Transmission Reduction for UV and IR Radiation with Dyed Lyocell Knitted Textiles

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

There are some issues needed to be amended, revised, and fixed prior acceptance. The comments and suggestions are as stated below. 

Comments:

• Title: The title of the manuscript should be revised. The title is not reflected to the current study. Cellulosic textile material is too general. The authors should focus on Lyocell knitted fabric.

 

• Abstract:

                   i.         The authors should highlight the benefit of the study, such as advantages, function, readiness to be used, etc.

                  ii.         The quantitative data of the abrasion test should be added.

 

• Introduction:

                 i.         Please elaborate more on the background of study, improvement of this research as compared to previous research.

                   ii.         Please fixed the format of reporting the ranges. Example: 100 nm to 400 nm or 100-400 nm.

 

• Results & Discussion:

                    i.         Section results and discussion should be combined. The discussion parts on this section are very shallow. The authors should include their critical opinion and related previous study/reference on state of the art in the manuscript

            ii.         The characterization section is not well discussed. The authors only stated/mentioned the results obtained. The authors should discuss based on the previous studies/research (with example) that has been conducted using the specific instrument for characterization.

                     iii.         Please improve the resolutions of Figures 4 and 7.

                    iv.         Please revise the citation of Figure 7. Figure 7, left à Figure 7a, Figure 7, right à Figure 7b.

 

• Conclusion: The conclusion section is missing and needs to be included.
• Language Style: The English language quality is moderate and needs proofreading to meet the standard necessary for a scientific article.

Author Response

Reviewer 1

This reviewer stated that some issues should be improved before publication. Following these points are addressed in detail.

+Title+ According to the reviewer request, the title of the articles is changed and now the words “knitted” and “lyocell” are added.

+Abstract1+ The reviewer suggests to add comments on the benefits of the development to the abstracts and mention also the readiness to use. Following this suggestion, related comments are added to the abstract and the abstract in general is checked for improvements to improve the readability.

+Abstract2+ According to the reviewer comment, the quantitative number for abrasion test is added to the abstract.

+Introduction1+ According to the demands of the reviewer, the introduction of the manuscript is optimized. A comparison to previous research is now presented in the discussion section of the manuscript.

+Introduction2+ The format of reported ranges is now formatted, the style “100 nm to 400 nm” is now used.

+Results/Discussion1+ The reviewer suggested to combine the both sections “results” and “discussion” and to support a comparison to results of previously published studies. In fact the reviewer is right, to improve the readability of both section, the section discussion is rewritten and a new section “conclusion” is added. A comparison to previously published materials is now as well added to the discussion section of the manuscript. This discussion is mainly done in respect to three different systems investigated for reduction of UV and IR light transmission – these systems are based on coatings containing pearlescent effect pigments, short basalt fibers or pigments from indium tin oxide.

+Results/Discussion2+ Following the suggestion of the reviewer, now a comparison of results to earlier published materials is supported in the section discussion.

+Results/Discussion3+ The sizes of both figures 4 and 7 is increased to improve their resolution.

+Results/Discussion4+ The citation of Figure 7 is checked.

+Conclusion+ According to the reviewer demand, now a section “conclusion” is added to the manuscript.

+Language+ The reviewer states that the English quality of the manuscript is moderate and suggest a proof-reading. For this, the manuscript is checked and modified to improve language quality.

 

Reviewer 2 Report

Reviewer’s Comments:

The manuscript “Transmission reduction for UV and IR radiation by application of different dyes on cellulosic textile material” is a very interesting work. In this work, The sun's radiations are essential for humans, but at the same time they pose a danger that can lead to skin ageing, sunburn and, in the worst case, cancer. Textiles with functional protective effects can counteract these problems. In current research, knitted fabrics were produced from Lyocell yarns doped with the UV absorber titanium dioxide TiO₂. Reference materials were produced by Lyocell yarns without TiO2. Resulting textile materials were dyed with different dye stuffs to implement and improve the protective properties against UV- and infrared light. The protective properties are determined by UV/Vis/NIR-spectroscopy in arrangement of diffusive transmission. While I believe this topic is of great interest to our readers, I think it needs major revision before it is ready for publication. So, I recommend this manuscript for publication with major revisions.

1. In this manuscript, the authors did not explain the importance of the transmission reduction in the introduction part. The authors should explain the importance of transmission reduction.

2) Title: The title of the manuscript is not impressive. It should be modified or rewritten it.

3) Correct the following statement “Overall, the samples containing TiO₂ proved to be more resistant here and less sensitive to abrasion. It was shown that the right choice of dye can improve the protective effect of textiles against various types of radiation. Lyocell textiles are suitable for the production of summer clothing due to their good moisture management”.

4) Keywords: The transmission reduction is missing in the keywords. So, modify the keywords.

5) Introduction part is not impressive. The references cited are very old. So, Improve it with some latest literature like 10.1016/j.jece.2021.105534, 10.1016/j.jphotochem.2021.113393

6) The authors should explain the following statement with recent references, “As reference measurements for description of properties of the pure dyes transmission measurements on aqueous dye solutions are performed”.

7) Add space between magnitude and unit. For example, in synthesis “21.96g” should be 21.96 g. Make the corrections throughout the manuscript regarding values and units.

8) The author should provide reason about this statement “Overall, dyeing with Solophenly Bordeaux reduces the transmission in the visible range by approx”.

9. Comparison of the present results with other similar findings in the literature should be discussed in more detail. This is necessary in order to place this work together with other work in the field and to give more credibility to the present results.

10) Conclusion part is very long. Make it brief and improve by adding the results of your studies.

 

11) There are many grammatic mistakes. Improve the English grammar of the manuscript.

Author Response

Reviewer 2

The reviewer stated that the current manuscript is an interesting work and the topic is of great interest for the readers of this journal. However, a major revision is needed for improvement. Following the points of this reviewer are addressed in detail:

+1+ The reviewer states that in the introduction part of the manuscript, it is not explained, what is the importance for radiation reduction. In fact, it is already explained in the introduction that UV and IR radiation can cause significant damages to the skin as sunburn, skin-ageing etc. For this, materials able to reduce transmission to these radiations can contribute significantly to human health and wellbeing. A statement to this is added to the introduction of the manuscript.

+2+ According to the reviewer demand, the title of the manuscript is rewritten.

+3+ The mentioned sentence in the abstract is restructured to improve readability, as the reviewer suggested.

+4+ the term “transmission reduction” is now added to the key words

+5+ The reviewer claims that some of the references mentioned in the introduction are quite old and more recent articles should be cited. Especially, he recommends to cite following two articles.

Qamar, M. A., Javed, M., Shahid, S., Iqbal, S., Abubshait, S. A., Abubshait, H. A., Ramay, S.M.; Mahmood, A.; Ghaithan, H. M. Designing of highly active g-C₃N₄/Co@ ZnO ternary nanocomposites for the disinfection of pathogens and degradation of the organic pollutants from wastewater under visible light. Journal of Environmental Chemical Engineering 2021, 9, 105534. doi.org/10.1016/j.jece.2021.105534

Sher, M., Javed, M., Shahid, S., Hakami, O., Qamar, M. A., Iqbal, S., Al-Anazy, M.M.; Baghdadi, H. B. Designing of highly active g-C₃N₄/Sn doped ZnO heterostructure as a photocatalyst for the disinfection and degradation of the organic pollutants under visible light irradiation. Journal of Photochemistry and Photobiology A: Chemistry 2021, 418, 113393. doi.org/10.1016/j.jphotochem.2021.113393

According to this suggestion, these two papers are now mentioned in the introduction as examples for photoactive materials working with visible light.

Further more references are now mentioned in the introduction.

Especially related to the topic of photoactive materials active with visible light as well following two articles are cited:

Barcelos, D. A., Gonçalves, M. C. Daylight Photoactive TiO₂ Sol-Gel Nanoparticles: Sustainable Environmental Contribution. Materials 2023, 16, 2731. doi.org/10.3390/ma16072731

Solovyeva, M., Selishchev, D., Cherepanova, S., Stepanov, G., Zhuravlev, E., Richter, V., Kozlov, D. Self-cleaning photoactive cotton fabric modified with nanocrystalline TiO₂ for efficient degradation of volatile organic compounds and DNA contaminants. Chemical Engineering Journal 2020, 388, 124167. doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2020.124167

 

+6+ The reviewer asks for an explanation of following sentence: “As reference measurements for description of properties of the pure dyes transmission measurements on aqueous dye solutions are performed”. In fact, the reviewer is right the term “reference measurements” is misleading. Now it is described as characterization of the dyes and their optical transmission in aqueous solution, which are done as starting point before application on the knitted fabrics.

+7+ As suggested by the reviewer, now between magnitude and unit a space is added. The manuscript is checked completely for this issue.

+8+ The statement mentioned by the reviewer is now restructured and rewritten to improve readability.

+9+ The reviewer asks for a comparative discussion of the results in respect to results published earlier. In fact, this is a reasonable suggestion and it is followed by discussion of the results in respect to three different systems investigated for reduction of UV and IR light transmission – these systems are based on coatings containing pearlescent effect pigments, short basalt fibers or pigments from indium tin oxide.

+10+ According to the reviewer request, now a short new section “conclusion” is added to the manuscript.

+11+ The manuscript is checked again for improvement of English grammar.

 

 

 

Reviewer 3 Report

 

 The authors reported the transmission reduction of UV and IR radiation using dyes on cellulosic textile material. The submission requires major revision taking into account the following points:-

1.      The novelty of the study is low and should be improved.

2.      The title should be revised to be clear, precise, and informative. Redundant words such as ‘by application of different,  and ‘material’ should be removed.

3.      The motivation for the selection of these dyes should be highlighted.

4.      The dye loadings were only 0.5 and 1 wt.%. Higher dye loading should be included.

5.      References for Textile modification should be updated including these examples;  10.1016/j.dyepig.2018.07.026; 10.1038/s41893-022-01004-5

6.      A comparison with previously published dyes should be discussed and summarized in a Table.

7.      The language should be revised and typos should be corrected.

Author Response

Reviewer 3

The reviewer suggested a major revision according to several points, which are addressed below:

+1+ To improve the description of novelty of current investigation, the discussion part is extended and a section “conclusion” is added to the manuscript. Also, the abstract is rewritten with this intention.

+2+ The title is modified according to demands of the reviewer, words like “materials” and “by” are now avoided.

+3+ The reviewer askes to describe the motivation for selection of used dyes. This dye selection is done for two reasons. First, the used Lyocell fibers exhibit a cellulosic chemical structure. Typical for dyeing of cellulose fibers are direct dyes and reactive dyes, because with these dyes the fiber dye interaction is strong to lead to sufficient washing and rubbing fastness. Direct dyes are used, because of simple application. Reactive dyes are known for best washing stability after application on cellulosic fibers. Second, the optical properties of used dyes are checked on their aqueous solutions by transmission measurements. If here a decrease in transmission for near infrared light is determined, these dyes are selected for further dyeing experiments. These statements will be added to the experimental part of the manuscript.

+4+ The reviewer mentioned, that only two different concentrations are applied for each investigated dye and suggest to report also result with higher dye concentration. The authors agree, the presentation of further investigations with other dye concentrations could be interesting. However, for the proof of concept for reduction of UV and IR transmission by application of the investigated dye stuffs, the current investigations with two different dye concentrations are sufficient. To improve the manuscript, a statement on this issue will be added to the experimental part of the manuscript.

+5+ The reviewer remarks that the references for textile modifications should be updated. Especially, he recommends to cite following two articles.

Emam, H. E., Abdelhamid, H. N., Abdelhameed, R. M. Self-cleaned photoluminescent viscose fabric incorporated lanthanide-organic framework (Ln-MOF). Dyes and Pigments 2018, 159, 491-498. doi.org/10.1016/j.dyepig.2018.07.026

Zhang, L., Leung, M. Y., Boriskina, S., Tao, X. Advancing life cycle sustainability of textiles through technological innovations. Nature Sustainability 2023, 6, 243-253. doi.org/10.1038/s41893-022-01004-5

According to this suggestion, these two papers are now mentioned in the introduction as examples for photoactive materials working with visible light.

Further, more actual references for textile modification are now mentioned in the introduction.

+6+ The reviewer asks for a comparative discussion of the results in respect to results published earlier. In fact, this is a reasonable suggestion and it is followed by discussion of the results in respect to three different systems investigated for reduction of UV and IR light transmission – these systems are based on coatings containing pearlescent effect pigments, short basalt fibers or pigments from indium tin oxide.

+7+ According to reviewer statement, the language of the manuscript is checked and optimized.

Reviewer 4 Report

 

The manuscript is about transmission reduction of UV and IR radiation of TiO₂-doped lyocell knitted fabric dyed with reactive dyes and direct dyes. Revision is needed and the detailed comments are listed as follows:

 

Section 2.1.1. Textile Material Production

Please provide information about the weight (g/m²) of knitted fabric.

 

Section 2.2.1. Preparation of Dye Solution

Please state whether the dyestuffs are used after purification or used as received.

 

Section 2.3.3 Colorimetry

Could the authors explain why they use L*a*b* value and L*C*h* value at the same time for the colorimetry measurement?

 

Section 3.2. Transmission spectra of knitted fabrics of 100% Lyocell and of Lyocell with TiO2

Please provide images for the six samples mentioned in Table 2.

 

Section 3.3.1. Washing resistance analysis

Please provide data about the original L*a*b* value of the dyed fabrics before and after washing instead of the delta values alone.

 

 

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Reviewer 4

The reviewer made several valuable suggestions to improve the manuscript, which are addressed in detail below.

+ the weight of knitted fabrics is now mentioned in the experimental part of the manuscript

+ The dyestuffs are used as received by the supplier without further purification. This information is now added to the experimental section of the manuscript.

+ The original L*a*b* values are no presented in table 2. As C* (=chroma) and h (=hue) are more interesting for description of the color impression due to the dyeing itself these values were given. DE* based on a*, b* and L* is the common value for dyers to compare changes in color induced by sample treatment, e.g. washing. Therefore, the according values were measured, too.

+ photographic images of prepared knitted fabrics are now added to the manuscript

+ Images of knitted fabrics from 100% Lyocell and with 2% TiO₂ were added (fig. 1). Images of the knitted fabrics dyed with Drimaren Yellow HF CD or Solophenyl Bordeaux 3BLE were also added (fig. 4).

Reviewer 5 Report

Dear Authors

Thank you very much for allowing me to be part of the review of the work entitled: Reduction of UV and IR radiation transmission through the application of different dyes on cellulosic textile material.

To talk about the sun and the skin is to talk about the effect of ultraviolet radiation (UVR) on the skin: photoaging, the lesions it causes or photodermatosis and skin cancer. This will lead us to consider the need to focus on skin protection throughout life. Let us remember that sun protection levels are measured. What factors should be taken into account when choosing a garment to protect us from the sun's rays? Sunlight is very rich in UVR in areas close to the sea and at high altitude, so all garments intended for use must offer additional protection and must provide adequate information on their labels.  The degree of protection of photoprotectors is expressed as sun protection factor (SPF), which indicates the exposure time against UV radiation and the appearance of skin alterations, but for clothing we use the unit of protection called UPF, which stands for Ultraviolet Protection Factor defined as the capacity or property of a fabric or material to limit the passage of UV radiation through it.  

The paper is well structured according to the parameters of the journal.  The research topic is very successful, I would like to share with you some observations to improve the work done.  I will divide the comments into sections related to your work:

 

Introduction

The introduction includes current references related to the research and it is relevant to include the objective pursued, as it provides clarity to those interested in the topic.

It would be good to specify the main objective of the research at the end of the introduction.

Materials and methods

 

The proposed methods are adequate

It would be good to include a section with all the nomenclature used in the work.

Results

The results are clear and understandable 

Discussion

It would be good to separate the Discussion and include a section of Conclusions  and It would be good to include in the conclusion a paragraph indicating how the objective has been achieved?

Author Response

Reviewer 5

This reviewer stated that the manuscript fits well to the scope and parameters of the journal. The research topic is as well successful. Some points for improvements are mentioned by this reviewer and are addressed following in detail:

+Introduction1+ According to reviewer suggestion some more current references are added to the introduction. Also, some sentences are restructured to optimize the readability of the introduction.

+Introduction2+ According to reviewer suggestion, the end of the introduction is rewritten and the main objectives of the current investigation is described more clearly.

+materials and methods+ According to reviewer statement, the used methods are adequate. The reviewer suggests further to add an additional section explaining the nomenclature used in the work. We checked this issue, and find only two units “dtex” and “Nm40” which may be uncommon for the reader of this journal. For this, instead of adding a completely new section, a short sentence is added to the material section to explain both units. Also, an adequate literature reference is given.

+results+ The reviewer stated that the presented results are clear and understandable.

+discussion+ The reviewer suggested to include an additional section “Conclusion” summarizing the main results and objectives of the paper. This excellent suggestion is followed and now a section “Conclusion” is presented.

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

All the comments have been amended and revised. Thus, I agree with this manuscript to be published.

Reviewer 4 Report

The revised manuscript is acceptable for publication.