Reviewer’s comments and author's response

Reviewer Comment Author’s Response

Authors should clearly write full
word before they use
abbreviations, such as PEMFCs in Edited as advised
the abstract.

• Reference for equations were added as advised

• Figure 1 in first version of manuscript (Figure A) has been changed to the illustration of porous
media usage in PEMFC stack (Figure B). Paper length of maximum 11 pages (as agreed by
STACLIM organiser) had to be maintained, thus illustration of CFD technique had more
significance than the previous figure included in the paper. Hence, the decision to terminate
the data presented in Figure 1 in previous manuscript draft.

1
Please add ref. to equations as well
as figure 1

Figure A Old version of Figure 1 in first manuscript draft.

 Figure B New Figure 1 in revised manuscript.

There are some typo mistakes

which need to be corrected.
Grammar must be checked very Edited as advised
well.

A pictorial view of each CFD

technique would make it more clear
Edited as advised – a total of 3 figures were added.
to understand.

Comparison table can include

another column stating as
2
'Application' to understand the Edited as advised – tabulated as Table 1 in the review paper.
potentiality of each CFD simulation.

Please check the grammatical

mistakes and improve accordingly. Edited as advised