Ratcheting Response of Heat-Treated Notched 1045 Steel Samples Undergoing Asymmetric Uniaxial Loading Cycles
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for Authors1. The affliation should be completed in the manuscript.
2. The materials mechanical properties should be provided, and the microstructures should be added into the manuscript.
3. The HT treatments difference about HT sepcimens should be shown.
4. The FE model about the specimens should be exhibted after the section 3.
5. The results should be discussed about different notch specimens.
Author Response
Dear Reviewer,
I have attached the authors' responses to your valuable comments.
Best regards,
Ahmad Varvani
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe study explores the ratcheting behavior of 1045 steel under asymmetric loading, focusing on the effects of heat treatment and notch shape on material deformation. It uses kinematic hardening models and Neuber's rule to predict local ratcheting, showing a dependence on notch geometry and heat treatment, with increased hardness reducing ratcheting. The research benefits from a detailed experimental setup and comprehensive modeling, offering insights into material behavior under cyclic loading. However, the study's scope might be limited by its focus on a specific steel type and the conditions tested, potentially affecting the generalizability of the results. The complexity of the models used and their assumptions could also limit the applicability of the findings to real-world scenarios.
The most important quantitative findings are to be mentioned in the abstract
The novelty of the paper is to be clearly stated
How would different steel alloys compare under similar testing conditions?
Can the study's findings be applied to predict the behavior of components in real-world engineering applications?
How do the microstructural changes due to heat treatment contribute to the observed ratcheting behavior?
Would the inclusion of more varied notch geometries provide additional insights into the material's behavior?
How do the results inform the design and material selection for components subjected to cyclic loading?
Can the study's approach be adapted to predict failure modes other than ratcheting, such as fatigue or creep?
How do environmental factors, such as temperature and corrosion, impact the ratcheting behavior observed in this study?
What are the limitations of the kinematic hardening models used, and how might they be improved?
Could the study's methodology be applied to non-metallic materials, such as composites or polymers?
How does the scale of the specimens influence the observed ratcheting behavior, and how might this translate to full-scale components?
Author Response
Dear Reviewer,
I have attached the authors' responses to your valuable comments.
Best regards,
Ahmad Varvani
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
Comments and Suggestions for Authors
In this work, the authors investigate the influence of heat treatment on local ratcheting in the area of stress concentrators under cyclic loading, which is an important scientific and practical task.
Heat treatment is widely used to strengthen metals and alloys, but its impact on cyclic plasticity and ratcheting under complex loading conditions is insufficiently studied. Of particular interest is the behavior of the material in local areas of stress concentration, since fatigue failure can develop there.
The paper examines 1045 steel samples with V-shaped and semi-circular notches subjected to various heat treatments. The samples are tested under asymmetric tension-compression loading cycles.
To model ratcheting, modern kinematic hardening models are used, taking into account local stresses according to Neuber's rule. The obtained results allow us to estimate the effectiveness of these models.
I recommend the work for publication after minor revisions and clarifications.
1. Update the list of references. Most references do not fall within the 5-year range.
2. Check that the graphics are correct. Pay attention to the minus sign. Check these points with your editor.
3. Spaces between the numerical value and the unit of measure are missing in some places in the text. Also, in some places the sign "–" (long dash) has been replaced by "-" (hyphen). Check carefully.
4. Was the fatigue of the material modelled along with the shortest possible time?
5. Have symmetrical loading cycle tests been performed to compare with asymmetrical loading cycle?
6. How were the heat treatment parameters (time, temperature) varied?
Author Response
Dear Reviewer,
I have attached the authors' responses to your valuable comments.
Best regards,
Ahmad Varvani
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
It can be accepted.
It can be accepted.
Reviewer 2 Report
After revision, the paper can be accepted for publication
After revision, the paper can be accepted for publication
Reviewer 3 Report
Accept for publication
Accept for publication
