A Review on Magnetorheological Jet Polishing Technique for Microstructured Functional Surfaces

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

In this manuscript, the machining mechanism, machining device development and process parameter optimization of Magnetorheological Jet Polishing. This research work is interesting and systematic, which provides a helpful guiding significance. Therefore, I suggest it to be published after minor revision. The detailed comments are as follows:

1. There are some formatting errors in this manuscript , such as “line 234-235”, variable parameter “k” and “V” should be in italics. Please check carefully.

2. Why is there a large blank indent on the left side of the document from page two on? Can I delete it?

3. In Figure.6, What do the red balls and border mean? It should be marked.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

This is a review paper on using a magnetorheological jet for surface polishing. Although the paper provides a comprehensive review on the polishing mechanism and effects of process parameters, some issues need to be clarified and revised before the acceptance. Please find my comments below:

 

1)    There are some typos in the paper. Authors should carefully do a proofreading in the revision. For an example, in Abstract: "Mgnetorheological" has to be replaced by "Magnetorheological".

 

2)    The removal mechanism seems to be the same as AWJ machining process. Since the MR returns to its initial viscosity after the magnetic field, what is the specific advantage of MR over that of the typical AWJ in the surface improvement? This issue must be stressed in Section 2.4.

 

3)    Material removal mechanism and related models are weakly reviewed. Interactions between the MR and workpiece surface must be additionally explained with regard to fracture mechanics, erosion mechanism and surface properties. Johnson-Cook and other relevant models must be addressed in the paper as they are commonly used for explaining machining mechanics in the abrasive jet machining processes. 

 

4)    Future trends, prospective applications and challenges of MIJP technology must be written in a separated section placing before 5. Summary.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

1. The authors should addresson the polishing methods using magnetorheological fluids in INtroduction. Then, some advantages and disadvantages of the MIP need to be discussed in detail.

2. Figure 2 should be deleted since it is not related to the MJP in the sense of the polishing mechanism.

3. In Figure 3, MR fluid should be legended and "M" should be described in full name.

4. In Figure 5, what is the Abrasive Particles? This needs to be changed magnetic particles or MR particles.

5. The subsection of (a), (b)...of all figures hsould be clearly identifed.

6. In Figures 13-15, the location of MRF should be denoted.

7. In the Summary, principal parameters mostly affect to the polsing result in MJP should be drawn using a kind of rader chart so that the potential readers can easily understand the scientific contents of the MJP.

8. One thing i want to ask is to the relationship between particle concnetration and nozzle geometry. If there is a report on this issue, please add this point to this review article.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

The paper can be accepted for publication in the journal.

Reviewer 3 Report

No comments.