A Fully Coupled CFD-DMB Approach on the Ship Hydroelasticity of a Containership in Extreme Wave Conditions
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The paper (jmse-1968488) presents an interesting but not novel study on fully coupled CFD-DMB approach to investigate the global ship motion, vertical bending moments (VBMs) and green water phenomenon of the ship in different regular wave conditions.
It is interested to see that the proposed method could help to provide a clear and detailed insight into the physical phenomena of the ship dynamic motions and its hydrodynamic loads in real sea states. However, the method is not comprehensively validated adopting the one-way coupling method instead of the two-way algorithm. The lacking of validation in enough tests could fail the motivation of paper since the one-way coupling method is common in the literature and results on that could be achieved in many different methods. The authors should provide enough testing cases to demonstrate results using the two-way coupled method, and provide conclusions on that.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
The current state of research is adequate. The work methodology is correct and detailed. The results have high accuracy and the conclusions reveal this.
Author Response
We would like to thank the Reviewer for their very positive comments about our paper. We are grateful to them for taking the time to review our paper.
Reviewer 3 Report
The paper with Manuscript ID jmse-1968488 and title "A fully coupled CFD-DMB approach on the ship hydroelasticity of a containership in extreme wave conditions" is recommended for minor revision.
STRENGTHS:
The paper has good organisation and flow.
The paper makes good contribution to the field.
The paper has good arrangement and good references.
The authors are knowledgeable in the area.
There is comprehensive analysis conducted in this paper.
WEAKNESSES:
I recommend that authors include a graphical abstract .
I recommend that authors improve upon the presentation in Section 1 by combining some of the paragraphs down to 4-6, if possible.
Also ensure that every equation presented that is not original to the author is referenced.
Some proofreading and minor English language editing is suggested.
Though it is a research paper, the conclusion should show the highlights and the key conclusions.
Also separate Section 6 and make it Discussion, then section 7 should be Conclusions. Acknowledgements, Authors Contributions, Funding Information, etc should be added before References, but not as a section. See other JMSE papers.
The paper lacks SOME details for setting up the CFD-DMB model, such as the input, output, etc. How was the model developed? However, the CFD tool used was ANSYS, but also add the module if ANSYS CFX? Some parameters were given but what are the conditions for the parameters like water density, air [pressure, input pressure, output parameters, water volume, dimensions of the water body's box, etc? Add details in tables too. Readers need to know how the results were achieved.
I suggest authors improve upon the proposed prospects in this study and future research areas, with implications, in the Conclusion section.
How the study was validated could be improved in future study. The verifications done could be accepted as it does show well how they came about the verification. State in conclusion that future work could be done using experimental validation.
What about the environmental conditions for the sea considered? Add these details- it is a technical academic paper, and not a report.
Can this model proposed be applicable to work for other ships or does it depend on one type or length of ship? Some discussion on ship engineering is necessary.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
The authors have adequately addressed comments of the reviewer.
