Analyzing SPIF Product Characteristics Using Full Factorial Design-Integrated PCA Approach

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The topic of the paper is the analysis and evaluation of Single-Point Incremental Forming (SPIF) process parameters using Principal Component Analysis (PCA) technique. The involved inputs are tool diameter, feed rate, step size and sheet thickness, while 15 output parameters were considered for characterizing the process and workpiece properties from experiments. PCA has been proved a suitable and appropriate tool for this purpose. The elaborated new method is correctly demonstrated offering detailed description of calculation steps and evaluation of results. Authors underline that the proposed PCA achieves better performance than other multivariate methods.

Some remarks for Authors:

R81: Table 2. Nechanical… Maybe Mechanical?

R83: Elongation at Break A (mm) ??? It is characterized by % of elongation

R145: an accuracy of 2 meters ??? Maybe μm?

R173: (b) circularity hysteresis ??? Please find a more appropriate word (for example deviation)

R204 and 210: Figure 4. title of figure is repeated twice, it is not necessary in the text

R254: (Ra and Rt (m). ??? Maybe μm? See values of Table 4.

R255: maximum principal stress (MPS (MPa)) How was this stress calculated? Please submit more information about the procedure.

R259: normalized values will be used ??? Which form of normalizing data was used?

R284 Table 4. All units of measured values must be displayed in the first row (for example units of forces – maybe kN?)

R311: Figure 5. Scrre plot ??? Maybe scree plot?

R313-329: Row numbers in the table

R331: Figure 6: unnecessary copy!

R421: side angel error ??? Maybe angle?

These remarks show that after successful research authors have not enough energy to elaborate perfectly the manuscript, it should be corrected.

Author Response

Please see the attachment. 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

The authors presented an article «Analyzing SPIF Product Characteristics using Full Factorial Design Integrated PCA Approach ». The authors are advised to consider the following comments for this paper.

 

·       Abstract

The abstract need to be improved. Please provide the main quantitative and qualitative research core findings. Demonstrate in the abstract novelty, practical significance. Briefly list the input and output parameters of the research.

·       Introduction

Seemingly, a comprehensive literature review was given. However, they were just summarized one- by-one. The authors have to stop after writing each example and think about the contributions and lack of knowledge for each paper. After that, in the final lines of the introduction give the blank spots of the topic. Then it will be clear what did authors make differently from the open literature. More references should be included in the reference. Some key references were studied in several paper as follows: (I) Experimental investigation of the effect of specially manufactured blank (SMB) materials on deep drawing,  (II) Investigation into the formability of Al-1050 tailor-welded blanks with antilock braking system. In the last paragraph of the introduction section; What is the scientific novelty of the paper? What is the practical value? What makes this approach different from other researchers? Please specify. Gap and significance of the work must be included.

·       2 Materials and Methods

What are the standards used in the tests?

Please provide more detailed basis and reference for selecting process parameters and their levels. Please specify.

Please explain why you used this material.

·       3 Results and Discussion

It is useful to add explanations of parameters to the results obtained. At least five sentences for each Figures. The results obtained should be explained by supporting the literature.

How many repetitions were the experiments performed?

·       Conclusion

The Conclusion need to be improved. The results are written long. It is necessary to more clearly show the novelty of the article. Add qualitative and quantitative results of your work. What is the difference from previous work in this area? Show practical relevance. What are the differences from previous works?

Suggestions should be made to increase the studies to be done in this field in conclusion section.

·       The effects of process parameters should be briefly discussed

·       Parameters and levels used in similar studies should be specified

·       “Literature and preliminary experiments were used to select these levels” a reference to the sentence should be added.Tablo 6 ilk sutünda yer alan sayılar yazı ile içi içe geçmiş.

·       The following articles can be added to the study.

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40032-015-0203-z

http://op.niscpr.res.in/index.php/IJEMS/article/view/45925

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2238785415000071

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0924013607002853

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40032-015-0203-z

·       Table 1 shows the chemical composition of the Al material. I think one of the columns was determined using by a SPECTRO- 73 MAXx, it is not specified whether the other column was requested by the manufacturer. Also, if one of the columns is manufacturer's data, a citation is required.

·       In Figure 1 a, different color can be used for the text. The color used makes it difficult to read.

·       Figure 1 d final shape should have a clearer picture (at the author's discretion).

·       Figure 6 has been added twice. One should be removed.

·       In Table 4, the experiments are given with two repetitions. What is the purpose of this. If it is to increase accuracy, the average should have been given and three repetitions should have been done.

·       - Figure 7 is missing, the author is advised to be more careful in this regard and to revise the manuscript thoroughly.

·       - Figure 8 not mentioned in the text.

·       More attention should be paid to table styles and arrangements (table 3 and table 6).

 

 

Author Response

See the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

The author investigated the effects of four process parameters, namely, tool diameter, feed rate, step size and sheet thickness, on the characteristics of the final product. During the experiments, product responses were measured and/or calculated. In previous published work, responses were classified into separate categories. The aim of this paper is to determine the relationships between responses using Principal Component Analysis (PCA).

Question:

1.      There are two same figure in figure 6.

2.      The data source need to point out in table 4, especially the column MPST and MPS. How did the author get the stresses and strains data.

Author Response

See the attachment. 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

The study is suitable for publication after corrections