Thermodynamic Analysis Based on the ZL205A Alloy Milling Force Model Study
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Thermodynamic analysis based on the ZL205A alloy milling force model study. This paper can be accepted after major revision.
1) The chemical composition of ZL205A alloy is missing.
2) Need a correction “The shear band bandwidth is h, and shear strain occurs within this range resulting in Error! Reference source not found”
3) Mention the name of the lubricant in the experimental section.
4) “The first bracketed term on the right-hand side of equation 5 represents the strain hardening effect of the material; the second bracketed term represents the strain rate hardening effect of the material; and the third bracketed term represents the temperature rise thermal softening effect of the material.” The second and third brackets are not here.
5) From where the authors got the stress parameters for ZL205A aluminum alloy?
Author Response
Manuscript ID: lubricants-2589485
Type of manuscript: Article
Title: Thermodynamic analysis based on the ZL205A alloy milling force model Study
Authors: Jing Cui, XingQuan Shen *, ZhiJie Xin, HuiHu Lu, YanHao Shi, XiaoBin
Huang, BaoYu Sun
Response to Reviewer #1 Comments
Dear Reviewer:
Thank you for your comments concerning our manuscript entitled “Thermodynamic analysis based on the ZL205A alloy milling force model Study” (lubricants-2589485). Those comments are all valuable and very helpful for revising and improving our paper, as well as the important guiding significance to our research.We have studied comments carefully and have made corrections. And we did a careful spell and grammar check.The reviewer comments are laid out below in italicized font and specific concerns have been numbered. Our response is given in normal font.
（1）The reviewer’s comment: The chemical composition of ZL205A alloy is missing.
The author’s response: We appreciate your advice. We have added the chemical composition of ZL205A aluminum alloy in the paper. We value your insightful comments and hope the corrections are accepted. (Page 3, line 91)
（2）The reviewer’s comment: Need a correction “The shear band bandwidth is h, and shear strain occurs within this range resulting in Error! Reference source not found”.
The author’s response: We are very sorry for our careless mistake. The reference comes from “Thermoviscoelastic modelling of oblique cutting: forces and chip flow predictions”. We value your insightful comments and hope the corrections are accepted. (Page 8, line 255)
（3）The reviewer’s comment: Mention the name of the lubricant in the experimental section.
The author’s response: We agree with the reviewer's suggestion that we modify the experimental part of the lower chapter 2 and add the introduction of lubricant to make the experiment more abundant and complete. We hope you can accept the revised article. (Page 3, line 99)
（4）The reviewer’s comment: The first bracketed term on the right-hand side of equation 5 represents the strain hardening effect of the material; the second bracketed term represents the strain rate hardening effect of the material; and the third bracketed term represents the temperature rise thermal softening effect of the material.” The second and third brackets are not here.
The author’s response: We sincerely apologize for the lack of clarity in the manuscript. In order to avoid ambiguity, the corresponding parts of parentheses have been described by formulas. We hope you can accept the revised article. (Page 8, line 233-236)
（5）The reviewer’s comment: From where the authors got the stress parameters for ZL205A aluminum alloy?
The author’s response: Thank you very much for your question. We conducted a series of experiments on the mechanical properties of aluminum-copper alloys. The Johnson-Cook constitutive model and Johnson-Cook damage model was estab-lished for quasi-static tensile, Hopkinson rod and high-temperature tensile tests. Con-sidering the impact of adiabatic temperature rise, the parameter C is corrected. The model is verified by quasi-static smooth stretching, Hopkinson rod and high-temperature tensile tests, and the maximum error of the model does not exceed 4%. We hope you can accept the revised article. (Page 2, line 83-88)
In the end, we would like to express our thanks again to the reviewers and we have revised the manuscript and hope it will be accepted.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
The study object of this manuscript is ZL205A aluminum alloy, and the thermodynamic analysis model of milling force is proposed. The model takes into account the front Angle of the cutter and the friction Angle, in which the friction Angle is regulated by the friction coefficient. The validity of the model for predicting the milling force is verified by the milling experiment. Before the test, the milling stability was analyzed and considered more comprehensively. It provides a theoretical basis for the preparation of ZL205A aluminum alloy mechanical parts. The main problems are as follows:
1. The Introduction section is a bit lengthy, so it is suggested to simplify it slightly.
2. The variables in Table 2 of the manuscript can be bolded or marked in red.
3. Further introduction to the dynamometer can be condensed in the manuscript.
4. The axial cutting depth and radial cutting depth of the figure in the manuscript should be ap and ae.
5. In 116 lines of the manuscript, this paragraph should give a brief description of the changing trend of milling forces.
6. How is the amount of tool wear in Figure 4 measured in the manuscript?
7. The characters in some formulas in the manuscript lack descriptions, such as the first occurrence 
in formula (7), and the first occurrence 
in formula (14).
8. The second point of the results in the manuscript should indicate that the milling force can be predicted by adjusting the friction coefficient from the experimental results.
In general, this paper is innovative and has made contributions to the field of thermodynamic modeling of milling forces and the manuscript is full of content. However, there are also some problems such as description errors in the manuscript, and it is recommended to be revised and approved.
Author Response
Manuscript ID: lubricants-2589485
Type of manuscript: Article
Title: Thermodynamic analysis based on the ZL205A alloy milling force model Study
Authors: Jing Cui, XingQuan Shen *, ZhiJie Xin, HuiHu Lu, YanHao Shi, XiaoBin
Huang, BaoYu Sun
Response to Reviewer #2 Comments
Dear Reviewer:
Thank you for your comments concerning our manuscript entitled “Thermodynamic analysis based on the ZL205A alloy milling force model Study” (lubricants-2589485). Those comments are all valuable and very helpful for revising and improving our paper, as well as the important guiding significance to our research. We have studied comments carefully and have made corrections. And we did a careful spell and grammar check. The reviewer comments are laid out below in italicized font and specific concerns have been numbered. Our response is given in normal font.
（1）The reviewer’s comment: The Introduction section is a bit lengthy, so it is suggested to simplify it slightly.
The author’s response: We appreciate your advice. We have revised the sentences in the article to improve the clarity of the summary and content, and the revised parts are marked in red in the article. We value your insightful comments and hope that your correction is accepted. (Page 1-2, line 29-77)
（2）The reviewer’s comment: The variables in Table 2 of the manuscript can be bolded or marked in red.
The author’s response: We agree with the reviewer's suggestion, and we have marked the variables in Table 2 in red to make the cutting parameters more clear We value your insightful comments and hope that your correction is accepted. (Page 3, line 105)
（3）The reviewer’s comment: Further introduction to the dynamometer can be condensed in the manuscript.
The author’s response: We agree with the reviewer's suggestion that we simplify the introduction of the dynamometer to make the structure more concise. We hope that you can accept the revised article. (Page 3, line 99-101)
（4）The reviewer’s comment: The axial cutting depth and radial cutting depth of the figure in the manuscript should be ap and ae.
The author’s response: We appreciate your advice. We have modified the symbols corresponding to figure 2, 7, 8, 9, and 10 in the article. We value your insightful comments and hope that your correction is accepted. (Page 4-figure 2, Page 11-figure 7-8, Page 12-figure 9, Page 13-figure 10)
（5）The reviewer’s comment: In 116 lines of the manuscript, this paragraph should give a brief description of the changing trend of milling forces.
The author’s response: We appreciate your advice. We have added the changing trend of milling force to the article to improve the clarity of the content, and the modified part is marked in red in the article. We value your insightful comments and hope that your corrections are accepted. (Page 4, line 119-120)
（6）The reviewer’s comment: How is the amount of tool wear in Figure 4 measured in the manuscript?
The author’s response: We appreciate your question. When the milling cutter is worn to a certain limit, it can no longer be used, and this wear is called the blunt standard. There are two conventional methods to develop the blunt standard, the blunt standard of small diameter end milling cutter should not exceed the critical value of severe tool wear; The rigidity of the process system is poor, and the minimum blunting standard should be specified. The wear of each blade of the milling cutter is basically the same, so it is considered to be stable cutting.
（7）The reviewer’s comment: The characters in some formulas in the manuscript lack descriptions, such as the first occurrence in formula (7), and the first occurrence in formula (14).
The author’s response: We appreciate your advice. We have modified the description of missing symbols in the article to improve the clarity of the formula, and the modified part is marked in red in the article. We value your insightful comments and hope that your corrections are accepted. (Page 8-9, line 244-245, 261)
（8）The reviewer’s comment: The second point of the results in the manuscript should indicate that the milling force can be predicted by adjusting the friction coefficient from the experimental results.
The author’s response: We appreciate your advice. We have added the conclusion part of the article to improve the clarity of the conclusion, and the modified part is marked in red in the article. We value your insightful comments and hope that your corrections are accepted. (Page 13, line 384-385)
In the end, we would like to express our thanks again to the reviewers and we have revised the manuscript and hope it will be accepted.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
There are few questions still existes:-
1) What is the unit of Table 2 (wt% or at%)?
2) Need a correction “ resulting in Error! Reference source not found”.-253 lines.-Still exists the error.
3) The first bracketed term on the right-hand side of equation 5 represents the strain hardening effect of the material; the second bracketed term represents the strain rate hardening effect of the material; and the third bracketed term represents the temperature rise thermal softening effect of the material.”
Still the second and third brackets are not here.
Moderate editing of English language required.
Author Response
Manuscript ID: lubricants-2589485
Type of manuscript: Article
Title: Thermodynamic analysis based on the ZL205A alloy milling force model Study
Authors: Jing Cui, XingQuan Shen *, ZhiJie Xin, HuiHu Lu, YanHao Shi, XiaoBin
Huang, BaoYu Sun
Response to Reviewer #1 Comments
Dear Reviewer:
Thank you for your comments concerning our manuscript entitled “Thermodynamic analysis based on the ZL205A alloy milling force model Study” (lubricants-2589485). Those comments are all valuable and very helpful for revising and improving our paper, as well as the important guiding significance to our research. We have studied comments carefully and have made corrections. And we did a careful spell and grammar check. The reviewer comments are laid out below in italicized font and specific concerns have been numbered. Our response is given in normal font.
（1）The reviewer’s comment: What is the unit of Table 2 (wt% or at%)?
The author’s response: We are very sorry for our careless mistake. The units in Table 2 are wt.% and are added under the heading. We value your insightful comments and hope the corrections are accepted. (Page 2, line 90)
（2）The reviewer’s comment: Need a correction “resulting in Error! Reference source not found”. -253 lines. -Still exists the error.
The author’s response: We are very sorry for our careless mistake. Reference here formatting error, has now been modified. We value your insightful comments and hope that your correction is accepted. (Page 9, line 255)
（3）The reviewer’s comment: The first bracketed term on the right-hand side of equation 5 represents the strain hardening effect of the material; the second bracketed term represents the strain rate hardening effect of the material; and the third bracketed term represents the temperature rise thermal softening effect of the material.”
Still the second and third brackets are not here.
The author’s response: We are sorry that the expression of formula 5 is not clear, and the expression has been modified in the manuscript. We hope you can accept the revised article. (Page 8, line 233-236)
In the end, we would like to express our thanks again to the reviewers and we have revised the manuscript and hope it will be accepted.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
