An Improved Metamorphosis-Based Scheme of Feed Mechanism Using Configuration Synthesis

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

An improved metamorphosis-based scheme of configuration synthesis for feed mechanism

 

The paper discussed an interesting process mechanism for part of the engineering instrument. Despite the topic, I found certain parts need serious attention to be revised.

1. Compose a literature review. It could not be determined the level of novelty of this work. Comparison with pioneer works in the last 5-10 years is a must. The review must be given in an individual section after the Introduction.

2. Describe and explain important terminologies, either in the Introduction or Literature review.

3. Subsection 3.2 and other similar sections are not clear. I found several equations, but they were not cited in the text. Then, what is the function of the equations? See Eqs. 4-10. What equations are these? No explanation was found. 

4. Assur must be given reference(s) to provide an adequate definition regarding the methodology.

5. Details of 3 configurations must be summarized in a table, including details of the source mechanism. Therefore, clear differences between these set-ups are clear.

6. Methodology still remains unclear. What is the methodology used in this work? numerical? analytical? experiment? How results in Figures 13 and 14 are produced? Based on this, I highly recommend to re-compose the Methodology section. This section at least must state 1. geometry and material, scenario and boundary condition, and 3. methodology/instrument for calculation.

7. Results are not adequate. With the current one, this paper is not suitable for the Processes. More complex scenarios and parametric studies are required.

8. Benchmarking based on previous results/research is also nowhere to find. How can we ensure the deployed methodology in this work is verified if no details in a specific method and/or benchmarking are explained?

9. Re-compose the conclusions. Future works must be recommended.

10. Fix the author's contribution. See the guideline of Processes.

11. Fix the reference style. See the guideline of Processes.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

Ÿ   The literature gap between references 4-31 and current work should be highlighted. It should be emphasized what are missing in previous papers that are improved in this work.

Ÿ   The work is based on one example of the source metamorphic mechanism in Fig.4. Could more examples or discussions be provided to show how the findings are applied in more general cases?

Ÿ   Unit should be provided in all figures.

Ÿ   The discussions on Figure 7-9 should be more precise. The variation range seems to be determined subjectively without a clear criterion.

Ÿ   It would be good to show Figure 4 next to figure 12. And the changes made in each configuration should be highlighted.

Ÿ   How long does the simulation take? Do other configuration syntheses mentioned in introduction give different solution? Or do they have lower computation efficiency?

Ÿ   There should be some experiments added to the work to further validate the method.

Ÿ   The work focuses on kinematic simulation. But in reality, the dynamic response of the lockstitch sewing machine is also critical. Do the three proposed configurations have same or better dynamic behavior than the source? Some discussions are needed.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

Give a transcript of the abbreviations that occur for the first time. For example, ... (3-CPS)

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 4 Report

This paper presents an improved mechanism-configuration synthesis method based on the principle of metamorphic mechanism. The feed mechanism is taken as the source metamorphic mechanism, and the kinematic performances of its variations are analyzed. The paper is well written, which provides a good reference for the design of lockstitch sewing machine with different functional requirements. It can be accepted after addressing the following minor comments.

1.     Line 150: it is suggested to use “link size” instead of “kinematic size”.

2.     It is claimed that the source metamorphic mechanism in Fig.4 can be divided into three metamorphic elements. However, it seems that two elements have common parts. Please explain how the source mechanism is divided.

3.     The statement in line 213 is a little bit confusing. Why the variation range of d3 is from 14 to 16 mm? Fig.8 shows the range is from 13 to 16mm. The same issue exists for d2 in Fig.7.

4.     It is suggested to revise the display manner of the horizontal coordinate values in Fig.13 and Fig.14.

5.     “±” exists in Eq.(7) and Eq.(8). Please clarify when “+” and “-” should be used, respectively.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

All comments have been well addressed.

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments are addressed properly.