Digital Thread Roadmap for Manufacturing and Health Monitoring the Life Cycle of Composite Aerospace Components

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The review article on the topic of digital thread roadmap for Manufacturing composite aerospace components are very novel work in the respective field. The motivation of the work is well described in terms of reducing carbon emissions and its necessity. Process monitoring, process control, predictive maintenance, inspection, work cell optimization, factory optimization, supply chain optimization, structural health monitoring, and service life monitoring are well described in each section. Overall. the manuscript is well-written and can be accepted with the following minor revisions:

1. Check spelling and grammar properly.

2. Add figures/ tables in some sections to make the visibility and content of the manuscript more profound.  

Author Response

Hello, 

First, I would like to thank you sincerely for using your time and expertise to review this manuscript.  I greatly appreciate the feedback you provided, and I was able to use it to make the necessary edits and additions to the paper.  I agreed with all of your comments/suggestions, and believe I have fully incorporated them into the revised paper I am submitting by 1. Checking grammar/spelling throughout, and 2. Adding more figures/images to provide greater depth to the subject.  Please let me know if there are any other areas you would like to see edited.  Thank you once again!  

Reviewer 2 Report

Dear author!

Your article deals with an extremely complex problem, the solution of which is very important for the progress of modern civilization. The author rightly chose the life cycle of aerospace engineering as the object of creation of the considered digital threads. The review-article is written in good scientific language, the conclusions on the issues under consideration are substantiated by the results of highly qualified researchers. Without in any way belittling the importance of the problems raised in the article, it should, however, be noted that after reading it, many questions remain, some of which are listed below and to which I would like to receive answers.

1. The order of access to information contained in the blockchain. Apparently, the system under discussion should have some restrictions on access to it due to political reasons, competition, and a potential terrorist threat.

2. In general, the blockchain structure does not imply a special thematic, temporal or other structuring of incoming information. How to ensure the convenience and efficiency of access to it, if necessary, get a hint for solving a specific practical problem?

3. For the effective use of a digital thread created by various sources, it is highly desirable to have some standards for presenting and entering information into it and, possibly, a means of recalling the user to the result of using information borrowed from this information thread.

4. Since both scientific organizations and aviation industries can be members of the information thread community, structures engaged in the rational organization of production capacities inside the factory, component suppliers operating airlines, the information entered into the system can vary significantly in completeness, reliability, presentation form, placement of accents the importance of the issues under consideration. This conclusion suggests that 90% or more of the information contained in the thread can be junk, only overloading computing power and making it difficult to access the desired result. Attempts to correct errors made at some stage without the possibility of editing information in a previously completed block significantly worsen the structure of the information space of interest.

5. With the development of production technologies, designs, the creation of new materials, test methods, the information in the system quickly becomes obsolete, loses its significance and overloads the system. This issue also needs to be discussed.

6. Different aircraft manufacturers may use different materials, other technologies to solve similar problems. Thus, the blocks of information created by them can not only compete, but also contradict each other. Who in this case will be the arbiter recommending the user to make this or that decision?

  Apparently, the creation of the systems described in the article will require at some stage of their development by the authorized international organizations the detailed provisions regulating the structure and operation of digital threads in industries. Despite the above questions and comments, the review-article is worthy of publication in Aerospace journal after minor revisions.

Author Response

Hello, 

First, I would like to thank you sincerely for using your time and expertise to review this manuscript.  I greatly appreciate the feedback you provided, and I was able to use it to make the necessary edits and additions to the paper.  I agreed with all of your comments/suggestions, and was very grateful for your insightful questions.

I believe that all of your questions should be answered within the manuscript to provide a more rounded case for the digital thread.  In order to answer the questions, I created two new subsections in the manuscript.

The first addresses the questions around blockchain, specifically the question about security (I also included the actual method we are using to guarantee security), and how specifically the data will be tied to blockchain and retrieved by only authorized parties.

The second combines the questions of architecture and compatibility.  This was an excellent suggestion especially, as I realized I hadn't directly addressed this in the manuscript even though nothing else works without it.  I discussed the challenge, the factors that must be considered, and how various companies and groups would work together to create the necessary architecture that is sustainable, robust, and flexible enough to be adopted by the various parties.

I have also added a number of figures/drawings to better illustrate some of the critical concepts of the paper.

I believe I have fully incorporated all questions/suggestions into the revised paper.  Please let me know if there are any other areas you would like to see edited.  Thank you once again, your insight was incredibly valuable!