Self-Excited-Resonance of Soil-Engaging Surface Spectrum: A New Method of Soil Cutting Resistance Reduction
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The paper describes the self-excited-resonance of soil-engaging surface spectrum: a new method of soil cutting resistance reduction. under different frequencies and amplitude. The paper is well structured and written in good English and it may present a good basis for further research since there seems to be a lack of papers dealing with the applications of vibration technology in soil cutting tools.
Detailed comments are given as follows and check pdf attached.
Title: Good state.
Abstract: Please rewrite this shorten
Introduction: needs to to support the direction of your research, present the novelty and research gaps.
Material and Methods: The methods are good described in detail and soil-engaging components-soil vibration cutting model, accurate measurement of natural vibration fundamental frequency .... etc,
Are you used the experimental design in this study?
Results & Discussion: Great results. However, i suggest to Authors improved the discussion section of your research paper should include limitations of your work, casual arguments and deductive
Conclusions: Good state
Comments for author File: 
Comments.pdf
It is fine to minor editing of English language required
Author Response
请参阅附件。
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
To explore the methods and effects of spectral resistance reduction for soil-engaging surface of self-excited resonant bulldozing plate with plane base on the basis of resonance effects, this study designed 24 spectral structures of the soil-engaging surface of bulldozing plates and model samples to test the resistance reduction characteristics of each model sample. However, there are still some problems.
1. The authors proposed a self-excited resonance approach for soil resistance reduction in this study. Whether the authors have done some corresponding studies and what the results are, it is necessary to list them in the introduction.
2. The relationship between the forces F1, F2, F3 and the horizontal resistance Fx, vertical resistance Fy or resultant force F in Figure 7(b) needs to be expressed in a relational equation.
3. The resistances at amplitude 2 mm, frequency 22 Hz and amplitude 6 mm, frequency 1 Hz are closer to the resistance of the plane dozer, and the resistance at amplitude 6 mm, frequency 41 Hz is even greater than the resistance of the plane bulldozing plates, which is not consistent with the description of lines 361-363.
4. Although the variations of the horizontal resistance Fx basically represent laws of resistance reduction of the bulldozing plate, is it appropriate to use Fx to represent the resultant force in the subsequent analysis?
5. In Figure8, the difference in the law of resistance variation at different frequencies is large for amplitudes of 2mm, 4mm and 6mm, so it is necessary to analyze them separately.
6. The description of lines 405-407 is inconsistent with Figure 9.
7. Whether Figure 10 is the result of this study obtained by experiment or another study cited should be stated.
English needs to be properly polished.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report
The content analysis of lines 424-440 has problems.
1. From Figure 9, it can be seen that when amplitude is 4 mm, soil adhesion on soil-engaging surfaces at frequency of 22 Hz is the least. In addition, when amplitude is 6 mm, soil adhesion on soil-engaging surfaces at frequency of 14 Hz is the least. This is not consistent with that description ” Amount of soil adhesion on soil-engaging surfaces of the bulldozing plate model was the least at the resonance points corresponding to three different amplitudes in Figure 9m, 9n and 9o”.
2. The description “From Figure 9a~9l as well as Figure 9p~9x, it can be seen that the far from the resonance frequency, regardless of the increase or decrease of the frequency, the amount of soil adhesion to the surface of the model sample increases” is not consistent with Figure 9.
Minor editing of English language required
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
