Optimization Method of Assembly Tolerance Types Based on Degree of Freedom

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

1. The methodology and the result are missing in the abstract. 

2. The introduction is adequate and appropriate. All the citations are listed in the references. Good job

3. The methodology needs to be improved. The methodology at present state is not clear.

4.  The discussion is concise

5. Lines 218,320,304, 308, and 311 should be regarded as equations

6. Table 1 should capture the 10 types of typical tolerance as stated in Figure 1 or the Authors should justify the reason(s) for excluding them in Table 1

7. Conclusion is not adequately written. The author should rewrite the conclusion to provide a summary of the research carried out

8.  The authors are not consistent with referencing style. Special attention should be given to lines 614, 615, 633, 6423-644, 653-654, 684, 687-689 

 

 

 

 

 

Fair and appropriate

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.doc

Reviewer 2 Report

The paper presents an assembly tolerance type optimization method based on the degrees of freedom of the tolerance zone for the optimization and screening problem after reasoning about all possible tolerance types.

In general, the paper is complex and detailed.

The abstract is structured.

The introduction transposes the reader into the problem of the study and at the end formulates the purpose of the study: ”this paper proposes a method based on degrees of freedom to screen and optimize the tolerance types of the assembly body, and  realizes the optimization of the tolerance scheme of the assembly workpiece.”

The objective of the study is not very clear from this sentence and it should be better formulated. In this context, research questions could be specified that would better orient the reader on the content of the manuscript.

In the field there are other works that analyze tolerance fields based on modal interval and small degrees of freedom (ex. 10.1007/s00170-010-2568-8) and for this reason it should be better emphasized the specific gap that the work covers in the field, but also in relation to other works on this topic.

The study methodology is clearly described and the results are presented. The case study section constitutes a practical validation of the proposed model, which should be reformulated in this sense. Along with verifying the validity of optimizing the assembly tolerance types by using DOFs of tolerance zones it should be highlighted what further controls should be considered.

The discussions could be more extensive by comparing with other results reported in the scientific literature.

Conclusions and future study directions are presented. The conclusions should not constitute a summary of the paper it should better emphasize only the innovative aspects discovered in the work. A direction of study that should be added along with the existing ones is the practical validation of the proposed model when assembling with high-precision parallel robots, where the field of tolerances is extremely precise, e.g.:

Moldovan, L.; Gligor, A.; Grif H.-S.; Moldovan, F. Dynamic Numerical Simulation of the 6-PGK Parallel Robot Manipulator. Proceedings of The Romanian Academy, Series A. 2019, 20(1), 67–75.

Along with this, the bibliographic references can be improved with papers that deal with topics related to the use of degrees of freedom in the study of tolerance fields.

There are some editing errors:

In heading of the paper please decide the  Type of the Paper (Article, Review, Communication, etc.)

technical college should be  Technical College (line 8)

Armillotta. A [26] – line 109 shoold be without . A. also in line 551

is analyzed – end with point (line 230).

on it [23]. and – line 237

in line 260 you mention Table 2 which comes very late.

Line 306 – a bracket is in blue

Line 316 When is small

In figure 8 it appears two times (a) and (b). One should be deleted.

Line 536 – Figure label should be in small letters

no conflict of interest.t:  (line  592)

The author names in references 1, 24 do not respect the template.

Reference 39 – title appears two times

Do not use caps for title in reference 40

 

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.doc

Reviewer 3 Report

Well written paper on a highly technical and theoretical field. My only concern would be if this paper is more suitable for a theoretical oriented journal. Some minor comments:  in figure some different fonts are used so this must be corrected also the color seems to be different. Line 592 there is a double t please correct. Please emphasize applied nature of the paper since this journal is "applied science" . 

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.doc

Reviewer 4 Report

Dear Authors,

the subject you approached is interesting and adds new knowledge to the domain of tolerancing the parts from the perspective of the assembled product.

 

Allthow, some improvement is needed. Some clarifications related to pictures and tables are required. As well, some clarifications on scientific issues are welcome. Some typimg/editting errors must be removed. I provided you with some suggestions (and questions to be answered) in the attached file.  

 

Good luck

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

The English should be revised, mainly by shortening the statements, to make the manuscript easier to be easier to read and understand.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.