CNC Turning of an Additively Manufactured Complex Profile Ti6Al4V Component Considering the Effect of Layer Orientations
, Saqib Anwar 2, Ali M. Al-Samhan 2, Khaled N. Alqahtani 1, Mustafa M. Nasr 1, Husam Kaid 1 and Wadea Ameen 3Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The authors looked into how two-part orientations of Ti6Al4V EBM parts affected the CNC turning process. In this work, two possible EBM part orientations are used: across EBM layers (AL) and parallel to EBM layers (PL). The effect of EBM Ti6Al4V part orientations on surface roughness, power consumption, chip morphology, tool flank wear, and surface morphology during dry turning with uncoated carbide tools at various cutting speeds and feed rates has been investigated.
The authors have well presented the research and found within the scope of this Journal.
The following corrections were suggested to improve the readability of the current research:
1. In the abstract following results were written: Using the same turning parameters, the difference between the 24 roughness (Ra) value for AL (0.36 μm) and PL (0.79 μm) orientations is about 54%. Similarly, the 25 maximum power consumption in AL orientation differs by 19% from the minimum power con- 26 sumption in PL orientation. The chip thickness ratio and the maximum flank wear show a difference 27 of 23% and 40%, respectively.
The author should specify which reference is used to estimate the percentage difference. For example, I believe PL orientation yielded a 54% higher Ra than AL orientation. Similarly, clearly edit the results for all responses used in Abstract. as well in entire research manuscript .
2. the Literature review part is common in introduction , suggesting to improve the quality of manuscript.by adding new articles. Also, write the research gap and objectives clearly.
3. The discussion part is also shallow need to consider the previously published paper.
4. Why you have chosen power factor 0.7. Give reference also.
5. Conclusion is good, only add the details of future study.
6. All figures are of good quality.
7. Overall Major revision required,
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Notes in the attachment.
Comments for author File: Comments.pdf
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
The authors have made sufficient corrections in the revised manuscript. Now in its current form, the paper may be accepted.
Reviewer 2 Report
The authors have corrected the text according to my comments. Thank you.
