The Mathematical Model of Curve-Face Gear and Time-Varying Meshing Characteristics of Compound Transmission
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The manuscript presents an very interesting study, where an original and innovative work is shown with a right methodology and the authors have worked exhaustively, taking care of the technical details. The document is clear, well organized and structured and the quality of the manuscript presentation is good
For these reasons, it is opinion of the reviewer that the manuscript is interesting to the readers and propose the editors to publish the manuscript.
Author Response
Dear Reviewer，
On behalf of my co-author, we thank you for your letter and for the comments concerning the manuscript entitled “The Mathematical Model of Curve-face Gear and Time-varying Meshing Characteristics of Compound Transmission” (No. applsci-1343771). Thank you very much for your affirmation of the paper. Please see the attachment for the revised paper.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
It is well composed paper.
Nevertheless, improvement on work progress is a mandatory.
Motive of this work is not clearly stated.
It is highly recommended to conduct literature review.
Analyze samples of research/publication since 2010 until now so that the current work is well justified.
Make a milestone of work progress to support the review.
Literature review must be put in one individual section after introduction.
Also, this work is conducted mainly by composing analytical formula.
Did the author test the formula before it is applied to this work?
How is the formula or equation developed?
Compose a nomenclature to list all definitions of the mathematical equation.
This part is essential since clarification of symbol is required by future reader.
What is unit of z and y axes in Figure 7?
See Figure 10 and 12. what is unit for x, y, z? is it coordinate? then, what is distance between coordinates?
What is unit of relative error? is it %? put the unit in Figure 17 and all related figures.
Provide recommendation based on your finding in this work.
It can be put in conclusions.
Author Response
Dear Reviewer，
On behalf of my co-author, we thank you for your letter and for the comments concerning the manuscript entitled “The Mathematical Model of Curve-face Gear and Time-varying Meshing Characteristics of Compound Transmission” (No. applsci-1343771). Those comments are all valuable and very helpful for revising and improving this paper, as well as the important guiding significance to the researches. We have studied the comments carefully and the corrections are made seriously, which we hope meet with approval. The revised portion are marked in red in the revised paper. The main corrections in the revised manuscript and the responds to your comments are answered separately in Answer Sheet. Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Reviewer 3 Report
As the Applied Science journal on its website includes measurements engineering and characterization techniques in the scope of the journal, the topic of the work at hand would appear to be an appropriate one. Furthermore, the proposed article contains the customary sections of a scientific article.
Abstract section: The abstract is a little bit confuse and missis some information like more results and conclusions, I suggest to authors follow these rules:
- One or two sentences on BACKGROUND
- Two or three sentences on METHODS
- Less than two sentences on RESULTS
- One sentence on CONCLUSIONS
As for the Introduction section, it offers a lack of survey of previous research, but I am missing a thesis statement, hypothesis or research question declaring the purpose of the study. The review of publications in the research area is very poor, it requires correction, with particular attention to materials related to gears, their testing and operational issues, this has to be corrected in the journal standard
can be used: 10.17559/tv-20191205165340
https://doi.org/10.3390/ma14112913
https://doi.org/10.17559/tv-20180321171428
https://doi.org/10.17559/tv-20171018100732
The vocabulary used in the work in the field of technical language may raise doubts and requires explanation
L70-71, "standard shaper" it can be guessed that it is a standard machine tool and tool, however, one should refer to the technology used here, specifying the tool e.g. hobbing - used tool hob.
L133 "shaper" does this apply to the tool? what type? what technology? (I recommend to use "shaper cutter")
In figure 3 the tooth profile is shown, the caption under the figure says otherwise.
The author often uses the term "shaper" in the text (L167 ...... and others), the context indicates the reference is the gear tooth profile and not the tool, the work has many features in common with ref. [33] maybe the author should take more care of the appropriate notations, this remark requires more explanation or an explanation like "corrected".
The presented mathematical description is extensive, however, many dependencies in the figures do not exist, If possible, please present, illustrate or describe the parameters used in the text on the figures, including the line:
L143 - parameter us; L151 – parameter eb, ea, qos, qsa, aas.
The construction of the TCA model and presentation of the results deserves a mention, the obtained results prove the correctness of the assumptions. The theoretical aspect of work at a high level.
The weakness of the work is the practical aspect - machining and measuring the gear.
How was the machining performed ?, the finger mill tool was used, how was the machining code obtained? of course, on the basis of the presented theoretical considerations it is possible, I know from experience that it is a difficult and long way. Used three jaw chunk in photo 15 is no good, especially since there are two, why? all this requires a detailed explanation.
The paper shows that the gears were machined, then measured and finally their accuracy was determined. The accuracy of the machined surface is influenced by many factors as: the type of processed material, the tool and the machining parameter, machine tool, climbing system. These parameters are missing in the study.
In chapter 5 on the measurement of the geometric surface of the tooth, the basic parameters of the tested gear are missing. The presented deviations without these parameters do not allow for the determination and assessment of the accuracy class. Unless the authors mean the geometric structure of the machined surface, but it probably isn't - please refer to the comment. I recommend to study ISO standard in this field.
Conclusions should be extended with the assessment of the technological aspect - processing and measurement of the manufactured gears, it is treated very generally in the work, of course, it does not refer to the hypothesis of the work but requires a better presentation.
Comments for author File: Comments.docx
Author Response
Dear Reviewer，
On behalf of my co-author, we thank you for your letter and for the comments concerning the manuscript entitled “The Mathematical Model of Curve-face Gear and Time-varying Meshing Characteristics of Compound Transmission” (No. applsci-1343771). Those comments are all valuable and very helpful for revising and improving this paper, as well as the important guiding significance to the researches. We have studied the comments carefully and the corrections are made seriously, which we hope meet with approval. The revised portion are marked in red in the revised paper. The main corrections in the revised manuscript and the responds to your comments are answered separately in Answer Sheet. Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Reviewer 4 Report
See attached file.
Comments for author File: 
Comments.pdf
Author Response
Dear Reviewer，
On behalf of my co-author, we thank you for your letter and for the comments concerning the manuscript entitled “The Mathematical Model of Curve-face Gear and Time-varying Meshing Characteristics of Compound Transmission” (No. applsci-1343771). Those comments are all valuable and very helpful for revising and improving this paper, as well as the important guiding significance to the researches. We have studied the comments carefully and the corrections are made seriously, which we hope meet with approval. The revised portion are marked in red in the revised paper. The main corrections in the revised manuscript and the responds to your comments are answered separately in Answer Sheet. Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report
All comments have been addressed.
Author Response
Dear Reviewer，
On behalf of my co-author, we thank you for your letter and for the comments concerning the manuscript entitled “The Mathematical Model of Curve-face Gear and Time-varying Meshing Characteristics of Compound Transmission” (No. applsci-1343771). Thank you very much for your affirmation of the paper.
Reviewer 3 Report
Accept in present form.
Author Response
Dear Reviewer，
On behalf of my co-author, we thank you for your letter and for the comments concerning the manuscript entitled “The Mathematical Model of Curve-face Gear and Time-varying Meshing Characteristics of Compound Transmission” (No. applsci-1343771). Thank you very much for your affirmation of the paper.
Reviewer 4 Report
This paper was revised according to Reviewer’s comments. However, (6) p. 20, line 497: “five-axis CNC machining center” → The company name and model number of machine like Klingelnberg and P26 should be described in the text.Author Response
Dear Reviewer，
On behalf of my co-author, we thank you for your letter and for the comments concerning the manuscript entitled “The Mathematical Model of Curve-face Gear and Time-varying Meshing Characteristics of Compound Transmission” (No. applsci-1343771). Those comments are all valuable and very helpful for revising and improving this paper, as well as the important guiding significance to the researches. We have studied the comments carefully and the corrections are made seriously, which we hope meet with approval. The revised portion are marked in yellow in the revised paper. The main corrections in the revised manuscript and the responds to your comments are answered separately in Answer Sheet. Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
