Next Article in Journal
Skeletal Muscle Assessment Using Quantitative Ultrasound: A Narrative Review
Next Article in Special Issue
Resonant Gas Sensing in the Terahertz Spectral Range Using Two-Wire Phase-Shifted Waveguide Bragg Gratings
Previous Article in Journal
Contrastive Learning-Based Anomaly Detection for Actual Corporate Environments
Previous Article in Special Issue
An Angular Radial Extended Interaction Amplifier at the W Band
 
 
Communication
Peer-Review Record

A Novel Staggered Double-Segmented Grating Slow-Wave Structure for 340 GHz Traveling-Wave Tube

Sensors 2023, 23(10), 4762; https://doi.org/10.3390/s23104762
by Zechuan Wang 1,†, Junwan Zhu 1,†, Zhigang Lu 1,2,*, Jingrui Duan 1, Haifeng Chen 1, Shaomeng Wang 1, Zhanliang Wang 1, Huarong Gong 1 and Yubin Gong 1
Reviewer 1:
Sensors 2023, 23(10), 4762; https://doi.org/10.3390/s23104762
Submission received: 7 April 2023 / Revised: 5 May 2023 / Accepted: 13 May 2023 / Published: 15 May 2023
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Millimeter Wave and Terahertz Source, Sensing and Imaging)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

 

A novel Staggered Double Segmented-Grating Slow Wave Structure for THz TWT is proposed in the manuscript. The SDSG improves the saturated power, gain, and efficiency compared with the SW-TWT. The manuscript is well organized and presented. And some comments are listed below.

1) Line 127, it indicates the simulation is carried by ANSOFT and CST. But most of the results are more likely by the CST. Could you please indicate more clearly?

2) Line 159, figure 8 gives a magnitude of 1010 V/m, which is relatively high and induces breakdown. Can you explain the setup in the simulation?

3) Line 162, The detailed structure and electric field distribution for couplers should be included.

4) Please gives the electric field distribution and electron trajectory for PIC simulation.

5) Please compare the performance in this paper with the published articles in 340 GHz TWT.

 

 

Author Response

First of all, I would like to send my best wishes to you for your objective and fair comments on my research paper. According to your comments, I examined and modified the paper carefully.

Please see the attachment

 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

1. It would be more helpful and would also guaranteed the self-autonomous character of the paper, if the authors added some more theoretical aspects regarding their concept. In this manner, the paper will be more helpful for the interested reader.

2. Can the authors provide some evidence regarding their numerical simulations? For example, what is the required RAM or CPU time?

3. Have the authors attempted to proceed to some experimental results? In such a case a description of the experimental setup would be indeed helpful.

4. How the proposed structure compares to existing ones from the literature apart from those appearing in the paper?

The language of the manuscript is adequate.

Author Response

First of all, I would like to send my best wishes to you for your objective and fair comments on my research paper. According to your comments, I examined and modified the paper carefully.

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

The revised version of the paper has been improved. Thus, I think that the paper can be accepted for publication.

The language is acceptable and can be understood.

Back to TopTop