Next Article in Journal
3D Numerical Modeling of Induced-Polarization Grounded Electrical-Source Airborne Transient Electromagnetic Response Based on the Fictitious Wave Field Methods
Previous Article in Journal
Impact of a Hybrid Assisted Wheelchair Propulsion System on Motion Kinematics during Climbing up a Slope
Open AccessArticle
Peer-Review Record

Dynamic Balance Method for Grading the Chain Drive Double Threshing Drum of a Combine Harvester

Appl. Sci. 2020, 10(3), 1026; https://doi.org/10.3390/app10031026
Reviewer 1: Anonymous
Reviewer 2: Alain Gil Del Val
Reviewer 3: Anonymous
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10(3), 1026; https://doi.org/10.3390/app10031026
Received: 2 January 2020 / Revised: 29 January 2020 / Accepted: 3 February 2020 / Published: 4 February 2020
(This article belongs to the Section Mechanical Engineering)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

It is an interesting paper, very valuable, well structured scientifically.
Personally I find the chapter "MATERIAL AND METHODS" too much developed, at least compared to the chapter "RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS" - almost double the number of pages (15 vs 9)
It is not wrong but usually the percentage should be the opposite: the results should be presented more widely than the method.

Author Response

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

It is an interesting paper, very valuable, well structured scientifically. Personally I find the chapter "MATERIAL AND METHODS" too much developed, at least compared to the chapter "RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS" - almost double the number of pages (15 vs 9). It is not wrong but usually the percentage should be the opposite: the results should be presented more widely than the method.

Answer: Thank you for your comments. Based on your comments and other reviewers, we have carefully revised and adjusted this article. For the MATERIAL AND METHODS portion of the manuscript, we compress it. Because "(2) Chain drive lateral vibration model system free vibration" is a theoretical explanation of chain drive. This article does not cite the conclusions of this section. So we delete this part.

In order to better analyze the Engineering application of double drum balance of combine harvester, in the MATERIAL AND METHODS, we added the "2.6 Test method for vibration characteristics and axis trajectory", the same to the RESULTS AND DISCUSSION section.

In this revision we have modified the grammar throughout the whole manuscript. We have also updated older references. We have modified the titles of figures and tables to make the titles of figures and tables easier to understand. Because roller and drum are the same meaning, it is unified to drum. All revisions are marked in red in the manuscript. Thank you very much for your careful review.

Thank you for your careful review. I apologize for my carelessness. After carefully reading the review comments and carefully modifying the manuscript, I feel that my writing level has also been improved. Thank you very much for your careful review. Your careful review and advice is a valuable asset to enhance our research capabilities.

All the modifications made to the manuscript are in red colour.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

This article proposes a dynamic balance strategy for double chain drives drum of combine harvester. The study is an interesting engineering problem about vibration problems in a current machine, the experimentation is well selected and the results are so important for technical user. However, I can not see the contribution of this work to improve the state of the art.

The paper requires a fatigue study or a fatigue simulation analyzing and comparing the different configurations of chain drives in the several machines. The results would analyze the vibration level, the strains and stresses. Besides, knowing the fatigue life of these elements of improved machines with respect of the current ones could be interested.

The introduction requires a better organization.

Revise the word spelling, the fonts, and paragraphs. Besides, revise mistakes, i.e., page 24 lines 10 and 11

The results and discussions part of this work needs more clarity of thought.

The conclusions are general and they should be improved.

On the total, this manuscript requires major revision.

Author Response

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This article proposes a dynamic balance strategy for double chain drives drum of combine harvester. The study is an interesting engineering problem about vibration problems in a current machine, the experimentation is well selected and the results are so important for technical user. However, I can not see the contribution of this work to improve the state of the art.

Answer: Thank you for your comments. This manuscript mainly studies the dynamic balance characteristics of single threshing drum and double threshing drums when they are driven by chain. This paper also carried out dynamic balance test and analysis on the double threshing drums of the chain transmission. We concluded that the chain transmission affects the dynamic balance. The traditional dynamic balance is mainly through the axial transmission of the drum by the motor. But in harvesting machinery, many drive systems are driven by chains. It is difficult to improve the accuracy of the dynamic balance of the threshing drum in the conventional dynamic balance method. Based on the analysis of the experiment in this paper, it is concluded that the chain transmission will change the phase of the threshing drum to be balanced. This manuscript also applies this conclusion. The contribution of this paper to the engineering industry is that the balance of chain-driven drums is proposed to consider the effect of the chain on the phase angle of the rollers, and then the dynamic balancing method of the chain-driven drum is given.

 

The paper requires a fatigue study or a fatigue simulation analyzing and comparing the different configurations of chain drives in the several machines. The results would analyze the vibration level, the strains and stresses. Besides, knowing the fatigue life of these elements of improved machines with respect of the current ones could be interested.

Answer: Thank you for your comments. You suggest that we need to perform a fatigue study or fatigue simulation analysis of the chain drive. We need to compare the different counterweights required for the chain drive of several combine harvesters, the resulting vibration levels, the resulting strains and stresses, etc. These new questions provide us with good research ideas. We will analyse these issues further in the next research. The focus of this manuscript is the Dynamic balance method for grading chain drive double threshing drum of combine harvester. In this paper, the double drums with chain drive of crawler combined harvester were selected as research object. The aim of this study was to develop a dynamic unbalance mode for grading chain drive double drums. Therefore, this manuscript does not add these contents. But in the next article we will carry out your research content. We hope that reviewers will forgive us for this revision.

 

The introduction requires a better organization.

Answer: Thank you for your comments. Based on your comments and other reviewers, we have carefully revised and adjusted the INTRODUCTION. For the MATERIAL AND METHODS section of this manuscript, we compress it. Because "(2) Chain drive lateral vibration model system free vibration" is a theoretical explanation of chain drive. This article does not cite the conclusions of this section. So we delete this part.

In order to better analyse the Engineering application of double drum balance of combine harvester, in the MATERIAL AND METHODS, we added the "2.6 Test method for vibration characteristics and axis trajectory", the same to the RESULTS AND DISCUSSION section. All revisions are marked in red in the manuscript.

 

Revise the word spelling, the fonts, and paragraphs. Besides, revise mistakes, i.e., page 24 lines 10 and 11.

Answer: Thank you for your comments. We checked and revised the whole manuscript. In this manuscript page 24 lines 10 and 11, Bold letters are the meaning of vectors. This manuscript has been adjusted for easier understanding.

 

The results and discussions part of this work needs more clarity of thought.

Answer: Thank you for your comments. We make revision to results and discussions. Some figures are also added to explain the difficult paragraphs. In order to better analyze the Engineering application of double drum balance of combine harvester, the vibration characteristics and axis trajectory are added into RESULTS AND DISCUSSION section.

 

The conclusions are general and they should be improved.

Answer: Thank you for your comments. We have rewritten the conclusion section. . All revisions are marked in red in the manuscript.

Thank you for your careful review. I apologize for my carelessness. After carefully reading the review comments and carefully modifying the manuscript, I feel that my writing level has also been improved. Thank you very much for your careful review. Your careful review and advice is a valuable asset to enhance our research capabilities.

All the modifications made to the manuscript are in red colour.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

You are using past tense instead of present tense. As general rule, use „is” instead of „was”, „are” instead of „were” You are using terms „roller” and „drum”. Are they not the same? If they are the same, then use only one, for the unity of the text. If they are used for different elements, then you need to explain. Page 6 line 9, page 7 line 15 and so on – use „and” instead of the sign „、” Figure 4 and following discussions – use another greek letter (like β) instead of „∠” Page 12 line 2 – This description is not clear „Different sizes of sprockets were installed between the drum and the drum, which were respectively 4 points 18 teeth, 6 points 18 teeth, 6 points 21 teeth, 6 points 25 teeth”.  

Do you mean „between the two drums” instead of „between the drum and the drum”? It is not clear what you mean by „points”. Are they variants like, as example, „18 teeth sprockets and 4 phase points ”?

There is no comparison between the results with these variants.

Page 12 line 6 – What is „M8”? Page 17 line 13 – Something wrong with the measurement unit „The test weight was 150 mm. ”

Author Response

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

You are using past tense instead of present tense. As general rule, use „is” instead of „was”, „are” instead of „were”.

Answer: Thank you for your comments. I checked the grammatical requirements of academic writing and learned that Abstract should use past tense to tell my experiments and conclusions. The introduction summarizes the literature and questions, focusing on the present tense and using some past tense. Method and Results are about your own experiments and results, using past tense. In discussion, you need to use the present tense and the past tense interchangeably based on the descriptive literature or your own experiments. The results of the cited literature are that conclusions published in the past can be considered as implementations that have been acknowledged and should be used now. However, when describing past experiments, especially the author's subject is because past things should be used. The tense of whole manuscript has been revised.

 

You are using terms „roller” and „drum”. Are they not the same? If they are the same, then use only one, for the unity of the text. If they are used for different elements, then you need to explain.

Answer: Thank you for your comments. Because roller and drum are the same meaning, it is unified to drum.

 

Page 6 line 9, page 7 line 15 and so on – use „and” instead of the sign „、” Figure 4 and following discussions – use another greek letter (like β) instead of „∠” Page 12 line 2 – .

Answer: Thank you for your comments. There is symbol confusion in this part. Many symbols are unique to Chinese. I'm really sorry; I didn't pay attention to these details during the thesis writing process. We made adjustments in this revision. I feel very ashamed to see these details you pointed out. I will be more careful in the future writing process. Thank you so much for your suggestion. Based on your comments and other reviewers, we have carefully revised and adjusted this article.

This description is not clear Different sizes of sprockets were installed between the drum and the drum, which were respectively 4 points 18 teeth, 6 points 18 teeth, 6 points 21 teeth, 6 points 25 teeth”.

Answer: Thank you for your comments. These parameters are the structural parameters of the threshing drum. This part of the parameter is not used in this article, so we delete it.

 

Do you mean „between the two drums” instead of „between the drum and the drum”? It is not clear what you mean by „points”. Are they variants like, as example, „18 teeth sprockets and 4 phase points ”?

Answer: Thank you for your comments. Between the two drums is a chain drive between two drums. As shown in Figure 4, the chain drives between the two drums. Six holes are arranged on the end surface of each threshing drum. These holes are bolt holes for weighting the threshing drum. Because these holes can form a certain angle with respect to the centre of the end face of the threshing drum, six holes are evenly distributed on the end surface of the threshing drum to form different phases.

 

There is no comparison between the results with these variants.

Answer: Thank you for your comments. In order to better analyse the Engineering application of double drum balance of combine harvester, in the MATERIAL AND METHODS, we added the "2.6 Test method for vibration characteristics and axis trajectory", the same to the RESULTS AND DISCUSSION section. All revisions are marked in red in the manuscript.

For the MATERIAL AND METHODS portion of the manuscript, we compress it. Because "(2) Chain drive lateral vibration model system free vibration" is a theoretical explanation of chain drive. This article does not cite the conclusions of this section. So we delete this part.

 

Page 12 line 6 – What is „M8”? Page 17 line 13 – Something wrong with the measurement unit „The test weight was 150 mm. ”

Answer: Thank you for your comments. M8 is the diameter of the counterweight bolt. The test weight should be mass. All revisions are marked in red in the manuscript.

In addition, some other mistakes were revised. We revised the size error in the manuscript. In this revision we have modified the grammar throughout the whole manuscript. We have also updated older references. We have modified the titles of figures and tables to make the titles of figures and tables easier to understand. All revisions are marked in red in the manuscript. Thank you very much for your careful review.

 

Thank you for your careful review. I apologize for my carelessness. After carefully reading the review comments and carefully modifying the manuscript, I feel that my writing level has also been improved. Thank you very much for your careful review. Your careful review and advice is a valuable asset to enhance our research capabilities.

All the modifications made to the manuscript are in red colour.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Back to TopTop