Optimization of Micro-Sandblasting Parameters for Enhanced Adhesion and Wear Resistance of AlTiSiN-Coated Tools
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for Authors
I have some comments as follows:
- What were the authors' reasons for including Figure 1(a) and (b)?
- Please specify the type of experimental design used in table 5. Please clarify how to specify the levels for each factor.
- The discussion of Figure 4(c) is superficial. Please provide a more in-depth analysis.
- Please specify the type of experimental design used in Table 6. Please clarify how to define the levels for each factor.
- What is the method for determining the optimal parameters for micro-sandblasting pretreatment. Please provide a more in-depth analysis.
- In Table 8, the ANOVA results for 'Deviation square' are unclear. Please provide clarification.
- Please specify the criterion for VB in both untreated and pretreated carbide tools.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for Authors
The authors studied the effect of sandblasting the cutting edge pre-coating (PVD0) and analyzed its impact on the machining process. Overall, an interesting and industry-relevant study. However, the following issues need to be addressed:
- When expanding an acronym, do that on the first instance - for example, PVD.
- Add a quantitative statement to the abstract.
- Improve the background to support the hypothesis statement.
- What is the reason for the "Comprehensive Performance Analysis" number? Why are we combining adhesion strength and hardness? Not sure of the scientific significance. Avoid that in a scientific paper.
- Some of the references are missing the details such as volume, issue, etc. example 7.
Overall, good work.
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
Comments and Suggestions for Authors
This study investigates the effect of microblasting pretreatment parameters (passivation pressure, spray gun feed rate, and tool rotation speed) on improving the surface properties and cutting performance of cemented carbide tools coated with AlTiSiN.
The following revisions are strongly recommended to improve the clarity of the article.
-It is recommended that the 3D analysis of the surface topography after sandblasting be supported by an optical profilometer.
-Adhesion strength and nano hardness tests were performed, but no microstructural analysis (phase analysis with XRD, grain size distribution) was performed to determine why these mechanical properties changed. The structural origin of the changes in mechanical properties was not clearly demonstrated.
-A picture of the sandblasting test setup should also be added to the article.
-What is meant by “knife speed” in Table 5? Is this the “cutting speed”? Terms related to machining should be used correctly.
-When examining the ANOVA results, we can say that the statistical reliability of the analysis of variance (ANOVA) performed on the experimental data is limited. Typically, for a factor to be considered statistically significant, the F-value is generally expected to be >4–5 (or p<0.05).
-The statistical significance of the F-values has not been interpreted.
-The p-value has not been presented.
-No critical evaluation has been made regarding the low F-values.
-The paper presents the milling experiment parameters in a largely clear and understandable manner. However, the following elements are missing or could be improved:
-The cutting environment (cooled or dry?) should be specified.
-The number of experiment repetitions should be clearly stated.
-How the cutting process was monitored over time (total length cut, measurement frequency at each step) should be described more systematically.
-According to the micro-blasting shape 3 SEM images, it appears to have caused a change in the tool edge radius. However,
-The edge radius has not been measured (e.g., the R value has not been given in micrometers).
-The magnitude of the change and the parameters that caused it to increase have not been specified.
-The contribution of the edge preparation effect to cutting performance has not been investigated in a separate experiment.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for Authors
-
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for Authors
The authors addressed the reviewer's comments.
Reviewer 3 Report
Comments and Suggestions for Authors
The authors have carefully considered the expected criticism and revisions and have revised the article accordingly. In its current form, the article is acceptable.
