Review Reports

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Manuscript applsci-1038292 by Fortino et al covers the monitoring of moisture in timber bridges, a factor with important implications for their structural health.  The manuscript contains significant data, and information interesting for various fields, and as a topic is suitable for AppSci.

The manuscript, however, has several problems, which need to be faced before a final decision.

A first main problem is that it is stated that the DAILY variations of the relative humidity of the atmosphere is influencing wood member in bridges (line 116).  In the text, only longer-term effects are examined. 

Second, the manuscript is poor in the explanation of various processes, necessary for the broad audience of AppSci and especially of figures explaining the various processes and sensor location (see below).  In addition, some photos of a damaged bridge are necessary to highlight the importance of the discussed effects (for example, a reference to a publication of a damaged timber bridge, though in another environment, published in Sensors (Thalla and Stiros, Sensors 2018, 18, 3867; doi:10.3390/s18113867) would be very useful.  In this article, the structural significance of cracks is discussed.)

These problems do not permit to understand this manuscript and to lead to a self-standing article.

 

Clarifications needed.

• At the beginning a diagram (or figure) explaining the structure of SLT and its location in a bridge. A clean photo of bridge.  
• The cupping deformation should be explained, preferably with a figure or a reference
• A graph explaining the saturation process using the different fickian models and their implications
• In Fig 1 the significance of colours is unclear
• Figures 2 and 3 are poor. Better figures showing the dimensions of the structure and the monitoring points to be added
• Figure 5 should be combined with a photo of the bridge showing the bridge characteristics, and the locations of parts shown in Appendix B.
• Figure 6 the location of the right figure is undefined
• In lines 114-115 to explain which are the implications of stress normal to the grain
• In line 210 to correct(?) air temperature

 

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

-fig 1-The effect of asphalt layer in top is not used in heat and moisture flux –or is analyse just the timber element ?

-On the bottom surface there is not liquid water (rain or other water contacts).

can you specify ?

-The bar force is typically from 89 to 356 (page 2)-applied load from start to end ?

-Laboratory tests revealed significant decrease of the bar forces at low temperatures, strongly depending on the MC of the wood

Low temperatures? clarify

 

 

 

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

The authors have done an excellent revision, responding positively to all my comments, including the addition of figures.  I believe that the revised manuscript is ready for publication and I can only recommend its publication.