Wheel Arrangement of Four Omni Wheel Mobile Robot for Compactness
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
This article presents an omnidirectional robot proposal and the results it achieves for two patterns. The novelty of this approach is that they focus the design method on both compactness and noise sensitivity. To highlight the performance of the proposed robot, the authors made a comparison with a conventional one from the perspective of error sensitivity for a pre-defined path.
1) At the end of the introduction, the authors present the structure of the paper, but it contains explanations only for Section 2.
2) The authors included the state-of-the-art part in the introduction. They could consider delimiting these two parts by introducing a separate section for related work. In this new section, the authors can present the similar solutions existing in the specialized literature and include a comparison with the solution proposed by them.
3) The authors can add a paragraph in the introduction to highlight the scientific contributions that authors propose through this paper.
4) The authors did not specify what the matrices A and B in equation 7 represent. They could also mention what each matrix represents in equation 9.
5) In section 3.1, the authors described the hardware configuration for the proposed robot. The authors can consider the realization of a scheme with the presentation of the five layers. This figure will help the reader to understand the proposed configuration.
6) The authors may consider adding a more detailed analysis of the results presented in the tables (Table 1, Table 2, Table 3 and Table 4).
7) The colours used by the authors for the graphics do not show well the difference between the target and the experimental results (for example, thicker line or dotted line). For figure 7, it is difficult to identify the target line.
8) The authors may consider adding an analysis of the differences between the two robots used for experiments in terms of the time required to complete the trajectory.
9) The authors could motivate why they chose the shape of a circle and square for the two patterns.
Author Response
Dear Reviewer,
We are incredibly grateful to you for taking the time to review our manuscript and for all the insightful comments. They made us realize our manuscript's inadequacies, lack of clarity, and mistakes.
Could you see the attached letter for more information regarding our response to your review?
We are looking forward to hearing from you and hope you find the revised manuscript satisfactory.
Sincerely,
Masaaki Hijikata, Renato Miyagusuku, Koichi Ozaki
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
The presented omni wheel robots with creative wheel arrangements are interested.
The research is meaningful. However, in the introduction, some other robot platform should be introduced.
For example the quadruped robot （https://doi.org/10.34133/2022/9816495), biped robot （https://doi.org/10.34133/2021/9817487）,and other mobile robot (https://doi.org/10.34133/2022/9780497).
Please refer them in the introduction part.
Some pictures (fig. 5 ) is not so necessary.
The annotations in figures are required. Some figures need to be intergrated.
Moverover, different wheel arrangements should be placed in one figures. Both schematic diagrams and real images are required.
Author Response
Dear Reviewer,
We are incredibly grateful to you for taking the time to review our manuscript and for all the insightful comments. They made us realize our manuscript's inadequacies, lack of clarity, and mistakes.
Could you see the attached letter for more information regarding our response to your review?
We are looking forward to hearing from you and hope you find the revised manuscript satisfactory.
Sincerely,
Masaaki Hijikata, Renato Miyagusuku, Koichi Ozaki
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
The experimental evaluation performed by the authors does not consider the external conditions. For example, it is necessary to specify how these aspects influence the quality of the results. The results are not reproducible without knowing these aspects (surface size, surface material, coefficient of friction, contact points, and temperature conditions). The authors can also consider making demo videos and providing them as a link in the article.
The authors use the concept of noise, but do not distinguish between the two main categories: noise caused by intrinsic factors and noise caused by external factors.
The authors could consider motivating the need and importance for such an improvement by providing practical examples that would require such a robot version.
Author Response
Dear Reviewer,
We are incredibly grateful to you for taking the time to review our manuscript and for all the insightful comments. They made us realize our manuscript's inadequacies, lack of clarity, and mistakes.
Could you see the attached letter for more information regarding our response to your review?
We are looking forward to hearing from you and hope you find the revised manuscript satisfactory.
Sincerely,
Masaaki Hijikata, Renato Miyagusuku, Koichi Ozaki
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 3
Reviewer 1 Report
The authors considered all previous observations. They could better highlight the importance of the proposed solution by detailing the contributions in the introduction. For example, the authors may specify that the proposed solution has improved distance error, and the time required to complete the trajectory.
It would be helpful to highlight changes to the manuscript by using colours.
Author Response
Dear Reviewer,
We are incredibly grateful to you for taking the time to review our manuscript and for all the insightful comments. They made us realize our manuscript's inadequacies, lack of clarity, and mistakes.
Could you see the attached letter for more information regarding our response to your review?
We are looking forward to hearing from you and hope you find the revised manuscript satisfactory.
Sincerely,
Masaaki Hijikata, Renato Miyagusuku, Koichi Ozaki
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
