Next Article in Journal
Multi-Objective Optimization of Turning Operation of Stainless Steel Using a Hybrid Whale Optimization Algorithm
Next Article in Special Issue
Disturbance of the Regenerative Effect by Use of Milling Tools Modified with Asymmetric Dynamic Properties
Previous Article in Journal / Special Issue
Reconstruction of Process Forces in a Five-Axis Milling Center with a LSTM Neural Network in Comparison to a Model-Based Approach
 
 
Article
Peer-Review Record

An Iterative Size Effect Model of Surface Generation in Finish Machining

J. Manuf. Mater. Process. 2020, 4(3), 63; https://doi.org/10.3390/jmmp4030063
by Ian Brown 1,2 and Julius Schoop 1,2,*
Reviewer 1: Anonymous
Reviewer 2: Anonymous
J. Manuf. Mater. Process. 2020, 4(3), 63; https://doi.org/10.3390/jmmp4030063
Submission received: 9 June 2020 / Revised: 28 June 2020 / Accepted: 30 June 2020 / Published: 2 July 2020
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Advanced Manufacturing and Machining Processes)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

This is a quality paper on the modeling of surface roughness in machining. The model, assumptions, formulation, and validation are good. The paper can be published with the following minor revision.

  • Abstract needs rewriting. Multiple times it is claimed that the model accurately predicts! Claiming this single time is enough. More details about model, and experiments should be added.
  • Literature review can be updated with papers that considered cutting edge effect. Journal of Materials Processing Technology 283, 116688.
  • 3 should have marking of the items shown in figure.
  • How the over prediction and under prediction is handled?
  • How these models differ from data driven model? Any future recommendation for integration of the data-based model with your model?

Author Response

Please see attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Review of jmmp-837607-peer-review-v1: “An Iterative Size Effect Model of Surface Generation in Finish Machining”

The subject of the paper is relevant with the topics of the journal.

Its significance with respect to their industrial value is good.

The number and the quality of the references selected are adequate while their use is correct.

 Although a limited amount of experimental work took place, this is not reducing the value of the outcomes achieved.

I would suggest the authors to incorporate the following in order to improve the quality of the paper:

  • In line 25, it would follow a good practice, to incorporate an introduction paragraph with 10-15 lines length and then to create a paragraph under the name “State of the art” or “Literature survey” with the rest of the text already existed.
  • Figure 1a should be mentioned within the text.
  • A table with the material’s under study properties can be introduced
  • In figure 4a, correct a spelling mistake “Edge”

My proposal to the editor is to accept the paper after minor revisions.

 

 

Author Response

Please see attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Back to TopTop