Review Reports

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Dear authors,

the topic of the paper is interesting and the sections devoted to the discussion and the conclusions are well written.

I suggest to you to update the references with recent papers concerning micropolar, nanofluid and stagnation.

Moreover I think that a section devoted to the nomenclature can be helpful. Also I don't like so much the symbol H for the microrotation since it recall the magnetic field.

I suggest to write at the beginning of section 2 also the vectorial form of the equation of the motion.

Minor: a point is missing in line 94.

 

 

 

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

The article deals with an interesting topic. I recommend this article for publication after a good revision. The following suggestion must be taken into account.

1.    Writing and spelling errors in the text need to be improved.

2.      The abstract is the most important part of the paper and should highlight the current field of theoretical application.

3.     The introduction section is poor and  not clear. The literature review should be improved, add the article below: MHD Flow of a Hybrid Nano-fluid in a Triangular Enclosure with Zigzags and an Elliptic Obstacle, Micromachines

4.   The novelty of the paper should be well clarified in the abstract and conclusion.

5.    What is the advantage of using the used method over other methods in solving this problem?

6. English should be improved throughout the manuscript.

7.  In the results section, the author needs to analyze the finding by giving reasons for each fact. Please explain every point.

8.   Add nomenclature part.

9.   More recent references must be added

 

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

No comment.