Sustainable Manufacturing Process in the Context of Wood Processing by Sanding

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The description of the research in the article is correct and sufficient. I do not make any substantive comments, but I suggest a slight redaction of terminology in the following lines:

1. Lines 34-37. I suggest redaction the sentence (e.g. Sanding as a technology is also interesting from the viewpoint of the tool used which is not susceptible to sharpening and must be replaced after wearing (blunting), therefore sanding is classified as a time-consuming and costly operation [2,4–11]).
2. Figures 1, 2 and 3 could be more contrasting. The choice of background colors and letters is not appropriate.
3. Line 97-98. I suggest change “(..) pressed into lumens of the cells.” Into “(…) partially pressed into cell cavities”.
4. Line 103-104. I suggest change “In to order obtain a quality surface of the workpiece before its final treatment of coatings, (…)” into “In order to obtain the expected parameters of the workpiece surface, before coating, (…)”
5. Line 356. I suggest change “The quality of the sanding means (…)” into “Efficiency of the sanding means (…)”
6. Line 389-390. I suggest change “(…) the belts were either disrupted from excessive overload 389 or their capacity was not utilized to the maximum (…)” into “(…) the belts were either disrupted from overload or their efficiency was not used to the maximum (…)”

Sincerelly,

Author Response

1. Lines 34-37. I suggest redaction the sentence (e.g. Sanding as a technology is also interesting from the viewpoint of the tool used which is not susceptible to sharpening and must be replaced after wearing (blunting), therefore sanding is classified as a time-consuming and costly operation [2,4–11]).

Thanks for your comment, this sentence has been changed.

2. Figures 1, 2 and 3 could be more contrasting. The choice of background colors and letters is not appropriate.

Thanks for your feedback, Figures 1, 2, and 3 have been changed and are more contrasting.

3. Line 97-98. I suggest change “(..) pressed into lumens of the cells.” Into “(…) partially pressed into cell cavities”.

Thanks for your comment, this sentence has been changed.

4. Line 103-104. I suggest change “In to order obtain a quality surface of the workpiece before its final treatment of coatings, (…)” into “In order to obtain the expected parameters of the workpiece surface, before coating, (…)”

Thanks for your comment, this sentence has been changed.

5. Line 356. I suggest change “The quality of the sanding means (…)” into “Efficiency of the sanding means (…)”

Thanks for your comment, this sentence has been changed.

6. Line 389-390. I suggest change “(…) the belts were either disrupted from excessive overload or their capacity was not utilized to the maximum (…)” into “(…) the belts were either disrupted from overload or their efficiency was not used to the maximum (…)”

Thanks for your comment, this sentence has been changed.

Reviewer 2 Report

Sustainable manufacturing process in the context of wood processing by sanding

Comments:

 

 The contribution seems novel, publication in this journal is advisable, after a careful revision taking into account the following comments.

 

A)- Language can be improved further. Take care of grammar deficits and typos in some places.

 

B)- Abstract must be more improved.

 

C)- The novel terms in the physical model pertaining to the current study should be highlighted and discussed. Also, explanations are required for imposition of boundary conditions.

D)- What is the most important physical conclusion making the work publishable in this journal? Mention this physical outcome in the Abstract.

 

E)- Declare the range of physical parameter used in the analysis.

 

F)- Try to comprehend the Conclusions from the physical viewpoint.

 

Author Response

A)- Language can be improved further. Take care of grammar deficits and typos in some places.

Thank You for your comment, we tried to improved English language in all the text.

B)- Abstract must be more improved.

Thank You for your comment, we realized that our abstract was very general and we improved its (we have supplemented specific outputs from our measurements).

C)- The novel terms in the physical model pertaining to the current study should be highlighted and discussed. Also, explanations are required for imposition of boundary conditions.

Thank You for your comment. We have added the explanation of pressure matrix, we specified, that only one pressure (after optimizing) will be used in our experiment for obtaining wear curves, there have been defined the boundary conditions.

D)- What is the most important physical conclusion making the work publishable in this journal? Mention this physical outcome in the Abstract.

Thank You for your comment. Tool wear can be assesed from the viewpoint of the criterion of optimal dulling of the tool or from the viewpoint of the technological criterion, which is the quality of the obtained surface and I think that these two criteria are very closed bound and the result should be good quality of coating and this is the main reason why to publish in this journal. We have got explanation it in the text too. 

E)- Declare the range of physical parameter used in the analysis.

Thanks for your comment. Physical parameter used in our analysis are  the sanding belt working time, immediate efficiency (specific wood removal value) and overall efficiency (total wood removal) of sanding belt

F)- Try to comprehend the Conclusions from the physical viewpoint.

Thanks for your comment Conclusions we supplemented with the findings of our research from the viewpoint of sanding time  and specific wood removal value

 

Reviewer 3 Report

Sustainable manufacturing process in the context of wood processing by sanding

 

The article deals with a very interesting topic related to the reduction of the amount of waste associated with the wood sanding process. This is influenced by both the process parameters, the kind of processed wood and the abrasives used. These aspects were generally well discussed by the authors. Nevertheless, minor corrections / clarifications are needed in the Materials and Methods, Results and Discussion and Conclusions:

• There is no clear information on the number of samples or the number of repetitions of individual determinations.
• No explanation as to why such and not other pressure values of the sanding means were used. The authors refer to other publications earlier, however, according to the reviewer, there should be a short explanation in this regard.
• Throughout the paper, the units should be corrected - it is: kg.m^-3, cm^-2, m.s^-1, g.cm^-2.min^-1, N.mm^-2, and it should be: kg·m^-3, N·cm^-2, m·s^-1, g·cm^-2·min^-1, N·mm^-2.
• The conclusions are a bit too general - they should be supplemented with observations related to the conducted research.

 

Taking into account the above remarks, the article requires a minor revision.

Author Response

• There is no clear information on the number of samples or the number of repetitions of individual determinations.

Thanks for your comment, we have added this information.

• No explanation as to why such and not other pressure values of the sanding means were used. The authors refer to other publications earlier, however, according to the reviewer, there should be a short explanation in this regard.

Thank You for Your comment - The pressure values vary over a wide range of pressures used in practice, but these specific values are given by the weight size, recommended by the designers of this experimental device.

• Throughout the paper, the units should be corrected - it is: kg.m^-3, cm^-2, m.s^-1, g.cm^-2.min^-1, N.mm^-2, and it should be: kg·m^-3, N·cm^-2, m·s^-1, g·cm^-2·min^-1, N·mm^-2.

Thank you very much for your reminder, the unit names have been changed according to your instructions.

• The conclusions are a bit too general - they should be supplemented with observations related to the conducted research.

Thanks for your comment, we supplemented it with findings of our research

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

Accepted