Modelling the Elements Reaction–Diffusion Behavior on Interface of Ti/Al₂O₃ Composite Prepared by Hot Pressing Sintering

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

What is novelity in this paper?. The autors should be adding to introduction What mechanical properties (e.g. fatigue, corrosion resistance) will be possess the produced composite in compared with titanium. The authors should be add a comments What is the potential apply of composite in the industry, there is no any information included in the article Minor language errors e.g. betwwen EDS analysis is not correctly to study light some elements e.g. O, Ti. The obtained spectrogram for oxygen is difficult to read. I suggest you do a quantitative analysis

Author Response

Thank you for your valuable suggestions. Now I will reply to you one by one for your suggestions and mark in red in the arcticle.

The novelity has been added in the last paragraph of Introduction.

The mechanical properties (e.g. fatigue, corrosion resistance) of the composite and Ti were discussed in the first paragraph of Introduction.

The potential application was given in the first paragraph of Introduction.

The EDS analysis was modified in 3.3.2 marked in red.

The purpose of our study on the interface reaction is to observe the interface reaction so as to lay the foundation for the subsequent work of inhibiting the interface reaction. Therefore, quantitative analysis has not been considered, and our original samples have been lost, so there is no way to carry out the next test.

 

Reviewer 2 Report

English should be improved, please check typo (e.g. line 86, 134, etc.) to increase readability provide some details of methods used during experiments - sample preparation prior analysis, details on image analysis, ... Details on composition of starting materials is missing (what kind of impurities, their content) - if you are doing some kinetic study it is important to know such information. Did authors analysed also some carbon diffusion from graphite die during hot pressing? This can affect the kinetic of reactions and diffusion. Caption to figures 2-6 missed information on holding time, this is pretty important parameter for reader. It will be much better to replace the figures (SEM images) with better resolution or after polishing. There are some cutting marks visible, grain pullouts, etc. and this in fact can affect the image analysis (missing details). FIBing should be very helpful to obtain excellent quality of surface for further analysis. As the interface between Ti and alumina is not sharp and straight authors presents its average thickness, however without any information on value scattering (deviation of interface thickness) and finally this is also missing in further calculations. Please check equations in manuscript, e.g. eq.2 is noted in wrong form (exponent).

Overall, the manuscript is focused on very interesting field, however form of the presentation of results is not acceptable.

Author Response

Thank you for your valuable suggestions. Now I will reply to you one by one for your suggestions and mark in red in the arcticle.

The language of the paper has been further modified marked in red.

The composition and content of impuritiesstarting materials has been given, their contents were very little, therefore it was no effect to the experiment results.

We used boron nitride powders painting in the mold wall and gaskets ,therefore C was isolated during sintering.

The holding time 1.5h have been added in the caption to figures 2-6.

At first, we used polished samples for testing. However, some impurities were often left on the cut surface of polished samples, so we used a thinner diamond blade to cut out and test directly,and it doesn't affect our results.

The thickness of the interface reaction layer was roughly measured according to the EDS scale, and the subscript was not clear after the EDS picture was reduced due to the output of the device,but it can be read from the original picture.

Eq.2 has been corrected.

 

 

Reviewer 3 Report

Accepted

Author Response

Thank you for your recognition of our paper. We have further improved the paper, language and content

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Descriptions of axises for EDS analysis are not readable. Author should improve.

Author Response

Thanks for your valuable advice. Due to the output of the device, the display of the coordinate axis is not clear. Now we have enlarged the coordinates and marked them.