Experimental Characterization of Tool Wear Morphology and Cutting Force Profile in Dry and Wet Turning of Titanium Metal Matrix Composites (Ti-MMCs)
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Presented paper deals with machining titanium metal-matrix composites, very modern material belonging to the difficult to cut materials. It is important to know the wear process of tools used for turning operations performed with Ti-MMC. However a few points in this paper should be improved.
My remarks after studying the paper:
1./ Every reference should be analyzed separately and points relevant to the paper should be presented. The authors should not use one sentence concerning a few references like in line 38 or in 45.
2/ Line 55 should be probably like this “with VB higher than 0.3 mm”.
3./ Figures 1 and 8 represent a college student level, should not be presented in a scientific paper. I think that the authors should remove them.
4./ Figure 2 should show the actual stand photo not catalogues photo.
5./ I would be desirable to present cutting data used in text in one clear table. They are scattered through the whole text.
6./ Conclusions are too compact, should be more detailed. The first conclusion is trivial, obvious. Wear process always takes place after the machining starts.
7./ It would be desirable to include some recommendations concerning Ti-MMC machining for the industry.
Author Response
Dear Editor
Please find the responses made to the editorial comments.
Regards
SA Niknam, Ph.D
Corresponding Author
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Dear Authors,
To clarify your manuscript I have suggested a minor revision:
- Line 120 – Table 2 has to be not Table 1
- Line 174 – … TS2000 was achieved in less than 60s, but if you look at Figure 7 TS2500 was achieved in less than 60s, not TS2000. There is a mistake somewhere (in text or Figure)!
- Line 207 – Figure 9. … of insert TS2000, has to be TS2500 according to sign under part a) in Figure 9.
- Line 208 – the same problem in Figure 10. … of insert TS2500, has to be TS2000 according to sign under part a) in Figure 10.
Author Response
Dear Editor
Please find the responses made to the editorial comments.
Regards
SA Niknam, Ph.D
Corresponding Author
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
The paper presents an experimental analysis of the toolwear observed while machining metal matrix composite. The subject is relevant for industrial applications, however it is not deeply covered in the litterature. The results are well presented and the paper has a good quality.
From the reviewer point of view, some element could be clarified to improve the quality of the paper:
- the cutting forces are recorded with a sampling frequency of 12 kHz (line 99), what is the eigenfrequency of the dynamometer, so is it appropriate to use such a high sampling rate ?
- the evolution of measured VB (figures 7, 9(a), 10(a),...) should include markers to see when a measurement has actually been done. In addition, error bars should be provided
- a omment about the repeatability of the results should be made: how many replication has been done and are the results fairly replicables ?
- cutting time ranging from 0,5 to 8 s is indicated (line 94) between the analysis of the inserts. A comment should be made to explain if the wear mechanisms observed in the study can be consistent with an actual machining operation for which longer cutting time can lead to different loads (higher temperature on the cutting edge). Do the authors feel confident about the fact that their conclusions can be extrapolated to industrial use of the inserts.
Author Response
Dear Editor
Please find the responses made to the editorial comments.
Regards
SA Niknam, Ph.D
Corresponding Author
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
