Effect of Active Deflection on the Forming of Tubes Manufactured by 3D Free Bending Technology
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
1. In my view, σρ and σθ should be interpreted after set of equations (4).
2. What does the term Rζ mean (eq. (9), (10), (11), (12) etc.)? I could not find it in the text. Correct me if I am wrong.
3. Is it possible to present chemical composition of SUS304 steel (page 7, line 208) in a form of a table, for instance?
4. Which parameter distribution is characterized by scale bar on Fig. 7? What are the units?
5. Does Fig. 12 presents distribution of Von Mises stress? Could it be characterized by eq. (7)? Scale bar units are [Pa], right?
6. Could you, please, describe the bending equipment: what is the type, location, manufacturer, etc. (page 12, lines 367-368)?
7. Some numbers and numerical values could be added in conclusions paragraph to prove the trends described by authors, if possible.
8. Page 14, lines 440-441. Authors write “…positively correlated…”. Does it mean that correlation coefficient was calculated? If so, please, provide its value.
Author Response
Comment #1:
In my view, σρ and σθ should be interpreted after set of equations (4).
Response:
Thanks for reminding us. We have interpreted the meaning of and on page 5, line 168 of the manuscript based on your precious suggestion. is the radial stress and is tangential stress.
Comment #2:
What does the term Rζ mean (eq. (9), (10), (11), (12) etc.)? I could not find it in the text. Correct me if I am wrong.
Response:
Thank you very much for the reminder. We have complemented the missing symbols with the meanings represented by and others on page 5, line 178. The mean of is the radius of the strain neutral layer described and is the radius on the cross section of the bend in Figure 2.
Comment #3:
Is it possible to present chemical composition of SUS304 steel (page 7, line 208) in a form of a table, for instance?
Response:
Thanks for the valuable comments. Providing detailed chemical composition parameters can provide more useful references for the readers' research. Therefore, we have added Table 2 on page 7 to present the main components of SUS304 material used in the experiment.
Comment #4:
Which parameter distribution is characterized by scale bar on Fig. 7? What are the units?
Response:
Many thanks. The scale in Figure 7 represents the stress distribution (Unit: MPa) in the radial direction of the tube, which is explained in detail at the location where it first appears in the text (Page 8, line 268).
Comment #5:
Does Fig. 12 presents distribution of Von Mises stress? Could it be characterized by eq. (7)? Scale bar units are [Pa], right?
Response:
Thank you for the reminder. We hope to represent the simulation results based on different guide structures, especially the obtained deflection angles in Figure 12. As you mentioned, the scale in Figure 12 shows the Von Mises stress (MPa), which can be characterized by Equation 7. Meanwhile, Figure 13 shows the Von Mises stress distribution in the circumferential direction of the tube extracted from the simulation results shown in Figure 12.
Comment #6:
Could you, please, describe the bending equipment: what is the type, location, manufacturer, etc. (page 12, lines 367-368)?
Response:
Thanks for the Reviewer’s kind suggestion. The equipment mentioned in the manuscript was designed and manufactured by Nanjing University of Aeronautics and Astronautics, model number: NUAA-G30. The information about this device was described in line 408 on page 13.
Comment #7:
Some numbers and numerical values could be added in conclusions paragraph to prove the trends described by authors, if possible.
Response:
Thanks for the Reviewer’s kind suggestion. Following your suggestion, we add some data descriptions to Conclusion 1 and Conclusion 2 to prove our conclusion more clearly.
Comment #8:
Page 14, lines 440-441. Authors write “…positively correlated…”. Does it mean that correlation coefficient was calculated? If so, please, provide its value.
Response:
Sorry for this misrepresentation. In this case we would like to express the idea that the trend of the deflection angle becomes larger as the radius of the trajectory grows, however, there is not a strict positive correlation.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
The paper presents commendable research regarding the effect of active deflection on the forming of tubes manufactured by 3D free bending technology. The literature review is comprehensive and based upon the latest results. The theoretical assumptions are validated by experimental tests.
However, the paper has some issues, mostly related with its presentations. Most of the figures are to small (illegible) and some of them are placed to far from their initial mention.
Figure 1 should be placed as close as possible to its first mention, in order to ease the readability of the paper.
Same observation for figure 2, which is place two pages away from its first mention, making difficult for the reader to follow the presentation of the theoretical analysis. Also, the notations from figure 2 are illegible, due to very small letters.
Table 1 – missing the units of measure for “Transition radius of curvature”.
Figures 4, 5, 7, 8 and 9 – notations illegible.
Figures 10, 11 and 12 – placed to far for their first mention and illegible notations.
Please consider “von Mises stresses” instead of “Mises stresses”. The full name of the scientist who formulated the yield criterion was Richard Edler von Mises, so the surname is “von Mises”.
Figure 13 and 16 – notations illegible.
Author Response
Comment #1:
Figure 1 should be placed as close as possible to its first mention, in order to ease the readability of the paper.
Response:
Thanks for the valuable comments. Following your suggestion, we moved Figure 1 to where it was first mentioned on Page 4.
Comment #2:
Same observation for figure 2, which is place two pages away from its first mention, making difficult for the reader to follow the presentation of the theoretical analysis. Also, the notations from figure 2 are illegible, due to very small letters.
Response:
Thank you very much for the reminder. It is necessary to adjust and correct the content and position of Figure 2. At first we move Figure 2 to the top of page 5 and then adjust the font size.
Comment #3:
Table 1 – missing the units of measure for “Transition radius of curvature”.
Response:
Many thanks. The missing unit in Table 1 is the millimeter (mm), which we have modified in the table.
Comment #4:
Figures 4, 5, 7, 8 and 9 – notations illegible.
Response:
Thanks for the Reviewer’s kind suggestion. We have re-edited and rearranged Figures 4, 5, 7, 8, and 9 for easier viewing.
Comment #5:
Figures 10, 11 and 12 – placed to far for their first mention and illegible notations.
Response:
Thank you for the reminder. According to your reminder, we have moved Figures 10 (Page 9, second paragraph), 11 (Page 11, first paragraph) and 12 (Page 11, second paragraph) to the closest position to the first mentioned in the text.
Comment #6:
Please consider “von Mises stresses” instead of “Mises stresses”. The full name of the scientist who formulated the yield criterion was Richard Edler von Mises, so the surname is “von Mises”.
Response:
Thanks for the Reviewer’s kind suggestion. We have corrected all incorrect usage on page 12.
Comment #7:
Figure 13 and 16 – notations illegible.
Response:
Many thanks. Following your reminder, we have modified the bottom frame and font color, etc., that exist in Figures 13 and 16 that affect the viewing, in order to improve the visibility.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
he work proposed by the authors addresses a topic of interest such as the active deflection of manufactured tubes, especially by free bending. The work is correctly written. According to the available bibliographic bases, the citations are mostly current and they are related to the studied subject. The proposal of the theoretical model is adequate from the point of view of mechanics.
Author Response
Thank you for your letter and for the reviewers’ comments concerning our manuscript entitled “Effect of active deflection on the forming of tubes manufactured by 3D free bending technology” (Manuscript ID: metals-1875952).
Your positive comments are the motivation for me to try to do better.
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
In my view, paper can be recommended for publishing.
