Review Reports

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The reviewed paper entitled „Investigation on the Correlation of Compressor Cascade Performance with Different Working Fluids” presents the results of the analysis of the influence of the physical properties on the performance of cascade of the compressor. The article is written legibly. English is correct. The results of the analysis presented in the article are of an application character and present high scientific value. The authors obtained a low discrepancy between the modeling results and the experimental and theoretical data. However, there are several points that need clarification.

Critical remarks:

1. Experimental data presented in the paper is very limited, compared to the scope of the modeling carried out. The Authors only indicate the source of the experimental data without describing the experiment itself in the slightest degree, for example, the range of process parameters of the experiment, e.t.c.
2. Figures: 3,4,5,7,8,13 are of very low quality, which makes it difficult to analyze the comparison results. The aspect ratio was not respected when pasting the drawings into the article, which may distort the image of the curves.
3. There are no results for Helium in Figure 4: Distribution of coefficient of total pressure loss with different working fluids. Is this an oversight or is it due to the quality of the drawing?

 

I propose to publish this article in the Applied sciences journal after considering the comments above.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.doc

Reviewer 2 Report

see attached file

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.doc

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

Please see the attached file

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf