Modify the Injection Machine Mechanism to Enhance the Recycling of Plastic Waste Mixed with MHD Nanoparticles

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

• 1.     The English writing of the manuscript needs improvement. Therefore, it could benefit greatly from professional editing to improve technical writing and English.

  2.     Please mention your study limits and suggest some future research topics

  3.     In References, the sources are written in different styles. Please update the reference list.  It is necessary to bring in accordance with the requirements of the journal for the design of References. If possible, indicate DOI.

  4.     Please use some innovative keywords.

  5.     Please mention your study limits in the abstract.

  6.     The Conclusions should reflect what the practical application of the results obtained in this study is. In what climatic conditions should the recommendations of the authors be taken into account?

  7.     The authors should increase their discussion on previous related research and highlight how their study is providing a different approach or adding significantly to what has been done. The authors have to explain what is the new here in comparison with the previous studies. The novelty of the current work should be highlighted in the introduction. Please try to mention a problem that needs solving - in other words, the research question underlying your study clearer.

  8.     Authors should add some relevant papers in reference for a better presentation of the manuscript.

  - Theoretical analysis of thermal damages in skin tissue induced by intense moving heat source. Int. J. Heat Mass Transf. 2018, 124, 1011-1014, doi:10.1016/j.ijheatmasstransfer.2018.04.018.

  -  Effect of thermal dispersion on free convection in a fluid saturated porous medium. Int. J. Heat Fluid Flow 2009, 30, 229-236, doi:10.1016/j.ijheatfluidflow.2009.01.004.

  - "A study on thermoelastic interaction in a poroelastic medium with and without energy dissipation." Mathematics 8.8 (2020): 1286.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer.

Thank you for your efforts which help us in enhancing the manuscript.
All changes or modifications are written in red color in the manuscript

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

·        Line 44 need reference

·        Suggest reading the next published papers which may strengthen the introduction

Ajorloo, M.; Ghodrat, M.; Kang, W.-H. Incorporation of Recycled Polypropylene and Fly Ash in Polypropylene-Based Composites for Automotive Applications. J. Polym. Environ. 2021, 29, 1298–1309. [CrossRef]

Larsen, Å.G.; Olafsen, K.; Alcock, B. Determining the PE fraction in recycled PP. Polym. Test. 2021, 96, 107058. [CrossRef]

Strangl, M.; Lok, B.; Breunig, P.; Ortner, E.; Buettner, A. The challenge of deodorizing post-consumer polypropylene packaging: Screening of the effect of washing, color-sorting and heat exposure. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2021, 164, 105143. [CrossRef]

Garofalo, E.; Scarfato, P.; di Maio, L.; Protopapa, A.; Incarnato, L. Zeolites as effective desiccants to solve hygroscopicity issue of post-consumer mixed recycled polyolefins. J. Clean. Prod. 2021, 295, 126379. [CrossRef]

·        The whole manuscript: the alumina nanoparticles have two sizes called alumina+ and alumina - and can be replaced with variables as beta, which beta core for alumina+ and beta skin for alumina-

·        Figure 1 Line 156 need improved

·        It is required to improve Figure 1 and bring the associated causes closer together in the same direction as the cause-and-effect diagram and indicate the computations way of their weights.

·        Review the variables in table 2, while the variable (weight) is not a real variable and maybe a hint below the table or added to the context.

·        If the data that extracts Figures 11, 12, 13, and 14 are available can be uploaded in supplementary files.

·        Review Ref. [30], [34], [35], [37], [42], [45], [47] to follow journal recommendations.

Author Response

Thank you for your efforts which help us in enhancing the manuscript.
All changes or modifications are written in red color in the manuscript

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Ms. Ref. No.: sustainability-2170565

Title: Modify the injection machine mechanism to enhance the Recycling of plastic waste mixed with MHD nanoparticles

The paper has been innovative in defining the suitable operating parameters' values for the desktop injection flow mechanism (i.e., Riga magnetic field and piston orifice pressure) using a meta-heuristic algorithm called WSA mathematically to control the amount of pushed nanoparticles in the mixture. The WSA relies on response surface methodology (RSM) to classify thirteen operating parameters to check the quality of the mixture and predict the control equation using experimental design (DOE), which guarantees the output quality.

I, recommend this paper be published in the Sustainability Journal after the authors address the following comments.

·         Review English grammar as there are mistakes throughout the text. This article should be rewritten.

·         10 lines of the abstract are extra. Remove these lines.

·           The resolution of figures must be improved. Such as figure 2?!!

• The physical explanation of figures 13 and 14 is limited. Please explain more
• More physical insight into the results section is needed.
• Figures 24 and 25 and table 15 must transfer to results and discussion, not in the conclusion section.
• The author needs to provide quantitative results and qualitative results in the abstract section of the article so that the reader can understand the generalities of the presented article.
• Add a section on study limitations before the conclusion section.
• The conclusion is too long and so weak. Please explain your main findings quantitatively.
• It is better to report the final results in the optimum conditions section (similar to doi.org/10.1016/j.seppur.2020.118031 and doi.org/10.1016/j.icheatmasstransfer.2022.106551) so that the reader can more easily understand the similarity between your results and the optimum results.
• By analyzing each term of the model, the terms with high p-values (higher than 0.05) were removed from the model. Have the authors done this work?
• The author must improve the introduction with more advanced applications. Also, the author could find new references and review these articles. The authors read these articles: Magnetic nanomaterials assisted nanobiocatalysis systems and their applications in biofuels production, Numerical study on the thermal performance of the shell and tube heat exchanger using twisted tubes and Al2O3 nanoparticles, Thermal improvement of Linear Fresnel Solar system utilizing Al2O3-water nanofluid and multi-way twisted tape

In conclusion, this paper might be made suitable for publication in this Journal if the as-mentioned comments are clarified. These constitute a Major revision of it.

Author Response

Thank you for your efforts which help us in enhancing the manuscript.
All changes or modifications are written in red color in the manuscript

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Accept in present form

Reviewer 3 Report

Accept