Investigation of Oxide Thickness on Technical Aluminium Alloys—A Comparison of Characterization Methods
, Thomas Maximilian Bruckner 1, Laura Hader-Kregl 1, Martina Hafner 2, Heiko Groiss 3, Jiri Duchoslav 4 and David Stifter 4,*
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Generally speaking there are no objections in the paper. Congratulations
Not perfect but enough
Author Response
Dear Reviewer,
please see the attachment!
Kind regards,
Gruber Ralph
Reviewer 2 Report
-
Abstract should contain only specific results not description of aims of the work, application etc.
-
Conclusions should not repeat Abstract.
-
Mathematical statistics say that absolute deviations (0.56 and 0.26) (Table 2) mean that the error is already present in the first digit after decimal point. If there is already an error in the first digit after the decimal point, it means that the second digit after decimal point can be any.
-
The findings (lines 248-252, 422-423) are very well known or trivial (290-291, 299-306, 309-312, 395-399, 403-448 etc.)
-
What does it mean “..Investigation of oxide thickness…”?
-
What are the aim and newness (novelty) of the work?
Poor English
Author Response
Dear Reviewer,
please see the attachment!
Kind regards,
Gruber Ralph
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
The paper presents new information on the application of TEM, XPS and AES methods to assess the thickness of the oxide layer on polycrystalline metal alloys. The above methods give reliable results when measuring uniform oxide layers on single crystals, especially semiconductors. The authors indicated the possibility of using the TEM, XPS and AES methods to assess the thickness of inhomogeneous, uneven layers of Al, Ti, and Zr oxides, which were formed on the surface of aluminum alloy sheets.
The work requires small detail and comments (comments below). After corrections, I recommend this work for publication in the Metals.
Major comments:
The abstract lacks information about the material and thickness of the oxide layer.
There is no information about the heat treatment (history) of the sheets.
The accuracy of layer thickness measurement (Table 2) at the level of 10 pm without detailing the description of the measurement procedure is not convincing.
The authors write that XPS underestimates the TEM data by about one nanometer. Not necessarily, the XPS data are averages. The lamel can also be cut in the place of the greatest unevenness. Perhaps the thickness in this place will significantly affect the average result.
Minor comments:
There is no comment regarding the lack of stoichiometry of the Al2O3 oxide, as shown in Table 3.
The Al2O3 subject is missing in the caption of Figure 10.
Author Response
Dear Reviewer,
please see the attachment!
Kind regards,
Gruber Ralph
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 4 Report
COMMENTS FOR THE AUTHORS
This work analyzed the significant effect of an aluminum oxide surface layer on different application properties and the importance of the exact compositional characterization, the question arises is a valid method for oxide thickness determination on industrial 6xxx aluminium alloys.
In some cases, the text must be clarified and there are issues that are not accurate. Better and more evidences for some conclusions are required. Without a careful revision this manuscript cannot be accepted.
1. In section 2, surface treatment procedure based on automotive standards should be introduced more details.
2. In Table 2, how many samples did you measure?
3. The authors can state some information about the effect of measure temperature and Atmospheric oxygen concentration on the thickness of the Al2O3
4. In Fig.7(a), the characters seems too small
5. The conclusion section should be divided several parts, e.g. (1)XXX; (2)XXX; (3)XXX.
6. Some reference seems too old, it’s better to cite the paper published in resent five years.
7. Besides TEM, XPS, ARXPS, AES, is there any other method to measure the thickness?
Author Response
Dear Reviewer,
please see the attachment!
Kind regards,
Gruber Ralph
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 4 Report
accept
