Production of Soft Magnetic Materials Fe-Si and Fe-Si-Al from Blends of Red Muds and Several Additives: Resources for Advanced Electrical Devices
, Yuri Konyukhov 2, Dmitri Zinoveev 2,3, Kejiang Li 4, Nikita Maslennikov 2, Igor Burmistrov 5, Jumat Kargin 6, Maksim Kravchenko 7 and Partha Sarathy Mukherjee 8
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe article is well done. I have just minor suggestions:
1. Some figures, especially SEM and EDS images, still lack clarity. Such as figure 5 and figure 6.
2. The conclusion is too long. Authors are required to revise the conclusion with important findings.
3. Although the author has referenced relevant literature, a more detailed description of the experimental procedures for SEM, EDS, and XRD should still be provided.
Author Response
Pl see attached file
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for Authors
Page 1: Please modify the title to be coherent with the contents. A suggestion for an alternative title is given in the attached pdf.
Page 1: The abstract needs some modifications as shown. For every correction, please apply for the whole text. In the abstract, it is good to write the names of analytical tools in full when they are mentioned for the first time, but it is also recommended to give the abbreviated forms too, e.g. (XRD), (SEM) and (EDS). Do not forget the analytical method by which major oxides content are measured, possibly the XRF or ICP-MS.
Page 1: The keywords need minor corrections.
Page 3: The highlighted 2nd paragraph should be combined with the 1st one in the introduction section.
Page 4: In the first line in the second paragraph, this is a proportion, so enough to mention as 24 %. Wt. % is recommended for chemical contents such as major oxides, e.g. alumina, silica, magnesia and what so else. Please check for this everywhere all over the text.
Page 4: in the last paragraph, replace “Iron bearing” by “Fe-bearing”.
Page 6: Please change the sub-title “1.3 Aim of the Investigation” to “Aims of study”.
Page 7 and on: It is not known the analytical technique by which the major oxides in the tables were determined. Is it by X-ray fluorescence (XRF) or else?. Nothing is mentioned in the materials and methods section about this. It is a weak point of the submitted manuscript.
Page 7, and elsewhere all over the text, again and again keep space between the digits and the unit of measurement.
Page 7-8: Content of sulphur oxide in a bulk chemical analysis should be reported as SO3--.
Page 8, Table 3: Why do not specify them as Fe2O3?. It is incorrect that they represent Fe in the divalent and trivalent states as you mentioned in the text. Fe3O4 looks strange in a chemical analysis of a natural geo-material.
Page 9: At the end of the experimental section, the used analytical techniques need more details, for example information about place, accuracy, precision, standards and conditions of current and voltage are needed.
Page 10: References are needed to confirm that they are typical values.
Page 10: Peaks (elements) in the spectral EDS analysis shown in Fig. 1 are not visible. You need to re-edit. Also, you need to indicate which one is spot analysis # 1 and which one is # 2.
Page 10, the last paragraph: Please use “increased” instead of “enhanced” and “areas” or “domains” instead of “regions”.
Page 11: For Fig. 2, please consider all the comments for Fig. 1. In the figure caption of Fig. 2, it is better to give the high temperature value.
Page 12: Same notes/comments for Figs. 1 and 2 should be considered for Fig. 3 too.
Page 14, Fig. 5: Peaks are not clear in the spectral analyses of phases, either set A or set B.
Page 15, the first paragraph: Use “maps” instead of “profiles”.
Page 23: For the novel and interesting results, you need to justify more and take in consideration previous work and their comparison for such a conclusion.
Page 25-26: The conclusions are ok but they are lengthy. Please summarize them in the form of short but informative bullets.
Page 27-35: Serious editing, especially punctuation are needed for the majority of references in the list. Also, when you abbreviate a journal name, do not use of or similar.
Some references are left with journal name without abbreviations, e.g. # 28, 29, 31, 62, 64, 66 and others.
Comments for author File: 
Comments.pdf
Author Response
Please see attached file
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Reviewer 3 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe article "Transforming Red Mud into Value-added Products in the Presence of Additives: Production of Soft Magnetic Materials Fe-Si and Fe-Si-Al for Advanced Electrical Devices " is undoubtedly relevant and is devoted to a very important topic - waste processing technology, which will help preserve the environment and resources. The article is well and interestingly written, contains a deep analysis.
There is one question:
1. Did the authors consider research on obtaining concentrate and extracting rare earth elements from red mud?
The article may be published in the journal Sustainability.
Author Response
Please see attached file
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsPage 8: Where is the correct position of this statement?. Probably with the previous paragraph.
Page 15, Fig. 5: Please remove the second slash (/) from the caption. Even you can remove the first one and write SEM-EDS, i.e. with a hyphen instead.
Page 23, and elsewhere: The figure or table captions shouldn’t be double-spaced but single.
Page 27: The reference list is improved but it still needs some minor corrections, e.g. place of publication year, abbreviation and punctuation issues. Please check for all and what is shown here are just examples.
Comments for author File: Comments.pdf
Author Response
Please see attached file
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
