Review Reports

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

 

Major issues

 

·        The paper is interesting, but it must underline more the novel character of the study or it elements. Namely, what was is unique here? Armor composition, manufacturing methodology or/and something else?

 

·        Comparison or at least description of other composite armor solutions could be presented.

·        More explanation in reference to the previous papers of the team (cited as 39 and 40 in the manuscript) should be stated.

 

Minor issues

 

·       UHMWPE abbreviation should be explained before first use
·       Line 282-283, the area is presented in mm units? Probably it is the diameter of the hole?

 

Author Response

Good morning,
the comments are in the document Reviewer 1. Thank you

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

The authors performed paper conducted some interesting tests on fibre composite for use as armour material. They conducted hardness tests and impact tests, describing the results in quite a bit of detail. The preparation method of the laminates is also described very well.

I think the paper is worthy of publication, subject to some minor comments:

- In table 1, is the “Tensile strength module” the Young’s modulus of the fibres?

- In general, the paper would benefit from another proof reading to correct small English issues. However, it is understandable throughout already.

- the authors stated the distance to the target was 25 m. However, it seems to be 22.5 m in figure 10. Which is correct?

- Would it be possible to provide the thickness in mm of the layers shown in figure 13?

The English is quite clear, however there are small imprecisions. A further round of proof reading should be sufficient at this stage.

Author Response

Good morning,
the comments are in the document Reviewer 2. Thank you.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

The authors responded to all the points of my review, however, I still feel the lack of description, which is a fundamental novelty of this research study. I mean one specific statement that will highlight the innovative nature of this work. I leave the decision of what to do with this fact to the Editors.

Author Response

Dear reviewer,
I enclose the responses to your comment. 

Yours sincerely
Jindřich Viliš

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

As all my comments have been addressed, I think the article is ready for publication.

Author Response

Vážený recenzenti,
přikládám reakce na Váš komentář. 

S pozdravem
Jindřich Viliš

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 3

Reviewer 1 Report

The authors responded to all my concerns. I recommend it for publication.