Review Reports

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Dear authors,

It is an interesting paper, important probably for the small furniture companies interested in reducing their wood wastes and their better utilization in the reconstituted panels.  However, the article needs some additions/clarifications as suggested in the report.

Consistency in the use of wood-specific terms – board or panel not sheet or plate.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Comment 1: Line 9: Replace plate by board

Response: We have replaced “plate” in line 10.

 

Comment 2: Line 10: What is wire cutting? Please reformulate.

Response: We have reformulated that ‘manual drawing lines and cutting procedure’ in line 10.

 

Comment 3: Line 13: Why sheet metal cutting? It is about wood! Please reformulate.

Response: We have reformulated that ‘wood board cutting’ in line 15.

 

Comment 4: Lines 15-16: “with isolated consideration of raw material sawing… ”. Add (standardized dimensions of wood pieces). Then, after “..shortcut splicing..” add (non-standardized dimensions);

Response: We have added ‘standardized dimensions of wood pieces’ and ‘non-standardized dimensions’ in line 17.

 

Comment 5: Line 18: It is about utilization rate

Response: We have added ‘rate’ in line 20.

 

Comment 6: Line 22: Preferred is better instead favored.

Response: We have replaced “preferred” in line 25.

 

Comment 7: Line 29: Please reformulate: wood is an anisotropic and orthotropic material with unique properties, color and texture ….

Response: We have added ‘rate’ in line 33.

 

Comment 8: Lines 30-31: Please, replace “plates” by pieces in line 30 and in line 31… several pieces are then parallel joined into a board according to….

Response: We have replaced ‘plates’ in lines 34-35.

 

Comment 9: Line 32: Replace plate, by board (usually we spoke about solid wood splicing board).

Response: We have replaced ‘plates’ in lines 36.

 

Comment 10: Line 37: Replace sheet by board or panel.

Response: We have replaced “sheet” in line 41.

 

Comment 11: Lines 60-70: The authors mentioned few references about GA algorithm possible to apply in different fields of activity. What about cutting of solid wood, or simple cutting problems, there are references with algorithms related to that problem? Please add other references. (See Lopes 2021- https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/14942119.2021.1952520), or Noriega 2016 (https://shipjournal.co/index.php/sst/article/view/138/400). See Table 2 in this article, where the results are explicitly presented, which may help you to present more clearly the results you have obtained (eg Table 4).

Response: We have carefully read the 2 articles and added them into references.

 

Comment 12: Line 75: Replace plate by board – be consistent in using wood-specific terms!

Response: We have replaced “plate” in line 83.

 

Comment 13: Line 84- In figure 1- Please, replace “solid wood panel” by solid wood board and “transmission belt” by belt conveyor. However, the notifications on the image should be (1), (2) … etc and identification of items, below, in the figure title as you do.

Response: We have replaced figure 1 and changed the notification.

 

Comment 14: Line 114: …” is generally first spliced according to the line…” it is about direction of fibers? Please, clarify.

Response: We have clarified that is direction of texture in line 125.

 

Comment 15: Line 115: add ….according to the dimensions demand!

Response: We have added “according to the dimensions demand” in line 126.

 

Comment 16: Lines 118-119;128;131;133; 138.. 149; 216; 222; 224; 225; 226 … etc, replace plate by board.

Response: We have replaced “plate” in this paper.

 

Comment 17: Line 134: …”number of standards..” - means standardized dimensions for the wood boards?

Response: Yes, and we have clarified it in line 145.

 

Comment 18: Line 136: Add two category of wastes! What mean the standardized wastes!?

Response: We have clarified it in line 148.

 

Comment 19: Line 156: Add in the Figure 2 : Method 1 (standardized dimensions) … and Method 2 without!)

Response: We have added it in Figure2.

 

Comment 20: Line 174: How this elite genetic algorithm is adapted to your experiment? Please add some comments.

Response: We have added it in line 192.

 

Comment 21: Line 178: It is about figure 4!

Response: Yes, we have corrected it.

 

Line 179: There are quality standards that accept defects on the board. The boards you have considered in the experiment belong to a quality class or were randomly chosen?

Response: Yes, we have corrected it.

 

Comment 22: It is important to mention that the boards are made from the same species and are quarter sawn or plain sawn, or not? The experimental algorithm was applied only on 5 boards?

Response: We have clarified it in line 198, we used 5 boards as an example, and then discussed the conditions that in large scales.

 

Comment 23: Line 181: What standards do you refer to?

Response: We have clarified it in line 181.

 

Comment 24: Lines 183-185: Could be delated.

Response: Yes.

 

Comment 25: Line 188: To better understand the experiment, 2 subchapters should be added: 3.1. Solid wood splicing board with standardized pieces, and 3.2 Solid wood splicing board with non-standardized pieces

Response: We have added the subtitle according to the suggestion.

 

Comment 26: Line 197: May be is useful to specify the standard used for dimensions.

Response: Yes, we clarified the standard sizes.

 

Comment 27: Lines 201-202: In order to be clearer, it is better to use: In Figure 6b, the small pieces with standardized length after removing defects are presented.

Response: Yes, we have modified the paper as suggested.

 

Comment 28: Line 204: Replace the sentence with: “the number and the standardized lengths of the small pieces obtained… ” In Table 3 replace standard with standardized lengths and number of segments (pieces)

Response: Yes, we have modified the paper as suggested.

 

Comment 29: Lines 206-207: Reformulate the sentence: .. the small pieces were spliced into rows and then the rows were jointed forming a board.

Response: Yes, we have reformulated sentence in line 228.

 

Comment 30: Lines 207-208: Replace “the layout of the plate” by: The surface of the board with standardized pieces was…: width…..Title of fig. 7: Replace by: The layout of wood splicing board with standardized pieces

Response: Yes, we have reformulated sentence in line 234.

 

Comment 31: Lines 211-212: Replace “stitching the plates” by … joining of pieces obtained after defects removing …….and “the final saw plate” with… the final splicing board would have the following dimensions…..

Response: Yes, we have reformulated sentence in line 235.

 

Comment 32: Line 215: Random number (1-5); can it be any number of pieces?

Response: Yes, but as the number of random number increases, the possibility of extreme situations increases, so we chose a relatively small random number to study.

 

Comment 33: Lines 217-220: It is not clear. Please, reformulate and explain better: e.g...different surfaces of the splicing boards were obtained from different number of pieces with defects (20, 50….) and the utilization rate was calculated and was presented table 4…??! Table 4: What represent the figures in Table 4? Do these values have a unit of measurement?

Response: Yes, we clarified the figure in Table4.

 

Comment 34: Lines 225-226 : The figures (60-80%; 80-90%) are not those obtained in your experiment?

Response: Because of the randomness of wood, we gave an approximate interval according to the results, in order to summarize the utilization rate of defective wood in large quantities.

 

Comment 35: Line 231: The increase in utilization rate was higher at 20 than at 100. Can you explain?

Response: Because of the randomness of wood, after cutting out the defects, some of the remaining wood cannot meet the minimum standard, and these boards are abandoned, which is more obvious in a larger number of wood boards.

 

Comment 36: In the discussion chapter, the explanation should have been made related to the parameters actually considered in the practical experiment (number of boards, number of segments after removal defects….etc). What represents 0.83…750…1390 generations in lines 249- 250? Be more explicit!

In figure 9: Add the title of the vertical and horizontal axes. Shortcut method!

A comparison with the current utilization rate existing in the factory where are made panels

from small wood pieces without defects, without algorithm, would have been necessary, if

possible.

Response: We modified the paper in line 278,280,281 according to the suggestion.

 

Comment 37: Line 263- replace sheet by board Lines 263-264; Please reformulate: The scales .. ..were increased??? Probably, it is about the increase of the utilization rate in case of greater number of boards/ or high production volume

Response: We modified the paper in line 291,291 according to the suggestion.

 

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

The discussion section is insufficient and the advantages and disadvantages of the methods used in the industry should be discussed.

there are some problems with the Figures and Tables

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Comment 1: The discussion section is insufficient and the advantages and disadvantages of the methods used in the industry should be discussed. There are some problems with the Figures and Tables.

Response: We have modified the paper according to the suggestion.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx