Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue

Article Menu

Share Help Cite Discuss in SciProfiles

Open AccessArticle

Peer-Review Record

Evaluation of the Prediction and Durability on the Chloride Penetration in Cementitious Materials with Blast Furnace Slag as Cement Addition

Constr. Mater. 2022, 2(1), 53-69; https://doi.org/10.3390/constrmater2010005

by Prang Subpa-asa¹, Nobukazu Nito², Satoshi Fujiwara² and Shigeyuki Date^1,*

Reviewer 1: Anonymous

Reviewer 2: Anonymous

Reviewer 3: Anonymous

Constr. Mater. 2022, 2(1), 53-69; https://doi.org/10.3390/constrmater2010005

Submission received: 10 December 2021 / Revised: 11 March 2022 / Accepted: 14 March 2022 / Published: 17 March 2022

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Thanks to the authors for their work in improving the article. Unfortunately, improvements have only been made partially.

First, the comment on the use of English was not just about the specific place (lines 152-192), but about the whole article. There are places where only minor improvements are needed (such as Introduction), but the following article has too many grammatical errors for the Reviewer to point out. The article needs to be corrected by a professional proofreader who will go into the text instead of making a mechanical correction, or involve a researcher from a concrete field who has a good knowledge of English.

The same comment applies to lines 152-192, corrections have been made following the Reviewer's previous comments, but the part related to English proficiency has not been done correctly and should be improved. The new chapters on XRD would also need to be corrected.

Also, this version does not take into account or respond to the content shortcoming identified in the previous review:

“The use of GGBS for cement substitution and chloride resistance are widely studied topics, but the Introduction contains mostly general information without referring to the recent findings. Also, the Results and Discussion section contains only results without any discussion, such as why did steam cured samples show such a small early increase in strength and such a large decrease in strength compared to water cured samples, and how does this correspond to what other researchers have found?”

The addition of XRD certainly improved the overall value of this article, but it has shortcomings:

Use of English 4.4. does not make it possible to understand the analysis carried out
Figure 13 - Incorrect caption
Table 4 - The second column does not give the name of the substance
Table 4 - it is not clear at which angle these values are visible?
Figure 13 - What is marked with a dark and what is marked with a light plot line?
Figure 13 - The characteristic angle and the substances being analyzed should be noted in the figure so that their differences can be seen more clearly.
In addition, other differences between A B C D could be included in the analysis, what substances are formed and how can these differences be explained?

In general, the article is approaching a stage where it could be published, but only after addressing the aforementioned comments.

Author Response

Response of authors: The authors appreciate all constructive comments from the reviewer to strengthen the study. The authors had significant revisions and added new data to improve the manuscript. To enhance the quality of the English language of the text, the authors had the manuscript proofread has undergone English language editing by MDPI (English editing ID: english-edited-39380). In addition, figures have been improved to clarify essential information. Responses are given as follows:

NO: 1 First, the comment on the use of English was not just about the specific place (lines 152-192), but about the whole article. There are places where only minor improvements are needed (such as Introduction), but the following article has too many grammatical errors for the Reviewer to point out. The article needs to be corrected by a professional proofreader who will go into the text instead of making a mechanical correction, or involve a researcher from a concrete field who has a good knowledge of English.

Also, this version does not take into account or respond to the content shortcoming identified in the previous review:

NO: 2 The addition of XRD certainly improved the overall value of this article, but it has shortcomings:

Use of English 4.4. does not make it possible to understand the analysis carried out
Figure 13 - Incorrect caption
Table 4 - The second column does not give the name of the substance
Table 4 - it is not clear at which angle these values are visible?
Figure 13 - What is marked with a dark and what is marked with a light plot line?
Figure 13 - The characteristic angle and the substances being analyzed should be noted in the figure so that their differences can be seen more clearly.
In addition, other differences between A B C D could be included in the analysis, what substances are formed and how can these differences be explained?

Authors response to 2: Thank you very much for the important suggestions. As the reviewer pointed out, the ones suggested by figure 13 and table 4. The effect of physical characteristics on amount of Friedel’s salt produced as determined by x-ray powder diffraction (XRD) part has been modified as follows: (p.12, line 370-390)

4.4. Effect of Physical Characteristics on Amount of Friedel’s Salt Produced as Determined by X-ray Powder Diffraction (XRD)

This study compares the result of X-ray diffraction data of cement paste partial with blast furnace slags at ages of 28 days. The results were compared before and after 28 days of the specimen’s immersion in saltwater and indicate that Friedel’s salt was formed. The experiment with different Blaine values and intensity counting for chemical product materials in Figure 13 shows nonreplacement, and replacement with BFS with 3000, 4000, and 6000 Blaine values, respectively, where the X-axis is count intensity and the Y axis is the angle of reflection. Chloride intensity determined from the XRD experiment is shown in Table 4, compared with aluminum oxide. When calculating Friedel’s salt, an indicator of delay penetration, an there was an increase in Friedel’s salt over time, as shown in Table 4.

The Blaine value was investigated, as the amount of Friedel’s salt that had emerged was confirmed as affecting the immobilization capacity of chloride ions. Thus, the result confirmed that increasing Blaine value of BFS was responsible for the increasing immobilization capacity of chloride ions.

Figure 13. X-ray diffraction patterns for (A) nonreplacement and replacement using BFS with (B) 3000 Blaine value, (C) 4000 Blaine value, and (D) 6000 Blaine value.

Table 4. Formula of each product and X-ray angle.

Blaine Value	Friedel’s Salt Substance Intensity (Counts)	Aluminum Oxide Substance Intensity (Counts)	Friedel’s Salt Correction Calculation
Non	1523	1021	1796
3000	1875	1204	1875
4000	2302	1288	2151
6000	2214	1225	2176

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

I support my previous decision. According to me the paper can be accepted in the present form.

Author Response

The authors appreciate all constructive comments from the reviewer to strengthen the study.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

The manuscript is difficult to read because of the poor English translation, especially because the terminology commonly used in cement and concrete science is not followed. I would strongly suggest reviewing of language.

The main comment is that the originality of the work is low, the effect of slag on the durability properties of concrete is well known. In the first part it says that BFS is used as a cement additive (which is correct, there are standard cements with BFS). The last sentence of the introduction however states that "BFS was not used as cement". This is not true, slag has been used in cements for decades. A lot is known about how slag works with an ordinary Portland cement. Based on what is known, the cement industry worldwide uses cement with slag and it is one of the most important types of cement in Europe. Therefore, unfortunately, I am not able to see any novelty in this work.

Additional comments

1) There is a lot of repetition in the introduction. The introduction about corrosion and chlorides is too long. It is not clear why steam curing was used.

2) How were the samples preconditioned for the Rapid Chloride Ion Penetration Test?

3) It is stated that quantitative analysis of XRD was performed. However, there is no quantitative analysis in the results. Quantitive analysis would mean you have calculated how much (%) of each of the phase there is in the sample.

4) The effect of steam curing is not properly addressed in the analysis of results - why was steam curing used, what was the expectation, the hypothesis?

5) The caption of figure 13 is wrong. It should be XRD patterns. These patterns should be analysed appropriately. It would be helpful if the major phases identified were indicated in the figures. Also, there are two patterns in each figure, which is also not clearly labelled.

Author Response

Response to Reviewer: The manuscript is difficult to read because of the poor English translation, especially because the terminology commonly used in cement and concrete science is not followed. I would strongly suggest reviewing of language.

NO: 1 The main comment is that the originality of the work is low, the effect of slag on the durability properties of concrete is well known. In the first part it says that BFS is used as a cement additive (which is correct, there are standard cements with BFS). The last sentence of the introduction however states that "BFS was not used as cement". This is not true, slag has been used in cements for decades. A lot is known about how slag works with an ordinary Portland cement. Based on what is known, the cement industry worldwide uses cement with slag and it is one of the most important types of cement in Europe. Therefore, unfortunately, I am not able to see any novelty in this work.

Authors response to 1: Thank you very much for the important suggestions. As the reviewer pointed out, the ones suggested by the reviewer are modified and added in the relevant parts of the manuscript. From literature review reveals many studies of BFS-containing concrete in various countries. However, few studies have examined its use in reducing chloride ion permeability as the main factor of corrosion reactions. Thus, this study utilizes BFS as cement to investigate concrete's performance in delaying chloride ion penetration, affecting corrosion reactions. Furthermore, an experiment was conducted to examine improvements in the performance of an alternative concrete using BFS different Blaine value as cement replacement, focusing on chloride diffusion on concrete with BFS. The study's result confirms the study's aim, which BFS affected chloride diffusion on concrete. Furthermore, This study aimed at developing products for use in the precast concrete industry toward extending the life of concrete structures, significantly reinforced concrete structures, in marine environments.

NO: 2 Additional comments

NO: 2.1 There is a lot of repetition in the introduction. The introduction about corrosion and chlorides is too long. It is not clear why steam curing was used.

Authors response to 2.1: Thank you very much for the important suggestions. As the reviewer pointed out, the ones suggested. The introduction part has shown the background of the study as corrosion and chlorides, which are necessary to introduce the study. In addition, steam curing was used in the study, which explains the reason in the conclusion part.

NO: 2.2 How were the samples preconditioned for the Rapid Chloride Ion Penetration Test?

Authors response to 2.2: Thank you very much for the important suggestions. As the reviewer pointed out, the ones suggested. The Rapid Chloride Ion Penetration Test (RCPT) part has been modified as follows: (p.5-6, line 214-216)

“The specimen was cylindrically shaped, with 100 mm diameter and a thickness of 50 mm, as shown in Figure 2. In addition, specimens were cured using the curing condition mentioned in Section 2.3.”

NO: 2.3 It is stated that quantitative analysis of XRD was performed. However, there is no quantitative analysis in the results. Quantitive analysis would mean you have calculated how much (%) of each of the phase there is in the sample.

Authors response to 2.3: T Thank you very much for the important suggestions. As the reviewer pointed out, the ones suggested by the reviewer are modified and added in the relevant parts of the manuscript. As the reviewer mentioned, the author is not sure that there is no quantitative analysis. The Effect of Physical Characteristics on Amount of Friedel’s Salt Produced as Determined by X-ray Powder Diffraction (XRD) part has been modified that quantitative analysis of XRD was shown in table 4 (p.13, line 390). For this study was focused on Friedel’s salt produced, therefore in the table was suitable of this study.

NO: 2.4 The effect of steam curing is not properly addressed in the analysis of results - why was steam curing used, what was the expectation, the hypothesis?

Authors response to 2.4: Thank you very much for the important suggestions. As the reviewer pointed out, the ones suggested. The conclusion part has been modified as follows: (p.14, line 403-406)

“Steam curing is preferred for the accelerated rapid hardening of concrete, high ear-ly-age strength, and improved (increased) construction speed. In this study, BFS re-placement was used to affect the high early-age strength by affecting its physical properties in the long term.”

NO: 2.5 The caption of figure 13 is wrong. It should be XRD patterns. These patterns should be analysed appropriately. It would be helpful if the major phases identified were indicated in the figures. Also, there are two patterns in each figure, which is also not clearly labelled.

Authors response to 2.5: Thank you very much for the important suggestions. As the reviewer pointed out, the ones suggested by figure 13 and table 4. The effect of physical characteristics on amount of Friedel’s salt produced as determined by x-ray powder diffraction (XRD) part has been modified as follows: (p.12, line 370-390)

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Thanks to the authors for their work in improving the article. One last comment from my side:

Lines 83-84 “The use of high C3A cement has good resistance to chloride corrosion but a high C3A content.” – incomplete sentence

Author Response

Response to Reviewer: Lines 83-84 “The use of high C3A cement has good resistance to chloride corrosion but a high C3A content.” – incomplete sentence

Response of authors: The authors appreciate all constructive comments from the reviewer to strengthen the study. As the reviewer pointed out, the ones suggested by the reviewer are modified and added in the relevant parts of the manuscript as “The advantage of using high C3A cement is good chloride corrosion resistance” on line NO: 83-84.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

This manuscript is a resubmission of an earlier submission. The following is a list of the peer review reports and author responses from that submission.

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The presented paper aims to predict the chloride diffusion on concrete with Blast Furnace Slag (BFS). The first part of the paper is devoted to experimental tests of concrete physical properties influenced by BFS and two curing types - water and steam. Results of the practical tests show the dependence on mechanical properties and durability against chloride ion attack. The minor second part tries to predict the time of corrosion attack of steel reinforcement. This part seems to be unsatisfactory and superficial. There is no information on how the prediction is influenced by the water content or degree of saturation and if the effect of water transfer (diffusion) was taken into account. It is suggested to change the title of this contribution, e.g., only to "Experimental tests of Chloride diffusion on Concrete with Blast Furnace Slag," or to extend the second part about the prediction by water transport effects.

The paper written in high-level English is well structured. Graphs, tables, and figures presented are clear, and they illustrate the problem appropriately. The theme is contemporary, and it follows up the research done in recent years, which is listed in references.
There are several mistakes and typos in the text. It is recommended to use a spellchecker for the whole text.
For example, in the abstract:

L15: "utilized" is written twice

L22: missing article: "on reinforced concrete structure" -> "on a/the reinforced concrete structure"

L24: "Blane" -> "Blaine"

It is recommended to accept the paper for publication after a major revision.

Author Response

Response to Reviewer 1:

Reviewer #1: The presented paper aims to predict the chloride diffusion on concrete with Blast Furnace Slag (BFS). The first part of the paper is devoted to experimental tests of concrete physical properties influenced by BFS and two curing types - water and steam.

Results of the practical tests show the dependence on mechanical properties and durability against chloride ion attack. The minor second part tries to predict the time of corrosion attack of steel reinforcement. This part seems to be unsatisfactory and superficial. There is no information on how the prediction is influenced by the water content or degree of saturation and if the effect of water transfer (diffusion) was taken into account.

It is suggested to change the title of this contribution, e.g., only to "Experimental tests of Chloride diffusion on Concrete with Blast Furnace Slag," or to extend the second part about the prediction by water transport effects.

The paper written in high-level English is well structured. Graphs, tables, and figures presented are clear, and they illustrate the problem appropriately. The theme is contemporary, and it follows up the research done in recent years, which is listed in references. There are several mistakes and typos in the text. It is recommended to use a spellchecker for the whole text. For example, in the abstract:

L15: "utilized" is written twice

L22: missing article: "on reinforced concrete structure" -> "on a/the reinforced concrete structure"

L24: "Blane" -> "Blaine"

Response of authors: The authors appreciate all constructive comments from the reviewer to strengthen the study. To improve the quality of the English language of the text, the authors had the manuscript proofread has undergone English language editing by MDPI (English editing ID: English-36422). In addition, figures have been improved to clarify essential information. Responses are given as follows:

No 1. The presented paper aims to predict the chloride diffusion on concrete with Blast Furnace Slag (BFS). The first part of the paper is devoted to experimental tests of concrete physical properties influenced by BFS and two curing types - water and steam.

Authors' response to 1: As the reviewer pointed out, the ones suggested by the reviewer are added in the relevant parts of the paper. The introduction has been modified as follows: (p.3, line 132-139)

BFS can improve the resistance of cementitious materials to sulfuric acid attack as the influence of concrete quality on diffusion coefficients is related to the concrete pore structure. The time dependence is due to the cement particles’ hydration and chemical reactions of seawater ions with hydration products, which reduce the pore structure. When BFS is used, the effect of strength on erosion by sulfuric acid is small; instead, high-strength concrete or mortar becomes more durable, owing to enhanced capacity to withstand sulfuric acid. Furthermore, BFS can suppress the penetration of chloride ions, inhibit steel corrosion, and reduce time-dependent strains [9-10].

[9] Subpa-asa, P., Nito, N., Fujiwara, S., Date, S. (apr 2020). Influence of Both Blaine Value and Curing Condition on Pore Sizes Distribution of Mortar with using Blast Furnace Slag. In The 7th International Conference on Engineering, Applied Sciences and Technology (ICEAST2021), of Proceedings of the API Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering. Applied Sciences and Technology (ICEAST2021), AIP Conference Proceedings 2397, 030001 (2021); https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0065955

[10] Subpa-asa, P.; Ta, Y.; Matsunaga, H.; Date, S. Basic Study on The Durability of Mortar Containing Blast Furnace Slag Fine Powder with Different Basicity. In Proceedings of the IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering. 6th International Conference on Building Materials and Construction (ICBMC2021), Singapore, 11–14 March 2021; Volume 896, pp. 119–117. Available online: Accessed date: 20^th July 2021

No 2. It is suggested to change the title of this contribution, e.g., only to "Experimental tests of Chloride diffusion on Concrete with Blast Furnace Slag," or to extend the second part about the prediction by water transport effects.

Authors response to 2: The suggestion by the reviewer is to change the title of this contribution. The title has been modified as follows “Experimental Tests of Chloride Diffusion on Concrete with Blast Furnace Slag.”

No 3. The paper written in high-level English is well structured. There are several mistakes and typos in the text. It is recommended to use a spellchecker for the whole text.
For example, in the abstract:

L15: "utilized" is written twice

L22: missing article: "on reinforced concrete structure" -> "on a/the reinforced concrete structure"

L24: "Blane" -> "Blaine"

Authors response to 3: The authors had the manuscript proofread has undergone English language editing by MDPI (English editing ID: English-36422).

Reviewer 2 Report

The subject matter of the work is not consistent with the title of the work. The authors touch on a whole range of topics (strength of specimens, diffusion coefficient, corrosion initiation time). The paper according to o the title is related to the impact of BFS on the diffusion coefficient.
The introduction adds nothing to the paper. It is necessary to write in the introduction what is the purpose of the work and what is the state of research in this field.
Work needs to be rethought. The introduction is about 50% of the paper.

Author Response

Response to Reviewer 2:

Reviewer #2: The subject matter of the work is not consistent with the title of the work. The authors touch on a whole range of topics (strength of specimens, diffusion coefficient, corrosion initiation time). The paper according to the title is related to the impact of BFS on the diffusion coefficient.

The introduction adds nothing to the paper. It is necessary to write in the introduction what is the purpose of the work and what is the state of research in this field.

Work needs to be rethought. The introduction is about 50% of the paper.

No 1. The subject matter of the work is not consistent with the title of the work. The authors touch on a whole range of topics (strength of specimens, diffusion coefficient, corrosion initiation time). The paper according to the title is related to the impact of BFS on the diffusion coefficient.

Authors response to 1: Thank you very much for the important suggestions. The suggestion by the reviewer is to change the title of this contribution. The title has been modified as follows “Experimental Tests of Chloride Diffusion on Concrete with Blast Furnace Slag.”

No 2. The introduction adds nothing to the paper. It is necessary to write in the introduction what is the purpose of the work and what is the state of research in this field.

Authors response to 2: Thank you very much for the important suggestions. As the reviewer pointed out, the ones suggested by the reviewer are added in the relevant parts of the paper. The introduction has been modified as follows: (p.3, line 140-149)

BFS was used as the aggregate to investigate the corrosion initiation on RC structures. The researchers focused on the physical and chemical attacks on RC structures during their service life and investigated whether any protections might be placed to mitigate the degeneration caused by these attacks. The concrete's performance may increase by including mineral additives in cement, such as silica fume, blast furnace slag (BFS), and fly ash [16].

However, BFS has not been used as cement. Therefore, this study aims to utilize BFS as cement to investigate the performance of concrete. Furthermore, the experiment was conducted to investigate the improvement of the performance of an alternative concrete using BFS as a cement replacement.

[16] Andrade, C.; Prieto, M.; Tanner, P.; Tavares, F.; Andrea, R. Testing and modelling chloride penetration into concrete. Constr. Build. Mater. 2013, 39, 9–18, doi:10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2012.08.012.

No 3. Work needs to be rethought. The introduction is about 50% of the paper.

Authors response to 3: As the reviewer pointed out, the ones important suggested by the reviewer are added in the relevant parts of the paper. In addtion, the introduction has been modified for some parts which is essential information and not necessary with this paper.

Reviewer 3 Report

Overall impression from this manuscript is negative, and it is due to the the whole study quality and its low correspondence to scientific standards of the work presentation.
The text needs, at least, rewriting. The manuscript needs a scientific editing. In many places, the references are needed; currently, there are multiple statements the confidence of which is not obvious.
It is not clear from the manuscript what is really new in this work. Effects of chloride ions on the durability and mechanical properties of concrete incorporating supplementary cementitious materials has been previously studied by other authors.

Author Response

Response to Reviewer 3:

Reviewer #3: Overall impression from this manuscript is negative, and it is due to the the whole study quality and its low correspondence to scientific standards of the work presentation.
The text needs, at least, rewriting.

The manuscript needs a scientific editing. In many places, the references are needed; currently, there are multiple statements the confidence of which is not obvious.

It is not clear from the manuscript what is really new in this work.

Effects of chloride ions on the durability and mechanical properties of concrete incorporating supplementary cementitious materials has been previously studied by other authors.

No 1. Overall impression from this manuscript is negative, and it is due to the the whole study quality and its low correspondence to scientific standards of the work presentation. The text needs, at least, rewriting.

Authors response to 1: As the reviewer pointed out, the ones important suggested by the reviewer are added in the relevant parts of the paper. The introduction has been modified for some parts which is essential information and not necessary with this paper.

No 2. The manuscript needs a scientific editing. In many places, the references are needed; currently, there are multiple statements the confidence of which is not obvious.

Authors response to 2: Thank you very much for the important suggestions. As the reviewer pointed out, the ones suggested by the reviewer are added in the relevant parts of the paper. Scientific editing and the reference have been modified as follows in the manuscript.

No 3. It is not clear from the manuscript what is really new in this work.

Authors response to 3: Thank you very much for the important suggestions. As the reviewer pointed out, the ones suggested by the reviewer are added in the relevant parts of the paper. The introduction has been modified as follows: (p.3, line 140-149)

BFS was used as the aggregate to investigate the corrosion initiation on RC struc-tures. The researchers focused on the physical and chemical attacks on RC structures during their service life and investigated whether any protections might be placed to mitigate the degeneration caused by these attacks. The concrete's performance may increase by including mineral additives in cement, such as silica fume, blast furnace slag (BFS), and fly ash [16].

Reviewer 4 Report

The article touches on a topical issue of using Blast Furnace Slag to prevent chloride diffusion into concrete that causes corrosion.

However, the current state of the article precludes any further review, as the number of errors and misuse of the English prevents the reviewer from reading the article.

Only after complete correction of the article, it will be possible to review it in detail. The correction does not guarantee acceptance, only a second review.

Author Response

Response to Reviewer 4:

Reviewer #4 The article touches on a topical issue of using Blast Furnace Slag to prevent chloride diffusion into concrete that causes corrosion.

However, the current state of the article precludes any further review, as the number of errors and misuse of the English prevents the reviewer from reading the article.

Only after complete correction of the article, it will be possible to review it in detail. The correction does not guarantee acceptance, only a second review.

Reviewer 5 Report

The paper conatins quite well known results of research. There is planty of papers about the use of GGBS cement in concrete and influence on durability.

The prediction of chloride diffusion in such a concrete was also tested - among others by U.M. Angst (look for set of his publications), Czarnecki&Woyciechowski, Kuziak at al. and many others.

Very important question - not discussed in this paper is an initial content of chloride ions in GGBS cement, which could be high - this is important form the point of view of diffusion prediction.

The effect of steam curing is also not common - how do you explain the low value after 28 days?

Table 1 – it depends on the type of GGBFS cement – this calculation is too general

Please specify the standard for cement which is the basis of this calculation an the content of slag in cement taken into account or please add a source of data in table 1

Figure1 – very basic information – not necessary in the scientific paper

Chapter 2.3 – the regime of steam curing is not fully understandable. Am I right that total time in elevated temperature was 8h? If so – what was the reason of lower strength of steam cured specimens? Usually the steam curing leads to higher values of 28-days strength for concrete with GGBFS… It is due to the activation of latent hydraulic properties of GGBS. Please discuss this phenomenon

Figure 8 –in what age the strength was tested?

Figure 9, 10, 11 , 12… what means “elapsed time”?

Fig 13 and others – horizontal axis – addition rate of what? (% of what –… of binder or… of cement?)

Chapter 6 Patents??? what do you mean by the title of this chapter?

Author Response

Response to Reviewer 5:

Reviewer #5 The paper conatins quite well known results of research. There is planty of papers about the use of GGBS cement in concrete and influence on durability.

The prediction of chloride diffusion in such a concrete was also tested - among others by U.M. Angst (look for set of his publications), Czarnecki&Woyciechowski, Kuziak at al. and many others.

Very important question - not discussed in this paper is an initial content of chloride ions in GGBS cement, which could be high - this is important form the point of view of diffusion prediction.

The effect of steam curing is also not common - how do you explain the low value after 28 days?

Table 1 – it depends on the type of GGBFS cement – this calculation is too general

Please specify the standard for cement which is the basis of this calculation an the content of slag in cement taken into account or please add a source of data in table 1

Figure1 – very basic information – not necessary in the scientific paper

Figure 8 –in what age the strength was tested?

Figure 9, 10, 11 , 12… what means “elapsed time”?

Fig 13 and others – horizontal axis – addition rate of what? (% of what –… of binder or… of cement?)

Chapter 6 Patents??? what do you mean by the title of this chapter?

Response of authors: The authors appreciate all constructive comments from the reviewer to strengthen the study. To improve the quality of the English language of the text, the authors had the manuscript proofread has undergone English language editing by MDPI. In addition, figures have been improved to clarify essential information. Responses are given as follows:

No 1. The prediction of chloride diffusion in such a concrete was also tested - among others by U.M. Angst (look for set of his publications), Czarnecki&Woyciechowski, Kuziak at al. and many others.

Authors response to 1: As the reviewer pointed out, the ones suggested by the reviewer are added in the relevant parts of the paper. The author has checked the citation, but the author did not find the publications matching this research and have not been modified.

No 2. Very important question - not discussed in this paper is an initial content of chloride ions in GGBS cement, which could be high - this is important form the point of view of diffusion prediction.

No 3. The effect of steam curing is also not common - how do you explain the low value after 28 days?

Authors response to 3: As the reviewer pointed out, the ones suggested by the reviewer are added in the relevant parts of the paper. Results and discussion as compressive strength has been modified as follows: (p.7, line 259-265)

According to the result, the addition of BFS influences the development of compressive strength. BFS had a low hydration speed at an early age so that the development of compressive strength over 28 days was slow. On the other hand, compressive strength was a significant development in BFS cement, more than Ordinary Portland Cement in the long term. For the curing condition, steam curing develops less compressive strength than water curing because the addition of BFS influenced by the curing temperature results in an accurate hydration speed for early strength development.

No 4. Table 1 – it depends on the type of GGBFS cement – this calculation is too general

Please specify the standard for cement which is the basis of this calculation an the content of slag in cement taken into account or please add a source of data in table 1

Figure1 – very basic information – not necessary in the scientific paper

Authors response to 4: As the reviewer pointed out, the ones suggested by the reviewer are added in the relevant parts of the paper. The author designed to delete as the reviewer mentions the table and figures every basic information that is unnecessary in the scientific paper.

No 5. Figure 8 –in what age the strength was tested?

Authors response to 5: The authors would like to modify the figure title of figure 4 (Figure 8 from the original version) as follows: (page 8 line 271)

Figure 4. The result of compressive strength in both curing conditions over 28 days.

No 6. Figure 9, 10, 11 , 12… what means “elapsed time”?

Authors response to 6: As the reviewer pointed out, the ones suggested by the reviewer are added in the relevant parts of the paper. The author has checked this word before. It is widely used in academic papers, which means the time passes through the experimental method.

No 7. Fig 13 and others – horizontal axis – addition rate of what? (% of what –… of binder or… of cement?)

Authors response to 7: As the reviewer pointed out, the ones suggested by the reviewer, are added in the relevant parts of the paper. Therefore, the figure has been modified as follows:

Figure 4, the horizontal axis is BFS replacement rate (p.8, line 270)

Figure 9, the horizontal axis is BFS replacement rate (p.10, line 306)

Figure 10, the horizontal axis is BFS replacement rate (p.10, line 309)

No 8. Chapter 6 Patents??? what do you mean by the title of this chapter?

Authors response to 8: As the reviewer pointed out, the ones suggested by the reviewer are added in the relevant parts of the paper—the author designed to delete as ‘Chapter 6 Patents’, which are not necessary.

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

The corrections and changes improved the paper quality significantly. The title corresponds to the scope of the paper. Mistakes and typos were corrected.

It is recommended to accept the paper for publication.

Reviewer 2 Report

The actual form of the paper was significantly improved in

comparison to the first one. I have no remarks.

Reviewer 3 Report

Despite the fact that the authors tried to revise the manuscript, the main problems associated with its novelty and scientific soundness remained.

Reviewer 4 Report

Although it can be seen that the article has been improved, it is mostly only a mechanical correction of English, without correcting the content, so there are still a lot of shortcomings and errors in the article, which the reviewer does not think should be corrected during peer review by the reviewer but should be done by the authors before submission. As an example, below are the 40 lines of this article (from 152-192) with 29 notes:

Line 154 – “Materials properties include a fine aggregate….” - The after-mentioned are not properties but raw materials

Line 155 – “…dry condition: 2.60 g/cm3…” - 2.64 according to Table 1.

Line 156 – “…the amount of SO3 was 2.41%...” – The amount of SO3 in what? Cement?

Line 156 – “…the amount of SO3 in level 1…” - Level 1 according to what standard?

Lines 156-157 – “the amount of SO3 was 2.41% (the amount of SO3 in level 1) as the amount of SO3 was more extensive, which supported early strength and decreased shrinkage.” – Wrong structure of the sentence and overall idea is not clear here.

Line 159 – “…of 2.91 g/cm3)” - 2.90 g/cm3 according to Table 1.

Lines 159-160 – “…cement mortar with the water binder ratio (W/B)…"” – just “water to binder ratio” or “water/binder ratio”

Line 160 – “”…of 0.50 wear was prepared.” – wear?

Line 160-161 – “mixed proportions” – mix proportions

Lines 162-168 – Unnecessarily paragraph for section “2.1. Materials Used and Proportions” , also contains errors, should be deleted

Table 1. “Properties” – These are not properties

Line 172. “mixed proportions” – mix proportions

Line 174 “According to JIS R 5201,” Physical testing methods of cement” [20,21].” - Should be “Mixing is done according to…” or similar

Line 176 “…on low for 60 s and high for 30 s…” - on low speed for 60 s and high speed for 30 s

Line 179 “The curing conditions were set to two levels” - Two different curing conditions not levels

Line 180 – “…was conducted in the water tank since the sample was de-molded for 28 days…” – was conducted for 28 days after demolding?

Line 180-181 – “… conducted at 7, 14, and 28 days.” - The are curing conditions, was is conducted at exact days?

Line 181 “Steam curing was pre-curing performed 2 h in advance” - It is not clear what is meant here

Line 182 – “…then fell at 10 °C/hour…” – was lowered

Line 183 – “…for 24 h in chamber,…” - What happened for 24 hours?

Line 183 – “”… and was carried out for 28 days.” - Steam curing was carried out for 28 days?

Lines 183-184 – “Curing was carried out in air under a constant 20 °C temperature and 60% humidity.” - This is referred to the period after the steam curing?

Lines 184-185 – “The test was conducted with steam curing at 1, 7, 14, and 28 days.” - What kind of test? If this is compressive strength then it belongs to the next section

Lines 173-185 2.2. Mixing Method – a diagram for the steam curing regime should be provided, it would explain it much better

Line 188 – What is summit mold?

Line 188 – “…summit mold was utilized for compressive strength testing.” - Molds are not utilized, but the samples are

Lines 188-189 “Water curing was conducted in the water tank since the sample was de-molded for 28 days.” - Belongs to a previous section

Line 190 “Water curing was conducted at elapsed times, which are the ages of 7, 14, and 28 days.” - Tests of the water cured samples were conducted at the ages of 7, 14, and 28 days?

Lines 191-192 “Steam curing performed as mentioned above was carried out at 1, 7, 14, 28 days after the 191 test was conducted.” - Tests of the steam cured samples were conducted at the ages of 1, 7, 14, and 28 days?

The use of GGBS for cement substitution and chloride resistance are widely studied topics, but the Introduction contains mostly general information without referring to the recent findings. Also, the Results and Discussion section contains only results without any discussion, such as why did steam cured samples show such a small early increase in strength and such a large decrease in strength compared to water cured samples, and how does this correspond to what other researchers have found?

The current state of the article, unfortunately, leads to its rejection, because even after correction, it is not in a state to be reviewed.

Reviewer 5 Report

Thank you for your answers. The present version of the paper is acdeptable

Article Menu

Evaluation of the Prediction and Durability on the Chloride Penetration in Cementitious Materials with Blast Furnace Slag as Cement Addition

Further Information

Guidelines

MDPI Initiatives

Follow MDPI