Bulletproof Performance of Composite Plate Fabricated Using Shear Thickening Fluid and Natural Fiber Paper

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

This paper presents Bulletproof performance of composite plate fabricated
using shear thickening fluid and natural fiber paper. The following comments need to be addressed befor accepting for publication

The abstract should discuss major objective; the summary of the results; and major findings This paper presents the effect of bullet on composite plate; however the objective is not clear; do the authors want to achieve something out of this work? What is the target? Is there any threshold velocity or stress to look at to understand the performance of the composite plate.  How to define the structure is bulletproof? A comparison study is required to understand the current material performance and prior study from the literature. Why this study is important and what are the advantages. A comparative study between theoretical and experimental results need to be presented. The summary of the results, major findings and future work (if any) need to be added in the conclusion. 

"The findings of this work would be beneficial to the munitions industry owing to the facile and cost-effective manufacturing process..."

Please jusify the statement. How it is going to be beneficial, why it is cost effecttive? Compare to with what? 

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

In this study, the manuscript entilted “Bulletproof performance of composite plate fabricated using shear thickening fluid and natural fiber paper” was presented by Cho et al. The author should clarify the following concerns and address the following questions.

 

 

The current literature review is not sufficient. Please mention more studies related to the matter of the article in the section of “Introduction”, for examples: A study on protective performance of bullet-proof helmet under impact loading. Journal of Vibroengineering, 18(4), 2495-2507.

 

Some figures cannot be found, such as Figure S1, Figure S2.

 

 

The finite element analysis was included in “2. Experimental Details”, the authors should separate this section into two sections, i.e., experiment and FEA.

 

The authors should split “Results and Discussion” to “Results” and “Discussion”.

 

Please give the references for the equations.

 

The quality of figures needs to be improved, such as “systematic diagram”. It’s hard to read figure 1. The fitting equation should be given in the figure 2. The relationship should be given regarding stress momentum and thicknesses in figure 7.

 

What’s the relationship between the experiment and FEA? In addition, how to validate the finite element method?

 

 

What are the limitations of the present study?

 

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

This manuscript pertains to the actual topic, namely the bulletproof performance of composite structure based on the shear thickening fluid and natural fiber paper. The results are interesting and novel. Experimental approaches are well illustrated. Nevertheless, I find a several small aspects are not thoroughly discussed in the manuscript. Please consider the following questions.

i. What is the reason to select cornstarch suspension?

ii. Describe preparation of cornstarch suspension (preparation temperature, mixing speed, suspension viscosity etc).

iii. Please provide Ref. for calculation of stress distribution in materials with layered architecture.

In my opinion, the results are interesting and the paper can be useful enough for the readership of Applied Sciences to be published.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Authors made substantial changes to the manuscript. The manuscript can be accepted for publication. 

Author Response

Reviewer 1:

Authors made substantial changes to the manuscript. The manuscript can be accepted for publication.

Response: We are grateful to Reviewer 1 for his/her time and efforts in examining our work. Thank you very much for positive and helpful comments.

Reviewer 2 Report

Please correct the figure legend for Fig. 7, there are two "(a)" and "(c)".

Author Response

Reviewer 2:

Please correct the figure legend for Fig. 7, there are two "(a)" and "(c)".

Response: We are grateful to Reviewer 2 for his/her time and efforts in examining our work. Thank you very much for positive and helpful comments. The Figure 7 legend has been revised.

Change made (Figure 7 legend): Figure 7. Stress momentum for various thicknesses of (a) Hanji layers and (b) cornstarch layers.  Bullet momentum values calculated for various thicknesses of (c) Hanji layers and (d) cornstarch layers.