Next Article in Journal
In-Process Fingerprints of Dissimilar Titanium Alloy Diffusion Bonded Layers from Hole Drilling Force Data
Next Article in Special Issue
Investigation of Microstructure and Mechanical Properties of Layered Material Produced by Adding Al2O3 to 316L Stainless Steel
Previous Article in Journal
Automatic Ore Blending Optimization Algorithm for Sintering Based on the Cartesian Product
Previous Article in Special Issue
Problems in Welding of High Nitrogen Steel: A Review
 
 
Article
Peer-Review Record

Effect of Solution Temperature on Tension-Compression Asymmetry in Metastable β-Titanium Alloys

Metals 2022, 12(8), 1352; https://doi.org/10.3390/met12081352
by Yong Wen 1, Jun Wang 1,*, Shiyun Duan 2,* and Cong Li 3,*
Reviewer 1:
Reviewer 2:
Reviewer 3:
Metals 2022, 12(8), 1352; https://doi.org/10.3390/met12081352
Submission received: 11 July 2022 / Revised: 12 August 2022 / Accepted: 12 August 2022 / Published: 15 August 2022

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Dear Authors, 

my remarks on your study are as follows:

1) l. 60-61 "hoping to provide a scientific reference for the study of mechanical properties of biological titanium alloys" - this need updating. The main scientific reference should be given hear. 

2) The samples were tested three times - why you did not give the errors on the graphs?

3) The names of specific measuring instruments should be given.

4) Descriptions in Fig. 4, 5, 6,  should be enlarged. 

5) The possible use of the results - what the research was done for? - should be indicated in the Conclusions and Introduction. 

6) Further investigations, as a result of presented study, should be mentioned in the Conclusion Chapter. 

7) The Introduction is relatively poor. It can be extended by referring to more references.

 

Author Response

Comment 1: 60-61 "hoping to provide a scientific reference for the study of mechanical properties of biological titanium alloys" - this need updating. The main scientific reference should be given hear.

Response: We are sorry for the misunderstanding resulted by this sentence, the sentence has been changed to “hoping to provide new insight for the study of mechanical properties of biological titanium alloys”.

 

Comment 2:The samples were tested three times - why you did not give the errors on the graphs?

Response: Changes have been made, the error bar has been added.

 

Comment 3:The names of specific measuring instruments should be given.

Response: The names of specific measuring instruments are given in the manuscript.

 

Comment 4: Descriptions in Fig. 4, 5, 6, should be enlarged.

Response: Changes have been made.

 

Comment 5:The possible use of the results - what the research was done for? - should be indicated in the Conclusions and Introduction.

Response: More information has been added in the related parts.

 

Comment 6:Further investigations, as a result of presented study, should be mentioned in the Conclusion Chapter.

Response: More information has been added in the related parts.

 

Comment 7: The Introduction is relatively poor. It can be extended by referring to more references.

Response: More reference has been added in the introduction part.

Reviewer 2 Report

The paper shows a work on Effect of solution temperature on tension-compression asymmetry in metastable β-titanium alloys. I think that the work should present some changes to be considered for publication.

First, authors must place a space between the digits and the units throughout the document.

In the graph of hardness evolution, you must place the standard deviation.

In presenting the microstructure, the authors should add more information.

In the TEM results, the authors could add more images with SAED to better characterize the samples. In the image they present, I think they could improve since the focus doesn't seem to be the best to present the deformation

Author Response

Comment 1: First, authors must place a space between the digits and the units throughout the document.

Response: Changes have been made.

 

Comment 2: In the graph of hardness evolution, you must place the standard deviation.

Response: Changes have been made in Figure 3.

 

Comment 3: In presenting the microstructure, the authors should add more information.

Response: More information has been added.

 

Comment 4: In the TEM results, the authors could add more images with SAED to better characterize the samples. In the image they present, I think they could improve since the focus doesn't seem to be the best to present the deformation

Response: More images have been added in the related parts.

Reviewer 3 Report

I recommend the paper for publication.

Author Response

Many thanks for the reviewer's comments.

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Dear Authors, 

I accept your modifications. 

Reviewer

Author Response

Thanks for reviewer's comments.

Reviewer 2 Report

The paper can be now accepted 

Author Response

Thanks for reviewer's comments.

Back to TopTop