Assessment of Fiber Orientation on the Mechanical Properties of PA6/Cellulose Composite

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The manuscript entitled: “Assessment of fiber orientation on the mechanical properties of PA6/cellulose composite”, describes on the characterization of different formulation of cellulose pulp fibers with polyamide-6. Although data seems to be correct, the paper lists only experimental results and there is not a real summarizing paragraph dedicated to the results discussion. Only after the implementation the manuscript will be suitable for publication in applied sciences. Also the introduction is not described in depth and more attention have to be dedicated to the bibliography, thus introducing more up to date articles, (e.g. Polymers 2020, 12, 1041; doi:10.3390/polym12051041)

Author Response

The authors have gone through all the reviewer' comments and have modified the manuscript accordingly. Please find attached response file below.

Sincerely,

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

The article discusses the subject of PA6 / cellulose composite and its mechanical properties, it is clearly written and easy to read.

In the reviewer opinion, the following fragments of the text require verification: line 202 "All the tensile strength values for 48-hour conditioned samples showed lower values than the dry ones since water behaves as plasticizer."

Water can act as a plasticizer but not on this stage of composite manufacturing. In the processing, water can damage the structure and cause defects in the produced item.

Line 223 "Higher compositions of cellulose pulp fibers contribute more relative surface area for the PA6 matrix, thereby increasing the tensile strengthand TMOE [32,33]."

For SEM analysis there is only one sample -25% celulose content, there is no information why this one is subject to the SEM analysis, and is it dry or conditioned one (due to good wetting, probably it is the coditioneted one).

A note to all figures containing graphs, it would be easier to read them if they had values for reference samples also, but it isn't necessary becouse the values are in the text.

Author Response

The authors have gone through all the reviewer' comments and have modified the manuscript accordingly. Please find attached response file below.

Sincerely,

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

This manuscript reported the “Assessment of fiber orientation on the mechanical 3 properties of PA6/cellulose composite”. Consideration its easy-to-use NFM design and the possible for practical application. Excellent writing and arrangement the data.  I believe this work is deserved to be reported by the journal, which may arouse great interest for relevant materials scientists to apply it. There are, however, several small changes I would suggest before acceptance:

1-The introduction needs to be shortened

2-In the introduction section, the authors should mention the previous work for reinforced cellulose composite with other natural polymers (mention its disadvantageous) 

3-It is better to study the effect of cellulose: nylon ratio on fiber diameter and porosity of NF mat

Author Response

The authors have gone through all the reviewer' comments and have modified the manuscript accordingly. Please find attached response file below.

Sincerely,

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

After modification the manuscript can be' accepted in the present form.