A Study on the Movement Characteristics of Fuel in the Fuel Tank during the Maneuvering Process

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

I think this study is an interesting research field.

However, there are a few things to improve.

 

1. Lack of reference research.

In addition to the references presented, there are other related studies. Please list and describe the contents of the references well.

 

2. Is the result simply based on the fuel tank model presented in Figure 1? Why did you decide on the model in Figure 1?

If the model in Figure 1 is set as the initial model and there are other optimized models that have been improved, it would be good from a design and analysis point of view.

 

3. "Therefore, in future research, the effects of roll acceleration and angular acceleration will be incorporated to comprehensively analyze and study the motion characteristics of fuel under the combined influence of multiple excitation factors."

  : Why were the authors unable to do so in this study?

 

4. A separate table for each of the characteristics presented in Sections 2.2, 2.3, and 2.4 seems effective to highlight the findings.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

To study the movement characteristics of fuel in the fuel tank during aircraft maneuvering, this paper conducts numerical simulations of a typical wing fuel tank using the finite point set method based on certain boundary conditions and excitation. Overall, the paper is quite interesting. But there are some problems in contribution description, literature review, language expression, innovation, etc. I only agree to the publication of the paper after the authors have revised it according to my comments. Here are some specific suggestions:

1. It is suggested that the authors summarize the contribution points of the method proposed in this article in the introduction part of the article to highlight the research advantages of this article

2. Many parts of the article need to pay attention to writing problems, such as 2700kg/m3 and 780kg/m3, 32 m/s2, and the power needs to appear in the superscript.

3. Regarding the theoretical basis and innovative part of this paper, the authors introduced some formulas, such as formulas (1)-(5), etc., to describe the movement of fuel. The Smoothed Particle Hydrodynamics (SPH) method treats the fuel fluid as a large number of discrete, freely moving particles. Based on kernel function interpolation, a correspondence between discrete particles and continuous physical fields can be established, It is worth mentioning that these methods It seems to be known knowledge in the industry, so where should the unique contribution of this article be reflected?

4. In the literature review part of the article, the authors analyzed the work on aircraft reliability is relatively thin and outdated. It is necessary for the authors to strengthen the analysis in this area. The authors can refer to a variational local weighted deep sub-domain adaptation network for remaining useful life prediction facing cross-domain condition, an integrated multi-head dual sparse self-attention network for remaining useful life prediction, a parallel hybrid neural network with integration of spatial and temporal features for remaining useful life prediction in prog nostics

5. Figure 3 lacks a legend

6. In the results and analysis, it is recommended that the authors add tables to describe and compare the results, rather than through large paragraphs of text descriptions

7. Please do not divide the conclusion into paragraphs

8. From the current point of view, the innovative part of the article needs to be strengthened and highlighted

Please see the comments to the authors.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

Some specific comments are as follows:

1. It is hoped that the authors will reply completely to the comments put forward by the reviewers. Before responding specifically to each comment, they need to respond to the comments on the overall evaluation of the article to report the revision situation

2. The meaning of the contribution summary proposed before may not be clear. It is recommended to summarize the contribution of the article in sections and number it 1, 2, 3...

3. The authors mentioned that In terms of simulating the free surface, although there are relevant literature and demonstrations in different technical fields, most of them are based on traditional smoothed particle hydrodynamics (SPH), arbitrary Lagrangian-Eulerian (ALE) and dynamic mesh methods, and the use of FPM is not very common. In this study, the FPM is used to simulate the fuel movement characteristics of the aircraft under short-term composite acceleration excitation. It is worth mentioning that this is not the first time that FPM Used, the authors also used FPM in their work Characteristics of fuel flowing and sloshing in crossing multi-compartments tank published in the Chinese Journal of Aviation. At the same time, it is found that some of the figures in the paper are the same in this paper, such as Figure 2, etc., as well as some theoretical formulas, and the conclusions are similar. It is worth mentioning that this work is also not cited for analysis in this paper, without highlighting the differences of this work.

4. The literature review section of the article did not make appropriate changes. The article does not increase the comparison and analysis of novel related work. Furthermore, there are many works more than 20 years ago in the article.

5. Regarding the comparison of the required results, the article did not make appropriate changes. Since the authors stated that in terms of simulating free surfaces, although there are relevant literature and demonstrations in different technical fields, most of them are based on traditional smooth particle hydrodynamics (SPH), arbitrary Lagrangian-Euler (ALE) and dynamic Grid method, then FPM should be compared with these methods to highlight the advantages of the method, rather than adding the description table of the so-called sensor

6. The innovation is not significant, and the previous Chinese Journal of Aeronautical Sciences' work Characteristics of fuel flowing and sloshing in crossing multi-compartments tanks both use FPM, but the authors say that there is no similar research at present

Extensive editing of English language required

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf