Gaussian Model of Anti-Radar Properties for Coatings Based on Carbonyl Iron Powder
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
In this manuscript, the anti-radar performance of epoxy coating containing carbonyl iron particles was investigated. In this context, the effects of resin type, film thickness and adsorber amount on anti-radar performance were studied. Although the study arouses interest, I think there are serious problems in its presentation. However, if the problems mentioned below are solved, I think it can be considered for publication.
1) There are typos. Please check the language and writing quality of paper.
For example:
- There are two “Figure 1”, please correct them.
- Table 3 is not mentioned in the text. Rewrite taking this into account.
- …
2) On page 3, line 75, Share information about where the particles were purchased in the “materials and methods” section, not here.
3) I think a schematic drawing or a photo of the experimental system should be shared.
4) How was the amount of adsorbent determined? If there is any other study on this subject by the authors or any other study in the literature, please mention it.
5) Considering that the coatings will be used outdoors, has a study been conducted on the durability of the them? Or do the authors have any predictions?
Author Response
We are grateful for the reviews for their work in evaluating our manuscript. We revised carefully the manuscript addressing all the comments presented by reviewers.
In this manuscript, the anti-radar performance of epoxy coating containing carbonyl iron particles was investigated. In this context, the effects of resin type, film thickness and adsorber amount on anti-radar performance were studied. Although the study arouses interest, I think there are serious problems in its presentation. However, if the problems mentioned below are solved, I think it can be considered for publication.
We are grateful for the reviewer for the evaluation of our manuscript.
1) There are typos. Please check the language and writing quality of paper. For example: There are two “Figure 1”, please correct them. Table 3 is not mentioned in the text. Rewrite taking this into account.
We are grateful for the comments. As suggested, the manuscript underwent a thorough revision and we eliminate the errors pointed by the reviewer and others. The corrections are marked in blue ink in the revised version of the manuscript.
2) On page 3, line 75, Share information about where the particles were purchased in the “materials and methods” section, not here.
We are grateful for the comments. As suggested, we moved this information to the Materials and Method section:
“Sets of pastes were prepared, differing in the content of the absorber (carbonyl iron – purchased from BASF Aktiengesellschaft, Carbonyleisenpulver EB – marked as EB): and the binder used (epoxy resin with a chemical hardener and, if necessary, an improver- viscosity reducing agent and plasticizer), as shown in Table 2. It is worth noting that the sizes of the absorber particles (EB) was 3-4 μm.”
3) I think a schematic drawing or a photo of the experimental system should be shared.
We are thankful for the comment. We add new figure 2 in the manuscript with the description of the experimental setup, indicating it in the main text.
Figure 2. Scheme of the testing setup
4) How was the amount of adsorbent determined? If there is any other study on this subject by the authors or any other study in the literature, please mention it.
We are grateful for the question. The description of the preparation of the absorbing pains was described in our previous work (ref. 14 Defence Technology (2022)). In order to not make this work redundant we gave a suitable reference for more details. Additionally, we focused here on the simulation of absorbing properties based on experimental data from above mentioned article.
5) Considering that the coatings will be used outdoors, has a study been conducted on the durability of the them? Or do the authors have any predictions?
We are thankful for the question. The reviewer mentioned a very interesting matter. Our prediction is that this coating should possess good resistance to the external conditions, however the testing was not performed. For sure it will be an inspiration for our next study.
Reviewer 2 Report
Referee 1
The manuscript “materials-2298185”, presents an original work in the area of anti-radar properties for coatings based on carbonyl iron powder. The model is a new one as far I concern. The subject itself is not new but in the last period of time we have a refreshment of it [1, 2].
The main crux of the present study is reflected in figure 1 and equation 10.
The concordance between experiment and theory is excellent.
Anyway, the weak point of the manuscript is that is not commented the influence of thermal effects, if there are any. Please see for example reference [2]. Are the thermal effects take into account by the coefficients A and B from equation 10? Please make a small comment.
If the authors can respond to the above question I recommend that the manuscript can be considered for publication.
References
[1] Materials 2022, 15, 5455. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma15155455
[2] Materials 2022, 15, 2499. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma15072499
Author Response
We are grateful for the reviews for their work in evaluating our manuscript. We revised carefully the manuscript addressing all the comments presented by reviewers.
Reviewer 2
The manuscript “materials-2298185”, presents an original work in the area of anti-radar properties for coatings based on carbonyl iron powder. The model is a new one as far I concern. The subject itself is not new but in the last period of time we have a refreshment of it [1, 2]. The main crux of the present study is reflected in figure 1 and equation 10. The concordance between experiment and theory is excellent.
References
[1] Materials 2022, 15, 5455. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma15155455
[2] Materials 2022, 15, 2499. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma15072499
We are grateful for the reviewer for the evaluation of our manuscript.
1) Anyway, the weak point of the manuscript is that is not commented the influence of thermal effects, if there are any. Please see for example reference [2]. Are the thermal effects take into account by the coefficients A and B from equation 10? Please make a small comment.
We are grateful for the comments. We tried to address this matter during the study, however in the current setup we did not manage to receive unequivocal response for the samples. Therefore we did not address the subject in current work. Currently, we work on adaptation of new measuring stand to address fully the mentioned matter. The phenomena of heating as a consequence of absorption will be addressed in our future work (undergoing research).
2) If the authors can respond to the above question I recommend that the manuscript can be considered for publication.
We hope that the above explanation will be suitable for the reviewer.
