Next Article in Journal
Anisotropic Analysis of Etch Rates for Sapphire Based on a Layer-by-Layer Removal Model of Surface Atoms
Previous Article in Journal
Studies of Niobium Sorption from Chloride Solutions with the Use of Anion-Exchange Resins
 
 
Article
Peer-Review Record

Study and Optimization Defect Layer in Powder Mixed Electrical Discharge Machining of Titanium Alloy

Processes 2023, 11(4), 1289; https://doi.org/10.3390/pr11041289
by Dragan Rodic *, Marin Gostimirovic, Milenko Sekulic, Borislav Savkovic and Andjelko Aleksic
Reviewer 1: Anonymous
Processes 2023, 11(4), 1289; https://doi.org/10.3390/pr11041289
Submission received: 23 March 2023 / Revised: 11 April 2023 / Accepted: 17 April 2023 / Published: 21 April 2023
(This article belongs to the Section Manufacturing Processes and Systems)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

In this article, the authors present a powder-mixed electrical discharge machining of titanium alloys. They added graphite powder as dielectric to reduce the defect layer using Taguchi approach. The structure of the work is well prepared. It has a scientific quality. I think the quality of the work can be increased by some of the comments below.

1. In the abstract, the authors should indicate the achieved thickness of the defect layer at optimal parameters.

2. In the introductory part, the last paragraph, you should state the aim of the paper and especially the contribution.

3. Page 5, line 172, check the number of figures. I think we need figures 1 and 2.

4. Page 8, line 279, substitute the abbreviation DDS.

5. In some parts of the text the term "Duty Cycle" is used, in others it is not. It is necessary to agree in the text. For example, line 295.

6. In the discussion section, authors should state that the minimum thickness of the defect layer is reached at a concentration of 12 g/l. And make a comment on it.

Author Response

The authors thank the reviewer very much for the helpful suggestions and comments to improve the manuscript. All changes in the main text are modified. All changes are marked in green in the revised changes document.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Please refer to the attached file

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

The authors thank the reviewer very much for the helpful suggestions and comments to improve the manuscript. All changes in the main text are modified. All changes are marked in green in the revised changes document.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

Congratulations to the authors on their progress with the manuscript. Although many improvements have been made, a few comments still need to be addressed before it can be accepted for publishing. For the next revision, please remove all sentences that authors want to remove, and for any changes, please use the blue colour font.

Please refer to the attached file

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Dear reviewer, all changes in the text are marked in blue.
We would like to thank you for your specific comments, which have significantly improved our paper.
Yours sincerely!

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Back to TopTop