Next Article in Journal
A Modeling Design Method for Complex Products Based on LSTM Neural Network and Kansei Engineering
Previous Article in Journal
Crystal Plasticity Finite Element Modeling on High Temperature Low Cycle Fatigue of Ti2AlNb Alloy
 
 
Article
Peer-Review Record

Structural Response of Double-Layer Steel Cylinders under Inside-Explosion Loading

Appl. Sci. 2023, 13(2), 709; https://doi.org/10.3390/app13020709
by Xuejun Qin, Jun Yang, Junyi Guan, Zhen Liao, Yanjun Ma and Dezhi Zhang *
Reviewer 1:
Reviewer 2:
Appl. Sci. 2023, 13(2), 709; https://doi.org/10.3390/app13020709
Submission received: 10 December 2022 / Revised: 24 December 2022 / Accepted: 29 December 2022 / Published: 4 January 2023

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

 

 

 In this paper, the deformation of the double-layered steel cylindrical shells is obtained. The paper should be expanded. It can be accepted after the revision.

 

1- Figures (except figure 1) is not shown in the paper. They should be inserted in the revised paper. after that, the paper will be reviewed again.

1- Please add notation list

2- In order to provide a more comprehensive literature review, the authors should cite and discuss the following relevant papers in their revised manuscript:

Nassiraei, H. and Yara, A., 2022. Local joint flexibility of tubular K-joints reinforced with external plates under IPB loads. Marine Structures84, p.103199.

3- The validation of the numerical model with exp. tests should be added.

4- “figure 7” should be “Fig. 7”. Also revise same issues in the texts.

5- In line 159, it is unclear that how radial displacement is determined.

6- The results are presented qualitatively; it is essential that they should be presented quantitatively. Also conclusion section should be summarized.

 

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

The problem is timely and interesting. I recommend the publication of the manuscript after the following revisions are properly made:

 

1) The aim of the paper is not completely well-specified. The authors could specify more this aspect in the abstract and in the introduction of the manuscript.

2) English should be enhanced throughout the manuscript to eliminate grammatical errors and misprints.

3) I this paper, FEM simulation is considered with LS-DYNA. Thus, the introduction should be improved by discussing recent works on FEM such as: [(a) “Static bending and buckling analysis of bi-directional functionally graded porous plates using an improved first-order shear deformation theory and FEM”; (b) “Nonlinear bending analysis of porous sigmoid FGM nanoplate via IGA and nonlocal strain gradient theory”; (c) “A new higher-order mixed four-node quadrilateral finite element for static bending analysis of functionally graded plates”, Structures, 47, 1595-1612.

 

4) Results and Discussion part need to improve by including some physical significant in support of their results.                       

5) In conclusion, give only main findings of your research with an appropriate value.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

The paper is ready for publication.

 

Back to TopTop