Attitude Error and Contact Influencing Characteristic Analysis for a Composite Docking Test Platform
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
This paper proposed a joint test configuration platform for implementing both vertical and horizontal docking. There are some major comments as follows:
1. In the paper, some formulas have symbols whose denotations are not given. For example, in formula (2), what’s the meaning of and ? In formula (17), is the symbol & in the position of subscript and hat?
2. In section 4.2, line 400, the speed of the upper and lower screw-thread lifting platforms are both defined as 0.01 m/s, how is this speed defined? And will the different definition of speed affect the curves of corresponding quantities shown in Figures. 8 and 9?
3. This paper gives the theoretical analysis of a joint test configuration platform. Can this simulation result by tested by real experiment?
4. For coordinate systems, is the system OXYZ in Figure. 2 the same with the system OXYZ in Figure. 4?
5. In table 2, Characteristic parameters of mass and inertia, how are these settings from?
Author Response
List of Responses
Dear Editors and Reviewers:
Thank you for your letter and for the reviewers‘Attitude Error and Contact Influencing Characteristic Analysis for a Composite Docking Test Platform’ (ID: applsci-2004688). Those 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. Revised portion are marked in red in the paper. The main corrections in the paper and the responds to the reviewer’s comments are as flowing:
Responds to the reviewer’s comments:
Reviewer #1:
- Response to comment:In the paper, some formulas have symbols whose denotations are not given. For example, in formula (2), what’s the meaning of and ? In formula (17), is the symbol & in the position of subscript and hat?
Response: I'm sorry to have bothered your review. This problem is caused by our version conversion. At present, some public notices with problems have been turned into screenshots.
- Response to comment: In section 4.2, line 400, the speed of the upper and lower screw-thread lifting platforms are both defined as 0.01 m/s, how is this speed defined? And will the different definition of speed affect the curves of corresponding quantities shown in Figures. 8 and 9?
Response:It is defined according to the previous experiments and component selection. Different speeds will certainly affect the magnitude of the curve, but the general trend is unchanged. Since the docking structure is designed by us first and processed and assembled, some selection parameters and definition parameters are selected according to the design. The modified parts have been marked red in the article. We sincerely apologize for the inconvenience caused by your review. - Response to comment: This paper gives the theoretical analysis of a joint test configuration platform. Can this simulation result by tested by real experiment?
Response:Thank you for your suggestion. We have added the experimental verification part in the revised version, which has been marked in red. In the experimental verification, the movement trend of each component is basically consistent with the theoretical design, and the maximum gripping force also meets the design indicators and also conforms to the theoretical analysis. - Response to comment: For coordinate systems, is the system OXYZ in Figure. 2 the same with the system OXYZ in Figure. 4?
Response:Thank you for your question. One of the two coordinate systems in Figure 2 is the coordinate system of the passive docking mechanism and the coordinate system of the active docking mechanism, while the coordinate system in Figure 4 represents the initial position coordinate system and the position coordinate system after moving of the active docking mechanism. - Response to comment: In table 2, Characteristic parameters of mass and inertia, how are these settings from?
Response:Thank you for your question. The data in Table 2 is provided by previous research and cooperation units. The source has been added in the revised version, and the research literature we have done before has been added.
Special thanks to you for your good comments.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
There are some major request before further evaulation:
1) Please mention the transformation matrix given in Equation 1 in a sentence.
2) Explain the reason why Fx and Fy forces behave proportionally to sweat starting from the 4th second in "Spherical Joint".
3) How did you determine the material characteristics? Is it real material? Please specify.
4) Cite to the equations you used.
5) Please verify the accuracy of the results with another finite element simulation.
Author Response
List of Responses
Dear Editors and Reviewers:
Thank you for your letter and for the reviewers‘Attitude Error and Contact Influencing Characteristic Analysis for a Composite Docking Test Platform’ (ID: applsci-2004688). Those 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. Revised portion are marked in red in the paper. The main corrections in the paper and the responds to the reviewer’s comments are as flowing:
Responds to the reviewer’s comments:
Reviewer #2:
- Response to comment:Please mention the transformation matrix given in Equation 1 in a sentence.?
Response: Thank you for your comments. We have made corrections in the revised version, won a red mark in the article, and quoted the source of the formula.
- Response to comment:Explain the reason why Fx and Fy forces behave proportionally to sweat starting from the 4th second in "Spherical Joint".
Response: Thank you for your question. Indeed, we did not explain this problem in the manuscript. In the revised version, we added an analysis of this problem, and marked it red in the article. At the same time, we explain this problem separately here:Since the X and Y directions are on the same horizontal plane, when the spherical pair is subjected to a force in one direction, due to the action of the structure, it is bound to produce a resultant force of the same size and opposite direction, so that the whole docking mechanism can achieve balance in the horizontal direction, without overturning or horizontal translation.
- Response to comment:How did you determine the material characteristics? Is it real material? Please specify.
Response: Thank you for your question. In response to this question, we have explained the materials that need to be added in the revised version and marked them in red. The material properties in this paper are defined according to the materials of the real docking mechanism. The materials used include high-strength lightweight materials such as aluminum alloy and titanium alloy. The material properties used are derived from the real materials of the cooperative unit and the physical prototype we designed before.
- Response to comment:Cite to the equations you used..
Response: Thank you for your comments. We have quoted the necessary formulas in the revised version.
- Response to comment:Please verify the accuracy of the results with another finite element simulation.
Response: Thank you for your suggestion. For this problem, we have carried out the physical prototype experiment of the whole docking process. I wonder if we can replace the finite element simulation you said. The experiment process and results have been marked red in the revised version. Thank you again for your valuable suggestions.
Special thanks to you for your good comments.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
Thanks for the revision.
Reviewer 2 Report
The authors have made an effort to make the necessary revisions. The article is acceptable as it is.
