Influence of Non-Metallic Inclusions on Local Deformation and Damage Behavior of Modified 16MnCrS5 Steel

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

In this article, deformation and damage behavior of a modified 16MnCrS5 steel was investigated by a combination of techniques such as EBSD, DIC and crystal plasticity simulation. The research is well designed and the obtained results are reasonable. The reviewer feels that this article could be published after minor revision as suggested below.

1. Fig. 5: Although the size of the inclusion is mentioned in the text, a scale bar would be inserted in the figure for better understanding of the reader.
2. Fig. 9 and 10: The loading direction would be indicated in the figures or captions.
3. Fig. 10: It seems that all kinds of non-metallic inclusions are displayed by white points. If so, it would be clearly described in the figure caption.
4. Fig. 10(V): Throughout the analyzed area, the damaged regions show band-like shapes at 45 degrees from the horizontal axis. Any comments on the reason of this behavior, in terms of slip systems or resolved shear stress, would be helpful to understand the result.

Author Response

Thank you for critically going through the document and providing constructive criticism for improving the article. The methods and results are presented more clearly. The language of the article has now been thoroughly checked for any spelling, grammatical or formatting style corrections. Apart from the suggested changes, we additionally have revised the article and have highlighted all the changes throughout the document. The point-by-point response to your comments is provided in the attached PDF file. Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

1. The contents of different elements before modification should be list in Table I. Otherwise, this sentence is confusing in line 119, 16MnCrS5 with 50% lower Carbon content and 20 % more Sulphur.
2. In line 121, it contains a higher number of MnS inclusions, with some being predominantly large, is this observed with an optical microscope? Metallographic pictures shall be inserted at the corresponding positions. And what is the ‘larger’ size here?
3. In Figure 1-C, in the in-situ tensile sample, the preset crack initiation source is a semicircular hole with R=0.5. We know that such a fine semicircular hole is difficult to process by wire cutting. This is different from the V-shaped specimen with the crack initiation source(Ref. In situ SEM analysis for deformation mechanism of micro/nanostructured 304 stainless steel with high strength and good plasticity. Modern Physics Letters B, 2018, 32(17): 1850182). What is the different effect on deformation and fracture? In line 479, the specimens were prepared using a special technique, a special technique should be explained.
4. In page 11, [Ref] detailed information is not given in the text diagram of Table 3.
5. In line 309. Does the yellow box represent the crack initiation source in Figure 8(a)?
6. In 344, what do voxels mean?
7. In lines 394 and 398, zone should unify the case of initial letters.
8. In line 406, Figure 13 should be changed to Figure 12.
9. Grammar needs to be examined more carefully.

Author Response

Thank you for critically going through the document and providing constructive criticism for improving the article. The methods and results are presented more clearly. The language of the article has now been thoroughly checked for any spelling, grammatical or style corrections. Apart from the suggested changes, we have revised the article and have highlighted all the changes throughout the document. The point-by-point response to your comments is provided in the attached PDf file. Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf