Effect of Roller Burnishing and Slide Roller Burnishing on Surface Integrity of AISI 316 Steel: Theoretical and Experimental Comparative Analysis

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Reviewer comments 

This paper stated on the “Effect of Roller Burnishing and Slide Roller Burnishing on Surface Integrity of AISI 316 Steel: Theoretical and Experimental Cmparative Analysis”.

1-      The slider roller burnishing is not a new or an advanced method. The method can generate smooth surface on the materials. However, it also has some limitations such as cracks or scratches can be formed on the surface of materials under this process due to the high acting force or pressure.

2-      The researches that related to surface polishing and finishing process should be added. Such as cylindrical magnetic abrasive finishing process or cylindrical polishing process.

These papers should be cited.

(1)   Study on cylindrical magnetic abrasive finishing using unbonded magnetic abrasives

(2)   Fabrication of precision meso-scale diameter ZrO2 ceramic bars using new magnetic pole designs in ultra-precision magnetic abrasive finishing

(3)   Modeling of material removal based on multi-scale contact in cylindrical polishing

3-      The abstract section is well-written; however, it would be advantageous to include more details about the new methods, concepts, results, and conclusions to emphasize the novelty of the technique. The percentage improvement in surface roughness by this the slide roller burnishing (SRB) should be shown.

4-      The Figure 3 is your own image? If not, it should be cited.

5-      The section 3 “Experimental conditions”, It should be “Experimental setup and conditions”. The authors should improve the quality of image in Figure 4. Also, more image of the equipment used should be added.

6-      The conclusions are too long. Use number 1, 2, 3,…4 for each paragraphs in this section.

Moderate editing of English language required

Author Response

See the attached file

Author Response File: Author Response.doc

Reviewer 2 Report

The work seems interesting and can be published after the following comments are addressed. 

1. The authors used theoretical background describing the behavior of the SRB process. However, analytical models conducted on surface roughness alternation of burnishing should be reviewed and it is stated that how much the work is beyond the state of the art. 

2. Please elaborate on how this force adjustment mechanism shown in Fig. 8 works 

English is good enough 

Author Response

See the attached file

Author Response File: Author Response.doc

Reviewer 3 Report

The reviewed article “Effect of Roller Burnishing and Slide Roller Burnishing on Surface Integrity of AISI 316 Steel: Theoretical and Experimental 3 Comparative Analysis” is very interesting, but there are some shortcomings in the work that require improvement.

Comments:

- Figure 2 - in the diagram there is Ra and it should be Ra, "a" is not a subscript,

- the note regarding roughness parameters (methods of recording them) applies to the entire work, in work is Ra, Rq, Rsk, Rku and it should be Ra, Rq, Rsk, Rku,

- the authors mention that pretreatment was turing, please provide information on the technological parameters of turning and the turning tool used,

- line 251 is “Figures 10. Tensile test outcomes: specimen geometry and photo; b. nominal stress–nominal strain diagram and main mechanical characteristics” and it should be “Figures 10. Tensile test outcomes: a. specimen geometry and photo; b. nominal stress–nominal strain diagram and main mechanical characteristics” - a. was added before specimen,

- line 371, the Authors write: “Since there is a positive correlation between the roughness height parameters Ra and Rz ,..”- after all, the Rz parameter was not analyzed, no correlation was checked...

- Figure 15 please increase the scale on the y axis - this is the minimum value,

- Figure 16 - please provide the conditions for burnishing RB over SRB in the description, although they were given in the previous subsections, providing them again will make it easier to obtain the results,

- Figure 17, 18, 19, 20, 21 – the same comment as for figure 16.

Author Response

See the attached file

Author Response File: Author Response.doc

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

The quality of paper has been improved.

It can be accepted.

Minor editing of English language required