Binary Supplementary Cementitious Material from Expanded Clay Production Dust and Opoka

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

 

The study is well-structured and provides significant insights into the potential applications of supplementary cementitious materials (SCMs) derived from expanded clay production dust and Opoka in reducing Portland cement usage. However, specific comments and suggestions are as follows:

1.      The introduction section lacks reference studies that have explored similar      materials, which highlights the novelty of this research  
2.      Briefly explain the reason for selecting the fixed replacement ratio of 25%.

3.      Please justify why the calcination temperature of 600°C was selected. 

 

4.      Make sure the sentence in line 131 is complete. 

5.      Ensure correct phrasing: 'at a temperature of 85 ± 5°C' instead of the current phrasing.

6.      Table 2 already includes the formulation details and abbreviations; please use only the abbreviations in Table 3 instead of repeating the formulation details.

7.      The unit (J/g) must be placed after the term 'hydration', mentioned in line 171.

8.      Line 179: Please clarify that the second peak intensity of thermal emission in samples containing additives is lower compared to pure Portland cement (OPC).

9.      Heat of hydration (lines 183-188): The specific reasoning behind the observed mechanism is not clearly explained. Please provide a detailed explanation and arguments for better understanding. 

10.  To align with standard technical terminology for thermal analysis, consider using the term 'peak' instead of 'hill'.

11.  Line 255: Check the sample ID. It should be 3E70 instead of 3K30.

12.  Please include the broader implications of the current findings for industrial applications in the conclusion section.

 

Author Response

Manuscript Number: sustainability-3371794

Title: BINARY SUPPLEMENTARY CEMENTITIOUS MATERIAL FROM EXPANDED CLAY PRODUCTION DUST AND OPOKA

Answers of Authors

Thank You for your remarks and suggestions.

We have made the required corrections and answered to your remarks (listed below).

Reviewer #1

Remark	Answer
1.      The introduction section lacks reference studies that have explored similar      materials, which highlights the novelty of this research	Thank You for your remark.  The Introduction has been supplemented and expanded
2. Briefly explain the reason for selecting the fixed replacement ratio of 25%.	Thank You for your remark. This replacing level was chosen on similar studies. This is provided in the text with citation.
3.  Please justify why the calcination temperature of 600°C was selected.	Thank You for your remark, the justification for temperature selection is included in the text
4.  Make sure the sentence in line 131 is complete.	Thank You for your remark, the text was corrected
5. Ensure correct phrasing: 'at a temperature of 85 ± 5°C' instead of the current phrasing.	Thank You for your remark, the text was corrected
6. Table 2 already includes the formulation details and abbreviations; please use only the abbreviations in Table 3 instead of repeating the formulation details.	Thank You for your remark, the Table 3 was corrected
7. The unit (J/g) must be placed after the term 'hydration', mentioned in line 171.	Thank You for your remark, the text was corrected
8.   Line 179: Please clarify that the second peak intensity of thermal emission in samples containing additives is lower compared to pure Portland cement (OPC).	The lower intensity of thermal emission can be explained by the fact that a significant amount (25 wt.%) of additives dilutes the cement content (especially calcium silicates) in the cement paste, leading to a reduction of thermal emission in samples containing additives. This explanation was added in the text.
9.      Heat of hydration (lines 183-188): The specific reasoning behind the observed mechanism is not clearly explained. Please provide a detailed explanation and arguments for better understanding.	Thank You for your remark, the text was corrected by explanation of mentioned mechanism.
10.  To align with standard technical terminology for thermal analysis, consider using the term 'peak' instead of 'hill'.	Thank You for your remark, the text was corrected
11.  Line 255: Check the sample ID. It should be 3E70 instead of 3K30.	Thank You for your remark, the text was corrected
12.  Please include the broader implications of the current findings for industrial applications in the conclusion section.	Thank You for your remark, the conclusions were improved

 

 

 

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

In this manuscript, the author examines the impact of binary SCMs, comprising calcined expanded clay kiln dust and opoka, on the hardening and hydration behavior of Portland cement. Binary supplementary cementitious materials appear to be a highly effective substitute, however, the following issues should be addressed.

 

1. Line 65: The color of reference 12 does not match the text. Please verify and correct it.

 

2. Figure 2: Please add a legend to clearly explain the content of the figure. Additionally, ensure that the drawing style is consistent throughout all the figures in the paper.

 

3. Line 110: There is an error in the labeling of Figure 2.2. Please correct this.

 

4. Lines 176-182: The description in this paragraph is not entirely consistent with the relevant images, and the narrative lacks clarity. Please read this section carefully and make the necessary changes to improve consistency and clarity.

 

5. Lines 258-283: There are errors in the abbreviations of the samples mentioned in this section. Furthermore, the content is poorly organized, and the associated diagrams do not correspond accurately to the text. Please revise this section to ensure accuracy, clarity, and scientific rigor.

Author Response

Manuscript Number: sustainability-3371794

Title: BINARY SUPPLEMENTARY CEMENTITIOUS MATERIAL FROM EXPANDED CLAY PRODUCTION DUST AND OPOKA

Answers of Authors

Thank You for your remarks and suggestions.

We have made the required corrections and answered to your remarks (listed below).

Reviewer #2

Remark	Answer
1. Line 65: The color of reference 12 does not match the text. Please verify and correct it	Thank You for your remark, the text was corrected
2. Figure 2: Please add a legend to clearly explain the content of the figure. Additionally, ensure that the drawing style is consistent throughout all the figures in the paper.	Thank You for your remark, Figure 2 was corrected
3. Line 110: There is an error in the labeling of Figure 2.2. Please correct this.	Thank You for your remark, the text was corrected
4. Lines 176-182: The description in this paragraph is not entirely consistent with the relevant images, and the narrative lacks clarity. Please read this section carefully and make the necessary changes to improve consistency and clarity.	Thank You for your remark; the description of this paragraph was improved
5. Lines 258-283: There are errors in the abbreviations of the samples mentioned in this section. Furthermore, the content is poorly organized, and the associated diagrams do not correspond accurately to the text. Please revise this section to ensure accuracy, clarity, and scientific rigor.	Thank You for your remark, the text was corrected

 

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This study focusses on the effects of binary SCMs, composed of calcined expanded clay kiln dust and opoka, on the hardening and hydration behavior of Portland cement, which is commendable. However, there were major problems in the organization and writing of this paper. The research depth of the article is poor, and it is recommended to reject the manuscript.

1.       There are many literatures related to the cement paste containing expanded clay, meanwhile, the author did not emphasize the innovation and research significance of this manuscript in the section of abstract and introduction.

2.       The experimental content of this manuscript lacks the pore structure test, and the existing microstructure tests cannot well demonstrate the effect of binary SCMs on the mechanical properties of cement paste.

3.       The weak logic of the instruction needs to be further improved.

4.       There are many formatting issues in the manuscript. E.g. line 65, Table 1, Table 3, line 190, Fig. 2.

5.       The quality of some figures needs to be improved. E.g. Fig. 6.

6.       The reviewers did not find much valuable information in the conclusion of the manuscript. It is recommended that the authors further improve the experimental results of this manuscript.

7.       Overall, the content of manuscript is little, so the reviewers are concerned that it does not meet the journal's publication requirements.

Author Response

Manuscript Number: sustainability-3371794

Title: BINARY SUPPLEMENTARY CEMENTITIOUS MATERIAL FROM EXPANDED CLAY PRODUCTION DUST AND OPOKA

Answers of Authors

Thank You for your remarks and suggestions.

We have made the required corrections and answered to your remarks (listed below).

Reviewer #3

Remark	Answer
1. There are many literatures related to the cement paste containing expanded clay, meanwhile, the author did not emphasize the innovation and research significance of this manuscript in the section of abstract and introduction.	Thank You for your remark, the text was improved
2.       The experimental content of this manuscript lacks the pore structure test, and the existing microstructure tests cannot well demonstrate the effect of binary SCMs on the mechanical properties of cement paste	Thank You for your remark. We agree with your opinion that pore structure test could supplement the results of the study. But the development of the properties of the cement stone during hardening process was evaluated by XRD, TG, DSC and compressive strength tests. We believe that the use of these four methods allows us to assess with sufficient clarity the effect of binary SCMs on the properties of cement paste.
3.       The weak logic of the instruction needs to be further improved.	Thank You for your remark, the text was improved
4.       There are many formatting issues in the manuscript. E.g. line 65, Table 1, Table 3, line 190, Fig. 2.	Thank You for your remark, all formatting issues was corrected
5.       The quality of some figures needs to be improved. E.g. Fig. 6	Thank You for your remark, figures were corrected
6. The reviewers did not find much valuable information in the conclusion of the manuscript. It is recommended that the authors further improve the experimental results of this manuscript.	Thank You for your remark; the text and conclusions were corrected

 

 

 

Reviewer 4 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The article is devoted to the study of binary supplementary cementitious material from expanded clay production dust and opoka. Despite the high percentage of repetition (Percent match: 21%) presented in the plagiarism report, but all matches are individual regular or standard phrases and expressions, this is not plagiarism or repetition of research. Therefore, I believe that the results of the article are innovative and this article can be recommended for publication after making the following minor additions namely:

Line 74 - it is necessary to indicate (specify) that enriched expanded clay production waste (EPW) at 600 ºC was used in the work.

Line 81 - Figure 1 should be supplemented with X-ray diffraction curves of EPW after firing at 600 ºC.

Author Response

Manuscript Number: sustainability-3371794

Title: BINARY SUPPLEMENTARY CEMENTITIOUS MATERIAL FROM EXPANDED CLAY PRODUCTION DUST AND OPOKA

Answers of Authors

Thank You for your remarks and suggestions.

We have made the required corrections and answered to your remarks (listed below).

Reviewer #4

Remark	Answer
1. Line 74 - it is necessary to indicate (specify) that enriched expanded clay production waste (EPW) at 600 ºC was used in the work.	Thank You for your remark. Table 1 presents the chemical composition of the expanded clay production waste received (not thermally activated), because we wanted to show the chemical composition of the original raw materials.
2. Line 81 - Figure 1 should be supplemented with X-ray diffraction curves of EPW after firing at 600 ºC.	Thank You for your remark. The EPW X-ray diffraction curve after firing at 600 ºC was added as Figure 3.

 

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

well revised.

Author Response

Thank You for your remarks and suggestions.

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The quality of the manuscript has been improved after the author's revision, which is commendable. However, there are still some problems in the experimental design, which makes the reviewers consider that this manuscript cannot meet the requirements for publication.

1.       Is the pozzolanic activity of expanded clay kiln dust and opoka studied in this manuscript limited to this sampling region? The authors did not compare samples from multiple regions or provide explanations.

2.       The manuscript lacks porosity tests and material morphology images so cannot well explain the changes in mechanical properties of cement-based material.

3.       Please check the image size of Fig. 2 and Fig. 7.

Author Response

Manuscript Number: sustainability-3371794

Title: BINARY SUPPLEMENTARY CEMENTITIOUS MATERIAL FROM EXPANDED CLAY PRODUCTION DUST AND OPOKA

Answers of Authors

Thank You for your remarks and suggestions.

We have made the required corrections and answered to your remarks (listed below).

Reviewer #3

Remark	Answer
1. Is the pozzolanic activity of expanded clay kiln dust and opoka studied in this manuscript limited to this sampling region? The authors did not compare samples from multiple regions or provide explanations.	Thank you for your remark. The Introduction was supplemented with a comparison of the pozzolanic activity of opoka and expanded clay kiln dust with other materials from other regions (in the text marked in green).
2.  The manuscript lacks porosity tests and material morphology images so cannot well explain the changes in mechanical properties of cement-based material.	Thank you for your remark. We agree with your opinion that the porosity test and the material morphology images could extend the results of the study. Unfortunately, these additional studies were not performed. It is not expedient to perform additional tests at this time, as a considerable amount of time has passed since the samples were prepared. When the samples are used for other research, they inevitably have contact with ambient air. This contact may have resulted in further carbonization or hydration of the samples. Therefore, additional tests of the porosity or morphology of the samples would not reflect real results. We will definitely pay attention to your recommendations when conducting similar studies in the future.
3.       Please check the image size of Fig. 2 and Fig. 7.	Thank You for your remark, the size of Fig. 2 and Fig. 7 are provided according to the journal template

Round 3

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Authors have improved the manuscript according to reviewer's comment.