Next Article in Journal
Water Modification by Cold Plasma Jet with Respect to Physical and Chemical Properties
Previous Article in Journal
A Spectrophotometry Evaluation of Clear Aligners Transparency: Comparison of 3D-Printers and Thermoforming Disks in Different Combinations
 
 
Article
Peer-Review Record

Conjugate Heat Transfer Analysis and Heat Dissipation Design of Nucleic Acid Detector Instrument

Appl. Sci. 2022, 12(23), 11966; https://doi.org/10.3390/app122311966
by Xiaohui Lin 1,2, Weihuang Cai 1,2, Shaolei Huang 3,4, Sijie Zhu 1,2 and Dongxu Zhang 3,4,*
Reviewer 1:
Reviewer 2: Anonymous
Reviewer 3:
Appl. Sci. 2022, 12(23), 11966; https://doi.org/10.3390/app122311966
Submission received: 25 October 2022 / Revised: 15 November 2022 / Accepted: 21 November 2022 / Published: 23 November 2022
(This article belongs to the Section Applied Thermal Engineering)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The paper describes experimental and numerical conjugate heat transfer analysis and heat dissipation design of nucleic acid detector instrument. The paper is well-written, the methodology is well described and results and conclusions are understandable and clear. However, there are still some minor issues with the paper before it can be published:

1. Fluent uses finite volume method, not finite element method. Please make sure that the correct name of the method is used.

2. The flow model described is called k-omega (k-ω), and not k-w, so please correct it in the manuscript.

3. A figure providing the mesh or a detail of it would be interesting to see.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

In this manuscript ‘Conjugate heat transfer analysis and heat dissipation design of nucleic acid detector instrument’, the authors investigated and improved the heat transfer process inside the nucleic acid instrument by simulation. Temperature measurements were also performed to verify the simulation results. The content and structure of the manuscript are clear, however, the writing of this manuscript is poor which largely limits its readability. It is difficult for reviewers or readers to dig into the details of this manuscript. The authors should read the whole manuscript several times to correct those obvious language errors before submission.

Several examples of language errors are listed here:

Page 1, line 41-43, grammar error in the sentence starting with ‘Because the rising ambient’

Page 2, line 58-60, grammar error in the sentence starting with ‘Improved the operation unit structure’ to ‘heat transfer mechanism’

Page 2, line 64-66, grammar error in the sentence starting with ‘Proposed a mathematical model’

Page 2, line 66-67, grammar error in the sentence starting with ‘Analyzed various parameters' influence’

Page 2, line 86-88, grammar error in the sentence starting with ‘The structure of the portable’

Page 4, line 116-117, two typos, please check.

Page 4, line 118, ‘shows’ instead of ‘show’

 

Page 5, line 129-130, grammar error in the sentence starting with ‘all heat sources’

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

This is an interesting study on the improvement of operation of PCR instruments (very important for Covid-19 DNA detection). The authors compute the temperature and flow field inside a nucleic acid detection instrument by CFD (conjugate heat transfer problem).

Further, they design the instrument’s vent based on the results of the CFD computation. A validation was carried out against the results with a temperature measurement platform, based on a thermocamera and thermocouples.

 

The authors must address the following issues in a revised version of their manuscript:

Line 112-113: what you mean by the statement “This study assumes …that the temperature rise curve does not change”? Please explain in more detail by reference to the Figures.

Figure 4: Are all these thermocouple measurements? Please explain.

Line 194: should be spelled k-ω (k-omega)

Line 209: is ΔP in Pa? please specify. Also, could you add the characteristic curve of the fan produced by the equation. Also, you should number the equation.

Line 238: you mean the number of elements or the number of nodes?

Figure 11 should be enlarged with higher definition.

Same with Figures 14-15

Same with Figure 21

Line 336-337 please add the definition of error in Figure 18

Figure 21: do you have some kind of filter at the air inlets?

Have you optimized their shape?

English need significant improvement, revision by a native English speaker.

Author Response

请参阅附件。

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

The revised manuscript has been greatly improved in languages. It reads very well and I recommend acceptance of this paper.

Reviewer 3 Report

The revised version can be published

Back to TopTop