Oil and Gas Structures: Forecasting the Fire Resistance of Steel Structures with Fire Protection under Hydrocarbon Fire Conditions

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

See notes in the attached file

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Manuscript need English editing

Author Response

Dear reviewer,

Thank you for your comments and recommendations. Responses to your comments are contained in the attached file and are also highlighted in the new version of the manuscript.

Sincerely, the team of authors

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The revised paper presents test results regarding the fire resistance of structures exposed to hydrocarbon fires. The objective of the study was to provide a relationship between fire resistance obtained under the standard and hydrocarbon fire conditions. The issue of fire protection is very important in the petrochemical, oil, and gas industries, so it should be emphasized that the topic discussed by the authors has a utilitarian aspect.

Both the title of the manuscript and abstract accurately describe the content. The introduction very well introduces the reader to the topics discussed in the work. Both the subject matter of the work and the scientific basis are described in detail. Also noteworthy is the fact that many elements with different types of fire protection were tested. The obtained research results were also presented in a clear way and correct conclusions were drawn, and the goal of the work was achieved.However, there are certain elements of the article that need to be improved.

First, the research itself was poorly described. In the chapter entitled Material and Methods, assumptions relating only to thermals are described. There is no information regarding the elements that were tested, i.e. no precise information about what elements were tested (the role of the elements in the structure), and, above all, no information about the material from which they were made and, for some elements, no information about their cross-sections. Regarding the thermals themselves, the reviewer also did not find information on how the tests were carried out - were the elements heated in furnaces? how was the temperature of the test elements measured?

Information about the research can be found in the Discussion and Results section, but it is described there in a very chaotic manner, which, together with the deficiencies in the previous chapter, makes a full assessment of the methodology and research plan impossible. Moreover, the article does not actually indicate exactly which research the authors conducted themselves, whether only experimental or also numerical research, whether all experimental research was carried out by the authors or only some of it. Moreover, the abstract states that beams were tested, while the reviewer did not find a description of the beam tests.

The beginning of the Introduction section should be edited because it contains repeated sentences - lines 33 to 36 and 43-45, as well as 55-57 and 64-66.

According to the reviewer, the article can be published, but only after undergoing another review. This review should focus on revising the section of the article that details the study undertaken, in order to address the mentioned deficiencies.

Author Response

Dear reviewer,

Thank you for your comments and recommendations. Responses to your comments are contained in the attached file and are also highlighted in the new version of the manuscript.

Sincerely, the team of authors

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This article introduces novel techniques for forecasting the fire resistance of steel structures in the presence of hydrocarbon flames, augmenting conventional methods that rely on standard fire curves. The data is sufficient to prove the conclusion and mechanism. This article can be included in publication after minor revisions.

 

1.      Could you elucidate how your model stacks up against established fire resistance prediction models about reliability and precision?

2.      What is the performance of the proposed method when subjected to environmental conditions that may not have been exhaustively replicated in your testing scenarios?

3.      Could you elucidate the precise constraints of your predictive model and specify the conditions in which it might prove incapable of generating precise predictions?

4.      The content is plentiful, but some part of the reference literatures is kind of obsolete (in 5 years). Key publications should be cited as completed as possible. Please also clarify the novelty and application implication of your work in this section. I suggest authors refer to the latest literatures from “MDPI”, and other related journals. But please do not exceed 30% of all citations from Fire. Authors may see the following reference while revising. “Safety. 2024, 10(1), 31.; Fire, 2024, 7(3), 86.”

Author Response

Dear reviewer,

Thank you for your comments and recommendations. Responses to your comments are contained in the attached file and are also highlighted in the new version of the manuscript.

Sincerely, the team of authors

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

All comments had been addressed by authors

Comments on the Quality of English Language

none

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

All major points have been addressed and the paper quality was significantly increased.