

Good luck

 

Author Response

Response to Reviewer 1 Comments

Manuscript title: Development of a magneto-rheological damper with self-powered ability for washing machines

Authors: Quoc-Duy Bui, Quoc Hung Nguyen, Nguyen Tan Tien, and Duc-Dai Mai

Article reference: applsci-813839

Thank you very much for the valuable comments. All your suggestions are considered in the revised version as followings

Point 1: It is advisable to cite literature in the field of damping vibrations of buildings or vehicles, e.g .:

Erkus B., Johnson E. A.: Dissipativity analysis of the base isolated benchmark structure with magnetorheological fluid dampers. Smart Materials and Structures, vol. 20, no. 10, 2011.

Makowski M., Knap L.: Investigation of an off-road vehicle equipped with magnetorheological dampers. Advances in Mechanical Engineering, Vol. 10(5), DOI: 10.1177/1687814018778222, pp. 1–11, 2018.

Stone E. J., Cebon D.: Control of semi-active anti-roll systems on heavy vehicles. Vehicle System Dynamics, vol. 48, no. 10, pp. 1215–1243, 2010.

Response 1: The recommended papers are cited in the revised version (Lines to 118).

Point 2: The relationship (1) magnetic flux is incorrect. Please correct this to get the unit [Wb] or [Tm ^ 2].

Response 2: The Equation (1) has been checked and the units of the parameters in the equation are further explained as follows

Point 3: The equation (2), why is considered only half the width of the cylinder (pm-lm) / 2.

Response 3: (p_m - l_m) is the length of the pole spacer shown in Figure 3. It is shared equally among the south pole of the 1^st magnet and the north one of the 2^nd magnet. Therefore, to determine the magnetic flux for each inducing coil, only the half length of the cylindrical surface area is considered in Equation (2).

Point 4: The equation (5), no description of the Ac variable.

Response 4: We have added the description of the variable A_c in Lines 264 and 265.

Point 5: What is the relationship between E1, E2 and P1, P2 (eq. 6,7-10).

Response 5: The relationship between E₁, E₂ and P₁, P₂ has been added to Equation (10).

Point 6: What electrical parameters were used for the calculations presented in Fig. 5.

Response 6: We have calculated the induced voltage E and resistance R_c of each inducing coil. Then the generated power P has been obtained by Equation (10) for the objective function of the optimization process.

Point 7: In equation (14) there are twice BaSY, and in table 2 is given aS_J aS_Ty, why.

Response 7: Equation (14) is used to estimate both the yield stress t_y and the post-yield viscosity h, in which Y represents one of these two rheological parameters. This means that α_Sτy will replace α_SY when calculating the yield stress t_y and similarly α_Sh will replace α_SY when calculating the post-yield viscosity h.

Point 8: Have tests been performed on the damping system without energy harvesting.

Response 8: The damper has been tested without energy harvesting in Section 5.2, Lines 480-514 when the energy harvesting part was removed and constant current was applied to the exciting coils of the MR damping part.

 

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

Remarks:

1. The “Abstract” and “Introduction” sections can be made much more impressive by highlighting your contributions. The contribution of the study should be explained simply and clearly. The novelty of the work is not clarified and literature review does not support this goal.
2. Authors should provide any differences between previously published authors ’articles and this article:

Bui D Q, Hoang V L, Le H D and Nguyen Q H 2017 Design and evaluation of a shear-mode MR damper  for suspension system of front-loading washing machines Proceedings of the International Conference on Advances in Computational Mechanics 1061-1072.

Nguyen Q H, Choi S B and Woo J K 2014 Optimal design of magnetorheological fluid-based dampers for front-loaded washing machines Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. C-J. Mec. Eng. Sci. 228(2) 294-306.

Nguyen Q H, Nguyen N D and Choi S B 2014 Optimal design and performance evaluation of a flow-mode MR damper for front-loaded washing machines Asia Pac. J. Comput. Eng. 1 3.

Nguyen Q H, Han Y M, Choi S B and Wereley N M 2007 Geometry optimization of MR valves constrained in a specific volume using the finite element method Smart Mater. Struct. 16(6) 2242-2252.

Nguyen Q H, Choi S B and Wereley N M 2008 Optimal design of magneto-rheological valves via a finite element method considering control energy and a time constant Smart Mater. Struct. 17(2) 1-12.

3. Also authors should deeply analyze the advantages and disadvantages of presented system.

4. Line 433- 473 Authors should deeply present the main characteristics of equipment or show the links where we could recognize it.

5. The pictures shouldn‘t begin or finish of the Chapters in this article. (Figure 5 and Figure 6 and etc.)

6. Results. Figures are very helpful but the comparison with existing literature? In addition, where is the critical analysis of results?

7. Conclusions. Authors should write conclusion focused in the novelty of getting results. In my opinion it’s not necessary to write one more abstract in the conclusion chapter. Authors must modified it accord this remark.

Author Response

Response to Reviewer 2’s Comments

Manuscript title: Development of a magneto-rheological damper with self-powered ability for washing machines

Authors: Quoc-Duy Bui, Quoc Hung Nguyen, Nguyen Tan Tien, and Duc-Dai Mai

Article reference: applsci-813839

Thank you very much for the valuable comments. All your suggestions are considered in the revised version as followings

Point 1: The “Abstract” and “Introduction” sections can be made much more impressive by highlighting your contributions. The contribution of the study should be explained simply and clearly. The novelty of the work is not clarified and literature review does not support this goal.

Response 1: Response 1: The “Abstract” and “Introduction” sections were rewritten for  highlighting contributions and novelty of our research works.

Point 2: Authors should provide any differences between previously published authors ’articles and this article:

Bui D Q, Hoang V L, Le H D and Nguyen Q H 2017 Design and evaluation of a shear-mode MR damper  for suspension system of front-loading washing machines Proceedings of the International Conference on Advances in Computational Mechanics 1061-1072.

Nguyen Q H, Choi S B and Woo J K 2014 Optimal design of magnetorheological fluid-based dampers for front-loaded washing machines Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. C-J. Mec. Eng. Sci. 228(2) 294-306.

Nguyen Q H, Nguyen N D and Choi S B 2014 Optimal design and performance evaluation of a flow-mode MR damper for front-loaded washing machines Asia Pac. J. Comput. Eng. 1 3.

Nguyen Q H, Han Y M, Choi S B and Wereley N M 2007 Geometry optimization of MR valves constrained in a specific volume using the finite element method Smart Mater. Struct. 16(6) 2242-2252.

Nguyen Q H, Choi S B and Wereley N M 2008 Optimal design of magneto-rheological valves via a finite element method considering control energy and a time constant Smart Mater. Struct. 17(2) 1-12.

Response 2: The introduction section was rewritten to clarify difference of this research and the above researches.

Point 3: Also authors should deeply analyze the advantages and disadvantages of presented system.

Response 3: The advantages and disadvantages of presented system was mentioned in the conclusion of the revised version

Point 4: Line 433- 473 Authors should deeply present the main characteristics of equipment or show the links where we could recognize it.

Response 4: The main characteristics of equipment are presented in the revised version (lines 429 -> 442)

Point 5: The pictures shouldn‘t begin or finish of the Chapters in this article. (Figure 5 and Figure 6 and etc.)

Response 5: We have modified the positions of Figures 3, 5, 6, 7, 10, 14, 15, 17 and 18 as suggested.

Point 6: Results. Figures are very helpful but the comparison with existing literature? In addition, where is the critical analysis of results?

Response 6: In figure 16, 17, 18 the results obtained from the self-power dampers are compared with the results obtained from constant applied currents which are similar to the results of [12]. In the revised version, this is mentioned (lines 474 -> 476).

Point 7: Conclusions. Authors should write conclusion focused in the novelty of getting results. In my opinion it’s not necessary to write one more abstract in the conclusion chapter. Authors must modified it accord this remark.

Response 7: We have modified the conclusions as commented

 

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Thank you for making corrections.

Good job.

 

Author Response

Thank you for your valuable comments. The revised version was much improved from your comments

Reviewer 2 Report

thanks to the authors for the corrections made to the article.

Author Response

Thank you for your valuable comments. the authors found that the final version was much improved with your comments