Increasing the Wear Resistance of Stamping Tools for Coordinate Punching of Sheet Steel Using CrAlSiN and DLC:Si Coatings
, Marina A. Volosova *, Ilya A. Korotkov, Vladimir D. Gurin, Artem P. Mitrofanov, Sergey V. Fedorov and Anna A. Okunkova
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe authors have conducted an interesting study in which increasing of the wear resistance of stamping tools for coordinate punching of sheet steel by applying CrAlSiN and DLC:Si coatings was achieved. A large amount of experimental work has been performed, however, the manuscript needs some revisions:
- - Please, add in the text the full names of the abbreviations used, such as CNC, PVD, PACVD, etc.;
- - Evidently from the description of the coating deposition process, the CrAlSiN coating is applied using a PVD method and the DLC:Si coating is applied using a PACVD process. Claiming in the conclusions that only one of the processes was used to from the coatings is inconsistent with the given description of the coating preparation process. It is highly advised to include in the “Conclusions” section the use of the PVD method as well, since this appears to be a double-process obtained coating (CrAlSiN/DLC:Si);
- - In Table 6 you have presented the nanohardness of the coatings. Please add the nanohardness value of the X165CrMoV12 die to track the change of this mechanical characteristic before and after deposition of the coatings;
- - The conclusions /particularly (2) and (3)/ are too long. Please present the results accurately and clearly.
In conclusion, the presented work has significant scientific value and should be published, however, only after some revisions are performed.
Author Response
Response to Reviewer 1 Comments
Dear reviewer,
Thank you so much for your kind evaluation of our work. We agree with all your proposals and comments and have modified the manuscript accordingly.
We hope the manuscript will be suitable for publishing in Technologies and attract many potential journal readers with your comments. The introduced corrections in the text of the manuscript are marked green.
Kind regards,
Authors.
Reviewer comments
Point 1: Please, add in the text the full names of the abbreviations used, such as CNC, PVD, PACVD, etc.;
Response 1: Thank you for your kind remark. It is revised in the text. We have taken a look through the text and found only those three acronyms. Also, they were given full names in the abstract to avoid confusing potential readers and improve the readability of the text.
Point 2: Evidently from the description of the coating deposition process, the CrAlSiN coating is applied using a PVD method and the DLC:Si coating is applied using a PACVD process. Claiming in the conclusions that only one of the processes was used to from the coatings is inconsistent with the given description of the coating preparation process. It is highly advised to include in the “Conclusions” section the use of the PVD method as well, since this appears to be a double-process obtained coating (CrAlSiN/DLC:Si);
Response 2: Thank you for pointing it out. Your comment is absolutely right. It consists of two technological processes that were implemented on the same hybrid technological unit. The corrections are introduced in the manuscript’s text.
Point 3: In Table 6 you have presented the nanohardness of the coatings. Please add the nanohardness value of the X165CrMoV12 die to track the change of this mechanical characteristic before and after deposition of the coatings;
Response 3: Thank you for your comment. The description of the initial state of this alloy is given in Table 2. It should be noted that the Berkovich nanoindentation method is specific for determining the nanohardness of thin films and coatings that have specific characteristics and cannot be applied to the bulk material of the substrate. These materials are of different classes: ceramic and diamond-like carbon films belong to superhard thin films, and die steel to bulk semi-heat-resistant die steels of medium hardness (difference in required characteristics, measuring units of those characteristics, and their study methods). These "hardnesses" have different scales that do not correspond. Nanohardness, adhesion strength, and elastic modulus are specific for thin films and cannot be compared to the characteristics of the bulk material of medium hardness (die steel).
Point 4: The conclusions /particularly (2) and (3)/ are too long. Please present the results accurately and clearly.
Response 4: Thank you for pointing it out. The conclusions are shortened. Please let us know if we can do them even shorter. We have tried to keep the main results and a short analytical conclusion. We agree that large paragraphs reduce the readability of the text.
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe article is written clearly, in standard parts such as introduction, methodology of the experiment, results and conclusion. I have no comments on the text part, everything is clearly stated. The only reservation I have is with Fig. 6, in which there is a discrepancy between the SEM image and the EDX analysis, which shows greater thicknesses of the coatings.
Otherwise, I have no objections to the article and I recommend the article to be published in this journal after reviewing the above image.
Author Response
Response to Reviewer 2 Comments
Dear Reviewer,
Thank you so much for your kind evaluation of our work. We agree with your comment and have modified the manuscript accordingly.
We hope the manuscript will be suitable for publishing in Technologies and attract many potential journal readers. The introduced corrections in the manuscript are marked yellow.
Kind regards,
Authors.
Reviewer comments
Point 1: The article is written clearly, in standard parts such as introduction, methodology of the experiment, results and conclusion. I have no comments on the text part, everything is clearly stated. The only reservation I have is with Fig. 6, in which there is a discrepancy between the SEM image and the EDX analysis, which shows greater thicknesses of the coatings.
Otherwise, I have no objections to the article and I recommend the article to be published in this journal after reviewing the above image.
Response 1: Thank you so much for noticing it. Indeed, those images do not correspond to each other by thickness. We conduct a large amount of research related to the deposition of coatings for different coating systems on the working surfaces of various types of products. Due to a technical mistake, the images were confused with another similar study of a similar coating composition. In the text of the manuscript, we have replaced them with the correct ones as follows (in attachment).
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsReviewed paper reports results of the research on the effect of protective DLC coatings on the wear resistance of the forms for cold stamping of steel workpieces. I find this work interesting, however, my main doubt concerns the scope of the journal chosen by the authors. I see that this work only loosely fits the scope in terms of "advances in material science". I am not sure if it suffers.
In my opinion, the authors need to choose another journal with the profile focused on mechanical engineering, machining of metals etc. Unlike that, "Technologies" is a journal oriented towards electronic technologies.
Author Response
Response to Reviewer 3 Comments
Dear Reviewer,
Thank you so much for your kind evaluation of our work. We agree with your kind evaluation of the Journal specialization. Recent significant articles published in Technologies are indeed more related to the applications of technologies in the area of optoelectronics.
Meanwhile, our research team has experience publishing articles in Technologies related to the machinery industry. Many of those articles were marked Editor’s choice and nominated for the 2024 Best Paper AWARD. There are a few of them:
- Metel, A.; Vereschaka, A.; Sotova, C.; Seleznev, A.; Sitnikov, N.; Milovich, F.; Makarevich, K.; Grigoriev, S. Study of the Nature of the Destruction of Coatings Based on the ZrN System Deposited on a Titanium Alloy Substrate. Technologies2024, 12, 179. https://doi.org/10.3390/technologies12100179
- Grigoriev, S.N.; Okunkova, A.A.; Volosova, M.A.; Hamdy, K.; Metel, A.S. Electrical Discharge Machining of Al2O3Using Copper Tape and TiO2 Powder-Mixed Water Medium. Technologies 2022, 10, 116. https://doi.org/10.3390/technologies10060116
- Metel, A.S.; Grigoriev, S.N.; Tarasova, T.V.; Filatova, A.A.; Sundukov, S.K.; Volosova, M.A.; Okunkova, A.A.; Melnik, Y.A.; Podrabinnik, P.A. Influence of Postprocessing on Wear Resistance of Aerospace Steel Parts Produced by Laser Powder Bed Fusion. Technologies2020, 8, 73. https://doi.org/10.3390/technologies8040073
- Grigoriev, S.N.; Dmitriev, A.M.; Korobova, N.V.; Fedorov, S.V. A Cold-Pressing Method Combining Axial and Shear Flow of Powder Compaction to Produce High-Density Iron Parts. Technologies2019, 7, 70. https://doi.org/10.3390/technologies7040070
- Melnik, Y.A.; Kozochkin, M.P.; Porvatov, A.N.; Okunkova, A.A. On Adaptive Control for Electrical Discharge Machining Using Vibroacoustic Emission. Technologies2018, 6, 96. https://doi.org/10.3390/technologies6040096
Advances in Materials science is included in the Scope of the Journal: https://www.mdpi.com/journal/technologies/about
Section 'Innovations in Materials Processing' is headed by Editor-in-Chief of Technologies - Prof. Dr. Manoj Gupta: https://www.mdpi.com/journal/technologies/editors
We hope the manuscript will be suitable for publishing in Technologies and attract many potential journal readers.
Kind regards,
Authors.
Reviewer 4 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsDear authors,
I kindly ask you to find my comments and observations bellow:
1. Figure 1, please cite source of photos if applicable
2. I suggest adding more references (4-5 references) to support the state of the art of DLC coatings used for sheet stamping.
3. Instead of "The authors of [27]" I suggest using "Abraham et al".
4. The aim of the paper should be expanded to include details of the microstructural investigations, etc. The main aim of the study is about the efficiency of top DLC:Si coating, but I recommend adding details of the investigations in 1-2 sentences.
5. The chemical composition and mechanical properties listed in Tables 1-4 have been measured by the authors. If so, please provide details of the investigations and tests.
6. In Figure 6, the DLC:Si topcoat shows an increased roughness which has a negative effect on punching, not to mention tolerances. Is the surface of the topcoat used as deposited or is there a post-deposition process to smooth the surface after deposition?
7. The cross section of the samples examined shows some traces of organic material from the metallographic preparation. Please be more careful when preparing samples for microscopy.
8. Figure 6 - I suggest using "EDX spectra" instead of "EDX images".
9. As future work, I recommend optimizing the deposition parameters of CrAlSiN/DLC:Si coatings. They look promising, but as shown in Figure 7, their surface contains particles which affect the cutting performance of the stamping tool if there is no post-deposition step to smooth the surface. This could also improve the COf (coefficient of friction) and reduce its variations.
10. In the results section, please link your results to similar observations published by other authors. There are only 5 references in the entire results section of the manuscript.
11. Is it possible to include some macro images of the edges after punching?
12. How is it ensured that the deposition of CrAlSiN/DLC:Si coatings does not lead to cracking and delamination at the edge?
Author Response
Response to Reviewer 4 Comments
Dear reviewer,
Thank you so much for your kind evaluation of our work. We agree with all your proposals and comments and have modified the manuscript accordingly.
We hope the manuscript will be suitable for publishing in Technologies and attract many potential journal readers with your comments. The corrections introduced in the manuscript text are marked blue.
Kind regards,
Authors.
Reviewer comments
Point 1: Figure 1, please cite source of photos if applicable.
Response 1: Thank you for your kind remark. The figures are original. However, it was revised to make it more representative.
Point 2: I suggest adding more references (4-5 references) to support the state of the art of DLC coatings used for sheet stamping.
Response 2: Thank you for your kind suggestion. We have added 3 references, the relevant fragment has been added, and the reference list has been revised. It should be noted that only a few studies are devoted to using solid lubricants in sheet stamping. The proposal within this study is unique.
Point 3: Instead of "The authors of [27]" I suggest using "Abraham et al".
Response 3: Thank you for pointing it out. It could be presented more personally with respect to the authors. It is revised.
Point 4: The aim of the paper should be expanded to include details of the microstructural investigations, etc. The main aim of the study is about the efficiency of top DLC:Si coating, but I recommend adding details of the investigations in 1-2 sentences.
Response 4: Thank you for pointing it out. It is revised. The following fragment is added:
“The coating was deposited using a hybrid unit combining physical vapor deposition and plasma assisted chemical vapor deposition technologies and investigated by scanning electron microscopy (SEM) (analytically in back-scattered electrons) and energy-dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (EDX spectra). The adhesion strength of the coatings was determined by scratch testing with a recording of acoustic emission and the definition of critical forces. The mechanical and physical characteristics were ob-tained by nanoindentation with a Berkovich pyramid. Tribological characteristics of coatings were assessed using two methods: in the conditions of abrasive action with a sphere of 20.0 mm in diameter and under friction-sliding conditions according to the "ball-on-disk" scheme at room temperature and under heating at 200 °C for two groups of samples in the initial state and after heating in a muffle furnace at 200 °C for 60 min. Full-scale tests of punches with DLC:Si-based coatings were carried out during coordinate punching of 41Cr4 sheet steel.”
Point 5: The chemical composition and mechanical properties listed in Tables 1-4 have been measured by the authors. If so, please provide details of the investigations and tests.
Response 5 Thank you for your comment on it. The data that are presented in Section 2 are provided for reference. They are relevant to the production standards and characterize the initial state of the die and carbon structural steels. The data are available in the open sources:
|
Material |
Relevant open source |
|
X165CrMoV12 die steel |
https://www.steel-grades.com/Steel-Grades/Tool-Steel/X165CrMoV12.html |
|
41Cr4 carbon structural steel |
https://www.steel-grades.com/Steel-Grades/Structure-Steel/41Cr4.html |
Point 6: In Figure 6, the DLC:Si topcoat shows an increased roughness which has a negative effect on punching, not to mention tolerances. Is the surface of the topcoat used as deposited or is there a post-deposition process to smooth the surface after deposition?
Response 6: Thank you for your remark. This is indeed the surface morphology that corresponds to DLC type of coatings deposited by physical vapor deposition. However, no additional processing is required. The fact is that after the first strokes during the punch running-in process, all these irregularities are smoothed out, and then the coating fulfills its functional purpose. As tribological tests show, the coefficient of friction decreases. Thus, the initially existing roughness does not affect the subsequent antifriction effect of the coating. The relevant comment is added to the text of the manuscript.
Point 7: The cross section of the samples examined shows some traces of organic material from the metallographic preparation. Please be more careful when preparing samples for microscopy.
Response 7: Thank you for pointing it out. You are right; the C content in Figure 6a corresponds to the presence of the epoxy resin. The relevant comment is provided: “The carbon content on the surface of the CrAlSiN coating (up to 0.5 µm on the linear X-axis in Figure 6a) corresponds to the residual epoxy resin.”
Point 8: Figure 6 - I suggest using "EDX spectra" instead of "EDX images".
Response 8: Thank you for noticing it. The comment is correct. It’s revised.
Point 9: As future work, I recommend optimizing the deposition parameters of CrAlSiN/DLC:Si coatings. They look promising, but as shown in Figure 7, their surface contains particles which affect the cutting performance of the stamping tool if there is no post-deposition step to smooth the surface. This could also improve the COf (coefficient of friction) and reduce its variations.
Response 9: Thank you for pointing it out. As it was mentioned above, the development of the COF is quite satisfactory after the running-in stage, where the first strikes smooth the surface out. The obtained morphology of the DLC:Si is typical for this type of coatings deposited using the PVD method. However, we agree that the developed factors of coating deposition can be improved in the future to be the purpose for further work.
Point 10: In the results section, please link your results to similar observations published by other authors. There are only 5 references in the entire results section of the manuscript.
Response 10: Thank you for pointing it out. The section is revised.
Point 11: Is it possible to include some macro images of the edges after punching?
Response 11: Thank you for your kind recommendation. We have provided additional optical images of the cutting edge after 50,000 strokes to watch the development of the wear wells in time.
Point 12: How is it ensured that the deposition of CrAlSiN/DLC:Si coatings does not lead to cracking and delamination at the edge?
Response 12: Thank you for your kind remark. Practice shows that the combined coating of CrAlSiN/DLC:Si is distinguished by the absence of pronounced discontinuities and pores in the microstructure. Under mechanical loads, a stable boundary antifriction film is provided between the punch and the counterbody. During the tests within the framework of this study, it was shown that the coating is efficient up to 50,000 strokes. In the further development of wear, the punches with the coating should be tested further.
Round 2
Reviewer 3 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe paper reports results on the study of the wear resistance of the CrAlSiN and DLC:Si coatings onto punch stamps to be used with sheets of structural steels. I find this interesting, however, the following questions need to be addressed by the authors:
1. DLC is a very specific form of carbon. How did you prove that? I do not see any Raman spectra that is conclusive in this respect.
2. I found such inconsistency: 'Considering that the wear rate of the punch working edges is higher than the wear rate of the die working frame, the wear of the stamping tool was assessed only for the punch.' (line 209) vs. 'The wear resistance of the die steel samples was assessed using two methods (Figure 5)." (line 265). Which is valid?
3. EDX in Fig. 6a reveals significant amounts of carbon onto (virtually) carbon-free CrAlSiN coating. Where does it come from? Also, Fig. 6b reveals that the Si prevails in the interfacial layer between CrAlSiN and DLC. Is it reasonable to say that the DLC is doped with Si as your paper suggests (DLC:Si)? In my opinion, Si diffuse deep into the (hypothetical) DLC layer, but then is stopped by the denser CrAlSiN barrier.
4. Table 6 - determination of the hardness and Y of a bi-layer structure CrAlSiN/DLC does not make a sense without saying how deep were the indents.
Several other comments are added in the enclosed manuscript
Comments on the Quality of English LanguageI found no serious issues, minor are highlighted in the attached manuscript.
Author Response
Response to Reviewer 3 Comments, 2nd round
Dear Reviewer,
Thank you so much for your kind evaluation of our work. We agree with all your proposals and comments and have modified the manuscript accordingly.
We hope the manuscript will be suitable for publishing in Technologies and attract many potential journal readers with your comments. The corrections introduced in the text of the manuscript are marked purple.
Kind regards,
Authors.
Reviewer comments
Point 1: DLC is a very specific form of carbon. How did you prove that? I do not see any Raman spectra that is conclusive in this respect.
Response 1: Thank you for your question. Our research team has investigated the composition of the DLC coating using X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS analysis). The results are provided in [1]. In this study, the DLC coating was deposited on oxynitride ceramics, but a similar gas mixture and deposition modes were used as they proved their reliability. The relevant reference is added to the manuscript text (Subsection 2.2, [36]).
References
- Volosova, M.A.; Okunkova, A.A. Study of the Influence of Silicon-Containing Diamond-like Carbon Coatings on the Wear Resistance of SiAlON Tool Ceramics. C2023, 9, 50. https://doi.org/10.3390/c9020050
Point 2: I found such inconsistency: 'Considering that the wear rate of the punch working edges is higher than the wear rate of the die working frame, the wear of the stamping tool was assessed only for the punch.' (line 209) vs. 'The wear resistance of the die steel samples was assessed using two methods (Figure 5)." (line 265). Which is valid?.
Response 2: Thank you for pointing it out. Here are two different aspects related to the methodology. We agree that the difference was not clearly described and is difficult to understand. For measuring wear rate, only the punch (the movable part of the stamp) was our research object under investigation since, as practice shows, the punch is subjected to more intensive wear and requires more frequent replacement than the fixed die of the stamping mold. The second sentence is related to the tribological tests where the wear behavior of the produced samples was assessed under abrasive action using the Calowear system (CSM Instruments SA, Peseux, Switzerland) and under condition of friction-sliding according to the "ball-on-disk" scheme using the TNT-S-AX0000 system (Anton Paar GmbH, Graz, Austria) at room temperature and during heating up to 200 °C. The word "die" is related to the class of steel; we have added as well the term "mold steel" (https://medium.com/@carama_36209/process-characteristics-of-die-steel-and-its-classification-and-grade-a0cdf55bcb1c ). It is a class of steel. The relevant remarks are added to the manuscript's text (Introduction, Subsections 2.1, 2.3).
Point 3: EDX in Fig. 6a reveals significant amounts of carbon onto (virtually) carbon-free CrAlSiN coating. Where does it come from? Also, Fig. 6b reveals that the Si prevails in the interfacial layer between CrAlSiN and DLC. Is it reasonable to say that the DLC is doped with Si as your paper suggests (DLC:Si)? In my opinion, Si diffuse deep into the (hypothetical) DLC layer, but then is stopped by the denser CrAlSiN barrier.
Response 3: Thank you for your kind remark. Carbon content in the EDX-spectra of Figure 6a is related to the residual epoxy resin and normal atmospheric contaminations. It's noted in the text:
"The carbon content on the surface of the CrAlSiN coating (up to 0.5 µm on the linear X-axis in Figure 6a) corresponds to the residual epoxy resin."
However, we have also added the remark on normal atmospheric contamination. Regarding Figure 6b, it’s written in the text:
“The concentration of Si increases significantly in the transition layer and then decreases slightly along the depth of the CrAlSiN nitride layer. Such a coating composition ensures satisfactory adhesion strength of DLC:Si coatings, comparable to traditional nitride coatings such as CrAlSiN.”
As Table 5 shows, the transition layer was formed after the deposition of the CrAlSiN coating. Following the technology, the layer was deposited in 16% (Si(СH3)4) + 6% (Ar) + %78 (N2) gas mixture using an Al-Si cathode. The composition of the gas mixture and cathode explains the presence of Si. The transition Si layer is necessary to provide better adhesion of the following DLC:Si layer. An additional explanation is added to the text.
Point 4: Table 6 - determination of the hardness and Y of a bi-layer structure CrAlSiN/DLC does not make a sense without saying how deep were the indents.
Response 4: Thank you for asking it. The measured indenter depths are provided below:
Table 6. Physical and mechanical characteristics of samples made of X165CrMoV12 die steel with two coating options.
|
Coating option |
Coating thickness, μm |
Adhesive strength of the coating, N |
Penetration depth at a load of 4 mN, nm |
Nanohardness, GPa |
Elasticity modulus, GPa |
|
|
F1 |
F2 |
|||||
|
CrAlSiN |
2.1±0.15 |
13±2 |
29±1 |
228±8 |
29±2 |
308±6 |
|
CrAlSiN/ |
1.9±0.1/ |
14±2 |
27±2 |
264±12 |
22±2 |
221±8 |
As follows from the data, as the depth of indenter penetration increases, the hardness of the surface layer decreases. Within the load (4.0 mN), the nanohardness of the coated samples is 29±2 GPa and 22±2 GPa, respectively. The relevant data and a remark on it are added.
Point 5: Several other comments are added in the enclosed manuscript. I found no serious issues, minor are highlighted in the attached manuscript.
Response 5: Thank you for helping us in improving our manuscript. Unfortunately, the editors didn't provide us with the file where your corrections were done. In the system, no file is available. We have asked the Editors, but no answer has been received. We would be happy to get it to make the manuscript even better with your kind help.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 4 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsDear authors,
I consider that your manuscript has improved its overall quality and I have no further comments.
Author Response
Response to Reviewer 4 Comments, 2nd round
Dear Reviewer,
Thank you so much for evaluating our article and for your comments. We believe that the manuscript looks better with your kind help. We wish you and your research group all the best in 2025.
Kind regards,
Authors.
Round 3
Reviewer 3 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThank you for the answers, however, I am not fully convinced as to your claim on the presence of DLC in your coating. Cited work shows only XPS results without any validation with Raman data, and it is known that XPS is good in estimation of sp2/sp3 contents, but is virtually insensitive to the presence of hydrogen. Thus, there is possibility that your films are, for example, hydrogenated tetragonal carbons rather than DLC. After all, I strongly recommend including Raman data in your future works.
Author Response
Response to Reviewer 3 Comments, 3nd round
Dear Reviewer,
Thank you so much for your kind remark. We agree with your proposal. The corrections introduced in the text of the manuscript are marked marine blue.
Please accept our warm wishes to you and your family! Happy New Year and Merry Christmas!
Kind regards,
Authors.
Reviewer comments
Point 1: Thank you for the answers, however, I am not fully convinced as to your claim on the presence of DLC in your coating. Cited work shows only XPS results without any validation with Raman data, and it is known that XPS is good in estimation of sp2/sp3 contents, but is virtually insensitive to the presence of hydrogen. Thus, there is possibility that your films are, for example, hydrogenated tetragonal carbons rather than DLC. After all, I strongly recommend including Raman data in your future works.
Response 1: Thank you for your kind remark. We agree that validation with Raman data could complete the study. However, we have found a paper with the results of Raman spectroscopy [1] that is also intermediately mentioned in [2], and a paper on the analysis of chemical bonds on the coating surface (XPS), where sp2 and sp3 hybridizations are discussed in detail [3]. You are absolutely right, the Raman spectroscopy is necessary for complete identification and characterization of the compounds. The DLC coating composition was also indirectly confirmed by satisfactory results of the wear resistance tests. We will take your remark into account for the future. The relevant remarks are added to the manuscript.
References
- Grigoriev, S.N.; Volosova, M.A.; Fedorov, S.V.; Shein, A.A.; Zykova, M.A.; Kapustina, N. The efficiency of diamond-like coatings for increased wear resistance of end mills at the machining aluminum alloys. Phys.: Conf. Ser. 2019, 1281, 012024. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1281/1/012024
- Grigoriev, S.; Volosova, M.; Mosyanov, M.; Fedorov, S. The Study of Radius End Mills with TiB2Coating When Milling a Nickel Alloy. Materials 2023, 16, 2535. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma16062535
- Grigoriev, S.N.; Volosova, M.A.; Fedorov, S.V.; Mosyanov, M. Influence of DLC Coatings Deposited by PECVD Technology on the Wear Resistance of Carbide End Mills and Surface Roughness of AlCuMg2 and 41Cr4 Workpieces. Coatings2020, 10, 1038. https://doi.org/10.3390/coatings10111038
