Magneto-Rheological Elastomer Composites. A Review
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The review article presented by Samal et al. summarizes the recent advances in the field of magneto-rheological elastomers MREs. Due to the importance of the topic for the development of the future elastomeric engineered matrixes, I think that this review is important to the field and hence could be published in applied sciences after some revisions.
1) In the abstract, some clear motivation on the advantages of MREs is missing, especially when it comes to comparing their performance with already existing materials used in current applications.
2) Introduction (line 28-32): I suggest adding how much magnetic flux density 1T represents, using common examples.
3) Regarding references, I think the review article is missing several references. For instance, line 49-76, has only one reference. The same applies to many other sections. I suggest the authors adding more references in the revised manuscript, e.g. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0142-9418(03)00103-X, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmmm.2016.11.048, https://doi.org/10.1002/mame.200900301, https://doi.org/10.1007/12_2006_104, etc.
4) I suggest the authors adding a short discussion regarding the current research using other types of elastomeric and/or regular polymeric matrixes in the fabrication of magnetic field responsive composites.
5) Introduction (Line 83-87), I suggest adding an illustration of the mechanism for magnetization of the materials.
6) Please add the units of all the parameters on each equation.
7) Introduction (Line 146-149), please clarify if the discussion on MR behavior refers to the vulcanized or non-vulcanized elastomer.
8) Materials and methods, the text as such sounds like the manuscript is a research article (e.g. lines 207-213). I suggest rephrasing it so it reads like a review of previous literature.
9) Discussion (Lines 317-320), please state how much current is applied and by how much is the magnetic field enhanced or weakened by the applied current.
10) In some figures, for instance, figure 10, a codified elastomer composition is given as e.g. "Elastomer ZA22". A brief introduction to the nomenclature would be appreciated.
11) Can the resolution of Figure 13 be enhanced? The text is pixelated.
12) The paragraph from line 395-398 looks misplaced. Please revise.
13) In section 3.3, I think a brief explanation of Payne and/or Mullins effects in filled elastomers would be appreciated by the readers, and will thereby enhance the theoretical review of this work. Some references are here suggested (but more will be also welcomed): https://doi.org/10.1002/pc.10178, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesa.2004.10.004, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijsolstr.2008.12.025, https://doi.org/10.1002/adfm.201602490, https://doi.org/10.1021/acsomega.8b03630
14) Line 435 should refer to Figure 16. Then, a conclusion regarding the outcome of that referred study is missing.
15) Section 4, line 446-454, I suggest the authors adding some reflection on how far, close, or good the MRE composites discussed in the text are, as compared to current polymers used in the application areas mentioned. Adding some experimental values here will enhance the work.
16) Section 4, line 457-460, how are the MRE properties affected by the addition of different rubber vulcanization agents, e.g. accelerants, sulfur, inhibitors, etc.? Perhaps a short review on this would be good.
Author Response
reviewer 1
The review article presented by Samal et al. summarizes the recent advances in the field of magneto-rheological elastomers MREs. Due to the importance of the topic for the development of the future elastomeric engineered matrixes, I think that this review is important to the field and hence could be published in applied sciences after some revisions.
- Thanks for appreciating our work.
1) In the abstract, some clear motivation on the advantages of MREs is missing, especially when it comes to comparing their performance with already existing materials used in current applications.
- The abstract has been modified, trying to follow the reviewer suggestion.
2) Introduction (line 28-32): I suggest adding how much magnetic flux density 1T represents, using common examples.
- thank you for the suggestion, we add a more specific value by citing the related reference, 2. Zhang, J.; Pang, H.; Wang, Y.; Gong, X. The magneto-mechanical properties of off-axis anisotropic magnetorheological elastomers. Composite Science and technology 2020, 191, 108079 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compscitech.2020.108079 in the text [2].
3) Regarding references, I think the review article is missing several references. For instance, line 49-76, has only one reference. The same applies to many other sections. I suggest the authors adding more references in the revised manuscript, e.g. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0142-9418(03)00103-X , https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmmm.2016.11.048 , https://doi.org/10.1002/mame.200900301 , https://doi.org/10.1007/12_2006_104 , etc.
- thank you for the suggestions, the indicated references have been add in the highlighted part of the manuscript. References 11-14 in the revised manuscript.
4) I suggest the authors adding a short discussion regarding the current research using other types of elastomeric and/or regular polymeric matrixes in the fabrication of magnetic field responsive composites.
- a brief comment has been added in the introduction (line 43-47) together with references [9,10], following the reviewer’s suggestion.
5) Introduction (Line 83-87), I suggest adding an illustration of the mechanism for magnetization of the materials.
- Thank you for the suggestion. In the revised manuscript, an illustration describing the mechanism for the magnetization of the materials has been added as Figure 2.
6) Please add the units of all the parameters on each equation.
1/3 (m)
(A. m2)
(A. m2)
(A2.m/K)
(dimensionless)
Dynamic properties equation are dimensionless.
7) Introduction (Line 146-149), please clarify if the discussion on MR behavior refers to the vulcanized or non-vulcanized elastomer.
- we referred to a vulcanized rubber, the clarification has been added in the text.
8) Materials and methods, the text as such sounds like the manuscript is a research article (e.g. lines 207-213). I suggest rephrasing it so it reads like a review of previous literature.
- thank you for the suggestion, the lines were rephrased.
9) Discussion (Lines 317-320), please state how much current is applied and by how much is the magnetic field enhanced or weakened by the applied current.
- Anisotropic MR elastomers with an iron particle mass ratio of 70% were used in the design. The resonant frequency of the device can be controlled by electrical currents from 55 Hz at 0 A to 81.25 Hz at 1.5 A, which is equivalent to an increase of 147%. For an applied current of 1.0 A, the magnetic field decreases from 0.58 T to 0.56 T (9% decrease). This information have been added in the text.
10) In some figures, for instance, figure 10, a codified elastomer composition is given as e.g. "Elastomer ZA22". A brief introduction to the nomenclature would be appreciated.
- ZA 22 refers to a sample obtained polyaddition, whilst N 1522 refers to a sample obtained by polycondensation. These specifications are present in the experimental section.
11) Can the resolution of Figure 13 be enhanced? The text is pixelated.
- we are sorry, it is a reprinted figure. We downloaded the HR image from MDPI.
12) The paragraph from line 395-398 looks misplaced. Please revise.
- the reviewer is right, we are sorry for the mistake. The paragraph has been removed.
13) In section 3.3, I think a brief explanation of Payne and/or Mullins effects in filled elastomers would be appreciated by the readers, and will thereby enhance the theoretical review of this work. Some references are here suggested (but more will be also welcomed): https://doi.org/10.1002/pc.10178 , https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesa.2004.10.004 , https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijsolstr.2008.12.025 , https://doi.org/10.1002/adfm.201602490 , https://doi.org/10.1021/acsomega.8b03630
- thank you for the suggestion. We revised the text by give an explanation of Payne and/or Mullins effects in filled elastomers. Furthermore, the suggested references have been added to the bibliography.
14) Line 435 should refer to Figure 16. Then, a conclusion regarding the outcome of that referred study is missing.
- thanks for reporting. The Figure number has been adjusted and a conclusion about the referred study has been added.
15) Section 4, line 446-454, I suggest the authors adding some reflection on how far, close, or good the MRE composites discussed in the text are, as compared to current polymers used in the application areas mentioned. Adding some experimental values here will enhance the work.
- the reviewer is right, the text has been modified accordingly (line 484-487.
16) Section 4, line 457-460, how are the MRE properties affected by the addition of different rubber vulcanization agents, e.g. accelerants, sulfur, inhibitors, etc.? Perhaps a short review on this would be good.
- the section has been modified following the reviewer’s suggestion (line 472-475.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
The manuscript "Magneto-Rheological Elastomer Composites. A Review" presents a rather broad review on the combination of elastomers and magnetic particles in their own narrative. This is the case, because they follow many of their own contributions to the literature. This is fine in the context of elastomers, which are not covered extremely well in the overall literature. However, I would add a sentence to the introduction about remediation, catalysts and microwave absorbers (for instance) as a broader view on magnetic nanocomposites (not necessarily including elastomers). Otherwise the review reads well and sound, and I would give way to publication.
Author Response
#reviewer 2
The manuscript "Magneto-Rheological Elastomer Composites. A Review" presents a rather broad review on the combination of elastomers and magnetic particles in their own narrative. This is the case, because they follow many of their own contributions to the literature. This is fine in the context of elastomers, which are not covered extremely well in the overall literature.
- thanks for appreciating our work.
However, I would add a sentence to the introduction about remediation, catalysts and microwave absorbers (for instance) as a broader view on magnetic nanocomposites (not necessarily including elastomers).
- The introduction has been modified following the reviewer’s suggestion (lines 43-47).
Otherwise the review reads well and sound, and I would give way to publication
- Thanks for appreciating.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
In line 35, 'Is' must be replaced with 'is'.
SEM images in Figure 10 do not show clear scale.
In Figure 11, what are these images? Are they from POM (polarizing optical microscope), mention clearly.
In Figure 14, the graph must be re-plotted and re-scaled properly with uniformity.
In Figure 16, the axis points are not visible well, therefore must be re-scaled.
Author Response
#reviewer 3
In line 35, 'Is' must be replaced with 'is'.
- thanks for reporting, it was a typos derived from Microsoft word. The text has been corrected.
SEM images in Figure 10 do not show clear scale.
- we are sorry, SEM images are reprinted. We downloaded the HR image from MDPI and wiley
In Figure 11, what are these images? Are they from POM (polarizing optical microscope), mention clearly.
- the reviewer is right. We added in the caption of the figure that images are cached with POM.
In Figure 14, the graph must be re-plotted and re-scaled properly with uniformity.
- we are sorry but we cannot change the figure, that is a reprinted one.
In Figure 16, the axis points are not visible well, therefore must be re-scaled.
- we are sorry but also in this case these are reprinted figures.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
The revised manuscript submitted by Samal et al. answered all my questions/issues adequately, and hence I suggest the text to be ready to be accepted by the journal.
