Online Monitoring and Control of Butt-Welded Joint Penetration during GMAW

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

 

The manuscript presents an experimental study in online visual inspection of weld bead geometry (width) in gas metal arc welding applications.

In general terms, the idea and results from the manuscript are solid, and its contents fit well within the scope of the journal. My suggestions and comments for further improving the manuscript are as follows,

1)       The first paragraph of Chapter 1 could use some sentences for focusing the overall work in arc welding processes as a way of distinguishing it from other welding processes used for obtaining butt joints such as laser or electron beam welding.

2)       Please include in Chapter 2.1 the transfer mode used in the welding power source. The material alloys of the welding wire and substrate would also be a good inclusion.

3)       The paragraph presented before Fig. 3 should be rewritten because some topics are left unclear. For instance, what to the authors mean by ‘rectangular butt plate’ or ‘morphological operations’. I suggest including some of these terms as captions in Fig. 3 to help understanding the overall procedure for measuring the bottom weld bead.

4)       Can the overall experimental procedure for analyzing the geometry of weld beads made using partial penetration?

5)       Please add the acquisition frame rate of the camera (for instance after equation 1).  

6)       Please clarify what do you mean by ‘gradient disappearance or explosion may occur’ in Chapter 3.

7)       How were the target values disclosed in Figure 5 obtained?

8)       Is the thermal efficiency coefficient of equation 4 constant throughout all parameter changes taking place during the experiments?

9)       Please improve the quality of the top photograph (surface) included in Figure 7. Is that a single bevel groove?

10)    All in all, the photographs and width vs. length plots presented in chapter 5 look quite good. However, no comments regarding thermal and metallurgical based defects are given. Did the authors notice any presence of distortions on the stainless steel plates, or undercuts/overlaps on the top region of the butt weld bead? Maybe some photographs of the overall plates highlighting the quality of butt welds would improve the scientific soundness of the experimental work.

 

 

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

The paper entitled “Online monitoring and control of butt welded joint penetration during GMAW" develops real-time a control method, the welding current is changed to monitor and control the bottom weld width.  From my point of view, the topic is of interest, some comments:

·        A graphical abstract would add interest to catch the eye

·        Please put in the abstract some quantifiable result that adds visibility to the paper.

·        The article should refer to recent work on monitoring that is related to the topic raised:

o   https://doi.org/10.1016/j.measurement.2021.110452

o   https://doi.org/10.3390/s16091500

·        From 190-194 format is not correct.

·        Future guidelines would do well to include references to their application in the control of WAAM additive manufacturing technology.

·        The quality of the experimental work is good, although it would be good to increase the number of experiments in view of the promising methodology.

·        Closing the control loop to make an on-line correction of the process would be of interest.

·        The conclusions could be enriched and presented in bullet format.

These comments are intended to improve an overall interesting and ready to publish paper.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf