Effect of Electrochemical Hydrogen Charging on Blistering and Mechanical Properties Behavior of Q690 Steel
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
This study deals with the problems associated with the cathodic protection of Q690 steel. The elaborate experimental results may be useful to those who are using this steel.
However, several improvements are required.
1. In the line 67 & 68, Creq and Nieq are introduced. Please describe how to define and how to calculate these values. How are they important in this study?
2. The authors repeatedly stress the importance of the current densities. However, as stated in the title, the task is "electrochemical hydrogen charging". Can you cite or estimate the rough numbers of hydrogen atoms created at the surface of the Q690 specimen for the charging current density of 10ｍA/cm2, for example? If you have thermal desorption data, that will be better.
3. This study is related to the industrial cathodic protection. Can you give some comment on the technical significance of your results?
4. Finally, the abstract is full of qualitative statements. It is recommended to improve it. Further, as regards the line 22, "The high current density is more favorable for blister initiation", does this mean that you recommend blistering during the cathodic protection?
No comments.
Author Response
Dear Prof Mr. Gillbert Li and reviewer,
Thank you for your kind letter and the reviewer’s comments concerning our manuscript entitled “Effect of electrochemical hydrogen charging on blistering and mechanical properties behavior of Q690 steel” (crystals-2429352). These comments are all valuable and very helpful for revising and improving our paper. We have studied the comments carefully and made corrections which we hope to meet with your approval. Revised portions are marked in blue color in the new manuscript.
The detailed responses to the reviewer’s comments are listed in the attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
The article deals with a hot topic, hydrogen embrittlement of structural materials. The article can be accepted for publication after minor revisions.
There are a number of comments on the article. These are listed below.
1. The Introduction needs to be expanded to include more information on how hydrogen interacts with steel, with links to relevant articles.
2. What is the meaning of "deep cracks"? What is the size range?
3. Is it possible to have a quantitative description of the expression "current density is too high or time is too long"? Give the values of time and current density.
4. Table 1 is not useful. I would propose to delete the table.
5. Please Add the values for the current density and the time to the conclusions and to the executive summary.
6. Please Add the novelty of the research in Abstract.
Author Response
Dear Prof Mr. Gillbert Li and reviewer,
Thank you for your kind letter and the reviewer’s comments concerning our manuscript entitled “Effect of electrochemical hydrogen charging on blistering and mechanical properties behavior of Q690 steel” (crystals-2429352). These comments are all valuable and very helpful for revising and improving our paper. We have studied the comments carefully and made corrections which we hope to meet with your approval. Revised portions are marked in blue color in the new manuscript.
The detailed responses to the reviewer’s comments are listed in the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
The article deals with a very important and current issue related to the operation of steel structures exploited in the sea water environment. These structures are protected against corrosion by the use of a coating system and cathodic electrochemical protection. The use of cathodic protection is associated with the occurrence of a reduction reaction of the depolarizer (hydrogen) on the surface or in the surface layer of the metal material. This leads to what is known as hydrogen corrosion. Which is especially dangerous for steel with a yield point above 400 MPa. The authors made an in-depth analysis of Q690 steel susceptibility to hydrogen corrosion. The proposed research methodology is adequate for the purpose. I have no comments to the obtained measurement results and their analysis. The conclusions drawn by the authors result from the content of the article.
Author Response
Dear Prof Mr. Gillbert Li and reviewers,
Thank you for your kind letter and the reviewer’s comments concerning our manuscript entitled “Effect of electrochemical hydrogen charging on blistering and mechanical properties behavior of Q690 steel” (crystals-2429352).
Thank you very much for your attention and consideration.
Reviewer 4 Report
In the manuscript “Effect of electrochemical hydrogen charging on blistering and mechanical properties behaviour of Q690 steel”, authors studied the effect of charging conditions on hydrogen damage. The author has done a good work and the paper is interesting in my viewpoint. However, I think that this manuscript still requires some major improvements in following areas:
- Add electrochemical hydrogen as keywords.
- Abstract is generic. Need to address a) need of this work, b) novelty, c) methodology suggested, d) results obtained (numerical).
- I didn’t observed any literature work in the introduction section. Add the literature of recent work carried out by the researchers and clearly mention the research gap through that study.
- In the last paragraph of introduction, write the novelty of your work and selected conditions for experimentations.
- Section 2.1: Add chemical composition table. It gives better idea to the reader.
- Include the picture of the used experimental setup in section 2.
- On what basis, the input conditions were selected? Add table of input parametric conditions and justify the selections.
- Although the results are good but the discussion part is inadequate. The results need more theoretical support.
- Use recently published articles of the domain.
- Mention the limitations and further scope of improvement in last section.
Author Response
Dear Prof Mr. Gillbert Li and reviewers,
Thank you for your kind letter and the reviewer’s comments concerning our manuscript entitled “Effect of electrochemical hydrogen charging on blistering and mechanical properties behavior of Q690 steel” (crystals-2429352). These comments are all valuable and very helpful for revising and improving our paper. We have studied the comments carefully and made corrections which we hope to meet with your approval. Revised portions are marked in blue color in the new manuscript.
The detailed responses to the reviewer’s comments are listed in the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 4 Report
The manuscript can now be accepted
