Design, Implementation, and Evaluation of an Output Prediction Model of the 10 MW Floating Offshore Wind Turbine for a Digital Twin

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

 1.It is mentioned in the article that the reduced order model established the relationship between the input data (wind speed, sea level) and the output data (4-dof of floater). The learning of the reduced order model is conducted by the correlation between FAST simulator which simulated the 4-dof of the floater and different marine environments. So what is the meaning of the simulation structure in the upper part of Fig. 4? The input and output data simulated in the upper part in Fig.4 is used for learning of ROM. Is there any difference between the input and output data of the upper part and the lower part? Can it be understood that the above simulation part uses the data (simulation data) of the laboratory, while the input data (wind speed and sea level) in the ROM below is the data measured in the actual sea?

2.The design of pitch and yaw control system mentioned in the paper takes into account the operating characteristics (fatigue, aerodynamics, structure and turbulence) of the wind turbine simulator developed by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory. What is the relationship between the two? How does one party affects the other?

3.Is the wind speed in Figure 2 (a) in the paper the absolute wind speed or the effective wind speed?

4.By applying the ROM system, it learns the pre-analyzed result data under various input data conditions to generate output data close to real-time,What is the difference between the pre-analyzed result data and the real-time output data? How is the result data of the pre-analyzed result obtained by the reduced order model?

5.The average values of the surge, pitch, and yaw are proportionally increased according to the wind speed, however, it is inversely proportional after the rated wind speed due to the decreased thrust by the pitch control.What is the thrust reduced by pitch control? Why can thrust change the average of the above three（surge, pitch, and yaw）?

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

The present paper is quite interesting and fits the scope of the journal. The authors have done a decent job explaining the methodology, there is enough discussion. However, there are a few points upon which the authors can improve the manuscript. Please find the reviewer's suggestions below:

1) Overall, it is a well-written paper; the use of English can be improved, though.

2) The Introduction section is satisfactory. A more critical review of the literature can be given as recently there has been a significant number of papers published on this topic. The critical review MUST reflect the motivation and objectives of this study.

3) A whole section explaining the development of the ANN model is required. Readers cannot know anything about the model or how it is optimised. What separates ANN from multivariate regression analysis?

4) There are many questions regarding the reliability of the experimental test and the model accuracy. Almost no information is reported, and the authors are strongly encouraged to prioritise the improvement of Section 4.

The reviewer believes that the suggestions given above would help this manuscript be better than an average article as it lacks scientific reporting characteristics. However, it has the potential to be an excellent paper.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

accept