Next Article in Journal
Performance of Mechanical Properties of Ultrahigh-Strength Ferrous Steels Related to Strain-Induced Transformation
Previous Article in Journal
Intermetallic/Ceramic Composites Synthesized from Al–Ni–Ti Combustion with B4C Addition
Previous Article in Special Issue
Formation and Properties of Amorphous Multi-Component (CrFeMoNbZr)Ox Thin Films
 
 
Article
Peer-Review Record

Effect of Aluminum, Iron and Chromium Alloying on the Structure and Mechanical Properties of (Ti-Ni)-(Cu-Zr) Crystalline/Amorphous Composite Materials

Metals 2020, 10(7), 874; https://doi.org/10.3390/met10070874
by Andrey A. Tsarkov 1,2,*, Vladislav Yu. Zadorozhnyy 1,3, Alexey N. Solonin 1 and Dmitri V. Louzguine-Luzgin 2,4
Reviewer 1: Anonymous
Reviewer 2: Anonymous
Metals 2020, 10(7), 874; https://doi.org/10.3390/met10070874
Submission received: 9 June 2020 / Revised: 19 June 2020 / Accepted: 22 June 2020 / Published: 1 July 2020
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Advanced Non-Equilibrium Metallic Materials)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The investigation reported in this manuscript is a continuation of a former research already published by some of the authors in 2016, (ref. 27).

  • The interest of this kind of study can be beyond the average, but some details should be better described in order to have a more complete understanding of the metallurgical causes behind the reported results:
  • The % of Ti is kept constant in the Cr- and Fe- based combinations, but not in the Al- type alloys. Which is the reason for this choice?
  • Three different types of compositions have been considered, but it seems that only the Al-based composition has been fully studied by XRD and EDS. Are there differences in the case of the Cr- and Fe- based compositions?
  • How have the authors computed the % of amorphous phase and which is the accuracy of the compositional analysis of each amorphous or crystalline phase?
  • In the conclusions it is said that “Addition of more than 5 at.% of Al and Cr leads to precipitation of NiTi2 phase and reduction of plasticity”, but no compositions beyond this 5% have been tested in this paper.

In addition, the text is, perhaps, too schematic. Sections 1 and 2 would admit a more detailed development.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

The paper is technically interesting and present an interest to the journal readers. Engineering part in the paper is in relatively good order. Analysis and scientific justification are much weaker.

The abstract needs to be re-written and to be factual instead of proclamations

There are some slips in language. For example I do not know what "Vladislav Yu. Zadorozhnyy performed state-of-the art and some experiments" means.

SEM analysis needs explanation. I guess that imaging was done in BSE mode, which needs to be mentioned in Fig.2 caption. Also, there are much more phases as just two authors are trying to analyse. I appreciate that the system is very complex but the authors should openly admit it

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Back to TopTop