Review Reports

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The article illustrates the numerical simulation of methane catalytic combustion in Al2O3 directional nanotubes modified by Pt and Pd catalyst. There are several communication problems: from English at times difficult to understand, to the confusion about the terms and concepts used. To improve the quality of the article, the following are suggested:

First of all, the paper needs a thorough editing work since there are grammatical errors rampant throughout the paper.

Author should add the novelty of this work in the first paragraph of the introduction section and add a clear hyphothesis in the last paragraph.

This paper does not explain the contribution and motivation of this study. Why is this case critical? What's the new contribution?

What is the purpose of this research? Goals and innovations should be clearly explained.

Line 77-99: This paragraph should be moved to the Materials and Methods section.

Line 92 should be materials and methods

From the viewpoint of experimental design, why the authors do not conduct a systematic design of experiments to reach the goal intended by the authors

Authors should discuss the results and how they can be interpreted from the perspective of previous studies and of the working hypotheses. The findings and their implications should be discussed in the broadest context possible. Future research directions may also be highlighted.

The results are very long and no comparisons have been made with previous studies.

Conclusion part is very long. Make it brief and improve by adding the results of your studies.

Author Response

Hello, thank you for your good suggestions on this article, the manuscript has now been revised in detail according to your requirements, and every comment and every point you raised has been carefully revised. I hope that the revised article will meet your requirements and will satisfy you.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Dear reviewers, thank you for your good suggestions on this paper. We have now revised the manuscript in detail according to your requirements, and have thought carefully about each and every point of your comments, and have actively worked hard to revise the article and respond to your comments. We hope that the revised article will meet your requirements and satisfy you.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

Ms. Ref. No.: applsci-2319319

Title: Numerical Simulation of Methane Catalytic Combustion in Al2O3 Directional Nanotubes Modified by Pt and Pd Catalyst 

Article type: Full Length Article

Reviewer's Comments:

(1)  The authors should take note on the subscript for Al2O3 in the title.

(2)  Figure 2 presented in this manuscript is the authors’ own work or it was taken from other published work. Please provide citation if it is necessary.

(3)  I would suggest the authors to provide citations for equation (1) to equation (9).

(4)  The authors have presented many results in this work and I would suggest the authors to provide some comparison with other reported results.

(5)  I would suggest the authors to shorten the write up for conclusion and avoid presenting this section in numbering format.

Author Response

Dear reviewers, thank you for your suggestions on this article, now we have revised the manuscript in detail according to your requirements, and we have thought carefully about each of your comments and actively worked hard to revise the article. I hope that the revised article will meet your requirements and satisfy you.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Thanks for addressing my comments and improving the manuscript. The improvements were satisfactory and I am recommending the manuscript to be published in Applied Sciences journal.

Reviewer 2 Report

The authors have made the required revisions, and the article can now be published in Applied Sciences.