Applications of Tungsten Pseudo-Alloys in the Energy Sector

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

 

The authors of this paper explore the potential use of W alloys as rotor materials in flywheel energy storage systems, which is an intriguing subject as it presents new material options and promotes the recycling of waste materials. However, there are some concerns that should be addressed to improve the manuscript.

1. Please avoid using acronyms in the manuscripts’ abstract. When they are first introduced in the text, they should be explained, e.g. W-MMC is not introduced/explained anywhere in the manuscript.

2. At line 74 it is stated that “As can be seen from the kinetic energy equation…” but there is no equation. The authors should insert an equation or just explain the relationship between the kinetic energy and angular velocity.

3. The authors suggest that W-composites may be more suitable for rotor fabrication than steel components due to their higher density and strength (lines 93-98). However, they acknowledge that there are other factors that must be considered. What additional requirements must W-composites meet to be considered viable materials for rotor fabrication?

4. Throughout the manuscript there are several unintelligible phrases/passages:

• line 17: there is no predicate in “Materials with densities = 7 800 kg/m3, and operating at lower to medium speeds up to 20 000 rpm.”

• Lines 82-86: should be carefully revised as it might be a part of the motivation for this study.

• Lines 199-200: please avoid repetitions such as “by annealing in vacuum at annealing temperature ”.

• Line 215: ”in contrast” - than

• Lines 222-223 : Is not clear which are the two terms of the comparison. In figure 7 one cannot compare the two microstructures. The authors should at least specify where is the other case presented.

  5. The conclusions section of the manuscript should be revised to more accurately emphasize the factors that support W-composites as materials for FESS components. Additionally, certain parts of this section may be more appropriate for the introductory part of the manuscript (e.g. lines 292-304).

•  

  •  

Comments on the Quality of English Language

The entire manuscript should be examined for English errors. Some parts should be reformulated.

 

Author Response

Good day, 
Thank you to the reviewer for the stimulating questions, answers and additions are attached. "Please see the attachment."

Thank you and have a nice day.

 

 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This manuscript submitted by Adéla Macháčková et. al., reports using new raw materials and recycled waste materials from chips to produce high-strength W-MMC materials for flywheels, which are used in rotor production for the energy sector. The sintering behavior, chemical compositions, and mechanical properties of W-MMC alloys fabricated with different precursors are studied and then compared. It is shown that W-MMC alloys made from recycled waste chips also acquire feasible strength and ductility for machining and forming processes. The results look reasonable and deserve to be published. Authors need to address the following concerns and comments before publishing their manuscript.    

The current title of the manuscript is too general to reflect the content and results reported in this manuscript. The major work in the manuscript focuses on using different recycled materials to synthesize W-MMC alloys and measuring the mechanical properties of fabricated materials. The current title sounds like the description of the specific application of these materials in the energy sector, however, the only application here is to fabricate flywheels.

 

Other comments:

- Line 14, what’s W-MMC? Authors need to give the full name of the abbreviation before use.

-Figure 2, ‘vakuum’ should be vacuum.

-Line 167, what are R_p0.2 nad R_m? Authors need to define the symbol before use.

-Line 177, why only the microstructure of figure 3d is desired? Figs 3b-d are all look quite similar. Authors need to explain on the details of microstructures in fig 3.

-Figure 4, how do you measure mechanical properties, tension, compression, or other methods? The experimental details need to be described in section 2. Why does strength drop in the sample quenched at 1000 ºC?

-Line 259-260, apparently chips after reduction and powder from normal production shown in fig 10 have different particle sizes. TNRC/TN on the right is finer than the one on the left. It is necessary to discuss this potential effect on sintering behavior and associated mechanical properties.

-Figure 12. The unit of X-axis deformation is MPa. This cannot be right.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Comments on the Quality of English Language

The English language is fine.

Author Response

Good day,

Thank you to the reviewer for the stimulating questions, answers and additions are attached.  "Please see the attachment."

Thank you and have a nice day.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf