Reviewers and editors commented on your above paper, and indicated that it is not acceptable for publication in its present form.

For information on the current journal policies and editorial preferences, please refer to dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2015.09.004

If you feel that you can suitably address the comments below, I invite you to revise and resubmit your manuscript within 30 days from today.

Reviewer #2: Surface quality of material is an important factor especially in the area of manufacturing/production engineering. The topic is very well presented. However, testing should be conducted on a larger number of samples.
Reviewer #1: *  Abstract, is Mise stress referring to von Mises stress?

*       Introduction, paragraph 1, line 3, phrase 'due to with' needs correction

*       Introduction, paragraph 4, line 1, phrase 'parameters changes' needs correction

*       Fig 1 - is the 'confirm research purpose' statement misplaced?

*       Table 1 should be placed after the text 'was shown in Table 1'

*       Fig 2 - A schematic diagram of the rotary burnishing tool would be useful to provide a clearer idea on how the rotary burnishing works on a flat workpiece. Is the burnishing tool custom made or commercially available?

*       Could the authors state the dimension, geometry and hardness of the rollers? Would the surface of the roller deteriorate during the burnishing process?  During burnishing, what was the approximate contact size at various frequency of vibration range?

*       Fig. 3 should be placed after the first paragraph of section 2.2

*       Section 2.2, paragraph 1, line 3, RCRB is not defined in the manuscript.  RCRB should be CRRB?

*       Table 2.2 - RCRB is not defined in the manuscript.  RCRB should be CRRB?

*       Would the authors provide a justification for selecting the frequency of vibration range to be 20-28 kHz?

*       Section 3, paragraph 1, line 6, to analyze

*       Section 3, paragraph 2, line 2, 'Abaqus software has advantage of the solution of nonlinear problem' need to be rephrased for clarity.

*       Section 3.1, paragraph 3, line 3, to simulate

*       Fig.6. should be labeled to ease identification between with and without ultrasonic vibration

*       The term 'material happened plastic flow' needs to be rephrased throughout section 5.1.

*       Section 5.1, paragraph 2, line 1, URRB is not defined in the manuscript.  URRB should be RURB?

*       It was mentioned that, 'Ultrasonic frequency has little effect on the depth of plastic flow layer of material. But the ultrasonic frequency can increase the area of material happened plastic flow at unit time, which would have a significant effect on grain refinement in the surface layer'. Could the authors provide further elaboration or citation.

*       Section 5.1, paragraph 4, line 4, phrase 'the assisting of ultrasonic vibration' needs correction.

*       Is there any level-off point for the frequency value? Or will exerting a higher  frequency leads to better result?

*       Section 5.2, paragraph 1, line 14, sentence ' Because the ultrasonic amplitude research the maximum at these moment' needs to be rephrased.

*       It was mentioned that, 'The assistance of vibration with appropriate ultrasonic strength can decrease burnishing force'. Is the burnishing force measured during the experimental work? This requires further elaboration as it is unclear how the authors measured the burnishing force.

*       Paper needs proofreading for occasional grammatical and typographical errors. 返回小木虫查看更多