Study on the Characteristics of Downwash Field Range and Consistency of Spray Deposition of Agricultural UAVs
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsComments for author File: 
Comments.pdf
English to be improved
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe paper addresses the critical issue of optimizing agricultural UAV spraying operations. The primary focus is on understanding how the downwash field of UAVs influences the deposition of spray droplets, which is vital for effective and efficient crop protection. The study employs a robust methodology combining CFD simulations and experimental verification. The use of the Reynolds-averaged Navier‒Stokes (RANS) equations and the k-ε turbulence model to simulate the airflow and droplet deposition is particularly commendable. This approach ensures that the results are both theoretically sound and practically relevant​​. The paper presents a thorough analysis of how various parameters, such as wind speed and UAV altitude, affect droplet deposition. The identification of different shapes ("four-point type", "square-like", and "ellipse-like") of the downwash field under varying conditions is insightful. It demonstrates a nuanced understanding of the dynamics at play​​.
Overall, this paper makes a significant contribution to the field of agricultural engineering by enhancing our understanding of UAV downwash dynamics and their impact on spray deposition. The rigorous methodology, combined with practical insights, makes it a valuable resource for researchers and practitioners aiming to optimize UAV-based crop protection strategies. With minor improvements in experimental scope and data presentation, the study's impact could be even greater.
I have a few comments:
1. In my opinion the figure 1 should find yourself in the chapter "Materials and methods".
2. Numbering of figures is incorrect (figure 8 is before figure 7).
3. While the experimental validation is a strong point, the study could benefit from a more extensive range of field conditions. Testing in different crop types, varying environmental conditions, and different UAV models would strengthen the generalizability of the results.
4. The results could be presented in a more clear way for recipients.
5. The proposals should be made more specific and emphasize the scientific and industrial importance of the research.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe study investigated the spraying droplet distribution and field range of different wind speeds under hovering DJIF450 through CFD, whose simulation results were validated through actual experiments. In my opinion, the manuscript is well-written and has a high quality. Introduction provides a comprehensive literature review and proper justifications for the study. The validation experiment design is original and novel, utilizing EPS balls and their swing periods to indicate wind speeds. One minor comment is that adding length units in Figure 6 might provide additional clarity. The study results were presented thoroughly and discussed in detail. I rarely recommend manuscripts for publication in the first round of review, but I would like to recommend the current manuscript for publication. Congratulations to the authors on completing this manuscript.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 4 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsStudy on the Characteristics of Downwash Field Range and Consistency of Droplet Deposition of Agricultural UAVs
This manuscript contains the results of computational studies studying the effects of the flow generated by UAV rotors on the deposition of sprays and the downwash field range. The computational studies were backed up with experimental studies for validation. This is an extensive work and adds to the field. I believe the readers of Agriculture will find this manuscript interesting.
However, I believe that the authors can considerably improve the presentation of their work. This would enable the manuscript to have a wider audience as it will be better understood.
Please download the detailed comments from the attached file
Comments for author File: Comments.pdf
Grammar and spelling check should be carried out. Certain paragraphs might need to be re-written [detailed in the feedback to the authors]
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe revision for the review has been done extensively but still needs to revise some of the issues. Kindly take care of the following points.
1. The abstract should be properly rewritten. The word “downwash airflow velocity is repeatedly used.
2. Provide the citations in Table 1. Elaborate extensively.
3. In Figure 16 labeling is not visible. Replace it with proper visible labeling,
4. In your explanation for Point 13 “This paper is based on simulation calculations of fixed-wing drones in a hovering state, and the conclusions studied apply to this premise. Future work will expand the state of the drones to obtain broader conclusions”. What o you mean by Fixed wing Drones?
5. Still label of many figures are not properly visible or have small font sizes.
6. Still there are several instances of awkward phrasing and grammatical errors throughout the text and also there is the issue of capitalization like heading No. 2 “related works section” etc.
no
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 4 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsPLEASE SEE MY COMMENTS ATTACHED IN A FILE.
THE AUTHORS HAVE ADDRESSED 19 OUT OF THE 58 COMMENTS RAISED. I HOPE THEY CAN ATTEMPT TO ADDRESS THE OTHERS.
Comments for author File: Comments.pdf
Grammar and spelling check should be carried out. Other details were presented to the authors.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
