Effects of TiC on the Microstructure and Mechanical Properties of Four Fe-Based Laser Cladding Coatings
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsAn interesting paper is presented about the study of the effects of TiC on the microstructure, microhardness, wear resistance and corrosion resistance of various Fe-based laser cladding coatings. The paper contains new scientific results, but requires correction, according to the comments made:
1. The title of the paper does not fully reflect its content. Needs to be corrected.
2. Line 74-75: add about tribological studies and corrosion.
3. Add a table for compositions B1-B4.
4. Add equipment used for SEM studies.
5. Line 91-93: explain why these parameters were selected.
6. Line 99-100: From Fig. 1 and 2 it is not clear that the good metallurgical bonding between the powder and the substrate.
7. Line 106: unclear expression “the physical phase”?
8. Fig. 3 and 4 need to be increased in size; as presented, these figures are difficult to read.
9. It is necessary to check the indicated phase reflections in Fig. 4, because some peaks are listed incorrectly. For example, at 72-73 °C the TiC and Ni3Ti peak is characterized. It is advisable to provide the numbers of the corresponding cards in the XRD database. It is also necessary to explain why the intensity of TiC reflections for sample B2 is maximum, and for other samples it decreases, and for sample B4 the intensity of TiC peaks is very low.
10. It is necessary to explain why chromium carbide was not found in samples B1 and B3.
11. For a better understanding of the structure of the deposited layer, it is necessary to present the results of SEM of the transverse section of the coating, especially since when analyzing the results of microhardness measurements we are talking about different zones of the coating. In its presented form, it is difficult to understand the structure of the deposited layer.
12. Line 211: The paper is about microhardness, not hardness. It is necessary to make corrections to the text.
13. Line 231-240: coating hardness depends on all structural components in the coating, especially it depends on the amount of solid phase. The authors remove the TiC solid phase and plot microhardness dependences, talking about uniformity and increased wear resistance. This point is not clear in the paper and requires a more detailed justification.
Author Response
An interesting paper is presented about the study of the effects of TiC on the microstructure, microhardness, wear resistance and corrosion resistance of various Fe-based laser cladding coatings. The paper contains new scientific results, but requires correction, according to the comments made:
Response: Thank you for your evaluation and constructive feedback on our research. Your insights are invaluable for improving the quality of our manuscript. Our study focuses on utilizing laser cladding technology to prepare coatings and analyzing the influence of TiC addition on the microstructure and mechanical properties of four types of Fe-based coatings, aiming to enhance their applicability and service life. We will diligently address your suggestions, as these revisions will significantly strengthen the paper and increase its scientific value. We look forward to your further review and hope that the revised manuscript meets the journal's standards.
- The title of the paper does not fully reflect its content. Needs to be corrected.
Response: Thank you for your feedback regarding the title not fully reflecting the content of our paper. Based on your suggestion and our reassessment of the work, we have revised the title to: "Effect of TiC on microstructure and mechanical properties of four Fe-based laser cladding coatings". We believe the revised title more accurately summarizes the focus and findings of our study, aiming to investigate the influence mechanism of TiC on the microstructure and mechanical properties of four Fe-based coatings, thereby enhancing their application range. If you have better suggestions, please feel free to speak up, thank you again for your comments!
- Line 74-75: add about tribological studies and corrosion.
Response: Thank you very much for your valuable suggestions on our manuscript. Based on your advice, we have incorporated discussions on friction studies and corrosion aspects into the introduction background. This revision now provides a stronger foundation for understanding the significance of our research in surface engineering and materials science. It emphasizes the impact of coating composition and microstructure on both frictional behavior and corrosion resistance, thereby enhancing clarity and relevance for readers regarding the introductory background.
We have added content：However, the addition of TiC tends to have a certain potential difference with the metal substrate, which will form local galvanic coupling corrosion and reduce the corrosion resistance of the material [18-19]. Zhou et al [20] investigated the effect of Ni content in the fusion cladding material on the performance of the fusion cladding layer, and the results show that the addition of Ni element will form a good passivation film and improve the corrosion resistance of the coating and the corrosion resistance of the coating is increased as the content of Ni increases.
- Add a table for compositions B1-B4.
Response: Thank you for your valuable feedback on our manuscript. We have carefully considered your suggestion and included a table detailing the components B1-B4 in our paper. We believe this addition will enhance the clarity and comprehensibility of our research findings. Below, we provide a detailed table according to your recommendation, outlining the composition of each component as follows:
|
Number |
C |
B |
Cr |
Ni |
Fe |
Si |
Mn |
Mo |
Nb |
Ti |
|
B1 |
3.91 |
0.40 |
12.00 |
5.92 |
Bal |
0.64 |
0.16 |
0.80 |
0.24 |
16.12 |
|
B2 |
3.90 |
0.33 |
12.66 |
4.25 |
Bal |
0.74 |
0.31 |
1.08 |
0.23 |
16.12 |
|
B3 |
4.02 |
0.90 |
12.67 |
1.51 |
Bal |
0.95 |
0.12 |
0.82 |
— |
16.12 |
|
B4 |
4.00 |
0.64 |
12.8 |
3.2 |
Bal |
0.96 |
0.22 |
1.38 |
1.04 |
16.12 |
- Add equipment used for SEM studies.
Reply: Thank you for your thorough review of our paper and for your valuable suggestions. We have now included information on the SEM equipment used in our study, specifically the Carl Zeiss EVO18 scanning electron microscope. This addition will further enhance the professionalism of our paper.
- Line 91-93: explain why these parameters were selected.
Reply: I would like to express my heartfelt gratitude to you for taking the time to review my paper amidst your busy schedule. Your suggestions and feedback are highly valued. We have carefully considered your concerns regarding parameter selection. In our study, the choice of specific parameters was primarily based on a review of existing literature and preliminary work. Additionally, we conducted initial experiments to ensure the feasibility of these parameters for our research.
- Line 99-100: From Fig. 1 and 2 it is not clear that the good metallurgical bonding between the powder and the substrate.
Reply: Thank you for your professional and rigorous comments on the metallurgical bonding between powder and substrate as shown in Figures 1 and 2. We appreciate your insight into this critical aspect of our study. Assessing good metallurgical bonding requires consideration of interface bonding characteristics. We acknowledge that Figures 1 and 2 do not adequately support this argument, and we have now moved this discussion to the microstructure section.
- Line 106: unclear expression “the physical phase”?
Reply: Thank you for your careful and thorough review of our paper. We acknowledge that our mention of "the physical phase" on line 106 may not have been sufficiently clear, leading to your confusion. By "the physical phase," we refer to the observed phase changes in the four Fe-based coatings and the coatings with added TiC. We have made the necessary revisions in the paper accordingly.
- Fig. 3 and 4 need to be increased in size; as presented, these figures are difficult to read.
Reply: Thank you for your suggestions and feedback. Regarding the issue with the size of Figures 3 and 4 and the readability concerns you raised, ensuring clarity is crucial for readers to understand the content of the paper. I will adjust the size of these figures accordingly to enhance their clarity and readability within the paper. The revised figures will be uploaded to the manuscript, clearly marked as revised, and formatted according to the journal's guidelines.
- It is necessary to check the indicated phase reflections in Fig. 4, because some peaks are listed incorrectly. For example, at 72-73 °C the TiC and Ni3Ti peak is characterized. It is advisable to provide the numbers of the corresponding cards in the XRD database. It is also necessary to explain why the intensity of TiC reflections for sample B2 is maximum, and for other samples it decreases, and for sample B4 the intensity of TiC peaks is very low.
Reply: We appreciate your careful review of our paper and your valuable comments and suggestions. Your analysis of the X-ray diffraction (XRD) pattern in Fig. 4 points out an important issue, and we have reanalyzed the XRD data in Fig. 4 to make sure that all peaks are correctly and accurately listed and that phase reflections are accurately identified. In particular, a detailed verification of the TiC and Ni3Ti peaks at 72-73°C will be performed.
It says " and for sample B4 the intensity of TiC peaks is very low " This is explained below:
The strongest diffraction peaks of TiC for B2 and B3 indicate that B2 and B3 have the highest TiC content on the coating surface, whereas the weaker diffraction peaks of TiC for B1 and B4 indicate that they have less surface TiC content. This is due to the lower density of TiC particles (4.9 g/cm3) compared to the Fe-rich substrate (7.8 g/cm3) in the molten pool generated by the melting of the powder by the laser beam, followed by the decomposition of the TiC particles while slowly floating up to the top of the substrate in the molten pool, while the lower cooling rate leads to the increase of the localized temperature in the bonding area of the melting zone with the substrate. As a result, TiC particles are more likely to gather at the top of the fused cladding layer.The residual TiC content is higher in B2 and B3. As can be seen from Table 1 powder elements, B4 has a higher content of C and Ni elements, and enough Ni and Ti elements in B4 combine to generate the hard phase Ni3Ti, which promotes the decomposition of TiC, and it is also possible that the uneven mixing of TiC particles and Fe-based alloy powder particles leads to this phenomenon.
It's redrawing:
- It is necessary to explain why chromium carbide was not found in samples B1 and B3.
Reply: Thank you for pointing out the key issues, regarding your question about not finding chromium carbide in samples B1 and B3, and also pointing out the inaccuracy of the analysis regarding the X-ray diffraction (XRD) pattern in Figure 4, we have re-analyzed the XRD data in Figure 4 to make sure that all the peaks are listed correctly and that the phase reflections are accurately identified.
- For a better understanding of the structure of the deposited layer, it is necessary to present the results of SEM of the transverse section of the coating, especially since when analyzing the results of microhardness measurements we are talking about different zones of the coating. In its presented form, it is difficult to understand the structure of the deposited layer.
Reply: Thank you for your valuable suggestion, which is helpful to enhance the professionalism of our paper. Indeed, it should be that by presenting the SEM results of the cross-section of the coating after the addition of TiC, we can present more intuitively the organization composition and structure of the coating cross-section, which will help the readers to better understand the relationship between the microhardness measurements and the different regions of the coating. We add the following: Figure 6 shows the microstructure element distribution of the cross-section of the fusion-coated layer with the addition of TiC. From the element distribution diagram, it can be seen that the irregular lumps are rich in the elements of Ti and C, and almost free of the element of Fe, which can be judged to be the hard phase of TiC.
- Line 211: The paper is about microhardness, not hardness. It is necessary to make corrections to the text.
Reply: Thank you for your careful review of the paper and valuable corrections. I apologize for the misdescription of "hardness" that you mentioned. Indeed, the reference should have been to "microhardness" rather than to "hardness" in general. In order to correct this error, I will re-examine the paper and replace all inappropriate expressions. Your professional and rigorous guidance will help improve the accuracy and professionalism of our paper.
- Line 231-240: coating microhardness depends on all structural components in the coating, especially it depends on the amount of solid phase. The authors remove the TiC solid phase and plot microhardness dependences, talking about uniformity and increased wear resistance. This point is not clear in the paper and requires a more detailed justification.
Reply: Thank you for meticulously reviewing the paper and for your valuable comments. As you pointed out, lines 231-240 are about the coating microhardness and structural composition. Please allow us to give a detailed explanation that we are trying to avoid TiC particles as much as possible during the testing of coating microhardness. The reasons are as follows:
Firstly, the TiC particles remaining in the coating are black in color, and their microhardness reaches more than 1000 HV, which will interfere with our microhardness test results and subsequent analysis; secondly, when comparing the microhardness of Fe-based coatings, the microhardness of the coatings after adding TiC has been significantly improved, which is in correspondence with our experimental conclusions; thirdly, we have detected the wear resistance of the coatings in detail in the subsequent friction and wear tests, and the wear resistance of the coatings has been significantly improved. Thirdly, we tested the wear resistance of the coating in the subsequent friction and wear test, and the wear resistance of the coating was significantly improved, which corresponded to our microhardness test results.
I would like to sincerely thank you for your meticulous review and valuable feedback on the papers submitted for this study. Every point you made was extremely valuable, and they not only helped us to identify the deficiencies in the thesis, but also pointed us in the direction of improvement. Your expertise and conscientiousness have greatly contributed to the improvement and enhancement of our research.
We are very grateful to you for taking the time and effort to review our work and for providing concrete and insightful suggestions to improve its quality. I would like to express my sincerest gratitude to you and wish you all the best, health and happiness in your future work and life.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe paper is well written. There are some minor corrections required.
1. Table 1 should be Fe-based powder not Ni-based powder.
2. Recheck the sentence on page 4, line 139 "Among them....TiC in A2 and A3.....while the TiC content in A1 and A4 is relatively low." There is no TiC in A samples.
3. Recheck on page 13, line 395 "In order to better assess.....are shown in Figure13" should be Figure 14.
4. Add corrosion performance for B samples in the conclusion.
Author Response
The paper is well written. There are some minor corrections required.
Reply: Thank you for your careful review of our thesis and your valuable suggestions, we are also honored to receive your positive comments and encouragement, and I am very pleased to receive your recognition of our work. Meanwhile, your valuable comments play an important role in improving the quality of our thesis. First of all, let me thank you for your positive comments on the thesis as well as your suggested revisions. It is meticulous feedback like yours that will enable us to make our research work more rigorous and better.
- Table 1 should be Fe-based powder not Ni-based powder.
Reply: I am very grateful to you for carefully reviewing the paper and pointing out the critical errors in Table 1, I will immediately correct this section as well as test the full text and resubmit it. In the meantime, we have added the table of compositions with the addition of TiC. I apologize for any confusion this error may have caused you and your readers and thank you for pointing it out. Your care and professionalism helped to improve the accuracy and reliability of the paper.
- Recheck the sentence on page 4, line 139 "Among them....TiC in A2 and A3.....while the TiC content in A1 and A4 is relatively low." There is no TiC in A samples.
Reply: Thank you for pointing out the problem. I value your feedback and it helps to improve the accuracy in the paper. I will make these corrections and review the rest of the paper again to make sure there are no similar issues. Thank you for your careful guidance, it is essential for us to improve the quality of the paper. It has been modified as follows: from Fig. 4, it can be seen that the diffraction peaks of TiC for B2 and B3 are the strongest, which indicates that the coating surfaces of B2 and B3 have the highest content of TiC, while the diffraction peaks of TiC for B1 and B4 are weaker indicating that their surfaces have less TiC.
- Recheck on page 13, line 395 "In order to better assess.....are shown in Figure13" should be Figure 14.
Reply: Thank you for your careful review and correction. On page 13, line 395, "as shown in Figure 13" should indeed be corrected to "as shown in Figure 14". I apologize for this oversight and have made the following corrections. I will also check the use of other figure numbers throughout the text to ensure that the figure numbers cited in the text are consistent with those of the actual illustrations. Your guidance will help us to improve the accuracy and quality of the paper.
- Add corrosion performance for B samples in the conclusion.
Reply: Thank you for your suggestion to add a discussion of the corrosion properties of the B samples to the conclusions. I agree with you that such an addition will make our findings more comprehensive and in-depth. Thank you for your valuable suggestion. We add the following:
(6) After adding TiC, the stable passivation film generated on the surface of Fe-based coating was destroyed by TiC, the corrosion resistance was reduced, and the current corrosion density increased by 28% on average. The corrosion resistance of the coating after adding TiC was ranked: B4>B2>B1>B3.
Please allow me to express my sincerest gratitude and deepest respect to you. Throughout the review process, you have not only demonstrated your expertise and meticulous attention, but also provided valuable feedback and constructive suggestions, which are crucial to our research work. Please accept our sincerest gratitude, and we will continue our research work with more rigor and higher quality standards in return for your valuable time and selfless help.
Thank you again for your review work, we look forward to more cooperation opportunities in the future and hope that our research results will be recognized by you.
We wish you success in your work and good health.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsIt appears that the authors have not proofread the manuscript, as there are a lot of errors and the quality of content is very poor. Please find my comments in the attached pdf.
Comments for author File: Comments.pdf
Author Response
Dear Reviewer,
Thank you for taking the time to check and review our manuscript. We greatly appreciate your efforts. We have thoroughly revised our research based on your comments. For details, please refer to the attachment.
Best regards,
Authors
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe authors responded to all comments. I recommend accepting the article.
Reviewer 3 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe authors have addressed all of my comments. I have no further feedback.
Comments on the Quality of English LanguageA few grammatical and typographical errors in the paper.
