The current manuscript provides a comprehensive model for simulating aerosol dynamics and signal response in the evaporative light scattering detector (ELSD). The overall quality of the manuscript is very good and scientifically sound. The experimental and simulation results are in quite good agreement. Nevertheless, some scientific issues have to be addressed:  

• What is the background behind Eq. (3), which seems to be an empirical correlation? How were required parameters obtained?
• Details of the ELSD measurements are missing or only very briefly described: How is the scattering geometry? Which scattering angles are used? What is the detection scheme (homodyne or heterodyne)? Figure 2 gives a very small sketch, but more details need to be mentioned in the text. In addition, I cannot see Eq. 47 which seems to be related to the ELSD method.
• Are multiple scattering effects relevant for the measurements?
• The authors stress out the relevance of temperature. However, it is not clear for me how the temperature of the droplets can be controlled or measured experimentally. A comment on this issue would help.
• An uncertainty statement or consideration for the experimental results is lacking so far. Such an evaluation is recommended to be performed for the property of interest.

Furthermore, some typos or technical errors are given in the manuscript. For example, some numbers are missing. The figures are also partly not fully readable or understandable (see, e.g., Figures 6 and 7).  

This paper presents a computational fluid dynamics (CFD) simulation of an Evaporative Light Scattering Detector (ELSD). Although the study is well motivated and well written, several important issues should be addressed:

• It would be valuable to include a mesh convergence study, clearly specifying the parameters used.
• Since the authors employ the k–ε turbulence model, what is the maximum y⁺ value obtained?
• The k–ε model performs well away from walls, however, given the narrow geometry of the channels, wall effects may significantly influence the flow and particle behavior. The use of an alternative turbulence model, such as SST k–ω, is recommended for comparison.
• What are the R² values associated with the fitted curves shown in Fig. 8?
• Was a dispersion model used for the Discrete Phase Model (DPM)?
• Line 336: the Appendix citation is missing.
• Line 378: the Figure citation is missing.