Analysis of Wave Parameters on the Uprighting Process of a Grounded and Capsized Ship

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The article is interesting. It is a pity that the author did not reach the article A. Pawlędzio pt. Determination of the stability parameters and the position of a ship in the condioton of flooding of the watertight compartment. V International Conference on Maritime Technology and Transportation. Szczecin 2003 y. It would be supplemented the knowledge on the impact of the free surface effect on the ship's safety.

Several editing errors were found in the article like:

- Parameters GZ, OG in the formula 6 is not explained,

 

- Sentence in lines 109, 110 written in larger font than the rest of the text,

- in line 150 repeated word are,

 

- parameters x₀ as well as many other parameters used in formulas 1-6l like  W , b (z), z_p, z_s,  A (x) are not marked in Fig. 1,   

- righting moment of heel angle f -  imprecise translation which makes the sentence incomprehensible to the reader or  perhaps there should be a righting moment of the heeled ship

- It is not known whether Fig. 1 and formulas 1-6 are original or based on literature.

 

 

- LBP no explanation of the meaning of the abbreviation, especially since the length overall is still referred to table 1,

- The axis direction X represents that the stern has positive direction but according to the professional literature the stern represents negative direction as shown in Fig. 4 where axis directions are marked as suggested by the reviewer,

- in Table 1 the ship's draft is incorrect 495.21 m,

 

 

 

- righting force should be the righting moment, which is the product of gravity and the righting arm, explain the concept of the righting force.

Author Response

1. Comparing the ship's righting process in different environments, it is found that the maximum negative stability arm of the 25 m wavelength is smaller, even smaller than the wave-free environment, which is not conducive to the uplighting process.

 

Response: This error was corrected.

 

2. What does "smaller, even smaller" mean? is it a typo (e.g. smaller) or are you referring to two conditions (one smaller, that you do not mention, and one that is even smaller)?

 

Response: This error was corrected.

 

3. I noticed that in other parts of the paper you write smaller or larger with no reference to what. If the text is unclear, the reviewer cannot really understand.

Response: In page 2, paragraph 4，Line 5, this error was corrected.

 

Reviewers#1:

Several editing errors were found in the article like:

1. Parameters GZ, OG in the formula 6 is not explained,

 

Response: In page 3, paragraph 5-8 and Figure 1 were added.

In page 4, paragraph 16，“ is the righting arm,  is the distance between O and the center of gravity” was added. “as shown in figure 2” was deleted.

 

2. Sentence in lines 109, 110 written in larger font than the rest of the text,

 

Response: This error was corrected.

 

3. in line 150 repeated word are,

 

Response: The sentence was adjusted. We hope our work will meet the requirements of reviewers.

 

4. parameters x0 as well as many other parameters used in formulas 1-6l like W, b (z), zp, zs, A (x) are not marked in Fig. 1,

Response: In page 4, paragraph 14，W is the weight of ship.

In page 5, paragraph 1， is the half-width of waterline at a random position .  is the left draft.   is the right draft.

In page 5, paragraph 5，Section area of underwater part in waves  which is  m off the amidship

 

5. righting moment of heel angle f - imprecise translation which makes the sentence incomprehensible to the reader or perhaps there should be a righting moment of the heeled ship

Response: This error was corrected. The sentence was revised as “righting moment of ship in following waves is obtained when ship’s heel angle is ”.

 

6. It is not known whether Fig. 1 and formulas 1-6 are original or based on literature.

Response: In page 4, “[29] Zeng Y. Ocean engineering environment. Shanghai: Shanghai Jiao Tong University Press, 2007. [30] Qiu D. The wave theory and its application in engineering. Beijing: Higher Education Press, 1985. ” was added.

 

7. LBP no explanation of the meaning of the abbreviation, especially since the length overall is still referred to table 1,

Response: In page 8, paragraph 1, “the length between perpendiculars” was added.

 

8. The axis direction X represents that the stern has positive direction but according to the professional literature the stern represents negative direction as shown in Fig. 4 where axis directions are marked as suggested by the reviewer,

Response: This error was corrected.

 

9. in Table 1 the ship's draft is incorrect 495.21 m,

Response: This error was corrected.

 

10. righting force should be the righting moment, which is the product of gravity and the righting arm, explain the concept of the righting force.

Response: Righting force is the applied force to right a capsized ship. When the ship is inclined under external force, the righting moment formed by gravity and buoyancy makes the ship return to the original equilibrium position.

In page 6, paragraph 12, “gravity , buoyancy force , ground reaction , vertical wave force  and righting force ” was add.

Reviewer 2 Report

 This paper establishes wave force calculation model by applying the airy wave theory, and the stability and righting force model of righting a grounded and capsized ship are obtained. Uprighting process of a grounded and capsized ship is simulated by GHS software, stability, righting force and ground force are solved, and the effect of wave parameters on stability and mechanical action is studied. 

This is a great work. Following are my comments:

- Abstract needs to be improved to understand the summary of the work done highlighting the principal contributions. On the other hand, a lot of discussions should be abstracted. 

- 3.3. Simulation scheme: this part should be more explained. 

- Simulation results are clear. However, the obtained results should be compared with some previous works. 

- Discussion section is missed. The paper should be reorganized by adding the discussion as a main section. 

- The Conclusion should be rewritten by integrating the limitations and the perspective. 

- English is generally good, but needs to be polished further. The manuscript should be formatted better and some spelling and grammar should be checked carefully.

Concluding, the paper has potential to be appreciated by the readers and the above comment are formulated such that to enhance its impact.

Author Response

1. Abstract needs to be improved to understand the summary of the work done highlighting the principal contributions. On the other hand, a lot of discussions should be abstracted.

 

Response: Abstract was revised.

 

2. 3. Simulation scheme: this part should be more explained.

 

Response: Simulation scheme was revised.

 

3. Simulation results are clear. However, the obtained results should be compared with some previous works.

 

Response: The previous work of the authors mainly focused on the research of righting a capsized ship in still water. In order to clearly study the influence of waves on the uprighting process of a capsized ships, in sections 4.1-4.4, case P1, case L1, case H1, and case E1 represent a wave-free environment.

 

4. Discussion section is missed. The paper should be reorganized by adding the discussion as a main section.

 

Response: Discussion section was added.

 

5. The Conclusion should be rewritten by integrating the limitations and the perspective.

 

Response: The Conclusion was revised.

 

6. English is generally good, but needs to be polished further. The manuscript should be formatted better and some spelling and grammar should be checked carefully.

Response: The manuscript was polished.

 

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

The authors reacted properly to my pointed issues.