Production of a Novel Biomedical β-Type Titanium Alloy Ti-23.6Nb-5.1Mo-6.7Zr with Low Young’s Modulus

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The manuscript describes the production of b-type titanium alloy Ti-23.6Nb-5.1Mo-6.7Zr with low young’s modulus. In this paper, the methodology is well described, however, the introduction, the overall goal, the analysis of the results and the discussion are lacking.

It is unclear if the study focuses on the production of new Ti alloy in general or in particular to biomedical/orthopedic implant. For biomedical/orthopedic implants there is missing information:

(a)   Why do biomedical/orthopedic implants need low young modulus, and what kind of YM values do they need?  

(b)  Is there another reason for replacing Ti-6Al-4V implants?

(c)   How do these elements that the authors used in this study affect the human body?

Additionally, for biomedical application, the authors should add corrosion testing and cytotoxicity test (ISO-10993-12).

The authors should discuss their YM results, are they fit for orthopedic implants? How do those results in comparison to other b-type titanium alloy (except Ti-6Al-4V)?

 

In the last sentence of the conclusion section, “The novel metastable Ti-β alloy described here exhibited better mechanical properties than most recently developed metastable Ti-β Alloys” – This is a misleading sentence since the authors checked only hardness and YM. Again, if the main goal is orthopedic implant, the mechanical properties such as tensile, compression and especially fatigue are extremely important (more than hardness) and this information should be added before concluding for better mechanical properties. 

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

The manuscript is acceptable for publication in the current state. 

Author Response

The authors gratefully acknowledge the reviewers' comments of the submitted manuscript to Metals.

Reviewer 3 Report

Review for metals-1869192

I have reviewed the paper of “Production of a Novel Biomedical b-Type Titanium Alloy 2 Ti-23.6Nb-5.1Mo-6.7Zr with Low Young’s Modulus” submitted for the possible publication in the Journal of Metals. Despite written in a good way, the paper has some lack of points which need to be improved. My review report is shown below:

1.      This paper is an original research work about the microstructural and mechanical properties of β-Ti alloy.   

2.      The aim of study should be extended and revised. Why this paper is written, what is the difference of the present submitted paper from the previous works? What is needed to for this paper? Explain all these questions at the end of the introduction part of the paper.

3.      Extend the introduction with the suggested new references.  

4.      Despite giving 35 references at the end of the paper, add some more references at the end of the paper to understand better of the submitted paper. Several recent papers are suggested to be cited below:

a.      “Mechanical properties and electrochemical behavior of porous Ti-Nb biomaterials”, J. of the Mechanical Behavior of Biomedical Materials”, Vol. 87, pp. 59-67, November 2018.

 

b.     “Production and Characterization of a Bone-Like Porous Ti/Ti-Hydroxyapatite Functionally Graded Material”. Journal of Materials Engineering and Performance, Vol. 29, Issue 10, pp. 6455-6467, Oct 2020.

5.      The authors should discuss the results and compare the results with the previous studies and mention coherent/incoherent points with the possible reasons.

6.      Finally, I believe the submitted paper can only be acceptable as a “research paper” after the correcting and/or adding the required points above mentioned for the publication in the journal. I also believe that this paper might be beneficial for the academicians who are working in the specific area.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf