Numerical Computation of Sloshing-Induced Force in Complex Ship Tanks under the Excitation of Ship Rolling Motion Based on the MPS Method

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

We appreciate for your warm work earnestly，The comments are all valuable and very helpful for revising and improving our paper, as well as the important guiding significance to our researches. We have studied comments carefully and have made correction which we hope meet with approval. Plsease see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

1. Line 54 page 2. Additional explanations correspond to different of sloshing analysis using a simplified tank and a real ship tank should be given in this paragraph to show that an analysis with the real tank should be performed even more complicate.
2. Line 112 page 4. A sub chapter should be initiate with an initial explanation before coming to the main explanation stated as points.
3. 6 page 8. More explanations correspond to the ballast tank shaped used for simulation are necessary mainly corresponding to relationship between geometric characteristic of tank and the sloshing phenomena to show that the simulation using real tank is important.
4. Equation 14 page 9. It does not clear the equation to calculated the natural roll period of scaled ship or to calculate the period of scaled tank. For scaled tank period should be calculated based on the real tank period. It should be depended on the tank geometric and level of liquid.
5. Line 219 page 10. The statement in this sentence should be followed by the values of tank period to show the effect of tank period.
6. Line 223 page 10. “Both of these two cases …………………. is suggested to simplify. It was double between “both” and “two cases”.
7. Line 234 page 10. Also be claimed the effect natural roll period of tank but the value of natural period of tank itself has never been shown in the manuscript.
8. Line 238 page 12. This sentence should be rearranged. The first statement that “the free surface is hardly parallel to the sea level” contradict with the last statement in this sentence “the traditional quasi-static method cannot reflect the movement of free surface realistically.
9. Figure 10 page 12. There are 3 curves in the figures but the legend of each figure only two. The red line curve was not shown in the figures.
10. Line 267 page 13. The natural period of tank is important in this paper. Therefore, the natural period of each filling level of tank should be calculated.
11. Figure 12 page 13. The legends of figures should include the red line curve.
12. Line 271 page 13. This statement is not relevant in this article because this article did not discuss effect of liquid sloshing on dynamic stability.
13. Line 277 page 13. This statement contradicts with the statement on page 12 line 238.
14. Line 264 page 13. The analysis of effect of natural period of tank should be conduct in advance to reach this conclusion because this statement was commonly known in field of sloshing tank. 

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

We appreciate for your warm work earnestly，The comments are all valuable and very helpful for revising and improving our paper, as well as the important guiding significance to our researches. We have studied comments carefully and have made correction which we hope meet with approval. Plsease see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

The Authors successfully addressed most of my questions and remarks in terms of content. The quality of English and quality of figures are much better now.

 

Reviewer 2 Report

Thank you very much for your revision.

This manuscript is a resubmission of an earlier submission. The following is a list of the peer review reports and author responses from that submission.