Review Reports

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The manuscript is a high quality one with an interesting topic for readers.  The structure of paper is logistic and writting is also very good for reading and understanding. The content of the paper is valuable for BF relative technician as reference to improve controling lever and producivity. 

1. please give more detail discription about the materials and research method (the second part of the paper);
2. the format of the paper should be in agreement with the requirement of the magazine，for example，“5. ......” should not be as a part of text.

Author Response

1. The revised version of the article provides a more detailed description of the "1. Introduction" and "2. Materials and Methods".
2. "References" expanded and adjusted.
3. "5. .....” is omitted from the text.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Reviewer comments on the paper

Development and Implementation of Decision Support Systems 2 for Blast Smelting Control in the Conditions of PrJSC "Kamet- 3 steel"

General comment: The authors addressed an important technological issue. In my opinion, the methods and analysis carried out are adequate. The general findings of the authors agree with the observed trend in previous work. In my opinion, the paper deserves to be published after revisions.

Some corrections, however, are necessary before the publication.

1. The literature review can be improved and discussed in further detail. The references are relatively old. Some important recent references must be included and discussed the method of analysis and improvements included in this work.
2. Materials and Methods: This section is poorly described. The methods are the most important section of a scientific paper. I recommend a detailed description of the methods to assure reproducibility of the results. Without a deep presentation and discussion of the analysis method, the paper became a mere description of the well-known operational conditions of the actual blast furnace.

 

 

In my view, the above suggestions are mandatory to the authors with the aim of improving the general readability of the paper.

 

Author Response

1. The revised version of the article provides a more detailed description of the sections “1. Introduction" and "2. Materials and methods".
2. "References" expanded and adjusted.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

The authors declare that the aim of this work is to "increase the level of automation of the BF production through the development and implementation of new decision support systems for managing BF smelting in variable technological and fuel and raw materials conditions ". then I lack information on specific developments in terms of analyzing the level of automation before and after the introduction of new support systems from the technical solutions, through the declared data analysis to the interpretation of the acquired functional dependencies for automated control at the declared 3 DSS levels. Although the article summarizes all three levels of management in a descriptive way with references to the authors' work, it would be appropriate to outline the basic differences compared to other expert systems (as far as the current state of knowledge is concerned) as well as to state in more detail what a particular DSS entails in terms of quantitative-qualitative indicators. The paper outlines a few remarks for possible correction or addition (see attached file|.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

1. The revised version of the article provides a more detailed description of the sections “1. Introduction" and "2. Materials and methods".
2. "References" expanded and adjusted.
3. The corrected article answers some questions.
4. This image (Fig. 1) is a visualization of the operator's workstation during the operation of the DSS, in the upper left part there are text recommendations generated by the DSS for technological personnel. The DSS interface is implemented at the request of users in Russian, includes 2 main video frames, therefore it has this form in this version. This DSS does not contain functional dependencies, but is based on algorithms that include decision-making in case of deviations in the quality indicators of the charge and fuel, as well as taking into account the characteristic errors that are made by technologists in process control.
5. Indeed, this figure 4 is illustrative, more details about these stationary thermal probes are given both in the text and in the corrected section "2. Materials and Methods" of the new version.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 4 Report

The scientific value is low. Decision support systems (DSS) are installed at different blast furnaces worldwide.

It is difficult for me to understand the technological novelty of the DSS described in this paper. What is beyond state of the art? Is it the monitoring of the blast distribution or the temperature distribution above the burden level? This should be clearly described.

The style of the paper is more like a report but like a scientific article. The text contains very long sentences (several lines). It is not easy to read and needs revision. Additionally, thorough grammatical and orthographical proofreading is required.

Half of the 40 references are published by one of the co-authors. This excessive self-citation is scientifically not sound.

Chapter 2, “Materials and Methods”, is very short. The applied methods have to be reproducible. A detailed description is necessary.

Page 3, lines 118 – 119: What does the expression “unit” mean?

Page 6, lines 223 – 224: “meterological tool”: Is this a misspelling of “metallurgical tool”?

Figure 5: Which temperature profile is measured with the thermoprobes? Are they moveable, and if yes, in which direction can they be moved?

Chapter 5 “Patents”: What is the purpose of this chapter? A patent can be a reference.

This paper needs a major rework before acceptance for publication. The content, style and orthography need to be significantly improved.

Author Response

1. The revised version of the article provides a more detailed description of the sections “1. Introduction" and "2. Materials and methods".
2. "References" expanded and adjusted.
3. Page 3, lines 118 – 119 (old version): What does the expression “unit” mean? - Fixed in the new version of the article.
4. Page 6, lines 223 – 224 (old version): “meterological tool”: Is this a misspelling of “metallurgical tool”? - It's not a misspelling. This refers to the low accuracy of metrological tool when controlling heat removals on water-cooled elements of tuyere tools in manual mode.
5. Figure 5: Which temperature profile is measured with the thermoprobes? Are they moveable, and if yes, in which direction can they be moved? - These thermoprobes - stationary, motionless. In the revised article, a description has been added.
6. Chapter 5 “Patents”: What is the purpose of this chapter? A patent can be a reference. - Deleted chapter 5 in the amended article.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 4 Report

All my comments were considered in the revision.