Development and Verification of a Simulation Model of an Automated Assembly Line

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

This paper develops an automated assembly line simulation model in the Poznań University of Technology Smart Factory laboratory. The simulation model is built via Tecnomatix Plant Simulation software for developing digital twin solutions. This study aims to obtain the assembly time of the model close to real and to verify the time deviation between the simulation model and the real process. This paper is recommended to be re-summit to a more proper journal. 

1. This study builds an automated assembly line simulation model in the Smart Factory laboratory. Is it a real factory? What product does it produce?  Or is it just experimental equipment? Introducing an experimental production factory instead of a real one may lead to different research results of the simulation. 

2. In Line 206 of Page 6, it is possible to set the route and processing time of the automated assembly line with the control panel. It is convinced that this study merely does a computer simulation based on another simulated assembly line in the real world. This may decrease the contribution of this paper. 

3. In Line 390 of Page 16, a variation Wt is introduced. According to MDPI Layout Style Guide, a mathematical symbol should use the italic font. Please correct it and give t an appropriate notation (subscript or put in bracket). 

4. The variable Wt is used as a time correction factor in the verification stage of research. How does its value calculated? Is there any formula or measurement? Please explain.

5. According to Section 5, it is claimed that problems will appear during the development of a simulation model, and finding solutions is very difficult. Except for the time deviation, what other problem does this study solve? Please explain. 

Author Response

Dear Reviewer 1.

Thank you for pointing out errors and all your comments and suggestions. I send detailed answers in the attached file. I hope they meet your expectations. Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

The comments are attached as a PDF file.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

A few long sentences with confusing logic. Most of the problems are related to the missing definitions.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer 2.

Thank you for pointing out errors and all your comments and suggestions. I send detailed answers in the attached file. I hope they meet your expectations. Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

Major comments #4, #5, #6 are NOT addressed in the Manuscript v2.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer 2.

We are very grateful for your review. Please see the attachment with our responses to your comments.

Best Regards

Przemysław Zawadzki 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf