Design and Simulation Analysis of Piezoelectric Ceramic Tube-Based Fiber Optic Nutator Applied to an Intersatellite Laser Communication System

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

1. The article title sequence number needs to be rewritten, and the title font is inconsistent.

2. Some abbreviations in the text are not explained.

3. The article is not innovative enough.

4. Picture number center.

5. In line 146, "minimum nutation bandwidth F" needs to be reconfirmed as the maximum or minimum.

6. Line 154, how to get 25 kHz.

• The normative use of English in the article needs to be changed appropriately

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Overall pleased with the paper and its contents. I have only some minor corrections to recommend.

1. A "3.1.1 Subsection" label was left in from the paper template -- please remove.

2. On page 3, lines 107 - 108, you define the variable alpha twice, with two different wordings. If these are two different ways of saying the same thing, please combine in a clearer way. If they are two different items, please clarify.

3. On page 3, line 116, you have the acronym "MFD". I did not see where this was defined earlier in the paper, and it needs to be defined.

4. On page 3, line 124, did you mean Airy spot instead of Avery spot?

5. On figure 5, in the legend you have 135 V, but the text and caption say 175 V. Please correct.

6. On Figure 1, the light blue coloring for some components is hard to read, especially on a light background. Consider changing to a darker blue.

7. On Figures 6 and 8, the font size of many numbers, including the legends, is quite small and difficult to read. Also, the right-side axes of figure 6 are in a similar light blue color as Figure 1. Consider increasing the font and darkening the color to improve readability for these figures.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Summary:

This paper presents a new fine tracking actuator with a related method to do fine tracking measurement with the device. In the paper they showed the architecture of the device, measurement outcome and embedding in the system. Most of the paper is sound, but I do have some remarks.

Comments

The authors say it can replace the coarse tracking detector. I do not agree with that. This depends on the uncertainty of position and attitude of the satellites. The authors need to either analyze this better or remove the statement on the coarse sensor.

How will coarse tracking take place?

How will you apply 250 V in a spacecraft? In other words: does this not compromise the volume that you saved by making a tiny device?

What about reliability of the piezo-electric actuators? Cracks due to fatigue are quite unpredictable and can disable the functioning of the mechanism.

How do you deal with hysteresis?

Were you able to verify the resonance frequencies of the nutator?

You say: simulation results are sub microrad, but how does that correspond to the measurement error of the experiment? In other words: What do you expect to be the accuracy, taking into account the errors you found in the measurements?

How does the course tracking take place?

How does the F-number of the lens influence the angular accuracy of the device?

No remarks

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf