Fabrication of MnCoS Thin Films Deposited by the SILAR Method with the Assistance of Surfactants and Supercapacitor Properties

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

1. In the abstract is the first mention of the two surfactants – SDS and CTAB, so their full names should be given in that place in the text.

Responds: the full names of SDS and CTAB have been given in that place in the text.

2. Sentence in rows 73-74 should be corrected.

Responds: Sentence in rows 73-74 have been corrected.

3. In the section 2.2. Deposition of MnCoS thin film – ”film” should be in plural form and in the description of the process in row 102 there is abbreviation”ZF” which should be NF.

Responds: ”film” and ”ZF” have been corrected to ”films” and ”NF” .

4. Text written below the illustrations in Figure 1 are unclear, figure needs to be corrected.

Responds: Text written below the illustrations in Figure 1 have been corrected. 

5. Figure 3 is missing – from Fig.2 the numbering jumps to Fig.4.

Responds: the numbers of the Figures have been rewritten in order.

6. In Fig.2 scales bars are not visible (d, e and f), these SEM images should be corrected.

Responds: the scales bars in Fig.2(d, e and f) have been corrected.

7. At the end of section 3.2. authors declare that “the MnCoS-CTAB electrode prepared in this work displayed the high specific capacity, higher than that of monometal sulfides thin film synthesized by SILAR, and binary metal sulfides synthesized by hydrothermal method in general, but lower than that binary metal sulfides synthesized by electrodeposited method” asserting that “a denser and stronger thin film was formed via electrodeposited method”. Nowhere in the paper text are mentioned methods for establishing physical characteristics for such properties of the films, tests conducted and results presented. The authors claims are probably based on the SEM images alone, but that's not enough to claim that the films are stronger. Either this part of the text should be redone or the necessary measurements added.

Responds: the last sentence in the section 3.2 is “this may be the reason that a denser and stronger thin film was formed via(“via” has benn corrected as “by”). electrodeposited method. ” , this is only a speculation, not the author's claim. Because the electrodeposition is driven by external electric field, the charged particles can be deposited quickly and evenly on the electrode surface and form a dense film, which is a basic common sense, also is the basis of our speculation. In the last sentence, a simple explanation has been added.

8. One of the main flaws of the article is the lack of information about the filmsthickness. Also method for measuring films thickness, which is not given Only nanoparticles thickness in given - about ~20 nm.

Responds: we agree with the reviewer. In this paper, the thickness of the film was really not tested, but the mass loading of the active material MnCoS on the NF is provided in the Section 2.2 Deposition of MnCoS thin films.” Besides, based on the TEM image, the size of the nanoparticles formed MnCoS thin film is estimated to be 20 nm, not the nanoparticles thickness is 20 nm.

9. Section’s 3.2.2. title is incorrect.

Responds: the section’s 3.2.2.title has been corrected.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

The authors presented work on the Fabrication of MnCoS thin films deposited by SILAR method with assistant of surfactants and the supercapacitor properties. The authors have prepared bimetal sulphide for supercapacitors prepared by SILAR method. The results are interesting and well-supported by the experimental/analytical evidence. But there are several research articles have been reported on the similar work.Therefore, I would recommend this article for publication in the coatings after some major revisions as advised in my comments below:

 

- The the introduction does not suit with the aim of the study. When generally introduce the energy storage and metal-air batteries, some highly relevant articles should be included in the manuscript: (https://doi.org/10.1016/j.surfin.2022.102410), (https://doi.org/10.1007/s10971-022-05961-3), (https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ceramint.2022.10.166) . There are many reports are available. What is the novelty of the current work? Authors need to clarify.

-the loading of the active materials should be provided.

-The image quality is poor, require revision.

- The hydrophobic group is a carbon chain. Explain more.

-The more microstructure information would be useful. XRD analysis is recommended.

- “It is clearly indicated that the MnCoS-CTAB electrode prepared in this work displayed the high specific capacity, higher than that of monometal sulfides thin film synthesized by SILAR, and binary metal sulfides synthesized by hydrothermal method in general, but lower than that binary metal sulfides synthesized by electrodeposited method, this may be the reason that a denser and stronger thin film was formed via. electrodeposited method.” What the authors are trying to say? Please revise

 

-It might seem that morphology by SEM is several micrometres but from TEM, within the nm range.

Author Response

1. The introduction does not suit with the aim of the study. When generally introduce the energy storage and metalair batteries, some highly relevant articles should be included in the manuscript: (https://doi.org/10.1016/j.surfin.2022.102410), (https://doi.org/10.1007/s10971-022-05961-3), (https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ceramint.2022.10.166) . There are many reports are available. What is the novelty of the current work? Authors need to clarify.

Responds: Thanks for the reviewers' correct opinions. Based on the references recommended by reviewer, part of relevant content have been added in the revision on the basis.  

2. the loading of the active materials should be provided.

Responds: the loading of the active materials has been provided in the revision.

 

3. The image quality is poor, require revision.

Responds: the SEM and TEM images were taken by professionals, we have made some adjustments to the clarity of the picture and have done our best.

4. The hydrophobic group is a carbon chain. Explain more.

Responds: the hydrophobic group of SDS and CTAB have been supplemented in revision.

5. The more microstructure information would be useful. XRD analysis is recommended.

Responds: XRD analysis has been added in revision. 

6. “It is clearly indicated that the MnCoS-CTAB electrode prepared in this work displayed the high specific capacity, higher than that of monometal sulfides thin film synthesized by SILAR, and binary metal sulfides synthesized by hydrothermal method in general, but lower than that binary metal sulfides synthesized by electrodeposited method, this may be the reason that a denser and stronger thin film was formed via. electrodeposited method.” What the authors are trying to say? Please revise

Responds: the last sentence in the section 3.2 is “this may be the reason that a denser and stronger thin film was formed via (“via” has benn corrected as “by”). electrodeposited method.” , this is only a speculation, because the electrodeposition is driven by external electric field, the charged particles can be deposited quickly and evenly on the electrode surface and form a dense film, which is a basic common sense, also is the basis of our speculation. In the last sentence, a simple explanation has been added.

7. It might seem that morphology by SEM is several micrometres but from TEM, within the nm range.

Responds: in the SEM image, we can see the overall morphology of the film, but not the morphology and size of the particles. In the TEM, the morphology and size of particles can be seen in TEM image.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

1.In the abstract is the first mention of the two surfactants – SDS and CTAB, so their full names should be given in that place in the text.

Responds: the full names of SDS and CTAB have been given in that place in the text.

2. Sentence in rows 73-74 should be corrected.

Responds: Sentence in rows 73-74 have been corrected.

3. In the section 2.2. Deposition of MnCoS thin film – ”film” should be in plural form and in the description of the process in row 102 there is abbreviation”ZF” which should be NF.

Responds: ”film” and ”ZF” have been corrected to ”films” and ”NF” .

4. Text written below the illustrations in Figure 1 are unclear, figure needs to be

Corrected.

Responds: Text written below the illustrations in Figure 1 have been corrected. 

5. Figure 3 is missing – from Fig.2 the numbering jumps to Fig.4.

Responds: the numbers of the Figures have been rewritten in order.

6. In Fig.2 scales bars are not visible (d, e and f), these SEM images should be corrected.

Responds: the scales bars in Fig.2(d, e and f) have been corrected.

7. At the end of section 3.2. authors declare that “the MnCoS-CTAB electrode prepared in this work displayed the high specific capacity, higher than that of 

monometal sulfides thin film synthesized by SILAR, and binary metal sulfides synthesized by hydrothermal method in general, but lower than that binary metal sulfides synthesized by electrodeposited method” asserting that “a denser and stronger thin film was formed via electrodeposited method”. Nowhere in the paper text are mentioned methods for establishing physical characteristics for such properties of the films, tests conducted and results presented. The authors claims are probably based on the SEM images alone, but that's not enough to claim that the films are stronger. Either this part of the text should be redone or the necessary measurements added.

Responds: the last sentence in the section 3.2 is “this may be the reason that a denser and stronger thin film was formed via(“via” has benn corrected as “by”). electrodeposited method. ” , this is only a speculation, not the author's claim. Because the electrodeposition is driven by external electric field, the charged particles can be deposited quickly and evenly on the electrode surface and form a dense film, which is a basic common sense, also is the basis of our speculation. In the last sentence, a simple explanation has been added.

8. One of the main flaws of the article is the lack of information about the filmsthickness. Also method for measuring films thickness, which is not given. Only nanoparticles thickness in given - about ~20 nm.

Responds: we agree with the reviewer. In this paper, the thickness of the film was really not tested, but the mass loading of the active material MnCoS on the NF is provided in the Section”2.2 Deposition of MnCoS thin films.” Besides, based on the TEM image, the size of the nanoparticles formed MnCoS thin film is estimated to be 20 nm, not the nanoparticles thickness is 20 nm.

9. Section’s 3.2.2. title is incorrect.

Responds: the section’s 3.2.2.title has been corrected.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

The authors have addresed the issues. The manuscript can be considered now.

Author Response

1. The introduction does not suit with the aim of the study. When generally introduce the energy storage and metal-air batteries, some highly relevant articles should be included in the manuscript: (https://doi.org/10.1016/j.surfin.2022.102410), (https://doi.org/10.1007/s10971-022-05961-3), (https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ceramint.2022.10.166) . There are many reports are available. What is the novelty of the current work? Authors need to clarify.

Responds: Thanks for the reviewers' correct opinions. Based on the references recommended by reviewer, part of relevant content have been added in the revision on the basis.  

2. The loading of the active materials should be provided.

Responds: the loading of the active materials has been provided in the revision.

3. The image quality is poor, require revision.

Responds: the SEM and TEM images were taken by professionals, we have made some adjustments to the clarity of the picture and have done our best.

4. The hydrophobic group is a carbon chain. Explain more.

Responds: the hydrophobic group of SDS and CTAB have been supplemented in revision.

5. The more microstructure information would be useful. XRD analysis is recommended.

Responds: XRD analysis has been added in revision. 

6. “It is clearly indicated that the MnCoS-CTAB electrode prepared in this work displayed the high specific capacity, higher than that of monometal sulfides thin film synthesized by SILAR, and binary metal sulfides synthesized by hydrothermal method in general, but lower than that binary metal sulfides synthesized by electrodeposited method, this may be the reason that a denser and stronger thin film was formed via. electrodeposited method.” What the authors are trying to say? Please revise

Responds: the last sentence in the section 3.2 is “this may be the reason that a denser and stronger thin film was formed via (“via” has benn corrected as “by”). electrodeposited method.” , this is only a speculation, because the electrodeposition is driven by external electric field, the charged particles can be deposited quickly and evenly on the electrode surface and form a dense film, which is a basic common sense, also is the basis of our speculation. In the last sentence, a simple explanation has been added.

7. It might seem that morphology by SEM is several micrometres but from TEM, within the nm range.

Responds: in the SEM image, we can see the overall morphology of the film, but not the morphology and size of the particles. In the TEM, the morphology and size of particles can be seen in TEM image.

Author Response File: Author Response.doc