Next Article in Journal
Wasted Ganoderma tsugae Derived Chitosans for Smear Layer Removal in Endodontic Treatment
Next Article in Special Issue
Crystalline Characteristics and Their Influence in the Mechanical Performance in Poly(ε-Caprolactone) / High Density Polyethylene Blends
Previous Article in Journal
PCL-ZnO/TiO2/HAp Electrospun Composite Fibers with Applications in Tissue Engineering
Previous Article in Special Issue
Piezoelectric Films Based on Polyethylene Modified by Aluminosilicate Filler
 
 
Article
Peer-Review Record

Chlorination Treatment of Meta-Aramid Fibrids and Its Effects on Mechanical Properties of Polytetramethylene Ether Glycol/Toluene Diisocyanate (PTMEG/TDI)-Based Polyurethane Composites

Polymers 2019, 11(11), 1794; https://doi.org/10.3390/polym11111794
by Wuyang Lu, Yuhua Yi *, Chunping Ning, Mingliang Ge and Jahangir Alam S.M. *
Reviewer 1: Anonymous
Reviewer 2: Anonymous
Reviewer 3: Anonymous
Polymers 2019, 11(11), 1794; https://doi.org/10.3390/polym11111794
Submission received: 24 September 2019 / Revised: 23 October 2019 / Accepted: 24 October 2019 / Published: 1 November 2019
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Multiphase Structure of Polymeric Materials and Physical Properties)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

This paper has been well prepared and can be accepted by the present form.

Author Response

Point 1: This paper has been well prepared and can be accepted by the present form.

 Response 1: Thank very much for your kind and valuable comments to publish this research paper in “polymers”.

Reviewer 2 Report

The manuscript reports on a novel method to increase the compatibility of aramid fibrids with PU matrix. As a general comment, the authors addressed the issue in detail, presenting results coming from different experimental techniques. However there are some issues that should be addressed before the paper can be accepted for publication:

English language needs to be improved; Page 2 line 47: “The researcher defined…”, who? Page 3 line 100: “…under certain conditions”. The conditions should be specified; Page 4: the authors mention an increase in surface roughness after chlorination but from SEM micrographs provided it is difficult to be detected; Page 6 line 169: “sand MAFCs”. The meaning is not clear; Page 7 lines 198 and 200: some angles are wrong. What is the standard deviation of these measurements?; Figure 6b: It should be “kN…”; How many sample were mechanically tested? In table 4 standard deviations should be included. “Shao should be Shore”, and “kN instead of KN”; The etching procedure should be described; Figure 7: Higher magnifications should be provided to appreciate differences.

Author Response

Manuscript Number: polymers-610201

“Chlorination treatment of meta-aramid fibrids and its effects on mechanical properties of polytetramethylene ether glycol/toluene diisocyanate (PTMEG/TDI)-based polyurethane composites”

 Thank you very much for your kind and valuable comments of our paper. The reviewer comments have been revised for kind looking. The revised texts have been marked with Red and Yellow colour in the manuscript. I would like to request the reviewer to have screening the manuscript. Changed and revised responses shown in below for your kind looking.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

Manuscript entitled "Chlorination treatment of meta-aramid fibrids and its effects on mechanical properties of polytetramethylene ether glycol/toluene diisocyanate (PTMEG/TDI)-based polyurethane composites" is well written and presents very good research and going to be interesting for the reader's. 

Author Response

Manuscript entitled "Chlorination treatment of meta-aramid fibrids and its effects on mechanical properties of polytetramethylene ether glycol/toluene diisocyanate (PTMEG/TDI)-based polyurethane composites" is well written and presents very good research and going to be interesting for the reader's. 

Response: Thank very much for your kind and valuable comments to publish this research paper in “polymers”.

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

The authors have revised the manuscript but there are some issues that still need to be addressed as follows:

The standard deviations should be added in table 4 to check the dispersion of data; The quality of written English needs to be significantly revised and improved.

Author Response

Thank you very much for your kind and valuable comments of our paper. The reviewer comments have been revised for kind looking. The revised texts have been marked with blue colour in the manuscript. I would like to request the reviewer to have screening the manuscript. Changed and revised responses shown in below for your kind looking.

if we need any correction again pls be advised us. Thanks

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Back to TopTop