Novel Processing Methods of Low-Clinker Multi-Component Cementitious Materials—A Review
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for Authorsplease see the attachment
Comments for author File: 
Comments.pdf
none
Author Response
We would like to thank the Reviewer for the effort they have put into their report. Our responses to the specific comments, point by point, are appended below for your convenience the changes are highlighted in yellow colour in the revised version of the manuscript.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsDear Authors;
Thank you very much for giving me the possibility to contribute to the quality of your work.
I also thank you for this excellent review. Despite the length it was easy and fluid to read. Moreover, it was very interesting the idea to collect the effects of all non-ionizing radiations (magnetic interactions, micro waves, and ultrasonic waves) on cement setting.
I humbly suggest to re-think the title. The current title is too general. I would recommend a more specific title and directly linked to the content of the review: effects of non-ionizing radiations (magnetic interactions, micro waves, and ultrasonic waves) on cement setting.
I would also recommend to define the abbreviations when first used. Many abbreviations are first used in the text without previous definitions. Examples:
Row 159: SF
Row 163: SSF
Row 167: DSF
Row 168: C-S-H
Row 330: SCC
Etc…..
Nevertheless, it is very useful to keep the abbreviation list at the end of the manuscript.
Sincerely yours
Author Response
We would like to thank the Reviewer for the effort they have put into their report. Our responses to the specific comments, point by point, are appended below for your convenience the changes are highlighted in yellow colour in the revised version of the manuscript.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThis paper gives a comprehensive review regarding the use of ultrasonic method, magnetic method and microwave method to improve the workability and early strength of low carbon concrete with SCMs. The topic of the paper is novel, interesting and meaningful to research community. The paper is well-structured. The paper can be accepted after addressing the following minor comment:
Row 46-49, the authors mentioned that the disadvantages of replacing OPC by SCMs in low carbon concrete include deteriorated workability, worse early strength. Actually, a very important drawback of replacing OPC with SCMs is the reduced carbonation resistance. It is suggested that the following references can be cited for the completeness of the paper.
Experiemental and numerical investigations on macrocell corrosion of partially carbonated reinforced concrete with supplementary cementitious materails
Understanding the carbonation of concrete with supplementary cementitious materials: a critical review by RILEM TC 281-CCC
Author Response
We would like to thank the Reviewer for the effort they have put into their report. Our responses to the specific comments, point by point, are appended below for your convenience the changes are highlighted in yellow colour in the revised version of the manuscript.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 4 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe review paper shows an interesting topic of cement and concrete curing through the advanced physical treatment methods such as ultrasound, magnetic field, microwave treatments. The manuscript can be further improved, by a major revision from addressing the following comments:
1. In Fig. 3, the schematic diagram should be closely linked to the real photos.
2. Some terms of “d50 of 0.72 μm” is suggested to be explained. Please also correct some phrases “Previous studies [60]”; “Unfortunately, It may”;
3. What are the insightful thoughts after reviewing section 2 ultrasound treatment (US-T) methodology?
4. Figures: Fig. 5(a) is problematic, as it is unclear that the curve belongs to surface tension coefficient or decrease ratio? Instead of displaying the M-Water production in Fig. 6, it is more interesting to show the microstructural evidence (SEM, CT, etc.) for M-Water curing of cement paste and concrete in a figure. For “Microwave pre-curing may also reduce the porosity of mortar, …”, please find some figures of pore size distribution between MWT and untreated samples.
5. Some sentences have duplicated meanings and the repeat should be reduced. For examples: “Water used in concrete production has a substantial impact on concrete mix properties, influencing cement hydration, the need for curing to achieve desired strength, and concrete's workability and durability [73,76,79]”. Some references are also presented to show the duplicated remarks, while these statements lack the insightful thinking. For instance, many repeated descriptions about strength development of concrete treated by M-Water are written. The mechanisms behind the mechanical improvement are more of interest in the science community.
6. A deeper understanding of “The penetration of M-Water into cement particles during hydration improved activity and resulted in more crystalline hydration products” should be provided. How does the crystalline hydration products varied by M-Water?
7. In MW-T, how to determine the penetration depth of microwave in concrete? For “Compared to traditional steam heating, MW-T can speed up the curing process and boost the early strength of concrete [117,123,124].”, how intensive the MW is applied to increase the temperature for concrete structure in the curing process?
8. How does microwave curing alter granular C-S-H gel? More scientific descriptions of molecular structure are suggested.
9. Illustration of a proposed approach in Fig. 11 is good, but the figure can be placed in other section rather than conclusion. Will this curing system be expensive for use in the construction field, note that the structural element is usually in large scale?
10. The curing method via electrical field has also been reported and discussed in the following article: (a) Qiwen Qiu, A state-of-the-art review on the carbonation process in cementitious materials: Fundamentals and characterization techniques, Construction and Building Materials, 247, (2020) 118503. (b) Zhihan Yang, Youjun Xie, Jionghuang He, Xiaohui Zeng, Kunlin Ma, Guangcheng Long, Experimental investigation on mechanical strength and microstructure of cement paste by electric curing with different voltage and frequency, Construction and Building Materials, 299, (2021) 123615. It has been found that the electroosmotic swelling of C-S-H products occurs, and the pore connectivity reduces under a DC field. This type of curing method for low-clinker cement is worth mentioning in this review paper.
Comments on the Quality of English Language
Moderate editing of English language required. The manuscript should be checked and corrected thoroughly.
Author Response
We would like to thank the Reviewer for the effort they have put into their report. Our responses to the specific comments, point by point, are appended below for your convenience the changes are highlighted in yellow colour in the revised version of the manuscript.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 5 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsPlease see the attachment
Comments for author File: Comments.pdf
Author Response
We would like to thank the Reviewer for the effort they have put into their report. Our responses to the specific comments, point by point, are appended below for your convenience the changes are highlighted in yellow colour in the revised version of the manuscript.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsAuthors should revise the reference section according to reviewers' comments, The format of manuscript is very messy.
Comments on the Quality of English Languagenone
Author Response
We thank the Reviewer for their suggestion. We have conducted a thorough reference section and updated the references. The format of the manuscript was prepared following the guidelines of "Applied Sciences" using the Microsoft Word template file.
Reviewer 4 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe reviewer's comments on the manuscript have been sufficiently addressed. The manuscript can be accepted for publication.
Comments on the Quality of English LanguageMinor editing of English language required.
Author Response
Thank you very much for your review and positive evaluation of the manuscript. We have revised the manuscript carefully and tried to avoid any grammar, typographical or syntax errors. We believe that the English language is now acceptable for the review process.
Round 3
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for Authorsit can be accepted
Comments on the Quality of English Languagenone
