Structural Synthesis of Lower-Class Robot Manipulators with General Constraint One

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The authors present a study on structural synthesis of lower-class robot manipulators with general constraint, with number of constrains d=1 and mobility ? = 5. The article is well described and easy to read with nice pictures, however, with low resolution.

The review suggests to address the following minor issues:

Point 1:

The introduction should address applications of this approach, for example, industrial robot, medical robot, etc., including references.

Point 2:

DOF should be defined and being used with the same acronym, DOF instead of dof.

Point 3:

All the figures should have a higher resolution.

Point 4.

In Section 5, more information on the computer model should be provided, e.g., which software has been used.

Point 5.

Conclusions should describe how this approach can be used in industry and which advantage can bring to the field.

Author Response

RESPONSE FORM

Answer to Reviewer1 comments:

Point 1:

The field of application has been added to the introductory part of the article. Page2, Heading1, Last part.

The use of such robot manipulators is considered more useful in reducing production errors and ensuring reliability. Excess freedom can lead to over-movements, this is making it difficult to evaluate and control the movement of robot manipulators in certain directions. We also need some overconstrained robot manipulators in medicine that move in the subspaces during surgery. If the movement we need is only the sum of 5 DOF or less than in the system, it would be more useful to build and use an overconstrained robot manipulator for this purpose.

Point 2:

We agree with the comment made by the Reviewer. All corrections mentioned in the article have been accomplished. According to another reviewer's comet, we provided full meanings of the abbreviations "6R" and "DOF" for the first time in the article. Inside of the "Introduction", Page1, Section2 and Line2 and 9. We have shown it in abbreviations in the following sections.

Point 3:

All figures were created using AutoCAD and SolidWorks software. I enlarged the pictures a bit to make them clearer to the readers.

Point 4.

We added information about the software used to create computer models of the overconstrained robot manipulators in Section 5. Physical models are obtained from 3D printing by providing assembly of the manufactured elements. Furthermore, provided axioms are obtained from the result of experimental processes.

Point 5.

In the conclusion, we are talking about the results obtained from the investigation. Also, showing examples for the applications of the designed robot manipulators with general constraint one. Synthesized new types of robot manipulators are presented with their physical and computer models and they can be used in industry, medicine, military, space, and other areas. In order to clarify these ideas, the introduction part provides information related to the field of application. Page2, Heading1, Last Part.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

In this paper, the structural synthesis of lower-class robot manipulators with general constraint one is investigated. This article has some practical significance, but the following questions still need to be explained and revised in detail before published in journal Robotics.

1. What word is abbreviated to ‘6R’, ‘dof’ and ‘DOF’? Here, the full name should be given.
2. The title of the reference does not need to be given in the manuscript.
3. The symbols in the formula should be explained in one paragraph without a comma after ‘where’.
4. The symbols of matrix are usually expressed by bold and non-italic letters. Besides, the symbols of variables are often expressed by italic letters. Therefore, please carefully modify the writing format of matrix and variable symbols in this paper.
5. In this paper, if some of equations are referenced from the existing literature, these specific references should be given. For example, Eqs. (2.2), (2.3) and (2.4), etc.
6. Some typographical errors, such as ‘ 2.1÷2.6 (Line 186)’, ‘Where (Line 204)’, etc.
7. The references are disorganized. Please modify according to the format of references in journal of Robotics. Besides, there are few references in recent years

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

RESPONSE FORM

Answer to Reviewer2 comments:

1. We provided full meanings of the abbreviations "6R" and "DOF" for the first time in the article. Inside of the "Introduction", Page1, Section2 and Line2 and 9. We have shown it in abbreviations in the following sections. According to another reviewer's comet, we replaced the small "dof" with a large "DOF” everywhere inside of the article.
2. The name of our research paper is "Structural synthesis of lower-class robot manipulators with general constraint one". If you are mentioning heading number 2. "Structural synthesis of robot manipulators with general constraint one" it is a different name.
3. We agree with the comment made by the Reviewer. All corrections mentioned in the article have been accomplished.
4. We did not use any matrix method in the article. If you are mentioning formulas with numbers 3.2 and 4.3, they are mathematical expressions in parentheses (curly brackets) for geometric figures. Given "italic" letters using for purpose of the explanation of the coordinates for geometric figures (dyads), and this is accepted in mathematics.
5. We agree with the comment made by the Reviewer. All corrections mentioned in the article have been accomplished. Inside of the Heading 2, Page2, Section2 and Line5.
6. Here we see Table 2, 2.1÷2.6, and means Table2 scheme from 2.1 until 2.6. Others as well Table4, 2.1÷2.6. This form of writing (2.1÷2.6) has always been used in articles in the literature.
7. We agree with the comment made by the Reviewer. All corrections mentioned in the article have been accomplished.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

Review Comment

In this research, the structural synthesis of lower-class robot manipulators with general constraint one is investigated. I think the innovation of the work in this paper is not inadequate. In addition, the written English is poor and the organization of the paper should be improved. Some comments are listed as following:

• In the abstract, the author clearly points out the purpose and premise of the research.
• In the Axiom 4, the author points out that“the length of the links should not be equal among each others”, it's not mentioned.How the author came to this conclusion should be explained.
• In the conclusion, “Synthesized new types of robot manipulators are presented with their physical and computer models and they can be used in industry, medicine, military, space, and other areas.”How did you arrive at this conclusion? In this paper, the author did not comment on new types of robot manipulators application is introduced, and the conclusion is given.

This paper contains some spelling and grammar mistakes that need to be corrected.

Section 1 Introduction:

1. In introduction Para 2, Line 6: The lack of punctuation in the middle of the sentence makes the sentence structurally incorrect. The author should add ' , 'after 1966.
2. Page 2, Section 1, Para 1, The Last Line 3: The phrase ‘described’ should be written as ‘are described’ to ensure correct grammar.
3. Page 2, Section 1, Para 2, Line 4: The author should add ' , ' after ‘requirements’.
4. Page 3, Section 2, Para 1, Line 1: There is a mistake in the use of the verb tense in this sentence. ‘having’ should be replaced by ‘have’.
5. Page 4, Section 3, Para 1, Line 2: This sentence has the problem of using the preposition incorrectly. The author should delete the word ‘of’.
6. Page 5, Section 3, Para 2, Line 1: There is an error in this sentence that lacks an article. The author should add ‘the’ before the word ‘first’.
7. Page 5, Section 3, Para 3, The Last Line: There is a mistake in the use of the verb tense in this sentence. The phrase ‘describes’ should be written as ‘describe’ to ensure correct grammar.
8. Page 5, Section 3, Para 3, The Last Line: This sentence contains the error of singular and plural noun. The word ‘legs’ should be written as ‘leg’ to ensure correct grammar.
9. Page 5, Section 3, Para 4, Line 1: The author should add ‘the’ before the word ‘first’.
10. Page 5, Section 3, Last Para 2, The Last Line: The meaning of 2.1÷2.6 is not clear here.
11. Page 5, Section 3, Last Para, The Last Line: The word ‘legs’ should be written as ‘leg’ to ensure correct grammar.
12. Page 9, Section 4, Para 2, Line 1: ‘locate’ should be instead of ‘is located’.
13. Page 9, Section 4, Para 4, Line 2: This sentence has the error of missing the verb.The author should add ‘is’ before the word ‘as’.
14. Page 10, Section 4, Para 4, The Last Line 5: There is a mistake in the use of verbs in this sentence. The word ‘is’ should be ‘are’.
15. Page 10, Section 4, The Last Para 2, The Last Line 1: The word ‘legs’ should be written as ‘leg’ to ensure correct grammar.
16. Page 17, Section 6, Para 1, Line 4: ‘First’ should be instead of ‘The first’.

Author Response

RESPONSE FORM

Answer to Reviewer3 comments:

• We say thanks to the reviewer for his/her opinion.
• An explanation of the method of obtaining axioms has been added in Heading5, Page16. Computer models of synthesized robot manipulators with general constraint one are created by using SolidWorks software. Physical models are obtained from 3D printing by providing assembly of the manufactured elements. Furthermore, provided axioms are obtained from the result of experimental processes
• Robot manipulators with general constraint one nowadays are widely used in the industry. The use of such robot manipulators is considered more useful in reducing production errors and ensuring reliability. Excess freedom can lead to over-movements, making it difficult to evaluate and control the movement of robot manipulators in certain directions. Medicine also has robot manipulators that move in the subspaces during surgery. If the movement we need is only the sum of 3 or 5 DOF in the system, it would be more useful to build and use an overconstrained robot manipulator for this purpose. The same thinks can be said about robot manipulators which employing in space. The use of these types of robot manipulators may be necessary because less displacement is required and reference elements need to be reduced. This paper contains some spelling and grammar mistakes that need to be corrected. Our investigation is a methodology where each stage is shown to create robot manipulators with general constraint one with its own sequences and results. In our research paper, explanations with tables, proofs with mathematical expressions, schematic descriptions, and as a result, a computer and a real model were created. The application of the vector method, the sequence of transformation from the concept of a kinematic pair to a robot manipulator is also more clearly reflected in our article which we didn`t meet any like that methodology in an article until this time (some methodologies exist which we showed as the references but they are not exactly like that approach).

According to another Reviewer comment, the field of application was added to the introductory part of the article. Page2, Heading1, Last part.

Section 1 Introduction:

1. We agree with the comment made by the Reviewer. All corrections mentioned in the article have been accomplished.
2. We agree with the comment made by the Reviewer. All corrections mentioned in the article have been accomplished.
3. We agree with the comment made by the Reviewer. All corrections mentioned in the article have been accomplished.
4. We agree with the comment made by the Reviewer. All corrections mentioned in the article have been accomplished.
5. We agree with the comment made by the Reviewer. All corrections mentioned in the article have been accomplished.
6. We agree with the comment made by the Reviewer. All corrections mentioned in the article have been accomplished.
7. We agree with the comment made by the Reviewer. All corrections mentioned in the article have been accomplished.
8. We agree with the comment made by the Reviewer. All corrections mentioned in the article have been accomplished.
9. We agree with the comment made by the Reviewer. All corrections mentioned in the article have been accomplished.
10. Here we see Table 2, 2.1÷2.6, and means Table2 scheme from 2.1 until 2.6. Others as well Table4, 2.1÷2.6. This form of writing (2.1÷2.6) has always been used in articles in the literature.
11. We agree with the comment made by the Reviewer. All corrections mentioned in the article have been accomplished.
12. We agree with the comment made by the Reviewer. All corrections mentioned in the article have been accomplished.
13. We agree with the comment made by the Reviewer. All corrections mentioned in the article have been accomplished.
14. We agree with the comment made by the Reviewer. All corrections mentioned in the article have been accomplished.
15. We agree with the comment made by the Reviewer. All corrections mentioned in the article have been accomplished.
16. We agree with the comment made by the Reviewer. All corrections mentioned in the article have been accomplished.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 4 Report

• The key expressions are not defined, and these are not getting explained in the article, let alone the theory of “general constraint one”.
• The scientific background and context of the research should better be introduced. The paper cites only one paper after 2010 and it is a self citation. Newer results (e.g. Bałchanowski:  General method of structural synthesis of parallel mechanisms, 2016, Meng: Type synthesis of parallel robotic mechanisms: Framework and brief review, 2014, Hegedus: The theory of bonds II: Closed 6R linkages with maximal genus, 2015) are not considered or even cited
• The English of the article is from perfect, both in terms of grammar and typos (unfinished sentences, missing comas, etc.)
• The equation between 3.1 and 3.2 contains potential divisions by zero, and that whole part is overcomplicated.
• The notations in Table 1-4 should be standardized to either follow the kinematic symbols of the electrical engineering canon or the mechanical engineering one.
• The 6 derived axioms shall be explained and put into context
• The practical impact of the results is not mentioned in the article

Author Response

RESPONSE FORM

Answer to Reviewer4 comments:

• The meaning of all keywords is expressed in the article clearly, with pictures, resolutions, and formulas. For example,
• the mobility number and general constraint – Headin2, Page2, Section1. We also provided mobility equations in our research paper. Heading2, Page3, Eqs. (2.2) and (2.4). Headings 3 and 4 are dedicated to finding the mobility number and general constraint. Page4 and 9. By conducting analytical computations, we determined the number of general constraints and mobility numbers during our research. Heading3, Page5, Section1, Last Line and Heading4, Page9, Section6, Line5. (As a result, the space mobility number of the studied system is found and the general constraint .)
• Higher kinematic pairs and transformations of kinematic pairs - In the abstract (Page1), introduction part (Page2, Section2), and in the Heading 3 and 4 we are talking about higher kinematic pairs (Page4 and 9). Descriptions of the used higher kinematic pairs are depicted on pages 4 and 9 (Fig.2. and Fig.3.). The transformation of kinematic pairs is shown in the article in sequence and with schematic illustrations. Heading3, Page4, Section2 then, Table.1 and2. and Heading4, Page9, Section7 then, Table.3 and 4.
• overconstrained robot manipulatorThe whole article deals with this issue. In particular, computer and physical models are given in Chapter 5, Page15 (Fig.4. And 5) as a result.

• Showed articles were added to our research paper with numbers 20, 21, and 22. The English of the article is from perfect, both in terms of grammar and typos (unfinished sentences, missing comas, etc.)
• After adding reference information to the article, the positions of formulas 3.1 and 3.2 have been changed.
• All the notations used in the tables are used in mechanical engineering and have been repeatedly mentioned in the journals of the theory of mechanisms.
• Additions were made to Chapter5. All of the provided axioms are obtained from the result of experimental processes. Their explanations is explained in Chapters 3 and 4 and in the tables.
• The practical impact of the investigation is added to the introductory section. Page2, Last two section.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 3 Report

All the concerns have been addressed by the authors. The reviewer has thus no further questions. It can be accepted for publication now.

Reviewer 4 Report

The authors have addressed some of the major concerns of the reviewer.