Study of the Cutting Mechanism of Oil Tree Peony Stem

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The article has been prepared in sufficient high quality, many and various analysis and results of calculations have been carried out and they were compared with the results of other researchers. Presented research results are sufficient original and new. The content of the manuscript is acceptable, the manuscript is structured in agreement with instructions to authors.  

Some comments and remarks:

• The authors in the „Abstract“ have to provide some information about the investigated oil tree Peony and where these investigations were carried out? The “Abstract” have only a general character, it provides only justification of research work and there are not presented some concrete research results. For example, the last sentence states: “The results indicate that optimization of cutting speed and tool geometric parameters…”. It is not clear exactly what the optimal cutting speed and tool geometric parameters were determined? This error is also evident in the conclusions.
• The text font presented in lines 89-93 is too small, and the end of this paragraph is cut off.
• In Table 1 presented only months, but it is not indicated the year of experiments?
• Table number 1 is repeated twice (in lines 95 and 111).
• In the “Materials and Methods” chapter there are written, that were investigated “Cutting tools with different geometric parameters“. But there were investigated cutting tools, in which only two angles were changed: blade and sliding-cutting angles.
• In the text is presented (in line 134), that „Cutting process was controlled by the computer through the testing machine“. It is unclear whether the authors used the manufactured testing machine, or made it themselves for their research?
• The title of Figure 7 is jumped to the next page.
• In the graphs of Figures 5-8 presented only average means of points. If these tests have been repeated several times, the calculated errors should also be reported.
• The conclusions should specify and reflect more clearly the main results of the performed research and analysis.

Author Response

    Thank you for your extremely careful job and sensible suggestion. We have revised our manuscript according to your suggestion. And we replied your comments point by point as shown in the uploaded file.We tried our best to improve the manuscript and made some changes in the manuscript. And here we did not list the changes but marked in red in revised paper.

    Once again, thank you very much for your comments and suggestions.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

Keep attention on lines

23 Missing dot after 1 and up case for "I" should be "1. Introduction"

25 Missing space after Dynasty should be Dynasty [1]

27 Missing space after acids [2]

Every ware should be space after a word and before the square brackets []

31 Missing space after decade and correct 3-4 with 3,4 should be decade [3,4]

34 Same error like line 31 should be machine [5,6].

38 Same error, space after "sufficient"

39 Space after  "machine" 

41 Space after  "psammophila" 

42 Space after  "generation" 

44 Space after  "cutting"

46 Again missing space, space after deformation also space before wood "deformation[13].Wood" should be deformation [13]. Wood

47 Space after  "force"

51 Space after  "advances"

55 Space after "2.65 m/s"

56 Space after "speed"

59 Also missing space after "2.9" and after "m/s" should be 2.9 m/s [19]

60 Space after "heights"

61 Space after "energy"

64 Space after "tested"

67 Space after "nodes"

68 Space after "cut"

70 Space after "increased"

81 Dot after 2 should be "2. Materials and Methods"

87 Space after 50 cm

88 Space after 12-15 cm.

89-92 The text is smaller in line 92 are "seen in" missing text

93 one dot without text

Missing text, explication for table 1 the must be before table 1 (before line 95)

99 Machine (Figure. 1). space after machine without dot after "Figure" should be machine (Figure 1).

104 Figure. 1 should be BOLD

107 Space after  "paper"

108 Correct Table 1 in Table 2

110 Figure 2 - bold

111 Table 1 - bold also correct in Table 2

In table space before brackets ()

Also you can move table in the same page, like line 111 move in page 4

114 Space after 25, should be 25 mm/min

121 bar [26])

122 rates [27]

123 Table 2 - bold and correct in Table 3

126 Correct Table 2 in Table 3

Also the paragraph from 124 to 128 should be before the table (line 123) not after the table (line 123)

132 Space after 10, should be 10 cm

133 Space after 2, should be 2 cm

142 Figure 3. - should be bolded

143 Dot after 3 should be 3. Results

148 Space after "stage" should be stage (OA) and space after "stage" should be (AC)

150 Space after "stage" - should be stage (CD)

153 The text "Figure 4" - should be bolded

154 Space after 5 should be Figure 5 (a)

158 Space after 27.71 and after 31.43

161 Space after 5 should be Figure 5 (b).

164 Space after "cutting" should be cutting (0

170 The text "Figure 5." should be bolded. Also after "force" replace dot by double dot ":"

173 The text "Figure 6" - should be bolded

176 Space after 25, 200 and 200

181 After "Figure 4" delete dot "." (after dot we start with caps)

183-186 These lines should be in the same page with figure

185 The text "Figure 7" - should be bolded. Also, after "energy" replace dot by double dot ":"

187 Space after 7 should be Figure 7 (a)

190 Space after 32.26 and after 29.93

194 Space after 7 should be Figure 7 (b)

195 Space after "cutting" should be cutting (0

200 The text "Figure 8" - should be bolded.

201 "be seen, , cutting" - delete one coma ","

203 Space after 25

206 Dot after 4 and caps for "d" should be "4. Discussion"

214 The text "Figure 9" - should be bolded.

216 The text "Figure 10" - should be bolded.

218 Space after "angle", should be angle [28-29]

220 Space "angle”, should be "angle (α′)"

221 What is "Eq." I think should be equation (2), also after "α" we need space should be "α (0"

223 Space after "angle", should be "angle (design"

230 The text "Figure 11" - should be bolded.

232 Space after "results" - should be "results [29]"

233 Space after 11 - should be 11 (a)

235 Space after "force"  - should be "force (F)"

236 Modify Eq. with equation, also space after "surfaces" - should be "surfaces ("

237 Space after "off)" - should be "off) [29]"

241 Space after 11 and after "force"

243 "Eq." should be "equation"

245 Space after "angles", also  "Eq." should be "equation"

246  "Eq." should be "equation"

247  "Eq." should be "equation"

253 Space after "psammophila" and after "logs" and after "studies"

276 Space after "25"

285 Space after "rate"

289 Dot after 5 and caps for "C" - should be "5. Conclusion"

Keep attentions on these errors and recommendations.

Author Response

Thank you for your extremely careful job and sensible suggestion. We have revised our manuscript according to your suggestion. And we replied your comments point by point as shown in the uploaded file.We tried our best to improve the manuscript and made some changes in the manuscript. And here we did not list the changes but marked in red in revised paper.

Once again, thank you very much for your comments and suggestions.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

Dear authors, now your paper looks better. 
In my pdf  version have some minor errors (suggestions):
Line 
92 and 93 move it in page 3 
237 move it in pg 8 (in same pg with figure)

263 in the same pg with equation 6 

Best regards!