Jet Penetration Performance of a Shaped Charge Liner Prepared by Metal Injection Molding

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The research carried out by the authors is interesting, topical, the results are presented explicitly, the diagrams, figures, tables are sufficient to support the conclusions of the authors.
30 bibliographic references are presented, but in the text the authors refer to many references, to the same paragraph.
The similarity test gave a result of 39%, most of the similarities being reported when taking without citation some data presented in two other works of the main author, the first "Determination of dynamic recrystallization parameter domains of Ni80A superalloy by enhanced processing maps "published in Transactions of Nonferrous Metals Society of China, Volume 29, Issue 7, July 2019, Pages 1449-1464 and the second" Separation of dynamic recrystallization parameter domains from a chaotic system for Ti – 6Al – 4V alloy and its application in parameter loading path design ", published in Materials Science and Engineering: A Volume 772, 20 January 2020, 138745.
If these papers were quoted properly then the value given by the similarity test was acceptable.
In this case, the decision belongs to the magazine in which the publication is requested, which can accept 39% similarity.

Author Response

Dear reviewer:

Thank you very much for your comments concerning our manuscript entitled “Jet Penetration Performance of a Shaped Charge Liner Prepared by Metal Injection Molding” (metals-1721015). Those comments are all valuable and very helpful for revising and improving our paper, as well as the important guiding significance to our researches. We highly appreciate the careful reading of our manuscript and the constructive comments of the reviewers. Our response to the questions raised is as follows. Please also note that all relevant changes editing has been highlighted font in the revised manuscript.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

The study results of the metallurgical properties of SCL on jet formation are meaningful by MIM. However, the type and shape of charge the gunpowder are also very important, so please mention it in the main manuscripts.

Author Response

Dear reviewer:

Thank you very much for your comments concerning our manuscript entitled “Jet Penetration Performance of a Shaped Charge Liner Prepared by Metal Injection Molding” (metals-1721015). Those comments are all valuable and very helpful for revising and improving our paper, as well as the important guiding significance to our researches. We highly appreciate the careful reading of our manuscript and the constructive comments of the reviewers. Our response to the questions raised is as follows. Please also note that all relevant changes editing has been highlighted font in the revised manuscript.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Reviewers' comments:
In this manuscript, the author studied Jet Penetration Performance of a Shaped Charge Liner Prepared by Metal Injection Molding. The explosive test proved that the MIM SCLs could achieve comparable or even better penetration performance than those prepared by spinning.. However, as for the e W–Cu mix, the innovation is not clearly stated by the authors. Therefore, a significant revision is needed before this manuscript can be published. The detailed comments are listed as follows.

1. The capital rule of the title should be unified and regular. Please check it.

2. The abbreviation in this manuscript should be checked, some are not proper in the context. All acronyms presented in the abstract section should be defined in the first appearance.

3. Some researchers use the powder-metallurgy route such as cold press and sintering[6] to reduce the machining cost and improve the production rate. By adding elements with a low melting point, such as copper, nickel, iron, and so on, the sintering of tungsten can be achieved within the conventional sintering temperature range, which can sustain the SCL preparation. Bai discovered that among pure W, W–NiFe, and W–Cu SCLs prepared using the P/M routes, the W–Cu SCL exhibits the best penetration performance Other metals should be compared. The related references can be cited.

4. How author calculate the Particle size distribution in Table 1?
5. What about the hardness measurements?
6. XRD should be included
7. The modern surface morphology studies i.e AFM and XPS should be included.
8. The authors think the SEM images and EDS) results of the steel plate and concrete target prove the existence of numerous tungsten particles, which is not discussed in the SEM analysis.
9. Authors should carefully check all the listed references, some of which are in the wrong format.
10. A thorough polish is badly needed for this manuscript because there are lots of mistakes and misunderstandings.
11. Compare findings with comparable published papers.

12. Authors do not clearly state the innovation

Author Response

Dear reviewer:

Thank you very much for your comments concerning our manuscript entitled “Jet Penetration Performance of a Shaped Charge Liner Prepared by Metal Injection Molding” (metals-1721015). Those comments are all valuable and very helpful for revising and improving our paper, as well as the important guiding significance to our researches. We highly appreciate the careful reading of our manuscript and the constructive comments of the reviewers. Our response to the questions raised is as follows. Please also note that all relevant changes editing has been highlighted font in the revised manuscript.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 4 Report

I think that this article has a very good, modern topic in metallurgical area.  The article was presented  a studies of metal injection molding (MIM) method was applied to manufacture a shaped charge liner (SCL) used for petroleum perforating bombs. The article a lot sufficient of experiments was included. The article good topic and very good information was characterized. For me the article  a not a lot of new literature’s positions was included – must be improved. An the conclusion is so short. I recommended this article after minor correction to print.

Author Response

Dear reviewer:

Thank you very much for your comments concerning our manuscript entitled “Jet Penetration Performance of a Shaped Charge Liner Prepared by Metal Injection Molding” (metals-1721015). Those comments are all valuable and very helpful for revising and improving our paper, as well as the important guiding significance to our researches. We highly appreciate the careful reading of our manuscript and the constructive comments of the reviewers. Our response to the questions raised is as follows. Please also note that all relevant changes editing has been highlighted font in the revised manuscript.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 3 Report

All comments have been addressed, now the manuscript could be accepted.