Aspects Regarding the Physical Parameters and Wear in the Work Process of the Disc Openers for Seeding Machines

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The paper conducted statistical analysis on the diameter, mass, thickness, etc. of the coulter discs and obtained deviation data. However, the study significance of the paper is not clear enough.

1.As a research paper, the framework of the paper lacks a second level title. In addition, the layers of study are not clear enough.

2. The introduction section lacks clear expression of the study significance.

3.It is recommended that the corresponding structural fig. should be added in section 2.

4. For agricultural machinery, the processing accuracy and strength of materials are generally not too high, including the requirement for wear resistance characteristics. Even if the parts fail, they can be replaced directly, and the cost will not be too high. So what is the significance of this study?

5. The line representation in Figure 8 is not clear enough.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

My comments in the letter.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The author has made revisions to the issues in the paper according to the first review comments, but the overall structure of the paper has not been refined and the hierarchy is not clear. The first question in the first review comments was not perfected. Suggest further improvement.

Author Response

Dear reviewer,
We are sending you the last version of our work on which we intervened according to your suggestions.
I hope that I understood the suggestions well and acted accordingly.
I put sub-headings and sub-sub-headings in both Results and Discussions.
For a new arrangement on the page, it was necessary to remove a (less important) figure, so that we fit under 20 pages.
Thanks for the suggestions! We hope that they led to a better understanding of the information that we authors tried to convey to the readers!

Dear reviewer,

Thank you, once again, for your support in improving the scientific level of our paper! We appreciate this!

We are sorry that we are unable to fully understand your remarks in the review report regarding the reorganization of the paper.

Our work has, first of all, the intention of presenting an analysis of the basic characteristics of the disc furrow openers of cereal seeding machines (especially in no-till conditions), both for new ones and after they have worked for a while of time.

We assume, however, that part of the information that can be found in the Results part of the paper could very well have been found in the Material and method part. Yes, we agree with this, but the information was entered at the time of the presentation of the results so that the reader would have them at hand to make his own assessment of them.

As it happens most of the time in practice, the distribution of the parameters of some car parts can be not only Gaussian (normal), but also of another type (e.g. logarithmic distribution - as presented in our paper).

Assuring you of our full consideration, we thank you for your appreciation and for your contribution to raising the scientific level of our paper.

Gheorghe VOICU

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

I have no comments.

Author Response

Dear reviewer,

Thank you, once again, for your support in improving the scientific level of our paper! We appreciate this!

Gheorghe VOICU