Novel Integration of CAPP in a G-Code Generation Module Using Macro Programming for CNC Application
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
I would prefer term G-code or G code (or ISO code) instead of Gcode.
Non-uniform terms appears though whole paper, e.g.:
Gcode (lines 2, 20, 23, 24, 25, 27, 31, 70, 72, 74, 86, 91, 174, 176, 179, 181, 187, 203, 239, 249, 266, 268, 272, 273, 275, 276, 278, 286, 290, 304, 311, 312, 317, 319) and G-code (lines 101, 111, 112, 114, 127, 173, 174, 178);
spindle speed (Tab.3) and rotational speed (Tab.5);
rough machining (lines 198, 280, 295, 297), rough machining process (line 292), rough cutting (lines 212, 222, 278, 285), rough step (line 259), roughing (lines 166, 208, 211), roughing process (lines 218, 282) and roughing cycle (line 286).
In the article is not explained what BKCAPP stands for.
There should be explained what “island” is (lines 129, 130, 294).
In Tab.2, the value of Ra should be written as 1.25 instead of 1,25. The units should be mentioned as well.
The correct form is “cutting tools” instead of “cut tools” (line 171).
Wrong stylization on the sentence: “…by the parameter or the by default…” (line 223).
Fig.6 and Fig.7 are hardly readable.
Tab.5 – information about cutting speed is usually more important than spindle speed.
Fig.8 refers to MF05 in Tab.5. In G code in Fig.8 were used spindle speed 1000 rpm (roughing) and 2000 rpm (finishing), while in Tab.5 were used spindle speed 2985 rpm (roughing) and 3980 rpm (semi-finishing). The same issue is with feed rate: 150/100 against 896/1241 mm/min.
Tab.6 – feed per tooth [mm/tooth] is labelling with lower case “f”. Upper case “F” is for the Force [N].
I believe there should be information about: readable CAD files; workpiece clamping consideration; collision avoidance; detection of non-reachable tolerances.
Author Response
Dear reviewer, thank you very much for your careful and constructive comments. Your comments on the shortcomings are very important for us to improve our manuscript. We review your comments point by point. The manuscript has been carefully revised based on your comments and suggestions. Please kindly have a look at the highlighted part of the revised manuscript and the response letter (green color). We hope that it fulfills your requirements. Each comment is explained and answered in the attachment file.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
The paper presents an integration method for CAD/CAPP/CAM, which is quite practical for the engineering application. The major contribution of this work is to build an automation connection through CAD/CAPP/CAM based on the feature technology, which is novel and impressive. Before its publication, the following comments are required to be answered:
- Please polish all the English writing.
- Please add more related references.
- In the introduction, please specify the gaps or the problems for the integration of CAD/CAPP/CAM.
- Please give the description of BKCAPP, when it is used for the first time in the manuscript.
- In the results, please demonstrate the efficiency of the integration method.
Author Response
Dear reviewer, thank you very much for your insightful comments. We also appreciate your positive and encouraging comments. We review your comments point by point. The manuscript has been carefully revised based on your comments and suggestions. Please kindly have a look at the highlighted part of the revised manuscript and the response letter (cyan color). We hope that it fulfills your requirements. Each comment is explained and answered in in the attachment file.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
The topic of th epaper is very interesting. The automated CAPP is a big challange in the field of process planning.
The article present the function of different modules of the developed CAPP system, but only the G-code generator is described detail. The details of other moduls are not clear. The presentation of the details of the CAPP system is incomplete.
I miss
- how the different machining features are detected from the CAD model
- how the machining directions are define, detected
- how the operations and operation steps are generated
- how the order of the operation is generated
- how the wp. coordinate system is defined to NC programming.
Generally: we now 'what', but do not know 'how'.
The Table 1 has no function, I suggest to insert the contant to the text body.
The description of the imput CAD format is too general. What type of CAD format can be processed?
What is the source of the technical requirements? (Table 2)
I prefer the "G-code" instead of "Gcode".
Row 150 and 174: the repetition of the subtitle at the biginning of the paragraph can be deleted.
Author Response
Thank you for taking your valuable time to review this manuscript. Your comments are very important for us to improve our manuscript. We review your comments point by point. The manuscript has been carefully revised based on your comments and suggestions. Please kindly have a look at the highlighted part of the revised manuscript and the response letter (yellow color) in the attachment file.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 3 Report
Thank you for the modifications, additions and comments.
I support to publish the new version of the article.
