Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue

Article Menu

Printed Edition

A printed edition of this Special Issue is available at MDPI Books....

Share Help Cite Discuss in SciProfiles

Open AccessArticle

Peer-Review Record

Analysis of the Influence of Segmented Rollers on Slab Bulge Deformation

Metals 2019, 9(2), 231; https://doi.org/10.3390/met9020231

by Qin Qin^*

, Ming Li and Jianlin Huang

Reviewer 1:

Emil Spišák

Reviewer 2: Anonymous

Metals 2019, 9(2), 231; https://doi.org/10.3390/met9020231

Submission received: 26 December 2018 / Revised: 10 February 2019 / Accepted: 12 February 2019 / Published: 14 February 2019

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Continuous Casting)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The name of Table 1 is incorrect.

The dimensions of the slab are given in Table 1 in mm, in Figures 2,5,6,7,9 are given in m. It is necessary to harmonize these units.

Is it actually used in the process of elastic solid rollers?

The vertical displacement of the two-section roller was evenly distributed around 0.004 mm. The displacement of the three-segmented roller in the vertical direction was generally distributed around 0.0015 mm. Are these values really achievable?

Moreover, the stiffness of two-segmented roller was 17.5 times than that of elastic solid roller, and the stiffness of the three-section roller was 46.7 times than that of elastic solid roller. The stiffness of casting roller could be greatly improved by using the segmented roller, which would effectively reduce the bulge deformation of the slab. The effect of the three-segmented roller was the most obvious. How did you determine stiffness?

Author Response

Dear reviewer,

We thank the reviewers for their comments and suggestions concerning our manuscript entitled “Analysis of the Influence of Segmented Rollers on Slab Bulge Deformation "(No. metals-424790). Those comments are all valuable and very helpful for improving our paper, as well as the important guiding significance to our researches.

We carefully revised our manuscript with fully adopted all the reviewers’ comments and suggestions. As a result, the quality of our work has considerably improved. We hope now it could meet the high standard of the journal. The revised portion are highlighted in the revised manuscript accompanying this resubmission. Since all the reviewers’ concern are safely removed, we hope you can accept our revised manuscript.

We would like to express our great appreciation to you and reviewers for comments on our paper. Looking forward to hearing from you soon. Please check the attachment.

Sincerely

Qin Qin, PhD

On behalf of all co-authors

School of Mechanical Engineering,

University of Science and Technology Beijing, Beijing 100083

Email: [email protected],
Phone(o):+86-10-62334106

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comment to Figure 6: x axis title is Distance to narrow center i.e. 0 should mean location of center, but in that figure it is marked edge on the distance 0. Should be checked!

It is a bit annoying that there is a lot of numbers among the text. The numbers should be presented in tables and figures.

The conclusions have repeated a number of previously presented numbers. But, for example, the actual conclusion about the superiority of their models has not been presented. And there is no discussion.

The results are interesting. Especially the idea of a elastic roller.

Some checking may be needed: “Distance to the narrow center” , better could be “distance to the center of the narrow face”