Three-Dimensional Point Cloud Task-Specific Uncertainty Assessment Based on ISO 15530-3 and ISO 15530-4 Technical Specifications and Model-Based Definition Strategy
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The paper is very nicely written and provides an extended overview about the state of the methodology and normative documents for industrial use of optical measurement devices, the current challenges and an experimental example of how the proposed normative approach can be used. There are many practical comments in the paper, which is really valuable. For reference, namely for reader outside of the field, it might be good to add a bit more detailed description about the MBD data processing strategy. Even if reader could search for that elsewhere, it would be nice to have it on one place. There are also very few minor typographic errors, e.g. sometimes the quantities are not in italics, which could be corrected as well.
Author Response
Response to reviewers and detail of changes:
The authors would like to thank the reviewers for their time and insightful comments. These comments have helped us to revise and improve our paper.
Every modification has been marked in red in the text to ease the review process.
Specific comments:
- Minor typographic errors have been amended.
- English language and style have been improved.
- References have been updated and additionally added to enrich the introduction chapter.
- Figure 1 has been deleted.
Reviewer feedback:
"The paper is very nicely written and provides an extended overview about the state of the methodology and normative documents for industrial use of optical measurement devices, the current challenges and an experimental example of how the proposed normative approach can be used. There are many practical comments in the paper, which is really valuable. For reference, namely for reader outside of the field, it might be good to add a bit more detailed description about the MBD data processing strategy. Even if reader could search for that elsewhere, it would be nice to have it on one place. There are also very few minor typographic errors, e.g. sometimes the quantities are not in italics, which could be corrected as well."
- A more detailed description of MBD concept has been added in chapter 2.2.
- Minor typographic errors and italics have been amended.
Reviewer 2 Report
Authors present a novel and interesting workflow for metrology. They use existing ISOs for CMM and adapt them to 3D point data notably. The methods are novel and powerful to obtain measurements for evaluation and assessment for uncertainty. The workflow seems complete itself.
Please explain better how metrology traceability affects directly to 3D optical sensors in the case of chain of calibrations, it is still not clear in the Introduction
Explain differences between model-based (MBD) and digital twin.
References are scarce, please select more. Specially in how to use 3D point data to treat MBD
Explain better how VCMM translates into optical sensors, it seems not clear the formula and the implications of using these ISO into optical sensors
Again go in detail in how MBD changes the use of digital twin
Please rewrite the last paragraph of 2.2. in a lengthy fashion, including the type of regressions, formulas and how to project the point cloud into the MBD or the CAD. Define if the projection of point data can be done into a MBD or it has to be done directly in the CAD. Also explain better the automatic segmentation method using MBD which is the main advantage here in the paper. Are you using the digital twin for anything here? *Explain here that alignment is done through a mesh and extend later in Step 3 definition.
Please define better the point cloud, is it single pixels or are small images of the workpieces? The method has to work with images or just samples?
Define how many seconds the pipeline needs to evaluate a piece according to the size of the point cloud.
Please provide dimensions of the mesh based on triangularization
Please extend Step 5 definition as it has not been explained before
In 2.3.2 please explain how many parameters can be obtained from the assessment. Please describe how the digital twin compares to the mesh or the MBD that has been measured. It is only parameter-based? Can all parameters be extracted from the MBD/CAD and the mesh?
Author Response
Response to reviewers and detail of changes:
The authors would like to thank the reviewers for their time and insightful comments. These comments have helped us to revise and improve our paper.
Every modification has been marked in red in the text to ease the review process.
Specific comments:
- Minor typographic errors have been amended.
- English language and style have been improved.
- References have been updated and additionally added to enrich the introduction chapter.
- Figure 1 has been deleted.
Reviewer feedback
"Please explain better how metrology traceability affects directly to 3D optical sensors in the case of chain of calibrations, it is still not clear in the Introduction"
- Additional references have been added for a clear explanation in chapter 1.
"Explain differences between model-based (MBD) and digital twin"
- The description of QIF and MBD have been improved in chapter 1 and digital twin concept and AI approaches has been introduced within chapter 2.1.2 with some additional bibliography information (line 202).
"References are scarce, please select more. Specially in how to use 3D point data to treat MBD"
- Bibliography has been updated and improved to support the manuscript state-of-the-art.
"Explain better how VCMM translates into optical sensors, it seems not clear the formula and the implications of using these ISO into optical sensors"
- Bibliography has been updated and improved about VCMM solution but commercial VCMM tool for optical sensors is not available yet.
"Please rewrite the last paragraph of 2.2. in a lengthy fashion, including the type of regressions, formulas and how to project the point cloud into the MBD or the CAD. Define if the projection of point data can be done into a MBD or it has to be done directly in the CAD. Also explain better the automatic segmentation method using MBD which is the main advantage here in the paper. Are you using the digital twin for anything here? *Explain here that alignment is done through a mesh and extend later in Step 3 definition.
Please define better the point cloud, is it single pixels or are small images of the workpieces? The method has to work with images or just samples?
Define how many seconds the pipeline needs to evaluate a piece according to the size of the point cloud.
Please provide dimensions of the mesh based on triangularization
Please extend Step 5 definition as it has not been explained before
In 2.3.2 please explain how many parameters can be obtained from the assessment. Please describe how the digital twin compares to the mesh or the MBD that has been measured. It is only parameter-based? Can all parameters be extracted from the MBD/CAD and the mesh?"
- The information related to the MBD section has been improved by adding some information and additional references. However, I would like to remark that authors do not aim to go in deep within the MBD concept but to be users of it.
Reviewer 3 Report
The publication draft "3D point cloud task-specific uncertainty assessment based on ISO 15530-3 and ISO 15530-4 technical specifications and Model-Based Definition strategy " describes the determination of the measurment uncertainty of a measured point cloud. The topic is interesting and the setup and results are described comprehensively, however the draft is more written as a report than a scientific paper. It focuses mostly on the application of a present ISO standard and the scientific novelty remains unclear. In the current form the draft can not be recommended for publication.
Further remarks:
1) The state of the art section should be extended: currently, only standardization is cited, is there no associated matching research work or papers that can be included in the state of the art section?
2) Equation 3: Formatting: the "cal" should be written as index
3) The scientific scope should be described more clearly. Generally, the application of a standard is presented - what is the benefit and novelty? In the introduction this is addressed in a very generic way, but should be highlighted more specifically throughout the manuscript.
4) The description of standardized routines is very extensive. The focus of the document should be more on the own experiments and results of the authors.
5) Formating: many variables are not formatted propertly throughout the tex, e.g. ub with b as subscript
6) The scope is to address the traceability and calibration hierarchy. To me it remains unclear in which way the results can help with this. The methodology is an application of the ISO standardized routines and new implementation and application for a specific workpiece are described. This aspect should be emphasized.
Author Response
Response to reviewers and detail of changes:
The authors would like to thank the reviewers for their time and insightful comments. These comments have helped us to revise and improve our paper.
Every modification has been marked in red in the text to ease the review process.
Specific comments:
- Minor typographic errors have been amended.
- English language and style have been improved.
- References have been updated and additionally added to enrich the introduction chapter.
- Figure 1 has been deleted.
Reviewer feedback
"The publication draft "3D point cloud task-specific uncertainty assessment based on ISO 15530-3 and ISO 15530-4 technical specifications and Model-Based Definition strategy " describes the determination of the measurment uncertainty of a measured point cloud. The topic is interesting and the setup and results are described comprehensively, however the draft is more written as a report than a scientific paper. It focuses mostly on the application of a present ISO standard and the scientific novelty remains unclear. In the current form the draft can not be recommended for publication."
- This article aims to present a point cloud measurement task-specific uncertainty assess-ment method and its experimental implementation.
- Manuscript redaction has been improved so it is more written as a scientific paper. It presents an important experimental work and this is why a detailed description of the methodology and results is done this way.
Further remarks:
"1) The state of the art section should be extended: currently, only standardization is cited, is there no associated matching research work or papers that can be included in the state of the art section?"
- Bibliography has been updated and improved to support the manuscript state-of-the-art.
- Standardization is considered an important part of the state of the art because measurement procedures and uncertainty assessment procedures are defined here.
- Associated matching research articles have been added in chapter 1.
"2) Equation 3: Formatting: the "cal" should be written as index"
- Minor typographic errors have been amended along the text.
"3) The scientific scope should be described more clearly. Generally, the application of a standard is presented - what is the benefit and novelty? In the introduction this is addressed in a very generic way, but should be highlighted more specifically throughout the manuscript."
- The scientific scope aims a point cloud measurement task-specific uncertainty assess-ment method and its experimental demonstration.
- Manuscript has been improved so the aim and conclusions are more focused on what the scope of the article is.
"4) The description of standardized routines is very extensive. The focus of the document should be more on the own experiments and results of the authors."
- Points 2.1.1 and 2.1.2 have been improved for the interest of the reader.
"5) Formating: many variables are not formatted propertly throughout the tex, e.g. ub with b as subscript"
- Minor typographic errors and italics have been amended along the text.
"6) The scope is to address the traceability and calibration hierarchy. To me it remains unclear in which way the results can help with this. The methodology is an application of the ISO standardized routines and new implementation and application for a specific workpiece are described. This aspect should be emphasized."
- Manuscript has been improved so the aim and conclusions are more focused on what the scope of the article is.
Round 2
Reviewer 3 Report
Comments have been considered, the article can now be recommended for publication
