The Influence of the Magnetic Field on Ni Thin Film Preparation by Electrodeposition Method and Its Electrocatalytic Activity towards Hydrogen Evolution Reaction

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The manuscript "The influence of the magnetic field on Ni thin film preparation by electrodeposition method and their electrocatalytic activity towards Hydrogen evolution reaction" has excellent results. In this article, the first aim is the electrodeposition of Ni thin film from three different electrolytes in the absence and presence of a magnetic field. The second one is studying the influence of the magnetic field on the microstructures and properties of the deposits, furthering the effect of the contact angle on the catalytic performance of the deposits towards HER. The paper is written well, and the presentation is quite good. The introduction is sufficient, and the references therein are relevant to the work. The results are clearly presented, and the conclusion is reflected in the results. However, I have comments:

1) Authors must pay attention to the names of the authors in previous studies, such as in line 42 in reference 34.

2) When writing the reference number at the end of the sentences, it must be followed by a dot in order to end the statement, as in lines 49, 50, 69, 89, 90, 93, 95,…....

3) Schemes 1 and 2 should be combined to form one scheme that contains A and B.

4) The authors should explain the mechanism of changing the pH with a perpendicular and parallel magnetic field directed to the samples and not just explain the SEM images.

Finally, the paper can be accepted after minor revision. 

Moderate editing of English language is required.

Author Response

 "Please see the attachment"

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

The manuscript "The Influence of the Magnetic Field on Ni Thin Film Preparation by Electrodeposition Method and Their Electrocatalytic Activity towards Hydrogen Evolution Reaction " by Safya Elsharkawy and coworkers describes three different electrosynthesis method to produce Ni thin films to be used as catalysts in HER reaction (hydrogen evolution). The work has some points of interest, and can be appropriate for publication in Coating, as it agrees with its scope. The main pitfall of the article is the quality of the language, that in some passages  contains errors and should be revised with attention.  The main issues I found follow:

1) The format of equation 2 is quite ugly (for instance, the dot before nable, should be a multiplication, I guess, and not a decima point, etc

2) I think that Ni-AIN should be Ni-AlN (aluminium nitride), Am I right?

3) Separate every etal into et al.

4) You consider B in x direction (orthogonal), in y direction (parallel). What about z-axis? Can you draw axes in Scheme 1?

5) At page 5, there is an excess of parenthese (like (Fig. 1 (a)), (Fig. 1 (l-m))), same in Fig 1 caption

6) What is the "macro's coating?

7) "Further, the analysis provides that for the deposited Ni from borate two diffraction peaks at 2 θ value of 44.6° and 52.07° that refers to diffraction planes (111) and (200) according to JCDPS card no. 01-078-7536 which indicates the same crystalline phases are formed as well for the fabricated Ni from borate.", there is a verb missing somewhere. two diffraction peaks ARE FOUND?

8)  The sentence "The crystallite size is calculated for Ni deposits from acetate and borate from heir distinct peaks using Scherer equation 4[59–61]. The average crystallite size for the deposited Ni from acetate and borate is found to be 20.16 and 14.11 nm, respectively." at page 15 is repeated twice

9) The unit "dec-1" stands for decade (reciprocal)?

10) What is α? Is it the a at equation 6?

The english language needs a major revision.

Various errors:

"as the same values that have been" -> that had been (before a perfect tense verb)

"a more uniform particles"

"the grains are agglomerate" 

Fig.9 represents XRD were made

"in order to comparing"

"does not be affected"

Author Response

"Please see the attachment"

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Review attached

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

'Please see the attachment"

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 4 Report

In this manuscript, Elsharkawy et al presented an interesting work on the influence of the magnetic field on Ni thin Film preparation by electrodeposition method and their electrocatalytic activity towards hydrogen evolution reaction. The fabricated Ni thin film from citrate electrolyte has the best catalytic properties towards HER as it has the lowest overpotential value of 231 mV and the highest exchange current density. Generally, this work is very well performed and the data are of high quality, moreover, the findings in this manuscript can also provide insights into the electrocatalysts design and preparation. For all these reasons I recommend publication of this paper after some revisions:

1. Will the active component Ni undergo changes during the hydrogen evolution process of electrocatalytic reactions? Because the HER reaction is carried out under acidic conditions. After the reaction is completed, it is necessary to conduct XRD analysis on the material to observe whether its crystal structure has changed. In addition, the details inside the material observed by SEM are not obvious. It is recommended that the author use TEM to observe the morphological changes before and after the reaction (only characterizing one sample is sufficient).

2. What are the advantages of an external magnetic field on the preparation of Ni thin films by electrodeposition? Is this method universally applicable?

3. What is the valence state of the active component Ni thin film? Is there only a zero price? The reviewer suggests using XPS for analysis

4. There are too many tables in the main text. It is recommended to remove unimportant tables and place them in the supporting information. There are two scale bars in both Figure 3 and Figure 4, and the length of the scale bar is different. It is recommended that the authors delete one of the scale bars.

5. The layout of Figure 2 is not standardized, and it is recommended to use a 4×4 layout form. Figure 8 is not standardized, with overlapping borders and needs to be replaced. On page 410-411, “The average crystallite size for the deposited Ni from acetate and borate is found to be 20.16 and 14.11 nm, respectively.” The sentence is repeated and needs to be deleted.

6. The reference lacks a title and page number, and needs to be supplemented, such as reference 1. Many reference formats are not uniform, and some journal names are full names, while others are abbreviated. Authors need to unify the literature format.

7. During the electrocatalytic water splitting process, the morphology of the catalyst plays an important role for the catalytic activity, and the papers are encouraged to be cited.

Minor editing of English language required

Author Response

'Please see the attachment"

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 4 Report

The authors have carefully revised the manuscript and made satisfactory response to me as well as other referee. I think the revised manuscript is suitable for publication in Coatings at this state. However, the abbreviation of the journal name is incorrect.

Reference 68：“NMS” should be replaced by “Nano Mater. Sci”

Minor editing of English language required