Optimization of the Flow of Parts in the Process of Brake Caliper Regeneration Using the System Dynamics Method

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Please explain FIFO shortcut.

Name of the Figure 4 is in Polish language.

In the following text use commas to separate paragraphs.

"- Body
- Brake caliper piston
- Lever, bracket and spring (in the case of Handbrake),
- Air vent  ,"

Additional comments:

AD1. The main question is optimization of brake caliper remanufacturing (recovery process), like I answered in the review. The issue is topical, the use of the SD method in the process of surface regeneration is new. Basically, it is about improving the quality of the recovery process. The main question is the possibilities of optimizing the process.

AD2. Yes, original and necessary from the point of view of sustainability (...maybe also suitable for SUSTAINABILITY MDPI Journal).

AD3. The research adds value to the subject area by providing a detailed breakdown of each phase of the regeneration process, incorporating surface regeneration, quality control, and employing the System Dynamics method for modeling in Vensim software. This approach offers a unique perspective compared to other published material.

AD4. Regarding the methodology, the authors might consider providing more information on the specific parameters used in the System Dynamics method and modeling. Additionally, further details on the selection criteria for automatic transport devices and the considerations for determining the optimal batch size....

AD5. The conclusions appear to be consistent with the evidence and arguments presented. To strengthen the paper, the authors could provide more explicit connections between the key findings and their implications for optimizing the refurbishment process in the automotive industry. The authors might consider providing more details on the limitations of the System Dynamics method in the context of their study.

AD6. References are adequate.

AD7. Figures and tables are understandable. I don't know, if the process diagrams will be readable at this resolution in the final version.

Author Response

Dear Madam / Dear Sir,

We would like to thank you very much for your effort put into reviewing our paper and all very valuable remarks which gave us opportunity to improve it. Taking into account all received remarks we made necessary improvements directly in the manuscript. All responses to received questions we present in the table below.

Yours faithfully,

Authors

Reviewer 2 Report

The topic of the article is relevant because optimization of production processes, including supply chains, is the basis for increasing the economic efficiency of any production.

A positive aspect of the publication is the practical orientation of the work.

1. The first section provides an introduction. The problem of restoration production, as well as transportation and storage of children is described.

2. The second section provides a literature review, which is mainly based on modern literature.

3. The third section describes the research methodology. The problem and solution that the authors are working on is described in more detail. Then the characteristics of the products and the remanufacturing process are given.

4. The fourth section describes the process of modeling a line for the restoration of parts. The initial data for developing the model and structural diagrams of the production process are provided.

5. The fifth section provides modeling of logistics processes during restoration production.

5. In the last sixth section, which is designated as the fifth, conclusions are presented based on the results obtained in the work.

Notes

1. reference 1 is not in the list of references. Judging by sections 1 and 2 of the article, which contain 34 references, and the list of references 35, there was simply an error in the design of the list of references.

2. Text formatting is careless in some places. There are also some typos.

3. Figure 14 and its signature on different pages.

4. Section designations are duplicated (twice the 5th section).

5. The structure of the article as a whole is ambiguous. The introduction and overview could be combined. It would also be possible to combine sections 3 and 4, since they are more methodological.

General conclusion about the article:

Despite the comments, the article is written quite well. The illustrations are high quality and clear. The tables provide the necessary quantitative information.

Author Response

Dear Madam / Dear Sir,

We would like to thank you very much for your effort put into reviewing our paper and all very valuable remarks which gave us opportunity to improve it. Taking into account all received remarks we made necessary improvements directly in the manuscript. All responses to received questions we present in the table below.

Yours faithfully,

Authors

Reviewer 3 Report

This paper is well written. Also I recommend it for publication pending minor revisions. My comments in below:

(1) There is no conclusion at the end of Abstract section.

(2) Section 1 the Introduction and section 2 the literature review should be together which reduces the number of pages.

(3) The research is about the industrial engineering field. Did the author used the technique of programming logic controls (PLC). Is figure 8 represents the layout of the stations and cells. Please explain.

(4) In section 5.2 when the author try to eliminate the bottleneck of the brake caliper. I do see in figure 9a the response is periodic while in figure 9c, the motion is chaos. Is the chaos will affect the manufacturing process? Also the same thing for figure 10 and figure 11.  Please explain.

(5) Does figure 14 represents the verification between the simulation results and the experiment procedure?

(6) The conclusion is very long and needs to be paraphrased.

(7) The reference section needs more attention. Reference no. 1 is empty. Reference no. 22 does not have name. The last names of Litwin and Gola have been coming couple times in the reference section. Please be aware from the self-citation.

Author Response

Dear Madam / Dear Sir,

We would like to thank you very much for your effort put into reviewing our paper and all very valuable remarks which gave us opportunity to improve it. Taking into account all received remarks we made necessary improvements directly in the manuscript. All responses to received questions we present in the table below.

Yours faithfully,

Authors