Genetic-Algorithm-Based Research on Key Technologies for Motion System Calibration and Error Control for the Precision Marking System

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Your manuscript "Genetic-Algorithm-Based Research on Key Technologies for Motion System Calibration and Error Control for the Precision Marking System" is of interest, and the algorythm is well described. Papers is also logically constructed and all figures are relevant. 

In your introduction, I suggest that you could cite this reference paper: Oliver WC, Pharr GM. An improved technique for determining hardness and elastic modulus using load and displacement sensing indentation experiments. Journal of Materials Research. 1992;7(6):1564-1583. doi:10.1557/JMR.1992.1564 

In the reference list, I suggest the authors provide the corresponding of all articles cited in the list, when available and use the MDPI style.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Please see in the attachment. 

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This paper presents a genetic-algorithm-based approach for motion system calibration and error control in precision marking systems, demonstrating significant engineering value. The manuscript is well-structured with clear logic and comprehensive experimental validation.

 

Revision suggestions:

1.The conclusion section should better highlight engineering application value to enhance guidance for practical production applications. The current Conclusion is largely a summary of achievements. Replace the last four sentences with a concise “how-to” paragraph that a production engineer can copy verbatim.

2. List the three calibration steps in the order they must be executed (such as, axis-orthogonality–PM-OM extrinsic – plane fit).
3. Give the exact force window for each nominal mark size (1 µm: 1.9–2.3 mN, 2 µm: 10.2–10.6 mN, 3 µm: 24–25 mN) and (iv) specify the environmental envelope (20 ± 1 °C, 45–55 % RH).  This single paragraph will immediately tell factory readers whether the method is transferable to their floor.

4.The composite Z-axis motion and indentation unit diagram in Fig. 2 is clearly labeled, but dimensional annotations are recommended to help readers understand proportional relationships.

5.Unit symbol format should be unified with spaces added between variables and units to meet academic writing standards.“Fig. 9. Array morphology of 1, 2 and 3 µm markers produced at 1.9–2.3 mN, 10.2–10.6 mN and 24–25 mN, respectively.”

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf