Graphene Oxide/Polyaniline Nanocomposites Used in Anticorrosive Coatings for Environmental Protection
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
- The paper has investigated “Graphene oxide Polyaniline Nanocomposites Used in Anticorrosive Coatings for Environmental Protection’’. This paper described detailed investigations. This can be an interesting and scientifically relevant to publish. However, one of the most important drawbacks concerns the originality of the paper. It is difficult to see what the significant difference is between this work and the literature. Of course, it is mentioned introduction part, but it is not clear enough. Can authors elaborate about the significant in their research as compared to the literature.
- Part 2.3 “Preparation of graphene oxide/polyaniline (GO/PANI) nanocomposites”, what were the amount of GO and ratio of GO/PANI?
- Part “2.4. Preparation of coatings”, I would recommend the authors to include the epoxy and GO coating formulation for comparison purpose.
- Figure 1, lines 171-172, can author explain further the statements “It shows that the GO/PANI composite was successfully synthesized” as well as “and dispersion of PANI was significantly enhanced”.
- Lines 185-186, please clarify “And no obvious peak of GO was observed in XRD pattern of GO/PANI, which reveals that GO and PANI are in complete contact and uniformly dispersed in the polymer matrix”
- It seems UV-vis and FTIR detected the GO, but not on the XRD curves, can authors explain this?
- If possible, authors can include the results for epoxy and GO in Figures 6 and 7, and Table 1.
- Finally, please do a thorough editing effort in the English language and make sure that format, spaces and proper grammar rules are followed throughout the manuscript.
Author Response
Response to Reviewer
Reviewer 1:
Point 1: Correct ‘ecological environment’.
Response 1: I changed the ‘ecological environment’ to ‘living environment’ (line 10, page 1, in red).
Point 2: Added ‘herein’ before ‘we developed’.
Response 2: I have added ‘herein’ before ‘we developed’ (line 13, page 1, in red).
Point 3: Added ‘it is concluded’ after ‘In general’.
Response 3: I have added ‘it is concluded’ after ‘In general’ (line 22, page 1, in red).
Point 4: Change the ‘At present’ to ‘Nowadays’.
Response 4: I have changed the ‘At present’ to ‘Nowadays’ (line 28, page 1, in red).
Point 5: However, I would like to see a flow diagram of the experimantal procedure. This will be helpful to the readers
Response 5: Thank you for the review comments. A flow diagram of the experimantal procedure have been supplied in the manuscript (Figure 1, page 3, in red).
Point 6: Enlarge this figure and place the appropriate arrows inside them to support with the images what you wrote.
Response 6: I have enlarge the figure and place the appropriate arrows inside them to support with the images (Figure 2, page 4, in red).
Point 7: How the trem 'significantly' is exlpained?
Response 7: The existence of GO and PANI has been pointed out in THE SEM diagram, and the surface material has been successfully prepared. Moreover, it can be seen from the figure that the agglomeration of PANI decreases, which proves that its dispersion performance increases. (line 170, page 4, in red).
Point 8: Delete the 'and'.
Response 8: I have delete the 'and' (line 186, page 5, in red).
Point 9: ‘were’ instead of ‘was’?
Response 9: I have changed the ‘was’ to ‘were’ (line 296, page 9, in red).
Point 10: Omit the ‘and’.
Response 10: I have omit the ‘and’ (line 297, page 9, in red).
Point 11: Added ‘It is concluded that’.
Response 11: I have added the ‘It is concluded that’ (line 306, page 9, in red).
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
Please see my comments in the atatched file
Comments for author File: 
Comments.pdf
Author Response
Response to Reviewer
Reviewer 2:
Point 1: However, one of the most important drawbacks concerns the originality of the paper.
Response 1: The PANI synthesis method in this paper is similar to other methods, but GO and AN is added for mixing in order to better intercalate the two materials, and the epoxy resin and curing agent are also better coating materials found by our research group.
Point 2: It is mentioned introduction part, but it is not clear enough. Can authors elaborate about the significant in their research as compared to the literature.
Response 2: The introduction part has been changed for more clear, and elaborated about the significant in their research as compared to the literature
Point 3: Part 2.3 “Preparation of graphene oxide/polyaniline (GO/PANI) nanocomposites”, what were the amount of GO and ratio of GO/PANI?
Response 3: Thank you for the review comments. Both pure PANI coating and pure GO coating has the same amount of 0.05g sample, the ratio of GO/PANI is 1wt%, 2wt%, 3wt%, 4wt% and 5wt% (line 129, page 3, in red).
Point 4: Part “2.4. Preparation of coatings”, I would recommend the authors to include the epoxy and GO coating formulation for comparison purpose.
Response 4: Thank you for the review comments. The epoxy and GO coating formulation has been added (line 170, page 4, in red).
Point 5: Figure 1, lines 171-172, can author explain further the statements “It shows that the GO/PANI composite was successfully synthesized” as well as “and dispersion of PANI was significantly enhanced.
Response 5: The paragraph was reinterpreted. ‘The existence of GO and PANI has been pointed out in The SEM diagram, and the surface material has been successfully prepared. Moreover, it can be seen from the figure that the agglomeration of PANI decreases, which proves that its dispersion performance increases’ (line 137, page 4, in red)
Point 6: Lines 185-186, please clarify “And no obvious peak of GO was observed in XRD pattern of GO/PANI, which reveals that GO and PANI are in complete contact and uniformly dispersed in the polymer matrix.
Response 6: No obvious peak of GO was observed in XRD pattern of GO/PANI, indicating that the GO has almost no agglomeration, but fully reacted with the polymerization reaction substrate to synthesize the GO/PANI nanocomposite.
Point 7: It seems UV-vis and FTIR detected the GO, but not on the XRD curves, can authors explain this?
Response 7: UV-vis and FTIR detected the GO, This indicates that the material has been successfully compounded. No obvious peak of GO was observed in XRD pattern of GO/PANI, indicating that the GO has almost no agglomeration, but fully reacted with the polymerization reaction substrate to synthesize the GO/PANI nanocomposite.
Point 8: If possible, authors can include the results for epoxy and GO in Figures 6 and 7, and Table 1.
Response 8: Thank you for the review comments. The results for epoxy and GO has been added in Figures 6 and 7, and Table 1.
Point 9: Please do a thorough editing effort in the English language and make sure that format, spaces and proper grammar rules are followed throughout the manuscript.
Response 9: We have done a thorough editing effort in the English language and make sure that format, spaces and proper grammar rules are followed throughout the manuscript.
Thanks again for your professional comments.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
