Optimization of Multi-Track Laser-Cladding Process of Titanium Alloy Based on RSM and NSGA-II Algorithm
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The article is devoted to a very relevant and popular research topic, namely, the study of the features of surfacing using laser technologies. In this work, laser cladding was carried out with TC4 alloy. While studying the paper, I had several questions and comments.
1. Why was titanium alloy chosen as a surfacing material? Where are these technologies used in practice? I am familiar with the technologies for obtaining products from this alloy using additive technologies: https://hdl.handle.net/10356/88710 https://doi.org/10.3390/coatings12060792 https://doi.org/10.3390/ma12193269 https://doi.org/10.3390/coatings12070986 https://doi.org/10.3390/machines8040079
However, in this work, it is the technology of surface surfacing that is investigated. In the introduction, it is necessary to give a more detailed justification for the relevance of this work. This, in turn, will increase the number of works in References. Now there are too few of them. The topic is very popular and there are a large number of similar works, it is necessary to say about them.
2. The type of microscope used in the study of the microstructure and powder is not indicated.
3. Why is the coefficient of friction taken out as a controlled parameter? What performance properties are required from a product subjected to surfacing with a titanium alloy?
4. Photos in Fig. 3 and 7 low resolution. Photo quality needs to be improved. The microstructure and porosity should be shown.
5. In the Discussion and Conclusions, it is necessary to explain why the wear resistance has increased and how the microstructure affects it.
Author Response
Please see attachment
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
“RSM and NSGA-II Algorithm” they are well know ! what is the novelty ?
What does means “BBD” please define all the acronyms before their first appearance in text
The second sentence in abstract is too long and difficult to follow
“The wear pattern of the specimens prepared” the English is quite limited- a native speaker may helps to improve it
Cause the above is not correct sense !
No a proper context was placed in abstract
“are not properly controlled” – what does means here proper controlled ?
There is any industrial implication from this work ?
The state of art is quite briefly presented – please reformulate it in more structure manner
Which is the actually novelty of this work and scientific implication ?
Not clear from you experiments which is actually the cladding material and which one is the substrate !
“was measured by the MMW-2 friction and wear tester” not clear ! cause you have measured two different things here !
A scale bar for each image in Figure 3 is required
What represent each image in Figure 3?
Figure 6 should be drafted in a better way
Why the friction curve is so noise ?
How many experiments for each trial was conducted especially for wear and friction test ?
A section of discussion is required !
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
REVIEW
on article
Optimization of Multi-Channel Laser Cladding Process of TC4 Alloy Based on RSM and NSGA-II Algorithm
Linsen Shu, Jiahao Li, Han Wu and Zhao Heng
SUMMARY
The article is of interest to the readers of the journal. To obtain the best processes for the parameters of laser cladding of TC4 alloy powder, a method was proposed for studying the parameters of laser cladding based on the RSM and NSGA-II algorithms.
The authors of the problem-solving solutions have conducted extensive research using state-of-the-art equipment and efficient methods. They established the optimal parameters of the laser cladding process. The method of mathematical planning of the experiment, the Box-Behnken model, was used. The NSGA-II algorithm was applied to obtain solutions.
The article has novelty and practical reach.
At the same time, there are many shortcomings in the article. Required fixes are listed below.
COMMENTS
1. The Abstract lacks an introductory part, that is, the relevance of the study. What problem are the authors solving in this study? Need to be added. Editors strongly encourage authors to use the following style of structured abstracts, but without headings: (1) Background: Place the question addressed in a broad context and highlight the purpose of the study; (2) Methods: Describe briefly the main methods or treatments applied; (3) Results: Summarize the article's main findings; and (4) Conclusions: Indicate the main conclusions or interpretations. The Abstract should be an objective representation of the article.
2. The authors of the study presented a rather concise literature review. A more extensive literature analysis is needed, adding at least 2 paragraphs containing an analysis of additionally 10-20 similar studies, preferably published between 2017 and 2022. This would make it possible to highlight more clearly the novelty of the study.
3. In line 51 there is a reference to [18], but there is no such source in the References section. This inconsistency needs to be corrected.
4. Please, bring the References section in accordance with the Coatings journal.
5. At the end of the Introduction section, there is a lack of formulations of the purpose, objectives and novelty of the research being conducted. Need to be supplemented.
6. After Figures 1 and 2, a short comment should be made summarizing subsection 2.1. For example, give a more detailed description of the figures presented in this subsection.
7. Line 81 “the BBD model is suiTab. for selection”. Looks like typo.
8. I recommend that the authors remove from the text the well-known approach to determining the coefficients of linear regression using the least squares method. It is in every school textbook.
9. Mentions in the text of tables are made in different styles: Table 1, Tab. 2. It is necessary to unify in accordance with the rules of registration adopted in the journal.
10. Lines 127-128. "The correlation coefficient is used to further verify the reliability of the fit." If you use a non-linear model, you must apply determination coefficient, not correlation coefficient. Because the correlation coefficient can be applied only for linear models. So, R2=0.83 is not so bad for results predicting.
11. Line 143-144. "Combined with the actual production background, in the process of laser multi-pass cladding." Phrase is not clear; the verb is absent. Please, change.
12. Equations system (6) is written incorrectly. Please, rewrite.
13. Equation (8). Please, check subscripts.
14. The quality of Figure 3 leaves much to be desired. Authors should improve image resolution.
15. Section 2 should have ended with a text part for a smoother transition to the next section. A small comment should be made on Figure 3 and Tables 1 and 2.
16. Table 3 should be placed immediately after the first mention of it in the text.
17. Section 3 ends with Figure 4, which is methodologically not entirely correct. It is necessary to give after Figure 4 its textual analysis to improve the understanding of the results obtained by readers.
18. Figure 6 should follow immediately after the first mention of it in the text.
19. The caption to Figure 10 lacks explanations for (a), (b), (c), (d). Need to be added.
20. The figure caption to Figure 11 indicates that a comparison is being made between S2 and S1, although S2 and S18 are indicated in the figure and before it. The inconsistency needs to be corrected.
21. Section 4 ends with a drawing. It is necessary to add a text part in several paragraphs after Figure 11, in which to summarize the analysis and comparison.
22. Section 4 lacks comparison of the obtained results with the results obtained earlier by other authors. Such a comparison should be given and a few paragraphs about it should be added. This, among other things, will allow expanding the rather meager References section, which contains only 17 sources. This is too small for high level articles. By expanding the literature review and section 4, you can increase the number of sources in the list of references to 30-35.
23. In the "References" section, there are not enough hyperlinks to literature sources in the form of https://doi.org/ or a doi number for a quick and easy search for works cited by the authors of the study. Should have been added.
24. In general, there are many typos and errors in the text, proofreading of the text and English corrections are required.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 4 Report
The authors have done optimization of multi-channel laser cladding process of TC4 alloy based on RSM and NSGA-II algorithms. In particular, they proposed the best process parameters of laser cladding TC4 alloy powder using these algorithms. This work is interesting and can be used for the developments of laser clads in laser cladding industries. However, there are some issues that need to be addressed before publication.
1. Please use captions for Fig. 1. Which one is powder morphology here?
2. Please expand all the abbreviation for the first time they are used. Like BBD, ABB, etc.
3. In introduction: …”genetic algorithm (Ga) [12]”, OR “…GA (Genetic Algorithm) [15]”. Are they different?
4. The composition of the TC4 alloy can be presented in a table. Please write wt.% or at.% also.
5. Please be consistent with the use of units. For example, 3kw--> 3kW.
6. Figure 2 can be improved. The various parts of this figures seems scattered. Please organize.
7. What is the highlight of Fig. 3? There is no scale bar.
8. The y-axis labels should be improved in Fig. 4.
9. No scale bar in Fig. 7
10. What kind of image shown in Fig. 10? No scale bars.
11. Additionally, English should be polished.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
The authors of the article responded to my comments. The article has been updated. I recommend the article for publication in this version.
Author Response
Thank you very much for reviewing this article again and for your contribution to it. Your comments have made an indelible contribution to the improvement of this article. The author has also made great progress in the process of revising the article.
Reviewer 2 Report
.
Author Response
Thank you very much for your re-review of this article. The author has revised the full text of the language problem of the article again, and I hope it will be to your satisfaction.
Reviewer 3 Report
1. "...With the increasing consumption of titanium alloy in aerospace and energy fields." This phrase is not completed.
2. " ...And laser cladding technology as an efficient means of machining, the problem of parameter optimization in the process of cladding has become imminent." Please, rephrase.
3. Figure 1 is still of low quality.
4. I recommend removing the well-known formulas 2-4 for estimating the coefficients of linear regression using the least squares method. This is the second-year undergraduate level.
5. For equation 5, please, give the coefficients of determination.
6. Figure 4 is still of low quality.
7. English needs to be improved.
Author Response
Please see the attached file.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 4 Report
The revised verison of manuscript is satisfatory for publication.
Author Response
Thank you very much for reviewing this article again and for your contribution to it. Your comments have made an indelible contribution to the improvement of this article. The author has also made great progress in the process of revising the article.
