Fabrication and Characterization of Micro-Arc Oxidation Films on β-Titanium Alloy in Silicate and Silicate/Glycerin Electrolyte
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe article titled "Fabrication and characterization of microarc oxidation films on β-titanium alloy in silicate and silicate/glycerin electrolyte" is original in terms of its subject and is an important article in understanding the properties of the film formed as a result of micro arc. Technically, the work done is clear and detailed enough. I don't see any serious technical shortcomings, just as a recommendation; I would like to state that examining the bond strength of this film will add value to future studies. However, I regret to say that there are significant deficiencies in the article in terms of form and these are stated below;
1) The introduction is solid, but focusing on improving the problem statement, research gap, and flow of the text will make the article more compelling. Additionally, streamlining some of the technical details and making the objective more prominent will help clarify the study's importance.
2)It would be beneficial to more clearly emphasise the main problem associated with β-titanium alloys, namely their wear resistance and surface toxicity, at the outset of the discussion. While the paragraph in question does address the strengths of β-titanium alloys, the transition to their limitations could be more seamless.
3)The sentence "the corresponding studies on their micro-arc oxidation surface treatment are quite limited" could be expanded to elucidate the significance of this gap in the existing literature and to delineate the objectives of the present study in addressing it.
4)Although previous works by Wenbin Xue and Yaming Wang are referenced, it would be beneficial to include a brief overview of the specific findings of these studies, particularly in terms of how they relate to or can be used as a point of comparison or reference. ( (also for sentence Page 2-line 47),
5) "Figure 4 presents" this sentence (Page 6/ Line 148) is misspelled and should be corrected as Figure 5.
6)Again, in Figure 5 and Fig.10 , the text in the picture is not readable, it should be made more obvious.
7)In Picture 6, the description of pictures d, e, f is not written.
8)XRD patterns are not visible in Pictures 4 and 6, it would be more appropriate to add larger images.
9) Figure 13 and Figure 15 -text in graphics cannot be read.
10) The number of references is too few, more references should be added
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe work is devoted to coatings on titanium alloy by the microarc oxidation method. The main part of the article contains a description of the composition and structure of the coatings using a number of methods. It should be noted that the methods used are described too briefly. The main drawback is that it does not discuss what depth each specific method describes. There is also a simple error ("typo") - there is no data on the use of Raman scattering, while this method is indicated in Section 2 (line 76). Below I provide what exactly needs to be improved in the description of the methods.
line 59 - usually a diagram of the installation is given or a link is given
lines 68 and 69. The sentence needs to be rewritten indicating the brand of the spectrometer. Please consider ... a scanning microscope (SEM....) equipped with energy dispersive ....(name of spectrometer)
line 75. Please consider - continuous scanning of 10 deg/min in the range of diffraction angles of 20 - 90 degrees
profilometer for measuring roughness is not specified
line 83. looking at the range of wavelengths and resolution, I think the device is multichannel (see the article at link 8). And it is also worth indicating the company - Avantes.
line 78. Usually, the type of X-ray source is indicated
Now comments and questions on the results
Tables 1 and 2. At what accelerating voltages were the EDS spectra taken?
It is more logical to transfer the XPS data to this section 3.1. The XPS data provide information on chemical bonds and cannot add anything to the phase composition in relation to the used version of XRD - the depths of analysis differ greatly nms and µms, respectively.
The deconvolution of the oxygen peak in Fig. 5e and 10g should be checked. I mean the relative position of the oxygen lines in silicon and titanium oxides.
I think that the information in Figures 2 and 7 can be presented in text form. And I wonder what the original roughness was?
Figures 3 and 8 (there is no caption that this is Figure 8) require revision. It is necessary to indicate where the substrate is and where the loose layer is.. (see link 8). The captions indicate the composition profiles (line scanning mode in EDS?). But they are not in the figures.
Figure 6 The caption does not contain links to d, e and f.
About plasma spectroscopy. I am not an expert in plasma and determining its parameters using emission spectroscopy. Therefore, I am writing a remark below simply as a proofreader.
In Figure 13a, the intensive line near 600 nm is designated as light from a neutral titanium atom (but see line 313 !?). In Figure 15a, the contribution from a singly charged carbon ion is added (apparently these lines are not resolved). Is this a typo? Or were there any grounds for such an illustration of the spectrum? Maybe these are EDS data on the absence of carbon in the first case? Please explain.
If the neutral titanium line is so intense, then I would provide its dependence on time. Perhaps it will decrease like the aluminum line in work 8 again, which you refer to. In my opinion, this would be ... well, a nice illustration of why emission spectroscopy is needed.
And one more typo. In Fig. 13, minutes are incorrectly indicated instead of seconds.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsGood studies on the layer formation of titanium oxide layers in various electrolytes.
The description of the methods and the results does not include how the roughness of the layers was determined, Fig. 2 and 7.
The X-ray diffraction diagrams Fig. 4 and 9 can be drawn wider and the respective X-ray peaks are to be indicated. It is also missing which database and which special database files were used for the phases found.
In Fig. 4, red diffractogram, why is the background so different here?
The entire manuscript must be corrected before publication so that tables are placed on one page complete with tab headings, and figures with their captions are also placed on one page, e.g. Fig. 4.
The following text passages or words or spaces must be corrected:
generally: protected space between measured value and unit, no line break possible.
Line 62 poor separation
Line 65 as10 nm Insert space after as
Line 73 X-ray
Line 83 200 nm - 750 nm
Line 96 of +
Line 100 500 V
Fig. 12 is to be made more compact, a) and b) more in circuit so figure smaller in height and therefore more compact.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe authors have fully addressed all deficiencies and weaknesses that I had pointed out during the previous refereeing process. I do not think that the article has any technical, scientific and stylistic deficiencies in this form and I think it is appropriate to accept the article as it is.
Yours sincerely
Author Response
We are grateful for the reviewer’s kind comments.
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsAuthors corrected all my remarks.
Please forgive me for not noticing several inaccuracies when I first read the article.
lines 117-119 Elements at a depth of about µm contribute to the EDS spectra at 20 kV. For light elements like boron, the depth of analysis is less. But one cannot say that this is adsorption on the surface based on the EDS spectra alone. Therefore, it is more correct to write that boron ions are implanted into the near-surface layers and not adsorbed on the surface.
I propose changing the title of section 3.2 removing structure
3.2 Phase analysis.......
and section 3.5 to
Optical emission spectroscopy of micro-arc discharge
Author Response
First, we would like to thank the reviewer kind comments to improve our manuscript. Th suggestions are very constructive. Please check the word file of Revised Manuscript with changes tracked. The revised parts of the manuscript are also attached below marked in red color for the convenience of review.
