Optimization of Induction Quenching Processes for HSS Roll Based on MMPT Model
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Dear authors, here are the comments after reading-going through your article:
The language have to be improved.
The units have to be separated from numbers, for example 0.7mm/s à 0.7 mm/s.
Check the unit denominations w –> W, Mpa à MPa , …
Check the use of: After this sign (:) a Capital letter should be used and after; a small letter should be used.
Spelling of: Koistinen, …Fisk, …
Information about the steel used is missing. Which are the Ms- and Mf temperatures? Which are the A1- and A3 temperatures? How has the steel been treated before the induction hardening? Has it been quenched and tempered and how in that case?
Sample preparation is described very simplified. If retained austenite is measured in a steel in which the austenite can transform to martensite, this should be done step by step (how have the samples been grinded and polished?) so that non-intentional TRIP effect can be excluded.
XRD measurements are described very shortly: How many measurements have been performed for each value presented?
Fig 1: What is Thetal?
Fig 2: What does Fig 2 show? Explain better what Fig 2a) and Fig 2b) shows. What do we see in these figures?
Fig 3: Explain in the figure text what we see in the figures. What are the different abbreviations a-E and what does the interconnected lines show?
Fig 4:Is it simulated values or is it real values from experiments with rolls that are described? Please indicate this in the figure text.
Fig 5: It is hard to understand what Fig 5 shows and what the differences between a) and b) are?
Fig 6: Is it simulated values or is it real values from experiments with rolls that are described? Please indicate this in the figure text.
Table 1: What is the accuracy of measured martensite content, for example 95.46 % ? Is it +- 0.005% and how has this accuracy been ensured? Also the uncertainty in the other figures presented; what is it?
Table 2: What cooling medium has been used? Are the given frequencies correct? This because they are below 1 kHz and most often higher frequencies are used.
Table 3: Are the values presented, literature values (if so, the references should be given) or have they been measured (if so, the methods should be presented shortly and uncertainties presented)?
Table 5: The diameter of the roll is 470 mm. All values over 230 mm for the hardening depth implies double heating of the central part of the roll. Which consequences will this have?
The maximum axial pressure is not described in a clear way in the article. What is it?
The modified Magee equation described in equation 1, 2 and 3 contains something that is wrong, because the exp function seems to have the unit [MPa s]. Exp functions should be unit-less.
The simulation results should be better separated from the experimental results achieved, in order to get better views of both.
Author Response
Dear reviewers and editors，
Thank you very much for your attention to our manuscript with ID metals-513500. After reading the reviewer’s comment carefully, I have revised this manuscript carefully. The revised parts are denoted by using red words. Our incorporation of the reviewers’ suggestions is as follows:
1) The language has been improved.
2) The units have been separated from numbers.
3) The unit denominations w –> W, Mpa à MPa , etc. have been checked and revised.
4) The use of : etc. has been checked.
5) Spelling mistakes of: Koistinen, …Fisk, …have been modified.
6) Information about the steel used has been given at the end of the first paragraph on page 4.
7) Sample preparation is described detailed on page 4 and 5.
8) In Fig. 1, Thetal should be “Theta”. I have revised all these mistakes.
9) Fig. 2(a) is the finite element model of the dual frequency induction process, in which the surface meshes are denser. Fig. 2(b) is the dual frequency induction experimental equipment, which is used to make the finite element model easy to understand.
10) For Fig 3, the meaning of the main effect of each factor has been discussed on page 9.
11) For Fig 4, the residual axial stress values are simulated results, which has been denoted in the middle part on page 10.
12) Figure 5 shows the simulated martensitic hardened layer under the conventional and optimized processes. The depth of martensitic hardened layer under the optimized process is bigger than that under the conventional process, which can be seen by comparing the width of the red zones in Figure 5(a) and (b).
13) Figure 6 shows the measured martensite distribution curves from the surface to the inner part of the actual cold rolling work rolls produced by the conventional and optimized dual frequency induction quenching processes, which has been denoted at the end of paragraph 2 on page 10.
14) In Table 1, the measured martensite content was obtained by analyzing the X-ray diffraction patterns by using Jade 6 software, which could give the accurate results of phase content by using K-value methods, adiabatic method etc.
15) In Table 2, for the induction quenching of industrial cold rolling work rolls, the cooling medium is water, of which the flow and flow rate can be adjusted. So the cooling intensity can be adjusted. The cooling intensity values in this paper are within the adjustable range. Frequencies of coils are selected according to the actual values in industrial production.
16) The parameters in Figure 3 were measured by authors. The measured methods have been described on page 5.
17) For industrial cold rolling work roll, the most suitable depth of hardened layer is about 75mm. So the purpose of this work is to obtain the process which make the depth of hardened layer enough and the maximum axial tensile stress not too large.
18) The maximum axial tensile stress is the biggest one from surface to the inner part of rolls during induction quenching.
19) I rechecked the modified Magee equation in this work. The parameter in the modified Magee equation in this work was deduced according to the dada in Table 1 and the calculated results are correct.
20) For large size cold rolling work rolls, it is difficult to study the mechanical and microstructure evolution only by using experimental tests because of too many influence factors. The combination of experiment and numerical simulation is an effective means for efficient and accurate analysis of the induction quenching process.
Thanks to the reviewers very professional and constructive suggestions for revision, I believe the manuscript has been improved and I hope this manuscript will be accepted for publication in Matals.
Sincerely yours,
Ligang Liu
eviewer 2 Report
Dear Authors,
I found your research extremely interesting.
Best Regards
Author Response
Dear reviewers and editors，
Thank you very much for your attention to our manuscript with ID metals-513500.
Thanks to the reviewers very professional and constructive suggestions for revision, I believe the manuscript has been improved and I hope this manuscript will be accepted for publication in Metals.
Sincerely yours,
Ligang Liu
Reviewer 3 Report
The manuscript contains some interesting results for researchers involved in modelling of phase transformations and heat treatment processes used in steelmaking. It is quite good organized and prepared. Some small corrections in the text are required - listed below.
Line 24 – “… among the above materials.” instead of “… in the above materials.”
Line 47 – “… a’” instead of “… a’”
Line 83 – I suggest to use more general subtitle than “Martensitic transformation model”. Perhaps “Experimental and modelling results”???
Lines 90-97– “2-Theta” instead of “2-Thetal”
Line 120 – Table 1 – Are you able to measure the volume fraction of martensite with accuracy to two decimal places?
Author Response
Dear reviewers and editors，
Thank you very much for your attention to our manuscript with ID metals-513500. After reading the reviewer’s comment carefully, I have revised this manuscript carefully. The revised parts are denoted by using red words. Our incorporation of the reviewers’ suggestions is as follows:
1) Line 24 –“… in the above materials.” Has been revised, “… among the above materials.”
2) Line 47 – “… a′” has been revised, “…a’”
3) Line 83 –the subtitle “Martensitic transformation model” has been revised. “ Experimental and modelling results” is more appropriate.
4) Lines 90-97– “2-Thetal” has been revised, “2-Theta” .
5) The measured martensite content was manually calculated. The diffraction peak intensity data were obtained by the help of Jade 6 software.
Thanks to the reviewers very professional and constructive suggestions for revision, I believe the manuscript has been improved and I hope this manuscript will be accepted for publication in Metals.
Sincerely yours,
Ligang Liu
Reviewer 4 Report
It is a good, interesting and well written paper, deserves to be published as it is
Author Response
Dear reviewers and editors，
Thank you very much for your attention to our manuscript with ID metals-513500.
Thanks to the reviewers very professional and constructive suggestions for revision, I believe the manuscript has been improved and I hope this manuscript will be accepted for publication in Metals.
Sincerely yours,
Ligang Liu
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
The authors have changed and given reasonable comments to my initial reviewpoints, except for 3.
1. The description of the sample preparation is not describing the central parts in grinding and polishing. The reader is interested in which grinding-papers (described by mesh number or final surface roughness value) and which diamond sizes that have been used (in micro-meter). It would be nice if the authors could include this information into the description. The reason for this is that the XRD measurements performed penetrates a few micrometers into the surface and if the grinding has affected a depth that is a certain part of the depth penetrated by the X-rays, possible phase transformation from austenite to martensite can have influenced the results.
2. The number of XRD measurements on each kind of material analyzed is not mentioned. Was it 1 or 2 or more different samples that were measured for each kind of material?
3. The equations 1 and 2 ends up in equation 3 and this has an exponential function that has an unit of [K Pa] Kelvin times Pascal.
ξM = 1 − exp(0.03114T + 393230σm − 1179690σ − 7.91516) (3)
In addition contains the equation 3: One expression describing temperature, two expressions describing stress and one expression being a constant.
The expression for ξM should describe a fraction of martensite, which is unit-less.
The authors should reconsider the use of this modified Magee equation or try to modify it so that the exponential function will be unit-less. and try to express this martensite amount as a fraction without units.
A reference should also be given for where the modified Magee equation has been taken and which modifications that have been performed.
Author Response
Dear reviewers and editors，
Thank you very much for your attention to our manuscript with ID metals-513500. After reading the reviewer’s comment carefully, I have revised this manuscript carefully. Our incorporation of the reviewers’ suggestions is as follows:
1. The mesh numbers of the grinding paper and the size of the diamond polishing paste have been given on page 5.
2. The number of XRD measurements on each kind of material analyzed has been given on page 5.
3. The units of parameters are given on page 7. For the Deform software, the parameters of Magee equation can be input and modified, which has been explained on page 8.
Thanks to the reviewers very professional and constructive suggestions for revision, I believe the manuscript has been improved and I hope this manuscript will be accepted for publication in Metals.
Sincerely yours,
Ligang Liu
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
