Experimental Investigation of Infrared Detection of Debonding in Concrete-Filled Steel Tubes via Cooling-Based Excitation
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe reviews are attached.
Comments for author File: 
Comments.pdf
Author Response
1.Research plot is sound, however, presentation of abstract needs improvement. Like results of efficient and stable cooling method needs to be supported with some tangible results attained in percentage or any suitable form; to be mentioned in the abstract. This will add clarity and also attract readers to go through rest of the paper. Authors to revisit the abstract and make it more captivating.
Response: Thank you very much for pointing out the shortcomings in the abstract and conclusion sections. To make the advantages of the proposed method clearer to the readers, the authors have revised both the abstract and conclusion. More specific quantitative values have been added to describe the proposed method, and a comparison of the average temperature difference between the debonded areas before and after excitation has been included to demonstrate the improvement capacity of the proposed method. The specific new content can be found from line 24 to line 26.
2.Introduction has been very well written, however, most of the cited references are more than a decade old and very less references are cited from recent 5 years. Suitable justification be given for this or few recent research work may be added in the references.
Response: Thank you very much for pointing out the shortcomings in the literature review. The authors have added several recent research papers in the introduction to help readers better understand the progress in this field.
3.Authors to elaborate semi-real time infrared tests and its significance in CFST.
Response: Thank you very much for pointing out this issue. The authors have revised the "Introduction" section to compare the limitations of other nondestructive testing methods and the advantages of infrared detection technology, emphasizing the importance of infrared testing for debonding detection in CFSTs. The specific new content can be found from line 81 to line 98.
4.A schematic research work flow with emphasis on methodology or block diagram be added be added to add clarity to the research scheme.
Response: Thank you very much for your suggestion. The authors have added Section 2.1 "Research Framework" and included a flowchart to outline the overall research approach, which will help readers better understand the research scheme.The specific new content can be found from line 147 to line 165.
5.In addition to figure 9 and 10, a tabular data be added by the authors, giving different distances and durations, for better analysis of results attained after experiment.
Response: Thank you very much for your feedback. The authors have added several tables to allow readers to more intuitively understand the research findings. The specific new content can be found from line 411 to line 559.
6.Figure 3(a) and (b) be made more clear, as numbers and text cannot be read properly.
Response: Thank you very much for pointing out the clarity issue in the figures. The authors have reviewed all figures and redrawn Fig. 3(a) and (b), adjusting the font size of the text to ensure that readers can easily read the information in the figures.
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsComments are attached
Comments for author File: Comments.pdf
comments are attached
Author Response
1.Quantitative results:
The paper could benefit from including some specific quantitative results to support the qualitative statements. For example, providing numerical ranges for what constitutes "short" vs "long" duration excitation would be helpful.
The discussion on the results should be more detailed on different aspects of the research study for clear understanding to the audience.
Response: Thank you very much for pointing out the shortcomings in the description of the results. The authors have revised the "Results and Discussion" section, adding quantitative descriptions where clarity was lacking and providing a more in-depth discussion of the experimental results to help readers better understand the findings. Specific modifications can be found from line XX to line XX.
2.Comparison with existing methods:
A brief comparison of the spray-cooling excitation method with traditional techniques would help readers better understand the advantages and potential drawbacks of this new approach.
Response:Thank you very much for your suggestion. The authors have revised the "Introduction" and "Conclusion" sections to highlight the limitations of traditional detection methods and the advantages of the proposed method. Specific new content can be found from line 540 to line 559.
3.Scalability and cost-effectiveness:
The paper addressed the scalability of the method for larger structures and its cost-effectiveness compared to existing techniques. This information would be valuable for practitioners considering adopting this method.
Response: Thank you for pointing out this issue. The authors have revised the "Conclusion" section to discuss the potential benefits of the proposed method and have added a "Limitations and Future Work" section to outline potential directions for future research, allowing readers to better understand the innovative aspects of this study. Specific new content can be found from line 561 to line 606.
4.Environmental considerations:
Given the use of water spray, a brief discussion on the environmental impact or water usage efficiency of the method could be included.
Response: Thank you very much for your valuable comment. The authors have addressed the environmental benefits of the proposed method in the "Results and Discussion" and "Conclusion" sections. Specific new content can be found from line 556 to line 559 and from line 579 to line 589.
5.Validation:
Mentioning any validation studies or real-world tests of the method would strengthen the quality of paper and increase confidence in its practical applicability.
Response: Thank you very much for pointing out this issue. Research has shown that [1] the experimental setup used in this study effectively simulates the exothermic phase of debonding concrete-filled steel tubes, so the optimal cooling excitation method derived from this experiment is highly feasible. In future research, we will further validate the proposed method in real-world bridge applications to provide empirical support. The "Limitations and Future Work" section mentions the limitations of this study and future research plans. Please refer to lines 588 to 606.
[1] Cheng, C.; Cheng, X.; Zhang, H.; Cai, H.; Zhou, J.; Na, R.; Wu, B. Experimental study on infrared detection of debonding in concrete-filled steel tubular structure under acceleratory period of hydration heat action. Case Studies in Construction Materials 2024, 21, e03928, doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cscm.2024.e03928.
6.Limitations:
While the conclusion focuses on the positive aspects of the method, it would be beneficial to briefly discuss any limitations or challenges encountered during the research. This would provide a more balanced perspective and help identify areas for further improvement.
Response: Thank you for your valuable comment. The authors have added Section 6, "Limitations and Future Work," to provide a clearer understanding of the limitations of this research and future research directions.Please refer to lines 588 to 606.
Reviewer 3 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsPotential issues and areas for improvement in the study:
· Include a dedicated section or appendix with all symbols, notations, and their meanings, ensuring consistency throughout the manuscript.
· Number all equations sequentially and reference them in the text. Attribute standard or derived equations to original sources when applicable.
· Provide a deeper discussion of all figures, focusing on: Trends shown in graphs (e.g., temperature differences, cooling effects). Correlations between variables (e.g., excitation duration vs. detection accuracy). Real-world implications of the results.
· Add a section titled "Limitations and Future Work" covering: Assumptions made (e.g., uniform properties, controlled environments). Constraints (e.g., testing parameters, absence of real-world validation). Future directions (e.g., application in field conditions, broader defect types).
· Conduct a sensitivity analysis to evaluate the impact of key parameters. Use visual aids (e.g., tables or graphs) to present findings. Discuss tolerances and optimal ranges for practical applications.
· Explicitly outline the novel aspects, such as: The innovative use of spray cooling as an excitation method during the exothermic hydration phase. Quantitative insights into heat conduction dynamics on steel plates.
· Include recent studies on: Alternative debonding detection techniques (e.g., ultrasonic methods, acoustic emissions). Advancements in infrared thermography. Comparative methods for CFST defect detection.
· Provide detailed explanations for all methodology choices. Justify parameter selection with prior studies or experimental evidence.
· Include key numerical results in the abstract and conclusions, such as: The timing of the maximum temperature difference. Optimal parameter ranges for efficient detection.
· Include a section on practical implications, covering: How the proposed method can be implemented in field settings. Its potential for improving structural safety assessments.
· Ensure all figures are of high resolution (minimum 300 dpi) to avoid pixelation in both print and online versions. Use consistent color schemes, fonts, and styles for all figures throughout the manuscript.
· Use modern visualization tools (e.g., MATLAB, OriginPro, or Python libraries like Matplotlib) to improve graphical presentation.
· For figures too detailed or crowded, include supplementary materials for additional plots or data.
· Review and cite relevant studies on debonding detection or similar experimental methods. Compare critical parameters like detection efficiency, temperature variation, or sensitivity under similar conditions. Highlight improvements or differences (e.g., higher detection accuracy, better practicality of the spray cooling method).
· Discuss why the results differ, considering methodological, material, or environmental factors.
· Emphasize the advantages of the proposed method over traditional techniques.
· Present a summary of comparisons in a tabular format for clarity and impact.
· Include specific findings, such as:
· Abstract: “The cooling excitation method achieved a maximum temperature difference of X°C under optimal parameters, improving detection efficiency by Y% compared to conventional methods.”
· “The proposed method reduced detection time by Z minutes, making it suitable for real-time applications.”
· Conclusions: Restate key quantitative results (e.g., optimal atomization level, excitation distance, and detection accuracy).
· Mention broader implications, such as potential cost reductions or enhanced safety assessments in engineering applications.
Author Response
1.Include a dedicated section or appendix with all symbols, notations, and their meanings, ensuring consistency throughout the manuscript.
Response: Thank you for your reminder. A dedicated section has been added in the manuscript to list all symbols and their meanings, allowing readers to better refer to them. The new content can be found from line 607 to line 613.
2.Number all equations sequentially and reference them in the text. Attribute standard or derived equations to original sources when applicable.
Response: Thank you for your suggestion. The authors have reviewed all equations and have cited the sources of the equations where necessary.
3.Provide a deeper discussion of all figures, focusing on: Trends shown in graphs (e.g., temperature differences, cooling effects). Correlations between variables (e.g., excitation duration vs. detection accuracy). Real-world implications of the results.
Response: Thank you for your reminder. The authors have revised the "Results and Discussion" section and provided a deeper discussion on each figure. This includes analyzing trends shown in the graphs, correlations between variables, and real-world implications of the results.
4.Add a section titled "Limitations and Future Work" covering: Assumptions made (e.g., uniform properties, controlled environments). Constraints (e.g., testing parameters, absence of real-world validation). Future directions (e.g., application in field conditions, broader defect types).
Response: Thank you for your reminder. A new section titled "Limitations and Future Work" has been added in Chapter 5, which discusses the limitations of the study and outlines directions for future research. The new content can be found from line 587 to line 606.
5.Conduct a sensitivity analysis to evaluate the impact of key parameters. Use visual aids (e.g., tables or graphs) to present findings. Discuss tolerances and optimal ranges for practical applications.
Response: Thank you for your valuable suggestion. The "Results and Discussion" section has been revised to include the standard deviation of the data to quantitatively evaluate sensitivity. The data from Fig. 11 to Fig. 14 is presented in tables to allow readers to better understand the relevant content.
6.Explicitly outline the novel aspects, such as: The innovative use of spray cooling as an excitation method during the exothermic hydration phase. Quantitative insights into heat conduction dynamics on steel plates.
Response: Thank you for pointing out the issues with the phrasing. The authors have revised the abstract to emphasize the novelty of the study. The changes can be found from line 15 to line 17.
7.Include recent studies on: Alternative debonding detection techniques (e.g., ultrasonic methods, acoustic emissions). Advancements in infrared thermography. Comparative methods for CFST defect detection.
Response: Thank you for pointing out the issue with the literature review. The "Introduction" section has been revised, and comparisons between infrared detection and other nondestructive testing methods have been added to highlight the advantages of infrared thermography. The changes can be found from line 51 to line 64.
8.Provide detailed explanations for all methodology choices. Justify parameter selection with prior studies or experimental evidence.
Response: Thank you for pointing out the issue with parameter selection. To help readers better understand the reasons for selecting certain parameters, the authors have added descriptions comparing parameters selected by other researchers and justifying the choices made in this study. The changes can be found from line 147 to line 152.
9.Include key numerical results in the abstract and conclusions, such as: The timing of the maximum temperature difference. Optimal parameter ranges for efficient detection.
Response: Thank you for pointing out the issues with the abstract and conclusion. The authors have revised both the abstract and conclusion sections, providing more specific quantitative descriptions of the proposed method and comparing the average temperature differences in debonded areas before and after excitation to demonstrate the improvement. The new content can be found from line 24 to line 26 and from line 574 to line 582.
10.Include a section on practical implications, covering: How the proposed method can be implemented in field settings. Its potential for improving structural safety assessments.
Response: Thank you for your valuable comment. Related studies have shown that [1] the experimental setup used in this study effectively simulates the exothermic phase of debonding concrete-filled steel tubes, so the optimal cooling excitation method derived from this experiment is feasible. In future research, we will further validate the proposed method in real-world bridge applications to provide empirical support. The "Limitations and Future Work" section has been updated to include the limitations of this study and future research plans. The new content can be found from line 587 to line 606.
[1] Cheng, C.; Cheng, X.; Zhang, H.; Cai, H.; Zhou, J.; Na, R.; Wu, B. Experimental study on infrared detection of debonding in concrete-filled steel tubular structure under acceleratory period of hydration heat action. Case Studies in Construction Materials 2024, 21, e03928, doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cscm.2024.e03928.
11.Ensure all figures are of high resolution (minimum 300 dpi) to avoid pixelation in both print and online versions. Use consistent color schemes, fonts, and styles for all figures throughout the manuscript.
Response: Thank you for pointing out the issues with the figures. The authors have reviewed all the figures to ensure that they have sufficient clarity and are easy for readers to interpret.
12.Use modern visualization tools (e.g., MATLAB, OriginPro, or Python libraries like Matplotlib) to improve graphical presentation.
Response: Thank you for your valuable suggestion. The authors have reviewed all the figures and used better visualization tools to improve the graphical presentation of the data.。
13.For figures too detailed or crowded, include supplementary materials for additional plots or data.
Response: Thank you for your suggestion. The authors have added Table 4 to Table 7 to provide additional data for readers to better understand the findings.
14.Review and cite relevant studies on debonding detection or similar experimental methods. Compare critical parameters like detection efficiency, temperature variation, or sensitivity under similar conditions. Highlight improvements or differences (e.g., higher detection accuracy, better practicality of the spray cooling method).
Response: Thank you for your suggestion. The authors have cited other studies to compare the advantages of the proposed excitation method in the conclusion. The changes can be found from line 579 to line 586.
15.Discuss why the results differ, considering methodological, material, or environmental factors.
Response: Thank you for your support. The authors have revised the "Results and Discussion" section, particularly Section 3.4, to discuss the reasons for differences in the maximum temperature difference. The new content can be found from line 529 to line 536.
16.Emphasize the advantages of the proposed method over traditional techniques.
Response: Thank you for your comment. The authors have revised the "Introduction" and "Conclusion" sections to highlight the limitations of traditional detection methods and the advantages of the proposed method. The new content can be found from line 576 to line 586.
17.Present a summary of comparisons in a tabular format for clarity and impact.
Response: Thank you for pointing out this issue. The authors have added several tables(Table4 to Table7) to provide a clearer understanding of the research findings.
18.Include specific findings, such as:
- Abstract: “The cooling excitation method achieved a maximum temperature difference of X°C under optimal parameters, improving detection efficiency by Y% compared to conventional methods.”
- “The proposed method reduced detection time by Z minutes, making it suitable for real-time applications.”
- Conclusions: Restate key quantitative results (e.g., optimal atomization level, excitation distance, and detection accuracy).
Response: Thank you for pointing out the shortcomings in the abstract and conclusion. The authors have revised both sections, emphasizing the improvements in detection efficiency after applying the proposed method. The changes can be found from line 24 to line 26 and line 579 to line 586
19.Mention broader implications, such as potential cost reductions or enhanced safety assessments in engineering applications.
Response: Thank you for your valuable comment. The authors have added relevant descriptions in the "Conclusion" and "Limitations and Future Work" sections to highlight the potential value and practical significance of the research findings. The new content can be found from line 576 to line 606.
Round 2
Reviewer 3 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThank you to the authors for their valuable contribution to scientific research. They did an excellent job addressing the reviewers' comments, and the responses and modifications are adequate. This article can be accepted in its current form.
