A Framework for Characterizing Flapping Wing Systems

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report (New Reviewer)

The authors have provided an overview of the issues involved with developing and analyzing flapping wing systems. This will be useful to students and researchers alike

Major Comments:

1) No actual results of research conducted. The paper is primarily overview of past research and discussion of future research directions.

2) The abstract promised discussion of instrumentation that can be applied to any flapping wing system, but could not find any description of such. 

3) Vacuum chamber experiments have been conducted to separate inertial and aerodynamic loads. Please refer to https://doi.org/10.2514/1.J052947 and other similar papers from the authors while updating review section.

 

Author Response

Please see attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report (New Reviewer)

In the sense of theory and integrity, it is very useful to construct an accurate measurement system of the force system of a complete bionic aircraft on the ground or even in flight, for understanding the bionic aircraft itself and improving the performance of the bionic aircraft.

But, in my opinion, the author's paper overemphasizes the importance of accurate measurement of the force system of the bionic aircraft.

In addition, as far as the completeness and correctness of the description of force system in the paper is concerned, it is of reference significance for researchers of biological flight or bionic aircraft. Therefore, I support the publication of this paper in this journal, although it is not innovative enough.

Author Response

Please see attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report (New Reviewer)

1.The main question addressed by the research is trying to propose a framework to be used to characterize any flapping wing. However, the key problem and corresponding solution is not given in detail in the research, and only some common knowledge is simply described in the paper.

2.The topic is original and relevant in the field and it addresses a specific gap in the field of flapping wing. But they did not give a convincing solution and just give a simple plan.

3.The authors should perform a specific case to show the feasibility of their methodology, and I believe, during that process, more difficulties and problems will be uncovered, which is more complex than they imagine.

4.Because there are not enough cases, so it need not to consider whether the conclusions are consistent with the evidence and arguments presented.

5. The references are appropriate.

6. The figures are too simple to demonstrate the specific process of experiment, such as Figure 4.

 

Author Response

Please see attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report (New Reviewer)

Comments accepted, although reviewer still feels this can be reduced to a technical note that covers the literature review aspects of things due to lack of original research data. Also, please take care to avoid presenting basic descriptions that can be found in a textbook (refer to the textbook if necessary)

Author Response

Please see attached.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

This manuscript is a resubmission of an earlier submission. The following is a list of the peer review reports and author responses from that submission.

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The updated manuscript is better, but the main flaw is not fixed.
It remains an initial and incomplete part of future research, which can be applied and proven, using the appropriate scientific method.
As it stands, this reviewer still does not recommend this manuscript for publication, but eagerly awaits the complete work in which the proposals presented will be applied.

Reviewer 2 Report

The second version of the article indicates, that some of reviewer's queries were taken into account. And this is now a much better one.