Design and Experimentation of a Self-Propelled Picking Type White Radish Combine Harvester

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The article is written very fluently. Sufficient research has been conducted. However, there are the following drawbacks:

1."experiment" in keywords is a common word. Replace it with the word "tassel-raising", "fixed knife" or "movable knife".

2. In Introduction: Existing research on radish harvesting equipment mainly focuses on carrots, such as: [9-12]; conducted relevant research on soil deep loosening; [13,14]; optimized the design of the carrot tassel cutting device; the combination harvester for root crops such as carrots has been developed [15,16]. Here it is not clear which part of the text the references [9-12] and [13,14] refer to.

3. It is appropriate to provide information on the mass of White Radish in 2. Biomechanical Properties of White Radish point.

4. 3. In the Main Structure and Working Principle section, "The white radish combine harvester is mainly composed of five parts: a forward device 1, a vibrating deep loosening device 2, a tassel gathering device 3, clamping and conveying device 4, a tassel cutting device 5, etc., as shown in Figure 2.” should be shown with numbers.

5. In the formula (8), it should be written n - Gathering claw belt rotation, not n - Gathering claw belt speed.

6. Multiple designations are marked with a single letter. For example: D – the diameter of belt pulley; the active pulley diameter D; the deep pine shovel makes a reciprocal swing around rocker point D; A—movable knife diameter; the power is input by the hydraulic motor from point A.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

The article is quite interesting. To substantiate the main design and kinematic parameters, simple and effective theoretical calculations were used.

The feeling of incompleteness appears after reading the experimental part - where the influence of the main parameters of the developed machine on the quality indicators of its work is not considered.

If this is planned to be done in future works, it would be great.

Use the same symbols to indicate the range of values.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Some words and terms are used in an inappropriate sense (some of them are highlighted in red).

I recommend you read it carefully again.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

The manuscript entitled “Design and experimentation of a self-propelled picking-type white radish combine harvester” brings advances

Abstract: present the conclusions about the study.

Keywords: do not repeat words that are already in the title.

Introduction: add scientific advances on the topic. Several studies have been carried out recently in this line. Show what advances this study can have in relation to the others.

Highlight the scientific hypothesis?

Methodology highlight the characteristics of the culture; justify the choices of design parameters (substantiate); describe the technology, company, location of each material used

Results – Ok

Discussion: the data should be discussed in relation to other studies carried out. The authors did not have a discussion. Present a detailed and deeper discussion, relating the results obtained with applications, especially on equipment design. Show results with applications in different processes.

Conclusions

They must be punctual, responding to the objectives. Avoid excessive text/discussion in the conclusions. Discussions should be held in the results and discussion.

Reference

Update, search for more recent works to discuss the results.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 3 Report

Accepted