Station for Tuning and Testing Digital Twin in Hydraulic Actuator Control Systems under Programmable Load—Methodology, Design, and Tests
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThere are some comments to improve the paper:
1. Under the chapter "Methodology of design and identification of the load application subsystem," it is suggested that methodological stages be presented to get a clear picture of the research design.
2. Please end the chapter without using Figures and Tables. Please add the text after Figure 6 "The Matlab Simulink model of a nonlinear load application system block diagram (a), 312 comparison of static characteristics of linear and non-linear models with real data (b)" and sub-chapter 3.2 "Controller Selection, Implementation, and Computer Simulation" and Figure 12. "Modeling of the disturbances: diagram of the model taking artificially introduced dis-420 turbances into account (a), signals used to identify the disturbance path (b)." before sub-chapter 4.2. "Tuning and Simulation of the example controllers: PID and fuzzy". The same issue is after Figure 15 "Simulation results of the positioning system operating under a variable external load" and sub-section 4.3 "Tests of the laboratory station" and Figure 17 "Response of the positioning system using a fuzzy controller" and chapter 5 "Summary".
3. Before concluding, the authors have to present a discussion. Herein, it is recommended that the theoretical gaps that exist and are solved in this paper be shown.
4. The literature list must be extended and include at least 5 contemporary papers from 2024.
5. When citing, the authors use different names for equations, such as "formula" and "equation." It is suggested that the name be unified and that the same word be used everywhere for the citation.
6. It is suggested that the list of abbreviations be provided by the end of the paper. In the keywords and summary mentioned, the abbreviation "PID" has no full-word explanation in the whole paper.
7. By the end of 55th reference, please provide the dot and improve the reference appearance: "Zimmer, A.; Englot, A. Identyfikacja Obiektów i Sygnałów: Teoria i Praktyka Dla Użytkowników Matlaba [in Polish] Object 654 and Signal Identification: Theory and Practice for Matlab Users; Wydawnictwo PK: Kraków, Poland, 2005;"
8. Please unify the text provided in the figures. Under Figures 8-9, Figures 15-17, and others, the text is provided in bold; however, under Figure 11, the text is not in bold.
9. The English text has to be revised with an advanced Grammarly tool, as it has style and writing errors.
10. The authors have to provide explanations of symbols after Equations, Tables and Figures if these symbols have no explanation provided before, such as used in Equation 1 and Table 1 have not provided explanation.
Author Response
The authors thank the reviewers for their time and contribution to improving the quality of our article. Thanks to the comments and suggestions, the article has been significantly expanded and improved; we hope that we have managed to dispel doubts related to the content and substantive value. Large inserted or heavily changed blocks of text and significant changes have been highlighted in yellow, while minor editorial changes (punctuation, additional markings, sizes of captions in figures, etc.) have been introduced but are not marked due to their large number. The length of the article has increased from 20 to 24 pages, and the number of references has increased from 55 to 63. Responses to individual comments and suggestions are provided in the following.
1. Under the chapter "Methodology of design and identification of the load application subsystem," it is suggested that methodological stages be presented to get a clear picture of the research design.
A new diagram (Figure 3) showing the design methodology for this part of the system and its explanations has been added at the beginning of Chapter 3, along with a paragraph of explanatory text.
2. Please end the chapter without using Figures and Tables. Please add the text after Figure 6 "The Matlab Simulink model of a nonlinear load application system block diagram (a), 312 comparison of static characteristics of linear and non-linear models with real data (b)" and sub-chapter 3.2 "Controller Selection, Implementation, and Computer Simulation" and Figure 12. "Modeling of the disturbances: diagram of the model taking artificially introduced dis-420 turbances into account (a), signals used to identify the disturbance path (b)." before sub-chapter 4.2. "Tuning and Simulation of the example controllers: PID and fuzzy". The same issue is after Figure 15 "Simulation results of the positioning system operating under a variable external load" and sub-section 4.3 "Tests of the laboratory station" and Figure 17 "Response of the positioning system using a fuzzy controller" and chapter 5 "Summary".
Fragments of text have been added in appropriate places or moved if the lack of description resulted from its placement earlier in the text due to avoiding gaps and minimizing the number of pages of the article. The analysis of the results of experiments on the hardware has also been extended, taking into account the method of measuring errors and assessing the similarity of real characteristics to simulated ones and the set signal.
3. Before concluding, the authors have to present a discussion. Herein, it is recommended that the theoretical gaps that exist and are solved in this paper be shown.
Additional text paragraphs containing a discussion of results have been added, mainly in Chapters 4 and 5. Chapters 1.1 and 1.2 also emphasize the need for research into simulation of electrohydraulic systems, Digital Twin, and experimental verification of simulation results. The Summary has been significantly expanded.
4. The literature list must be extended and include at least 5 contemporary papers from 2024.
The literature review was expanded to include 5 items mainly related to interference suppression methods, as well as 3 related to Digital Twin in relation to electrohydraulic systems. Conclusions from the literature analysis were also introduced.
5. When citing, the authors use different names for equations, such as "formula" and "equation." It is suggested that the name be unified and that the same word be used everywhere for the citation.
The nomenclature of the equations has been unified.
6. It is suggested that the list of abbreviations be provided by the end of the paper. In the keywords and summary mentioned, the abbreviation "PID" has no full-word explanation in the whole paper.
The meaninig of the PID abbreviation and other deficiencies noted have been explained in the text.
7. By the end of 55th reference, please provide the dot and improve the reference appearance: "Zimmer, A.; Englot, A. Identyfikacja Obiektów i Sygnałów: Teoria i Praktyka Dla Użytkowników Matlaba [in Polish] Object 654 and Signal Identification: Theory and Practice for Matlab Users; Wydawnictwo PK: Kraków, Poland, 2005;"
References have been corrected. If approved for publication, they are also always checked very carefully during editorial proofreading.
8. Please unify the text provided in the figures. Under Figures 8-9, Figures 15-17, and others, the text is provided in bold; however, under Figure 11, the text is not in bold.
The different appearances of the text result mostly from the scaling of the drawings to the dimensions that allow them to fit together on a page or in a row. All drawings have been reviewed for uniformity in size, weight, and font design.
9. The English text has to be revised with an advanced Grammarly tool, as it has style and writing errors.
The entire text was rechecked using the Writefull tool, which is the only one available at our university.
10. The authors have to provide explanations of symbols after Equations, Tables and Figures if these symbols have no explanation provided before, such as used in Equation 1 and Table 1 have not provided explanation.
Previously unexplained notation and symbols in equations, tables, and figures have been supplemented. Figures 1 and 2 have been enriched with additional notations to facilitate their understanding. These places are highlighted in the text.
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe paper presents a good research with clear relevance to current industrial challenges. However, refining the presentation, deepening the analysis, and providing more quantitative data could significantly enhance the quality and impact of the work. There are some issues to be clarified:
1.More literature work needs to be added in a criticized way to show the importance of the proposed work.
2.Although different control strategies (e.g., PID and fuzzy controllers) are tested, the paper could benefit from a more detailed comparative analysis of these approaches. A discussion on the advantages, disadvantages, and potential applications of each controller type in various scenarios would add depth to the analysis.
3. The paper does not provide enough quantitative data to substantiate their claim about satisfactory convergence. Including more detailed statistical comparisons or performance metrics would enhance the rigor of the study.
4.Some of the diagrams, such as the hydraulic diagram in Figure 1, may be complex for readers unfamiliar with the specifics of hydraulic systems. Simplifying these diagrams or providing more detailed explanations alongside them could improve comprehension.
5. What is the impact of the proposed work.
Comments on the Quality of English LanguageThe paper presents a good research with clear relevance to current industrial challenges. However, refining the presentation, deepening the analysis, and providing more quantitative data could significantly enhance the quality and impact of the work. There are some issues to be clarified:
1.More literature work needs to be added in a criticized way to show the importance of the proposed work.
2.Although different control strategies (e.g., PID and fuzzy controllers) are tested, the paper could benefit from a more detailed comparative analysis of these approaches. A discussion on the advantages, disadvantages, and potential applications of each controller type in various scenarios would add depth to the analysis.
3. The paper does not provide enough quantitative data to substantiate their claim about satisfactory convergence. Including more detailed statistical comparisons or performance metrics would enhance the rigor of the study.
4.Some of the diagrams, such as the hydraulic diagram in Figure 1, may be complex for readers unfamiliar with the specifics of hydraulic systems. Simplifying these diagrams or providing more detailed explanations alongside them could improve comprehension.
5. What is the impact of the proposed work.
Author Response
The authors thank the reviewers for their time and contribution to improving the quality of our article. Thanks to the comments and suggestions, the article has been significantly expanded and improved; we hope that we have managed to dispel doubts related to the content and substantive value. Large inserted or heavily changed blocks of text and significant changes have been highlighted in yellow, while minor editorial changes (punctuation, additional markings, sizes of captions in figures, etc.) have been introduced but are not marked due to their large number. The length of the article has increased from 20 to 24 pages, and the number of references has increased from 55 to 63. Responses to individual comments and suggestions are provided in the following.
1. More literature work needs to be added in a criticized way to show the importance of the proposed work.
The literature review was expanded to include 5 new recent items, mainly related to interference suppression methods, as well as 3 related to Digital Twin in relation to electrohydraulic systems. Conclusions from the literature analysis were also introduced.
2. Although different control strategies (e.g., PID and fuzzy controllers) are tested, the paper could benefit from a more detailed comparative analysis of these approaches. A discussion on the advantages, disadvantages, and potential applications of each controller type in various scenarios would add depth to the analysis.
A discussion of the advantages, disadvantages, and potential applications of tested controllers is provided in Chapter 4.2 at the begining.
3. The paper does not provide enough quantitative data to substantiate their claim about satisfactory convergence. Including more detailed statistical comparisons or performance metrics would enhance the rigor of the study.
Chapter 4.3 has been expanded to include a method for calculating the control error in relation to the setpoint for both controllers.
4. Some of the diagrams, such as the hydraulic diagram in Figure 1, may be complex for readers unfamiliar with the specifics of hydraulic systems. Simplifying these diagrams or providing more detailed explanations alongside them could improve comprehension.
The electrical and hydraulic diagrams (Figures 1 and 2) have been expanded with additional symbols to facilitate their understanding.
5. What is the impact of the proposed work.
A paragraph on the impact of the developed solutions has been added to the summary of the article. The developed methodology, hardware and software can be used for cost-effective, fast, and safe (for people and hardware) testing of both simple and more complex control systems and algorithms.
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsAccept
Comments on the Quality of English LanguageAccept
