Acoustic Modal Characteristics of Pump Tower Structures Based on Fluid–Structure Coupling Effects

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This article investigates the modal characteristics of pump tower structures under fluid structure coupling through finite element analysis. A comparison was made between dry and wet modal analysis methods. Explored the effects of internal and external fluids, as well as different liquid levels, on natural frequencies, vibration modes, and local deformations. The main revision suggestions are as follows:

1. The abstract should incorporate specific quantitative results, such as numerical values or percentage changes.
2. In order to illustrate the applicability of dry and wet modal analysis methods to practical engineering aspects such as optimization design, the following engineering examples in related fields should be cited:

• https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijsolstr.2017.09.029
• https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oceaneng.2023.114315

3. In Section 2.1, a detailed structural diagram with annotations should be included to visually depict the study object.
4. In Section 2.2, it is necessary to describe the finite element model in detail, such as the setup of the fluid domain and the verification of mesh independence.
5. Thisarticle use the excitation test data, but does not indicate its source. The part of excitation test should be detailed. This includes the arrangement of measurement points, the frequency of data acquisition, and the method of processing experimental data.
6. The third-order mode shape cloud mapsshown in Figure 11 differs from the first- and second-order modes at five levels. In order to exclude the influence of calculation errors, the results of other level calculations should be supplemented.
7. In Section 3.3, very little analysis of the results is provided. The pipeline system consists of two pumps and two pipelines, the correlation between different components of the same system needs to be determined.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Author Response

comments1：The abstract should incorporate specific quantitative results, such as numerical values or percentage changes.

responses1：Thank you for pointing this out. We agree with this comment. Therefore ,we have included specific quantitative results.

comments2：In order to illustrate the applicability of dry and wet modal analysis methods to practical engineering aspects such as optimization design, the following engineering examples in related fields should be cited:

responses2：Thank you for pointing this out. We agree with this comment. Therefore ,we have cited the references you provided.

comments3：In Section 2.1, a detailed structural diagram with annotations should be included to visually depict the study object.

responses3：Thank you for pointing this out. But, we mainly study the principles of pump tower structures.

comments4：In Section 2.2, it is necessary to describe the finite element model in detail, such as the setup of the fluid domain and the verification of mesh independence.

responses4：Thank you for pointing this out. We agree with this comment. Therefore ,we have added the settings for the fluid domain and the mesh independence verification.

comments5：This article use the excitation test data, but does not indicate its source. The part of excitation test should be detailed. This includes the arrangement of measurement points, the frequency of data acquisition, and the method of processing experimental data.

responses5：Thank you for pointing this out. We agree with this comment. Therefore ,we have provided a detailed explanation of the source of the data.

comments6：The third-order mode shape cloud maps shown in Figure 11 differs from the first- and second-order modes at five levels. In order to exclude the influence of calculation errors, the results of other level calculations should be supplemented.

responses6：Thank you for pointing this out. We agree with this comment. Therefore ,we supplemented the calculation results.

comments7：In Section 3.3, very little analysis of the results is provided. The pipeline system consists of two pumps and two pipelines, the correlation between different components of the same system needs to be determined.

responses7：Thank you for pointing this out. We agree with this comment. Therefore ,we have explained the correlation between different components within the same system.

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

There are a number of points which I would like the authors to consider. In particular there is very limited detail in the paper relating to the background work in the literature and the simulation and experimental method used in the paper.

1. The literature review is rather limited and should be expanded. There is no need to split it into International and Domestic research.
2. Section 2.1. the authors should identify the dimensions of the system with the aid of a figure.
3. Line 80-82. Rather than saying that reasonable boundary conditions are required, the authors should give the boundary conditions that they use.
4. Lines 85. It is unclear how the model in [9] was applied. Is it available in ANSYS?
5. Figures 1 and 2. The resolution of these image should be improved. The authors should explain more clearly what these figures depict. E.g. which are the experimental and simulation results.
6. The authors need to include details of the experimental procedure and how their experimental results were obtained.
7. Similarly, for the simulation results. Other than the fact that ANSYS was used with a fixed contrarian at the top, there is no details of the simulation approach, e.g. mesh details. This comment also related to simulations performed in section 3.
8. Table 2. In the discussion of the results in table 2, the error in the second order is 21.6% and 24.2% respectively. This comes from the table, so it is not clear how this relates to reference [11]. Can this level of error be described as “consistent”?
9. In table 3 the frequency changes are relatively small, e.g. from 18.63 Hz to 19.60 Hz. The values are quotes to two decimal places. Could the authors comment on the accuracy fo there frequency values?

Author Response

comments1：The literature review is rather limited and should be expanded. There is no need to split it into International and Domestic research.

responses1：Thank you for pointing this out. We agree with this comment. Therefore ,we have made the appropriate changes.

comments2：Section 2.1. the authors should identify the dimensions of the system with the aid of a figure.

responses2：Thank you for pointing this out. But, We mainly study the principles of pump tower structures.

comments3：Line 80-82. Rather than saying that reasonable boundary conditions are required, the authors should give the boundary conditions that they use.

responses3：Thank you for pointing this out. We agree with this comment. Therefore ,we have already provided reasonable boundary conditions.

comments4：Lines 85. It is unclear how the model in [9] was applied. Is it available in ANSYS?

responses4：Thank you for pointing this out. Of course, it can be found in ANSYS.

comments5：Figures 1 and 2. The resolution of these image should be improved. The authors should explain more clearly what these figures depict. E.g. which are the experimental and simulation results.

responses5：Thank you for pointing this out. We agree with this comment. Therefore ,we have made the appropriate changes.

comments6：The authors need to include details of the experimental procedure and how their experimental results were obtained.

responses6：Thank you for pointing this out. We agree with this comment. Therefore ,we have made the appropriate changes.

comments7：Similarly, for the simulation results. Other than the fact that ANSYS was used with a fixed contrarian at the top, there is no details of the simulation approach, e.g. mesh details. This comment also related to simulations performed in section 3.

responses7：Thank you for pointing this out. We agree with this comment. Therefore ,we  have added the irrelevance verification of the grid.

comments8：Table 2. In the discussion of the results in table 2, the error in the second order is 21.6% and 24.2% respectively. This comes from the table, so it is not clear how this relates to reference [11]. Can this level of error be described as “consistent”?

responses8：Thank you for pointing this out. We agree with this comment. Therefore ,we have provided the corresponding explanation in the text.

comments9：In table 3 the frequency changes are relatively small, e.g. from 18.63 Hz to 19.60 Hz. The values are quotes to two decimal places. Could the authors comment on the accuracy fo there frequency values?

responses9：Thank you for pointing this out. ANSYS has such accuracy for modal frequencies.

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The authors have addressed each of my points.