Design and Field Experiment of Synchronous Hole Fertilization Device for Maize Sowing

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Aiming at the problems of low fertilizer utilization rate, unstable operation quality and environmental pollution in traditional strip fertilization technology in maize planting, this paper innovatively designed a synchronous hole fertilization device for maize sowing based on real-time intelligent control. This paper introduces the design principle of the device, the optimization of key components, the design of the control system and the methods and results of the field experiment in detail, and shows the advantages of the device in improving the fertilizer utilization rate and accurately controlling the simultaneous sowing of seed and fertilizer. The experimental design of this paper is rigorous, the data is sufficient, the conclusion is reliable, and it has significant practicability in the field of intelligent agricultural equipment. It provides a theoretical basis and practical reference for promoting the development of precision agricultural equipment.

1.The introduction part can be further condensed.

2.Please check the full text carefully to ensure that all variables are italic.

3.According to the results of ANOVA analysis table and response surface analysis, it can be seen that the interaction BC has no significant effect on the evaluation index Y₁, and the interaction AC has no significant effect on the evaluation index Y₂. Therefore, do Figure 15c and Figure 16b need to be retained ?

4.Figure 13 and figure 17 have the same title, please rewrite one of the titles to facilitate the distinction and improve the readability of the article.

5.The diagrams and illustrations in the article are clear and helpful to understand the research content. It is recommended that the author check the accuracy of all formulas, diagrams and illustrations and ensure that they are consistent with the text content.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Dear Authors,

I assess the topic presented in the article very highly. I believe the research presented has significant practical value. On the one hand, the savings and precision in the application of mineral fertilizers contribute to environmental protection, and on the other, they offer measurable financial savings. It is unfortunate that the Authors did not attempt to demonstrate the scale of these savings.

Below, I include a few minor remarks regarding the submitted manuscript:

• In subsection 2.4, line 344, for the vernier caliper and ruler, there is no information provided regarding their measurement range and accuracy.

• This section lacks clearly indicated ranges and intervals for the variable factors. Bullet-pointing them would significantly enhance the clarity and comprehensibility of the article.

• I have some doubts regarding the accuracy and repeatability of determining point Pi — the method appears to be insufficiently consistent and highly dependent on the person conducting the measurement (lines 370–371). Could this method be improved or made more objective?

• In Chapter 3 (Results and Discussion), there is no clear indication of the range in which optimal alignment between fertilizer and maize seed application was achieved. Providing such values or ranges would enable practical use of the results. Furthermore, I find it lacking in terms of clearly outlining the advantage of these findings compared to those of other authors. The discussion of results requires significant expansion, as it is currently absent. The authors should explicitly highlight the value and novelty of their findings.

Kind regards

 

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The research paper "Design and Field Experiment of Synchronous Hole Fertilization Device for Maize Sowing” is very structured and deals with applying a relevant, fast-evolving area of research. I would, however, propose these major revisions to strengthen the manuscript further:

1. The manuscript fails to properly situate the innovation of the presented device with respect to currently available systems like AccuShot or other planetary-gear-based hole fertilization mechanisms. Table comparison of important performance metrics with previous designs (e.g., discharge precision, real-time control resolution, responsiveness) needs to be provided to point out innovation.

2. Although the STM32-based dual-loop control system is adequately described, no quantitative verification of its timing accuracy (in milliseconds) or error tolerance in seed-fertilizer synchronization exists. Actual vs. target phase offset data logs would prove allegations of real-time synchronization.

3. The authors use Hall sensors and optical encoders but give no information on calibration routines, resolution, and accuracy under field vibration. Without this, seed and fertilizer position detection reliability is unknown.

4. Under each of the Box-Behnken design settings, only three replications were performed. Robust statistical power requires five or more replicates, particularly under field variability.

5. Missing Dynamic Fertilization Tests: The experiment is missing "tests under dynamically changing speeds" (for example, acceleration or deceleration in real field turns or slope situations), which are essential for testing closed-loop adjustability under realistic farming circumstances.

6. The control system has several DC motors and fan modules combined, but no measurement of the energy taken (in W or Ah) per unit area or cycle of operation is reported. These measurements are crucial for large-scale feasibility.

7. All tests seem to be done under a common field condition. Differences in soil compaction, water, and texture might affect seed and fertilizer penetration, these need to be investigated or at least addressed.

8. The fixed geometry outer groove wheel design was used (3 grooves, 34 mm radius), but there is no mechanical stress analysis, wear prediction, or maintenance intervals mentioned. A simple FEA or life cycle analysis would be beneficial.

9. These types of figures like Figure 1, Figure 5 and Figure 8 are too complicated with low-resolution line diagrams. Exploded views based on CAD or color-coded schematics would be useful in comprehending mechanical design as well as sensor placement.

10. Seed-fertilizer coordination (Y1 = 94.024%) and coefficient of variation (Y2 = 3.147%) are outstanding yet lack baseline measurement from conventional strip fertilization technique to compare with, undermining improvement claims.

11. The text has grammatical mistakes and excessively long, passive-voice sentences (e.g., "the operation performance . . . was studied based on . . ."). There is a need for a professional language check to enhance clarity and readability.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf