Search

My comments concern the significant errors in the crystallographic part of the commented paper. The diffraction patterns are erroneously analysed and the final chemical composition is different than those supposed in the paper. There are also some manipulations with data. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

My comments concern some errors in the crystallographic part of the commented paper. The diffraction patterns are erroneously analysed and the final data on the structure (symmetry and unit cell parameters) are different than those supposed in the paper. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

My comments concern the significant errors in the crystallographic part of the commented paper. The diffraction patterns are erroneously analysed. It is supposed that the correct crystal structure is an Aurivillius phase Bi 5 Ti 3 FeO 15 with m = 4. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

My comments concern the significant errors in the crystallographic part of the commented paper. The diffraction patterns are erroneously analysed. The studied sample contain two phases what can influence on the final results of experiments. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• It is shown that the commented paper has severe errors. • The analysis of the diffraction pattern was made without success. • The chemical composition of the studied crystals is unknown. My comments concern the errors in the crystallographic part of the commented paper. Moreover, the true chemical composition of the studied sample is different than BaNaFeWO 6 as proposed by authors. Therefore, the subsequent data on other measurements may have no scientific value. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

My comments concern the errors in the crystallographic part of the commented paper. The diffraction patterns are erroneously analysed. The crystal structure was not presented in the commented paper. • Correction of erroneous analysis of diffraction patterns. • Comparison of unit cells relation to the content of Ca dopant. • The crystal structure was not given in the commented paper. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

My comments concern the severe errors in the crystallographic part of the commented paper. The actual composition of the studied crystals is not known, but the diffraction patterns and Rietveld analysis suggest the chemical formula of Ba 2 Sr(VO 4)(FeO 4) instead of Ba 1.5 Sr 0.5 FeVO 6. Moreover, the symmetry should be trigonal. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

My comments concern the severe errors in the crystallographic part of the commented paper. The actual composition of the studied crystals is not known, but the diffraction patterns and Rietveld analysis suggest the chemical formula to be Ba 2 Sr(VO 4)(FeO 4) instead of BaSrFeVO 6. Moreover, the symmetry should be trigonal. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The author of this Comment is concerned with severe errors in the crystallographic part of the commented paper. The actual composition of the crystals studied is not known, but the diffraction patterns and Rietveld analysis suggest the chemical formula of Ba 3 (VO 4) 2 :Ca. Moreover, the symmetry should be trigonal. • Several errors in the crystallographic part of the commented paper were found. • New chemical formula and crystal symmetry is proposed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Authors say that three independent lattice parameters of the orthorhombic unit cell, a, b and c, were calculated from only one diffraction peak, i.e. using one diffraction angle and one equation 1. (http://creativecommo ns.org/licenses/by- nc- nd/4.0/) Materials Science-Poland, 38(3), 2020, pp. 400-401 http://www.materialsscience.pwr.wroc.pl/ DOI: 10.2478/msp-2018-0101 Some remarks on the paper "Optimization of S:Sn precursor molar concentration on the physical properties of spray deposited single phase Sn 2 S 3 thin films" by J. Srivind, V .S. Nagaretthinam, A.R. Balu [Mater. Some remarks on the paper "Optimization of S:Sn precursor molar concentration on the physical properties of spray deposited single phase Sn2S3 thin films" by J. Srivind, V.S. Nagaretthinam, A.R. Balu [Mater. [Extracted from the article]