Influence of Al2O3 Nanoparticles Addition in ZA-27 Alloy-Based Nanocomposites and Soft Computing Prediction
, Petr Svoboda 3, Simon Klančnik 4, Adrian But 5, Miloš Vorkapić 6, Marta Harničárová 7,8 and Blaža Stojanović 9,*
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
This paper attacks an interesting and cumbersome problem of predicting wear in tribological contacts with nanocomposite materials.
Have authors tested the ANN on data from other composites or this is specific of ZA-27 alloy composite?
Because wear rate coefficient depends like the coefficient of friction on a lot of parameters, commonly this factor is found experimentally.
Any wear surface characterization for the system studied?
Author Response
see the attachment
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
The manuscript investigates the influence of amount and size of Al2O3 particles on the wear characteristics of ZA-27 alloy-based 24 nanocomposites. Some further checks are needed before being considered published in Lubricantes.
1. The amount of Al2O3 used in this study ranges from 0.2 to 0.5%, while other studies could go high as 5%. Why not try higher amounts? Did authors try using high amounts and still get a good fit on the models?
2. The SEM characterizations are highly recommended to show the distribution of Al2O3 particles in the composite's matrix.
3. In Figure 4, some words in the images are not correctly shown, including Al2O3 without subscripts, nm3/m should be shown vertically, "Normal load" in (h) does not fully appear.
4. In Figure 5 and 6, they lack the (a)(b)... to label the sub-figures.
5. In Figure 7, the x-axis title "Test no." should be placed in the center position.
6. The reference format should be double-checked to ensure consistency.
Author Response
see the attachment
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
1. The study of the tribological properties of nano aluminium oxide is not new and has been reported by several researchers. The authors have also indicated the usage of Al2O3. I would suggest to have more defined and explained Novelty of the work.
2. The authors did not show the micro structure of the composite developed. They must analyze the micro structure and indicate the defects uf any.
3. Why ISO VG 220 was chosen? Any specific reason?
4. The authors have used Anova, RSM and ANN to predict the vales but they did not discuss anything about the influence of the nanoparticles on the properties of the alloy. It is important to show a clear understanding of how the properties improved or deteriorated.
5. The conclusion is not matching with the title. The content of the article too needs to be re-written with emphasis on getting the optimized results and indicating how the addition of nano particles have changed the properties.The scientific reasons needs to presented accordingly.
6. The manuscript is more of comparing the computational methodologies rather than concentrating on the tribo behavior and reasoning.
Author Response
see the attachment
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 3 Report
The authors have improved the manuscript considerably, however minor modifications are required as indicated below:
i. The usage of small amounts of the reinforcement do not seem to be a great novelty , however for the present one it can be accepted only if you can also include how much the small amounts have affected the results as compared to the earlier published work.
ii. Conclusions must also include brief of the wear analysis particularly highlighting the comparison/benefit of using small amount of the reinforcement,
iii. Please include the number of nodes in ANN. Also, please mention how much was % of data taken for testing, training and validation.
iv. The title is not interesting at present after adding "small amount"...You may replace small amount with "content" and also include "soft computing methods" as these are also done in arriving the final result.
Author Response
see the attachment
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
