Optimizing Active Disturbance Rejection Control for a Stubble Breaking and Obstacle Avoiding Control System
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for Authors
1. The research Objectives is not clearly stated in the abstract. Please ask the author to clarify the research purpose.
2. The current state of research in the Introduction section is not clearly stated and does not lead to the problem it is trying to solve, so the authors are invited to analyze it systematically.
3. The authors are requested to explain the working principle of the obstacle avoidance device in detail.
4. In Chapter “2.2.2 Fuzzy ADRC Control Principle”，the analysis of the ADRC principle has no practical significance and is recommended to be deleted.
5. At line 380, the data format is not standardized and it is recommended that it be changed to a table.
6. Check all unit formats. For example, Kg*m2 should be Kg·m2 in Table1. Check all.
7. Please explain the advantages of BP-Fuzzy ADRC compared with other controllers in detail.Explain the significance of data engineering in “Table 4 Control performance of each controller in stubble breaking obstacle avoidance control system”.
8. Authors should be more specific in their conclusions, highlighting the achievements that contribute to the work and the contributions generated.
Comments on the Quality of English Language
none
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for Authors
In the manuscript titled Huibin Zhu, Tao Huang etc. performed optimizing ADRC for stubble-breaking and obstacle-avoiding control system. This study contains some interesting findings and are valuable for the understanding of obstacle-avoiding control system. However, lack of detailed discussion is the major flaw of the study. On the other hand, lack of experiments for comparison and verification. Therefore, major revision has to be done before this manuscript could be accepted for publication in the agriculture.
Materials and methods 1. Provide more context or justification for the choice of hardware, such as the advantages of using a Mitsubishi FX3U-16MT PLC in the control module. 2. Detail how components are interconnected and any configuration specifics that are critical to the system’s operation. 3. Address any technical inaccuracies or ambiguous statements. For example, ensure that all component specifications, such as load capacities or communication interfaces, are correctly noted and relevant to the described functions. Instead of merely stating the connection interface, explain why a particular type of interface is chosen based on system requirements.
Result and discussion 1. Be more specific about the simulation setup and the parameters being tested. For example, specify why particular parameters (like h, r, β) are set at certain values and how they influence the system's performance. 2. Use consistent technical terms and units of measurement throughout the section. Ensure that all abbreviations and symbols are defined or standardized according to scientific conventions. 3、The authors advised discussing the implications of observed results, such as overshoot or regulation time, on the practical application of the control systems in agricultural settings.
Comments on the Quality of English Language
should be modified.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
Comments and Suggestions for Authors
In the overall discussion of this paper, there is no explanation of the machine structure design in this paper. In the part of Materials and Methods, there is little analysis of the machine designed in this paper, and the hardware part of the equipment proposed in this paper is not described in detail.
3.2. Hardware-in-the-Loop Simulation Test Platform in this paper lacks simulation analysis of the application scenarios of the equipment in this paper, and experimental analysis of the actual operation of the proposed method in the equipment is not carried out. The feasibility of this method has not been well verified.
At the same time, the proposed algorithm is not applied to the equipment mentioned above for experiments, which fails to demonstrate the feasibility of the proposed algorithm.
The overall analysis structure of this paper is unreasonable, and the algorithm proposed in this paper is not well reflected in the research background and purpose of the analysis, and the research purpose is not clear.
For the pictures inserted in this paper, the expression is not clear, the layout is not beautiful, the research purpose is not clear, the overall analysis structure is miscellaneous, it is difficult to clearly express the described object and provide readers with a better reading experience.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 4 Report
Comments and Suggestions for Authors
The article presents a system to avoid obstacles autonomously and in-real time while stubble breaking.
Research methodology is extensively presented; some improvements to reveal the article more readable are proposed, as follows:
Introduction details the need for the Chinese southwestern agriculture region to develop the research on the autonomous obstacle avoidance control system. Anyhow, certain benchmarking with other environmental contexts may be relevant, considering references, too. Screening of other potential authors (outside Asian - Chinese region) allow relevance for researchers and / or regions with similar environmental conditions or setting boundaries of the current research application.
System structure composition should be explored outside the laboratory, too. A discussion of how does it fit and behave in real-case situations, the limitations and future developments, the productivity for big surfaces, the envisages issues a.s.o. seems mandatory to transfer from the lab to practice. Otherwise, the approach lies a theoretical/mathematical / simulation proposal.
These elements may be discussed, at least, in the Conclusion section.
Good continuation!
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for Authors
I tried to figure out the aim of this paper. The entire paper seems comprehensive. But the expression and analysis of control systems should be improved, and also the writing structure should be modified:
Materials and Methods:
By the overarching structure and specifications of the control system, the connectivity mode and testing parameters of each component are elucidated.
Please explain the reason for entering a step signal with an amplitude of 1 at t=0.1s and analyze the response curve.
Results and Discussion:
The study should delve into the ramifications of the adopted methodology on the system, juxtaposed with its comparative advantages over alternative approaches.
For example, explain the effect of ground load changes on a servo motor system when a stubble breaker is transported in the field.
It is recommended that the authors incorporate Figure 9, depicting the response curve, alongside a discussion on its influence on motor response across diverse control algorithms.
Comments on the Quality of English Language
Moderate editing of the English language required.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
Comments and Suggestions for Authors
After the revision of the paper, I think that compared with the previous version of the paper, the machine structure and related hardware have been explained in detail, while the materials and methods have been improved, and the proposed algorithm has been further analyzed on the research background, so as to reflect the research value and purpose of this paper. At the same time, appropriate adjustments have been made to the drawings and expression methods of this paper. I think this paper has scientific rigor and corresponding academic value, and meets the publication standards of this journal.
Author Response
Thank you very much for your guidance and suggestions on our manuscript.
