Performance and Reinforcement Mechanism of Modified Asphalt Binders with Nano-Particles, Whiskers, and Fibers
, Jiupeng Zhang 1, Jianyou Huang 1 and Dongliang Hu 2Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Review of the paper "Performance and reinforcement mechanism of modified asphalt binders with Nano-particles, whiskers and fibers" authored by Xing et al. (2019)
In this paper, the authors used applied modifiers to prepare modified asphalt binders. In this regard, the penetration, softening point and ductility of the following materials: aramid fibers, CaCO3 whiskers and nano-CaCO3 particles modified asphalt were evaluated. The rheological properties and microscopic morphology of modified modified asphalt were studied afterwards.
In my point of view, the authors investigate an interesting subject with good impacts to the field. However, the paper needs moderate/major revision before it is in the good shape for publication in Applied Sciences. Therefore, in the revised version I would like to see the following comments/concerns addressed and then I will provide my final recommendation of this work:
(1) How these different binders interact with the asphalt molecules? What type of interactions exist? Also, asphalt is a complex structure and it is important that the authors provide more discussions and thoughts in this regard.
(2) The authors need to compare the performance of three modifiers shown in Figure in Figure 4. Why the sensitivity of rutting factors decreases as temperature increase? I do not see a clear temperature effect once T>45 C. However, the authors think there is a huge change. Please consider modify the claim or provide stronger evidence if the authors really believe this is a huge change in rutting factors.
(3) Are these modifiers stable under the experimental conditions or at elevated temperatures? Could they undergo decomposition? That would be important to discuss the stability of these binders.
(4) What controls the morphology of these different binders and why their morphology is different? At least, provide some thoughts and possible reasons for the formation of different morphologies.
(5) Why did not the authors study broader range of binders concentration and study the effects on the results?
(6) How long did it take to measure the materials' rheological properties? Did the authors make sure the system reach the equilibrium status before collecting the data sets?
(7) The error of Multiple Stress Creep Recovery (MSCR) test should be stated or added into the main text.
(8) The experimental conditions need to be added into the caption of Figures 7 and 8.
(9) The manuscript needs to be proofread. Few grammatical issues as well as typos can be found in the manuscript.
(10) The journal has a high standard and its impact increases. The authors need to consider citing several papers published in "Applied Sciences".
(11) The literature review needs to be improved in the manuscript. The following research articles need to be cited at least in the paper:
(i) Energy & Fuels, 29(9), pp.5595-5599. (ii) Organometallics 38.2 (2018): 451-460.(iii) Physical Review E, 96(5), p.052803. (iv) Colloids and Surfaces A: Physicochemical and Engineering Aspects, 513, pp.178-187. (v) Langmuir 33.8 (2017): 1927-1942.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
My comments are given in the attached file.
Comments for author File: Comments.pdf
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
The article under the title: " Performance and reinforcement mechanism of modified asphalt binders with Nano-particles, whiskers and fibersr" refers to the very important problem of asphalt modification. The content of the manuscript is interesting and useful but it should be revised according to following recommendations:
1. In point 2.1. the authors should provide a detailed description of the materials used for the research. In addition, the information provided in point 3.3 and figure 6 should be moved to point 2.2 this will complete the description of the materials.
2. How did the authors assess the mixing time to obtain a homogeneous mixture?
3. What was the stirring speed? Stirring speed affects to the homogeneity of the mixture. In the case of SBS modifications, this is very important. Did the authors analyze this problem?
4. Did the authors assess the homogeneity of the mixture when mixing aramid fibers with asphalt? Aramid fibers tend to stick together in contact with asphalt.
5. Drawings are unreadable. The inscriptions are too small.
6. The authors in line 225 write "The reason is the density of CaCO3 whiskers 225 and asphalt is very different, and CaCO3 whiskers are precipitated." however, is not determined the density in the test results. Please complete the test results.
7. The result of mixing aramid fibers with asphalt (figure 9) should be presented in the case of e.g. 5x; 10x; 25x and 50x. This will allow you to evaluate the quality of mixing.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 4 Report
Very interesting and well written and structured paper.
Small refinements need in the Material and methods section.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
The authors have successfully addressed my comments. I recommend this work for publication.
However, in the final version: (1) proofread the manuscript one more time and (2) check the journal reference style to be correct.
Reviewer 2 Report
After the revision, the paper is greatly improved and, in my opinion, it can be published in the present state.
Reviewer 3 Report
All my comments have been applied.
