Sustainable Diamond Burnishing of Chromium–Nickel Austenitic Stainless Steels: Effects on Surface Integrity and Fatigue Limit
, Galya Duncheva 1, Angel Anchev 1, Vladimir Dunchev 1, Kalin Anastasov 2 and Yaroslav Argirov 3
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsI would be very glad to review the paper in depth, the topic is interesting and valuable, but it has certain problems affecting the paper quality.
#1. The magnification of the local magnified image is missing in Figure 4. In addition, the magnification in Figure 4 is not uniform. Why is the magnification is 1500× in Figure 4d. Please unify the magnification in Figure 4.
#2.The title of Figure 4 is the microstructures of the surface and subsurface layers obtained by DB under different conditions. Then only the subsurface microstructure is shown in Figure 4. Lack of surface morphology of the workpiece.
#3.The clarity of Figure 4 needs to be improved.
#4. Suggest adding the initial roughness parameter (Ra) of the workpiece for better comparison.
#5. The enlarged image in Figure 6a is a little misleading. The bar graph should start from zero in order to better display the differences in sample roughness parameters under different conditions. Additionally, the local enlarged image in Figure 6a lacks error bars.
#6. D is dry grinding, please check if there are any errors in lines 318-319 on page 10. (The better oil-holding capacity of specimens A and D is also confirmed by the larger values of the functional parameter Rvk (see Table 5)).
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThis manuscript investigates the surface integrity and fatigue limit of sustainable diamond burnishing of chromium -nickel austenitic stainless steel, proposes four processes, and conducts experimental analysis. The manuscript is well organized and the experimental data analysis is also relatively sufficient. Before the manuscript is recommended for acceptance, the following issues require additional explanations or clarifications.
1. In the Introduction section, the authors were suggested to supplement the existing research on the correlation between surface integrity and fatigue limit of processed specimen.
2. In the experiment, it is necessary to clarify the details of how to use thermocouples for measuring the surface temperature during machining. This is a crucial experimental detail. The processing temperatures of different processes were not mentioned or discussed in the experimental results.
3. Which position was the surface roughness measured on the specimen? Did the authors measure 6 points on a single specimen surface or measure the machined surface of 6 specimens?
4. The Section 3.1 is suggested to be placed in section 2.1, which is not an experimental result.
5. In Section 3.2.1, the authors wrote “The temperature primarily depends on the amount of heat generated in the plastic deformation process (mostly due to the sliding friction) and is less strongly related to the cooling conditions.” How to understand that temperature is not closely related to cooling conditions?
6. How to understand Figure 9? The residual stress distribution of different specimens displayed in Figure 9 is irregular. Further explanation is needed for the information shown in Figure 9.
7. Do the four processes proposed by the authors also have drawbacks when applied in engineering? From a dialectical perspective, every process has certain limitations in its application, for example, in terms of efficiency and tool life.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThis paper focused on the diamond burnishing of chromium-nickel austenitic stainless steels, the effect of diamond burnishing on the microstructure, roughness, micro hardness has been analyzed. The comments as following:
1. The research target and application scenarios of this paper should be illustrated in the abstract.
2. In Figure 4, how about the effect of different conditions on the quantitative thickness of the deformed layer?
3. In Figure 6b, the microhardness results should be put into the section 3.2.3.
4. In section 3.2.4, how about the original microhardness after turning?
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
