Tool Wear Prediction in the Forming of Automotive DP980 Steel Sheet Using Statistical Sensitivity Analysis and Accelerated U-Bending Based Wear Test
, Junghan Song 1, Hong-Gee Kim 3, Gihyun Bae 1,* and Myoung-Gyu Lee 2,*Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Presented article by the team of authors Bang, J. et al. entitled "Tool wear prediction in the forming of automotive DP980 steel sheet using statistical sensitivity analysis and accelerated U-bending based wear test" solves the problem of technological process of forming using experimental as well as calculation methods. The team of authors bases their research on a relatively detailed analysis of literary sources and also uses a quality software and hardware portfolio in the process of their performed experiments. The overall structure of the article is relatively well and clearly organized. The results are understandable for the reader and at the end of the article, the authors declare a benefit for the scientific field and as well as for the industrial practice.
Author Response
*Answer to the comments from the reviewer 2
Title: Tool wear prediction in the forming of automotive DP980 steel sheet using statistical sensitivity analysis and accelerated U-bending based wear test
Authors: Junho Bang, Namsu Park, Junghan Song, Hong-Gee Kim, Gihyun Bae, and Myoung-Gyu Lee
The authors would like to thank the reviewer for invaluable comments whose incorporations have resulted in significant improvement of the revised manuscript. To provide concise and clear understanding to the readers, the manuscript has been significantly revised as the reviewer recommended. We now offer a response to the reviewers’ comments below:
Comments from the reviewer 1:
Presented article by the team of authors Bang, J. et al. entitled "Tool wear prediction in the forming of automotive DP980 steel sheet using statistical sensitivity analysis and accelerated U-bending based wear test" solves the problem of technological process of forming using experimental as well as calculation methods. The team of authors bases their research on a relatively detailed analysis of literary sources and also uses a quality software and hardware portfolio in the process of their performed experiments. The overall structure of the article is relatively well and clearly organized. The results are understandable for the reader and at the end of the article, the authors declare a benefit for the scientific field and as well as for the industrial practice.
[Authors’ response]
Thanks for your kind feedback. I hope our research results can be published by this journal. For improving the quality and the level of completion, some revisions and corrections are updated based on other reviewers, which includes the proof correction of English. If you have more comments and advises, please let us know. Thank you very much.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
The manuscript aims to investigate the methodology to develop the tool wear prediction model. It is an interesting research topic, however, there are few technical problems that require revisions. A list of requested revisions must be addressed is as follows.
- Please explain why the authors only considered the elastic contact behaviour but not the elastoplastic one based on the Hertz contact theory.
- The name of the vertical coordinates in Fig. 7 should be “S/N” but not “SN”. Please revise it.
- Please check carefully the use of English throughout the manuscript. A typical mistake can be found in line 2 of the section 3.3 on page 8, in which “Three repetitive test” should be revised to “Three repetitive tests”.
- It is suggested to consider the volumes and the profiles variance of the wear tracks and give the corresponding analysis.
- There are two “The” at the beginning of the section 4.2. Please revise it.
- Please avoid using the same symbol in the same manuscript. In this manuscript, symbol “a” was used to represent both “the radius of contact surface” (page 6) and the “punch width” in Table 6. Please check carefully about this kind of mistake entire the manuscript.
Author Response
*Answer to the comments from the reviewer 2
Title: Tool wear prediction in the forming of automotive DP980 steel sheet using statistical sensitivity analysis and accelerated U-bending based wear test
Authors: Junho Bang, Namsu Park, Junghan Song, Hong-Gee Kim, Gihyun Bae, and Myoung-Gyu Lee
The authors would like to thank the reviewer for invaluable comments whose incorporations have resulted in significant improvement of the revised manuscript. To provide concise and clear understanding to the readers, the manuscript has been significantly revised as the reviewer recommended. We now offer a response to the reviewers’ comments.
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
The reviewer comments of the paper «Tool wear prediction in the forming of automotive DP980 steel sheet using statistical sensitivity analysis and accelerated U-bending based wear test»- Reviewer
The authors presented an article «Tool wear prediction in the forming of automotive DP980 steel sheet using statistical sensitivity analysis and accelerated U-bending based wear test». However, there are several points in the article that require further explanation.
Comment 1:
In general, the abstract is well written. However, add quantitative and qualitative work results to the abstract. Add what's done with FEM.
Comment 2:
Overall, the introduction is well written and understandable. However, it will be useful to show the relevance of the material DP980 steel. What are the properties? Where is it used? What problems are there? It is helpful to add an article: DOI: 10.1007/s00170-016-9216-x
Lines 112 and 123 don't say anything about FEM. And this cannot be missed.
Comment 3:
For devices, software and machines used in research, indicate in parentheses (manufacturer, city, country).
Give the reference where the mechanical properties are taken from in table 1.
Are all figures original? If not needed appropriate citations and permissions.
What is the hardness of the workpiece and how was it measured?
Explain how Figure 1 relates to ongoing research? Is it advisable to use it? Rather, it distracts the reader from the essence of the research being carried out than helps.
Give the parameters of the PC on which the FEM calculations were carried out. What is the performance and calculation time?
Comment 4:
- Tool Wear Prediction Model
Are all formulas original? If not, please provide relevant citations.
Tables 3 and 4 should be located after the paragraph where they were cited.
It is also important to show what type of wear the designed model is related to: adhesive, abrasive, etc. It is useful to discuss this in the introduction as well.
How is the coefficient of friction determined? Does it change with increasing wear? This should be explained in detail in the text and figures.
We need SEM showing sections of measured wear depth.
Comment 5:
It will be useful to add a section of Nomenclature in which to sign all the physical quantities and abbreviations encountered in the article. There are many physical quantities in the text and such a section will help to find the description of the necessary element.
For example,
E1; E2 : Elastic modulus (MPa)
UHSS : Ultra-high strength steel
etc.
Comment 6:
Conclusions.
The conclusions must be rewritten. It is necessary to more clearly show the novelty of the article and the advantages of the proposed method. What is the difference from previous work in this area? Show practical relevance. What is the difference from other researchers? What are the quantitative and qualitative research results obtained?
Use the format:
- Conclusions 1
- Conclusions 2
- Etc.
The article is interesting. However, there are places that are in doubt. Authors should carefully study the comments and make improvements to the article step by step. All changes should be highlighted. After major changes can an article be considered for publication in the "Metals".
Author Response
*Answer to the comments from the reviewer 3
Title: Tool wear prediction in the forming of automotive DP980 steel sheet using statistical sensitivity analysis and accelerated U-bending based wear test
Authors: Junho Bang, Namsu Park, Junghan Song, Hong-Gee Kim, Gihyun Bae, and Myoung-Gyu Lee
The authors would like to thank the reviewer for invaluable comments whose incorporations have resulted in significant improvement of the revised manuscript. To provide concise and clear understanding to the readers, the manuscript has been significantly revised as the reviewer recommended. We now offer a response to the reviewers’ comments.
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report
The manuscript has been revised properly based on our comments.
Reviewer 3 Report
The authors have responded to all comments. The article can now be published.
