Effect of Pulse Electrodeposition Mode on Microstructures and Properties of Ni-TiN Composite Coatings
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for Authors
Title: Effect of pulse current mode on microstructures and properties of Ni-TiN composite coatings
Manuscript ID：3274408
The authors presented an article «Effect of pulse current mode on microstructures and properties of Ni-TiN composite coatings». There seem to be some issues with experimental method and analyzing results. For example
1 Authors should be start abstract with briefly the purpose and novelty of the research, the principal results and major conclusions with industrial scope.
Please revise the article title.
Abstract must mention the specifying the purpose.
Figures containing test and measurement methods should be added.
What are the standards used in the tests?
Were the experiments repeated?
Those related to corrosion should be marked on Figure 10 (corrosion cracks and pins. etc).
For the article paper, the authors must conduct a comprehensive review that includes research published at least five or six years ago to track the extent of the topic's development rather than focusing on recent references only. Therefore, more references should be included certainly the reference. Some key references were studied in several paper as follows:
· https://doi.org/10.1080/2374068X.2023.2184585
· https://doi.org/10.1142/S0218625X22501542
Ultrasonic electrodeposition change the roughness of surfaces but no information has not been given about the surface roughness of the samples. Therefore, surface roughness of the samples is required to measure and give in the study.
Mention the application of Ni-TiN composite.
Are the chemical composition and mechanical properties of the material provided by the material supplier or determined by the authors? I think you should specify this in detail.
Conclusions should be supported by the data and must be reconstructed.
Author needs to the quality of all figures.
Discussion is poor please improve the discussion with appropriate proof.
Write the future scope.
The discussion of results could better connect the findings to the theoretical framework and more extensively explore their practical implications in engineering and manufacturing.
In the Results and Discussion section, the content will be enriched if the studies related to the subject of the article are cited comparatively. Thus the value and citation rate of the article will increase.
Authors should carefully study the comments and make improvements to the article step by step. All changes should be highlighted in color.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe paper presents valuable findings on the fabrication and performance of Ni-TiN composite coatings using ultrasonic electroplating, with a clear comparison of current modes. The use of pulse currents, particularly PNPC, significantly enhances key properties like bonding strength, corrosion resistance, and wear performance. However, a deeper exploration of the mechanisms, corrosion testing, TiN particle dispersion, and electroplating parameter optimization would imrpove the paper further. Overall, this research has the potential to contribute meaningfully to advancements in coating technologies for various industrial applications.
While the paper presents a strong dataset, it would benefit from a deeper discussion of the underlying mechanisms responsible for the observed improvements in coating properties. For example, a more detailed explanation of how PNPC leads to superior bonding strength and TiN incorporation compared to other methods would strengthen the paper.
Suggest to add an analysis of TiN particle dispersion across the coating using techniques like energy-dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (EDX) or mapping methods to better illustrate how the current modes influence the uniformity of particle incorporation.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe article is well-structured and compact. Citations are from recent studies and support results not measured directly in this article (for example higher TiN content in PC/PNPC coating method than in DC, as confirmed in study (14) "As previously stated, a low DC and high PF generated by the pulsed power supply improved the quantities of implanted TiN nanoparticles" ). The experimental method is thoroughly described to allow for reproducibility, yet there is no information about the surface preparation of the mild steel sheet, on which the coating is deposited(for example, sandpaper grits used for polishing, if the surface was activated with acid, etc.).
128-130 "The coating achieved through positive-negative pulse current electroplating displays even greater uni- formity in thickness, resulting in a smooth and flat interface between the coating and the substrate." Only evidence of this is included in the photographs, there are no measurements. And Figure 3, C with supposedly the best uniformity in thickness, has a visible valley just right to the "Coating" text on yellow background. Using only Figures 3 a, b, c, one would choose sample b as the one with the best thickness uniformity. I would consider adding measurements of thickness to support the thesis of best uniformity. Figure 7: The values of the friction coefficient cannot be read from the chart, therefore, one would expect to have the average value of the friction coefficient for "positive pulse current electroplating". It is not clear if the given values are the average values of the friction coefficient, or values at the end of the test, or other. The study concludes that positive-negative pulse electrodeposition coatings are superior in every measured aspect, which is remarkable and gives importance to the article. Remarks: 61 "bath with sodium rice TiN was used" meaning of "rice" not clear
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
