Preparation and Characterization of Pulse Electrodeposited Ni/W-SiC Nanocomposite Coating on Mild Steel Substrate

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The authors presented a paper entitled "Preparation and characterization of pulse electrodeposited Ni/W-SiC nanocomposites". The work is quite interesting, but I have a few comments and suggestions:

 

Abstract:

- Please add general information about the material like application or reason why it is interesting

- Avoid the description of every nanocomposites - it is confusing when suddenly some materials called S1, S2, S4 are described. Please add information about the differences between production parameters

 

Introduction:

- "Generally, electrodeposition is the most dramatically used method to prefabricate Ni-W nanocomposites(...)" - why "dramatically"? I think you wanted to write "commonly"

- Please explain why the pulsed method is used - what are the advantages compared to the classical electrodeposition method?

 

Experimental:

- Description of preparation - the samples were polished by hand?

- The names (producer and model) of the equipment used for the analysis are missing.

- Please specify how the samples were cut to obtain a cross-section image.

 

Results:

- How did you calculate the SiC content? I see the you added the content of C and Si and concluded this is the content of SiC. But, the ratio of content Si/C is different for every sample and these values are different than Si/C ratio in pure SiC. Take into account the C content can be increased due to the electrolytes composition. Please recalculate it. Also, I suggest to make the analysis of composition from bigger area of samples.

- SEM pictures:  In the pictures it is not a cauliflower structure, but more irregular clusters.

- Why in case of 4 g/L nanoparticles are agglomerate? So why in case of 7 g/L the NPs do not agglomerate?

-Synthesized coatings are characterized by good anti-corrosion properties so I suggest to perform the corrosion tests.

- No scale in Fig. 7a

- Explain, how the Ni, NiO, SiC, and SiO2 phases were determined (mapping analysis does not give this information)

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.doc

Reviewer 2 Report

1.     The title should be extended with the ending “ ... Ni/W-SiC nanocomposite coating on mild steel substrate”

2.     Features of the pulse electrodeposition method should be described in the introduction.

3.     The substrate choice should be justified with reference to the sources of information, since mild steels are not used for the purposes indicated by the authors. See numerous mechanical engineering textbooks for an understanding of what materials are implemented for what applications. In addition, the tests should correspond to typical operating conditions, which should be described as well.

4.     A general view of the coating should be presented in good quality for the possibility of assessing the presence of defects.

5.     Figure 3 is completely uninformative, it is impossible to understand at least some details in it.

6.     In the section "3. Results and discussion" the results are only described, not discussed. Accordingly, the conclusions correspond to the laboratory report, but not to the scientific article. The obtained data should be compared with theory, typical operating conditions (see point 3), as well as the results of previous numerous studies.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.doc

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

The authors have adapted to most suggestions.

However, I think corrosion tests would be a very valuable part of the research work due to the fact these materials are dedicated to application in corrosive environments. I understand that the authors have been focused on other properties of the synthesized materials. For the next time - the explanation that it was impossible to do part of research because someone is on vacation may be badly received.

Generally, I think that the presented work may be interesting for the readers of the journal.

Reviewer 2 Report

The manuscript is more at the level of laboratory research reports than scientific articles. I leave the possibility of its publication at the discretion of the editors.