Comparison of Manual Setting Weight Reduction and Topology Optimization of the Wing Tips of Electric Vertical Take-Off and Landing Aircraft
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
"Comparison of Artificial Weight Reduction and Topology Optimization of the Wing Tips of Electric Vertical Take-off and Landing (eVTOL) Aircraft"
by Yangyang Zeng et al.
This is an interesting case study of design of an eVTOL, shown in Figure 2 of the manuscript. Unfortunately, the quality of the English writing is poor and there is a need for a substantial revision so that the paper becomes clear to its possible readers.
I offer a few suggestions later, but first it is necessary to clarify the intention of the paper. The sentence in line 21 " ... artificially set the filling structure reinforcement according to the force of the aircraft ..." is vague and unclear. What do the authors mean by “artificially set the filling” ? and what is “force of the aircraft” ?
In line 148 the authors mention a “force of 3.18 MPa” - please note that MPa is unit of stress, not force.
For ex. in line 292 the authors mention a “0.3 mm node”. Is this the mesh size? 0.3 mm node means what? please check carefully the terminology used.
Specific suggestions (these are only examples of changes needed):
Line 17 – “the paper has designed” – please rewrite for clarity: suggestions – the authors designed an aircraft … or ….. the paper presents the design of an aircraft …
Lines 46 and 52 – after ; do not capitalize – e.g. in line 46 it should be … experience; artificial …
Line 48 …… passed to the later researchers – please rewrite for clarity: passed to subsequent researchers …
Line 56 – please re-write “ is the worst complex” – do the authors mean the more complex?
Line 112 – instead of …. the change of lift…. I suggest to emphasize … the cyclic change of lift …
Lines 134, 138 and 181 - please do not write “ … . As shown in Figure … “; rearrange the sentences.
Line 170 – please give an explanation for the different details of the scheme – a) …, b) …. etc.
Line 259 – …. where …. is not indented (this is not a new paragraph!)
Line 292 and elsewhere (line 411, for ex.) – please clarify “0.3 mm node”
Line 498 – Doctor is name of the Univ. ? if note, separate: doctor thesis, National …
Line 506 - Please be consistent in the presentation of references – do not use capitals only for the titles. (also in line 543)
Furthermore, decide if titles are written capitalizing, or not, the words. For consistency of presentation, you should not use both styles!
Author Response
please see attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
- You are defining two optimization methods, one is by intuition other is by CAD; there are no clear definition and mathematical statement and also clear comparision results of those methods ; must be clarified;
- Mesh independency study of FE analysis must be shown;
- Relation with Mesh Independency and mesh growth rate, mesh size and also mesh size must be explained;
- "continuum structures" must be corrected;
- What about overall structural analysis after topology optimization; must be explained;
- Number of turns, motor weight and motor power values effects of lifting power unit on the anlysis did not included; must be explained and clarified
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Reviewer 3 Report
This is a very interesting study concerning a up-to-date area, electric drones, named EVTOL.
I am not a specialist on aeronautics, therefore my review will be only on Materials sections.
Very interesting 3D print technologies, being manufactured 5 sets of printings leading to different strengths and weight.
The results helped to chose different 3D Print fillings in the wings and an optimization procedure was carried out.
The conclusions are sustained by the work done.
Therefore my opinion is that the manuscript shall be accepted without any changes
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
manuscript applsci-172465:
'Comparison of Artificial Weight Reduction and Topology Optimization of the Wing Tips of Electric Vertical Take-off and Landing (eVTOL) Aircraft' by Yangyang Zeng et al. This manuscript was thoroughly revised by the authors, and the weaknesses / ambiguities I identified in my revision of the initial version were properly addressed. I recommend publication now.
