Next Article in Journal
Investigation of the Effect of Filler on Cohesive Bond Strength of Asphalt Mastic Using Binder Bond Strength (BBS) Test
Next Article in Special Issue
Investigation of the Structure and Properties of Molybdenum Coatings Produced by Laser-Directed Energy Deposition
Previous Article in Journal
Characterizations and Kinetic Modelling of Boride Layers on Bohler K190 Steel
 
 
Article
Peer-Review Record

Removal of Wear-Resistant Coatings from Cutting Tools by Fast Argon Atoms

Coatings 2023, 13(6), 999; https://doi.org/10.3390/coatings13060999
by Alexander S. Metel *, Marina A. Volosova, Yury A. Melnik, Enver S. Mustafaev and Sergey N. Grigoriev
Reviewer 1:
Reviewer 2:
Reviewer 3: Anonymous
Reviewer 4:
Coatings 2023, 13(6), 999; https://doi.org/10.3390/coatings13060999
Submission received: 29 April 2023 / Revised: 19 May 2023 / Accepted: 25 May 2023 / Published: 28 May 2023
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Technologies of Coatings and Surface Hardening for Tool Industry III)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

This is a piece of interesting work regarding the removal of wear resistant coatings from cutting tool using the sputtering technique. To improve the quality of the manuscript, minor revisions are required, as follows:

(1) References are necessary for the chemical method (page 1, line 30-34).

(2) Page 2, line 54: Ra=0.005 should have a unit.

(3) Results: since the instruments used in the research have been stated in Materials and Method section, there is no need to repeat the instrument model/make again.

(4) Many many drills can be treated in one batch? Authors may need to indicate the scale up of the technique and its application potential in industry.

Some improvement in English language is necessary, e.g.

"low thickness" should be "small thickness"

"for removal of ..." should be "for the removal of ..."

Author Response

To improve the quality of the manuscript, minor revisions are required, as follows:

(1) References are necessary for the chemical method (page 1, line 30-34).

On your advice we added a reference [4] for the chemical method (page 1, line 34).

 

(2) Page 2, line 54: Ra=0.005 should have a unit.

Yes, we corrected this misprint – Ra = 0.005 µm.

 

(3) Results: since the instruments used in the research have been stated in Materials and Method section, there is no need to repeat the instrument model/make again.

On your advice, we removed in the section "Results" all unnecessary data on the instruments already indicated in the "Materials and Methods" section.

 

(4) How many drills can be treated in one batch? Authors may need to indicate the scale up of the technique and its application potential in industry.

The described setup allows treatment of one tool in one batch. To explain the situation, we added in lines 416-420 of the page 12: “An additional processing of the cleaned end mill for one hour more allows a significant sharpening of its cutting edges and, after deposition of a new coating, obtaining a cutting tool with improved machining capability. To expand the scale of application of the new technique and the possibilities of its application in industry, it is necessary to develop systems for the simultaneous processing of several tools in one batch”.

 

On your advice, we changed "low thickness" for "small thickness" (page 1, line 28) and "for removal of ..." for "for the removal of ..." (page 3, lines 99, 110 and 115)

 

Thank you for the helpful advices.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Respected sir

The manuscript was reviewed carefully it should be revised as follows

In section 2.1 experimental part the unit must be same for all the components

What kind of etchants were used on the drill bit?

Figure 7 a scale should be provided

The following article should be cited

1.       Yang, J., Shang, L., Sun, J., Bai, S., Wang, S., Liu, J.,... Ma, D. (2023). Restraining the Cr-Zr interdiffusion of Cr-coated Zr alloys in high temperature environment: A Cr/CrN/Cr coating approach. Corrosion Science, 214, 111015. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.corsci.2023.111015

2.       Wang, S., Chen, Y., Gu, C., Sai, Q., Lei, T.,... Williams, J. (2023). Antifouling Coatings Fabricated by Laser Cladding. Coatings, 13(2). doi: 10.3390/coatings13020397

3.       Xu, Q., et al., Reversible adhesion surface coating proppant. CHINESE CHEMICAL LETTERS, 2021. 32(1): p. 553-556.

4.       Guan, Z.X., et al., The synergistic effect of P-doping and carbon coating for boosting electrochemical performance of TiO2 nanospheres for sodium-ion batteries. CHINESE CHEMICAL LETTERS, 2021. 32(12): p. 3847-3851.

 

 

Author Response

The manuscript was reviewed carefully it should be revised as follows

 

  1. In section 2.1 experimental part the unit must be same for all the components

On your advice we used in section 2.1 of the revised manuscript for all the components only one unit – centimeter (page 4, lines 134-136)

 

  1. What kind of etchants were used on the drill bit?

Solely fast argon atoms were used to etch the tools.

 

  1. Figure 7 a scale should be provided

Yes, we provided a scale in Figure 7.

 

  1. The following article should be cited
  2. Yang, J., Shang, L., Sun, J., Bai, S., Wang, S., Liu, J.,... Ma, D. (2023). Restraining the Cr-Zr interdiffusion of Cr-coated Zr alloys in high temperature environment: A Cr/CrN/Cr coating approach. Corrosion Science, 214, 111015. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.corsci.2023.111015
  3. Wang, S., Chen, Y., Gu, C., Sai, Q., Lei, T.,... Williams, J. (2023). Antifouling Coatings Fabricated by Laser Cladding. Coatings, 13(2). doi: 10.3390/coatings13020397
  4. Xu, Q., et al., Reversible adhesion surface coating proppant. CHINESE CHEMICAL LETTERS, 2021. 32(1): p. 553-556.
  5. Guan, Z.X., et al., The synergistic effect of P-doping and carbon coating for boosting electrochemical performance of TiO2 nanospheres for sodium-ion batteries. CHINESE CHEMICAL LETTERS, 2021. 32(12): p. 3847-3851.

From Managing Editor Diana Zhao ([email protected]) we received a strict instruction: "Please check that all references are relevant to the contents of the manuscript". After scrutinizing the above articles, we have not found any relation to the removal of wear-resistant coatings. For this reason, we may not cite the above articles.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

This article introduces the process of using rapid argon atomic beam to remove the wear-resistant coating on the surface of workpieces. There are several issues that need further improvement:

1. The Introduction section is not concise enough. The research content of this article is the process of rapid argon atomic beam peeling coating. The current research status of this study and any breakthroughs or innovations in this article should be introduced in detail.

2.The article states that the coating deposited after this process has a hardness value of 2300HV40 and a high bonding force of Lc1=29 N. Specific test parameters should be provided in the characterization section, and the test results (charts of test data) should be supplemented. In addition, the hardness and adhesion results of coatings with the same parameters deposited on the original tool should be supplemented, and compared and explained for analysis.

3.Although the use of rapid argon atom compression for coating peeling reduces processing time to some extent, will the high-energy beam have an impact on the surface of the substrate tool?

English writing should be improved, especially in terms of writing structure.

Author Response

This article introduces the process of using rapid argon atomic beam to remove the wear-resistant coating on the surface of workpieces. There are several issues that need further improvement:

 

  1. The Introduction section is not concise enough. The research content of this article is the process of rapid argon atomic beam peeling coating. The current research status of this study and any breakthroughs or innovations in this article should be introduced in detail.

Summarizing the detailed description of known methods and means for removal of wear-resistant coatings we added in the Introduction: “Unlike all previous methods for removing worn coatings, the innovations of this study are the acceptable removal rate and the ability to sharpen the cutting edges of cleaned tools before applying new coatings” (page 2, lines 93-95).

 

2.The article states that the coating deposited after this process has a hardness value of 2300HV40 and a high bonding force of Lc1=29 N. Specific test parameters should be provided in the characterization section, and the test results (charts of test data) should be supplemented. In addition, the hardness and adhesion results of coatings with the same parameters deposited on the original tool should be supplemented, and compared and explained for analysis.

The original end mills purchased for the experiments were coated with AlTiN. The coating adhesion and microhardness of 2300HV40 were measured before the coating removal. After the removal and sharpening the cutting edges the same kind of coating was deposited. Microhardness of the new coating amounted to 2300HV40, which did not differ from the original one, however, the adhesion was improved. We have added on page 11 of the revised manuscript a plot of the adhesion test (Figure 12), as well as a comparison and explanation of the results.

 

3.Although the use of rapid argon atom compression for coating peeling reduces processing time to some extent, will the high-energy beam have an impact on the surface of the substrate tool?

The main impact is heating of the tools. On page 14 in lines 297 and 298 is written: “The temperature of the end mill, measured during the removal of the coating, not exceeded 700°C”. This is quite admissible for carbide tools. When a decrease in the temperature is mandatory, the discharge current or/and the grid voltage should be reduced. Although this reduction will increase the processing time.

 

Thank you for the useful advices.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 4 Report

This manuscript is the continuation of the previous work of the authors, published in the Coatings 202111(4), 465; https://doi.org/10.3390/coatings11040465. 

Although the manuscript contains some previously published results (considering method of the reducing the cutting edge) it also brings a novelty in a combination of this process with the removal of wear coatings.  

I found the article very interesting and clearly presented.

Author Response

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This manuscript is the continuation of the previous work of the authors, published in the Coatings 2021, 11(4), 465; https://doi.org/10.3390/coatings11040465.

Although the manuscript contains some previously published results (considering method of the reducing the cutting edge) it also brings a novelty in a combination of this process with the removal of wear coatings. 

I found the article very interesting and clearly presented.

 

Thank you very much for appreciating our work.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 3 Report

The author has provided relevant data and is ready to receive it.

Back to TopTop