Distribution and Prediction of Incremental Cutter Flank Wear in High-Efficiency Milling

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The paper presents experimental, mathematical and numerical studies of the cutter flank wear increment at high efficiency milling.  The problems addressed are important from the point of view of applications as well as from scientific point view. The work is quite interesting, and, in my opinion, it can be interesting for the journal readers. However, before possible publication, the following problems should be addressed:

1. The manuscript should be thoroughly checked for typographical and editorial errors (see for example line 407)

2. Describe in more detail the origin of formula (13)

3. Please increase resolution of some images.

Author Response

Dear editor/reviewer,

Please see the attached file "Responses to reviewer 1 comments".

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

The paper presents the results of stiffness distribution and pressure changes on the tool wear flank. The study is well presented, structured and with specific result. However, I suggest some minor changes to improve:

These processes are very complex and different in many aspects and not all of them are dealt with in this paper, so the selected process material and boundary conditions should be justified in the introduction.

Workpiece material, contour conditions, tool material etc. are also a major influence factor and the wear mechanisms are different. In this respect, the work carried out is not correctly contextualised.

Table 1 not indicated in text and the parameters are not expressed properly. In this sense an image can help to explain them.

Image 1 is far removed from the context.

It is not specified how the acquisition equipment is used, and whether it is on the tool or on the workpiece?

The selected tool is very particular, so its use must be justified and the particularity of the equations obtained must be indicated.

Error reference page 16.

Conclusions need to be improved in both wording and content.

Author Response

Dear editor/reviewer,

Please see the attached file "Responses to reviewer 2 comments".

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

In the reviewer opinion, the paper can be recommended for publication in Applied science journal after addressing the following comments:

- What is the novelty of the current research? It's not clear from the abstract, or even the conclusion.

- Table 1 it seems that the correct unit of the milling linear velocity which is similar to feed rate is in mm/min and not in m/min. or this parameter should be called the cutting velocity.

- In the same table the unit of the spindle speed should be rpm and not r/min.

- The quality of Figure 1 should be improved. The nomenclature of the figure is not clear

- Line 192, a reference to Hertz' theory should be added

- Figure 4 is prepared using what tool or software? it should be specified on the text.

- Figure 4 to 7 the colored area is very small it is very difficult to differentiate the difference between the instantaneous contact stiffness of the milling cutter flank or the wear increment it might be necessary to zoom and the maximum values of these parameters should be indicated.

- The correlation between contact stiffness and the wear increment should be analyzed and interpreted in the text with the corresponding values.

Author Response

Dear editor/reviewer,

Please see the attached file "Responses to reviewer 3 comments".

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf