Response to the letter to editor

This extended comment is in response to the letter of Barlat (Int J Mater Form 2020) concerning our recent article (Chandola et al. (Int J Mater Form 12(6):943–954 2019)). The main issue raised is an apparent “mismatch” between some of the F.E. results presented and cup forming data of Tucker (Acta Metall 9:275-286 1961). There is no mismatch because the simulation results presented in our paper correspond to a different material than the one used by Tucker (Acta Metall 9:275-286 1961). Specifically, the F.E. results correspond to an Al-Cu single crystal for which uniaxial tension characterization data were reported in Karnop and Sachs (Z Für Phys 49:480–497 1928) and was processed differently than Tucker’s material. Furthermore, in the letter of Barlat (Int J Mater Form 2020), the scope and findings of our study are misrepresented, and all the quotations from our paper are taken out of context. Detailed responses to the issues raised by Barlat (Int J Mater Form 2020) are given.