Overcoming Processability Limitations in Al6082 Alloy by Using Laser Powder Bed Fusion of Aluminum Matrix Composites with Titanium Carbide/Silicon Carbide Reinforcements

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The application of aluminum alloys in aerospace is constrained by their low weldability, rendering many of them unsuitable for Additive Manufacturing (AM) techniques such as PBF-LB/M. This limitation restricts the production of intricate and lightweight structures. To address this challenge, Aluminum Metal Matrix Composites (AMMCs) are developed by mechanically alloying the non-processable Al6082 base alloy with ceramic reinforcements, specifically Titanium Carbide (TiC) and Silicon Carbide (SiC) particles. This work deals with this important problem.

POINTS FOR IMPROVEMENT:

1. A GOOGLESCHOLAR literature review by using the authors exact keywords revealed just 2 references. By using the full terms instead of abbrevaitions in the keywords revealed about 1000 published works with more than 300 published after 2024. Please, kindly a) use the full terms instead of abbreviations in the keywords b) complete literature cited and/or the keywords c) explain in detail the status in the area d) explain very carefully your contribution
2. Please avoid using abbreviations without explanation in the title and abstract
3. Please, make a patent literature review for similar methods
4. The thermal and the rest mechanical properties were not studied. What's the effect of the process conditions on these properties?
5. What's the main difficulty of the proposed method for industrial application?
6. Propose ideas for future work.

Author Response

Thank you very much for taking the time to review this manuscript. Please find detailed responses in the corresponding revisions/corrections in the re-submitted files.

     

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This manuscript discusses the microstructural effects of SiC and TiC particulate reinforcements on the properties of the EN AW-6082 aluminum alloy processed via laser powder bed fusion (LPBF) process. Various contents of TiC and SiC particles were considered. The authors believed in this approach to circumvent the problem of solidification cracking of the EN AW-6082 aluminum alloy during the LPBF process. It was concluded that the aluminum matrix composites with ceramic reinforcements are an effective strategy in reducing solidification cracking during the LPBF process.

The experimental campaign is very limited, however, the experimental design is appropriate. The manuscript is scientifically sound. This work can be potentially considered for publication once the following comments are addressed.

lines 35-37: The authors justified the span between liquidus and solidus temperatures of EN AW-6082 alloy by citing the literature: "[...] as noted by Nartu and Agrawal." The reviewer found no references to this statement in [4]. In [4], there are not even any references to EN AW-6082 aluminum alloy. It is suggested to check the accuracy of all references.

Introduction: Add a description of the gap in the knowledge that the study was designed to fill. The description of closely related previous studies, should clearly outline a specific gap in our knowledge or understanding of a specific question in the field. Recent developments in LPBF of EN AW-6082 aluminum alloy have not been comprehensively presented.

Section 2: It is intriguing why composites with only 5 wt.% SiC and composites with varying TiC concentrations were produced. Can the authors explain the genesis of this approach?

Lines 84-86: The authors presented the variability values of the LPBF process parameters. However, it is unfortunately not known what combinations of 3D printing parameters were used. A table with a research plan is required.

All figure captions should clearly state their content. For example, on lines 132-133, the caption should be "(B) microstructure of cuboid processed with volumetric energy density 116 J/mm3" instead of "(B) Example of cuboid with 116 J/mm3." There are many other shortcomings and simplifications in the manuscript that should be avoided in a scientific article.

The graphical quality of Figure 7 is unacceptable. Moreover, the ordinate axis description in Figure 7A is missing.

The authors reported that while TiC is superior for solidification control and crack mitigation, SiC can achieve comparable hardness through different metallurgical mechanisms. Why was the combined effect of TiC and SiC addition on the properties of aluminum metal matrix composites not considered?

The limitations of this study should be discussed.

Other comments that do not require the authors' response:

The cited literature is relevant and current. Approximately 60% of the cited sources were published in the last four years. I found no excessive self-citation rate.

The authors summarized the paper well in the conclusions. The future work are also presented.

The structure of the manuscript is appropriate.

The conclusions are consistent with the evidence presented.

Author Response

Thank you very much for taking the time to review this manuscript. Please find detailed responses in the corresponding revisions/corrections in the re-submitted files.

     

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Manuscript was greatly improved. I am recommending publication.

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

I thank the authors for providing reasonable answers. The manner of revising their manuscript is satisfying. The manuscript has been improved in accordance with my comments, therefore the revised manuscript can be accepted for publication.