Evaluation Method and Application of Cold Rolled Strip Flatness Quality Based on Multi-Objective Decision-Making

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

1.      In the last paragraph of the introduction, the purpose of the research carried out should be clearly formulated.

2.      The strip flatness [y1, y2, ..., ym] should be better explained e.g. by means of a drawing.

3.      The values of xi and zi and their meaning should be explained in the form of a drawing.

4.      Figures 3 and 4. What is the meaning of Flateness / UI?

Author Response

Dear Editor and Reviewers:

Thank you very much for your letter and for the reviewers’ comments concerning our manuscript entitled “Evaluation method and application of cold rolled strip flatness quality based on multi-objective decision-making” (No.: metals-1983677).

We have carefully modified the original manuscript based on these comments and suggestions. All revised portions are marked in red color on the paper. We hope the new manuscript will meet your journal’s standards. Below you will find our point-by-point responses to the reviewers’ comments. The original comments are in black, and our responses are in blue.

Thank you again for the comments and suggestions.

Best regards.

Yours sincerely,

Qiuna Wang, Jingdong Li, Xiaochen Wang, Quan Yang and Zedong Wu.

 

Corresponding authors: Quan Yang

E-mail address: [email protected]

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

There is insufficient explanation of the data in Table 2:

- what do the symbols in parentheses next to each number mean?

- how was Compresive quality evaluation value calculated?

The letters and numbers in Figure 7 are too small to see anything.

Author Response

Dear Editor and Reviewers:

Thank you very much for your letter and for the reviewers’ comments concerning our manuscript entitled “Evaluation method and application of cold rolled strip flatness quality based on multi-objective decision-making” (No.: metals-1983677).

We have carefully modified the original manuscript based on these comments and suggestions. All revised portions are marked in red color on the paper. We hope the new manuscript will meet your journal’s standards. Below you will find our point-by-point responses to the reviewers’ comments. The original comments are in black, and our responses are in blue.

Thank you again for the comments and suggestions.

Best regards.

Yours sincerely,

Qiuna Wang, Jingdong Li, Xiaochen Wang, Quan Yang and Zedong Wu.

 

Corresponding authors: Quan Yang

E-mail address: [email protected]

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Very interesting. In this manuscript was designed and applied to cold rolling production a local shape wave extraction algorithm and a fuzzy classification algorithm for general classification of the flatness defects, establishing a cold-rolled strip flatness quality determination system. 

Author Response

Dear Editor and Reviewers:

Thank you very much for your letter and for the reviewers’ comments concerning our manuscript entitled “Evaluation method and application of cold rolled strip flatness quality based on multi-objective decision-making” (No.: metals-1983677).

We have carefully modified the original manuscript based on these comments and suggestions. All revised portions are marked in red color on the paper. We hope the new manuscript will meet your journal’s standards. Below you will find our point-by-point responses to the reviewers’ comments. The original comments are in black, and our responses are in blue.

Thank you again for the comments and suggestions.

Best regards.

Yours sincerely,

Qiuna Wang, Jingdong Li, Xiaochen Wang, Quan Yang and Zedong Wu.

 

Corresponding authors: Quan Yang

E-mail address: [email protected]

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 4 Report

The paper provides useful information for the determination of the local flatness and quality of a cold-rolled steel strip and deals mainly with the evaluation via local waveforms. Although the structure and the general approach of the analysis are comprehensible, the work contains considerable gaps and errors. Publication is therefore only recommended on the condition of a comprehensive overall revision.

 

Does the introduction provide sufficient background and include all relevant references?

 The spelling and grammar throughout the article need to be revised. Even the first sentence makes no grammatical sense. It should read:

“With the rapid development of the steel industry in recent years, finished strips have gradually changed from low-end products to precision and high-end products, especially in the production of cold-rolled wide and thin strips, the quality requirements for flatness have increased.”

 

Is the research design appropriate and are the methods adequately described?

 The entire description of the experiment is missing from the article. What does the experimental setup look like? Which sensors were used and how were the measured values recorded? How many series of experiments were carried out? The article still has to answer these questions.

 In this work, an algorithm for extracting local waveforms was developed, but what is meant by waveform was not defined.

 Section 2.2.2 introduces the "Internal local wave shape defect recognition and extraction". However, the following explanation seems to be translated automatically without subsequent correction, so that the content cannot be understood.

 Figure 6 shows for the first time which values are measured ("including thickness h, width b, voltage e"). What other measured values are used and what does the measurement infrastructure look like?

 In 2.3 "Overall flatness recognition algorithm" the flatness errors are divided into primary, secondary, tertiary and quaternary. How does this definition come about?

 

Are the results clearly presented?

 There is no description of the test series, the test setup and the recorded measurement data. That needs to be added.

 Some sentences seem to be translated automatically without subsequent correction, so that the content is lost. An example of this can be found in lines 64, 72, 77, 134, 135, 150, 270, 285 and many others.

 Figure 1 shows how the number of valid channels on the detection roll is selected. However, at no time is the measuring principle or the measured variables explained. In addition, there is no explanation of how the experiments were carried out, so that it is not possible to understand the results.

 In figure 2 you show "Local wave shapes on site" but the image lacks a label where this can be seen and also lacks a definition of what "local wave shapes" are.

 For the evaluation, the "steepness of the valid flatness data of the ith channel" is calculated in line 134. It is not clear what is meant by this. It seems like an automatic translation error which makes it impossible to understand the results.

 In Figure 3 and Figure 4, "Flatness/IU" is plotted on the y-axis without defining what is meant by this. In addition, there are white empty fields at the arrows in the figures. The results shown under "Flatness after local smoothing" cannot be understood because neither the measurement method is clear nor what exactly is meant by "local smoothing". The term "local smoothing" does not appear in the text. Nor is there any explanation of what is meant by it.

 

Are the conclusions supported by the results?

 In line 307 you write “Through the application of this system, the influencing factors of local flatness of extremely thin specifications were quickly found, and suitable parameter setting intervals were obtained” à What are the influencing factors?  What settings have been made?

 The article states that there has been a decrease of 19.29% in quality objection. Where were the values before and where were the values after the developed measurement method?

Author Response

Dear Editor and Reviewers:

Thank you very much for your letter and for the reviewers’ comments concerning our manuscript entitled “Evaluation method and application of cold rolled strip flatness quality based on multi-objective decision-making” (No.: metals-1983677).

We have carefully modified the original manuscript based on these comments and suggestions. All revised portions are marked in red color on the paper. We hope the new manuscript will meet your journal’s standards. Below you will find our point-by-point responses to the reviewers’ comments. The original comments are in black, and our responses are in blue.

Thank you again for the comments and suggestions.

Best regards.

Yours sincerely,

Qiuna Wang, Jingdong Li, Xiaochen Wang, Quan Yang and Zedong Wu.

 

Corresponding authors: Quan Yang

E-mail address: [email protected]

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf