S-Velocity Profile of Industrial Robot Based on NURBS Curve and Slerp Interpolation

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

1. Figure 1 and Figure 2 require more detailed labeling
2. In Figure 4, Figure 5 the content are out the box of the flow chart


3. A conclusion/Summary will be better at the end of the article in setad of "Analysis and Discussion".

Section 6 "Analysis and Discussion" can be merged with the Simulation Results section.

4. Where have you used the equation (66)?

5. Most of the Graphs are not readable.


6. Is this possible to merge some of the Figures of Figure 13?

7. The axis names in Figure 8, Figure 9, Figure 12, Are they
x (mm), y(mm) instead of x/mm and y/mm?

8. Is this necessary to show Figure 10?

9. In Table 2, Second column

Title : Coordinate in Cartesian space(mm,deg)
Parameters (6): (420,100,715,0,0,0)
Can you confirm which value has which unit?

10. What is the unique contribution of this work?

11. How do you confirm the validity of the quantitative data?

12. Where have you used Eqn 32?

Author Response

Dear reviewer,

  I'm glad to receive your suggestion, which is very helpful to improve the quality of my manuscript. According to your suggestion, I revised the original manuscript and answered your questions one by one. Please see the attachment.

   

Thank you and best regards.

Yours Sincerely!

GuirongWang

Author Response File: Author Response.doc

Reviewer 2 Report

In this paper, the authors consider the problem of increasing the smoothness of the manipulator's trajectory using NURBS interpolation. The campaign is really interesting, but I think that the authors consider their own example of applying this approach in too much detail. Still, it is correct to solve the general problem first, and then show an example on which this solution can be demonstrated. In the present, the authors immediately solve a system of equations of the 6th order for a particular manipulator. I think that the work does not have a proper theoretical justification for the result obtained. The example is described in too much detail. In its present form, I do not recommend the work for publication.

Author Response

Dear reviewer,

  I'm glad to receive your suggestion, which is very helpful to improve the quality of my manuscript. According to your suggestion, I revised the original manuscript and answered your questions one by one. Please see the attachment.

   

Thank you and best regards.

Yours sincerely!

GuirongWang

Author Response File: Author Response.doc

Reviewer 3 Report

Dear Authors,

The paper presents a topic of interest for researchers and practitioners. However, a number of improvements are needed.

1. The abstract should present the need for research, the methodology, the main results obtained and the future directions of research.

2. To emphasize the need for this study.

3. The stages of the methodology must be presented in detail.

4. To highlight the gaps filled by the present study.

5. The conclusions section should be completed with a review of the study.

Author Response

Dear reviewer,

  I'm glad to receive your suggestion, which is very helpful to improve the quality of my manuscript. According to your suggestion, I revised the original manuscript and answered your questions one by one. Please see the attachment.

   

Thank you and best regards.

Yours Sincerely!

GuirongWang

Author Response File: Author Response.doc

Round 2

Reviewer 3 Report

I accept this version.