Influence of Bogie Maintenance and Retrofitting on Wheel Wear: Analysis Using Integer Programming and Multibody Simulation
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report (Previous Reviewer 1)
All the changes and suggestions proposed by the reviewer have been studied in detail in the revised version. Consequently, the manuscript should be published.
Author Response
We appreciate your comments and contribution in the development of the manuscript.
Regards.
Reviewer 2 Report (Previous Reviewer 3)
COMMENTS FOR THE AUTHORS
The article has improved much better, however, in some cases, some issues should be modified.
1. High resolution in Fig.1 and Fig.2 is needed.
2. Font size in Fig.7 is too small。
3. The conclusion section should be divided several parts, e.g. (1)XXX; (2)XXX; (3)XXX.
Author Response
We appreciate your comments and contribution in the development of the manuscript.
We have improved the quality in the figure 1 and 2 as requested. The conclusion is summarezed and divided in several parts.
Regards.
Reviewer 3 Report (Previous Reviewer 4)
very good improvements were done. Thankyou!
Author Response
We appreciate your comments and contribution in the development of the manuscript. Thank you.
Regards.
Reviewer 4 Report (New Reviewer)
Review Comments
1. Check for Grammar and spelling.
2. In abstract and in conclusion refer to the comparison of present results with
published sensitivity of the work.
3. Add more comparison to the related work.
4. This study aims to analyse the influence of bogies on wheel wear, author should
quantify the results they have got in this work.
5. Define the boundary conditions used in your work.
6. Manuscript should be checked for language.
7. Add few more recent references.
8. Clearly mention motivation of the work in introduction.
9. Figures explanation is missing.
10. Figure 7 is not clear. Legends used are unreadable. Increase the resolution.
11. What is the value of roll signal measured on field.
12. What is the flange thickness considered in the manuscript
13. Make equation numbers right aligned.
14. Pg 13, L No. 274 is not clear. Results indicates linear integer programming, from
where cost is comes from and is related to which parameter. Specify the result in
clear manner.
15. Figure 10 legends are not clear.
16. Use high resolution picture for 11, 12, 13. It is not clear.
17. Figure 12 caption is incomplete. What is the angle of attack author has got in both
the cases.
18. Figure 13 no explanation is given. Elaborate your result.
19. The conclusion is too detailed and needs to be summarised.
20. Any future work.
Author Response
We appreciate your comments and contribution in the development of the manuscript. Please, see bellow the answers for the requested points.
- Check for Grammar and spelling.
Answer: The manuscript has been revised by the MDPI English edition and checked by the authors.
- In abstract and in conclusion refer to the comparison of present results with
published sensitivity of the work.
Answer: As requested we did more comparison through the manuscript and added in the conclusion.
- Add more comparison to the related work.
Answer: Three comparison was made. 1) Wheel lifespan; 2) Wheel wear reduction due retrofit; 3) Angle of attack reduction due bogie improvements.
- This study aims to analyse the influence of bogies on wheel wear, author should
quantify the results they have got in this work.
Answer: The gains is explicit now.
- Define the boundary conditions used in your work.
Answer: The boundary conditions are now defined in the L No. 364.
- Manuscript should be checked for language.
Answer: The manuscript has been revised by the MDPI English edition and checked by the authors.
- Add few more recent references.
Answer: Two more recent references were added.
- Clearly mention motivation of the work in introduction.
Answer: We have make it clear in the L No. 52, 53 and 54
- Figures explanation is missing.
Answer: We have added the explanation in figures which were missing.
- Figure 7 is not clear. Legends used are unreadable. Increase the resolution.
Answer: We have revised and increased the resolution
- What is the value of roll signal measured on field.
Answer: We added the peak-to-peak maximum value in rad/s.
- What is the flange thickness considered in the manuscript
Answer: L No. 60 (page 2) and in the L No.165 (page 5) are defined the initial value of AAR-1B narrow flange, which is a known profile. In the L No.166 (page 5) is defined the limit.
- Make equation numbers right aligned.
Answer: Sorry, we did no understand that point.
- Pg 13, L No. 274 is not clear. Results indicates linear integer programming, from
where cost is comes from and is related to which parameter. Specify the result in
clear manner.
Answer: We have changed this part in order to became clear.
- Figure 10 legends are not clear.
Answer: We have increased the figure quality and improved the legends.
- Use high resolution picture for 11, 12, 13. It is not clear.
Answer: We have increased the resolution of the figures.
- Figure 12 caption is incomplete. What is the angle of attack author has got in both
the cases.
Answer: We added in the caption the angle of attack values.
- Figure 13 no explanation is given. Elaborate your result.
Answer: We decided to took out this figure as was bringing doubts and was not giving significantly results contribution.
- The conclusion is too detailed and needs to be summarised.
Answer: We have summarized the conclusion and divided in parts as requested for other revisor.
- Any future work.
Answer: We added this part in conclusion
Regards
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
This paper studied the influence of the bogie maintenance and retrofit on wheel wear. However, this manuscript lack of novelty and is not well written.
Specific comments are as follows:
1. This paper is lack of novelty.
2. The structure of the paper does not conform to the standard of an academic paper. For instance, Section 1: Introduction and Section 2: Literature Review.
3. The logic is not clear enough to be understood. For instance: Figure 8.
4. The language of the manuscript should be improved.
5. Some figures in this manuscript are not standardized enough, such as Figs. 16-17.
6. Since the contact patch can’t be seen in Fig.2, the title of this figure is not accurate.
7. Fig. 3: the distribution of adhesion area and slip area inside the contact patch that shown in this figure is wrong. The reason for this classic error can be found in the following reference:
J.J. Kalker, Three-dimensional elastic bodies in rolling contact. Dordrecht, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Netherlands, 1990.
Reviewer 2 Report
The paper discussed the influence of bogie maintenance and design on wheel wear. The content of the article is very rich, and the results presented are encouraging.Based on the background of Brazilian railway, this paper analyzes the wheel wear from two aspects of maintenance and design by means of literature research and numerical calculation.
The title of the paper is too vague, so it should be more specific.
The language can also be further improved.
strengths of this manuscript:
The content of the article is very rich, and the results presented are encouraging.
Weaknesses of this manuscript:
The article is unnecessarily long and needs to focus on key points and innovative contributions.
For example, can 2.1 be removed? The mechanical mechanism is too basic for most readers in our area. It is unnecessary for a technical paper.
Short, concise and innovative articles will attract more readers.
Reviewer 3 Report
This work analyzed the influences of bogies on wheel wear, including the maintenance condition was evaluated through measurements performed by waysides and field measurements. The data collected were later evaluated in a statistical way and modeled in integer linear programming in order to optimize and review the maintenance strategy. The design condition was analyzed using VAMPIRE multibody simulation software in which the modernization bogie was modeled to improve the dynamic behavior and analyzed using wheel/rail contact theory .
In some cases, the text must be clarified and there are issues that are not accurate. Better and more evidences for some conclusions are required. Without a careful revision this manuscript cannot be accepted.
1. The introduction Section should include both section 1. Introduction and Section & section 2. Literature Review.
2. The caption of Fig.1 should be translated to English, besides, the words in figure also should be change to English.
3. In the methodology section, the authors stated that using VAMPIRE multibody simulation software in which the modernization bogie was modeled; however, what is the accuracy of the modal analysis? How to prove it?
4. In the results section, the authors just showed the results of “average wear rate”, however, could they give some evidences (e.g. some pictures for worn surface) to illustrate more details of the wear of counterparts.
5. All the dates should be added error bars.
6. Pay attention to spelling and grammatical errors, e.g, in Fig.13 should be “average” not “avarage”
Reviewer 4 Report
Figure 1 is in Portugese language, please translate to english
In table 2 there is a mixture of Si dimensions and imperial units. Please replace tf to kN and lbs to kg, of course with correct adapted values.
