Next Article in Journal
A Systematic Mapping with Bibliometric Analysis on Information Systems Using Ontology and Fuzzy Logic
Next Article in Special Issue
Influence of Local Properties on Fatigue Crack Growth of Laser Butt Welds in Thin Plates of High-Strength Low-Alloy Steel
Previous Article in Journal
The Application of Mesenchymal Stem Cells on Wound Repair and Regeneration
 
 
Article
Peer-Review Record

Application of Fatigue Damage Evaluation Considering Linear Hydroelastic Effects of Very Large Container Ships Using 1D and 3D Structural Models

Appl. Sci. 2021, 11(7), 3001; https://doi.org/10.3390/app11073001
by Sang-Ick Lee 1, Seung-Hwan Boo 2 and Beom-Il Kim 3,*
Reviewer 1: Anonymous
Reviewer 2: Anonymous
Appl. Sci. 2021, 11(7), 3001; https://doi.org/10.3390/app11073001
Submission received: 2 March 2021 / Revised: 19 March 2021 / Accepted: 23 March 2021 / Published: 27 March 2021
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Focus on Fatigue and Fracture of Engineering Materials)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

please download my report in pdf.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Thank you for your kind and meaningful comments for publishing the good paper. Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Dear Authors, The paper presents a FE analysis performed on a container ship hull. The authors projected the FSI findings performed on a beam model to a 3D model and performed a fatigue analysis. I find the paper clear and well organized; flowing reading. However, the applied procedure seems to derive from a well established method in the field, so I ask the authors to better underline the innovative contribution. Some minors are listed below: 3D global model: a detailed description of the FE is required (nodes?, elements? llinear elements? etc...) lines 261-275: text is beside the figure 7 Figs 9-11 rigid vs flex body: flex body catches gratest moments between 1-2 Hz, please explain Fig 15 Fatigue damage evaluation should be explained. line 410: 10 is not a reference.

Author Response

Thank you for your kind and meaningful comments for publishing the good paper. Please see the attachment.

 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

all comments have been addressed in the revision.

Back to TopTop