Next Article in Journal
A Customized Extended Kalman Filter for Removing the Impact of the Magnetometer’s Measurements on Inclination Determination
Next Article in Special Issue
Detection and Control Framework for Unpiloted Ground Support Equipment within the Aircraft Stand
Previous Article in Journal
Integrated Controller Design and Application for CNC Machine Tool Servo Systems Based on Model Reference Adaptive Control and Adaptive Sliding Mode Control
Previous Article in Special Issue
Research on Attitude Detection and Flight Experiment of Coaxial Twin-Rotor UAV
 
 
Article
Peer-Review Record

Vibration-Based Recognition of Wheel–Terrain Interaction for Terramechanics Model Selection and Terrain Parameter Identification for Lugged-Wheel Planetary Rovers

Sensors 2023, 23(24), 9752; https://doi.org/10.3390/s23249752
by Fengtian Lv 1,2,3,4, Nan Li 1,*, Haibo Gao 1, Liang Ding 1, Zongquan Deng 1, Haitao Yu 1 and Zhen Liu 1
Reviewer 1: Anonymous
Reviewer 2:
Reviewer 3: Anonymous
Sensors 2023, 23(24), 9752; https://doi.org/10.3390/s23249752
Submission received: 24 November 2023 / Revised: 8 December 2023 / Accepted: 9 December 2023 / Published: 11 December 2023

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This paper proposes a speed-independent vibration-based method for WTIC recognition to switch the terra mechanics model and then identify its terrain parameters. To switch terra mechanics models, wheel-terrain interactions are divided into three classes. Three vibration models of wheels under three WTICs are built and analyzed. Vibration features in the models are extracted and nondimensionalized to be independent of wheel speed. A vibration-features-based recognition method of the WTIC is proposed. Then, the terrain parameters of the terra mechanics model corresponding to the recognized WTIC are identified. The innovation of the paper is obvious. However, many typos/errors in the equations must be corrected before the final submission.

1.     Some parameters in the eqation are not defined, such as  eq.(5) and eq. (18).

2.     How to give the subscript in eq.(39)?

3.     Interruptions appear in several figures in the paper, as shown in Figure 7, Figure 16 and 17. Please supplement or give corresponding ones.

4.     Two references are missing (line 624), please add.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

 The wheel-terrain interaction classes (WTICs) are usually different for rovers traversing various type terrains. The work is very interesting, and it could be accepted for publication. It would be better if the paper provides some comparsions with others' work.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Title of the peer-reviewed manuscript: “Vibration-based Recognition of Wheel–terrain Interaction for Terramechanics Models Selection and Terrain Parameter Identification for Lugged-wheel Planetary Rovers”.

The manuscript consists of an Abstract, Keywords, an Introduction section, five main parts, a Conclusion section, list of References from 29 titles, 9 of which were published during the last 5 years. The manuscript contains 25 Figures and 9 Tables.

The studies were carried out by mathematical simulation with a experimental verification of the results on a laboratory setup.

Questions and recommendations:

1. The paper is well structured, but I would recommend that the authors also describe the structure of the paper at the end of the Introduction section after formulating the goals and objectives.

2. In the Abstract, the authors indicated that “The relative errors of estimated wheel-terrain interaction force with identified terrain parameters is less than 16%, 12%, 9% for rovers traversing hard, gravel, and sandy terrain respectively.”. However, this information is not explicitly visible in the paper. It may be worthwhile to make certain emphasis both in the main sections of the manuscript and in the Conclusion section.

3. The authors presented the texts of the programs they proposed in Tables 3 and 6. It seems to me that it would be more clear to present these algorithms in the form of block diagrams.

I have no other comments or recommendations for improving the paper.

It is difficult for me to assess the relevance and possible interest in the article of specialists in this scientific field. However, I want to point out that the paper is well organized and easy to read. I would like to congratulate the authors for a well-written article and can recommend it for publication after minor revision.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Back to TopTop