Multidisciplinary Collaborative Design and Optimization of Turbine Rotors Considering Aleatory and Interval Mixed Uncertainty under a SORA Framework
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
1- please give a nomencalture.
2- the recent literature in the field of the turbine rotor must be addressed indetails and the main contribution should be highlighted.
3- The format of equation is not good. it must be improved.
4- Is the design of the turbine rotor depend on the type of the implemented electric machine?
Author Response
- Please give a nomencalture.
Response: The nomencalture section has been added to the latest submission
- The recent literature in the field of the turbine rotor must be addressed indetails and the main contribution should be highlighted.
Response: This article mainly studies the optimization method of aleatory and interval mixed uncertainty. It is then applied to the turbine rotor. A detailed description of the current state of RBDO has been added to the latest submission.
- The format of equation is not good. it must be improved.
Response: We double checked the formatting of the equation and made further modifications.
- Is the design of the turbine rotor depend on the type of the implemented electric machine?
Response: This article studies multidisciplinary reliability optimization based on worst-case reliability of interval variables, so it is equally applicable to normal operation.
Reviewer 2 Report
The article ‘Multidisciplinary collaborative design and optimization of turbine rotor considering aleatory and interval mixed uncertainty under SORA framework’.
Thank you for the opportunity to review this paper. I read it with interest. The paper focuses on the optimization of the turbine rotor, where the strength parameters are used as the criterion. The performance response values at the proposed conditions were obtained by computer calculations using a virtual model. Ultimately, the RBMDO model of the rotor was used considering the multi-source uncertainty. MDO method with different uncertainty conditions was used to solve this model.
The paper represents a good scientific level, and the research on topics presented in it can be useful in the future analysis of the subject. All analyses look very good and are supported by literature reports. I suggest you consider making the following corrections:
1. The abstract should briefly state the purpose of the paper.
2. In page 9, line 202 - 'The rotor mechanism weight M is selected as the objective function'. In the following section, strength properties are taken as the basis for the description. What is the reason for this?
3. In page 18, line 328 - 'The maximum strain value under the rotor rated condition is 0.499mm as shown in Figure 15'. Is the strain is in the unit 'mm'.
4. In point 4 it is not stated how the optimization was done. What tools were used, was it Ansys software or other?
5. In 'Conclusion' no precise reference was made to the results obtained, no numerical values were given to evaluate the correctness of the optimization process.
Author Response
- The abstract should briefly state the purpose of the paper.
Response: The abstract summarizes the article as follows: “Therefore, this article uses the multidisciplinary reliability analysis and optimization method under random and interval uncertainty to quantitatively analyze the uncertainty factors. Then optimally solve the RBMDO problem of the turbine rotor mechanism. Through the finite element simulation analysis of the optimized design scheme, the rationality and feasibility of the obtained results are further verified.”
- In page 9, line 202 - 'The rotor mechanism weight M is selected as the objective function'. In the following section, strength properties are taken as the basis for the description. What is the reason for this?
Response: This article takes the lightweight of the turbine rotor as the optimization goal. This changes the size of the rotor, which affects strength and stiffness. Therefore, the optimal solution is achieved with strength and stiffness as constraints.
- In page 18, line 328 - 'The maximum strain value under the rotor rated condition is 0.499mm as shown in Figure 15'. Is the strain is in the unit 'mm'.
Response: This place is a mistake made by the authors' negligence in writing the article. Modifications have been made in the latest submitted article.
- In point 4 it is not stated how the optimization was done. What tools were used, was it Ansys software or other?
Response: In the optimization process, ISIGHT software was used. As a third-party software, it can efficiently import and optimize models from Ansys simulation software.
- In 'Conclusion' no precise reference was made to the results obtained, no numerical values were given to evaluate the correctness of the optimization process.
Response: The article has already analyzed the rotor optimization results in different situations in Section 5. It is also concluded that the design scheme meets the operating requirements of all operating conditions.
Reviewer 3 Report
The article about Multidisciplinary collaborative design and optimization (MDO) of turbine rotor, which uses collaborative optimization deals with an interesting problem solved by the MDO method under aleatory and interval uncertainties.
The introduction part is quite short. It could be broaden by references which also deal with optimization of particular machine parts, e.g. by Hrcek at al in Global sensitivity analysis of chosen harmonic drive parameters affecting its lost motion, which also uses approximation techniques described in chapter 3.2.
The Multidisciplinary design optimization under aleatory and interval uncertainties chapter is nice done and presents all necessary equations and algorithms for the solved task.
The chapter 3 is most important due to the application of the chosen method. Please, put to the Fig. 6 a 3-D picture of the rotor with marked region, to which belongs the drawing placed in Fig.5 to make it more clear for the readers.
The conclusion part could be also broaden there, where the values are mentioned, by writing the specifically values they were achieved by the MDO process (e.g. the rotor specific weight savings compared to the initial state before optimization).
Author Response
- The introduction part is quite short. It could be broaden by references which also deal with optimization of particular machine parts, e.g. by Hrcek at al in Global sensitivity analysis of chosen harmonic drive parameters affecting its lost motion, which also uses approximation techniques described in chapter 3.2.
Response: In the latest submission, we have expanded the introduction section. Added references and analyzed the development status of RBDO.
- The Multidisciplinary design optimization under aleatory and interval uncertainties chapter is nice done and presents all necessary equations and algorithms for the solved task.
Response: Thank you editor for acknowledging our work.
- The chapter 3 is most important due to the application of the chosen method. Please, put to the Fig. 6 a 3-D picture of the rotor with marked region, to which belongs the drawing placed in Fig.5 to make it more clear for the readers.
Response: 3D plots have been given in Figures 9 and 10. The two-dimensional sketch in Figure 6 is mainly to indicate the position information of each variable.
- The conclusion part could be also broaden there, where the values are mentioned, by writing the specifically values they were achieved by the MDO process (e.g. the rotor specific weight savings compared to the initial state before optimization).
Response: A detailed analysis of the optimization results has been given in Section 5. A further summary is made in Section 6.
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
The authors have addressed my comments.
