Next Article in Journal
Structural and Antimicrobial Investigation of Some New Nanoparticles Mixed Ligands Metal Complexes of Ethyl 6-Amino-4-(4-chlorophenyl)-5-cyano-2-methyl-4H-pyran-3-carboxylate in Presence of 1,10-Phenanthroline
Previous Article in Journal
Fluorescence Resonance Energy Transfer Properties and Auger Recombination Suppression in Supraparticles Self-Assembled from Colloidal Quantum Dots
 
 
Article
Peer-Review Record

Electrode with a Carbon Nanotube Array for a Proton Exchange Membrane Fuel Cell

Inorganics 2023, 11(5), 219; https://doi.org/10.3390/inorganics11050219
by Adelina A. Zasypkina 1, Nataliya A. Ivanova 1,*, Dmitry D. Spasov 1,2, Ruslan M. Mensharapov 1, Olga K. Alekseeva 1, Ekaterina A. Vorobyeva 1,3, Elena V. Kukueva 1 and Vladimir N. Fateev 1
Reviewer 1:
Reviewer 2: Anonymous
Inorganics 2023, 11(5), 219; https://doi.org/10.3390/inorganics11050219
Submission received: 23 April 2023 / Revised: 15 May 2023 / Accepted: 17 May 2023 / Published: 19 May 2023
(This article belongs to the Section Inorganic Materials)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

In this work, the authors report the preparation of carbon nanotube array materials on the surface of commercial GDLs, and explore the factors and partial characterizations that affect the growth of CNTs. I think the work can be considered for publication after revision.

1. In abstract. The authors report thatThis electrode provides …, as well as proved stability and longer service life due to the enhanced adhesion of carbon materials to the GDL. But where is the author's experimental data about the stability and longer service life? How is it confirmed?

2. Which test method does the author use to measure "measuring the longitudinal resistance"?

It's good.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

 

In this paper authors effectively explain how carbon nanotube arrays (CNTAs) were grown directly on commercial gas diffusion layers (GDLs) and formed new type of electrode. The following minor items should be addressed:

Line 70 sentence ending confusing “was solved in [23]” would be better “was solved by Kudinova et al. [23]”

In Figures 7 and 8 blue dots representing nickel are hard to see - can they be made clearer?

Line 258 and 283  hard to distinguish the two symbols used for height of one layer and height of entire micoroporous layer. Instead of HCNT’ maybe use a different symbol such as HCNT*

 

Line 263 solution of the precursor (H2PtCl6) of a specified concentration” 

What is concentration?

 

Line 290 and 291 Equation is somewhat confusing – can you clarify the thickness relates to total height of CNTA layer and how related to diameters involved. Clarify how diameters related to thickness or height H.

 

Line 311   “where Z is … “   should not be indented

 

Lien 318 “cur-rent” should just be current

 

Line 327  The Raman spectroscopy have shown that…” should be “Raman spectroscopy has shown that …”

 

Line 328 and 329  can you clarify how these values are connected  “The optimal CNTA thickness was formed to 27 µm for the tube diameter of 50 nm.”

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Accept.

Back to TopTop