Dynamic Performance Analysis of a Compact Annular-Radial-Orifice Flow Magnetorheological Valve and Its Application in the Valve Controlled Cylinder System
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
- In section 2 it is not clear which design methodology was used to obtain the design parameters and the proposed parameters are not explained or justified. This should be clarified so that the work can be reproduced.
- In section 3, it is necessary to give the details of the finite element modeling process.Justify the type of finite element used for both solid parts and air zones, materials, boundary conditions, simulation conditions - symmetry, mesh size analysis, among other simulation parameters.
- Figure 5 has no units of measurement
- The discrepancy of the models presented in Figure 23 is not discussed. How is the discrepancy justified, how much is acceptable?
- Add a results discussion section addressing the discrepancy presented in Figure 23 and the main results.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
This study presents the dynamic performance analysis of a compact annular-radial-orifice flow magnetorheological value with variable radial damping gaps . My concerns are:
- In Introduction, The authors mentioned that the reasonable damping gap ranges are between 0.5mm and 1.5mm. The reference about this should be given in this paper.
- In Section 3.3. The values of some parameters, such as dynamic viscosity of the zero magnetic field η, the flow rate of the hydraulic system q, and the modification coefficient depending on the flow rate c should be given in the simulation analysis.
- In Conclusions. The authors mentioned that the proposed MR valve significantly improves its efficiency through compact design and variable radial damping gaps. However, the efficiency of the proposed valve is not defined in this paper.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
The reviewer's report was attached as a pdf document.
Comments for author File: Comments.pdf
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 4 Report
Dear Authors,
I am glad that I could become a reviewer of your article. It is a great contribution to the development of industry. You have devoted a lot of time and work to simulation and experimental research. The work is prepared at a very high level. The analysis of the operation of the valve itself and in the system with the actuator is very extensive and gives a lot of information for further applications of such valves. The high level of the presented results is undeniable.
The only thing that, in my opinion, would improve readability is the presentation of the maps in Figure 23 from a different angle or in the form of a different graph. Perhaps breaking down the 3D plots into two 2D plots would help. You can also add information about the maximum and average differences between simulation, experiment and theory.
Congratulations on your good article and I wish you further scientific success.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 5 Report
This paper designed and developed a compact annular-radial-orifice flow MR valve with variable radial damping gaps which consist of annular damping gap, radial damping gap and small orifice flow channel in sequence. Simultaneously, the size of radial damping gap can be guaranteed by replacing the washers of different thickness.
Unfortunately, the main drawback of the MR valve is the inability to quickly change the radial damping gap: the size of radial damping gap can be guaranteed by replacing the washers.
For practical use this idea MR valve, it is desirable to automatically change the radial gap at a speed of 100-200 ms
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
The authors improved the manuscript taking into account this reviewer's comments.
Reviewer 3 Report
No comments
