Reviewer’s comments

Authors’ Reply

 some drawings have an illegible legend, e.g. fig. 77, fig. 78..., the size of the legend should be adjusted to fit the text

Thanks for your comments, we have done our best to make it clearer. However, it is difficult to accommodate in the limited space.

- The literature review could be improved to some extent, e.g. lines 167-170

DOI: 10.1016/j.compstruct.2022.116102

The following article was added.

Rogala, M.,  Gajewski, J.,  Gawdzińska, K., ( 2022) “ Crashworthiness analysis of thin-walled aluminium columns filled with aluminium–silicon carbide composite foam”. Composite Structures( 229).

Reviewer’s comments

Authors’ Reply

+ All the manuscript needs to consider the common structure of an article (Introduction - Materials and Methods or Experimental procedures - Results - Discussions)

All section of the manuscript was significantly revised and improved.

Please describe what the problem is and then explain. The results. The abstract should answer the questions: What problem did you study and why is it important? What methods did you use? What were your main results? And what did you conclude from your results? Please make your abstract with specific and quantitative results to further enrich the content of the article. Please indicate each of these questions in the abstract separately when you are replying to this comment.

·                     This section is intended to show (highlight) parts of the problem that are not solved by other scientists.

·                     The outcome of the review is the identification of a “gap” of research that is not occupied by other scientists in this problem.

The abstract and conclusions were improved and revised as follow.

This paper describes a technique for developing models that would be well suited for conducting additional research on curved steel-glass facades. In each case study, an approximate model was created using Rhino7's Grasshopper visual programming editor and then exported to Strand7 for analysis under both strength and serviceability loads per AS1170.0. Rhino7's Grasshopper and its community-made plugins facilitate parametric structures modeling by allowing design choices to be made throughout the modelling process. A numerical analysis of curved steel-glass facades can be challenging using Strand 7's internal modelling tools, which is why this method is applicable.

From the results of all the case studies discussed in this paper, it is evident that the proposed method is well-suited for the analysis of the effects of beam curvature on the global behavior of curved steel-glass structures. The study found that in every case, the curve member model was more critical than its straight member counterpart, indicating that beam curvature significantly affects a structure's overall performance. It should be noted that although all models performed well under the specified loads in this study, the wind loads applied were relatively simplistic due to the limitations of the software and the availability of data at the locations of the case study. Consequently, the results may only partially reflect the structures' actual behavior when subjected to more complex and realistic wind conditions. Under load combinations, 1.2G + W, the Kazakhstan Pavilion and Hague Central light rail station showed the most significant differences in performance between the straight and curved member models, where wind loads played an important role. Evidence indicates that curved members may be more susceptible to lateral loads, underlining the importance of considering wind loads when designing curved steel-glass structures.

+ MATERIALS AND METHODS.

- Provide a workflow of this work to understand the main methods applied.

- What was the software used and conditions.

- Please talks about the time independence and mesh to develop CAD model and then the analysis.

+ The methodology, Methods, and Materials section must give a clear overview of what was done and give enough information to replicate the study (like a recipe!); be complete, but make life easy for your reader! break into smaller sections with subheadings, cite references for commonly used methods, and display a flow diagram or data table where possible. This section is missing.

- How was planned the experimental design for cad analysis?

More explanation was provided.

+ RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

- From the information obtained, this was verified with experimental results from the authors?

- The results need to be compared, discussed and analyzed with other references.

- The information need to be presented in a clear way, its hard to follow the results.

+ RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

Was revised accordingly.

+ The conclusions are not aligned with the objectives. Therefore, it is necessary to clearly describe the purpose of the study so that the result points are the same as the conclusions.

+ Conclusions in accordance with the objectives set, however, it is desirable to expand the text in them.

The conclusion was revised according to the main objectives of the paper.

+ It is recommended to describe the results obtained with add a scientific interpretation of the results.

Further scientific interpretation were added in the conclusion and discussion sections.

Reviewer’s comments

Authors’ Reply

The manuscript was presented in a form of a book with a long chapter and no novelty was addressed in the article. It needs re-arrangement and the conclusions should be condensed.

This paper describes a technique for developing models that would be well suited for conducting additional research on curved steel-glass facades. In each case study, an approximate model was created using Rhino7's Grasshopper visual programming editor and then exported to Strand7 for analysis under both strength and serviceability loads per AS1170.0. Rhino7's Grasshopper and its community-made plugins facilitate parametric structures modeling by allowing design choices to be made throughout the modelling process. A numerical analysis of curved steel-glass facades can be challenging using Strand 7's internal modelling tools, which is why this method is applicable.

From the results of all the case studies discussed in this paper, it is evident that the proposed method is well-suited for the analysis of the effects of beam curvature on the global behavior of curved steel-glass structures. The study found that in every case, the curve member model was more critical than its straight member counterpart, indicating that beam curvature significantly affects a structure's overall performance. It should be noted that although all models performed well under the specified loads in this study, the wind loads applied were relatively simplistic due to the limitations of the software and the availability of data at the locations of the case study. Consequently, the results may only partially reflect the structures' actual behavior when subjected to more complex and realistic wind conditions. Under load combinations, 1.2G + W, the Kazakhstan Pavilion and Hague Central light rail station showed the most significant differences in performance between the straight and curved member models, where wind loads played an important role. Evidence indicates that curved members may be more susceptible to lateral loads, underlining the importance of considering wind loads when designing curved steel-glass structures.

Reviewer’s comments

Authors’ Reply

1) Abstract Authors should reference research on the current state of simulation models and mention the gains we have when applying them.

The Abstract was revised according to your recommendations.

 2) Summary showing percentage gains in comparisons.

It was provided in different technical tables.

3) The introduction is long, I understand that the aspect of the study must be aligned with the main points to bring information to the readers.

The introduction was comprehensively revised accordingly.

4) Distribute the study in introduction, methodology and results and conclusion.

All indicated sections were revised.

5) Make a flowchart explaining the methodology.

We have done in the following paper.

https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/4/3612

We wanted to have different presentation in this paper.

6) I suggest explaining better the cycle of analysis carried out in each figure.

It was revised.

7) In the results, I suggest reinforcing the statements with other cited studies

The conclusion was comprehensively revised accordingly.

Reviewer’s comments

Authors’ Reply

The manuscript is excessive in its length (93 pages), a research article provides summarized information to be replicated and informed to the scientific community. Please summarized.

This is a benchmark article to introduce new modelling techniques, thus, it needs to provide a comprehensive explanation. We have done our best to summarise the manuscript.

  Provide a workflow of this work to understand the main methods applied.

·                     

This article proposes using two commercial 3D software programs, Rhino7 and Strand7, to complete the FEA simulation of light steel curved members. The 3D model is created in Rhino7, and the individual elements are discretised into more minor elements using Strand7 for assigning material properties, defining boundary conditions, running simulations, and analysing the results. The paper presents five case studies of steel-glass facades and applies the proposed methodology to each. Examples include the Phoenix International Media Centre in Beijing, the Kazakhstan Pavilion and Science Museum in Astana, the Moynihan train hall in New York City, the Chadstone shopping centre in Melbourne, and the central light rail station in The Hague.

What was the software used and what conditions?

3D software programs, Rhino7 and Strand7, to complete the FEA simulation of light steel curved members.

Please talks about the time independence and mesh to develop the CAD model and then the analysis. 

It is not relevant to the current study.

Please check this reference (https://www.mdpi.com/2311-5521/6/4/160) for mesh and time independence.

It is not relevant to the current study.

Reviewer’s comments

Authors’ Reply

Is the research design appropriate?

We have done our best to improve it. Thanks for your comments.