Simulation of a Hybrid Thermoelectric-Magnetocaloric Refrigerator with a Magnetocaloric Material Having a First-Order Transition

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

1 It is not clear why the authors combined the thermoelectric and magnetocaloric systems together. The potential applications of the system should be discussed.

2 The authors used a lot of parameters in Section 2. A schematic should be provided with all the parameters and symbols for easier understanding.

3 The plots in Figure 2, 6, 7, 8 are very confusing.

4 The presentation of the results and discussions need to be improved. The figures and discussions are very confusing, and it is very difficult to get the logic of the work.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

       I think the authors may need to provide real materials for the Figure 1, sandwich structure, and provide the experimental data to verify the simulations.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Manuscript ID: magnetism-2028766

Title: Simulation of a hybrid termoelectric-magnetocaloric refrigerator with a magnetocaloric material having a first-order transition

Journal: MAGNETISM

 

Comments to authors:

In this study a simple hybrid thermoelectric-magnetocaloric (TE-MC) system is analytically and numerically simulated using the working parameters of commercial Peltier cells and the properties of a material with a first-order magneto-structural phase transition, as La(Fe,Mn,Si)13H1.65. The results are compared with those corresponding to a pure TE system and a pure MC one with ideal thermal diodes. Although extensive work has been performed but the novelty can be questioned. However, before it can be considered for publication, please address the following comments for a minor revision:

1)      Where is the word “Abstract”? Please add it.

2)      The Abstract should be enriched with the brief details of the experimental methodology. The problem to be addressed in this study should also be highlighted in the Abstract.

3)      Please highlight the novelty in the Abstract also.

4)      Formatting is required according to the template of the journal.

5)      The authors should also present some quantitative results in the Abstract.

6)      English proofreading is required for grammatical mistakes and typos.

7)      The novelty and significance of the present work should be highlighted in the last paragraph of the Introduction section.

8)      The authors are recommended to add latest relevant literature review on such works.

9)      What is the need for this work? Is this work helpful for practical applications? Which applications?

10)  The literature review should be improved by adding latest references and discussion.

11)  Work methodologies need more discussion.

12)  Results section should be defended using technical reasons and relevant references.

13)  More technical discussion to the presented experimental results should be added.

14)  There are no critical review/discussions before the Conclusions. Authors should add it.

15)  Conclusions should be refined and briefly presented. More numerical results should be added.

16)  What are the limitations of the present study? Please mention them in the manuscript.

17)  The authors can add the future recommendations based on the present study.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

The authors have addressed the comments and suggestions by the reviewers, i think it can be accepted now.