Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The paper deals with DEM simulation and field experiments of the operation of strip rotary tillage. In order to clarify the mechanism of tiller-soil interaction in the process of strip rotary tillage, four blade configurations composed of three rotary blade(bent C, straight and hoe) at three rotary speeds(280, 380 and 510 rpm) were investigated.

This was an interesting research project, and the description of methods and results were well developed. There are some problems that need minor revisions before this manuscript would be ready for publishing.

1. It is recommended to reserve spaces between 280r/min, 380r/min and 510r/min, and check the whole text uniformly

2. There seems to be an error in Table 2. Please correct the incorrect data in Table 2

3. An extra space needs to be deleted between the combination in line 28

4. There should be spaces between the reference number and the words. Please revise the full text

5. Line 210, indent two spaces at the beginning of the paragraph

6. In line 231, the soil side throwing of MC configuration was only 70% of that of HC configuration when the rotary speed was 510 r/min How is 70% calculated?

7. In line 295, the spelling error of suiTable needs to be corrected

8. In line 310, the statement "Soil fragments is too large" is incorrect. Please modify it

Author Response

Dear Editors:

Thank you so much for the helpful comments on the further revision. In respect to each point, we carefully made revisions accordingly. If there is any place left unsatisfactorily revised, your are kindly expected to provide us further comments. We will try our best to submit a quality manuscript worthy of compatibility with the honored journal.

For clarity purpose, all reviewers’ comments were marked in red. Each comment was answered and each answer was numbered as Reply 1, Reply 2, etc. to ensure that the answers may cross-reference among the Replies.

In addressing each comment, I tried to revise according to reviewers’ suggestions. There were still several places which may not be as satisfactory as possible. For this, I beg your forgiveness.

The Revision Note provided Line numbers. Please note, Line numbers refer to the Word document under the Revision Mode. Please open the revised manuscript in the Revision Mode. Otherwise the Line numbers of the Clean Mode mismatch.

Thank you.

Reviewer: 1 

Comments

The paper deals with DEM simulation and field experiments of the operation of strip rotary tillage. In order to clarify the mechanism of tiller-soil interaction in the process of strip rotary tillage, four blade configurations composed of three rotary blade(bent C, straight and hoe) at three rotary speeds(280, 380 and 510 rpm) were investigated.

 

This was an interesting research project, and the description of methods and results were well developed. There are some problems that need minor revisions before this manuscript would be ready for publishing.

 

1. It is recommended to reserve spaces between 280r/min, 380r/min and 510r/min, and check the whole text uniformly

 

2. There seems to be an error in Table 2. Please correct the incorrect data in Table 2

 

3. An extra space needs to be deleted between the combination in line 28

 

4. There should be spaces between the reference number and the words. Please revise the full text

 

5. Line 210, indent two spaces at the beginning of the paragraph

 

6. In line 231, the soil side throwing of MC configuration was only 70% of that of HC configuration when the rotary speed was 510 r/min How is 70% calculated?

 

7. In line 295, the spelling error of suiTable needs to be corrected

 

8. In line 310, the statement "Soil fragments is too large" is incorrect. Please modify it

 

1. It is recommended to reserve spaces between 280r/min, 380r/min and 510r/min, and check the whole text uniformly

Reply 1:

Following this comment, we carefully made revisions accordingly in the article.

 

 

2. There seems to be an error in Table 2. Please correct the incorrect data in Table 2

Reply 2:

Following this comment, we carefully made revisions accordingly please see Table 2

 

 

 

 

An extra space needs to be deleted between the combination in line 28

Reply 3:

Following this comment, we carefully made revisions accordingly please see line 28. 

 

 

 

There should be spaces between the reference number and the words. Please revise the full text

Reply 4:

Following this comment, we carefully made revisions accordingly

 

5. Line 210, indent two spaces at the beginning of the paragraph

Reply 5:

Following this comment, we carefully made revisions accordingly.

 

 

In line 231, the soil side throwing of MC configuration was only 70% of that of HC configuration when the rotary speed was 510 r/min How is 70% calculated?

Reply 6:

The soil side throwing was used to quantitatively analyze the throwing of soil particles to both sides of the seedbed by the rotary blade during the cultivation process. The calculation formula is shown in Formula (3)

 

7. In line 295, the spelling error of suiTable needs to be corrected

 

Reply 7:

Following this comment, we carefully made revisions accordingly.

 

 

8.In line 310, the statement "Soil fragments is too large" is incorrect. Please modify it

Reply 8:

Following this comment, we carefully made revisions accordingly.

 

 

Author Response File: Author Response.doc

Reviewer 2 Report

My comments and suggested improvements are outlined below.

1.      Table 1: Water content (31.8%) is in dry basis or wet basis? It is very high for performing tillage operation.

2.      Table 1: Cone index value of 348 kPa represent almost the tilled loose soil. Have you performed all the experiments at this value of cone index? Please check and correct.’

3.      On what basis the tillage depth of 5 cm was selected for conducting the experiments. It is very less. How it will indicate real operating conditions.

4.      Table 2: Check the units of soil particle radius. How soil particle size could be 5 mm?

5.      Section 3.4: The soil fragmentation increases with the increase of rotary speed. Following study on another type of rotary tillage implement i.e. powered disc may be added to support the statement. Comparative assessment of energy requirement and tillage effectiveness of combined (active-passive) and conventional offset disc harrows.

6.      Lines 83 and 290: Correct the spelling of ‘suitable’.

7.      In Introduction section to support the statements about no-tillage and strip rotary tillage, following study may be added in this regard. Crop residue management challenges, opportunities and way forward for sustainable food-energy security in India: A review.

8.      The authors have not presented the results of any physical experiments conducted in simulated test bed or soil bin. What is the purpose of giving Figure 1, if you have not conducted any physical experiments in simulated test bed or soil bin?

9.      A comparison of simulation results obtained from the software should have been done with the physical experiments conducted in simulated test bed or soil bin.

 

10.  Give detailed specifications and working of in-situ experimental platform.

Author Response

Dear Editors:

Thank you so much for the helpful comments on the further revision. In respect to each point, we carefully made revisions accordingly. If there is any place left unsatisfactorily revised, your are kindly expected to provide us further comments. We will try our best to submit a quality manuscript worthy of compatibility with the honored journal.

For clarity purpose, all reviewers’ comments were marked in red. Each comment was answered and each answer was numbered as Reply 1, Reply 2, etc. to ensure that the answers may cross-reference among the Replies.

In addressing each comment, I tried to revise according to reviewers’ suggestions. There were still several places which may not be as satisfactory as possible. For this, I beg your forgiveness.

The Revision Note provided Line numbers. Please note, Line numbers refer to the Word document under the Revision Mode. Please open the revised manuscript in the Revision Mode. Otherwise the Line numbers of the Clean Mode mismatch.

Thank you.

Reviewer: 2 

Comments

1. Table 1: Water content (31.8%) is in dry basis or wet basis? It is very high for performing tillage operation.
2.      Table 1: Cone index value of 348 kPa represent almost the tilled loose soil. Have you performed all the experiments at this value of cone index? Please check and correct.’5-10,800
3.      On what basis the tillage depth of 5 cm was selected for conducting the experiments. It is very less. How it will indicate real operating conditions.
4.      Table 2: Check the units of soil particle radius. How soil particle size could be 5 mm?
5.      Section 3.4: The soil fragmentation increases with the increase of rotary speed. Following study on another type of rotary tillage implement i.e. powered disc may be added to support the statement. Comparative assessment of energy requirement and tillage effectiveness of combined (active-passive) and conventional offset disc harrows.
6.      Lines 83 and 290: Correct the spelling of ‘suitable’.
7.      In Introduction section to support the statements about no-tillage and strip rotary tillage, following study may be added in this regard. Crop residue management challenges, opportunities and way forward for sustainable food-energy security in India: A review.
8.      The authors have not presented the results of any physical experiments conducted in simulated test bed or soil bin. What is the purpose of giving Figure 1, if you have not conducted any physical experiments in simulated test bed or soil bin?
9.      A comparison of simulation results obtained from the software should have been done with the physical experiments conducted in simulated test bed or soil bin.
10. Give detailed specifications and working of in-situ experimental platform

 

 

 

 

 

 

1. Table 1: Water content (31.8%)is in dry basis or wet basis? It is very high for performing tillage operation.

Reply 1:

Water content was conducted in dry basis. Due to the particularity of paddy soil and the time of field test is November 2021, the water content in the field is up to 31.8

Following this comment, we carefully made revisions accordingly please see line 90 in the article.

 

 

2.  Table 1: Cone index value of 348 kPa represent almost the tilled loose soil. Have you performed all the experiments at this value of cone index? Please check and correct.’

Reply 2:

Thank you for your correction. I have carefully checked the data and found that the cone index value at 0-5cm depth is 348 kPa, and the cone index value  at 5-10cm depth is 826kPa, with an average of 587 kPa. It has been corrected in table 1

 

 

 

3.      On what basis the tillage depth of 5 cm was selected for conducting the experiments. It is very less. How it will indicate real operating conditions.

Reply 3:

Thank you for your question. The purpose of strip tillage is to create a loose and fine seedbed while minimizing tillage to achieve the purpose of conservation tillage. Many studies have shown that the planting ditch with a depth of 5cm can meet the needs of sowing, so 5cm is selected as the cultivation depth in this paper

 

 

 

4. Table 2: Check the units of soil particle radius. How soil particle size could be 5 mm?

Reply 4:

The soil particle size indicated in Table 2 is the particle radius in the EDEM simulation. Reducing the particle diameter in the EDEM simulation will increase the calculation amount exponentially. Limited by the performance of the computer, 5mm is selected. Although the particle radius used in the simulation is far greater than the true size of soil particles, the simulation results and the test results have errors but the trend is the same. The simulation can effectively simulate the test and reveal the test mechanism

 

5. Section 3.4: The soil fragmentation increases with the increase of rotary speed. Following study on another type of rotary tillage implement i.e. powered disc may be added to support the statement. Comparative assessment of energy requirement and tillage effectiveness of combined (active-passive) and conventional offset disc harrows.

 

Reply 5:

 

Thank you for your suggestion. Lee et al. studied the energy consumption after adding a disc on both sides of the rotary tiller, and found that the disc will greatly increase the energy consumption of the implement The number of blade in MC combination in this study has not increased, and the blades are alternately cultivated, so the energy consumption should not increase, but the specific value is still to be tested in the next step

 

Lee K S, Park S H, Park W Y. Strip tillage characteristics of rotary tiller blades for use in a dryland direct rice seeder.Soil Tillage Res. 2003, 1, 25-32.

 

6. Lines 83 and 290: Correct the spelling of ‘suitable’.

Reply 6:

Following this comment, we carefully made revisions accordingly. please see line 86 and 300 in the article.

 

 

 

 

 

 

7. In Introduction section to support the statements about no-tillage and strip rotary tillage, following study may be added in this regard. Crop residue management challenges, opportunities and way forward for sustainable food-energy security in India: A review.

Reply 7:

Sorry, I can't find this reference. Could you please send it to me for study

 

 

8.      The authors have not presented the results of any physical experiments conducted in simulated test bed or soil bin. What is the purpose of giving Figure 1, if you have not conducted any physical experiments in simulated test bed or soil bin?

 

Reply 8:

Thank you for your question. The in-situ experimental platform shown in Figure 1 is used for field test. This in-situ experimental platform is developed by our school. It can accurately control the forward speed of the implement and the rotation speed, eliminating the disadvantage of inaccurate control of the forward speed of the tractor test

 

9. A comparison of simulation results obtained from the software should have been done with the physical experiments conducted in simulated test bed or soil bin.

 

Reply 9:

Thank you for your suggestion. In the follow-up study, I will compare the simulation and physical experiment to further improve the research level

 

 

10. Give detailed specifications and working of in-situ experimental platform

Reply 10:

 

Following this comment, we carefully made revisions accordingly. please see line 104 in the article.

 

 

Author Response File: Author Response.doc

Reviewer 3 Report

line 19: should be "rpm" instead "r/min"? - review for all text.

Abstract: clarify the configurations ("HC", "SC", etc.).

Keywords: avoid using the same words presented in title.

line 78-line 85: clarify the general goal of the paper and split in specific objectives (if necessary)

Table 1: use SI units

Figure 4-7: specify which means "a, b, c" and the green/red points. Also, clarify "time", what you were measuring with it?

Figure 12: it should be interesting to measure the statistical difference between the configuration/rotation

Author Response

Dear Editors:

Thank you so much for the helpful comments on the further revision. In respect to each point, we carefully made revisions accordingly. If there is any place left unsatisfactorily revised, your are kindly expected to provide us further comments. We will try our best to submit a quality manuscript worthy of compatibility with the honored journal.

For clarity purpose, all reviewers’ comments were marked in red. Each comment was answered and each answer was numbered as Reply 1, Reply 2, etc. to ensure that the answers may cross-reference among the Replies.

In addressing each comment, I tried to revise according to reviewers’ suggestions. There were still several places which may not be as satisfactory as possible. For this, I beg your forgiveness.

The Revision Note provided Line numbers. Please note, Line numbers refer to the Word document under the Revision Mode. Please open the revised manuscript in the Revision Mode. Otherwise the Line numbers of the Clean Mode mismatch.

Thank you.

Reviewer: 3 

line 19: should be "rpm" instead "r/min"? - review for all text.

 

Abstract: clarify the configurations ("HC", "SC", etc.).

 

Keywords: avoid using the same words presented in title.

 

line 78-line 85: clarify the general goal of the paper and split in specific objectives (if necessary)

 

Table 1: use SI units

 

Figure 4-7: specify which means "a, b, c" and the green/red points. Also, clarify "time", what you were measuring with it?

 

Figure 12: it should be interesting to measure the statistical difference between the configuration/rotation

 

 

 

 

1. line 19: should be "rpm" instead "r/min"? - review for all text.

Reply 1:

Following this comment, we carefully made revisions accordingly in the article.

 

 

2. Abstract: clarify the configurations ("HC", "SC", etc.).

Reply 2:

Following this comment, we carefully made revisions accordingly please see abstract

 

 

 

 

Keywords: avoid using the same words presented in title.

Reply 3:

Following this comment, we carefully made revisions accordingly please see keywords 

 

 

 

line 78-line 85: clarify the general goal of the paper and split in specific objectives (if necessary)

Reply 4:

Following this comment, we carefully made revisions accordingly. The general goal is fond the key factors affecting the quality of rotary tillage. Based on the results of simulation and experimental research, a rotary tillage blade configuration suitable for strip rotary tillage was designed for wheat rotary strip-till planter for cohesive paddy soil.

 

Table 1: use SI units

Reply 5:

 

Following this comment, we carefully made revisions accordingly please see table 1

 

 

Figure 4-7: specify which means "a, b, c" and the green/red points. Also, clarify "time", what you were measuring with it?

Reply 6:

In Figure 4-7, a, b, and c are different simulation steps. Time is the time of simulation, and the increase of time indicates that the tool is working ceaselessly The red dot represents high-speed moving particles, green represents medium-speed moving particles, and gray represents motionless particles

 

 

5. Line 210, indent two spaces at the beginning of the paragraph

Reply 5:

Following this comment, we carefully made revisions accordingly.

 

 

In line 231, the soil side throwing of MC configuration was only 70% of that of HC configuration when the rotary speed was 510 r/min How is 70% calculated?

Reply 6:

The soil side throwing was used to quantitatively analyze the throwing of soil particles to both sides of the seedbed by the rotary blade during the cultivation process. The calculation formula is shown in Formula (3)

 

7. In line 295, the spelling error of suiTable needs to be corrected

 

Reply 7:

Following this comment, we carefully made revisions accordingly.

 

 

8.In line 310, the statement "Soil fragments is too large" is incorrect. Please modify it

Reply 8:

Following this comment, we carefully made revisions accordingly.

 

 

Author Response File: Author Response.doc

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

Section 3.4: The soil fragmentation increases with the increase of rotary speed. The study on another type of rotary tillage implement i.e. powered disc may be added to support the statement. As per author's request, here is the full reference details. Upadhyay, G., & Raheman, H. (2020). Comparative assessment of energy requirement and tillage effectiveness of combined (active-passive) and conventional offset disc harrows. Biosystems Engineering, 198, 266-279.

In Introduction section to support the statements about no-tillage and strip rotary tillage, study may be added in this regard. As per author's request, here is the full reference details. Kumar, N., Chaudhary, A., Ahlawat, O. P., Naorem, A., Upadhyay, G., Chhokar, R. S., ... & Singh, G. P. (2023). Crop residue management challenges, opportunities and way forward for sustainable food-energy security in India: A review. Soil and Tillage Research, 228, 105641.

Author Response

Thank you for your suggestion. References have been cited in the article, please the line 43 and 285

Author Response File: Author Response.doc