Methodology of Designing Sealing Systems for Highly Loaded Rotary Machines

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

1.  Please delete this sentence from the abstract “Examples of modeling complex sealing systems of rotary machines with high parameters are given”

2.  Paragraphing needs to be amended. So many paragraphs and English syntax need major revision, especially in the introduction  

3. Other methodologies or other researchers' work on the designing and calculation of sealing systems is not referred to in the introduction. Similarly, the identification of the gap is missing in the introduction.

4.  The aim of the paper and the work done are a bit different. The scope/ aim of this paper should be only related to the shaftless pump. Please apply the necessary corrections.

5.  In the abstract and in the conclusion too, please add that this model is valid for shaftless pumps and similar is the case for validation rather than making it generalized for all highly loaded pumps

6.  Please clearly defined what you mean and understood by the highly loaded pump as I understand you want to say high-pressure pump. Because high pressure and highly loaded are different.

7.  I suggest removing the word compressor from your paper as compressor dynamics are different than pump and not applicable.

 

 

 

 

Author Response

Please see attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Reviewer Comments

In this paper, higher parameters of centrifugal machines are constantly required, such as the pressure of the medium to be sealed and the speed of rotation of the shaft. However, as the parameters increase, it becomes more and more difficult to ensure the effectiveness of sealing. In addition, sealing systems affect the overall safety of equipment operation, especially vibration. In order to harmonize the sealing functions and increase the dynamic rigidity of the rotors of centrifugal machines, a method for modeling complex sealing systems has been developed. Non-contact seals are considered as hydrostatic-dynamic bearings that can effectively dampen rotor oscillations. However, the followings should be carefully addressed in the revision to be published in Sustainability.

1-      The authors should be followed the instruction of the journal in all parts and sections in this manuscript.

2-      Complete mathematic calculation model with all nomenclature missing

3-      The abstract needs more quantitative results. The abstract section is an important and powerful representation of the research. It is better that the results should be presented with the support of specified data. Please provide your contribution and work novelty.

4-      The authors should indicate this technique to enhance system performance. Also, the author should add more references that discuss the effect of using this technique. It is recommended that the authors carry out wide analysis and comparison with the state-of-the-art studies.

5-      Most tables and figures are needed more improve the quality of all tables and figures.

6-      Add references for all equations.

7-      I would also expect to validate with two more experimental works available in the literature.

8-      The literature review must be improved. Please highlight in the literature review the differences between previous papers and your paper. Please clearly indicate the knowledge gap and prove that it is a really not analyzed area of the field. Please indicate new approach / new methods in a comparison to the existing investigations (literature review should be extended by adding references). 

9-      Description of simulation analysis should be improved. More quantitative information for the chosen model are needed.

10-  You need to add error analysis of your results and add the error bars in your graphs to indicate your accuracy measurements.

11-  Improve work justification. Also, add more analysis about velocity and pressure contours.

12-  More quantitative conclusions should be presented. Please prepare additional comparisons, some percentage differences. There is a lack of quantitative conclusions which should contain main findings from the paper and highlight the new and high novelty and contribution of your work to the field.

13-  Present the mathematical equation of the boundary conditions and initial condition.

14-  I would also suggest including in the conclusion section but also in several other places in the manuscript discussion and comparison with findings from other authors with similar published research work.

15-  The conclusion section on lacks in summative conclusions. The main results, novelty and academic contributions should be emphasized in this section. Moreover, are the results obtained in this paper really applicable in other similar researches?

16-  In the discussion development, it is very important to emphasize points of agreement or disagreement between results in this work and others cited in references part of manuscript.

17-  Authors should discuss limitations of the current study and possible improvements for future directions/research works.

18-  The nomenclature list is not complete. Please recheck parameters, variables and abbreviations appeared in the manuscript and append them to the nomenclature list.

 

19-  Finally, I recommend the author to read through the whole text and correct it to make it more reader-friendly.

Author Response

Please see attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

Reviewer Comments

The followings should be carefully addressed in the revision to be published in Sustainability.

1-      The abstract still needs more quantitative results. Please provide your contribution and work novelty.

2-      Most tables and figures are still  needed more improve the quality of all tables and figures.

3-      Add references for all equations.

4-      The literature review still need more improved.

 

5-      The conclusion section still lacks in summative conclusions. 

Author Response

Please see attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf