Preparation and Properties of Hydrophobic and Oleophobic Coating for Inkjet Printing

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The paper is multidisciplinary and it makes it interesting for a large number of readers.

But before publishing it should be improved.

Figure 1 and 2: show the bands at the graphs.

Figure 6: Is it possible to add element spectra?

Figure 7: add the contact angle in the figure.

Figure 5 and 10: the quality should be bette.

Please, modify sentences:

In recent years, the hydrophobic / oleophobic surface of bionics has been extensively concerned by scholars [add the references that were used].

Due to the large electronegativity of fluorine and the very stable C-F bond [DOI:10.3390/ma14061428], the modified polymer not only would maintain the original characteristics of epoxy acrylic resin polymer, but also could improve the hydrophobicity and oil repellency of polymer coating effectively [31,32].

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

Dear Authors, I am really glad to have had the opportunity to read your magnificent manuscript.

I do propose to accept as is.

My only remark, due to a typo, is at line 136-137: The scanning times were 30 times and the measurement range was 500-4000cm-1. My guess is that the The scanning times  were 30 seconds and the measurement range was 500-4000cm-1.

The scientific content of the manuscript is really high for industrial and academic readers in the field of paints and printing. Your idea and thorough work may be a new path in the digital printing industry, both for industrial and house printing.

Congratulations.

My dearest regards.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

1.     Please specify the meaning of the methods or results in the context, which would be differentiated from the previous studies on the fluorinated acrylate coatings modified with dodecafluoroheptyl methacrylate.

2.     It was experimentally shown that Printing Gloss and Color Reproductibility were optimal for a certain condition of the molar ratios. However, it is hard to find specific evidences for the reasons.

3.     In conclusion, the authors mentioned that “the oleophobic performance of the coating needs to be improved.” What is the expected level of oleophobicity for the application?

4.     In all figures, for the titles of axis and parameters, molar ratio should be used instead of sample numbers or sample codes. In all tables, too.

5.     Adhesion Grade in Table 2 might be checked. In normal, Grade 0 represents no adhesion, and Grade 3 does cohesive attachment requiring sharp dissection. The weaker adhesion is improved result?

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 3 Report

Further follow-up is needed for the authors’ responses.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf