Experimental and Numerical Simulation Study of Pressure Pulsations during Hose Pump Operation
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The paper describes the operation of the hose pump (peristaltic pump).
The paper is very well written using a very clear work plan.
The authors described in detail the numerical model then the experimental set-up. The results are then presented with analysis.
Some points should be taken into account:
- Authors must mention the originality of their work in relation to the literature.
- Page 5 / line 152: delete the repeated sentence: "The fluid is described in an arbitrary Lagrangian Eulerian framework.".
- Page 7: Fig. 8: the title of the vertical axes must be changed to "volume flow rate".
- Page 12 / Fig 14 + Page 13 / Fig 15: Please add "Experimental results" to the captions.
Author Response
“请查看附件”
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
The article studied the pressure fluctuation characteristics of the hose using a 3D two-way fluid-structure coupling model. The results seems interesting the model utilized was also seems accurate. I suggest the article can be published.
However, I have a few minor comments/corrections that need to be considered:
- In Figure 8, the legends says something 'Emulation'. I am not sure what thats mean. Did you mean 'simulation'? In that case, please fix that.
- Figure 10 and 11- at each rotating speed, you have three figures. Are they at different time points? If yes, please mention that in the legends. If not then also mention that in the figure legends or in the figures.
- Figure 12 and 13, Can you overlay the streamlines on the color contours? I assume that will be more attractive.
- You assume the turbulent model. However, what was the Reynolds number range in this study? For example you should mention the Reynolds number based on both the suction side and pressure side.
- Were the flow field actually turbulent, such as, were the eddies size and location same at different time interval after reaching the equilibrium?
Author Response
“请查看附件”
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Reviewer 3 Report
I appreciate very much the article and the work of the authors that interweaves simulation and experiment. I have some suggestions for authors, mainly referring to editing:
line 65: Stokes instead of Sokes;
line 116: I can't understand what are the seven parts the computational domain is divided in "as shown in Figure 1 ".
line 152: It is already written above (line 151) that" the fluid is described in an arbitrary Lagrangian Eulerian framework".
Line 153: The acronym ALE should be explained, perhaps at the line 152 where "arbitrary Lagrangian Eulerian" description occurs.
Line 174: Explain the significance of the parameter's notation in the head of Table 2.
Line 178: What is referring to the following statement: "It is distributed on the suction and pressure sides of the roller"? Is it about the seven monitoring points? If so, the statement subject should be plural.
Line 226: In the legends of Figure 8 is it written Emulation instead of Simulation? The fonts are too small.
Line 233: A dot before the word "When" is missing.
Line 361: The same section title as at the line 306.
Line 412: The same section title as at the line 306 and 361.
Line 423: It should be 65 r/min instead of 65/min.
Line 437: There is no unit of measure on the x-Axis in Figure 18.
As a general suggestion on the section Conclusions, I think some quantification would be better than comments on increasing or decreasing trend of an amount in a certain context. If an amount is increasing/decreasing, say by how much!
At the section 5. Patents some editing instructions should be erased.
Author Response
“请查看附件”
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
