Research on Multi-Physical Field Coupling Simulation of Local Electrochemical Machining
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Good paper showing a combination of theoretical, simulation and experimental work for a problematic application of ECM; however, some issues need to be addressed.
English, grammar and punctuation need to be reviewed, particularly in the abstract and the introduction. Dots and commas are used incorrectly throughout the whole text.
Please review:
- It needs to be clarified if this work is about the after-machining of CRECM or if it is a process on its own.
- Literature has already shown that pure electric field simulation is not good enough for simulating ECM accurately. Please justify its inclusion in this paper.
1. Introduction
- 'kind of large' is not scientific language
- Difference between conventional ECM, local ECM or CRECM is not clear
- Problems of clarity due to English. Please review.
2. Materials and Methods
- Not clear which kind of ECM is being applied. A mix of CRECM and local ECM is used as reference in the text.
- 'root of the machining convex' needs clarification
- Equations on the mathematical model need references
- Values used as constants, such as conductivity temperature coefficient and gas volume index fraction, need justification/reference.
3. Simulation results analysis
- Reference to Formula 16 needs explanation (first paragraph).
4. Experimental verification
- English needs to be reviewed
- The expression 'basically consistent' is used several times, which needs to be clarified and scientific language. Explain what you mean by this phrase.
5. Conclusions
- As above, define 'basically consistent'.
Author Response
Response to Reviewer 1 Comments
We would like to thank you for your careful reading, helpful comments, and constructive suggestions, which has significantly improved the presentation of our manuscript.
Point 1: It needs to be clarified if this work is about the It needs to be clarified if this work is about the after-machining of CRECM or if it is a process on its own. of CRECM or if it is a process on its own.
Response 1: Thank you for your reminder. Local electrochemical machining is the after-machining of CRECM, We have revised the description in the Abstract, revisions are made as follows: " Local electrochemical machining is proposed under this background, which is used for after-machining of the pre-shaped convex structure by CRECM ".
Point 2: Literature has already shown that pure electric field simulation is not good enough for simulating ECM accurately. Please justify its inclusion in this paper.
Response 2: Thank you for pointing out this problem in our manuscript. Electrochemical machining pure electric field simulation is the most classic and widely used, this article needs to explain why it has a significant error from the actual situation, and it can be used as a good comparison object to highlight the significance of multi-physical field coupling simulation.
Point 3: 'kind of large' is not scientific language
Response 3: Thank you for pointing out this problem in our manuscript, we have corrected it.
Point 4: Difference between conventional ECM, local ECM or CRECM is not clear
Response 3: Traditional ECM refers to copying ECM. CRECM refers to a special ECM method, its principle(Figure 1) is explained in the second paragraph of introduction, which is mainly applicable to machining thin-wall rotary parts. Local electrochemical machining is proposed for the precision machining of the pre-shaped convex structure by CRECM, it is a method to process the local area around the pre-shaped convex structure(Initial convex structure), its principle(Figure 2) is explained in the first paragraph of Materials and Methods.
Point 4: Problems of clarity due to English. Please review.
Response 4: Thank you for pointing out this problem in our manuscript, we have reviewed my English, and revised part is marked in red.
Point 5: Not clear which kind of ECM is being applied. A mix of CRECM and local ECM is used as reference in the text.
Response 5: Thank you for pointing out this problem in our manuscript. The topic of this paper is local electrochemical machining, this paper mainly studies the multi-physical field coupling simulation of local electrochemical machining pre-shaped convex structure by CRECM.
Point 6: 'root of the machining convex' needs clarification
Response 6: Thank you for pointing out this problem in our manuscript, we have indicated this in Figure 3.
Point 7: Equations on the mathematical model need references
Response 7: Thank you for pointing out this problem in our manuscript, we have added the references, as follows:
- Wang H, Liu J, Zhu D. A Study of Precision Current Efficiency Curve Measurement with a Casing-Type Anode. Applied Sciences. 2021;11(4): 1425.
- Zhang J, Li X, Wang J, Qiao L. CFD–DEM Simulation of Dust Deposition on Solar Panels for Desert Railways. Applied Sciences. 2022;13(1): 4.
- Li G, Du Y, Yang L. Simulation Study on Thermal Wake Characteristics of Underwater Vehicle under Rotary Motion. Applied Sciences. 2023;13(3): 1531.
- Li Z, Li W, Dai Y. Experimental Research and Multi-Physical Field Coupling Simulation of Electrochemical Machining Based on Gas-Liquid Two-Phase Flow. Micromachines (Basel). 2022(13): 246.
Point 8: Values used as constants, such as conductivity temperature coefficient and gas volume index fraction, need justification/reference.
Response 8: Thank you for pointing out this problem in our manuscript, we have added the references.
Point 9: Reference to Formula 16 needs explanation (first paragraph).
Response 9: Maybe my explanation is not very clear, We have revised the description, revisions are made as follows:" According to Formula 16, the conductivity of the electrolyte is the result of the combined influence of the bubble rate and temperature T of the electrolyte. With the increase of the bubble rate , the conductivity will decrease, when the bubble rate is 1, the conductivity will be 0. With the increase of the temperature T, the conductivity will increase.”
Point 10: English needs to be reviewed
Response 10: Thank you for pointing out this problem in our manuscript, we have reviewed my English, and revised part is marked in red.
Point 11: The expression 'basically consistent' is used several times, which needs to be clarified and scientific language. Explain what you mean by this phrase.
Response 11: Thank you for pointing out this problem in our manuscript, we have added the specific error value, which is expressed as " The contours of the multi-physical field coupling simulation results are basically consistent with the experimental contours, and there are slight deviations (< 0.06mm). “
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
The paper investigated the multi-physical field coupling simulation of local electrochemical machining. It is well presented and is suitable for publication. However, following concerns must be addressed in the final version of the manuscript.
1. Author should include some most recent literature from MDPI journals, especially from MDPI-Applied Science.
2. The English should be revisited and improved.
3. The conclusion must be included with the limitations and industrial implications
Author Response
Response to Reviewer 2 Comments
We would like to thank you for your careful reading, helpful comments, and constructive suggestions, which has significantly improved the presentation of our manuscript.
Point 1: Author should include some most recent literature from MDPI journals, especially from MDPI-Applied Science.
Response 1: Thank you for pointing out this problem in our manuscript. We have added five latest articles from the applied science journals, as follows:
- Liu J, Liu Y, Zhang Z, Wang H. Parameter Optimization and Experimental Study on Tool-Vibration-Assisted Pulsed Electrochemical Machining of γ - TiAl TNM Blades. Applied Sciences. 2022;12(16): 8042.
- Wang H, Liu J, Zhu D. A Study of Precision Current Efficiency Curve Measurement with a Casing-Type Anode. Applied Sciences. 2021;11(4): 1425.
- Zhang J, Li X, Wang J, Qiao L. CFD–DEM Simulation of Dust Deposition on Solar Panels for Desert Railways. Applied Sciences. 2022;13(1): 4.
- Li G, Du Y, Yang L. Simulation Study on Thermal Wake Characteristics of Underwater Vehicle under Rotary Motion. Applied Sciences. 2023;13(3): 1531.
- Li Z, Li W, Dai Y. Experimental Research and Multi-Physical Field Coupling Simulation of Electrochemical Machining Based on Gas-Liquid Two-Phase Flow. Micromachines (Basel). 2022(13): 246.
Point 2: The English should be revisited and improved.
Response 2: Thank you for pointing out this problem in our manuscript. we have reviewed my English, and revised part is marked in red.
Point 3: The conclusion must be included with the limitations and industrial implications
Response 3: Thank you for your reminder. The limitation of multi-physical field coupling simulation is that it requires too much computation, but this is not the focus of this paper. For industrial implications, We have revised the description in the conclusion, revisions are made as follows: " The pure electric field simulation results have a significant error with the experimental results, and the maximum error is 0.28mm and 0.32mm respectively. The multi-physical field coupling simulation results are basically consistent with the test results, the deviation is within 0.06mm, it is proved that the multi-physical coupling simulation can predict the local electrochemical machining results with high precision, which is of great significance to improve the precision of local electrochemical machining. "
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
