Review Reports

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Please see the attachment file.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

This work reports on the preparation of PET surfaces with hydrophobic properties. I recommend that the manuscript can be accepted for publication in Coatings after revision.

1. The title of the manuscript needs to be revised to highlight the key core of the current work.

2. Authors claimed that the particle layer in Figure 4 has a thickness of about 10-15 μm. But the boundary of this layer is not very clear. Can the authors give a clear boundary for particle layer and film layer with arrows?

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

Review attached

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 4 Report

This paper describes an interesting technique to create hydrophobic surfaces on PET. This technique is a very effective method and is expected to be applied.

1) Abstract: The abstract should be a total of about 200 words maximum. The abstract of this paper is about 120 words. Please describe the details of experimental findings so that the reader can understand the content of this study from the abstract alone.

2) Line 22: [1][2][3][4][5][6] → [1-6].

3) Line 40: What is UE? When an abbreviation appears for the first time, please write it without an abbreviation.

4) Figure 1: Please write down the reagents and conditions for i) and ii).

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 4 Report

Revisions were well done. This paper is acceptable.