Next Article in Journal
A Multi-Semantic Driver Behavior Recognition Model of Autonomous Vehicles Using Confidence Fusion Mechanism
Next Article in Special Issue
A Fault Diagnosis Approach for Electromechanical Actuators with Simulating Model under Small Experimental Data Sample Condition
Previous Article in Journal
Identification of Bearing Dynamic Parameters and Unbalanced Forces in a Flexible Rotor System Supported by Oil-Film Bearings and Active Magnetic Devices
 
 
Article
Peer-Review Record

Topology Optimization of Large-Scale 3D Morphing Wing Structures

Actuators 2021, 10(9), 217; https://doi.org/10.3390/act10090217
by Peter Dørffler Ladegaard Jensen 1,*, Fengwen Wang 1, Ignazio Dimino 2 and Ole Sigmund 1
Reviewer 1: Anonymous
Reviewer 2: Anonymous
Actuators 2021, 10(9), 217; https://doi.org/10.3390/act10090217
Submission received: 1 July 2021 / Revised: 24 August 2021 / Accepted: 26 August 2021 / Published: 31 August 2021
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Aerospace Mechanisms and Actuation)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

In this paper, a topology optimization approach to design the 3D morphing wing structures is proposed. Both the density based approach and the feature mapping based approach are employed to design morphing trailing edge sections. It is an interesting topic and has many potential applications.

 

Comments to the author (if any):

  1. A comparison between the initial structure and your optimized structure is suggested to be made.
  2. As we all know, the morphing structures are required to be flexible enough to meet the need of less energy consumption for actuating it. So, does it have any conflict with your objective (minimize structural compliance)?
  3. Page4. Why do you set the modulus of SMA to be 70GPa? In addition, the modulus of SMA is sensitive to thermal change.
  4. In Table1, does “α” mean morphing angle? Is it can be classified to “Material properties”?
  5. I don’t think the skin could have the same material properties as the structural material. Normally, the skin is much more flexible than the structural material.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Please refer to the attached file.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Back to TopTop