Application of Resistometric Sensors for Real-Time Corrosion Monitoring of Coated Materials

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

 

Title: Application of resistometric sensors for real-time corrosion monitoring of coated materials

In this manuscript, a polyolefin coating for carbon steel corrosion protection, in atmospheric and immersion conditions, was evaluated by EIS and using commercial resistometric sensors.

The Introduction is long but not all the relevant topics are treated with appropriate detail. Some important issues related to the study are absent or were only superficially referred and techniques not used in the experimental part are presented with some detail (for example the “advanced spatially resolved electrochemical tools”). Moreover, several sentences are not supported by appropriate references:

1.      The manuscript should be revised in general to improve the references cited, since, frequently, the references are not appropriate and relevant to support the sentences. For example, in Section 1. Introduction. Line 39, reference [2], is too specific to support the sentence. The same, for example, for the use of references [6-9] to support the following sentence (line 39 to 41). There are several other examples. Reference to standard EN 12944, and to other standards related to the corrosivity of the environments and to durability requirements, for example, would also be relevant in the scope of the work.

2.      The application of EIS in the study of coatings for steel corrosion protection should be presented in the Introduction in more detail than the techniques not used in the experimental part.

3.      The use of EIS only for the study of the 50 mm coated sensor should be justified.

4.      The selection of polyolefin coatings when compared to other types of coatings for the use in the study should be justified in the Introduction in parallel with the literature review on the expected performance of this type of coating for the anti-corrosion protection of steel in different exposure environments.

5.      Section 2.1. The company that sells CorrSen should be identified.

6.      Section 3.1. line 432. Figure number is missing.

Author Response

Thank you very much for the factual comments which helped us to improve our work.  Our comments and explanations are below. All changes to the original manuscript are highlighted in yellow in the revised version.

1. The manuscript should be revised in general to improve the references cited, since, frequently, the references are not appropriate and relevant to support the sentences. For example, in Section 1. Introduction. Line 39, reference [2], is too specific to support the sentence. The same, for example, for the use of references [6-9] to support the following sentence (line 39 to 41). There are several other examples. Reference to standard EN 12944, and to other standards related to the corrosivity of the environments and to durability requirements, for example, would also be relevant in the scope of the work. - We have replaced the citations to more general works dealing with the corrosion protection and anti-corrosion coatings, and added the references to the standards related to the environmental classification and coating testing.
2. The application of EIS in the study of coatings for steel corrosion protection should be presented in the Introduction in more detail than the techniques not used in the experimental part. - We have shortened the information on the spatially resolved techniques not used in this paper and added more information on the EIS.
3. The use of EIS only for the study of the 50 mm coated sensor should be justified. - Done, see section 2.4.
4. The selection of polyolefin coatings when compared to other types of coatings for the use in the study should be justified in the Introduction in parallel with the literature review on the expected performance of this type of coating for the anti-corrosion protection of steel in different exposure environments. - Done, see the final paragraph of the Introduction.
5. Section 2.1. The company that sells CorrSen should be identified. - Done.
6. Section 3.1. line 432. Figure number is missing. - The figure number was missing in the pdf version of the manuscript for some reason, but present in the docx version. We will ensure that it is present in the final version before the publication.

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The research paper presents a framework related toresistometric sensors for the real-time corrosion monitoring of carbon steel covered with a 18 polyolefin coating with and without an inhibitor under atmospheric. The overall work sounds interesting. However, the manuscript needs more improvements. Here are my comments.

1-     The presentation and structure of the study need more improvements, where many phrases seem as repetitions, while the language needs a lot of work. The abstract is too descriptive, stick with science and put some of the most important results

2-     The introduction section should contain more works related to the applications of sensors for corrosion detection such as “An intelligent framework for forecasting and investigating corrosion in marine conditions using time sensor data”, also try to decrease the author's self citations. The main contribution and novelty should be clearly stated in the last section of the introduction.

3-     The accelerated corrosion tests should be described better with the reason behind choosing the material type and experimental design.

4-     Can the authors add a flowchart that describes the study structure.

5-     Limitations of the study should be stated.

Author Response

Thank you very much for the factual comments which helped us to improve our work.  Our comments and explanations are below. All changes to the original manuscript are highlighted in yellow in the revised version.

1. The presentation and structure of the study need more improvements, where many phrases seem as repetitions, while the language needs a lot of work. The abstract is too descriptive, stick with science and put some of the most important results. – Thank you for the comment. The Abstract has been re-written. We also worked on the improvement of the language throughout the text.
2. The introduction section should contain more works related to the applications of sensors for corrosion detection such as “An intelligent framework for forecasting and investigating corrosion in marine conditions using time sensor data”, also try to decrease the author's self citations. The main contribution and novelty should be clearly stated in the last section of the introduction. – We have added the proposed reference together with the paper “Effect of climatic parameters on marine atmospheric corrosion: correlation analysis of on-site sensors data”, which is based on the same measurement, to the literature overview and pointed out the main contribution of the present paper in the last paragraph of the introduction.
3. The accelerated corrosion tests should be described better with the reason behind choosing the material type and experimental design. – Done, see Sections 2.1 and 2.3.
4. Can the authors add a flowchart that describes the study structure. – Done.
5. Limitations of the study should be stated. – The limitations of using the technique to study the coated materials are stated in the first paragraph of the Discussion, where the corrosion of the electrical contacts and reference tracks is discussed, and are summarized in the last bullet point of the conclusion.

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The comments were considered appropriately. The manuscript can be published in the present version.

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The authors addressed all the comments and suggestions. No further comments.