Abstract

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to study the tribology behavior of steel-steel contact under the lubrication of water-based drilling mud with different oleic acid-filled microcapsules as lubricant additives.Design/methodology/approachA ball-on-disc tribometer was used to evaluate the lubrication properties of the steel-steel contact. The wear tracks of the worn surfaces were observed by a scanning electron microscope.FindingsResults show that the dependence of both friction and wear on the category of additives shares a consistent pattern. In contrast to oleic acid and empty microcapsules, oleic acid-filled microcapsules achieve the best tribological performance which is related to the lubricant effect of oleic acid and the isolation and rolling abilities of microcapsules.Practical implications - This study provides a helpful method of encapsulated lubricant additives to prolong lubrication performance for steel-steel contact.Originality/valueThis study has applied microcapsules to improve the tribological properties of drilling mud.Peer reviewThe peer review history for this article is available at:


Authors

Ji, Min;  Liu, Shuhai;  Xiao, Huaping

Publons users who've claimed - I am an author

No Publons users have claimed this paper.

Contributors on Publons
  • 3 reviewers
  • pre-publication peer review (FINAL ROUND)
    Decision Letter
    2020/02/21

    21-Feb-2020

    Dear ji, min; liu, shuhai; xiao, huaping

    It is a pleasure to accept your manuscript ilt-08-2019-0320.R2, entitled "Tribological behaviors of water-based drilling mud with oleic acid filled microcapsules as lubricant additives for steel-steel contact" in its current form for publication in Industrial Lubrication and Tribology. Please note, no further changes can be made to your manuscript.

    Please go to your Author Centre at https://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/ilt (Manuscripts with Decisions for the submitting author or Manuscripts I have co-authored for all listed co-authors) to complete the Copyright Transfer Agreement form (CTA). We cannot publish your paper without this.

    All authors are requested to complete the form and to input their full contact details. If any of the contact information is incorrect you can update it by clicking on your name at the top right of the screen. Please note that this must be done prior to you submitting your CTA.

    If you have an ORCID please check your account details to ensure that your ORCID is validated.

    By publishing in this journal your work will benefit from Emerald EarlyCite. As soon as your CTA is completed your manuscript will pass to Emerald’s Content Management department and be processed for EarlyCite publication. EarlyCite is the author proofed, typeset version of record, fully citable by DOI. The EarlyCite article sits outside of a journal issue and is paginated in isolation. The EarlyCite article will be collated into a journal issue according to the journals’ publication schedule.

    FOR OPEN ACCESS AUTHORS: Please note if you have indicated that you would like to publish your article as Open Access via Emerald’s Gold Open Access route, you are required to complete a Creative Commons Attribution Licence - CCBY 4.0 (in place of the standard copyright assignment form referenced above). You will receive a follow up email within the next 30 days with a link to the CCBY licence and information regarding payment of the Article Processing Charge. If you have indicated that you might be eligible for a prepaid APC voucher, you will also be informed at this point if a voucher is available to you (for more information on APC vouchers please see http://www.emeraldpublishing.com/oapartnerships

    Thank you for your contribution. On behalf of the Editors of Industrial Lubrication and Tribology, we look forward to your continued contributions to the Journal.

    Sincerely,
    Prof. Carsten Gachot
    Editor, Industrial Lubrication and Tribology
    carsten.gachot@tuwien.ac.at

    Decision letter by
    Cite this decision letter
    Reviewer report
    2020/02/21

    No further comments.

    Reviewed by
    Cite this review
    Author Response
    2020/02/20

    Response Letter
    We appreciate the comments on our manuscript entitled “Tribological behaviors of water-based drilling mud with oleic acid filled microcapsules as lubricant additives for steel-steel contact” (ID: ilt-08-2019-0320.R1) from the reviewers. We have carefully taken the comments of reviewers into consideration in preparing our revision. The point-to-point rebuttal is listed below. The changes are highlighted in red in the manuscript. Please feel free to contact us should more information is needed.
    The responses to the reviewers' comments
    Reviewer #1:
    1. The manuscript needs to undergo a careful language revision.
    Response: We are so sorry about those wrong language expressions. We have gone through the manuscript and English language has been double checked. Mistakes have been corrected and the changes are highlighted in red in the revised manuscript.

    1. You have included a part experimental set-up and tribological tests. You should merge both sections.
      Response: Reviewer's suggestion is appreciated. Experimental set-up and tribological tests have been merged into one part according to reviewer’s suggestion.

    2. The number of figures must be reduced.
      Response: Figure 1 has been deleted and figure 6 has been included to figure 7.

    3. Figure 1 can be deleted.
      Response: Figure 1 has been deleted according to reviewer’s comment.

    4. All experimental results including the wear analysis must be presented with error bars.
      Response: Thanks for your advice. The wear analysis and other results have been presented with error bars.



    Cite this author response
  • pre-publication peer review (ROUND 2)
    Decision Letter
    2020/02/10

    10-Feb-2020

    Dear Dr. liu:

    Manuscript ID ilt-08-2019-0320.R1 entitled "Tribological behaviors of water-based drilling mud with oleic acid filled microcapsules as lubricant additives for steel-steel contact" which you submitted to the Industrial Lubrication and Tribology, has been reviewed. The comments of the reviewer(s) are included at the bottom of this letter.

    The reviewer(s) have recommended major revisions to the submitted manuscript, before it can be considered for publication. Therefore, I invite you to respond to the reviewer(s)' comments and revise your manuscript.

    To revise your manuscript, log into https://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/ilt and enter your Author Centre, where you will find your manuscript title listed under "Manuscripts with Decisions." Under "Actions," click on "Create a Revision." Your manuscript number has been appended to denote a revision.

    You will be unable to make your revisions on the originally submitted version of the manuscript. Instead, revise your manuscript using a word processing program and save it on your computer. Please also highlight the changes to your manuscript within the document by using the track changes mode in MS Word or by using bold or coloured text.

    Once the revised manuscript is prepared, you can upload it and submit it through your Author Centre. The deadline for uploading a revised manuscript is 10-May-2020 from receiving this email. If it is not possible for you to resubmit your revision within this timeframe, we may have to consider your paper as a new submission.

    When submitting your revised manuscript, you will be able to respond to the comments made by the reviewer(s) in the space provided. You can use this space to document any changes you make to the original manuscript. In order to expedite the processing of the revised manuscript, please be as specific as possible in your response to the reviewer(s).

    IMPORTANT: Your original files are available to you when you upload your revised manuscript. Please delete any redundant files before completing the submission.

    Please note that Emerald requires you to clear permission to re-use any material not created by you. If there are permissions outstanding, please send these to Emerald as soon as possible. Emerald is unable to publish your paper with permissions outstanding.

    Once again, thank you for submitting your manuscript to the Industrial Lubrication and Tribology and I look forward to receiving your revision.

    Sincerely,
    Prof. Carsten Gachot
    Editor, Industrial Lubrication and Tribology
    carsten.gachot@tuwien.ac.at

    Reviewer(s)' Comments to Author:
    Reviewer: 1

    Comments to the Author
    - The manuscript needs to undergo a careful language revision.
    - You have included a part experimental set-up and tribological tests. You should merge both sections.
    - The number of figures must be reduced.
    - Figure 1 can be deleted.
    - All experimental results including the wear analysis must be presented with error bars.
    -
    Reviewer: 1

    Recommendation: Major Revision

    Comments:
    - The manuscript needs to undergo a careful language revision.
    - You have included a part experimental set-up and tribological tests. You should merge both sections.
    - The number of figures must be reduced.
    - Figure 1 can be deleted.
    - All experimental results including the wear analysis must be presented with error bars.
    -

    Additional Questions:
    Originality: Does the paper contain new and significant information adequate to justify publication?: Please see comments below.

    Relationship to Literature: Does the paper demonstrate an adequate understanding of the relevant literature in the field and cite an appropriate range of literature sources? Is any signficant work ignored?: Please see comments below.

    Methodology: Is the paper's argument built on an appropriate base of theory, concepts, or other ideas? Has the research or equivalent intellectual work on which the paper is based been well designed? Are the methods employed appropriate?: Please see comments below.

    Results: Are results presented clearly and analysed appropriately? Do the conclusions adequately tie together the other elements of the paper?: Please see comments below.

    Practicality and/or Research implications: Does the paper identify clearly any implications for practice and/or further research? Are these implications consistent withthe findings and conclusions of the paper?: Please see comments below.

    Quality of Communication: Does the paper clearly express its case, measured against the technical language of the field and the expected knowledge of the journal's readership? Has attention been paid to the clarity of expression and readability, such as sentence structure, jargon use, acronyms, etc.: Please see comments below.

    Reproducible Research: If appropriate, is sufficient information, potentially including data and software, provided to reproduce the results and are the corresponding datasets formally cited?: Please see comments below.

    This journal is participating in Publons Transparent Peer Review. By reviewing for this journal, you agree that your finished report, along with the author’s responses and the Editor’s decision letter, will be linked to from the published article to where they appear on Publons, if the paper is accepted. If you have any concerns about participating in the Transparent Peer Review pilot, please reach out to the journal’s Editorial office. Please indicate below, whether you would like your name to appear with your report on Publons by indicating yes or no: No, I would not like my name to appear with my report on Publons

    Decision letter by
    Cite this decision letter
    Reviewer report
    2020/02/10

    • The manuscript needs to undergo a careful language revision.
    • You have included a part experimental set-up and tribological tests. You should merge both sections.
    • The number of figures must be reduced.
    • Figure 1 can be deleted.
    • All experimental results including the wear analysis must be presented with error bars.

    Reviewed by
    Cite this review
    Author Response
    2019/12/02

    Dear editor

    We appreciate the comments on our manuscript entitled “Tribological behaviors of water-based drilling mud with oleic acid filled microcapsules as lubricant additives for steel-steel contact” from the reviewers. We have carefully taken the comments of reviewers into consideration in preparing our revision. The point-by-point list of the questions were answered in a response letter. The changes are highlighted in red in the manuscript. Once again, we acknowledge your comments and constructive suggestions very much, which are valuable in improving the quality of our manuscript. Our response letter to the reviewers’ comments one-by-one is attached as a file.
    Please feel free to contact us should more information is needed.

    Yours sincerely,

    Min Ji, Shuhai Liu and Huaping Xiao



    Cite this author response
  • pre-publication peer review (ROUND 1)
    Decision Letter
    2019/10/23

    23-Oct-2019

    Dear Dr. liu:

    Manuscript ID ilt-08-2019-0320 entitled "Tribological behaviors of water-based drilling mud with oleic acid filled microcapsules as lubricant additives for steel-steel contact" which you submitted to the Industrial Lubrication and Tribology, has been reviewed. The comments of the reviewer(s) are included at the bottom of this letter.

    The reviewer(s) have recommended major revisions to the submitted manuscript, before it can be considered for publication. Therefore, I invite you to respond to the reviewer(s)' comments and revise your manuscript.

    To revise your manuscript, log into https://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/ilt and enter your Author Centre, where you will find your manuscript title listed under "Manuscripts with Decisions." Under "Actions," click on "Create a Revision." Your manuscript number has been appended to denote a revision.

    You will be unable to make your revisions on the originally submitted version of the manuscript. Instead, revise your manuscript using a word processing program and save it on your computer. Please also highlight the changes to your manuscript within the document by using the track changes mode in MS Word or by using bold or coloured text.

    Once the revised manuscript is prepared, you can upload it and submit it through your Author Centre. The deadline for uploading a revised manuscript is 21-Jan-2020 from receiving this email. If it is not possible for you to resubmit your revision within this timeframe, we may have to consider your paper as a new submission.

    When submitting your revised manuscript, you will be able to respond to the comments made by the reviewer(s) in the space provided. You can use this space to document any changes you make to the original manuscript. In order to expedite the processing of the revised manuscript, please be as specific as possible in your response to the reviewer(s).

    IMPORTANT: Your original files are available to you when you upload your revised manuscript. Please delete any redundant files before completing the submission.

    Please note that Emerald requires you to clear permission to re-use any material not created by you. If there are permissions outstanding, please send these to Emerald as soon as possible. Emerald is unable to publish your paper with permissions outstanding.

    Once again, thank you for submitting your manuscript to the Industrial Lubrication and Tribology and I look forward to receiving your revision.

    Sincerely,
    Prof. Carsten Gachot
    Editor, Industrial Lubrication and Tribology
    carsten.gachot@tuwien.ac.at

    Reviewer(s)' Comments to Author:
    Reviewer: 1

    Comments to the Author
    (There are no comments.)

    Reviewer: 2

    Comments to the Author
    Well written and clear results presentation. Congratulations!!!

    But, some comments for improvement:
    The authors should emphasize the significance of this study compared to the previous studies.
    The manuscript need to send for English proof-read.

    Reviewer: 3

    Comments to the Author
    Please refer to the specific comments above. In addition please highlights your achievement as compared to the previous findings; may be in the form of graph etc.
    Reviewer: 1

    Comments:
    (There are no comments.)

    Additional Questions:
    Originality: Does the paper contain new and significant information adequate to justify publication?: Yes. It contains new and significant information. It can be considered for publication.

    Relationship to Literature: Does the paper demonstrate an adequate understanding of the relevant literature in the field and cite an appropriate range of literature sources? Is any signficant work ignored?: As per my understanding, it contains adequate relevant literature.

    Methodology: Is the paper's argument built on an appropriate base of theory, concepts, or other ideas? Has the research or equivalent intellectual work on which the paper is based been well designed? Are the methods employed appropriate?: Paper needs adequate improvement. The following may be considered:

    1. No Figure has been properly explained. Every technical aspect has been left for readers to understand in all the Figures ; No Figure has been discussed with background and technical understanding.

    In this context paper needs major revision both in manuscript and clarity in analysis as per trend shown in the Figures.

    1. Test Rig Figure and proper details are missing.Test Rig operation to be explained.

    2. Authors must bring procedure of data collection in the light of test rig technical features.No understanding has been brought out regarding operation, procedure and data collection and interpretation of data subsequently in different subtitles.

    4.Why Oleic acid has been used?

    1. Trials must be made with other acids or must be explained why this is preferred technically.

    6.Details of micro-capsules as lubricant shall be brought out; their sizes, shapes etc.Advantage and disadvantage of micro-capsules shall be analyzed in the light of published literature.

    7.How the number of capsules effect COF and Wear? This must be technically discussed.

    8.How oleic acid with polar group and long carbon chain is adsorbed?

    1. Enlarge picture of micro-capsule with porosity must be inserted and is discussed.

    2. Result and Discussion must be split in different small heading to have better understanding.

    3. Test Rig, procedure, data deduction shall be precisely explained and put in different section for quick understanding.

    4. Variation in all the Figures must be explained in the light of how and why so as to draw proper conclusion.

    5. Relative comparison of different size of micro capsules used in the test must be given and compared for analysis to arrive at optimum size.

    6. In Figure 1, a1,b1,c1,d1 etc has been numbered but in description a,b,c,d are mention.
      Pl.carefully correct complete manuscript and all figures in a proper way.

    7. There is no mention of ab,b,c,d in Figure 2.

    16.Other Figures also have various issues. Pl.check.

    Results: Are results presented clearly and analysed appropriately? Do the conclusions adequately tie together the other elements of the paper?: Results are not well drawn and explained. Needs improvement.

    Practicality and/or Research implications: Does the paper identify clearly any implications for practice and/or further research? Are these implications consistent withthe findings and conclusions of the paper?: Needs more clarity and improvement.

    Quality of Communication: Does the paper clearly express its case, measured against the technical language of the field and the expected knowledge of the journal's readership? Has attention been paid to the clarity of expression and readability, such as sentence structure, jargon use, acronyms, etc.: Needs revision at various locations.

    Reproducible Research: If appropriate, is sufficient information, potentially including data and software, provided to reproduce the results and are the corresponding datasets formally cited?: In present form reproducibility is not feasible.

    This journal is participating in Publons Transparent Peer Review. By reviewing for this journal, you agree that your finished report, along with the author’s responses and the Editor’s decision letter, will be linked to from the published article to where they appear on Publons, if the paper is accepted. If you have any concerns about participating in the Transparent Peer Review pilot, please reach out to the journal’s Editorial office. Please indicate below, whether you would like your name to appear with your report on Publons by indicating yes or no: Yes, I would like my name to appear with my report on Publons

    Reviewer: 2

    Comments:
    Well written and clear results presentation. Congratulations!!!

    But, some comments for improvement:
    The authors should emphasize the significance of this study compared to the previous studies.
    The manuscript need to send for English proof-read.

    Additional Questions:
    Originality: Does the paper contain new and significant information adequate to justify publication?: Yes. But authors need to emphasis the significance of this study compared to the previous studies.

    Relationship to Literature: Does the paper demonstrate an adequate understanding of the relevant literature in the field and cite an appropriate range of literature sources? Is any signficant work ignored?: adequate

    Methodology: Is the paper's argument built on an appropriate base of theory, concepts, or other ideas? Has the research or equivalent intellectual work on which the paper is based been well designed? Are the methods employed appropriate?: appropriate

    Results: Are results presented clearly and analysed appropriately? Do the conclusions adequately tie together the other elements of the paper?: well written

    Practicality and/or Research implications: Does the paper identify clearly any implications for practice and/or further research? Are these implications consistent withthe findings and conclusions of the paper?: Yes

    Quality of Communication: Does the paper clearly express its case, measured against the technical language of the field and the expected knowledge of the journal's readership? Has attention been paid to the clarity of expression and readability, such as sentence structure, jargon use, acronyms, etc.: Need to send for English proof-read

    Reproducible Research: If appropriate, is sufficient information, potentially including data and software, provided to reproduce the results and are the corresponding datasets formally cited?: NA

    This journal is participating in Publons Transparent Peer Review. By reviewing for this journal, you agree that your finished report, along with the author’s responses and the Editor’s decision letter, will be linked to from the published article to where they appear on Publons, if the paper is accepted. If you have any concerns about participating in the Transparent Peer Review pilot, please reach out to the journal’s Editorial office. Please indicate below, whether you would like your name to appear with your report on Publons by indicating yes or no: Yes, I would like my name to appear with my report on Publons

    Reviewer: 3

    Comments:
    Please refer to the specific comments above. In addition please highlights your achievement as compared to the previous findings; may be in the form of graph etc.

    Additional Questions:
    Originality: Does the paper contain new and significant information adequate to justify publication?: The article presented an interesting finding that can help oil and gas industry to increase the efficiency in drilling well.

    Relationship to Literature: Does the paper demonstrate an adequate understanding of the relevant literature in the field and cite an appropriate range of literature sources? Is any signficant work ignored?: Yes. But in the result and discussion should cited more recent references.

    Methodology: Is the paper's argument built on an appropriate base of theory, concepts, or other ideas? Has the research or equivalent intellectual work on which the paper is based been well designed? Are the methods employed appropriate?: In the methodology, how the microcapsule that contain the lubricant was produced should be elaborated.
    The detail of the microcapsule size, thickness of the microcapsule, and the amount of the lubricant in microcapsule should be presented in table.

    Results: Are results presented clearly and analysed appropriately? Do the conclusions adequately tie together the other elements of the paper?: The result presentation can be improved. Please cite more related works on the microcapsule in your discussion. At present on two articles were cited, which is not enough.

    Practicality and/or Research implications: Does the paper identify clearly any implications for practice and/or further research? Are these implications consistent withthe findings and conclusions of the paper?: Yes.

    Quality of Communication: Does the paper clearly express its case, measured against the technical language of the field and the expected knowledge of the journal's readership? Has attention been paid to the clarity of expression and readability, such as sentence structure, jargon use, acronyms, etc.: The English used is acceptable

    Reproducible Research: If appropriate, is sufficient information, potentially including data and software, provided to reproduce the results and are the corresponding datasets formally cited?: No

    This journal is participating in Publons Transparent Peer Review. By reviewing for this journal, you agree that your finished report, along with the author’s responses and the Editor’s decision letter, will be linked to from the published article to where they appear on Publons, if the paper is accepted. If you have any concerns about participating in the Transparent Peer Review pilot, please reach out to the journal’s Editorial office. Please indicate below, whether you would like your name to appear with your report on Publons by indicating yes or no: Yes, I would like my name to appear with my report on Publons

    Decision letter by
    Cite this decision letter
    Reviewer report
    2019/10/23

    Please refer to the specific comments above. In addition please highlights your achievement as compared to the previous findings; may be in the form of graph etc.

    Reviewed by
    Cite this review
    Reviewer report
    2019/10/21

    Well written and clear results presentation. Congratulations!!!

    But, some comments for improvement:
    The authors should emphasize the significance of this study compared to the previous studies.
    The manuscript need to send for English proof-read.

    Cite this review
All peer review content displayed here is covered by a Creative Commons CC BY 4.0 license.