Investigation of Corrosion Behaviors on an Fe/Cu-Type ACM Sensor under Various Environments
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Reviewer’s comments
Overall some good results but it is hard to identify the research focus within the manuscript in its current form, i.e. article present inconsistent discussions on Fe/Cu alloy and ACM sensors, it is difficult to identify whether the article research is about using ACM sensors for corrosion measurement or analysing Fe/Cu alloy under various environmental conditions. This is immensely important to differentiate within the manuscript. There are many fundamental issues which need to be addressed before submission for publication in a journal for example;
- First, it seems like that this article has been rejected from another journal, this assumption can be concluded by that fact at although it has been submitted to Metals in MDPI, there are no references cited from this journal. Although this is not a requirement, however it important to show that the paper is within the scope of the journal and reflects the aims and scope of the journal it is submitted to.
- The introduction section very lengthy – it could be reduced for example the first paragraph is about the corrosion and ACM, which is not needed, also there are sporadic discussions among ACM and galvanic corrosion cell, electrochemical impedance, and electrical resistance measurement, however, it is hard to deduce why all these methods are mentioned as there is no comparative analysis among them. We are aware that they are different methods.
- From line 55 to 70, in the discussion it is somehow made clear that ACM sensors are established method to measure corrosion on metals, if this is the case then this undermines the significance and rigour of this manuscript. If ACM is an established method, then what is the novelty of this manuscript?
- From line 80 onwards, it can be concluded that most of the work conducted is mainly dependent on the ACM sensor, however, the authors have not shown that how the sensors were calibrated and how the data has been verified? In the current form, it is just assumed that whatever data has been generated/created via the sensors it is correct? Which should not be the case.
- In table 2, where do we use deionised water in real-time/life applications? This set up has no relevance, similarly what does 0% of NaCl, NaHSO3 and combined pollutants mean? Either they are present or not.
- Line 116 onwards, in the analytical methods section various commercial equipment are mentioned but most fundamental aspects such as equipment setup are not mentioned.
- Line 164, it is mentioned that when NaCl was increased from 0% to 1%, how? If there was a NaCl solution, it must have some concentration – one can athere was no NaCl solution on the surface and then it was introduced to the surface with 1% concentration?
- Line 211 onwards discussions are basic literature and are already present in public domain, there is no justification or logic present here, the discussion is merely a representation of the date obtained via sensors.
- Line 299, should not be discussions, but conclusion.
Comments for author File: 
Comments.pdf
Author Response
Dear Reviewer #1,
We would like to thank you for giving us the opportunity to revise our manuscript, and sincerely appreciate the positive evaluation and valuable suggestions on our work given by the editor and reviewers. We believe these comments and suggestions can significantly improve the quality of our manuscript.
We have revised the manuscript very carefully following the advices, and the changes of the context were highlighted in yellow in the revised version. If any other items should be further modified, please do not hesitate to let me know.
Thank you and best wishes.
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
"The manuscript needs extensive English language edits and modifications. The logical flow in the narrative is not smooth, and there are gaps in the research. For example, the authors do not discuss why there is a jump in the current values after certain time, why the current tends to increase (spike) in DI and NaCl where as has a downward treand in sulfate solutions. The spikes in current are again not uniform across temperatures and solutions. Which needs to be explained. In the correlation between corrosion current and corrosion rate, the factor or inclusion for temperature is missing. These are major scientific drawbacks and cannot be left unaddressed. Secondly, the authors make a case and show the corrosion products morphology,, but do not explain its importance or role in the corrosion phenomenon. Thirdly, There is a results and discussion section, again a discussion section and no conclusions. This is odd. Authors may want to please reformat into conventional style. There are several other minor and significant flaws in the manuscript, but these alone are enough to call it for a reject. For the benefit of the authors, I have attached my annotated pdf document. "Comments for author File: Comments.pdf
Author Response
Dear Reviewer #2,
We would like to thank you for giving us the opportunity to revise our manuscript, and sincerely appreciate the positive evaluation and valuable suggestions on our work given by the editor and reviewers. We believe these comments and suggestions can significantly improve the quality of our manuscript.
We have revised the manuscript very carefully following the advices, and the changes of the context were highlighted in yellow in the revised version. If any other items should be further modified, please do not hesitate to let me know.
Thank you and best wishes.
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
The influence of temperature, chloride and hydrosulfite ions on the corrosion of Fe/Cu-type ACM was studied experimentally. The test process and results were well presented.
In short-term corrosion test, corrosion test results is very sensitive to corrosion testing method. In this corrosion test, the testing time was very short, 24 hours, and a method of spraying the corrosive medium which is often used for long-term corrosion test was selected. A method of immersion in corrosion medium can be used for the corrosion test to make constant liquid film thickness of the corrosive medium and to simulate constant corrosive environment.
In this test, the corrosion products on the steel were removed by scrubbing with a wire brush and mass loss was calculated. Since the amount of corrosion productions is very small in this test, the corrosion production should be removed carefully by other methods (for an example, Ultrasonic cleaner)
Author Response
Dear Reviewer #3,
We would like to thank you for giving us the opportunity to revise our manuscript, and sincerely appreciate the positive evaluation and valuable suggestions on our work given by the editor and reviewers. We believe these comments and suggestions can significantly improve the quality of our manuscript.
We have revised the manuscript very carefully following the advices, and the changes of the context were highlighted in yellow in the revised version. If any other items should be further modified, please do not hesitate to let me know.
Thank you and best wishes.
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
Please go through the manuscript once again, there are minor changes needed to improve the English. Some grammatical errors are still evident.
Author Response
Thank you for your advice. We have revised the manuscript and highlight the words.
Reviewer 2 Report
There are minor errors in the language. I suggest to take a careful look before final submission. The questions have been satisfactorily answered. The manuscript may be accepted.
Author Response
Thank you for your advice, and we have revised the manuscript again in language. The words have been highlighted in yellow.
Reviewer 3 Report
It is difficult to keep the same condition at every loations in chamber for 24hrs.
There are no information on salt spray box and test conditions, such as size of the box, air pressure and amount of solution, .
It should be presented that the salt spray box can make a constant corrosive conditions in 24hrs.
Author Response
The model of the salt spray box is Kemei-60A salt spray box.
The internal chamber of the salt spray box is 60 cm × 45 cm × 40 cm, and the pressure of compressed air is 1 ± 0.01 kgf cm-2, and the solution prepared for the spray is 15 L. Due to that it is difficult to keep the same condition at every location in the chamber, we installed the ACM sensor and the corrosion coupons at the same locations for each test, controlling the difference caused by different test locations.
These words have been added in line 98-103.
Round 3
Reviewer 3 Report
No comments
