A Non-Linear Non-Planar Coupling Mechanism of Suspended Cables in Thermal Conditions

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The present work investigates the nonlinear coupling mechanism of suspended cables

in thermal environments. the subject is interesting and the manuscript is well-written, however, some modifications are needed. In my opinion, the present work can be published after some minor revisions.

-          In the abstract, Keywords should start with capital letters

-          The literature review should be improved by recent publications.

-          Some of the obtained data should be given in the abstract.

-          Is the temperature varies continuously?

-          The explanation of parameters in Table 1, should be started with capital letters.

The manuscript is well-written, however needs some minor editing of english.

Author Response

Reviewer 1^#

Comments: The present work investigates the nonlinear coupling mechanism of suspended cables in thermal environments. the subject is interesting and the manuscript is well-written, however, some modifications are needed. In my opinion, the present work can be published after some minor revisions.

Responses: Thank you for your valuable feedback regarding our manuscript. We appreciate your recognition of the interest in and quality of our work. Based on your comments, we have made some minor revisions to the manuscript to improve its overall quality. We hope that the revised manuscript meets your expectations and we look forward to hearing from you soon regarding its possible publication.

Comments: In the abstract, Keywords should start with capital letters.

Responses: We appreciate your attention to details and valuable suggestion. We have not made the necessary changes to the abstract as requested, because the keywords in the previously published paper do not start with capital letters.

Comments: The literature review should be improved by recent publications.

Responses: We appreciate your suggestion regarding the literature review, and have made the necessary improvements by incorporating recent publications to enhance the review's completeness and currency. We believe that the updated literature review has significantly enhanced the quality of the manuscript. The revised version of the manuscript with the updates has been resubmitted for your review.

Comments: Some of the obtained data should be given in the abstract.

Responses: We appreciate your suggestion regarding the abstract and have made the necessary modifications by adding a description of some of the obtained data. We believe that the updated abstract provides a more comprehensive overview of the results presented in the manuscript.

Comments: Is the temperature varies continuously?

Responses: We appreciate your question regarding the temperature variation considered in the study. We would like to clarify that the temperature changes considered in our study are not continuous but rather discrete and specified values. We have made this explicit in the manuscript to avoid any ambiguity.

Comments: The explanation of parameters in Table 1, should be started with capital letters.

Responses: We greatly appreciate your suggestion regarding the capitalization of parameter names in Table 1. We have made the necessary changes as per your suggestion and ensured that all parameter names in the table now start with capital letters.

Comments on the Quality of English Language: The manuscript is well-written, however needs some minor editing of English.

Responses: We have carefully reviewed the manuscript and made the necessary corrections to improve the quality of language.

According to your comments and suggestions, we have tried our best to improve the manuscript and incorporated many of your suggested corrections and changes in the revised manuscript. We appreciate your helpful feedback and guidance and hope that these corrections will meet your approval.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

I recommend this paper for publication under the following minor revision:

1.       The authors must explain the contribution this work can bring to the existing literature.

2.       Please update the literature by adding the latest theoretical/experimental works recently reported on this domain. Also, try to explain the results of the cited article so that the readers can clearly understand the research gap this article is trying to fill.

3.       If possible, try comparing your results with the available literature.

4.       Add a nomenclature.

5.       Highlight the advantages of the obtained results in the domain at the end of the conclusion section.

1.       The article needs to remove grammar and spell mistake as well.

Author Response

Reviewer 2^#

Comments: The authors must explain the contribution this work can bring to the existing literature.

Responses: In the revised version of the manuscript, we have added a section that specifically highlights the value and significance of the research results presented in the paper. We believe that the updated manuscript now provides a more comprehensive explanation of the contribution that this work brings to the existing literature.

Comments: Please update the literature by adding the latest theoretical/experimental works recently reported on this domain. Also, try to explain the results of the cited article so that the readers can clearly understand the research gap this article is trying to fill.

Responses: We greatly appreciate your suggestion regarding the need to update the literature by including the latest theoretical and experimental works recently reported in this domain. In the revised version of the manuscript, we have extensively reviewed and added the most recent works related to our study to ensure the paper is up-to-date. Additionally, we have provided a detailed explanation of the results of the cited articles to help readers better understand the research gap that this paper is trying to fill. We believe that the updated manuscript now provides a more comprehensive and insightful analysis of the research area.

Comments: If possible, try comparing your results with the available literature.

Responses: We appreciate your suggestion regarding the comparison of our results with the available literature. However, upon careful review, we found that there are no existing studies with comparable computational results and literature available in our research area. Therefore, we have added a numerical integration method to ensure the accuracy of our computational results. The revised manuscript provides a detailed description of the numerical integration method used, and the results obtained from this method have been compared to our previous results to demonstrate the correctness of our calculations. We believe that this approach ensures the reliability and accuracy of our results.

Comments: Add a nomenclature.

Responses: We appreciate your suggestion regarding the addition of a nomenclature. In the revised version of the manuscript, we have not added a nomenclature section that includes a comprehensive list of all symbols and abbreviations used in the paper. All the parameters have been defined and illustrated very clearly as well as their units of measurement.

Comments: Highlight the advantages of the obtained results in the domain at the end of the conclusion section.

Responses: We appreciate your suggestion regarding the need to highlight the advantages of the obtained results in the domain at the end of the conclusion section. In the revised version of the manuscript, we have added a section to the conclusion that highlights specifically the advantages and contributions of the research results presented in the paper. We have emphasized how our findings add value to the existing literature and how they can be utilized in practical applications. We believe that the updated conclusion section now provides a more comprehensive and insightful analysis of the research area.

Comments on the Quality of English Language: The article needs to remove grammar and spell mistake as well.

Responses: In the revised version of the manuscript, we have carefully reviewed the language quality, grammar, and spelling, and made the necessary corrections to correct any errors. We have taken great care to ensure that the language is clear, concise, and error-free to enhance the readability and understanding of the paper.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

My specific comments on this manuscript are as follows:

-I found that, an author has cited only few references. I suggest authors to include some more references related to this work to make their results and finding more promising.
-The manuscript might be accepted for publication after incorporating all the above suggested changes and improvements.

Quality of English in this paper good, 

Author Response

Reviewer 3^#

Comments: I found that, an author has cited only few references. I suggest authors to include some more references related to this work to make their results and finding more promising.

Responses: We appreciate your suggestion regarding the inclusion of additional references related to our work. In the revised version of the manuscript, we have extensively reviewed and added the most recent and relevant references related to our study to ensure that the results and findings are more robust. We have taken great care to ensure that the added references are in line with the scope of our research and contribute significantly to the understanding of the research area.

Comments: The manuscript might be accepted for publication after incorporating all the above suggested changes and improvements.

Responses: Thank you for your feedback on our manuscript. We greatly appreciate your positive assessment and the acknowledgment that the manuscript is acceptable for publication after incorporating all the suggested changes and improvements. We have carefully reviewed and incorporated all the suggested changes, and we believe that the revised manuscript now meets the required standards for publication. We are grateful for your time and effort in reviewing our manuscript and providing valuable feedback that has helped us improve the quality of our work. We hope that the revised manuscript meets with your approval and look forward to hearing from you soon.

Comments on the Quality of English Language: Quality of English in this paper good.

Responses: Thank you for your feedback on our manuscript. We appreciate your positive assessment of the quality of English in the paper. We have taken great care to ensure that the language is clear, concise, and error-free to enhance the readability and understanding of the paper. We are grateful for your time and effort in reviewing our manuscript and providing valuable feedback. We hope that the revised manuscript meets your expectations and look forward to hearing from you soon.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf