Large Transfer of Nitrogen, Silicon and Titanium through Various Thin Mo–Ti/Si and Ti–Mo/Si Bilayer Films Processed in Expanding Microwave Plasma: Formation of Nitrides and Silicides

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Re.:              Coatings, manuscript coatings-2644772-peer-review-v1.pdf

Title:             Large transfer of nitrogen, silicon and titanium through various thin Mo-Ti bilayer films processed in expanding microwave plasma: formation of nitrides and silicides

Authors:      Isabelle Jauberteau, Richard Mayet, Julie Cornette, Pierre Carles, Denis Mangin, Annie Bessaudou, Jean Louis Jauberteau, Armand Passelergue

General Statement

In the paper results of experimental investigation of different Mo-Ti bilayer structures exposed to microwave plasma atmosphere as well as to increased temperature are presented and discussed. The analysis is focused mostly on phenomenological aspects and limited to qualitative conclusions. The mentioned research is a continuation of this type of work conducted by the team. However, the current work brings interesting new results. In my opinion the observed phenomena have been properly identified and described.

From a formal point of view, the manuscript meets the criterion of thematic compatibility of the publication with the profile of the magazine. In general the paper is well organized and in terms of scientific description sounds good. The few minor comments I present below do not prevent me from recommending the work for publication after making minor corrections.

Comments

While reading the work, I marked the fragments of the text to which the comment concerned. The manuscript with markings is attached. In addition major comments I am providing below. 

Line 25:

Missleding description sugesting not a  double layer thin film but a three layer film structure. Maybe it should be raplaced with Mo-Ti/Si.

Line 82:

Some readers could not be familiar with these abbreviations in the paper context.

Lines 112-114:

This one and two next are Ti-Mo/Si structures, not a Mo-Ti/Si. I recommend to introduce a comment on this.

Line 129:

The justification for the composition of the mixture is obvious, but the question arises whether the proportions were selected in any special way or are they the result of an arbitrary decision of the researchers.

Lines 372-374:

Is it possible to provide numerical data, e.g. average SIMS singnal amplitude over the range up to 200 s? Due to the nature of the data shown and log ordinate scale it is difficult to notice this fact.

Alternatively the discussed fragment of the data can be indicated with an arrow on the chart.

Line 438:

Do the authors mean Mo-Ti interface within the MoTi1 specimen or the Mo-Ti layer as the whole?

Lines 450-453:

Verb missing in the first sentence.

Line 457:

Magnification and other picture details are hardly to be seen.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

I have no additional comments.

Author Response

We thank very much the reviewer for his or her valuable comments on the manuscript.

The paper has been completely revised by taking into account  all the comments.

The names of the various bilayer films have been modified through the text to remove all ambiguities. They are especially explained in the materials and methods section.

About the quantitative analysis of SIMS signals, we add a note in materials and methods section and add an arrow on the chart to easily distinguish the N signal.

The other revisions have been done and are highlighted through the text.

Sincerely yours

Reviewer 2 Report

The manuscript shows the bilayer films based on nitrides and silicides of Mo and Ti, respectively. I recommend the publication of it after a minor revision.

1. XRD peaks are not marked clearly in Figure 2 and 5, especially for those with low intensity. The corresponding planes should be analyzed to improve the scientificity of the article.

2. The chemical formulas of Mo-Ti composites are not written in the right way. Please check carefully.

3. The conclusion is not written well and the form is not good so that I cannot figure out the main idea that the authors want to put forward. Please write it in just one paragraph and make the summary briefly and clearly.

Author Response

We thank very much the reviewer for his or her valuable comments and remarks of the manuscript.

The paper has completely been revised by taking into account all the comments.

The names of the various bilayer films are modified through the text to remove all ambiguities. They are especially explained  in the materials and methods section.

We marked the identified XRD peaks which were not marked and add the corresponding reflection lines in the text to clarify the purpose.

We completely rewrite the conclusion to make it more clear.

All changes are highlighted through the text.

Sincerely yours