Next Article in Journal
Precast Concrete Building Construction and Envelope Thermal Behavior: A Case Study on Portuguese Public Social Housing
Next Article in Special Issue
Construction Site Utilization Planning: A Process Based upon Industry Best Practices
Previous Article in Journal
Rheology, Mechanical Properties and Porosity of Ternary Alkali-Activated Binders Based on Mining Mud Waste with Waste Glass and Metakaolin
Previous Article in Special Issue
Reality Capture of Buildings Using 3D Laser Scanners
 
 
Article
Peer-Review Record

Thermal Analysis of Mass Concrete Containing Ground Granulated Blast Furnace Slag

CivilEng 2021, 2(1), 254-270; https://doi.org/10.3390/civileng2010014
by Guadalupe Leon and Hung-Liang (Roger) Chen *
Reviewer 1: Anonymous
Reviewer 2: Anonymous
Reviewer 3: Anonymous
CivilEng 2021, 2(1), 254-270; https://doi.org/10.3390/civileng2010014
Submission received: 19 January 2021 / Revised: 21 February 2021 / Accepted: 2 March 2021 / Published: 17 March 2021
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Advances in Civil Engineering)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The work concerns the significant engineering problem, as temperature rise due to the hydration process in mass concrete. Thus, the topic of the article is very interesting. Generally, it is a nice study of the thermal behaviour of mass concrete made of GGBFS binder.

My main critical comments relate to:

There are no references to recently published articles (for examples see articles published “Materials” journal and related to mass/massive concrete as well articles in other journals focused on low clinker cements, activation energy, hydration heat). The Introduction is not well constructed. It is too short, there is no need to discuss the existing softwares because this is not the topic of the article. The focus should be on reviewing the properties of slag concrete/ mass concrete that are available in the literature.

It is also difficult to identify the novelty of the work comparing to the existing research - the aim of the research was not clearly defined. Therefore, in Introduction the originality of the article should be described, addressing the relationship to the existing research works. The references should be updated with recently published articles.

Likewise, the Conclusions should not merely summarize the scope of the article, but state the original conclusions of the research.

Detailed comments:

Please decide about unit for temperature (Equation – line 51) – K or oC ? By the way there is no number of this equation.

Why the reference temperature is 296K?

Please add the calculated values of: ultimate heat of the binder, ultimate degree of hydration.

Activation energy  -  describe the method of the calculation (the different methods can be used)

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

Please see the attachment for a point-by-point response to your comments. Changes in the manuscript are highlighted in yellow in the response file.

Thank you

 

 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

  1. Request for clarification what does cem - total cementitious content mean; in different parts of the world it is interpreted differently
  2. Row 111 PC3S… .. PC4AF - in many countries it concerns the Portland cement phase composition, it will be more universal.
  3. Table 2 - the concrete mix contained approx. 6% air / Have chemical admixtures been used; if so, what type?
  4. The heat of cement hydration depends mainly on its mineral composition and the degree of grinding (specific surface). The quality of the slag is determined by the high content of the glass phase and the degree of grinding. In my opinion for the proper assessment of the analyzes performed Table 3 should be supplemented with the above-mentioned properties.
  5. In the entire section presenting the results of the research, the authors very often refer to the literature. This makes the analysis of the published results very difficult. In the opinion of the reviewer, the relevant information from the literature should be provided with reference to the author.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

Please see the attachment for a point-by-point response to your comments. Changes in the manuscript are highlighted in yellow in the response file.

Thank you

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

The authors shared a very nice study. I would have been interesting to apply the proposed model also to other mixes but it's understandable that the authors focused on one mix only. Further minor comments: 

1) please provide information related to the lateral position of the temperature sensors in Fig 5

2)line 289: the precision is suggesting an unrealistic accuracy

3) check grammar in line 325

 

 

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

Please see the attachment with a point-by-point response to your comments. Changes in the manuscript are highlighted in yellow in the response file.

Thank you

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

I accept the article in the present form

Back to TopTop