You are currently viewing a new version of our website. To view the old version click .
MDPIMDPI
Search all articles
by
  • Hongmin Kan1,2,*,
  • Linxin Qi1 and
  • Jiang Wu1

Reviewer 1: Anonymous Reviewer 2: Anonymous Reviewer 3: Anonymous

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Title: Preparation and properties of Al-SiC composite coatings from AlCl3-LiAlH4-benzene-THF system

Summary: This paper studies the corrosion behavior of coatings in Al-SiC. This paper needs major corrections to be published.

Abstract: It's Ok

Introduction: Correct the reference formats. Include the novelty of your research.

Methods: What type of test did you take to perform the corrosion test?

What are your deposition parameters?

What are the electrodes that you employed?

What parameters did you use to realize the Vickers measurement?

Results: Do you have elements mapping from SEM-EDS?

How did you determine the homogeneity of your coating?

Include the fitting line of EIS.

Made the axis equivalents to see the corrosion process (axis Y and axis X should be equal, or the distance should be equal or proportional.

Include the Bode diagrams of |Z| and phase angle.

Use sub index

Explain the inductor behavior

What means the n value?

Discussion: What corrosion process did you have?

Is the Vickers hardness associated with the phase of coatings?

Conclusions: Include more quantitative conclusions.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

 Dear Editors,

In their paper titled “Preparation and properties of Al-SiC composite coatings from AlCl₃-LiAlH₄-benzene-THF system,” Kan et al. prepared Al-SiC composites and investigated their surface morphology, corrosion resistance, and hardness. In my opinion, the paper is interesting and may be considered for publication after major revision. My concerns are listed below:

  1. In the abstract, the use of the word “best” needs to be revised. The best morphology in comparison with which materials and which morphologies? Such a claim is valid only if a comparison with multiple materials has been conducted.
  2. The research question is not clearly defined. Please clarify why this study was undertaken and how its results can contribute to synthetic data and industrial applications.
  3. Please provide benchmark references for the XRD patterns shown in Figure 2.
  4. Figures 3–6 require higher resolution.
  5. Please redraw Figure 14 using professional software. The current figure appears to be generated in Excel, which does not meet journal standards. Consider using software such as Origin to improve quality.
  6. The term corrosion resistance is ambiguous. Resistance in which environment(s)? Please specify the exact environment in which the corrosion resistance was tested.
  7. If the corrosion resistance of Al-SiC is compared with that of pure SiC or Al alloys, which material provides superior performance under similar conditions?
  8. Please clarify the crystal lattice structures of Al and SiC. For example, is the Al observed in a face-centered cubic (FCC) lattice? Which SiC polytype is studied (e.g., 3C-SiC or 4H-SiC)?
  9. Please carefully revise the manuscript for standard English grammar, punctuation, and style.
Comments on the Quality of English Language
  1. Please carefully revise the manuscript for standard English grammar, punctuation, and style.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The article Preparation and properties of Al-SiC composite coatings from 2 AlCl3-LiAlH4-benzene-THF system by Hongmin Kan, Linxin Qi and Jiang Wu presents a wide scientific work in the coating science of metals to obtain better hard coatings with anticorrosive and high hardness properties on the surface of Al metal. This work is clear and varies a wide range of reaction parameters with the corresponding characterizations and, finally the respective conclusions. This work is appropriate for the Coatings journal and can be published after minor changes and one only grate change that can be well done by the authors.

Starting with the main change of the article this is related to the comparison between the obtained results and the others found in the bibliography. There is not any reference to other articles in the Results and Discussion section. The authors must compare their results with other found in the literature and they must show the improvements achieved with their work. While this is well done in the Introduction section however there is an absence in the Discussion one. This is necessary done before accepting this work.

Respect to the minor changes these are:

  1. The particle size distribution (and mean particle size) of the SiC powders must be included in the text. If possible, the XRD pattern and some SEM photographs.
  2. In Section 2, it is indicated (at the end of page 2of16) that “the composition was analyzed by XRD…”. The XRD technique does not give “composition”, it gives crystalline phases only and, other not crystalline phases (amorphous, vitreous) can no be detected.
  3. In accordance with the above change (b), it would be interesting to provide the chemical composition of the SiC particles to know if the is an excess of carbon, or SiO2 (on its surface), etc. This will be interesting because the electrodeposition process is very dependent on the surface properties and mainly on the surface chemical composition. Therefore, bulk (elemental chemical analysis) and surface (XPS technique) would be included in the article.
  4. It would be interesting to give a table in the Preparation and Characterization section (2) with all the parameters varied and studied in the work: temperature, concentration of SiC particles, current density, deposition time, etc. This will clarify the reading of the work.
  5. It would be also interesting to give the EDS analysis of the aluminum sheet because most of the aluminum materials are dopped or alloyed with Si or other metals and, therefore, the Si element detected by EDS could be due to SiC or to aluminum sheet (if it contains it).
  6. The element distribution of Si and C in Figure 1 must be changed to other colours than black (or green on black) because it is very difficult to distinguish the dots from the background.
  7. In Figures 3, 4 and 5 I believe that the EDS spectra must be removed because they are similar in all cases. If would be necessary I think that only one can be plotted in Figure 1. Besides, as the EDS spectra of C, O, Al and Si is between 0 and 3 keV, it would be interesting to plot in such energy range and not between 0-18 keV. This would clarify the view of the spectra.
  8. Table 1 gives the analysis determined by EDS for the C, O, Al and Si elements however, in the rest of the text the results only refer to Si element, what does happen with the other elements? Are the Si/C and Si/Al and C/O ratios constant in all the analysis carried out changing the different parameters (temperature, current density, etc.)?
  9. How much analysis have been carried out for each sample? How were the standard deviations of the different analysis? Has been carried out and statistical analysis?
  10. In Sections 3.1 and 3.2 the authors indicate the different parameters studied: SiC concentration, current density, Temperature, time and AlCl3-LiAlH4-benzene-THF amounts. However, in Sections 3.3 and 3.4 not all of them are indicated, therefore it is impossible to know if the temperatures or current densities or time etc., were similar or different. I think that if the authors include a new table with all the studied parameters it will clarify the reading of the article.
  11. Results of corrosion resistance after different conditions have been included and the results are very interesting, however how is the adhesion resistance of the different coatings? Has been carried out scratch tests or other mechanical analysis?
  12. Table 9 and in other results there are given with 1 and 2 decimals. Please use always 2. Besides, Figure 14 presents the same results of Table 9, and therefore one of they must be removed.
  13. I think that Figure 8 cand be inserted into Figure 7 and thus the results and samples would be more easily compared.
  14. In some parts of the text the font size (or probably the font type) is changed and this leads to confusion when reading the text. Please, be careful and use the same font size in all the work.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Ok

Author Response

Comments and Suggestions for Authors is ok

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Dear Editors,

In their paper titled “Preparation and Properties of Al-SiC Composite Coatings from AlCl₃-LiAlH₄-Benzene-THF System,” Kan et al. addressed all of the main concerns. I am pleased to recommend this paper for publication after minor revision.

  1. Please add the following explanation, which was included in the response letter but omitted from the manuscript:

“In our Al-SiC composite coating, the uniformly dispersed SiC nano/micro particles play the following crucial roles: (i) acting as a physical barrier to impede the spread of the corrosion medium and the extension of corrosion cracks; (ii) refining the aluminum grains, thereby generating a denser and more stable passive film (Al₂O₃); and (iii) filling the pores and reducing the defect density of the coating. These factors collectively significantly delay the initiation and development of pitting corrosion.”

“The type of SiC we employed is 3C type.”

“Corrosion of the pure aluminum coating typically initiates when aggressive ions such as Cl⁻ attack the surface defects or weak points, and it is prone to develop into pitting corrosion.”

  1. The similarity index of the manuscript is 34%. I recommend that the authors reduce this value to below 20%.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf