Next Article in Journal
Systematic Reliability-Based Multidisciplinary Optimization by Parallel Adaptive Importance Candidate Region
Previous Article in Journal
Numerical Modeling of Heat Exchanger Filled with Octahedral Lattice Frame Porous Material
 
 
Article
Peer-Review Record

Form-Finding Analysis of Mesh Reflector of Large Parabolic Cylindrical Antenna

Aerospace 2022, 9(5), 239; https://doi.org/10.3390/aerospace9050239
by Jinbao Chen, Jiayu Dong, Zhicheng Song *, Chuanzhi Chen and Jiaqi Li
Reviewer 1: Anonymous
Reviewer 2: Anonymous
Aerospace 2022, 9(5), 239; https://doi.org/10.3390/aerospace9050239
Submission received: 25 February 2022 / Revised: 25 March 2022 / Accepted: 18 April 2022 / Published: 26 April 2022
(This article belongs to the Section Astronautics & Space Science)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

This paper presents a study of a hybrid iteration force density method of an antenna mesh reflector. The presented work in the manuscript has some aspects of novelty. However, the authors need to reduce the size of section 1, because the introduction part is too lengthy, reduction in size should help the readers. 

Paper also need extensive English review, remove typos and grammatical mistakes. 

  • The Authors must include the physical dimensions and other specifications of the antenna.
  • Authors are encouraged to add a comparison with the method used in this work and with others found in the literature.
  • Please mention the real application of this particular prototype.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

The authors proposed a hybrid iteration force density method (HIFDM), to ensure both tension uniformity and accuracy of an antenna mesh reflector. I believe that the present form of the manuscript needs some minor improvements prior to acceptance.

1. In Section 1 (Introduction), the novelty of the proposed contribution is not documented. What is the exact novelty of the proposed work in the context of and in comparison, with the previous works? Comparison should preferably be provided in the form of a table.

2. Improve the state of the art analysis by discussing more related works. The related work discussed should be form more recent years like 2020 and 2021.

3. Authors should improve the quality of all figure to improve the readability of the figures.

4. Authors should use any professional tool to check the English and grammatical mistakes.

 

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Back to TopTop