The Nb-V-Ti-N-C System Microelements Coupling Precipitation Behavior and Its Effects on Properties in High Strength Naval Steel
, Zidong Wang 1,3 and Hao Tang 1
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
- The title of the article should be corrected
- Throughout the text, there are long sentences that need to be rewritten
- The flowchart of the process and calculations should include the “materials and methods” section.
- In the abstract, the term "etc." should not be brought up.
- The following sentence is long and difficult to understand. It must be rewritten: ”The thermodynamic analysis results show that the solid solution amount of each microelement decreases as the temperature decreases in high-strength naval steel, and the complete solution temperature TAN was 1506.39℃ for N1 steel, while the complete solution temperature TAN was 1628.74℃ for N2 steel. 116.69℃ higher than the corresponding liquidus temperature of 1512.05℃, and the carbonitrides formed in the metal melt, therefore, the carbonitrides with micro-particles in this steel, and the carbonitrides with nano-particles in N1 steel.”
- Please provide a more complete explanation regarding the following sentence.
- Thermal insulation held for about 1 min after all the pure Ti wires were completely reacted.
- Figure 2(e): The expression in the figure is incomplete: ”granular bath”
- In the "Conclusion" section, the authors should present more quantitative data as the main results of the research study rather than just some qualitative data.
The literature review is not sufficient and authors must review and cite more papers in the field of correlation between chemical composition and mechanical properties and especially newly published ones. Doing this, reviewing the following refs could be helpful:
[a] Neural Network World, 23, 2013, 351-367.
[b] Journal of Mining and Metallurgy, Section B: Metallurgy, 51, 2015, 173-178.
Author Response
Response to the Reviewers’ comments on paper of
metals-2051846
“The Nb-V-Ti-N-C system microelements coupling precipitation behavior and its effects on properties in high strength naval steel l”
Dear reviewers:
Thank you very much for your careful review and constructive suggestions with regard to our manuscript “The Nb-V-Ti-N-C system microelements coupling precipitation behavior and its effects on properties in high strength naval steel”. Those comments are helpful for authors to revise and improve our paper. We have studied comments carefully and tried our best to revise and improve the manuscript and made great changes in the manuscript according to the referees′ good comments. Revised portion is marked in red in the paper. The main corrections in the paper and the responds to the reviewer’s comments are as flowing. We appreciate for Editors/Reviewers’ warm work earnestly, and hope that the corrections will meet with approval. Please feel free to contact us with any questions and we are looking forward to your consideration. We would like to express our great appreciation to you and reviewers for comments on our paper. Looking forward to hearing from you.
Merry Christmas.
Thank you and best regards.
Yours sincerely.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
The reviewed manuscript entitled “The effects on properties by the micro/nano particles in Nb-V-Ti-N-C system high strength naval steel” investigates the effects of micro/nano particles addition on the microstructure, mechanical properties and corrosion resistance of Nb-V-Ti-N-C high strength naval steels system with different titanium contents. The article is made at a good scientific and technical level, and its practical significance is beyond doubt. In order to improve the readability and clarity of the manuscript, some major concerns need to be addressed before the paper is to be processed further:
1- In the abstract, try to avoid the detailed findings and undefine abbreviations (L22-23) and replace by some quantitative brief results.
2- Please correct the citation sequence in the introduction part, it is totally messy.
3- Please demonstrate in the introduction of the paper, the novelty of this research in relation to other thematically similar research papers.
4- Table 1: The base matrix element must be added, with weight percentage “balance”.
5- L101: According to which standard the tensile test was performed and the dimension of the samples were selected.
6- Figures 1&2, SEM: Please provide the original SEM images with the original scale bar and other printed information.
7- Figure 5, EDS: Please attach the elemental analysis results on the same graph as percentages of each element in the pattern.
8- Figure 6: Use sub numbering for each graph in the same figure. Moreover, for better comparison, combined each property for (N1 & N2) in the same graph, i.e: Tensile strength for both N1 & N2 in one graph and same for the yield strength, exactly as you did in the elongation (figure 6.c).
9- Figure 6.a: Why the difference between tensile strength and yield strength is huge at 400 and 700 oC only? Discussion is lack of scientific explanation for the obtained results. Authors should attribute the results achieved to a clear scientific reason.
10- 3.3 Corrosion resistance: Please include Tafel parameters, corrosion rate and equivalent circuit.
11- Conclusion needs some quantitative results.
12- The English language used in the paper is to be revised and improved before the subsequent manuscript submission. Please, read the text carefully before the next submission of the paper.
Author Response
Response to the Reviewers’ comments on paper of
metals-2051846
“The Nb-V-Ti-N-C system microelements coupling precipitation behavior and its effects on properties in high strength naval steel l”
Dear reviewers:
Thank you very much for your careful review and constructive suggestions with regard to our manuscript “The Nb-V-Ti-N-C system microelements coupling precipitation behavior and its effects on properties in high strength naval steel”. Those comments are helpful for authors to revise and improve our paper. We have studied comments carefully and tried our best to revise and improve the manuscript and made great changes in the manuscript according to the referees′ good comments. Revised portion is marked in red in the paper. The main corrections in the paper and the responds to the reviewer’s comments are as flowing. We appreciate for Editors/Reviewers’ warm work earnestly, and hope that the corrections will meet with approval. Please feel free to contact us with any questions and we are looking forward to your consideration. We would like to express our great appreciation to you and reviewers for comments on our paper. Looking forward to hearing from you.
Merry Christmas.
Thank you and best regards.
Yours sincerely.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
The revised manuscript is acceptable.
Author Response
Response to the Reviewers’ comments on paper of metals-2051846
“The Nb-V-Ti-N-C system microelements coupling precipitation behavior and its effects on properties in high strength naval steel”
Dear reviewers:
Thank you very much for your careful review and constructive suggestions with regard to our manuscript “The Nb-V-Ti-N-C system microelements coupling precipitation behavior and its effects on properties in high strength naval steel”. Those comments are helpful for authors to revise and improve our paper. We have studied comments carefully and tried our best to revise and improve the manuscript and made great changes in the manuscript according to the referees′ good comments. Revised portion is marked in red in the paper. The main corrections in the paper and the responds to the reviewer’s comments are as flowing. We appreciate for Editors/Reviewers’ warm work earnestly, and hope that the corrections will meet with approval. Please feel free to contact us with any questions and we are looking forward to your consideration. We would like to express our great appreciation to you and reviewers for comments on our paper. Looking forward to hearing from you.
Merry Christmas.
Thank you and best regards.
Yours sincerely.
Review Report (Round 2)
Comments and Suggestions for Authors
The revised manuscript is acceptable.
Answer: Thank you very much for your careful review and making positive suggestions with regard to our manuscript.
All the revisions are made in highlighted font so that the reviewer can easily view the changes. If there is any problem, please do not hesitate to contact me by any of the following methods. Thank you very much.
E-mail: wangyanlin921@ustb.edu.cn
Telephone: +86 10 8237 6048
Looking forward to your reply,
Sincerely yours,
Yanlin Wang
Reviewer 2 Report
The revision is satisfactory and the authors have provided amendments to 80% from the suggested queries. Still some major corrections need to be addressed:
1- Figure 6, SEM: For fair comparison, all images must be taken at the same magnification. Moreover, why there’s a repetition for the 795 N; image (a) and (d)?
2- The EDS figure 6.e is useless without the elemental percentages. It has been used to proof the high Ti concentration in the selected position, while there’s no EDS values for the other areas where is the Ti is within the normal concentration.
3- In the previous comment #9: I understand that there’s a conducting in-depth research is going on, but at least a simple and reasonable explanation for that strange behavior is need to be added to the text.
4- In the previous comment #8: authors reply was: “Answer 8: Thank you for your suggestion. we have made a correction according to the reviewer’s advice.” But no corrections have been done. Authors should know that these corrections will help resolving the issue in the above comment# 3 as well.
Author Response
Response to the Reviewers’ comments on paper of metals-2051846
“The Nb-V-Ti-N-C system microelements coupling precipitation behavior and its effects on properties in high strength naval steel”
Dear reviewers:
Thank you very much for your careful review and constructive suggestions with regard to our manuscript “The Nb-V-Ti-N-C system microelements coupling precipitation behavior and its effects on properties in high strength naval steel”. Those comments are helpful for authors to revise and improve our paper. We have studied comments carefully and tried our best to revise and improve the manuscript and made great changes in the manuscript according to the referees′ good comments. Revised portion is marked in red in the paper. The main corrections in the paper and the responds to the reviewer’s comments are as flowing. We appreciate for Editors/Reviewers’ warm work earnestly, and hope that the corrections will meet with approval. Please feel free to contact us with any questions and we are looking forward to your consideration. We would like to express our great appreciation to you and reviewers for comments on our paper. Looking forward to hearing from you.
Merry Christmas.
Thank you and best regards.
Yours sincerely.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 3
Reviewer 2 Report
The paper has now significantly improved. All the comments are carefully addressed, and there is no need for further revisions. The paper can be accepted in the current form.
