Prediction of a Material Property Gradient near the Friction Surface in Axisymmetric Extrusion and Drawing
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
I have some comments about this paper.
1. There are many wrong degrees “0” in the text， please change them to “o”.
2. Please give a further clear description of the predictive effect of this model.
3. The notation for formula 13 is missing half a parenthesis.
Author Response
- There are many wrong degrees “0” in the text，please change them to “o”.
This correction has been implemented in the revised manuscript.
- Please give a further clear description of the predictive effect of this model.
The section Discussion has been modified to provide the required description (shown in red).
- The notation for formula 13 is missing half a parenthesis.
This correction has been implemented in the revised manuscript.
Reviewer 2 Report
The reviewed paper titled “Prediction of a Material Properties Gradient near the Friction Surface in Axisymmetric Extrusion and Drawing” is of a sufficient scientific level. Theoretical prediction of the evolution of material properties near the friction surface in axisymmetric extrusion and drawing was demonstrated. Unfortunately, the issues discussed in this work are quite commonly known and are characterized by little originality. In my opinion, it is suitable for publication in its current form. Experimental research should be added to theoretical research, then the work in my opinion can be published
The authors did not avoid minor errors and inaccuracies. Notes for reflection and minor correction of the work:
1. Introduction - the introduction to the work is generally quite well described, but it would be worth writing a few sentences about the influence of friction on the uniformity of deformation and the quality of metal products. This would emphasize the sense of the presented research.
2. Statement of the Problem - overall fairly well described
3. General Solution - overall fairly well described
4. Strain Rate and Work Rate Intensity Factors- overall fairly well described
5. Thickness of the Layer of Intensive Plastic Deformation and Hardness at the Friction Surface - overall fairly well described
6. Numerical Examples - Results are described correctly, but calculations are based on known formulas. It is difficult to find something new that would expand knowledge in this research area
7. Discussion - the analysis of the results is very poor, which should be associated with the weak research potential of the work. It is difficult to draw any breakthrough conclusions
8. No conclusions. in a journal with such an impact factor, this is unacceptable
9. Experimental research should be added
Author Response
Please find the file attached.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
The manuscript by the author describes a theoretical solution in conjunction with Hosford’s yield criterion for determining the material properties near the friction surface in axisymmetric extrusion and drawing. The work is interesting, but I have some notes concerning clarity of the method and results, it would be very nice if a Nomenclature illustrating all the parameters appeared in the manuscript is added, for papers focusing on theory. The in-text citation of figures should be using the same style, both Figure 1 and Fig. 2 exist. Figure caption could be more detailed, e.g. figure 1, what process? Also, the conclusions can be more clear if adding a separate section of Conclusions which contains only the most important conclusions (in bullet points). Overall, it is a good and novel study on this subject, the text is clear and easy to read, this work reminded me of some very recently published articles on experimental studies (EBSD characterisation) and modelling (FEM) of the extrusion process with more or less similar gradient microstructure near the friction surface. In case authors are interested, and for possible citation: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmachtools.2021.103771; https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2020.116682
Author Response
All corrections proposed by the reviewer have been incorporated into the revised manuscript. As to the section Conclusions, the instruction for authors reads:
- Conclusions: This section is not mandatory but can be added to the manuscript if the discussion is unusually long or complex.
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report
The work is not suitable for publication in this form
