Next Article in Journal
Second-Order Modified Nonstandard Explicit Euler and Explicit Runge–Kutta Methods for n-Dimensional Autonomous Differential Equations
Previous Article in Journal
Some Aspects of the Effects of Dry Friction Discontinuities on the Behaviour of Dynamic Systems
Previous Article in Special Issue
On the Impact of Discrete Atomic Compression on Image Classification by Convolutional Neural Networks
 
 
Article
Peer-Review Record

An Analysis of the Stress–Strain State of a Layer on Two Cylindrical Bearings

Computation 2024, 12(9), 182; https://doi.org/10.3390/computation12090182
by Vitaly Miroshnikov *, Oleksandr Denshchykov, Iaroslav Grebeniuk and Oleksandr Savin
Reviewer 1: Anonymous
Reviewer 2: Anonymous
Reviewer 3: Anonymous
Computation 2024, 12(9), 182; https://doi.org/10.3390/computation12090182
Submission received: 2 August 2024 / Revised: 28 August 2024 / Accepted: 30 August 2024 / Published: 6 September 2024

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

See attached file

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The spatial problem of the theory of elasticity is solved for a layer rigidly conjugated to two thick-walled cylindrical tubes under the conditions of smooth contact on the inner surfaces of the tubes. This paper has some minor issues.

1.         The format of the first line in paragraph 90 differs from that of other paragraphs.  

2.         The caption format of Figure 2 is inconsistent with other captions.  

3.         The overall formula formatting lacks uniformity.

4.         The underlying mechanism and key scientific finding should be further discussed.

 

Comments on the Quality of English Language

The spatial problem of the theory of elasticity is solved for a layer rigidly conjugated to two thick-walled cylindrical tubes under the conditions of smooth contact on the inner surfaces of the tubes. This paper has some minor issues.

1.         The format of the first line in paragraph 90 differs from that of other paragraphs.  

2.         The caption format of Figure 2 is inconsistent with other captions.  

3.         The overall formula formatting lacks uniformity.

4.         The underlying mechanism and key scientific finding should be further discussed.

 

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The comments are proposed in the attached file.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Comments on the Quality of English Language

The English of the manuscript must be improved and checked.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

I recommend it to be published after the following minor revisions:

1) In Fig. 1, a schematic representation of the specified stresses
should be presented separately  (Left + right, diagrams) with its description and text.


2) Figures are improved compared to the first version, but not enough.
For instance, In Fig. 2, the text inside should be at the top. All figures
must be in high-quality presentation.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

All English typos can be checked.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Back to TopTop