Parametrization of Fluid Models for Electrical Breakdown of Nitrogen at Atmospheric Pressure

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

In the manuscript entitled “Parametrization of Fluid Models for Electrical Breakdown of Nitrogen at Atmospheric Pressure”, the author shows the simulation results using different approximation methods. The manuscript is very well written with a many information. The manuscript is clearly written with a sufficient number of citations.

In the introduction, the author describes the importance of using models that can be used in practical applications of low-temperature plasma. It is also interesting that the author focuses on nitrogen discharge, which is often used under atmospheric pressure. The diagnosis of such discharges is very important for applications and will facilitate the next direction for use in practice.

I have the following questions or comments about the text

-          Page 4, under table 1:  formula for U(t) is not clear, what is U(t)?

-          For calculations, you work with the BOLSIG+ solver. Do you have a reason for choosing this program? Have you tried the solution using any other solver? E.g. The Lisbon KInetics - LoKI.

In general, the submitted manuscript is in an acceptable form and I recommend accepting the article for publication in journal Plasma.

 

Author Response

In the manuscript entitled “Parametrization of Fluid Models for Electrical Breakdown of Nitrogen at Atmospheric Pressure”, the author shows the simulation results using different approximation methods. The manuscript is very well written with a many information. The manuscript is clearly written with a sufficient number of citations.

In the introduction, the author describes the importance of using models that can be used in practical applications of low-temperature plasma. It is also interesting that the author focuses on nitrogen discharge, which is often used under atmospheric pressure. The diagnosis of such discharges is very important for applications and will facilitate the next direction for use in practice.

I have the following questions or comments about the text

-          Page 4, under table 1:  formula for U(t) is not clear, what is U(t)?

-          For calculations, you work with the BOLSIG+ solver. Do you have a reason for choosing this program? Have you tried the solution using any other solver? E.g. The Lisbon KInetics - LoKI.

In general, the submitted manuscript is in an acceptable form and I recommend accepting the article for publication in journal Plasma.

 

Response

We would like to thank the reviewer for the comments and suggestions. We have revised the manuscript to correct all the issues raised by the reviewer.  Below is the response for each comment.

U(t) is the notation for step function.  We should have defined the function.  However, it is redundant since we state a step voltage is applied.  The U(t) was removed.

Most of the article published that we have cited and reference use the BOLSIG+ two term Boltzman solver.  Since you pointed to this resource (The Lisbon KInetics - LoKI ) we will look into it.  They use the same set of cross sections set as BOLSIG+.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Please see the attached file

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Moderate editing is necessary

Author Response

Please see attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Not all the formula must end with a point. If the following sentence starts with a lower case letter a comma is needed.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

English form is adeguate

Author Response

Not all the formula must end with a point. If the following sentence starts with a lower case letter a comma is needed.

Response:  The punctuations for the equations were corrected. Some of the periods were replaced by comma where the sentence continued.