Underwater Radiated Noise Prediction Method of Cabin Structures under Hybrid Excitation
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsDear authors, thank you for sending this paper over. The manuscript is well presented in its contents and the results are commented appropriately. However, there are only a few things that should be improved, explained as follows:
- the references cannot be grouped for more than 3 per time. Please spread the reference more appropriately across the text. This happens especially in the introduction.
- graph of figure 3 is in bars. please comply with the other ones in line plotted.
- captions of the figure should be revised and be clearer. caption of figure 17 for example should be improved and describe what the points mean.
- please increase the number of references based on the support to your conclusions and statement for the analysis of the results.
Thank you
Author Response
Dear reviewer, my reply is shown in the attachment. Thank you for your review
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe article is interesting but needs some changes to increase its quality.
1. In paragraph 2, I recommend that you enter the constitutive equations. Also here, the initial and boundary conditions used must be entered. At the end of this paragraph, you can enter the problem shown in figure 1. At the end of the paragraph, I recommend you to have a discussion about the integration method used. Please also have a discussion about the influence of the types of elements used in mesh (see figure 5), as well as their number. They must be presented in a very clear way (The statements must be proved by graphs.).
2. The OTPA method is known in the specialized literature. I am referring here to those written in paragraph 3.1. However, I recommend you to carry out a discussion related to the numerical implementation of the method. Solution (11) is obtained when using persistent signals. In this sense, I recommend you to present the statistical properties of the signals used.
3. The experimental part of the article must be explained much more clearly. What transducers do you use? Are analog/digital filters used? What is the accuracy of the used acquisition system? In order to validate, I recommend that you present the errors in graphic form, for each analyzed scenario.
Author Response
Dear reviewer, my reply is shown in the attachment. Thank you for your review
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe author has analyzed external radiation noise and the coupling characteristics of the monitoring in formation under the hybrid excitation of sound and forces. The manuscript is good and has a practical interest.
The following recommendations are made to improve the readability
1) Add key findings in the abstract. highlight novelty
2) The introduction is good, however, few recent literatures are recommended to cite. expand literature review part
3) is there any influence of number of axial sampling collection points? what is minimum no required? justify in section 2.2
4) Wht OPTA is adopted? what are the merits over other techniques
5) result and discssion section is good. improve the quality of figures. many numbers in the figures are not visible
Comments on the Quality of English Language
Minor editing of English language required
Author Response
Dear reviewer, my reply is shown in the attachment. Thank you for your review
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsDear authors,
I congratulate you on the article.
