Atomistic Insights into the Competition between Damage and Dynamic Recrystallization Stimulated by the Precipitate Mg17Al12 in Magnesium Alloys
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
In lines 131-134, 135-140, 141-144 the asseverations don't have references, which is very important to explain
any results, it is very important to establish if there are previous knowledge and/or to establish a possible hypothesis. Not only explain the results. Please, improve all similar details.
Figure 9 must be improved because Pure Mg, 4, and 8 precipitates lines are not shown clearly.
It is necessary to have clarity in the results of the figures. Please, improve all figures with any similar details.
Author Response
Q1: In lines 131-134, 135-140, 141-144 the asseverations don't have references, which is very important to explain any results, it is very important to establish if there are previous knowledge and/or to establish a possible hypothesis. Not only explain the results. Please, improve all similar details.
Thanks for the reviewer’s valuable suggestions. The analyses in lines 131-134, 135-140, 141-144 are based on the Ref. 29, which has been cited at line 121.
Q2: Figure 9 must be improved because Pure Mg, 4, and 8 precipitates lines are not shown clearly. It is necessary to have clarity in the results of the figures. Please, improve all figures with any similar details.
The quality of all figures has been improved according to the reviewer’s suggestions in lines 194 and 216.
The modifications can be found in the coverletter. The authors are looking forward to your positive response
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
The paper is worth of publication
Author Response
The authors are sincerely grateful to the reviewer for the comments. The manuscript has been thoroughly proofread.
Reviewer 3 Report
The manuscript presents an atomistic insight into the competition between damage and dynamic recrystallization in Mg alloys with focus on the role of precipitates, here Mg17Al12. The effects of the distribution of the precipitates and their dimensions on the void nucleation, dislocation emission and void growth are discussed. Damage evolution of a system with a pre-existed void is compared with a system with a single precipitate - two extra stages during damage evolution have been found.
The paper is well written and structured. There are only a few comments and suggestions which would improve the quality of the paper.
It would be helpful the Introduction would address the size and the coherence to provide some insight to this. The reason why plate-shaped precipitates are used should be provided in more clearness. Figure 1 and 2 are rather large in relation to the content. Please check that the text referring to a Figure is provided before the Figure is shown (Figure 3 and 4 for example). You mention that keeping the same volume fraction and varying the dimensions and spacings of the precipitates, refinement and densification increases deformation compatibility, hindering void nucleation and elevating the toughness. It is suggested to distinguish between varying the dimension and spacing, either dimension or spacing, in more detail. In Figure 7 and 9 should be taken care that all curves/lines start a Zero strain (some line unfortunately overlap). The summary focuses on two major conclusions – might be wise to not cluster the summary this way. The first point starts off the (in)coherence of the interface between the precipitates and the matrix – please my comment above: the paper lacks in the background on this. After addressing the comments and suggestions the paper can be published.
Author Response
Q1: It would be helpful the Introduction would address the size and the coherence to provide some insight to this.
The authors deeply appreciate the reviewer for the detailed comments and valuable suggestions. The references concerning the size and coherence have been added into the Introduction and lines 131-133, respectively.
Q2: The reason why plate-shaped precipitates are used should be provided in more clearness.
The reasons for the plate-shaped precipitates in lines 77-78.
The main alloying element in most Mg alloys is aluminum, which results in the several precipitates. The most common one is the plate-shaped Mg17Al12 [22-24].
Q3: Figure 1 and 2 are rather large in relation to the content.
The figure sizes have been modified.
Q4: Please check that the text referring to a Figure is provided before the Figure is shown (Figure 3 and 4 for example).
The problem of the text referring to figures has been fixed.
Q5: You mention that keeping the same volume fraction and varying the dimensions and spacings of the precipitates, refinement and densification increases deformation compatibility, hindering void nucleation and elevating the toughness. It is suggested to distinguish between varying the dimension and spacing, either dimension or spacing, in more detail.
Keeping the same volume fraction and periodic arrangement, the precipitates naturally become dense as the dimension decreases. That is, both dimension and spacing vary together.
Q6: In Figure 7 and 9 should be taken care that all curves/lines start a Zero strain (some line unfortunately overlap).
They have been modified.
Q7: The summary focuses on two major conclusions – might be wise to not cluster the summary this way. The first point starts off the (in)coherence of the interface between the precipitates and the matrix – please my comment above: the paper lacks in the background on this.
According to Refs. 37 and 38, the interface between the precipitates Mg17Al12 and the matrix is not perfectly coherent. It is stated in line 131-133.
The modifications can be found in the coverletter. The authors are looking forward to your positive response.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
