Next Article in Journal
Wear Characteristics of Textured Floating Oil Seal Surfaces: A Simulation and Experimental Study
Previous Article in Journal
Comparative Analysis of Cutting Forces in CNC Milling of MDF: The Role of Tool Coatings, Cutting Speed, and Feed Per Tooth
Previous Article in Special Issue
Pectin and Alginate Functional Biopolymers: Factors Influencing Structural Composition, Functional Characteristics and Biofilm Development
 
 
Article
Peer-Review Record

Investigation and Comparison of Alternative Oxygen Barrier Coatings for Flexible PP Films as Food Packaging Material

Coatings 2024, 14(9), 1086; https://doi.org/10.3390/coatings14091086
by Farshad Sharbafian 1,*, Katharina Tosic 1, Romana Schmiedt 1, Martin Novak 1, Michael Krainz 2, Bernhard Rainer 1 and Silvia Apprich 1
Reviewer 1:
Reviewer 2: Anonymous
Coatings 2024, 14(9), 1086; https://doi.org/10.3390/coatings14091086
Submission received: 30 July 2024 / Revised: 20 August 2024 / Accepted: 22 August 2024 / Published: 23 August 2024
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Research on Food Packaging and Storage)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

-no data related to recyclability,thus can remove this word. Add the focus on the investigation of the effect of curing conditions to OTR and DSC analysis (LINE 140)
- Table 1: is this standard thickness of the coating material?

-section 2.2.1: not stated the specific composition of each component used

-table 4: any reason why it set for 20s? and not same duration like laboratory samples?

- Figure 1: good if can provide a table to calculate different precentage of different OTR compared to semi industry and uncoated, so can see the improvement OTR

-based on your findings, what is your conclusion for the optimized curing conditions and thickness of coating? is it worth to perform double coating?

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This paper provides an interesting comparison of several barrier materials for PP, but there are several issues.

1) The paper assumes that barrier layers will be incorporated as coatings, but most current barrier films are based on coextrusion. 

2) There is no discussion of the other major polymeric barrier layer - i.e., PA 6 - and of metallic coatings.

3) There is limited discussion of how the barrier layers will be separated from the films (which is the major issue for recycling).  

4) There is extensive use of trade names for the coatings in the Introduction and Results and Discussion.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

1) Polymer names (e.g., polypropylene) should be capitalized.

2) Minor grammar and spacing issues.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The revised paper addresses most major concerns.  The only remaining issue is recycling.  I realize that you are looking for a new barrier layer, but separation of the barrier layer will still remain any issue.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

There are still minor grammar errors, primarily spacing, in the paper.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Back to TopTop