Impulse Air Jet Action on the Convective Heat Exchange Tubular Surfaces in Boilers

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

In this paper, the authors carried out calculation and experimental investigations to determine the parameters of the impulse air jet created by the pneumatic generator of the air-impact system of cleaning of tubular heat exchangers in boilers. The research topic is interesting and meaningful. The main problems in this paper are as follows:

Comments:

(1) Is the abstract complete? Please check and complete.

(2) The references in the manuscript are very old, and it is suggested to add and describe the research status of the field in the past five years.

(3) Please supplement the mesh model diagram and describe the meshing strategy and information.

(4) Please give a diagram of the numerical model and explain the simplification process and boundary conditions of the numerical model.

(5) Please supplement the verification process and verification results of the numerical method.

(6) Please supplement the legend of Fig. 9 to distinguish what the different lines represent.

(7) The format of references needs to be modified according to the requirements of journals.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

In this study, numerical and experimental work  for impulse air jet system of boilers air-impact cleaning. Pressure distribution in the non-stationary gas jet and forces acting on the tubular heat-exchange surfaces were determined.

This topic is important and overall paper is well written. I recommend its publication. Following comments needed to be addressed prior to publication of the paper:

1) The governing equations in the numerical method are missing.

2) All solver settings in the numerical model should be given.

3) Experimental uncertainty may be given in Tabular form.

4) Was mesh independence performed?

5) Include all symbols in the Nomenclature.

6) Perform a spell-check for the whole article.

7) Include outlook and future extension of the work.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Some questions have not been well answered and need to be revised.

Comments:

(1) The modified content is not marked.

(2) The mesh model cannot be seen clearly. No grid independence verification was performed.

(3) The numerical calculation model is also unclear. There is no experimental verification of the numerical method.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Author Response

Thank you for your feedback. Your comments helped improve the article.

Round 3

Reviewer 1 Report

The manuscript has been improved and the current version is acceptable.