Review Reports

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The paper contains a high value scientific research, but there are some issues that should be solved:

-          In the line 35 The torque ripple of PMSM is mainly composed of cogging torque and ripple torque. It is an overlapping here of the meanings. Please be more specific with the explanation.

-          In lines 82 and 85 Programming python language, parameterizing the structural parameters of the combined rotor. The sentence has no sense. Please make a new formulation.

-          If relation (1) is not developed by the authors, please indicate the references source of it. Same problem for relations (2) and (3).

-          Same problem in line 127 regarding the expression of the amplitude of the harmonic component of the cogging torque.

-          Same problem for the relations (11) ... (13).

-          Please explain how can be practically implemented the proposed mathematical method in the functioning conditions of a PMSM.

-          Please explain, by mentioning some specific references, which is the scientific add-on of the method.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

This research work presented high-performance PMSM with reduced torque fluctuations based on magnetic field harmonic compensation. The work is implemented using FEM and mathematically described. However, there are some comments that should be addressed to improve the manuscript as follows:

1- The Introduction Section does not provide sufficient background and overviews with relevant references! please revise it with appropriate recent works.

2- There are no references for Model Analysis like equations 1, 2, ...

3- Fig. 10(a) is unclear in the case of subplots. Please specify the subplots with relevant captions.

4- There are no numerical tabular results! Please provide a numerical one that illustrates the total torque fluctuations before and after optimization.

Minor editing of the English language is required.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Thank you for the revised article.

Reviewer 2 Report

The authors have addressed the comments and you can now consider the manuscripts for publication.

N/A