A Study on the Practical Use of Synthetic Polymerized Rubber Gel Waterproofing Materials Based on the Mixture of Waste Oil and Waste Rubber
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
This work are useful to contribute to the improvement of cost reduction and environmental pollution arising due to waste disposal and incineration. I suggest it can be published after the major revision.
1. Please pay attention to the introduction which is short of the support from the references. The authors should cite at least ten effective references to show them. And why the authors cite more references in the aim paragraph of the introduction.
2. The font size in every pictures are too small to see. Please turn them up.
3. Too much conclusions, the authors should modify them representative.
Author Response
Please refer to the attached file for details on the revision
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
The paper entitled A Study on the Practical Use of Synthetic Polymerized Rubber Gel Waterproofing Materials Based on the Polymerization of Waste Oil and Waste Rubber is an original contribution to the development of polymer technologies. It presents the obtaining of waterproof materials based on the polymerization of waste oil and waste rubber. The great advantage of this material is precisely the use of waste materials, so this work fits perfectly into the development trends observed in recent years based on recycling. Such a solution allows both to reduce the consumption of new materials and to reduce the costs associated with the storage of waste materials. Please expand the introduction with modern polymerization and compolymerization techniques. Please cite the following works: https://doi.org/10.3390/polym10050532, 10.1109/JSEN.2020.2982742. In the paper, the authors presented the methodology of synthesis of waterproofig materials in great detail, however, in my opinion, in section 2.2 there should be general information on the synthesis, while the whole development of the procedure and optimization of process parameters (I mean Figure 3, Figure 4 and Figure 5 with appropriate comments) should be moved to the chapter "Results and Discussion". Section 3.1.1 in my opinion lacks commentary on the results obtained. Did the authors wonder why viscosities below the quality standard were obtained for samples obtained in ratios of 5:1 and 6:1? Surely such a comment should be included in the paper. I have a similar question about the results shown in Figure 9. Did the authors wonder why they obtained low values for sample C(4:1). Also, I suggest that the authors expand on the comments describing the results obtained. For all the research conducted, in my opinion, they are far too weak and need to expand and explore the issue raised. It seems to me that expanding the research to include the chemical aspect would be very helpful in this regard. I suggest that the authors use chemical analysis techniques, i.e. XPS or FITR, to study the chemical and functional composition of both the substrates of the copolymerization reaction and the resulting product. Further analysis based on such studies will give new light on the problem addressed in the paper and will make it possible to explain why such results were obtained.
In conclusion, the work is very interesting and certainly worthy of publication after major revisions.
Author Response
Please refer to the attached file for details on the revision
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Reviewer 3 Report
This article has value in circular economy. Please consider the following points to improve the quality of the manuscript:
1. Please briefly describe such polymers for reuse application, previous publication.
2. As you claimed successful polymerization, you have to prove it by FT-IR/NMR analysis of new polymer.
3. If possible you can evaluate the molecular weight by GPC.
Author Response
Please refer to the attached file for details on the revision
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
The authors have answered mu questions properly. I agree its publication in its current form.
Author Response
Thank you very much for agreeing to the publication.
Reviewer 2 Report
The paper has been corrected according to the reviewer's comments and may be accepted for publication.
Author Response
Thank you very much for agreeing to the publication.
Reviewer 3 Report
You mentioned polymerization in Title, but you didn't prove it in the main manuscript. Please do at least FT-IR analysis and confirm your polymerization/product. Yes, later you can do other analyses.
Author Response
Thank you very much for your review to improve the quality of this paper.
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
