Tensile Strain Capacity Prediction Model of an X80 Pipeline with Improper Transitioning and Undermatched Girth Weld
, Lianshuang Dai 3, Heng Xuan 4, Xiongxiong Gao 1, Kun Yang 1, Lei Wang 1, Qiang Chi 1 and Chunyong Huo 1Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Title: Tensile strain capacity prediction model of an X80 pipeline with improper transitioning and undermatched girth weld.
Authors: Hongyuan Chen et al…..
Journal: materials, 10.3390
Major corrections:
Line 18: …. Based on the initiation- control based…; specify what is initiated?
Line 72 and 73…. Fracture behaviour. Sentence is incomplete
Line 99 Insert reference for the last line of Page 2 continuing in page 3
As many readers use MPa, include MPa unit along with the ksi
Section 2.2.2 is repeated twice. Correction required
Page 193: … to CTODA is the …. What do you mean by this?
Line 309 – 310: Change the voice in this line.
Line 310: Table 6.3. Where is the table?
Line 310-311: are they single lines. At present separate lines?
Bring some references and discuss salient features by bringing into this paper.
Grammar corrections:
Line 17 ….X80 pipeline is researched (may be corrected as investigated)
Line 54…. Tensile stress not stresses
Line 91 – line starting from And. -such start is not recommended
Page 110, 137, 138 and other lines- Table not table
Page 111, Three zones not the three zones
Page 129, 123, 242: Figure not figure
Page 132 remove bracket close
There are many grammar related errors throughout.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
Please see the attached file.
Comments for author File: 
Comments.pdf
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Reviewer 3 Report
The paper is written at a high level.
For a better understanding of the material, I ask you to make several corrections.
Figure 1 shows a scale bar, but does not indicate its size on it. You also made samples, one of which is shown in the indicated figure. However, the procedure does not describe what welding modes this sample was obtained in, what electrodes were used, nor does it describe how the sample was etched and what microscope was used to study the microstructure.
In Figures 12–16, axis labels and text designations are small and hard to see.
In the second output, you write about high and low offset. It would be nice to indicate the percentage or numerical values of the concepts of high and low bias.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report
The authors have attended to the recommendations, and, in my opinion, the paper is suitable for publication after minor changes. Please carefully revise the size and format of figures, text font and size in figures, citing, and referencing style according to the journal's specifications.
Author Response
The size and format of figures, text font and size in figures, citing, and referencing style have been revised.
Reviewer 3 Report
In general, my comments were taken into account by the authors and corrected. In my opinion the article can be published.
Author Response
The size and format of figures, text font and size in figures, citing, and referencing style have been revised.
