Review Reports

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The manuscript addresses the problems such as elevated labor intensity and low efficiency of ramie fiber decorticating, designed a simple automatic ramie decorticating machine, and the key parameters of the machine are given and tested. The manuscript is beneficial to improve the development of the ramie industry, however, the design process of the manuscript is too simple and the theoretical depth is not enough, and the

（1）The name of the manuscript is about the design and parameter optimization of the ramie decorticator, however, the full text lacks the analysis of the relevant forces during the interaction between the machine and ramie. And there is a lack of theoretical derivation or simulation of the design of the key. The design of key parameters is mostly based on experience and preliminary research, and the design concept is not well-reflected.

（2）The manuscript has too few pictures related to the machine design and fails to reflect the design and optimization of key parameters.

（3）Lines 203-204, the speed range of the decorticating drum comes from the results of previous experimental research, are there any relevant references?

（4） In Chapter “2.3.2. Ramie Decorticating Device”, the text size in Figure 3 is inconsistent.

（5）The standards appearing in the manuscript, it is recommended to indicate the relevant references, indicating the country that issued this standard unit, and the references may be added.

（6）In Table 3, the factors “Decorticating clearance x1”、“Drum speed x2” and“Conveying Speed x3”, are the actual value or the code value. If it is the actual value, please write the actual level of the factor. If it is a coded value, the unit should not appear in the title.

Minor editing of English language required

Author Response

请参阅附件。

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

1. It is suggested to supplement and improve the key technical parameters of the prototype in Table 1.

2. It is suggested to further supplement the structure diagram of other perspectives of the prototype according to Figure 1.

3. Please explain the significance of the dimensioning in Figure 3. It is recommended to round the processing size.

4. Please explain the basis for the selection of relevant parameters in Table 2 and their different level values.

5. The quantization of response surface analysis results was strengthened by combining Figure 5 and Figure 6.

6. It is suggested to refine and improve the conclusion of the paper.

• Careful revision and improvement of the language.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

Dear Authors,

I think I should write the following sentences.

The authors carried out a comprehensive and exemplary study and turned it into an article beautifully. I think they deserve appreciation, congragulations.

The suggestions can be seen below.

- In all the manuscript, It is recommended to use passive sentence structure. For example, some sentences were started to "we"....

- The unit notations in all the text should be standard. For example, r/min (line 22), kg h-1 (Table 1), %, percent (line 25, 28)......

- Line 30. the second point have to be removed at the end of sentences.

- Line 145. A references should be given for Eq1. 

- Line 146. The explanation of T was absent. (Eq 1)

- Line 201. The explanation of v1 was absent. (Eq 2)

- Line 252. ....0ptimal... should be changed as ...optimal...

- Line 264. Values of the standart deviations should be given for avreage values.

- Eq (3) and Eq (4). Notations of the % should be removed.  

- Line 305. ......results.Design.... should be changed as .....results. Design... (a space should be given)

- Line 314, 317 - The sentence should be comly with the heading. 

- 3.2.1. ...........................Significance Analysis of Impurity of Raw Fiber. 

......comprising the fiber percentage of fresh stalk (Y1), ....

It can be any confusion?

- Line 358, 360 - The sentence should be comly with the heading. 

-  3.2.2. .....................Significance Analysis of the Fiber Percentage of Fresh Stalk

.....comprising the impurity rate of raw fiber (Y2),.

It can be any confusion?

This two points should also be check with the expalanations in Eq8.

max Y1 (x1, x2, x3), min Y2 (x1, x2, x3)

- The English of the manuscript should be edited by native speaker or a professional.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 4 Report

The paper addresses a topical issue in the field, namely the design of a fibre decortication machine. The description and constructive design of the machine is well done. A mathematical model is developed for testing based on the Box-Behnken scheme. The results obtained are also validated experimentally.

As suggestions for improvement of the work I have the following:

The authors should check the spelling, e.g. the abstract ends with 2 dots, or at line 252, the optimal is written with 0.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 5 Report

The manuscript has been well written and adequately referenced. It is an innovation that would add to the body of knowledge in the subject area.

My only suggestion for improvement is separation of Discussion from Conclusion

The conclusion section of your article is not concise. It should end with the summary of your thoughts and convey the larger implications of your study. It shouldn’t be used for another round of results and discussion.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

The manuscript addresses the problems such as elevated labor intensity and low efficiency of ramie fiber decorticating, designed a simple automatic ramie decorticating machine, and the key parameters of the machine are given. The optimal combination of parameters for the machine was obtained by conducting multi-factor tests of the simple automatic ramie decorticating machine. The research of this manuscript is beneficial to improve the quality and efficiency of ramie peeling，and improve the development of ramie industry.

(1) In the Table 3“Box-Behnken experimental design”, The horizontal line under the first group of tests can be removed.

(2) In Figure 3 (a), there is a gray horizontal line below the picture. Please confirm if the content is required in the picture.

(3) In chapter “2.4.2. The Assessment Index”, The fiber percentage of fresh stalks and impurity rate of raw fiber were denoted by the letter Z and I. However, in table 3 “Box-Behnken experimental design” that was denoted by Y₁ and Y₂. It is better to be consistent before and after

(4) In chapter “3.3.2. Verification Test”, the value of validation test of Fiber percentage of fresh stalk and Impurity rate of raw fiber are lower than predicted value, please briefly explain which factors may cause a certain amount of error in the results.

Minor editing of English language required

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.docx