Enhancing Artifact Protection in Smart Transportation Monitoring Systems via a Porous Structural Triboelectric Nanogenerator
, Shuxing Xu 1,2, Wei Tang 1,2,3, Leo N.Y. Cao 2,3, Ding Li 1,2,3,* and Zhong Lin Wang 2,3,4,*
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
This work is interesting. Therefore, I recommended minor revision before publication.
(1) Why PI used between PorousCB/Ecoflex and Cu?
(2) Please provide porosity related data.
(3) The author should provide accuracy of the sensor for collision monitoring.
(4) How did they compare with commercial sensor?
(5) Need to discuss about self powered sensor based work (ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 2021, 13, 4, 4955–4967) in the introduction section.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Following the review of the paper "Enhancing Artifact Protection in Smart Transportation Monitoring Systems via a Porous Structural Triboelectric Nanogenerator", we can conclude that:
1. It is necessary to clarify in the paper all the measurement conditions for the experiments performed;
2. Regarding the experimental results it is necessary for the authors to improve the discussion regarding the calibration of the measurement system that is indicated in Figure 2 (a);
3. It is necessary for the authors to improve in the paper the discussion regarding the reproducibility of the obtained values, Figure 2 (d-i);
4. Regarding the proposed porous carbon black (CB)/Ecoflex triboelectric nanogenerators (PCE-TENGs), the authors should improve the discussion about the design. First of all, the geometric dimensions of this device are not specified. Then, the shape of the electrodes through which the resulting voltage is taken must be highlighted. The method of interfacing the electrodes with the active material must also be exemplified;
5. In Figure 1 (c)-(d), the scale factor must be clearly stated;
6. The multichannel acquisition, the data processing and WiFi transmission system, Figure 5 (a) is presented extremely synthetically. It is necessary for the authors to improve the discussion regarding the multichannel acquisition, the data processing and WiFi transmission system for to be included in the paper. In this regard, it can be said that Figure 5 (a) is not representative. An additional electronic scheme would be desirable;
7. In general, it is elegant that a paragraph does not end with a figure, but with a comment. In this regard, is necessary to add a comment after Figure 1, Figure 2, Figure 4 and Figure 5;
8. The conclusions of the paper must be comprehensive and well-organized information. The paper contains many results that need to be highlighted in the conclusions. The conclusions of the paper must contain the possible implications of these study in future practical developments.
Moderate editing of English language required.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
The present paper reports an in situ solution based on a 22 porous carbon black (CB)/Ecoflex triboelectric nanogenerator (PCE-TENG) for constructing a smart artifact monitoring system (SAMS) that can monitor collisions in real-time and absorb vibrations 24 during artifact transportation. The work is interesting, and I recommend for publication after the next minor revisions:
- There is no information in the "Experimental section" about the fabrication of the device related with the layers of polyamide and Cu. Please provide it.
In general the authors should revise all the text, please find bellow some examples of minor corrections you should do:
- Line 19 - "...human intelligence. And transportation...", should this be "human intelligence and transportation"?
- Line 39 - "Articfacts" is repeated.
- Figure 1b is cited before the figure 1a
Extensive editing of English language required, the authors should better revise the manuscript.
Author Response
Please check the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
