A Model-Based Approach to Automated Validation and Generation of PLC Code for Manufacturing Equipment in Regulated Environments

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

This work developed a model-based approach to automated validation and generation of PLC code for manufacturing equipment in regulated environments. The authors used MATLAB/Simulink and followed the V-model methodology.

 

The article is properly written and organized. Figures and tables are in accordance with the journal format.

 

Suggestions and considerations for the final version of the article:

 

In line 60, In the introduction section, in addition to describing the article's objective, the work's contributions in relation to state of the art must be listed.

 

The case study presented in Figure 5 (line 269) was modeled using Stateflow and later used the Simulink PLC coder tool. The question would be whether it would be possible to use this methodology to develop control systems that involve PID controllers?

 

Highlight in the article that other brands of PLC can be used to apply this methodology?. Only Rockwell Automation Studio 5000 was used.

 

On line 374, there is an error from figure 12.

On line 386, there is an error from figure 13.

On line 389, there is an error from figure 13.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

The paper deals with A model-based approach to automated validation and generation
of PLC code for manufacturing equipment in regulated environments.
According to the reviewer, the paper is worth publishing at Applied Sciences Journal,
but some corrections are needed and then the paper can be accepted for publication in the journal.
While the authors have made considerable research effort,
the presentation of the paper and the results must be proved.
Additionally make the following corrections to the manuscript:

Comment 1
Line 8
The authors must add the Country (Ireland?).

Comment 2
Extended text editing.

Line 61
model-based design (MBD)
The authors should replace
Model-Based Design (MBD)

Line 130
operations [22], [23].
The authors should replace
operations [22 - 23].

Line 139
[26].    This approach
The authors should replace (delete the extra space)
[26]. This approach

Lines 140 - 141
safety systems [27]
[28]. The
The authors should replace
safety systems [27 - 28]. The

Line 143
(PLC)code in
The authors should replace
(PLC) code in

Line 168
text format,   [44], which
The authors should replace
text format [44], which

Line 235
for common    equipment functions,
The authors should replace (delete the extra space)
for common equipment functions,

Line 284
As  previously mentioned,
The authors should replace (delete the extra space)
As previously mentioned,

Line 332
Modified Condition Decision Coverage .  These analyses
The authors should replace (delete the extra space)
Modified Condition Decision Coverage. These analyses

Line 374
in Figure 12Figure 12 and showcases
The authors should replace (delete the extra Figure 12)
in Figure 12 and showcases

Lines 386 and 389
Figure 13Error! Reference source not found. displays the
The authors must delete the "Error! Reference source not found."

Line 416
product, [54] [57].
The authors should replace
product [54, 57].

Line 428
these issues.   With
The authors should replace (delete the extra space)
these issues. With

Line 436
in [42], [43], [44] , where
The authors should replace
in [42 - 44], where

Comment 3
Line 153 + Figure 2
(see Figure 2)
From 38 => 41 (without 39 and 40)
The authors must format the paper according to the journal's instructions
References: References must be numbered in order of appearance in the text (including table captions and figure legends)
and listed individually at the end of the manuscript.

Comment 4
Lines 197, 282 and 384.
It's not so good to start the sub-section with a Figure without using text.

Comment 5
Figure 6
The authors must increase the visibility of the Figure (especially of the text).

Comment 6
Line 359
All forty-one test cases were successfully simulated,
The authors must give more details for the forty-one test cases (insert a table with data for different cases?).
The authors must give the results for a typical case (simulation and experimental).
 
Comment 7
Figure 11
The authors must explain the numbers (91, 90, 79, 65, 65, 65).

Comment 8
References
Increase the number of the reference papers including (primarily) from MDPI Journals
The authors use 0 papers from Applied Sciences journal / 0 MDPI Journals / 59 papers from journals (References)
Τhe number for papers from MDPI journals
is considered insufficient (in reviewer's opinion).

The authors must format the References according to the journal's instructions.
Journal Articles:
1. Author 1, A.B.; Author 2, C.D. Title of the article. Abbreviated Journal Name Year, Volume, page range.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

Comment in app

Comments for author File: Comments.docx

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

Figures 2, 3, 6, 7, 8 and 12  - The authors must increase the visibility of the Figure (especially of the text).

Reviewer 3 Report

I agree with correction