Quantitative Relationships between Mechanical Properties and Microstructure of Ti17 Alloy after Thermomechanical Treatment
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
This paper is new, original and well organized. English language is good in the paper and all references are adequate. The subject of the manuscript corresponds to the goals of the journal. The article can be published without changes and comments.
Author Response
Dear reviewer
Thank you so much for your reviewing! We deeply appreciate your recognition of our research work.
Reviewer 2 Report
In this work, the relationships between the thermomechanical treatment, the microstructural evolution, and the mechanical properties of Ti17 alloy has been studied. Before further considerations please consider the following issues:
The novelty aspect is missing and this aspect should be highlighted. The effect of stacking fault energy of the restoration mechanisms should be explained in the introduction. Which method has been used to calculate the thickness of lamellar? Please cite its standard. The sample preparation procedure for metallography should be included in the materials and methods. The role of alloy’s stacking fault on the DRX should be discussed. The majority of the references are very old and thus they should be replaced with new ones.Author Response
We would like to thank the Reviewer for your helpful comments. We have followed all the suggestions and made revisions accordingly. The list below gives the details of the changes that we have made in the revised manuscript.
First of all, for the “novelty aspect”, there are four aspects to summarize, and it has been stated in the paper, as follows: The thickness of lamellar α was quantified; The Tensile properties and impact toughness of Ti17 alloy were evaluated; The changing law of tensile properties and impact toughness was determined; The quantitative relationship between the thicknesses of lamellar α and mechanical properties was established.
Then, The effect of stacking fault energy of the restoration mechanisms have been explained in the introduction. Refer to lines 43 to 50 in the manuscript.
About “Which method has been used to calculate the thickness of lamellar” has been revised to “The thickness of lamellar α was measured quantitatively from SEM images via Image-Pro-Plus 6.0, and the planimetric procedure (or Jeffries) in ASTM E1382-97 standards was applied.” Refer to lines 116 to 118 in the manuscript.
For “The sample preparation procedure for metallography should be included in the materials and methods.” It has been revised to “Specimens were cut to a size of 5 ×5 mm by using electric spark. Before exposure, the samples were ground to 2000 grit on SiC sandpaper, polished with 2.5 μm alumina suspensions until the surface appeared mirror-like and etched for 2s in Kroll's reagent (1(HF):3(HNO3):7(H2O)).” Refer to lines 112 to 114 in the manuscript.
What is more, “The role of alloy’s stacking fault on the DRX should be discussed.” It has been discussed in microstructure evolution of manuscript. Refer to lines 126 to 134 in the manuscript.
Last one, part of old references have been replaced with new ones.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
The manuscript entitled Quantitative relationships between mechanical properties and microstructure of Ti17 alloy after thermomechanical treatment is suitable to be accepted and published in metals after several small revisions.
(1) In Figure 4 avoid use red in the sEM microgragh due to it is quite challenging to see the letter.
(2) I miss in the manuscript to see some fracture micromechanisms at 570 and 600ºC. In Figure 6a you are not able to see practically any difference in terms of tensile strength however some important difference is apreciated when the authors report the reduction of area. Please, provide the SEM micrographs in order to enhance the quality of this manuscript.
Author Response
We would like to thank the Reviewer for your helpful comments. We have followed all the suggestions and made revisions accordingly. The list below gives the details of the changes that we have made in the revised manuscript.
It has been revised about for “using red in the SEM micrograph”. SEM micrographs has been provide and made a detailed analysis and discussion for the fracture mechanism. Refer to lines 229 to 249 in the manuscript.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 4 Report
Congratulations on the great work.
The manuscript looks well-written and well-organized.
Good luck.
Author Response
Dear reviewer
Thanks reviewer for good comments and hard work.
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report
The paper can be accepted in the current form.
