Simulation Study of the Liquid–Solid Multistage Adsorption Process
, Shahad Zuhair Atta Al-Najjar 2, Arnold A. Lubguban 3 and Roberto M. Malaluan 3
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Paper title: Simulation Study of the Liquid-Solid Multistage Adsorption Process.
Manuscript Number: Sustainability-2159052
Reviewers Comments;
This paper includes the potential area of modern research by correctly addressing the detailed and informative discussion regarding “Simulation Study of the Liquid-Solid Multistage Adsorption Process”. I recommend this paper for publication after minor revision which will be corrected before publishing this manuscript.
1. There are many grammatical and spelling mistakes. These mistakes should be removed by reviewing the paper to an English expert having chemistry knowledge.
2. It is better to add list of abbreviations in the manuscript.
3. Study gap should be added at the end of introduction.
4. Updated references should be added in the manuscript. Some paper should be very helpful for this study read and need to be cited these papers in this manuscript.
“Investigation of catalytic potential of sodium dodecyl sulfate stabilized silver nanoparticles for the degradation of methyl orange dye”
“Lead In drinking water: Adsorption method and role of zeolitic imidazolate frameworks for its remediation: A review”
Author Response
Answers to Reviewer’s Comments
We would like to thank Reviewers for taking the necessary time and effort to review the manuscript. We sincerely appreciate all your valuable comments and suggestions, which helped us in improving the quality of the manuscript. Please find below our answer to all your comments.
- There are many grammatical and spelling mistakes. These mistakes should be removed by reviewing the paper to an English expert having chemistry knowledge.
Answer: The manuscript is reviewed by an English expert, and all grammatical and spelling errors were corrected.
- It is better to add list of abbreviations in the manuscript.
Answer: The abbreviations are available at the end of the manuscript.
- Study gap should be added at the end of the introduction.
Answer: The research gap is added at the end of the Introduction section.
- Updated references should be added in the manuscript. Some paper should be very helpful for this study read and need to be cited these papers in this manuscript.
“Investigation of catalytic potential of sodium dodecyl sulfate stabilized silver nanoparticles for the degradation of methyl orange dye”
“Lead In drinking water: Adsorption method and role of zeolitic imidazolate frameworks for its remediation: A review”
Answer: The two papers provided information about adsorption and were cited in the introduction section.
Reviewer 2 Report
The manuscript deals with investigations on the simulation study of the liquid-solid multistage adsprption process. The manuscript is very interesting and suitable to be published in this journal, however some minior points should be addressed before publication.
- English needs to be carefully checked by a native English speaker.
- Carefully check that all references are accurate and correctly numbred (one by one, please, in text and in the list).
- The novelty of the work should be clearly stated.
- The introduction part of the paper must be strengthened. I think it would be better if the introduction part is rewritten more systematically.
Author Response
Answers to Reviewer's Comments
We would like to thank Reviewers for taking the necessary time and effort to review the manuscript. We sincerely appreciate all your valuable comments and suggestions, which helped us in improving the quality of the manuscript. Please find below our answer to all your comments.
- English needs to be carefully checked by a native English speaker.
Answer: The manuscript is reviewed by an English expert, and all grammatical and spelling errors were corrected.
- Carefully check that all references are accurate and correctly numbred (one by one, please, in text and in the list).
Answer: The References is checked carefully and are written in EndNote.
- The novelty of the work should be clearly stated.
Answer: The novelty of the work is stated at the end of the Introduction section.
- The introduction part of the paper must be strengthened. I think it would be better if the introduction part is rewritten more systematically.
Answer: The Introduction section is strengthened by adding a paragraph and more references.
Reviewer 3 Report
Comments are attached.
Comments for author File: 
Comments.pdf
Author Response
Answers to Reviewer’s Comments
We would like to thank Reviewers for taking the necessary time and effort to review the manuscript. We sincerely appreciate all your valuable comments and suggestions, which helped us in improving the quality of the manuscript. Please find below our answer to all your comments.
There are many too long and confused phrases with grammar and language mistakes in the text. For instance the following phrases (page 2):
- Page 3, lines 102-105: This requires the evaluation of the evaluation … as illustrated below.
Answer: Corrected.
- Page 6, lines 141-144: The F365-375 oil, iso-octane, and … of the equation above.
Answer: Corrected.
- Page 6, …aluminum pore volume (0.26 ml/g), should be alumina?
Answer: Corrected.
- Page 7, lines 195-198: As opposed to a standardized distribution of alumina… higher concentration patterns.
Answer: Corrected.
- Page 3: Input = (??+????? ??)? – Input should be replaced with Output!
Answer: Corrected. Thanks!
- Page 8: “Figure 8 shows … the initial concentrations of the top units were 0.04508, 0.02485, and 0.007197 g/ml…” but the last value is different in Fig 8 ( c0 = 0.0721)
Answer: Corrected. Thanks!
- Page 9: In the following paragraph “…have a look at Figure 5's depiction of the effluent concentration from three-unit systems” is confusion as in page 7, the authors claim that: “Figure 5 shows the effluent concentration vs. total effluent volume for a system of four units…”
Answer: Corrected in Page 5. Thanks!
- Page 9, lines 245-247: “As long as enough slurrying was maintained… total amount of solution adsorption across the units”.
Answer: Corrected.
- The figures 4-8 must be redone because they are unclear.
Answer: Figrues 4 to 8 are prepared with 300 dpi resolution.
