Next Article in Journal
Human Postures Recognition by Accelerometer Sensor and ML Architecture Integrated in Embedded Platforms: Benchmarking and Performance Evaluation
Next Article in Special Issue
Temporal Analysis and Classification of Sensor Signals
Previous Article in Journal
Improved Bidirectional RRT* Algorithm for Robot Path Planning
Previous Article in Special Issue
CFD Model of a Mechanical Oscillator Flowmeter
 
 
Article
Peer-Review Record

Eddy Current Testing of Conductive Coatings Using a Pot-Core Sensor

Sensors 2023, 23(2), 1042; https://doi.org/10.3390/s23021042
by Grzegorz Tytko
Reviewer 1: Anonymous
Reviewer 2:
Sensors 2023, 23(2), 1042; https://doi.org/10.3390/s23021042
Submission received: 10 December 2022 / Revised: 29 December 2022 / Accepted: 11 January 2023 / Published: 16 January 2023
(This article belongs to the Special Issue State-of-the-Art Sensors Technology in Poland 2021-2022)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

This paper presents an interesting development of the TREE method for the treatment of sensors equipped with ferrite core. I think that the seminal work of Theodoulidis and Kriezis (inventors of the methode name, after all) should be cited:

- Theodoulidis TP, Kriezis EE. 2006 Eddy current canonical problems (with applications to nondestructive evaluation). Forsyth, GA: Tech Science Press

The theoretical development are difficult to follow, as they refer a lot to previous works in a not so clear way. I think that a reader with no prior knowledge about the method would be completely lost. This should be revised and presented in a more compact way: why not only develop the final expressions in a way that readers can reproduce the results presented?

As a minor remark: The quantities T and U used in the development are not defined nor referred to.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

sensors-2122452

Eddy current testing of conductive coatings using a pot-core sensor

The manuscript must include some essential sections, e.g., analytical studies, simulation results etc.

Some

points need to be known.

·         Page 1 abstract. Author claim that "the analytical model was derived with the employment of the truncated region eigenfunction expansion (TREE) method." It will be good to add a separate section for the Analytical model and explain it in detail.

·         Page 1 abstract. "The calculations made for the TBC were verified with a numerical model created using the finite element method (FEM) in Comsol Multiphysics." It will be good to add a separate section for the finite element method (FEM) in Comsol Multiphysics, showing some simulated results.

·         Figure 1 and Figure 3 should explain more clearly and mention the part names in the figures.

·         The author should include a brief overview of the air–core, pot-core, and I-core sensors.

 

·         Is there any specific reason to select the frequency range from 1 kHz to 50 kHz? What about higher frequencies, i.e., in MHz etc.?

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

I would like to thank the authors for the modifications of the paper, which is now in my opinion much improved. I have no further remark.

Reviewer 2 Report

Sensors- 2122452

Eddy current testing of conductive coatings using a pot-core sensor

 

Thank you for allowing me to revise resubmitted manuscript titled " Eddy current testing of conductive coatings using a pot-core sensor" I believe the submitted manuscript and presented work are suitable for publishing in the Sensors. I suggest accepting the manuscript.

Back to TopTop