Aeroelastic and Aerodynamic Tests of Wind Turbine with Various Polygonal Towers^†

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

This paper is well written and the results are presented in the good way. However, author may work to improve the conclusion and overall presentation quality of the work.

Author Response

Answers for reviewer's comments were uploaded.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

Questions and comments on the article
1. Please provide additional explanations about the possibility (reliability) of transferring the data of model (1/100) experiments to real turbines.
2. Please explain the choice of the turbulence scale value in the experiments (11%).
3. Please indicate the accuracy (error or uncertainty) of the experimental data (pressure, displacement, speed, etc.).
4. Please provide additional explanations for the discovered pattern: the larger the number of sides, the larger the Strouhal number.
5. Please formulate potential directions for further research on this topic.

Author Response

Answers for reviewer's comments were uploaded.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

This paper includes a systematic wind tunnel experiment to study the aeroelastic responses of wind turbines with various polygonal towers. The experiment is well designed and the paper is well organized. However, there are some important issues should be improved before the paper can be published.

1. It is not clear from Fig. 1 the configurations of the tested tower. It is also not clear what (208) (130) mean in this figure. The 8^th subfigure is not explained.
2. Are the mass, frequency, and damping of all towers the same? How is this ensured?
3. Are the blades rotable during the experiment? The reviewer feels the rotation of the blades can have a large influence on the results. If yes, how is the rotation of the model blades scaled to the prototype scale?
4. It is said at Line 111 that the displacement at the bottom is measured. It is not clear how is this achieved since the botton is fixed.
5. It is said in Line 189 that only one peak exists in Fig. 8(b). This is not true since there are clearly two peaks in this figure.
6. The scientific language should be improved.

Author Response

Answers for reviewer's comments were uploaded.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments are addressed properbly.