Next Article in Journal
Viscoelastic Property of an LDPE Melt in Triangular- and Trapezoidal-Loop Shear Experiment
Next Article in Special Issue
Biostable Shape Memory Polymer Foams for Smart Biomaterial Applications
Previous Article in Journal
Numerical Modelling and Analytical Comparison of Delamination during Cryogenic Drilling of CFRP
Previous Article in Special Issue
Poly(L-lactic acid) Reinforced with Hydroxyapatite and Tungsten Disulfide Nanotubes
 
 
Article
Peer-Review Record

Kinetics of the Thermal Degradation of Poly(lactic acid) and Polyamide Bioblends

by Félix Carrasco 1,*, Orlando Santana Pérez 2 and Maria Lluïsa Maspoch 2
Reviewer 1: Anonymous
Reviewer 2: Anonymous
Submission received: 30 October 2021 / Revised: 11 November 2021 / Accepted: 16 November 2021 / Published: 19 November 2021
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Advances in Biocompatible and Biodegradable Polymers)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Kinetics of the thermal degradation of poly(lactic acid) and pol-yamide bioblends

 

Comments:

  1. Its better author should write a nomenclature, to provide the list of symbols, including Greek letters and abbreviation.
  2. Application must be more explained and make your work synchronize with the real-world applications.
  3. Author must comment(s) on the previous and explain why your work is different? Justify your work that why it should be published in polymers.
  4. How did you get Eq. (1)? What is the physical meaning of this equation?
  5. If possible, provide a comparison to justify your work.
  6. English language must be improved according to the standard of POLYMER journal.

Author Response

We are enclosing a file.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

  1. In the introduction section, the Authors should describe in more detail the research on the improvement of compatibility of PLA/PA blends.
  2. The abbreviation for Equation is Eq., not Eqn.
  3. Figure 1. Authors should provide full axis captions, not only symbols that are not defined in the text of the article.
  4. The authors use the notation "β" as heating rate, which is nowhere defined in the text.
  5. Line 218. Is: conversion ( m), should be: conversion (αm).
  6. Equations 6-8 have a different text editing than the rest of the equations.
  7. Why did the authors include figure 9 in the Conclusion section? It is not a good place for it. There is no possibility to discuss it at this place. In addition, the Conclusion Section should be better supported by research results.
  8. The English language of the article should be checked by a Native Speaker.

Author Response

We are enclosing a file.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

accepted

Reviewer 2 Report

The article has been significantly improved. I recommend publishing this article.

Back to TopTop