Next Article in Journal
A Secure and Efficient Method to Protect Communications and Energy Consumption in IoT Wireless Sensor Networks
Previous Article in Journal
Multi-Scale Semantic Segmentation for Fire Smoke Image Based on Global Information and U-Net
Previous Article in Special Issue
Performance Entitlement by Using Novel High Strength Electrical Steels and Copper Alloys for High-Speed Laminated Rotor Induction Machines
 
 
Article
Peer-Review Record

Low-Voltage, High-Frequency Synchronous Motor for Aerospace Applications

Electronics 2022, 11(17), 2719; https://doi.org/10.3390/electronics11172719
by Daniel Matt 1,*, Lorenzo Piscini 2, Nadhem Boubaker 3, Anthony Gimeno 4, Philippe Enrici 1 and Mourad Aitakkache 1
Reviewer 1:
Reviewer 2:
Electronics 2022, 11(17), 2719; https://doi.org/10.3390/electronics11172719
Submission received: 26 July 2022 / Revised: 17 August 2022 / Accepted: 22 August 2022 / Published: 30 August 2022

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

This paper studies a PM electric motor used for driving propeller of aircrafts, which uses solid bar winding instead of traditional round wire winding. Especiallythe optimization of the slotthe copper conductor, permanent magnet size other design parameters is presented in the paper. Finally, the main experimental test results of the prototype are shown and analyzed. The performance of the prototype is in a good agreement with the design. The optimization design of the PM electric motor, especially the solid bar winding design, is interesting and some publishable results are contained.

 Major comments

1. The Abstract Section should be rewritten, because the focuses and innovation of this paper, in the abstract, are not expressed. Abstract should be concise.

 2. In the Abstract Section, authors write that “It has been proven that…a continuous power-to-weight close to 10 kW/kg”, but in Section 4, authors write that “it is certainly almost impossible to achieve better than 5 kW/kg …”. So, what is the power-to-weight ratio of the motor in this paper? It should need to be further determined.

 

Minor comments

1. Figures in the paper should be standardized, in the reviewer’s opinion. Including the line thickness of the curves, the size and type of fonts in Figures, the specification of the coordinate axes, etc. For example, Figure 10, 11, and 12 should be redrawn.

Author Response

Responses in the attached document.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

This paper is very interesting and clear demonstrates the potential benefits to have better power-to-weight ratio. The followings are the reviewer's concern to this paper.

The literature review and discussion are missing. It is recommended to provide a comprehensive literature review including the gap in the previous studies and summary of the reviewer's perspective. 

Line 41. If the authors need the citation or resource of pictures, please include them.

Line 50. What is the PM?

Line 58. Please make sure that table 1 is fitted in page 2.

Author Response

Responses in the attached document

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Back to TopTop