Development of Elastoplastic-Damage Model of AlFeSi Phase for Aluminum Alloy 6061

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

I have serious concerns about the results and their interpretation, also most of the results about the properties of AlFeSi are simply calculations using JMatPro, thus no original contribution.

Overall, I am not willing to comment on the whole manuscript in detail, just give a few issues:

Fig.2: I suppose these are equilibrium calculations for a composition Al86.1Fe8.3Si5.6 (it is not explicitly written). Then, we see that over a wide range of T we have three phases in equilibrium (what is Al in the diagram?  Should be fcc-Al).  Thus, it is a phase mixture for this specific composition, it has almost nothing to do with AlFeSi in A6061. I suppose above 620°C we see melting, not dissolution.

Could you verify that both, alpha and beta-AlFeSi are present in A6061?

Consequently, the computed properties in Fig. 3 are those for the phase mixture and the steep changes above 620C are also related to melting and are not a property change of any of the single phases.

The experimental study in chapter 4 is also for a phase mixture, i.e. a multiphase structure. In order to allow a proper interpretation, the microstructure needs to be characterised, in particular one has to check whether the phase fractions correspond to the calculated ones. Overall, it is rather a new material and has no direct relation to AlFeSi-precipitates in A6061.

 

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

1. In my opinion the work can be published, although I have a justified doubts about the possibility of using the results of the scratch experiment to create the model of precision cutting processes
2. As every experimental model, the J-C model it is of little use for modeling precision cutting processes. The effects of this cutting are influenced by too many factors related not only to the material, but also to the machine, tool, cutting conditions, etc., hence the constants in the J-C equation determined in the scratch experiment are subject to high uncertainty

3. The scratch speed was 5 mm / s (line 234). On what basis was the speed in the scratch test taken? Did the authors check what the results would be for other speeds?

4. The authors should measure and put in the work the radius of the tool edges, it is very important for precision machining, assuming a radius value of zero is too much of a simplification. The cutting forces, the possibility of grooving and surface roughness strongly depend on the value of this radius, and in particular the ratio of the depth of cut to the radius of the cutting edge of the tool

5. It is not clear how the authors determined the maximum error of force between the simulation results and the experimental results at the level of 6.5%, this requires clarification, including the definition of the probability level on which this error was estimated

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Dear Authors,

The manuscript is very interesting for the publication in the Metals, the results are clearly presented, however I have a few minor comments for the author:

1. In the Title Alfesi is not written properly, it should be AlFeSi.
2. Please provide the version, name, and location of the manufacturer for ALL software programs used in this paper.
3. The axis labelling in the Figures is not unique in all figures. Please uniform.
4. The numbers and units must include space. Please correct through the hole manuscript. With the except of %.
5. References are not written according the Instructions for Authors.
6. Grammar corrections are needed.
7. Figure 12 is low resolution and poor visibility.

I am attaching the manuscript, whereas I marked quite a few corrections. Please induce them through the whole manuscript.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf