Bricks Using Clay Mixed with Powder and Ashes from Lignocellulosic Biomass: A Review

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

I read the article with interest. On a daily basis, I research masonry structures, including those made of ceramic masonry units. The reviewed article presents in detail the technology, composition and physical parameters of this type of wall element. As a review article, it is a source of information on ceramic masonry units in which the clay has been partially replaced by lignocellulosic fly ash. The article is a valuable resource for those involved in this topic, including researchers who would like to investigate the effects of ecologic additives replacing non-renewable ingredients. The use of a rich bibliography also allows interested people to delve into the topic. I propose to accept the article as a review article, taking into account the following comments:

 1. Lines 446-449. The percentage composition of OPBA should be explained, from the text it appears that the components add up to more than 100%.

2. Lines 529-540 and 541-552. The entire paragraph has been duplicated.

3. Figure 1 and 6. I suggest moving the descriptions in Fig. 1. Currently, it looks bad and is illegible.

4. Line 615, 648. I suggest that Table 2 and Table 4 be placed in the text closer to the place where this table is referenced.

5. Line 867. You mean Table 3?

6. The compressive strengths of specimens obtained by equal researchers may be incomparable for one more reason, the shape and size of the samples, which should be mentioned. Unless ALL the compared strengths were obtained on samples compliant with a standard for testing this type of material.

7. The third conclusion is way too long. It needs to be split or sub-items introduced to improve readability.

8. All errors related to punctuation, missing or excessive number of spaces, incorrectly used capital letters should be corrected.

Author Response

Q1.      Lines 446-449. The percentage composition of OPBA should be explained, from the text it appears that the components add up to more than 100%.

R1.    First of all, we wish to express our appreciation for your in-depth comments, suggestions, and corrections, which have greatly improved the manuscript. Regarding the chemical composition of OPBA, we have checked the percentages in the article and we have made the changes in the manuscript. Since three different methods were used to ascertain the chemical composition, the calcium carbonate content and the organic matter content, the components' total value is still higher than 100%.

By using X-ray fluorescence (XRF), the percentages of skeletal materials (SiO2, Al2O3), melting oxides (CaO, MgO, Na2O, K2O), and gaseous materials (F2O3) were determined. These percentages represent, respectively, 12.5%, 53.1%, and 1.6% of 100% of the amount of OPBA used in this technique. As shown in Table 2, additional components like (SO3, NiO, CuO, ZnO, Rb2O, Cl,..) were found, but in negligible amounts.

OPBA's percentages of organic matter and calcium carbonates (CaCO3) were measured using the Standard Test Method for Moisture, Ash, Organic Matter of Peat and Other Organic Soils (ASTM D-2974, 1987) and calcimetry, respectively.

Q2.      Lines 529-540 and 541-552. The entire paragraph has been duplicated.

R2.      We removed the duplicated lines from 529-540.

Q3.      Figures 1 and 6. I suggest moving the descriptions in Fig. 1. Currently, it looks bad and is illegible.

R3.      All the figures have been modified.

Q4.      Line 615, 648. I suggest that Table 2 and Table 4 be placed in the text closer to the place where this table is referenced.

R4.      Tables 2 and 4 were positioned in the text more closely to the place where this table is cited.

Q5.      Line 867. You mean Table 3?

R5.      Referring to table 1, which listed the various studies as well as the various  fired brick-making parameters, the manuscript has been updated with a change.

Q6.      The compressive strengths of specimens obtained by equal researchers may be incomparable for one more reason, the shape and size of the samples, which should be mentioned. Unless ALL the compared strengths were obtained on samples compliant with a standard for testing this type of material.

R6.      It is possible to compare the compressive strength between the studies by D. Eliche-Quesada et al [81] and Bonet-Martinez [82] because the tests were carried out using the same test piece sizes (rectangular bricks 60*30cm) and according to the same standard (UNE-EN 772-1).

7. The third conclusion is way too long. It needs to be split or sub-items introduced to improve readability.

R7.      We totally agree and the conclusion was modified.

Q8. All errors related to punctuation, missing or excessive number of spaces, incorrectly used capital letters should be corrected.

R8.      Thanks a lot and this was done.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

Before making any recommendations for a scientific article "Bricks Using Clay Mixed with Powder and Ashes from Lignocellulosic Biomass: A Review", I would like to present the following statements on the topic. Based on my long-term research and transfer profile in the field of holistic perception of the issues of civil engineering, I consider the evaluated scientific article to be topical, but I have several comments about it. I consider the total range 1585 lines of paper, but especially I consider 42 pages texts,  too extensive. Irrelevant parts of the article should be omitted and some more extensive texts should be replaced with a concise summary or table. On the contrary, I consider the number of 7 images and 4 tabels to be insufficient, even though I am fully aware that it is A Review.

Mandatory requirements:

LNSA 10-23...Abstract is necessary to rework with greater emphasis on the authors' own findings. After a brief summary of the global state of the issue, it is necessary to establish clear goals, methodological procedures and the resulting methodology for their achievement. On the basis of objectified facts, it is necessary to abstract the acquired knowledge into formulating one's own contribution to the given field of research.

LNSA 38-40... According to the International Energy Agency (IEA), the building sector alone consumes about 1/3 of the world's energy supply and is responsible for almost 40% of greenhouse gas emissions... it is necessary to specify the information source of this assertion.

LNSA 144-145...It is totally amorphous and hydrophobic in nature 144 which prevents water from attaching to the surface [21]..it is necessary to add a period at the end of the sentence.

LNSA 573… LNSA Figure 1. Linear firing shrinkage for samples made with lignocellulosic biomass ash : olive Bottom 573 ash(OPBA) (Eliche-Quesada and Leite-Costa 2016) [81]...the figure needs to be revised, the graphic quality should be significantly improved , remove the overlap of texts and graphic data... I consider the combination of names and numbers of references  to be an unnecessary duplication of data, it also applies to other figures.

LNSA 668-676... Figure 3. Water... In a picture with only one graph, it is appropriate that they were located on one side.

LNSA 804-813… Figure 6. Compressive strength.. it is necessary to significantly increase the quality of the figure, indicate the correct MPa and shorten its name in accordance with the recommendations.

LNSA 845-846… Table 2. The chemical make-up of various lignocellulosic biomass ashes used in the production of 845 fired bricks....in the table, it is necessary to replace the decimal comma (,) with a decimal point (.) and unify the number of decimal places.

LNSA 1023... Figure 7. Compressive strength for... it would be appropriate to unify the format of writing numerical data in images (above, inside columns,...). The name of the y-axis needs to be corrected.

LNSA 1155...Figure 8. compressive strength for geopolymer bricks:..the name of the image should start with a capital letter, this is as the case with the other images.

LNSA 1225...Table 3. Articles on Unfired Clay Bricks...the table needs to be significantly reformatted (change the line spacing and font size, column widths,...) so as to reduce the total length from 4 pages (30-33) to a maximum of 2 pages.

LNSA 1271-1305…Conclusions.. considering the amount of work done and its quality, it would be appropriate to rework the conclusions. It is necessary general statements of the type "is a promising way to lessen the need for non-renewable clay, as well as to reduce the environmental risks and high costs. ,... to reduce the energy consumption" to be supplemented with numerical quantification by the authors of the objectified results or analyses. As already indicated, the results of the authors' research need to be compared with important articles by foreign authors. Before the conclusions, it is necessary to complete the discussion chapter, or make an extended chapter Discussion and conclusions.

Facultative recommendations:

LNSA 42-45...Brick factories are very energy-consuming industries: with a production capacity of 400 tons per day, a brick factory consumes up to 5 GWh of electricity per year 43 and 56 million thermies (1thermie = 4,185,500 joules) of natural gas per year, which 44 means a total annual energy consumption equivalent to 70 GW [1]...the information source mentioned comes from 1998. It is necessary to provide more recent data, or add to the text of the article that it is data from in 1998.

LNSA 66-67... Many studies are focused on fired bricks. 66 [4], [5], [6], [7], [8] [4] investigated the effects...I recommend combine the sentences into oneand use references to literature in the form [4-8], it also applies to other parts of the article.

LNSA 267-269… The history of brick making dates back seven thousand years ago when bricks were made in the form of hand-molded earth blocks without compaction and dried in the sun [14]… I would like to remind the authors of the following fact. Çatalhöyük is a very large Neolithic and Chalcolithic proto-city settlement in southern Anatolia, which existed from approximately 7500 BC to 6400 BC, and flourished around 7000 BC. In July 2012, it was inscribed as a UNESCO World Heritage Site.

LNSA 511-514... Table 1. Articles on Fired Bricks... the table nwould be appropriate reformatted (change the line spacing and font size, column widths,...) so as to reduce the total length from 4 pages (11-14) to a maximum of 2 pages.

LNSA  769...5.3. what effect on mechanical properties?..I recommend changing the size of the first letter of the figure name  and consider using a question mark.

LNSA 935-1271… 6. Unfired Clay Bricks Reinforced by Lignocellulosic Biomass Ash... I would divide the chapter into several subsections. I consider it unnecessary to divide the chapter into subsection  6.1 without subchapter 6.2 following it.

LNSA 1024-1028... Figure 7. Compressive strength for unfired clay bricks stabilized with lignocellulosic biomass ash 1024 and lime/Cement: 10%OPC-8%SBA (James et al. 2016) [99]...in my opinion indicating authors' names and numbers references are duplicating data, in my opinion it is sufficient to indicate only the numbers of references. This statement also applies to table 8.

I consider the scientific potential of the reviewed scientific article to be considerable and, despite the mentioned comments, I recommend its revision. I would like to  repeated emphasis on shortening the article and significantly improving the figures and tables. From the aspect of the stated fact and based on a detailed study of the article, in case of incorporation of comments, or relevant justification of their non-incorporation, I am able to process a repeated review within 3 days.

Author Response

Before making any recommendations for a scientific article "Bricks Using Clay Mixed with Powder and Ashes from Lignocellulosic Biomass: A Review", I would like to present the following statements on the topic. Based on my long-term research and transfer profile in the field of holistic perception of the issues of civil engineering, I consider the evaluated scientific article to be topical, but I have several comments about it. I consider the total range 1585 lines of paper, but especially I consider 42 pages texts,  too extensive. Irrelevant parts of the article should be omitted and some more extensive texts should be replaced with a concise summary or table. On the contrary, I consider the number of 7 images and 4 tables to be insufficient, even though I am fully aware that it is A Review.

R1.    First of all, we wish to express our gratitude for your insightful comments, we appreciate the time and effort that you have dedicated to providing your valuable feedback on my manuscript. The article is certainly long, but we thought it would be interesting to present a broad vision of the state of the art and not to dissociate the current research into two parts. This is a review of the literature, which is why we have allowed ourselves to be more "prolix" than usual.

LNSA 10-23...Abstract is necessary to rework with greater emphasis on the authors' own findings. After a brief summary of the global state of the issue, it is necessary to establish clear goals, methodological procedures and the resulting methodology for their achievement. On the basis of objectified facts, it is necessary to abstract the acquired knowledge into formulating one's own contribution to the given field of research.

R2. The abstract has been revised to better reflect the goal of the manuscript and the authors' cross-referenced conclusions from the various research studies they conducted.

LNSA 38-40... According to the International Energy Agency (IEA), the building sector alone consumes about 1/3 of the world's energy supply and is responsible for almost 40% of greenhouse gas emissions... it is necessary to specify the information source of this assertion.

R3.      The reference was introduced in the manuscript.

LNSA 144-145...It is totally amorphous and hydrophobic in nature 144 which prevents water from attaching to the surface [21]..it is necessary to add a period at the end of the sentence.

R4.      All errors related to punctuation were corrected.

LNSA 573… LNSA Figure 1. Linear firing shrinkage for samples made with lignocellulosic biomass ash : olive Bottom 573 ash(OPBA) (Eliche-Quesada and Leite-Costa 2016) [81]...the figure needs to be revised, the graphic quality should be significantly improved , remove the overlap of texts and graphic data... I consider the combination of names and numbers of references  to be an unnecessary duplication of data, it also applies to other figures.

LNSA 668-676... Figure 3. Water... In a picture with only one graph, it is appropriate that they were located on one side.

LNSA 804-813… Figure 6. Compressive strength.. it is necessary to significantly increase the quality of the figure, indicate the correct MPa and shorten its name in accordance with the recommendations.

LNSA 1023... Figure 7. Compressive strength for... it would be appropriate to unify the format of writing numerical data in images (above, inside columns,...). The name of the y-axis needs to be corrected.

LNSA 1155...Figure 8. compressive strength for geopolymer bricks:..the name of the image should start with a capital letter, this is as the case with the other images.

LNSA 1024-1028... Figure 7. Compressive strength for unfired clay bricks stabilized with lignocellulosic biomass ash 1024 and lime/Cement: 10%OPC-8%SBA (James et al. 2016) [99]...in my opinion indicating authors' names and numbers references are duplicating data, in my opinion it is sufficient to indicate only the numbers of references. This statement also applies to table 8.

R5.      We totally agree with the reviewer comment and suitable changes have been made to all figures and their names.

LNSA 845-846… Table 2. The chemical make-up of various lignocellulosic biomass ashes used in the production of 845 fired bricks....in the table, it is necessary to replace the decimal comma (,) with a decimal point (.) and unify the number of decimal places.

LNSA 1225...Table 3. Articles on Unfired Clay Bricks...the table needs to be significantly reformatted (change the line spacing and font size, column widths,...) so as to reduce the total length from 4 pages (30-33) to a maximum of 2 pages.

LNSA 511-514... Table 1. Articles on Fired Bricks... the table would be appropriate reformatted (change the line spacing and font size, column widths,...) so as to reduce the total length from 4 pages (11-14) to a maximum of 2 pages.

R6.      OK. Changes have been made to all Tables as the reviewer claimed.

LNSA 1271-1305…Conclusions.. considering the amount of work done and its quality, it would be appropriate to rework the conclusions. It is necessary general statements of the type "is a promising way to lessen the need for non-renewable clay, as well as to reduce the environmental risks and high costs. ,... to reduce the energy consumption" to be supplemented with numerical quantification by the authors of the objectified results or analyses. As already indicated, the results of the authors' research need to be compared with important articles by foreign authors. Before the conclusions, it is necessary to complete the discussion chapter, or make an extended chapter Discussion and conclusions.

R7.      Based on the reviewer suggestion, reworked was done to the conclusion.

LNSA 42-45...Brick factories are very energy-consuming industries: with a production capacity of 400 tons per day, a brick factory consumes up to 5 GWh of electricity per year 43 and 56 million thermies (1thermie = 4,185,500 joules) of natural gas per year, which 44 means a total annual energy consumption equivalent to 70 GW [1]...the information source mentioned comes from 1998. It is necessary to provide more recent data, or add to the text of the article that it is data from in 1998.

R8.      OK the year 1998 was added in the text.

LNSA 66-67... Many studies are focused on fired bricks. 66 [4], [5], [6], [7], [8] [4] investigated the effects...I recommend combine the sentences into one and use references to literature in the form [4-8], it also applies to other parts of the article.

R9.      Yes it was done

LNSA  769...5.3. what effect on mechanical properties?..I recommend changing the size of the first letter of the figure name  and consider using a question mark.

R10.    Yes, it was also done

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

Regarding the facts mentioned in the submitted cover letter, I would like to take the following position.

R1. First of all, we wish to express our gratitude for your insightful comments, we appreciate the time and effort that you have dedicated to providing your valuable feedback on my manuscript. The article is certainly long, but we thought it would be interesting to present a broad vision of the state of the art and not to dissociate the current research into two parts. This is a review of the literature, which is why we have allowed ourselves to be more "prolix" than usual.

I consider the shortening of the article from the total range 1585 lines on 1547 insufficient. I demand repeatedly irrelevant parts of the article should be omitted and some more extensive texts should be replaced with a concise summary or table. On the contrary, I consider the number of 7 images and 4 tables to be insufficient, even though I am fully aware that it is a review. I request to shorten the texts by at least 25%, or if possible to divide the article into 2 parts. The mentioned scope will with a high degree of probability result in psychosomatic fatigue of many readers, making it impossible to read the article in one go, which in turn will make it difficult to understand the complex context of an interesting issue.

R2. The abstract has been revised to better reflect the goal of the manuscript and the authors' cross-referenced conclusions from the various research studies they conducted.

LNSA (Line Number of Scientific article) 11-12…The abstract still needs to be improved. I do not agree with the authors' general statement that "Bricks are the strongest and most dependable building material in the world..". This hardening only applies to some construction applications, which need to be specified in more detail. 

LNSA 24-25…"Waste brick production methods" it should be restyled, personally, I would use, for example, the formulation "to production methods of bricks  from the waste (specify specific types of waste materials)".

R5. We totally agree with the reviewer comment and suitable changes have been made to all figures and their names.

LNSA 1024-1028... Figure 7. Compressive strength for unfired clay bricks stabilized with lignocellulosic biomass ash 1024 and lime/Cement: 10%OPC-8%SBA (James et al. 2016) [99]...in my opinion indicating authors' names and numbers references are duplicating data, in my opinion it is sufficient to indicate only the numbers of references. This statement also applies to table 8.

The stated requirement applies to the entire document, and in all cases, duplicate data has not been removed. For example, LNSA 105-105 Also, Murmu and Patel [15] and 104 Al-Fakih et al [16]..., Eliche-Quesada et al 454 [77] (LNSA 454-455),...

There was no response to the following part of my review of the first version of the article. 

LNSA 267-269… The history of brick making dates back seven thousand years ago when bricks were made in the form of hand-molded earth blocks without compaction and dried in the sun [14]… I would like to remind the authors of the following fact. Çatalhöyük is a very large Neolithic and Chalcolithic proto-city  settlement in southern Anatolia, which existed from approximately 7500 BC to 6400 BC, and flourished around 7000 BC. In July 2012, it was inscribed as a UNESCO World Heritage Site.

LNSA 1271-1305…Conclusions.. considering the amount of work done and its quality, it would be appropriate to rework the conclusions. It is necessary general statements of the type "is a promising way to lessen the need for non-renewable clay, as well as to reduce the environmental risks and high costs. ,... to reduce the energy consumption" to be supplemented with numerical quantification by the authors of the objectified results or analyses. As already indicated, the results of the authors' research need to be compared with important articles by foreign authors. Before the conclusions, it is necessary to complete the discussion chapter, or make an extended chapter Discussion and conclusions.

The final requirements of the first review were not met at all (I would like to repeat emphasis on shortening the article) and (significantly improving the figures and tables) were only partially met. Although the second version achieves a higher quality than the first version of this article, it needs to be reworked for publication in a renowned scientific journal Applied sciences.

Author Response

First of all thank you again for the time and the deployed effort for examining our work.

Below are responses to the reviewer’s requirements:

Q1)     I consider the shortening of the article from the total range 1585 lines on 1547 insufficient. I demand repeatedly irrelevant parts of the article should be omitted and some more extensive texts should be replaced with a concise summary or table. On the contrary, I consider the number of 7 images and 4 tables to be insufficient, even though I am fully aware that it is a review. I request to shorten the texts by at least 25%, or if possible to divide the article into 2 parts. The mentioned scope will with a high degree of probability result in psychosomatic fatigue of many readers, making it impossible to read the article in one go, which in turn will make it difficult to understand the complex context of an interesting issue.

R1)      we understand the reviewer suggestion. However, when you investigate a work like a paper you make a plan as a block idea and it will not easy either to make it shorter or to cut it into two parts. We think that only few reader could read a review paper in one go, and it will be more benefit when reading it in three or more times. However, we succeeded to make it shorter by about 20% (1267 lines instead of 15800 lines). As it is a review paper, we can’t add more figures or tables because it is not an original research for which we can obtain new results, and we don’t like reproducing published figures or tables from literature because we should in this case demand copyrights from the owner authors.

Q2)      LNSA (Line Number of Scientific article) 11-12…The abstract still needs to be improved. I do not agree with the authors' general statement that "Bricks are the strongest and most dependable building material in the world..". This hardening only applies to some construction applications, which need to be specified in more detail. 

R2)      We agree and the abstract is rephrased to reach the reviewer suggestion (we hope so).

Q3)      LNSA 24-25…"Waste brick production methods" it should be restyled, personally, I would use, for example, the formulation "to production methods of bricks  from the waste (specify specific types of waste materials)".

R3)      Yes, we take it into consideration though the whole manuscript

Q4)      LNSA 1024-1028... Figure 7. Compressive strength for unfired clay bricks stabilized with lignocellulosic biomass ash 1024 and lime/Cement: 10%OPC-8%SBA (James et al. 2016) [99]...in my opinion indicating authors' names and numbers references are duplicating data, in my opinion it is sufficient to indicate only the numbers of references. This statement also applies to table 8.

The stated requirement applies to the entire document, and in all cases, duplicate data has not been removed. For example, LNSA 105-105 Also, Murmu and Patel [15] and 104 Al-Fakih et al [16]..., Eliche-Quesada et al 454 [77] (LNSA 454-455),...

There was no response to the following part of my review of the first version of the article.

R5)      Yes we agree and we take it seriously into consideration. However, in some cases and depending on the sentence structure we must write the last noun of the first author and recall the reader by the corresponding paper number.

Q5)      LNSA 267-269… The history of brick making dates back seven thousand years ago when bricks were made in the form of hand-molded earth blocks without compaction and dried in the sun [14]… I would like to remind the authors of the following fact. Çatalhöyük is a very large Neolithic and Chalcolithic proto-city  settlement in southern Anatolia, which existed from approximately 7500 BC to 6400 BC, and flourished around 7000 BC. In July 2012, it was inscribed as a UNESCO World Heritage Site.

R5)      OK. Thank you very much for the information and we added it in the manuscript.

Q6)      LNSA 1271-1305…Conclusions.. considering the amount of work done and its quality, it would be appropriate to rework the conclusions. It is necessary general statements of the type "is a promising way to lessen the need for non-renewable clay, as well as to reduce the environmental risks and high costs. ,... to reduce the energy consumption" to be supplemented with numerical quantification by the authors of the objectified results or analyses. As already indicated, the results of the authors' research need to be compared with important articles by foreign authors. Before the conclusions, it is necessary to complete the discussion chapter, or make an extended chapter Discussion and conclusions.

R6)      Really we appreciate this fruitful remark despite that it will make the paper longer. We add discussions, we more organized the conclusions and add perspectives in this thematic of research.

Q7)      The final requirements of the first review were not met at all (I would like to repeat emphasis on shortening the article) and (significantly improving the figures and tables) were only partially met. Although the second version achieves a higher quality than the first version of this article, it needs to be reworked for publication in a renowned scientific journal Applied sciences.

R7)      We hope that by this new version of paper we met the reviewer requirements.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 3

Reviewer 2 Report

Based on the incorporation of the changes recommended by me, I allow myself to rate the assessed second version of the scientific paper as follows. Reviewed contribution “Bricks Using Clay Mixed with Powder and Ashes from Lignocellulosic Biomass: A Review “ I rate it very good. Based on my experience in the assessed issue and subsequent deepening of my knowledge, I am pleased that the submitted fourth version of the article meets the decisive majoritymy essential requirements for a quality scientific article. I am fully satisfied with the implementation of the required changes, or credible justifications for disregard on recommendations, and I hope that I have contributed a little to improving the quality of the assessed scientific contribution.

In the final version of the article, it would be appropriate to remove the following minor formal deficiencies:

LNSA 399...Table 1. Studies on the production of bricks from lignocellulosic biomass ash waste materials through firing...I recommend reformatting the table (remove empty spaces in the rows, consistently replace decimal points with decimal points - 54.5,.. . ), also applies to table 3.

LNSA 546....Figure 5, Figure 6 (LNSA 583)..it is necessary to unify the writing of physical units when describing axes (in brackets, without brackets). This requirement applies to the entire document.

LNSA 648 ...Table 2. The chemical make-up of various lignocellulosic biomass ashes used in the production of fired bricks... In the table, it is necessary to replace decimal points with decimal points).

In conclusion, I would like to sincerely congratulate the authors on a very good scientific article and thank the publisher for the opportunity to expand my European scientific knowledge. At the same time, I keep my fingers crossed for researchers in continuing their, for me, very current civil engineering research, saving non-renewable resources through innovative solutions.

Author Response

Nice day to you and thank you very much for giving us from your precious time in order to peer-review our paper meticulously.

We agree with you on your three comments. So, we correct the present version taking into account your requirements. Tables 1 and 3 are reworked and we replaced decimal points by point, in table 2

Best regards

Author Response File: Author Response.docx