Next Article in Journal
Multi-Time and Multi-Band CSP Motor Imagery EEG Feature Classification Algorithm
Next Article in Special Issue
Correlation Analysis and Its Application on an Asymmetry Rotor Structure with Overhang
Previous Article in Journal
In Vivo Evaluation of PVP-Gelatin-Chitosan Composite Blended with Egg-Yolk Oil for Radiodermatitis
 
 
Article
Peer-Review Record

Scaled Model Simulation and Experimental Verification of Submarine Flexible Pipeline Laying System

Appl. Sci. 2021, 11(21), 10292; https://doi.org/10.3390/app112110292
by Haixia Gong *, Tong Zhao, Xiaofeng You, Liquan Wang and Feihong Yun
Reviewer 1: Anonymous
Reviewer 2: Anonymous
Reviewer 3: Anonymous
Appl. Sci. 2021, 11(21), 10292; https://doi.org/10.3390/app112110292
Submission received: 4 October 2021 / Revised: 24 October 2021 / Accepted: 27 October 2021 / Published: 2 November 2021

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

I marked some notes in the attached pdf.

1) Some typos and layout-problems

2) A lot of parameters are used but not declared

3) The citations should be unified

4) The references must be completed and unified!!!

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Dear reviewer:
Thank you very much for your careful review and your valuable professional opinions. I have corrected the mistakes in my paper you pointed out to me. I have corrected the typing errors you marked me, and modified the article layout according to the documents you provided me. I also explained the parameters I didn't declare. The citation has also been modified according to your requirements. In addition, I updated the introduction section to make it more concise and clear. 
Thank you again for your suggestion and Please do not hesitate to contactme if you have any questions about my manuscript.
Kind regards,
Haixia Gong

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

You have submitted quite a fascinating manuscript and I sure would like to see it printed soon.

Minor revisions are as follows:

1.Few of the references are recently published. There should be 5 to 10 more citations.

2.You are applying the similarity rule focusing on the Froude number, but since you cannot control gravity, you must be controlling the flow velocity, where is the information about the flow velocity?

3.Fig.6 and 7: I don't understand the difference between a scale model and a prototype. The graph should be stretched horizontally.

4.Fig.21: No unit on the vertical axis.

 

 

Author Response

Dear reviewer:
Thank you very much for your careful review and your valuable professional opinions. I have corrected the mistakes in my paper you pointed out to me. I added seven references published in recent years; In addition, a subsection is added in Chapter 3, which is about the working parameters of the pipe laying vessel and the marine environmental parameters of the fourth level sea state during operation. This part contains the information of fluid velocity. In Fig. 6, the contact force height of the tower of the model and prototype is consistent with that of the angle adjustment mechanism; In Figure 7, I simulate and calculate the pipe tension through Adams and orcaflex. I have extended the graph according to your suggestion and added units to the vertical axis in Figure 22. In addition, I updated the introduction section to make it more concise and clear. 
Thank you again for your suggestion and Please do not hesitate to contactme if you have any questions about my manuscript.
Kind regards,
Haixia Gong

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

This paper analyses a scaled model of a deep-sea flexible pipeline laying system based on a similar theory under the coupling of the ocean state. It also discusses laying ship motion and pipeline dynamics as well as the similarity of the scaled model of the tower. The Authors used the ANSYS model. Some of the lacking boundary conditions were established by experiments. I find this work suitable for publishing within the Applied Sciences. But before that, it would be beneficial to check the mistyping and some mistakes. I have noticed two of them:

line 108 - there is a mistyping there

lines 598-599, 613-614, 624 - Tables 3, 4, 7 might be reorganised 

Author Response

Dear reviewer:
Thank you very much for your careful review and your valuable professional opinions. I have corrected the mistakes in my paper you pointed out to me. I have corrected the input error on line 108 (now line 88) and reorganized the table across the page. In addition, I updated the introduction section to make it more concise and clear.
Thank you again for your suggestion and Please do not hesitate to contactme if you have any questions about my manuscript.
Kind regards,
Haixia Gong

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Back to TopTop