Intelligent Predictive Maintenance (IPdM) in Forestry: A Review of Challenges and Opportunities

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

This is a comprehensive and objective review of the literature and data opportunities. It fulfils the objectives proposed by the authors. The manuscript would have benefited by some analysis of the empirical data, but this was not the objective, instead the extensive review of the literature will provide a good resource fro further academic research into the subject.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

Thank you for all your advice.

The points you mentioned have been covered.

Best Regards,

Jamal

Reviewer 2 Report

The paper investigates an important and interesting topic on chippers maintenance and can be of use to the industry and academy users. I would encourage the authors to revise it and I have following suggestions to improve the paper;

line 111- change "leads" to "lead"

line 212- remove "the" from " the figure 2"

226- change "Repairman" to "repairman"

238- change "preventive" to "Preventive" 

246- remove "the" from "the figure 3"

295/299- remove "the" from "the figure 4"

391- change "improvements: to "improves"

403- make sure to use consistent currency unit in the whole text of paper.

490- correct to "researcher has used...."

571- remove "the" from "the table 1"

614- change "Fig" to "Figure"

682- remove "the" from "the figure 6"

691- part 4.4.1. I suggest adding a table on what type of chippers were studied including age and technical information such as horsepower etc. Also add information on where the data was collected (region, plantations, company name...) this will help the readers understand the research.

752- part 4.2. I suggest the authors adding a table of correlation ratios among the variables

786- part 4.3.  I suggest adding detailed numeric results on predicted cost of chippers in $/t, $ per each chipper type. Also worth to present the share of maintenance costs compared to total cost of machine which can be useful to the readers. 

847-849. I would suggest removing the research aims from the conclusions and just keep the conclusions restricted to main messages taken from the study.   

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

Thank you for all your advice.

The points you mentioned were covered.

Best Regards,

Jamal