Analysis of Strain-Hardening Viscoplastic Wide Sheets Subject to Bending under Tension
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
This paper investigates the finite plane strain bending by taking into account of the strain-hardening viscoplastic materials. The research topic is interesting. A numerical procedure was proposed for the deduction, which is also valuable. The reviewer thinks it can be considered for this journal if the authors could well respond the comments as follow:
(1) Some references in the expression of the deduction process were ignored.
(2) More introduction and explanation should be included for the numerical example section.
(3) The conclusions should be more concise.
Author Response
All corrections are shown in red.
This paper investigates the finite plane strain bending by taking into account of the strain-hardening viscoplastic materials. The research topic is interesting. A numerical procedure was proposed for the deduction, which is also valuable. The reviewer thinks it can be considered for this journal if the authors could well respond the comments as follow:
1) Some references in the expression of the deduction process were ignored.
We have referred to a book where standard methods are considered and a paper where the method in question has been applied to a different problem. Note that most previous solutions are elastic/plastic. In this case, this kind of difficulty does not occur, and standard methods can be used.
(2) More introduction and explanation should be included for the numerical example section.
We have slightly extended Section 6. This section is an addition to Section 5 and, in general, could be included in Section 5. Therefore, all necessary explanations are provided in Section 5, which has also been extended.
(3) The conclusions should be more concise.
We have not understood this comment. This section occupies only ten lines. How can it be shorter?
Reviewer 2 Report
The paper concerns the analysis of strain-hardening viscoplastic wide sheets subject to bending under tension. Presented results and research methodology are interesting however, the motivation for undertaking research is not clear. The novelty as well as the motivation for undertaking research are not clarified. The Authors of the manuscript should clearly present what new discoveries they have made in relation to other researchers. Only papers that bring new information into the research topic are of interest to potential readers.
In the introduction part, Authors should show the motivation for conducting research. Introduction in a present form show only some results obtained by other researchers without any scientific discussion provided by the Authors of the manuscript. The Authors should reedit the introduction in order to increase the scientific impact.
The main disadvantage of the manuscript is the lack of experimental or modelling verification of presented results. Theoretical considerations should be an introduction to further research. The authors should improve the manuscript with model or experimental results.
Author Response
All corrections are shown in red.
1) The paper concerns the analysis of strain-hardening viscoplastic wide sheets subject to bending under tension. Presented results and research methodology are interesting however, the motivation for undertaking research is not clear. The novelty as well as the motivation for undertaking research are not clarified. The Authors of the manuscript should clearly present what new discoveries they have made in relation to other researchers. Only papers that bring new information into the research topic are of interest to potential readers
In the introduction part, Authors should show the motivation for conducting research. Introduction in a present form show only some results obtained by other researchers without any scientific discussion provided by the Authors of the manuscript. The Authors should reedit the Introduction in order to increase the scientific impact.
We have corrected the Introduction to show the motivation and novelty. Note that none of the previous papers has dealt with a general model for which our solution is valid.
2) The main disadvantage of the manuscript is the lack of experimental or modelling verification of presented results. Theoretical considerations should be an introduction to further research. The authors should improve the manuscript with model or experimental results.
We cannot do the experiment. We agree that theoretical considerations may be a starting point for further research. However, it is not necessary that the same team does both theory and experiment. We have emphasized in the conclusion the reviewer’s point of view. We have not understood the term “modelling verification”. The semi-analytical solutions do not need any verifications. In turn, these solutions are used to verify finite element solutions. We have emphasized this issue in the conclusion.
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report
Dear Authors,
The revised version of the manuscript is more clear in term of novelty aspect of presented methodology and results. Ii is true, that the some team does both theory and experiment. Hovever, publications prepared in cooperation with other teams are at a higher scientific level, because they show comprehensive solutions to a given problem. My advice to the authors is to consider preparing a comprehensive manuscript containing theoretical calculations and experimental verification in the future. Certainly, such a publication will be more interesting for readers.
