Multi-Objective Optimization of an Axial Flux Permanent Magnet Brushless DC Motor with Arc-Shaped Magnets
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
line
107: p does not exist in (1) and earlier
115: what is arc coefficient?
123: m should be in italic m
126: what for is 3)
129: Do and ... Di ... can be written
Where is Di
133: The AFPMBLDC is designed. And what? This sentence must be improved.
208: wahat is x parameter?
The bibliography should be expanded to include European and American positions.
Author Response
Response to Reviewer 1
Point 1: 107: p does not exist in (1) and earlier
Response 1: Thanks very much for reviewer’s hard work. Here “p” is a superfluous explanation. And we have deleted them.
Point 2:115: what is arc coefficient?
Response 2: Thanks very much for reviewer’s good suggestions. The pole arc coefficient is a coefficient that describes the distribution of the actual air gap magnetic field within a range of poles.
Point 3:123: m should be in italic m
Response 3: Thanks very much for reviewer’s hard work. We have revised it in the revised version.
Point 4:126: what for is 3)
Response 1: Thanks very much for reviewer’s hard work. We have revised it in the revised version.
Point 4:129: Do and Di can be written Where is Di
Response 1: Thanks very much for reviewer’s good suggestions. In this article, the inner and outer diameters of the permanent magnet are consistent with the inner and outer diameters of the motor. In the revised version, we only the expression of Do, and we deleted the some content about Di because it is not necessary to give the expression of Di.
Point 5:133: The AFPMBLDC is designed. And what? This sentence must be improved.
Response 5:Thanks very much for reviewer’s good suggestions. We have improved this sentence in the revised version.
Point 6:208: what is x parameter?
Response 6: Thanks very much for reviewer’s good suggestions. Where x represents the motor optimization parameter. We have revised it in the revised version.
Thanks again for the expert’s hard word.
Reviewer 2 Report
In my opinion the paper is worth to be considered for publication. However, the paper must go through linguistic corrections carried out by professional proofreaders. Some parts of the paper must be reconsidered and rewritten for publication in scientific journal. The authors should also rethink the paper layout including the placement of symbol definitions. I recommend to reconsider the manuscript for further submission process after linguistic proofreading and paper layout corrections. Some remarks and suggestions are listed beneath which can be helpful in improving the paper quality and understanding of its content:
1. what is mean by the coefficient "beta" in equation 7,
2. what is the correlation between equation 7 and 8,
3. paragraph 169-176 is a copy of 158-165,
4. figure 3 please check unit,
4. 279, 280 wrong unit.
Author Response
Response to Reviewer 2
Point 1: In my opinion the paper is worth to be considered for publication. However, the paper must go through linguistic corrections carried out by professional proofreaders. Some parts of the paper must be reconsidered and rewritten for publication in scientific journal. The authors should also rethink the paper layout including the placement of symbol definitions. I recommend to be reconsidered the manuscript for further submission process after linguistic proofreading and paper layout corrections. Some remarks and suggestions are listed beneath which can be helpful in improving the paper quality and understanding of its content.
Response 1: Thanks very much for reviewer’s good suggestions. In the revised version, we adjusted the order of the mathematical model and added some content, as shown in the revised version.
Point 2: what is mean by the coefficient "beta" in equation 7,
Response 2: Thanks very much for reviewer’s good suggestions. beta is the ratio of motor outer diameter to inner diameter, and the value is √3
Point 3: what is the correlation between equation 7 and 8,
Response 3: Thanks very much for reviewer’s good suggestions. In the revised version, we adjusted the order of mathematical models, and make the whole mathematical model deduction process logical.
Point 4: paragraph 169-176 is a copy of 158-165,
Response 4: Thanks very much for reviewer’s good suggestions. According to the relationship between the content of the article and the table, the content of paragraphs 158-165 has been deleted.
Point 5: figure 3 please check unit,
Response 5: Thanks very much for reviewer’s good suggestions. We have checked them. We think that Figure 3 only illustrates the permanent magnet structure, and whether to mark the units does not affect the description, and the marking of units in the figure seems messy.
Point 6: 279, 280 wrong unit.
Response 6: Thanks very much for reviewer’s good suggestions. The unit has been corrected according to the content in the figure.
Thanks again.
Reviewer 3 Report
The paper presents an interesting topic concerning the multi-objective optimization of the geometry parameters of the permanent magnet motor. Although the simulation model used for this purpose wasn’t experimentally verified.
Comments:
1. In my opinion, the Authors should add information about the time-stepping finite element method used for the simulation of the permanent magnet motor.
2. The paragraph “Based on the four variable optimization parameters …” at line 169 is the same as at line 158.
Author Response
Response to Reviewer 3
Point 1: In my opinion, the Authors should add information about the time-stepping finite element method used for the simulation of the permanent magnet motor.
Response 1: Thanks very much for reviewer’s good suggestions. According to the characteristics of Taguchi method, the paper adds Taguchi method modeling process for readers to understand. And in the part of finite element analysis, we add the transient time stepping finite element method.
Point 2: The paragraph “Based on the four variable optimization parameters …” at line 169 is the same as at line 158.
Response 2: Thanks very much for reviewer’s good suggestions. According to the relationship between the content of the article and the table, the content of paragraphs 158-165 has been deleted.
Thanks again.
