Enhancing the Performance and Durability of Commercial Vehicle Cargo Box Frames through Modal Analysis
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
In this paper a Cargo Box Frame of a commercial vehicle is investigated regarding its frequency response experimentally and computationally.
Firstly the CBF looks like it is over sized with respect to the net weight of the vehicle. Furthermore the design is far from optimized.
Section 1 could be shorter and more oriented to International standards and legislation.
Section 2 should be completely restructured since the methodology is not clear.
The experimental setup should be described in more details, as well as each experiment. The sampling frequency should be explained. The uncertainty of measurements should be considered.
The FE model should be described in more details. The material properties should be checked again. The composite grid type mesh should be explained. Figure 6 should be checked. The results should be checked in terms of units (i.e. p.18 stress not in mm/mm). Table 3 is not clear.
Sections 3 and 4 are poor.
Minor editing of English language required
Author Response
Dear Reviewer
Thank you for your suggestion. I sent my revised version with response to your comments. Please see attached file as your request. Thank you for your consideration of this manuscript.
Sincerely
Srisertpol J,
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
The paper does not present any novelty, without any reference to any new methodology or even addition to any existing one, presenting a numerical analysis of a simple vehicle frame validated within an experimental modal analysis. The paper is closer to a technical report rather than a research paper. In its present form it is not acceptable.
Moderate editing of English language
Author Response
Dear Reviewer
Thank you for your suggestion. I sent my revised version with response to your comments. Please see attached file as your request. Thank you for your consideration of this manuscript.
Sincerely
Srisertpol J,
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
The experimental and numerical modal properties of cargo box frame structures were studied in this work. Generally, the manuscript is good and the work is interesting. But there are still some some details are expected to be added.
1. The manuscript is overall well-written. Literature is less. Authors are advised to report in the literature recent works on the modal analysis of structures to be cited.
2. Page 11, elaborate the FEA modeling procedure. Please add how the parameters are set in the simulation of the models, so that the readers can understand and refer to this method.
Additional comments:
The experimental and numerical modal properties of cargo box frame structures were studied in this work. There are still some some details are expected to be added.
1. Table 2, what is the boundary conditions adopted for the simulation.
2. Table 4, the authors replaced the square tube (ST) to a C-light lip channel (CL) but the deformation, and stress are higher for CL, what is reason.
3. I would suggest the authors to define the locations 1-8 presented in table 3
4. Some statistical analysis should be given for the experimental results.
5. We only see frequency values of the numerical model in figure 6, why is that? You have experimental data, show it to the reader. A comparison of FRFs between the experiment and the model would be interesting to see.
Author Response
Dear Reviewer
Thank you for your suggestion. I sent my revised version with response to your comments. Please see attached file as your request. Thank you for your consideration of this manuscript.
Sincerely
Srisertpol J,
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
Dear authors thank you for your response.
Section 2 although it has the title "Materials and Methods" contains also the results. Please restructure it. Sections 3 and 4 are still poor especially compared to the volume of the results.
Minor editing of English language required
Author Response
Dear Reviewer
Thank you for taking the time to review our manuscript and for providing your valuable comments and suggestions.
The article's structure has been adjusted as recommended, and it is organized as follows: Section 2 presents the research methodology and materials used. Section 3 analyzes the results and provides validation for both simulation and experimental performance analysis. Section 4 interprets the differences found in the requirement expression characteristic analysis. Finally, Section 5 presents the conclusions derived from the proposed technique.
If you have any additional suggestions or specific areas you would like us to address, please do not hesitate to let us know. Your feedback is instrumental in making our work more valuable to the community.
Thank you for your time and consideration.
Sincerely
Srisertpol J.
Reviewer 2 Report
As I mentioned in my 1st review the paper does not present any novelty, without any reference to any new methodology or even addition to any existing one, presenting a numerical analysis of a simple vehicle frame validated within an experimental modal analysis.
As I mentioned in my 1st review the paper does not present any novelty, without any reference to any new methodology or even addition to any existing one, presenting a numerical analysis of a simple vehicle frame validated within an experimental modal analysis.
Author Response
Dear Reviewer
Thank you for taking the time to review our manuscript and for providing your valuable comments and suggestions. We truly appreciate your feedback, and we are pleased to see that you recognize the practical benefits of our work.
We acknowledge your observation about the absence of novelty in terms of introducing new methodologies or significant modifications to existing ones. Our primary focus in this study was not to propose revolutionary techniques but rather to present well-established finite element analysis (FEA) and modal analysis procedures that are commonly used in practice. We aimed to demonstrate how these established methods can be effectively applied to address a specific engineering challenge: the installation of the cargo box frame (CBF) with good riding stability conditions, particularly concerning the center of gravity (CG) of a pickup truck.
The significance of our work lies in its emphasis on practicality. By showcasing the FEA and modal analysis techniques tailored to address the specific engineering problem, we believe that our manuscript provides valuable insights for researchers working in the automotive and structural analysis domains. We have emphasized how the techniques and procedures presented in the paper can be readily implemented in real-world scenarios, contributing to improved design and safety in the automotive industry especially in Thailand.
Once again, we genuinely appreciate your thoughtful feedback, and we believe that the revised version of the manuscript now better communicates the practical benefits of our work. We hope these additions address your concerns and align the paper more closely with the objectives of contributing to applied engineering knowledge and best practices.
If you have any additional suggestions or specific areas you would like us to address, please do not hesitate to let us know. Your feedback is instrumental in making our work more valuable to the community.
Thank you for your time and consideration.
Sincerely,
Srisertpol J.
