Next Article in Journal
Heat Treatment and Austenitization Temperature Effect on Microstructure and Impact Toughness of an Ultra-High Strength Steel
Next Article in Special Issue
Combined Effects of EMBr and SEMS on Melt Flow and Solidification in a Thin Slab Continuous Caster
Previous Article in Journal
Forming a Flanged Hole When Quenching Press-Hardened Steel for Mechanical Fastening
Previous Article in Special Issue
Cone Clogging of Submerged Entry Nozzle in Rare Earth Treated Ultra-Low Carbon Al-Killed Steel and Its Effect on the Flow Field and Vortex in the Mold
 
 
Article
Peer-Review Record

Flow Field and Temperature Field in a Four-Strand Tundish Heated by Plasma

Metals 2021, 11(5), 722; https://doi.org/10.3390/met11050722
by Mengjing Zhao, Yong Wang, Shufeng Yang *, Maolin Ye, Jingshe Li * and Yuhang Liu
Reviewer 1: Anonymous
Reviewer 2: Anonymous
Metals 2021, 11(5), 722; https://doi.org/10.3390/met11050722
Submission received: 3 April 2021 / Revised: 16 April 2021 / Accepted: 24 April 2021 / Published: 28 April 2021

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The paper entitled "Flow field and temperature field in a four-strand tundish
heated by plasma" presents interesting results concern the simulation of a tundish plasma heating process. In general the paper is well-organized, however some English language and typos must be corrected. In order to accept the paper some suggestions are depicted:

(1) Abstract: The words "outlet 1 and 2" and "plan 2" confuse the reader who has not read the article, please improve the abstract so that it does not depend on reading the article.

(2) Abstract: "When the heating power is 1000KW..." the symbol kilogram in power must be written in lowercase. This is valid for all article, i.e., text and figures.

(3) There was not especified an "2. Theoretical section" for example, i.e., after the "1. Introduction", it is presented the "2.1. Geometric Model".  Please correct.

(4) Figures 1 and 2: Please insert a scale value.

(5) Table 2: please correct the numbers in the units as superscripts.

(6) It is not clear what simulation software was used by authors. Please describe and specify.

(7) With regard to the discussion of results, the authors do not compare their results with the literature. There is no citation in the results and discussion section, please improve this.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

As attached.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

The authors made the corrections as suggested, it is recommended that the article be published in the present form.

Back to TopTop