A New Nodal-Integration-Based Finite Element Method for the Numerical Simulation of Welding Processes

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

1. The title corresponds to the topic of scientific paper
2. The topic of the paper is of interest for different fields of activity (mechanical, metallurgical, plastic deformations, etc.).
3. The mathematical component of the scientific paper is well documented and presented
4. The graphic component (graphics and images) of the scientific paper has an excellent quality and is well founded
5. The references includes a large volume and respects the theme of the scientific paper

Author Response

Dear editor,

The responses to reviewer 1 can be found in the attached document.

thanks a lot

Best regards 

yabo

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

The paper discusses about a new nodal-integration-based finite element method for the numerical calculation of residual stresses induced by welding processes. The method is considered useful. The paper is also well written. However, there are some concerns about the validity of the simulation. Comments are as follows.

1. FEM with Q1P0 elements was adopted as reference. Did you validate this model against experimental result? The reason for using as reference was the smoothest of all in Figure 7. In my opinion, the smooth graph cannot be used as a reason to legitimate it.
2. Did you conduct a convergence study regarding the mesh size? Do mesh convergence effect the result of the analysis?
3. Comparisons between results of the models were conducted qualitatively by comparing the stress distribution patterns on the models. Is there any possibility to compare the results quantitatively? Is the magnitude (difference) of the stress not important in the simulation of residual stresses induced by welding processes?
4. Stress oscillations was confirmed from the analysis. Is there any recommendation to avoid this stress oscillation in the analysis?
5. In this paper, nodal-integration-based method was applied on models with tetrahedral elements. If the method is applied on hexahedral elements, do you think there is any advantage to do it?

Author Response

Dear editor,

The responses to reviewer 2 can be found in the attached document.

thanks a lot

Best regards

yabo

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

The paper treats an up-to-date problem the prediction of residual stresses induced by welding processes. It is well written and well organized. I would advise to make the following improvements:

1. Introduction: after the sentence Stresses and distortions mainly arise from temperature gradients and possible phase transformations occurring during cooling. Authors should add an additional literature
2. page 2, line 29: add the steel grade instead “some”
3. The references used are almost sufficient (see p.1) for the paper's issues clarification. However each one (two) of the quoted references should be discussed individually and demonstrate their significance to the work. It is not necessary used four or even six references in one bracket: [10-13], [14-19]
4. page 7, the sentence: The stresses and internal variables may then be calculated at every node in exactly the same way as they are calculated at every Gauss point in the classical FEM, using the constitutive equations of the material. – Add the flow stress equation which was used
5. page 11, the sentence: All the material properties employed are taken from the databse of SYSWELDTM database [30]. The database is not available for all, that’s why Authors should add the coefficient of the flow stress and the range of the plastometric tests.
6. What was a deformation as a result of the residual stresses?
7. There is no verification of the numerical simulation (for example deformation or residual stresses – using not destructive method, for example Barkhausen method). Only such verification will give a direct answer about the accuracy of the FE simulation.

Author Response

Dear editor,

The responses to reviewer 1 can be found in the attached document.

thanks a lot

Best regards

yabo

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

Thank you for your response. The quality of the manuscript has been improved. It can be accepted now.

Reviewer 3 Report

The paper is ready for publication