Multifunctional Graphene–Polymer Nanocomposite Sensors Formed by One-Step In Situ Shear Exfoliation of Graphite

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

This manuscript introduced a exfoliating method of graphites and the preparation of graphene/polymer composites. It is interesting and shows good academic value. Some issues need to be resolved.

1. The shearing rate is critical for exfoliating multiple layers of graphites, I suggest authors should consider the previous works ((a)  Rath, T., & Li, Y. Nanocomposites based on polystyrene-b-poly (ethylene-r-butylene)-b-polystyrene and exfoliated graphite nanoplates: Effect of nanoplatelet loading on morphology and mechanical properties. Composites Part A: Applied Science and Manufacturing, 2011, 42(12), 1995-2002. (b)  Li, Y., & Shimizu, H. Toward a stretchable, elastic, and electrically conductive nanocomposite: morphology and properties of poly [styrene-b-(ethylene-co-butylene)-b-styrene]/multiwalled carbon nanotube composites fabricated by high-shear processing. Macromolecules, 2009, 42(7), 2587-2593.)

2. To confirm the graphene structure in polymer composites, I suggest to test the SAXS to measure the mono or layer lattices of graphene.

3. The references should be carefully revised.

Author Response

The authors would like to thank the Reviewer for kindly reviewing our manuscript and providing us with expert opinions and valuable comments. The following addresses the reviewer’s comments point by point. Please note that the authors’ responses to reviewers’ comments are printed in blue, immediately following the comments, and changes made to the manuscript appear here in red.  We revised the abstract, introduction (provided more details on the in-situ shear exfoliation process), materials and methods (provided more details on the methods used and our procedures), and results (added or modified figures and tables).  We hope that the Reviewer finds out modifications satisfactory. We greatly appreciate this opportunity and thank you for reconsidering our submission.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

The author of paper which title is “Multifunctional Graphene-Polymer Nanocomposite Sensors Formed by One Step in-situ Shear Exfoliation of Graphite” evaluated the prepare graphene-polysulfone (G-PSU) and graphene-polyvinylidene fluoride (G-PVDF) nanocomposites formed by a one-step, in-situ exfoliation of graphite to graphene nanoflakes (GNFs) with different properties.  The goal of the paper is interesting, however; it suffers from a scientific point of view and needs to consider the following revision before publishing in Chemical Engineering Journal.

 

1-     The English part of the paper need to be revised. Some sentences in the abstract are not understandable. Please revise the whole paper in terms of grammatical point of view.

2-     In the introduction part, authors need to highlight different exfoliation method, especially In-situ exfoliation of graphene from the literatures and then, explain the novelty of their method. Authors can use the following references:

 

https://doi.org/10.1002/cey2.14

https://doi.org/10.1021/acsaem.9b00479

 

3-     The shear exfoliation explanation is a little bit confusing. Authors need to provide more in-details of exfoliation. Please provide a schematic or video for the exfoliation process.

4-     SEM images in Figure 2 are no labeled. The quality of SEM images are very low and blurry. Please provide high quality images with higher magnification. EDS results also help us to understand the uniformity of flakes in terms of oxygen and other element content.

5-     In order to find out the uniformity and quality of exfoliated graphene, authors need to provide more material characterization support such as FTIR, XRD, TEM results. Also, what is the conductivity of exfoliated graphene before and after exfoliation?

6-     Authors need to provide the eqiuvalnet circuit for the EIS data and provide the ohmic resistance, double layer capacitance, charge transfer resistance and W element. It seems the nyqiust curve is fitting very well with the modified Randles model.

7-     In general, what is the advantage of this shear exfoliation method compared to the other techniques? Is there a possibility to exfoliate the graphene down to nanosheet with this method?

The English part of the paper need to be revised. There are couple of grammatical errors in the abstract and body of paper.

Author Response

The authors would like to thank the Reviewer for kindly reviewing our manuscript and providing us with expert opinions and valuable comments. The following addresses the reviewer’s comments point by point. Please note that the authors’ responses to reviewers’ comments are printed in blue, immediately following the comments, and changes made to the manuscript appear here in red.  We revised the abstract, introduction (provided more details on the in-situ shear exfoliation process), materials and methods (provided more details on the methods used and our procedures), and results (added or modified figures and tables).  We hope that the Reviewer finds out modifications satisfactory. We greatly appreciate this opportunity and thank you for reconsidering our submission.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

Paper is ready to publish in a present form.