Dynamics Modeling and Analysis of an Underwater Glider with Dual-Eccentric Attitude Regulating Mechanism Using Dual Quaternions

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Accept.

Author Response

RESPONSES TO REVIEWERS’ COMMENTS

Manuscript No: [jmse-2010363]

Type of manuscript: Article

Title: Dynamics Modeling and Analysis of an Underwater Glider with Dual-eccentric Attitude Regulating Mechanism Using Dual Quaternions

Author name: Peng Wang, Xuehao Wang, Yanhui Wang*, Wendong Niu, Shaoqiong Yang, Chao Sun, Chenyi Luo

 

Dear Reviewer,

We are very grateful for the valuable comments you mentioned. We have studied the comments very carefully. All the revisions have been addressed in the Reply and highlighted in the manuscript with red words. If there is something you think is inappropriate, we are happy to modify it further and improve. We hope the revised manuscript can be considered acceptable.

 

Reply to the comments

Comment 1

-Accept.

 

Reply:

We appreciate the reviewer for the recognition of this work.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

This manuscript treats about a dynamics modeling and analysis of an underwater glider with dual-eccentric attitude regulating mechanism using dual quaternions. The manuscript is interesting, novelty and well-written. I recommend to accept it subjected to the following minor modifications:

- The abstract is clear and concise and thus I do not have any suggestion about that. Before the abstract, in line 1, please change “Type of the Paper (Article)” to “Article”.

- The introduction is well-described and many references are cited and appropriately discussed.

- Regarding the structure of the paper, the editorial (https://www.mdpi.com/journal/jmse/instructions) recommends to structure as 1. Introduction; 2. Materials and Methods; 3. Results and Discussion; 4. Conclusions. This manuscript does not follow this structure but according to the content this aspect is not important and it is readable in its present state.

- Figures, tables and equations are clear.

- Regarding the appendix A, I suggest to include more text to explain the content of this appendix. Only a single line (line 562) is used.

 

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

1. Research gaps are not identified properly through literature review.

2. Need to explain the three modes (LR, VM, LF) and how DARM covers these modes.

3. "This model solves the attitude singularity problem caused by the expansion of the pitch angle and provides a model basis for the follow- 529 ing research." -this sentence in the conclusion needs an explanation.

4. How do you compare the efficiency of the proposed approach?

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 4 Report

see the attached file

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 3 Report

The authors addressed almost all my comments. However, the last comment is not appropriately handled. 

It is recommended that authors can compare their proposed method with some other existing methods.  

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx