Iterative Learning Control for AGV Drive Motor Based on Linear Extended State Observer

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

This article utilizes Iterative Learning Control (ILC) combined with linear
extended state observer to improve the control accuracy of AGV drive motor for solving the problems of repetitive and non-repetitive interference in the work-flow of Automated Guided Vehicle (AGV).

This article is of research interest, but there are a few suggestions for further improvement:

1. The abstract can be further expanded to make it fuller.
2. Please check the use of “the”.
3. Line 68“In this paper, the Coulomb friction model [14] is used, and its expression is“    Similar sentences in the article could be expressed in a better way
4. Capital and small letter problem in the first line of Table 2 should be noticed.
5. There is ”Figure 1“ in line 100, but there is ”FIGURE 2“ in line 109. There are many similar formatting problems in the article. Please correct them.
6. Actually, the innovation of this article is limited, but the author could revise the manuscript in a better type. Many formula were put forward by the before researchers, but the author does not cite them. It is not rigorous. Some formula jump a lot, but it is fine.
7. The words in many figure are not so good. Please develop them.
8.  Figure 10 is terrible. The reader could not get any useful information in it! Software interface is not shown, so  The credibility of the latter data is quite low. Besides, readers could not know anything about the software and the experiment equipment.
9. Experiment writing is not satisfied. Introduction about experiment, equipment, software, experiment operation is not enough. Especially, the experiment analysis is too simple, please add enough content.
10. There is ”Table 14 shows that“ in line 266. Where is  Table 14? Maybe, this essay is a part of your degree article. please correct these similar problems. There are lots of similar problems in the paper. Compared with innovation, authors' attitude and preciseness are also significant. The innovation of this article is not fantastic, so please correct these problems as I have mentioned.
11.  The content of this paper should be replenished properly.
12. This research is fine, but it will be better if the author cites these relevant references:  "Design and Simulation of Meshing Performance of Modified Straight Bevel Gears" The researchers put forward the meaningful investigation about the gears in the drive motor.

This paper is meaningful.  Not only is the research direction really valuable, but also the workload is large and it is innovative.

Therefore, if the author correct the problems I have mentioned above, I will recommend that this paper could be accepted.

Author Response

Dear Editors and Reviewers:

 

Thank you for your letter and for the reviewers’ comments concerning our manuscript entitled “Iterative Learning Control for AGV Drive Motor Based on Linear Extended State Observer” (ID: machines-1450486). Those comments are all valuable and very helpful for revising and improving our paper, as well as the important guiding significance to our researches. We have studied comments carefully and have made correction which we hope meet with approval. Revised portion are marked in the paper. The main corrections in the paper and the responses to the reviewer’s comments are as following:

Reviewers ：

1. The abstract can be further expanded to make it fuller.

Reply: Thank you for your comments, we have expanded the contents of the abstract.

 

2. Please check the use of “the”.

Reply: This is our mistake, we will check it again.

 

3. Line 68“In this paper, the Coulomb friction model ^[14] is used, and its expression is“ Similar sentences in the article could be expressed in a better way.

Reply：According to your suggestion, we modified the sentence as “Coulomb friction model ^[14] is used in this paper, and it can be constructed as”.

 

4. Capital and small letter problem in the first line of Table 2 should be noticed.

Reply: We correct the problem of Capital and small letter in Table 2.

 

5. There is ”Figure 1“ in line 100, but there is ”FIGURE 2“ in line 109. There are many similar formatting problems in the article. Please correct them.

Reply：The problem has been corrected, and we check others again.

 

6. Actually, the innovation of this article is limited, but the author could revise the manuscript in a better type. Many formula were put forward by the before researchers, but the author does not cite them. It is not rigorous. Some formula jump a lot, but it is fine.

Reply：The relative references are cited as shown in the paper.

 

7. The words in many figure are not so good. Please develop them.

Reply：The words in some figures are developed.

 

8. Figure 10 is terrible. The reader could not get any useful information in it! Software interface is not shown, so the credibility of the latter data is quite low. Besides, readers could not know anything about the software and the experiment equipment.

Reply：We modified Figure 10 because of format problems, and now we make figure 10 clearer and point out the software used for motor control.

9. Experiment writing is not satisfied. Introduction about experiment, equipment, software, experiment operation is not enough. Especially, the experiment analysis is too simple, please add enough content.

Reply：Thank you for pointing out what I need to add, we have added the corresponding content according to your suggestions

 

10. There is ”Table 14 shows that“ in line 266. Where is  Table 14? Maybe, this essay is a part of your degree article. please correct these similar problems. There are lots of similar problems in the paper. Compared with innovation, authors' attitude and preciseness are also significant. The innovation of this article is not fantastic, so please correct these problems as I have mentioned.

Reply：We corrected the mistakes you raised and rechecked whether there were similar mistakes.

 

11. The content of this paper should be replenished properly.

Reply：We have added some contents according to your opinions and other experts.

 

12. This research is fine, but it will be better if the author cites these relevant references:  "Design and Simulation of Meshing Performance of Modified Straight Bevel Gears" The researchers put forward the meaningful investigation about the gears in the drive motor.

Reply：We have cited these relevant references in this paper.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

1. Please indicate the model and type of dynamometer used in the experiment and explain how the load is configured.
2. Please explain how inertia (which related to the total mass) in the AGV is represented in the experiment and study.  To properly represent the effect of inertia, an “inertia dynamometer” should be used. 
3. For Figure 11, I guess it is not the graph after ten iterations, correct? If not, please include one after ten iterations. Also please include initial error for Figure 12. 

      4.   Line 103, “Refer to the relevant information, set Ku to 15.” Please specify the reference. 

      5.   In the experiments, the author only compare no load and with rated load. It is suggested to include another set of data with half load. 

6. Figure 10 is not clear. Please redraw Figure 10. Use separate image for each component and draw lines in between. 

7. Please explain how random disturbance is included in the experiment. The periodical motor stops in Figure 11 does not seem to be a random disturbance. 

8. For each image, please include detailed caption. 

 

Other minors: 

1.  Figure 10    Hose Computer -> Host Computer

2. Line 245, SVPWM, please indicate full phrase when first use. 

3. May need to provide the reference for the values in table 1 as well as table What floor condition is used for the friction coefficient. 

4. Need to indicate the machine model and settings used for the experiment. 

5. Figure 7 uses rad as unit and Figure 11 uses degree as unit. Please be consistent with the Angle unit throughout the paper.

Author Response

Dear Editors and Reviewers:

 

Thank you for your letter and for the reviewers’ comments concerning our manuscript entitled “Iterative Learning Control for AGV Drive Motor Based on Linear Extended State Observer” (ID: machines-1450486). Those comments are all valuable and very helpful for revising and improving our paper, as well as the important guiding significance to our researches. We have studied comments carefully and have made correction which we hope meet with approval. Revised portion are marked in the paper. The main corrections in the paper and the responses to the reviewer’s comments are as following:

 

Reviewer：

1. Please indicate the model and type of dynamometer used in the experiment and explain how the load is configured.

Reply: We added the model of dynamometer and other relevant experimental equipment, the value of torque applied by dynamometer is given in the previous part of the paper.

 

2. Please explain how inertia (which related to the total mass) in the AGV is represented in the experiment and study. To properly represent the effect of inertia, an “inertia dynamometer” should be used.

Reply：The “inertia” in the table 2 is the moment of inertia of motor servo system. It is part of the dynamic equations of the servo system. It is our fault to describe it unclearly. Now we change it into “ moment of inertia”. The load torque which should be loaded to the motor is given by dynamometer in the experiment.

 

3.For Figure 11, I guess it is not the graph after ten iterations, correct? If not, please include one after ten iterations. Also please include initial error for Figure 12.

Reply：The figures of position tracking after ten iterations has been added, also include the situation of AGV with no load.

 

4. Line 103, “Refer to the relevant information, set Ku to 15.” Please specify the reference.

Reply：We added the relevant information.

 

5. In the experiments, the author only compare no load and with rated load. It is suggested to include another set of data with half load.

Reply：Thank for you opinion, we added more tracking curves.

 

6. Figure 10 is not clear. Please redraw Figure 10. Use separate image for each component and draw lines in between.

Reply：According to your opinion, we redraw Figure 10 to make it clearer.

 

7. Please explain how random disturbance is included in the experiment. The periodical motor stops in Figure 11 does not seem to be a random disturbance.

Reply：The random disturbance means uncertain load with different load torque. The cases with different load are analyzed in the experiment for position tracking.

 

8. For each image, please include detailed caption.

Reply：we already given more detailed caption to help readers understand our image.

 

Other minors:

1. Figure 10 Hose Computer -> Host Computer

Reply：we fixed the mistake in Figure 10.

 

2. Line 245, SVPWM, please indicate full phrase when first use.

Reply：We have added the full phrase of SVPWM:” Space Vector Pulse Width Modulation”.

 

3. May need to provide the reference for the values in table 1 as well as table What floor condition is used for the friction coefficient.

Reply：We given the reference for choosing AGV model and the floor condition.

 

4. Need to indicate the machine model and settings used for the experiment.

Reply：According to your suggestions, we given the specific model of the equipment used in the experiment.

 

5. Figure 7 uses rad as unit and Figure 11 uses degree as unit. Please be consistent with the Angle unit throughout the paper.

Reply：Now we use rad as angle unit throughout the paper.

 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

The article concerns an important problem of drive control, which has been solved in a scientific way. The work contains relevant references to the literature. In the following sections, the authors presented the drive model, the control law, the results of the simulation and the experiment, whether the manuscript contains all the relevant elements. The results of the experiment are well described and the conclusions are reliable.

However, I have two minor comments:

1. The article does not mention the novelty. Certainly there is such an element, so the authors should clearly inform the reader about it at the end of the introduction.

2. Some of the curves in figures 7 and 8 are very difficult to distinguish because there is a small deviation. In this situation, in addition to the course of the rotation angle, the angle error should be presented (in new Figures) - the differences between individual iterations will be more clearly visible.

Author Response

Dear Editors and Reviewers:

 

Thank you for your letter and for the reviewers’ comments concerning our manuscript entitled “Iterative Learning Control for AGV Drive Motor Based on Linear Extended State Observer” (ID: machines-1450486). Those comments are all valuable and very helpful for revising and improving our paper, as well as the important guiding significance to our researches. We have studied comments carefully and have made correction which we hope meet with approval. Revised portion are marked in the paper. The main corrections in the paper and the responses to the reviewer’s comments are as following:

 

Reviewer：

1. The article does not mention the novelty.Certainly there is such an element, so the authors should clearly inform the reader about it at the end of the introduction.

Reply：Thanks for your comments, I added some content at the end of the introduction to explain the innovation of my work.

 

2. Some of the curves in figures 7 and 8 are very difficult to distinguish because there is a small deviation.In this situation, in addition to the course of the rotation angle, the angle error should be presented (in new Figures) - the differences between individual iterations will be more clearly visible.

Reply：Because the iterative process produces a large number of tracking curves, it is difficult to see even if the error curve is drawn into a diagram, so I made Figure 9 (iterative process diagram of tracking error average) to give more information and differences between figure 7 and 8.

 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

1. The quality of the figure 10 need to be improved. For example the PMSM image is too dark and reader can not see clearly from the image how the PMSM is mounted.
2. Please integrate figure 11-figure 22 into 1-2 large figures with subfigures. Use caption to explain each subfigures. Try to make reader compare the data easily. 
3. Brand and model for the PMSM? 
4. Please put explanation of the "random disturbance" in the paper so that reader will have clear expectation for this paper. 

 

Author Response

Dear Editors and Reviewers: Thank you for your letter and for the reviewers’ comments concerning our manuscript entitled “Iterative Learning Control for AGV Drive Motor Based on Linear Extended State Observer” (ID: machines-1450486). Those comments are all valuable and very helpful for revising and improving our paper, as well as the important guiding significance to our researches. We have studied comments carefully and have made correction which we hope meet with approval. Revised portion are marked in the paper. The main corrections in the paper and the responses to the reviewer’s comments are as following: 1.The quality of the figure 10 need to be improved. For example the PMSM image is too dark and reader can not see clearly from the image how the PMSM is mounted. Reply: We redraw the figure 10 according to your opinion. 2.Please integrate figure 11-figure 22 into 1-2 large figures with subfigures. Use caption to explain each subfigures. Try to make reader compare the data easily. Reply: Thank you for your advice, we integrated figure 11-figure 22 into 3 large figures with subfigures and described them. 3.Brand and model for the PMSM? Reply: we added the model of the PMSM in the paper marked in red. 4.Please put explanation of the "random disturbance" in the paper so that reader will have clear expectation for this paper. Reply: According to your suggestion, we put the explanation of the "random disturbance" in the paper.