Optimization of DLTS Hinges for the Assembly of the Solar Arrays of a Communication CubeSat
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThis manuscript deals with analytical and numerical calculations for the obtainment of critical parameters of DLTS hinges, used for the coupling between solar panels and cubesats. The manuscript presents potential useful development results, but lacks some better explanation/visualization about the integration of the proposed hinges with the solar arrays and the cubesat technology, as well as its improvements in comparison to the established technology.
- In section 3, for example, present some details about the mesh used and generated.
- in 3.1 and 3.2 the manuscript lack some figures/schemes with dimensions for a better visualization and understanding of the readers.
- In section 4.2, fourth line, please differentiate between simulation/modelling and experiments.
- Please develop further the discussion/conclusions of the results obtained and the present literature with other models, as well as future perspectives and impact of these results in the field. I suggest separate in different sections the results and their discussions for a clearer understanding.
Author Response
This manuscript deals with analytical and numerical calculations for the obtainment of critical parameters of DLTS hinges, used for the coupling between solar panels and cubesats. The manuscript presents potential useful development results, but lacks some better explanation/visualization about the integration of the proposed hinges with the solar arrays and the cubesat technology, as well as its improvements in comparison to the established technology
Comment 1- In section 3, for example, present some details about the mesh used and generated.
# Reviewer 1 Response 1.
In section 3 we have rewritten much of it and included more detail of the mesh approach based on your comments.
Comment 2- in 3.1 and 3.2 the manuscript lack some figures/schemes with dimensions for a better visualization and understanding of the readers.
# Reviewer 1 Response 2.
We have also added figure 5 and Figure 6 to help the reader understand the modelling more clearly.
Comment 3- In section 4.2, fourth line, please differentiate between simulation/modelling and experiments.
# Reviewer 1 Response 3.
This is a good comment, we have now added the words ‘simulation experiments’ so explicitly separating the modelling from actual physical experiments.
Comment 4- Please develop further the discussion/conclusions of the results obtained and the present literature with other models, as well as future perspectives and impact of these results in the field. I suggest separate in different sections the results and their discussions for a clearer understanding.
# Reviewer 1 Response 4.
As mentioned in the paper coupling mechanisms attribute to 10% of overall failures therefore with this knowledge we intentionally adopted a focus on the critical design parameters of the DLTS hinge. Through research and liaising with our partners we identified parameters to be of importance for the development of a 1st stage specification. We did not ignore or neglect the holistic design but we made a decision that was driven by the need to thoroughly explore the geometric parameters R, θ, and t and understand the specific influence and implications on σv and moments without the confounding effects of broader design considerations. By isolating R, θ, and t we have attained a clear analysis that has provided valuable information and can contribute to a foundational understanding before integrating it into a broader, more comprehensive design framework and 2nd stage specification. We have re written much of the conclusion section to provide the reader more clarity of the findings, and added a brief future work section.
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThis paper presents analytical and numerical investigations aimed at determining the predefined critical parameters of double-layer tape-spring (DLTS) hinges. The following suggestions are provided for the author's consideration to enhance readability.
1. Commence the conclusion by succinctly reiterating the primary objectives of the study, with a focus on the design and simulation process for optimizing DLTS hinge parameters.
2. Provide specific numerical values for the optimized parameters, demonstrating the success in achieving the predicted lowest Von Mises stress (σv) and steady-state moment while staying within established safety thresholds.
3. Emphasize the comprehensive evaluation of safety, durability, non-permanent deformation, and stability throughout the stowed-to-deployment configuration, showcasing a holistic assessment of DLTS hinge performance.
4. Highlight the practical implications by emphasizing how the optimized parameters contribute practically to the safe and efficient coupling of solar panels, addressing concerns related to deformation and degradation.
5. Figure Descriptions:
Differentiate figures using labels (a), (b), (c), and (d) for clarity and improved readability.
In Figure 5, Figure 6, and Figure 7, provide specific explanations if the "Von Mises stress" and "Steady moment" intersect or overlap to enhance reader understanding.
6. Finally, clarify whether the obtained reliability analysis has undergone on-site validation.
Author Response
This paper presents analytical and numerical investigations aimed at determining the predefined critical parameters of double-layer tape-spring (DLTS) hinges. The following suggestions are provided for the author's consideration to enhance readability.
Comment 1. Commence the conclusion by succinctly reiterating the primary objectives of the study, with a focus on the design and simulation process for optimizing DLTS hinge parameters.
# Reviewer 2 Response 1.
This is a good point. We have added the following at the start of the conclusion. ‘The double-layer tape-spring (DLTS) hinge is employed to facilitate the connection between the flasher solar panels, supporting the adaptation and realization of the assumed origami-based pattern in the solar arrays. This study aimed to discern the crucial parameters of the DLTS hinge during the transition from the stowed to the deployment configuration. The design methodology involved simulations to obtain the optimal solution for the critical design parameters of the DLTS hinge.’
Comment 2. Provide specific numerical values for the optimized parameters, demonstrating the success in achieving the predicted lowest Von Mises stress (σv) and steady-state moment while staying within established safety thresholds.
# Reviewer 2 Response 2.
Table 2 and 3 provide the optimised (for lowest stress and moments) prediction results. The figure is in bold to emphasise the result.
Comment 3. Emphasize the comprehensive evaluation of safety, durability, non-permanent deformation, and stability throughout the stowed-to-deployment configuration, showcasing a holistic assessment of DLTS hinge performance.
As mentioned in the paper coupling mechanisms attribute to 10% of overall failures therefore with this knowledge we intentionally adopted a focus on the critical design parameters of the DLTS hinge. Through research and liaising with our partners we identified parameters to be of importance for the development of a 1st stage specification. We did not ignore or neglect the holistic design but we made a decision that was driven by the need to thoroughly explore the geometric parameters R, θ, and t and understand the specific influence and implications on σv and moments without the confounding effects of broader design considerations. By isolating R, θ, and t we have attained a clear analysis that has provided valuable information and can contribute to a foundational understanding before integrating it into a broader, more comprehensive design framework and 2nd stage specification. We have re written much of the conclusion section to provide the reader more clarity of the findings.
Comment 4. Highlight the practical implications by emphasizing how the optimized parameters contribute practically to the safe and efficient coupling of solar panels, addressing concerns related to.
# Reviewer 2 Response 4. CG
This research was carried out with an end user for cubsats and the design process focused on identifying the critical design parameters of DLTS hinge within the stowed and deployed state. By focusing on σv and moments experienced on the hinge we have successfully identified critical dimensions and then optimised them further for the safe and efficient coupling of panels. This was our main task and the findings are a valuable step in the design decision making process, but we acknowledge that further research will be required. In particular life cycle assessment that will consider deformation and degradation. We hope to proceed with this and additional research challenges with our partner organization going forward. We have added a future work point in the conclusion to highlight this.
Comment 5. Figure Descriptions:
Differentiate figures using labels (a), (b), (c), and (d) for clarity and improved readability.
In Figure 5, Figure 6, and Figure 7, provide specific explanations if the "Von Mises stress" and "Steady moment" intersect or overlap to enhance reader understanding.
# Reviewer 2 Response 5.
We have now modified this figure as to your suggestion. Regarding the overlap in these figures, this is not critical to the design we simply used the secondary axis (steady state) to save on the number of figures used in the paper.
- Finally, clarify whether the obtained reliability analysis has undergone on-site validation.
# Reviewer 1 Response 6.
# Reviewer 2 Response 5.
On site validation requires a large investment and will be part of the future research plan that we are developing with our partner organisation. We have added this point to the conclusion section.
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe manuscript was improved, some of the suggestions made were added and it can be considered for publication.
Author Response
Thank you for a valuble review.
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsAccording to this type of question, Figure 7, specific explanations should be provided if the "Von Mises stress" and "Steady moment" intersect or overlap to enhance reader understanding. When using figures to illustrate experimental variations or comparisons, it is important to discuss relevant changes in the text, especially points where slopes intersect, as they represent significant differences in the same experiment. Simply explaining the figure is not sufficient; it is crucial to highlight the relevance of using such graphical representations.
Reviewing all figures throughout the document to ensure they align with writing guidelines is also advisable. The presentation of Figure 7 may lead to confusion, and it is essential to clarify its content for better comprehension.
Author Response
Comment 1. According to this type of question, Figure 7, specific explanations should be provided if the "Von Mises stress" and "Steady moment" intersect or overlap to enhance reader understanding. When using figures to illustrate experimental variations or comparisons, it is important to discuss relevant changes in the text, especially points where slopes intersect, as they represent significant differences in the same experiment. Simply explaining the figure is not sufficient; it is crucial to highlight the relevance of using such graphical representations.
#Response 1. In relation to the overlap observed in Figure 7, it is important to note that this overlap does not play a crucial role in the overall design, and there is no scientific significance associated with it. The utilization of the secondary axis (steady state) was primarily aimed at optimizing the number of figures presented in the paper. It is essential to clarify that providing additional text to describe the overlap could potentially mislead the reader.
Comment 2. Reviewing all figures throughout the document to ensure they align with writing guidelines is also advisable. The presentation of Figure 7 may lead to confusion, and it is essential to clarify its content for better comprehension.
#Response 1. Thank you for your valuable feedback. We appreciate your suggestion to review all figures in the document for alignment with writing guidelines. We spent two days thoroughly examine each figure to ensure consistency. After discussions we believe that for each figure there is an appropriate amount of supporting text. Regarding Figure 7, I acknowledge your concern and we reviewed the text describing these figures. The text is appropriate and importantly much of the findings are further analysed in sections 4.1, 4.2.1, 4.2.2. In particular, from these plots we were able to further extrapolate information in the form of to provide rank importance of the dimensions, the difference in the range and the prediction result for lower stress and moments.
Round 3
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsWhile some corrections were made, I discovered a significant amount of
potential plagiarism originating from a specific manuscript upon using
Turnitin to examine the possibility of plagiarism in this document that
it may be an unpublished graduation thesis from a student. Therefore, I
suggest that clarification should be sought from the author, as this
could potentially involve disputed content or instances of self-plagiarism.
Author Response
Yes we believe that the content is from an unpublished graduate thesis. We confirm that the Author of this thesis is the principal author of this paper, and the work is not published elsewhere. Hopefully this clarifies any plagiarism and self plagiarism concerns and we confirm that there is no dispute over ownership.
Round 4
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe author has addressed my concerns, and the publication can proceed in its current form.
