Next Article in Journal
Development of a TiNbTaMoZr-Based High Entropy Alloy with Low Young´s Modulus by Mechanical Alloying Route
Next Article in Special Issue
Interface Quality Indices of Al–10Si–Mg Aluminum Alloy and Cr18–Ni10–Ti Stainless-Steel Bimetal Fabricated via Selective Laser Melting
Previous Article in Journal
Influence of Forming Parameters on the Mechanical Behavior of a Thin Aluminum Sheet Processed through Single Point Incremental Forming
Previous Article in Special Issue
A Constitutive Model for Yield Strength and Work Hardening Behaviour of Aluminium Alloys during Artificial Ageing
 
 
Article
Peer-Review Record

Effect of Die Angle and Frictional Conditions on Fine Grain Layer Generation in Multipass Drawing of High Carbon Steel Wire

Metals 2020, 10(11), 1462; https://doi.org/10.3390/met10111462
by Alexey Stolyarov 1, Marina Polyakova 2, Guzel Atangulova 1 and Sergei Alexandrov 3,4,*
Reviewer 1: Anonymous
Reviewer 2: Anonymous
Reviewer 3: Anonymous
Metals 2020, 10(11), 1462; https://doi.org/10.3390/met10111462
Submission received: 12 October 2020 / Revised: 22 October 2020 / Accepted: 28 October 2020 / Published: 31 October 2020
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Analysis and Design of Metal-Forming Processes)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Abstract is too short and my recommendations are as follows: the main sentences of the abstract must present the following aspects: placing the work in context; the purpose of the work; explaining what was done (research, methodology); indicating the main results and the most important consequence of the paper.

Line 78: please write the manufacturer of Thixomet analyzer

Figure 2: change 1,60 with 1.60....

Line 101: Why m2

Line 109: How was obtained this experimental plan? Which was the method used?

Figure 3: change 11,7 with 11.7μm and so on

Figure 4: the same changes as above for figure 3

Figure 5: the same changes as above for figure 3

Figure 6: the same changes as above for figure 3

Author Response

The corrections made in the revised manuscript are shown in red.

  1. Abstract is too short and my recommendations are as follows: the main sentences of the abstract must present the following aspects: placing the work in context; the purpose of the work; explaining what was done (research, methodology); indicating the main results and the most important consequence of the paper.

Response. We have extended the abstract. Please take into consideration that, according to the instruction for authors, the abstract should be a total of about 200 words maximum

  1. Line 78: please write the manufacturer of Thixomet analyzer

            Response. We have added the manufacturer (http://www.thixomet.com/).

  1. Figure 2: change 1,60 with 1.60....

Response. Corrected.

  1. Line 101: Why m2

           Response. It is because this quantity represents mass in grams per area in m2. Of course, because the surface is a circular cylinder, it is straightforward to introduce a similar quantity whose dimension is g/m.

  1. Line 109: How was obtained this experimental plan? Which was the method used?

            Response. The effect of the die semi-angle and friction conditions on the generation of fine grain layers in one-pass drawing of the same steel was studied previously [10]. It was reasonable to use the same conditions in the present study of the multi-pass process. The real technological process at OJSC “Magnitogorsk hardware and sizing plant “MMK-METIZ controls the initial and final diameters of wires. Therefore, our priority is to investigate the process for these diameters. We chose three passes because the difference between the initial and final diameters is not large. We understand that our plan is not comprehensive, but we needed to start with something to see some tendencies. 

  1. Figure 3: change 11,7 with 11.7μm and so on

            Figure 4: the same changes as above for figure 3

            Figure 5: the same changes as above for figure 3

            Figure 6: the same changes as above for figure 3

Response. Corrected.

Reviewer 2 Report

The present manuscript studies the manufacturing of a fine grain layer near the surface of a wire using a multi-pass drawing. The main focus is on finding the correlation between layer thickness and process parameters. That being said, the paper has a few major issues that need to be addressed.

  1. The introduction looks quite poor of recent publications on the subject. Please update your introduction with more recent publications. You may cite the following works for example:

Belov, N.; Murashkin, M.; Korotkova, N.; Akopyan, T.; Timofeev, V. Structure and Properties of Al–0.6wt.%Zr Wire Alloy Manufactured by Direct Drawing of Electromagnetically Cast Wire Rod. Metals 2020, 10, 769. https://doi.org/10.3390/met10060769

Medvedev, A.; Arutyunyan, A.; Lomakin, I.; Bondarenko, A.; Kazykhanov, V.; Enikeev, N.; Raab, G.; Murashkin, M. Fatigue Properties of Ultra-Fine Grained Al-Mg-Si Wires with Enhanced Mechanical Strength and Electrical Conductivity. Metals 2018, 8, 1034. https://doi.org/10.3390/met8121034

Santana Martinez, G.A.; Qian, W.-L.; Kabayama, L.K.; Prisco, U. Effect of Process Parameters in Copper-Wire Drawing. Metals 2020, 10, 105. https://doi.org/10.3390/met10010105

Prisco, U.; Martinez, G.A.; Kabayama, L.K. Effect of die pressure on the lubricating regimes achieved in wire drawing. Production Engineering 2020, articles in press. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11740-020-00985-6

  1. The experimental section "2. Material, process and methods." which describes the experimental setup needs to be reformulated because it is not clear. Please, specify for example using a table, the parameters of each pass (angle, inital and final diameter, lubricant condition, etc) for each experiment.
  2. The looked-for correlation could be more properly discussed and presented using a figure reporting the thickness of the fine-grained layer vs the pass number for the different die angle and friction conditions. The same could be done for the roughness.
  3. Was the wire subjected to heat treatment after the drawing process? In this case, the authors have considered the possibility that this heat treatment could alter the thickness and microstructure of the fine-grained layer? Please, discuss this point.
  4. In Fig. 3 and 4, the fine-grained layer is not quite well visible. Please, restrict the view to a zone near the surface to see the layer and the bulk microstructure, in a ratio of 1:4 or 1:3, for example

Author Response

The corrections made in the revised manuscript are shown in red.

1. The introduction looks quite poor of recent publications on the subject. Please update your introduction with more recent publications. You may cite the following works for example:

Belov, N.; Murashkin, M.; Korotkova, N.; Akopyan, T.; Timofeev, V. Structure and Properties of Al–0.6wt.%Zr Wire Alloy Manufactured by Direct Drawing of Electromagnetically Cast Wire Rod. Metals 2020, 10, 769. https://doi.org/10.3390/met10060769

Medvedev, A.; Arutyunyan, A.; Lomakin, I.; Bondarenko, A.; Kazykhanov, V.; Enikeev, N.; Raab, G.; Murashkin, M. Fatigue Properties of Ultra-Fine Grained Al-Mg-Si Wires with Enhanced Mechanical Strength and Electrical Conductivity. Metals 2018, 8, 1034. https://doi.org/10.3390/met8121034

Santana Martinez, G.A.; Qian, W.-L.; Kabayama, L.K.; Prisco, U. Effect of Process Parameters in Copper-Wire Drawing. Metals 2020, 10, 105. https://doi.org/10.3390/met10010105

Prisco, U.; Martinez, G.A.; Kabayama, L.K. Effect of die pressure on the lubricating regimes achieved in wire drawing. Production Engineering 2020, articles in press. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11740-020-00985-6

Response. We have extended this section.

2. The experimental section "2. Material, process and methods." which describes the experimental setup needs to be reformulated because it is not clear. Please, specify for example using a table, the parameters of each pass (angle, inital and final diameter, lubricant condition, etc) for each experiment.

Response. We are afraid that we do not understand this comment. Table 2 in the original manuscript provides exactly the data specified in this comment. 

3. The looked-for correlation could be more properly discussed and presented using a figure reporting the thickness of the fine-grained layer vs the pass number for the different die angle and friction conditions. The same could be done for the roughness.

Response. We are not sure that this approach is more informative than Table 5. These functions are discrete. Therefore, it is only possible to show several points.

4. Was the wire subjected to heat treatment after the drawing process? In this case, the authors have considered the possibility that this heat treatment could alter the thickness and microstructure of the fine-grained layer? Please, discuss this point.

Response. You are right in the sense that heat treatment can affect the thickness and properties of fine grain layers. We did not heat-treated our samples, but we discussed this point in the revised manuscript.

5. In Fig. 3 and 4, the fine-grained layer is not quite well visible. Please, restrict the view to a zone near the surface to see the layer and the bulk microstructure, in a ratio of 1:4 or 1:3, for example

Response. Corrected.

Reviewer 3 Report

This present study proposes a process of multi-pass drawing to solve  the generation of fine grain layers in high carbon steel wires. There are some suggestions on this work to improve in the following:

  1. This study deals with the fine grain layer. Thus, it is important to indicate the position of this layer in figures.
  2. In Tables 3-5, the average thickness of grains is calculated, but the standard deviation is not given here, which is important to understand the data deviation.
  3. For hard friction, it is observed that after the third pass the average thickness increases. It usually should be reduced but here it increases. The authors should explain it.
  4. Finally, on the manuscript structure, it is suggested that the discussion is better to combine with the results, and conclusions is in a section. 

Author Response

The corrections made in the revised manuscript are shown in red.

1. This study deals with the fine grain layer. Thus, it is important to indicate the position of this layer in figures.

Response. We agree. However, all figures in Section 3 show the thickness of the layers at several points.

2. In Tables 3-5, the average thickness of grains is calculated, but the standard deviation is not given here, which is important to understand the data deviation.

Response. We calculated the sample range, R (Table 5). However, we forgot to introduce this quantity in the text. The manuscript was revised in this respect.

3. For hard friction, it is observed that after the third pass the average thickness increases. It usually should be reduced but here it increases. The authors should explain it.

Response. In general, this issue is, of course, important. However, we do not focus on the mechanism responsible for the generation of the layer in question. We are developing the phenomenological approach based on continuum mechanics. This approach does not require this kind of explanation. One needs experimental data that connect process parameters and layer parameters. We emphasized this point in the abstract.

4. Finally, on the manuscript structure, it is suggested that the discussion is better to combine with the results, and conclusions is in a section. 

Response. According to the instruction to authors, section Discussion is required as a separate section. Therefore, we divided Section 4 of the original manuscript into two sessions.

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

The authors improved the manuscript and answered satisfactory to all the issues I raised.

Back to TopTop