Review Reports

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Dear Authors,

I make the following comments on the proposed paper:

* The linear regression model (Figure 2) does not adequately describe the experimental data. A better regression model should be found.

* The text does not state or describe what Figure 3 represents.

* The fitting curve from Figure 3 in some experimental points does not follow the logical trend of the measured values. These experimental data are better described by the cubic regression equation.
If the authors send me the true measured values, then I can draw them the correct version of Figure 3 with the cubic regression equation.

* Authors should display the names and shapes of the regression equations and the correlation coefficients for each regression equation from Figures 5, 6, and 7.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Dear Authors,

Some comments below: 

LINE 29 , Please explain the “3C” meaning.

 Lines 33-39: The following sentences are really general and without any references: “Therefore, temperature is an important parameter in the rolling process of magnesium alloy, which is directly related to the quality and yield of magnesium alloy thin strip products. If the temperature  is too high or too low, serious surface cracks and edge cracks will occur, and even strip  breakage will occur. It is very important to ensure the stability of rolling temperature and  the uniformity of temperature distribution for realizing the continuous production and  production safety of magnesium alloy rolling.”

The rolling temperature is very important for any material, not only for Mg…so please, try to be less general and more detailed adding some references for any Mg-related problems, such us, if any of high contamination, reactivity with rolling mill tools etc etc.

Line 94, please repeat here the meaning of NAER .

Fig 7: please give comments on the details of the heating contributions: “Frictional contact heat”? “Electric contact heat”? How do you have measured such details? Are the graphs/figures reported in Fig.2 and Fig.9, experimental data or taken from the literature? Please explain in detail.

Line 260-261: Please read and check, the sentence is really cryptic.

Fig.14: please improve the figure quality and layout or remove it. This figure is useful for a Tech Report, not for a scientific paper.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The Authors have really made a heavy revisione. Now it is recommended for publication .