Salt-Fog Corrosion Behavior of GCr15 Steels Treated by Ultrasonic Strengthening Grinding Process
, Jun Wu 3, Xiaochu Liu 3,* and Jinrui Xiao 3,*Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Please find an attachment.
Thank you!
Comments for author File: 
Comments.pdf
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
In this manuscript, the authors investigated the corrosive behavior of GCr15 specimens subjected to salt spray corrosion after four finishing processes, namely ultrasonic shot peening (USP), ultrasonic dry and wet reinforcement grinding process DUSGP, WUSGP, and conventional polishing process. The effectiveness of these processes was analyzed by evaluating the capacitance arc, polarization curves and corrosion morphology.
In reviewer's opinion, the paper can be recommended for publication in Journal of Applied sciences with addressing the reviewer's comments listed below:
- In abstract the following finding `` The obtained corrosion pits and cracks show a width of approximately 1.4 µm and 2.1µm, respectively, degrading 78% and 75% compared to polishing``. Is for which one of process USP or DUSGP or WUSGP.
- Section 2.1 line 83 the unit of roughness is the micrometer not ``um``
- The quality of Figure 2 should be improved; it is very difficult to read the nomenclature.
- In Section 2, the salt spray process used to induce corrosion is not presented, nor is the surface treatment of the specimens. A figure of the experimental setup should be added to the text.
- Section 3. Line 127 the authors said that the specimens were immersed in seawater but the title of the manuscript states that the corrosion was created using a salt spray which is not the same corrosion process.
- Figure 6. The white substance that appears in the macroscopic corrosion morphology is salt or other phenomena that occur during corrosion.
- Figure 9. It is hard to understand from the discussion why this type of cracks happens after the finishing processes used in this investigation
- The novelty of the current research is not clear in the abstract and conclusion of the article, the authors should highlight the novelty compared to other research.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
