Next Article in Journal
An Efficient Synthesis and Photoelectric Properties of Green Carbon Quantum Dots with High Fluorescent Quantum Yield
Next Article in Special Issue
Effects of Annealing on Characteristics of Cu2ZnSnSe4/CH3NH3PbI3/ZnS/IZO Nanostructures for Enhanced Photovoltaic Solar Cells
Previous Article in Journal
Hybrid ZnO Electron Transport Layer by Down Conversion Complexes for Dual Improvements of Photovoltaic and Stable Performances in Polymer Solar Cells
Previous Article in Special Issue
Spatially Resolved Optoelectronic Properties of Al-Doped Zinc Oxide Thin Films Deposited by Radio-Frequency Magnetron Plasma Sputtering Without Substrate Heating
 
 
Article
Peer-Review Record

Influence of Thickness and Sputtering Pressure on Electrical Resistivity and Elastic Wave Propagation in Oriented Columnar Tungsten Thin Films

Nanomaterials 2020, 10(1), 81; https://doi.org/10.3390/nano10010081
by Asma Chargui 1, Raya El Beainou 1, Alexis Mosset 1, Sébastien Euphrasie 1, Valérie Potin 2, Pascal Vairac 1 and Nicolas Martin 1,*
Reviewer 1: Anonymous
Reviewer 2: Anonymous
Nanomaterials 2020, 10(1), 81; https://doi.org/10.3390/nano10010081
Submission received: 9 December 2019 / Revised: 23 December 2019 / Accepted: 25 December 2019 / Published: 1 January 2020

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The manuscript titled "Influence of thickness and sputtering pressure on 2 electrical resistivity and elastic wave propagation in 3 oriented columnar tungsten thin films" by Chargui et al. presents a somewhat straightforward, but nevertheless detailed study of the morphology as well as electrical and acoustic (as measured by elastic wave propagation) properties of W films grown by glancing-angle DC magnetron sputtering.

While the methods are well explained and the presented data are carefully obtained, I feel that the manuscript, in its current state, lacks in terms of research motivation, in particular as to why the authors decided to conduct this study on W films in particular. The way it reads, the work is just a systematic study with a series of characterization experiments performed just "because the authors could". As such, I strongly suggest the addition of a brief paragraph to the introducyion section of the manuscript, explaining why the study has been conducted on W films in more detail. Once this is done, I think the work would be suitable for publication in Nanomaterials.

Author Response

While the methods are well explained and the presented data are carefully obtained, I feel that the manuscript, in its current state, lacks in terms of research motivation, in particular as to why the authors decided to conduct this study on W films in particular. The way it reads, the work is just a systematic study with a series of characterization experiments performed just "because the authors could". As such, I strongly suggest the addition of a brief paragraph to the introducyion section of the manuscript, explaining why the study has been conducted on W films in more detail. Once this is done, I think the work would be suitable for publication in Nanomaterials.

As suggested by the Reviewer, the motivation of of conducting such a study has been added in the introduction part as follows:

"This study is motivated by the understanding of anisotropic behaviors in terms of electronic transport properties and elastic wave propagation in nanostructured thin films exhibiting a tilted columnar architecture. The choice of tungsten films is due to its ability to produce a columnar structure with tunable cross-section morphologies depending on deposition time and sputtering conditions."

Reviewer 2 Report

This work is very interesting and well prepared.

I have only a few minor remarks to make:

- The abstract in line 13 uses "W", it would be better to write Tungsten

- similarly in line 477 (summary)

- could be separated part cross-section and TOP view more clearly in Figures with SEM.

However, the scientific results are solid and well discussed.inline

Author Response

I have only a few minor remarks to make:

- The abstract in line 13 uses "W", it would be better to write Tungsten

- similarly in line 477 (summary)

- could be separated part cross-section and TOP view more clearly in Figures with SEM.

However, the scientific results are solid and well discussed.inline.

As suggested by the Reviewer, we wrote "Tungsten" instead of "W" in abstract and conclusion.

As suggested by the Reviewer, we separated top and cross-section views in Fig. 2 and 6.

Back to TopTop