Investigation of Pressure Fields Generated by Two Simultaneous Discharges in Liquid Initiated by Wires
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
This is a very interesting study.
The advantages of this method should be explained in detail in the paper compared with other processes.
What shortcomings can be overcome and what is the scope of application.
The review is not comprehensive, and the number and content of literature should be increased.
In the paper, the forming effect of this method, whether simulated or experimental, shall be given.
The structure of the thesis is not reasonable enough. The results are not all result data. The results and discussion sections should be reorganized.
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
The works presented in this paper are very interesting from a practical point of view because they make it possible to check that it is possible, with a single discharge, to produce two simultaneous pressure waves. One can imagine that it is possible to use more than two wires. The methodology used to evaluate the pressure field is very simple and very imprecise, but it allows the pressure gradients to be correctly evaluated. The assumptions made are strong, but the authors are aware of this and they give good coments. In conclusion, I personally find this paper interesting and believe it can be published in the present form.
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
The article entitled « Investigation of Pressure Fields Generated by Two Simultaneous Discharges in Liquid Initiated by Wires” written by Mykhaylo Knyazyev et al and proposed as research article to Journal of Manufacturing and Materials Processing.
The matter tackled in the submitted article is related to hydraulic forming by high pulsed power and authors claim that they provide a method for evaluating the resulting pressure field of exploded copper wire underwater. So the overall topic matches with the scope of JMMP, at least by considering that the proposed matter deals with “Mechanics analysis and predictive modeling of engineering materials…and other operations in the manufacturing of parts and components” , “Establishment of advanced and innovative methodologies for manufacturing operations, including mechanical, thermal, optical, chemical, electrical or other processes” n the sense that the proposed method would allow evaluating the exerted field pressure on the part to be formed, and in the same way, it would serve the “Design of equipment or the development of tooling for materials processing and manufacturing” and at last, the proposed method would help the “Capability enhancement of materials processing and manufacturing through control, measurement, monitoring, and automation”.
However, the proposed method relies on strong assumptions and the method lacks of clarity. The scientific background should be developed since valuable results are already available in the scientific literature.
The organization of the abstract should be revisited as suggested : The abstract should be structured as proposed below and must contain all of the above 5 lead words.
*Background: Introductory sentence about the current gap(s) in our capabilities or knowledge that is (are) addressed by the research presented in this paper. 1-2 sentences.
*Objective: The primary objective of this study (no methods or procedures are named here unless they are the objective). 1-2 sentences.
*Methods: The experimental/computational/analytical methods that are developed or utilized towards the stated objective(s). Novel aspects of the work must be highlighted. 2-3 sentences.
*Results: Notable quantitative and qualitative results. New insights or capabilities derived from this research or new data that are not available in literature should be stated. 2-3 sentences.
*Conclusions: Main conclusions of this work. 1-2 sentences.
The introduction must be completed by the scientific objectives of the authors and by the strategy to address these objectives. Also it should include a description of the article organization.
In the introduction, you could also indicate that your findings would help numerical simulation such as the work performed in https://www.mdpi.com/2504-4494/5/2/47
The references list must be completed by latest works on the fields of exploded wires and hydraulic forming. In its actual form, there are no references among MDPI journals. Some references are given as example in this review.
In paragraph 2 :
L62 ‘the formulated scientific tasks” are not clear. They must be clearly identified earlier, in the introduction.
Fig 1 : I do not understand whether there is a gap or not between the plate 6 and the bottom 7. Are holes 8 filled with water or air ? Please add the location of the nipple.
L81, in addition to the diameter, could you specify the class quality of the steel studs ? Are they made of stainless steel A4 or another class ?
In fig 2, please adda dimension on each picture. For instance, in fig 5a, as far as I understand, the length of the plate is 500 mm so you could add an arrow along the plate edge and an indication of the length “500 mm”. In fig 5b, it could be the electrode length of 20 mm. In the legend, it is mentioned “dial gauge” but what is dialed ? the displacement ? what can of gauge is it ?
L92, the steel grade DC01 should also refer to the European Standard EN10130:2006. Authors should add ASTM and EN standards in the references list.
L98 “electrotechnical copper” please specify its grade according to standards.
L131-135 : Assumptions should be completed by : 1) The pressure field is supposed to be locally homogeneous above the hole and constant during the time. So the proposed method does not consider dynamic effects and gives a combined image of the pressure and impulse effects of a dynamic phenomenon, 2) The fluid-structure interaction is neglected in the analytical approach, 3) the spring-back is not considered.
These are three strong assumptions that are not considered in the presented analytical work and that play a major role in metal forming.
In fig 3, letter c showking the chamfer is not introduced, what is the chamfer value ?
L151-152, could you please specify the geometry ? what are the thickness, length and width ?
Whas the tensile test monitored by force or displacement control ? what was the rate of it ? How was the strength measurement performed ? by cell force ? which accuracy ? How was displacement measured ?
In fig 4 please specify how did you obtain stress from strength measurement.
L205-206 and eq 7, please explain how is flow stress calculated from measured values.
L219 there is a typographic mistake, strain rates should be 102-104 s-1.
L233 In the scientific literature it is possible to find visco plastic constitutive laws for DC01 (for instance https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12289-019-01513-3), these works could be mentioned.
L249, some authors recently attempt to measure the pressure impulse in hydraulic forming (by exploding wire), they could compare with numerical modelling, may be you could mention this work too (it is in a MDPI journal) : https://www.mdpi.com/1424-8220/21/13/4429/htm
L259-262 should be included in the introduction, it shows the interest of this study.
Fig 5, fig 6, fig 7 : axis labels have disappeared
In the discussion, three zones are found, please could you indicate them in fig 6 ?
L362-363 Here you could mention some works performed at Imperial College by S. Bland et al, for instance : https://aip.scitation.org/doi/abs/10.1063/1.5005174 ; https://aip.scitation.org/doi/abs/10.1063/1.5089813 And Shi et al : https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1361-6463/ac10a3/meta
According to the comments done before, I would suggest major modification before this article could be reconsidered for a review.
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
Accept in present form
Reviewer 3 Report
The reviewer thanks authors for having considered all remarks and comments and for having provided a consistent rebuttal letter.
To my opinion, the proposed paper has reached a higher standard that merrit to be published under its current form.
