Simulation Study on Nanofluid Heat Transfer in Immersion Liquid-Cooled Server

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Thank You for the opportunity of reading this article.

Recommendation minor Report

Manuscript ID:  applsci-2442682

Title: Simulation study on nanofluid heat transfer in immersion liquid cooled server

The topic and scope of the article are interesting, actual, and highly desirable. The manuscript is well written and needs to be improved for better readability. Here are my comments.

1.      The Abstract should be revised with the inclusion of the main findings.

2.      The novelty of this work needs more explanation.

3.      The introduction should be improved with the latest work.

4.      How the equations (1-7) have been derived? Support of any previous study, so that readers can understand it quickly.

5.      When elaborating the figures, describe the physics of the problem rather than pure mathematical discussion.

6.      I suggest adding a paragraph with limitations of the discussed approach as well as future directions.

7.      There are a large number of parameters; therefore, a nomenclature table is needed.

 

 

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

The authors have carried out essential study on evaluating the beneficial effects of nanofluids on heat transfer processes and identified Al – FC40 as the most effective nanofluid for enhancing the cooling efficiency compared to FC40.  The manuscript is well written, and needs minor revision as per the comments under:

 

1.       Could you please incorporate the novelty of the work performed with appropriate references.

2.       Could you please incorporate the types of industries which will benefit with the developed technology with relevant references.

Comments on formatting:

1.       In the abstract section, statements on lines 11-15 are in-complete and fail to convey the message. Please kindly revise them.

2.       Please incorporate a full stop on line 60.

3.       On lines 128-129, the comparation was made against the base fluid with base fluid which is not correct. Please make the necessary changes.

4.       Please remove spaces between number and % sign throughout the manuscript.

Minor punctuational edits recommended.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

The author explores the use of different nanofluids for water cooling of servers. The author obtained more credible results through experimental parameters and simulation. But the author should pay attention to some improvement points to improve the quality of the article. Please refer to the comments below.

Authors should list their affiliation.

Page 1 line 31. Error message shown at here.

Page 1 line 33. I’m not sure what’s the meaning of ‘1’ after ‘Nanofluidics’, the number of citation?

Page 1 line 39. I can’t find the original paper from citation 4. Please let me know the DOI of it.

Page 2 line 79. ‘according to the following equations 9’? Where is equation 9?

Quality of English looks OK

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 3 Report

My suggestion is accept

No