Evaluation of the Laser Cleaning Efficacy of Q235 Steel Using Laser-Induced Breakdown Spectroscopy
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
In this work, laser cleaning is used to remove the contaminants from the locally prepared Q235 steel samples. The authors also are investigated the elemental analysis in the contaminated and laser-cleaned samples. The manuscript is rather well prepared; however, the following checks and comments can help improve the manuscript:
· The novelty of the work is not clearly highlighted.
· In Figure 3, the numbers as well as axis titles need to be more visible.
· In Figure 6, the authors need to verify the results with the findings of others.
· The conclusion section needs to provide more detailed information, quantitative rather than qualitative.
Author Response
In this work, laser cleaning is used to remove the contaminants from the locally prepared Q235 steel samples. The authors also are investigated the elemental analysis in the contaminated and laser-cleaned samples. The manuscript is rather well prepared; however, the following checks and comments can help improve the manuscript:
Point 1: The novelty of the work is not clearly highlighted.
Response 1: Thank you very much, we have added a sentence to the last paragraph in the introduction part (Lines: 76, 77).
Point 2: In Figure 3, the numbers as well as axis titles need to be more visible.
Response 2: Figure 3 is modified accordingly, thanks.
Point 3: In Figure 6, the authors need to verify the results with the findings of others.
Response 3: The comparison of the current study can be verified from Ref. [12] and the references therein. We have cited Ref [12] in lines 197 and 198. Thank you
Point 4: The conclusion section needs to provide more detailed information, quantitative rather than qualitative.
Response 4: In this study, we mainly carried out the qualitative analysis, and then we will increase the number of samples for quantitative analysis. In the near future, multiple samples will be selected to perform quantitative and qualitative analysis and integrate LIBS with a laser cleaning system for real-time monitoring. Of particular interest in the study, it is believed that this study will open new advances for the laser cleaning community.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
- Provide clear motivation for the article. Why I should use LIBS for cleaning procedures?
- I recommend the add more information about the LIBS technique for metal control.
- Remove the description of the city. It is enough the name and coordinate.
- Table 2 contains the trace elements. How this trace element was established?
- Where is the content of oxygen? Maybe it is enough to control the oxygen and carbon content for cleaning the surface?
- Provide the quantitive results for elements for the cleaned surface.
- The graphics in the article have a different style (frame and qualities). Please use one style and improve the resolution of the pictures.
- Additional analysis is needed for verification of LIBS for instance X-ray fluorescence or XPS.
- Provide the roughness of the surface before and after cleaning.
- Maybe I miss it in the article but how fast the detection procedure can be done? is it real-time monitoring?
Author Response
Point 1: Provide clear motivation for the article. Why I should use LIBS for cleaning procedures?
Response 1: Thank you, the previous laser cleaning process was not monitored, and the cleaning quality could not be judged. The ultimate goal of this study is to improve the laser cleaning of contaminated samples and use the LIBS approach to pinpoint the origins of various pollutants. Of particular interest in the study, it is believed that this study will open new advances for the laser cleaning community.
Point 2: I recommend the add more information about the LIBS technique for metal control.
Response 2: Thank you very much for this recommendation, we already cited the previous work related to steel because this work is mainly focused on steel. LIBS technique for metal control can be found in Refs. [29-38] based on the steel study.
Point 3: Remove the description of the city. It is enough the name and coordinate.
Response 3: Dear reviewer, we have removed the description of the city from the manuscript. Thank you for the suggestion.
Point 4: Table 2 contains the trace elements. How this trace element was established?
Response 4: These trace elements are determined by a standard method, Inductively Coupled Plasma Mass Spectrometry (ICP-MS).
Point 5: Where is the content of oxygen? Maybe it is enough to control the oxygen and carbon content for cleaning the surface?
Response 5: Thank you for your comments. The experiment process is not a vacuum environment, the oxygen in the air has a certain interference with the measurement results. We used a machine learning algorithm for qualitative analysis, taking into account the influence of oxygen and carbon elements on the results.
Point 6: Provide the quantitive results for elements for the cleaned surface.
Response 6: In this manuscript, we mainly carried out the qualitative analysis, and then we will increase the number of samples for quantitative analysis. In the near future, multiple samples will be selected to perform quantitative and qualitative analysis and integrate LIBS with a laser cleaning system for real-time monitoring.
Point 7: The graphics in the article have a different style (frame and qualities). Please use one style and improve the resolution of the pictures.
Response 7: Thank you very much for your suggestions, we have already modified all the figures accordingly.
Point 8: Additional analysis is needed for verification of LIBS for instance X-ray fluorescence or XPS?
Response 8: Thank you for this question, that’s what we have planned to do after the current study. This time, unfortunately, there are few samples, so it is difficult to conduct a quantitative analysis. In the future after the pandemic (COVID-19), we will increase the number of samples to get the results of quantitative analysis.
Point 9: Provide the roughness of the surface before and after cleaning.
Response 9: Respected reviewer these comments are noteworthy. We are planning to purchase roughness detection equipment for the roughness analysis in future studies.
Point 10: Maybe I miss it in the article but how fast the detection procedure can be done? is it real-time monitoring?
Response 10: The duration of the analysis is mainly the scanning process (about 10 seconds), while the data analysis process is almost instantaneous (on the order of milliseconds). Second, we have proposed real-time detection for the next study, which can be monitored in real-time.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
The manuscript presents an analysis of the LIBS technique in detecting the percentage of chemical elements in Q235 steel, for a laser-cleaned case and a contaminated one.
Laser cleaning of the sample is the key part of this manuscript, however, I cannot find conclusions about its usefulness or not.
I suggest that the author devote more investigation or explanation about the advantage of the process. The results show nothing.
In the attached pdf there are only small flaws to be checked by the author.
Comments for author File: Comments.pdf
Author Response
The manuscript presents an analysis of the LIBS technique in detecting the percentage of chemical elements in Q235 steel, for a laser-cleaned case and a contaminated one.
Point 1: Laser cleaning of the sample is the key part of this manuscript, however, I cannot find conclusions about its usefulness or not.
Response 1: Thank you very much for your comment. Our previous laser cleaning process was not monitored, and the cleaning quality could not be judged, therefore, we planned this study. The ultimate goal of this study is to improve the laser cleaning of contaminated samples and use the LIBS approach to pinpoint the origins of various pollutants. Of particular interest in the study, it is believed that this study will open new advances for the laser cleaning community.
Point 2: I suggest that the author devote more investigation or explanation about the advantage of the process. The results show nothing.
Response 2: Respected reviewer, thank you very much for these suggestions. We already have modified the main manuscript, removed some unnecessary descriptions, and enhance the resolution of the figures. We hope that the revised manuscript would be acceptable.
Point 3: In the attached pdf there are only small flaws to be checked by the author.
Response 3: Dear reviewer, the highlighted flaws in the pdf file are highly appreciated, we have removed and corrected all these mentioned flaws in the revised manuscript. Thank you once again.
- 300 kW is confirmed, its maximum pulse power. (Table 1)
- 0C is replaced with °C. (Table 1)
- Water is replaced soil in figure 6 (last one).
- The extra “spectrum” word is deleted.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 4 Report
The aim of this work is interesting. The methodology is well-described. Nevertheless, the conditions to which the samples were subjected would benefit from a more rigorous quantitative control, for instance, following a standard.
Additionally, other formats could have been used to present the results, and a discussion should have been added.
Finally, please revise the manuscript regarding typos and grammar.
Author Response
The aim of this work is interesting. The methodology is well-described. Nevertheless, the conditions to which the samples were subjected would benefit from a more rigorous quantitative control, for instance, following a standard.
Point 1: Additionally, other formats could have been used to present the results, and a discussion should have been added.
Response 1: Thank you very much for these valuable comments. We have modified the current manuscript and recreated the results to enhance the resolution of the figures. The results and discussion parts are also separated.
Point 2: Finally, please revise the manuscript regarding typos and grammar.
Response 2: Thank you very much for your suggestions, the manuscript is revised, removed all the typos, and the grammar is further improved.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 3 Report
The authors adequately answered my questions
Author Response
Point 1: The authors adequately answered my questions.
Response 1: Thank you very much for your positive response. Also, thank you very much for your suggestions. We sincerely appreciate you taking the time to carefully read and comment on our manuscript.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
