High-Permeability Wood with Microwave Remodeling Structure
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Dear authors,
I read and commented submitted manuscript "High-permeability Wood with Microwave Remodeling Structure". Comments can be found in attached file.
Comments for author File: 
Comments.pdf
Author Response
List of Responses
Dear reviewer:
Thank you for your comments concerning our manuscript entitled “High-permeability Wood with Microwave Remodeling Structure” (ID: 1394700). Those comments are all valuable and very helpful for revising and improving our paper, as well as the important guiding significance to our researches. We have studied comments carefully and have made correction which we hope meet with approval. Revised portion are marked in red in the paper. The main corrections in the paper and the responds to the reviewer’s comments are as flowing:
High-permeability Wood with Microwave Remodeling Structure
I would suggest change in title:
»Microwave treatment as method of improving the permeability of wood« or something in this line. Original title is confusing.
We change to the following title:
“High-permeability wood based on microwave processing”
Abstract:
12 raw material is natural wood? I think would be useful to use only one way of describing unmodified or unpuffed wood
We agree with your suggestion and changed to “NW”
16 what is material retention?
Maybe this is more appropriate:
“Liquid absorption performance”
17 is it correct phrase »20 times that«? Should not be »20 times higher than«?
We agree with your suggestion and changed to “20 times higher than”.
18-19 I do not understand this sentence “
The crack space 18 enables puffed wood to serve as fluid transportation or transfer station and a storage warehouse. «
We changed to “puffed wood to serve as a fluid transportation and a storage warehouse”.
Introduction:
25 Trees do not grow everywhere on Earth. Either be more specific or change the statement.
The description of this sentence is indeed wrong. We deleted this description.
36 en-hanced is written enhanced
Errors caused by article layout. We agree with your suggestion and changed to “enhancing”.
37 appli-cations is written applications
Errors caused by article layout. We agree with your suggestion and changed to “applications”.
42 this is unclear to me “impregnation of large-size wood functional modification.« Specify or paraphrase the text.
We have modified this description.
45 con-trolled is written controlled. Check throughout the text for the same type of mistakes.
Errors caused by article layout. We agree with your suggestion and changed to “controlled”.
50 clogged holes is a very laic way of saying. Is it meant vessel elements or other water conduction elements?
We have modified this description.
54 correct tis-sues
Errors caused by article layout. We agree with your suggestion and changed to “tissues”.
38-56 poorly written paragraph. Terminology is laic and unscientific, wood anatomy elements are referred to in a non-correct way. Strongly suggesting rewriting the whole paragraph.
We have modified this description.
64 correct mate-rials
Errors caused by article layout. We agree with your suggestion and changed to “materials”.
Materials and Methods:
67 missing scientific name for Radiata Pine
We agree with your suggestion and added to “Pinus radiata D．Don”.
69 use unbreakable space to keep number and unit in the same line (ctrl + shift+ space)
We agree with your suggestion and made a correction.
72 30% -50%, wrong use of spaces, should be 30–50%.
We agree with your suggestion and made a correction.
72 how was MC adjusted? How was measured in the first place? Why such a big MC span, 20% is quite a lot.
The moisture content of the raw wood was about 100%, and we adjusted the moisture content to approx. 40% by air drying. The moisture content determination method referred to ISO 13061-1-2014 Physical and mechanical properties of wood-Test methods for small clear wood specimens-Part 1: Determination of moisture content for physical and mechanical tests. Taking into account the uneven distribution of moisture in the wood, we estimated the moisture content of the whole sample by weighing.
In the preliminary experiment, the puffed wood with abundant cracks can be obtained when the moisture content of the wood is 30-50%. We considered that the uneven distribution of moisture in large-size wood caused such an MC span.
75 how was the drying process controlled?
The wood was put in the air drying shed for air drying. We determined the moisture content regularly to estimate the moisture content of the sample.
66 wood samples were with or without bark? How many samples were used? All samples were prepared in the same way with the same parameters of microwave processing equipment? If yes, why? Are those parameters considered to be the most optimal? Are they the same for every wood species?
The wood samples were stripped of bark. There were 20 samples in total. All samples were processed under the same conditions. The focus of this article was to introduce the structural characteristics and permeability of MPW, so there was no more introduction to the preparation process parameters. The mechanism of microwave treatment of wood and cracks is still under study. In a large number of preliminary experiments, we have obtained the best treatment parameters for this experiment. These parameters are applicable to most of the woods we studied, but they do not represent the best parameters for all woods. For example, for Chinese fir, lower microwave power and shorter processing time can obtain puffed wood with better effect.
77 previously in the text abbreviation for natural wood (NW) was already introduced. I suggest using it in the text, especially next to the other abbreviation (MPW). What forms a group? From the same sample or some other parameter? 2 pieces of natural wood are taken from the sample with the length of 300 mm? Consider preparing a figure explaining sample preparation and cutting.
We agree with your suggestion and reorganized this part.
MPW and NW from the same piece of wood were used as an experimental group. MPW and NW were cut into a size of 150 mm × 60 mm × 60 mm. There were 3 groups in total. Each group of materials contains 1 piece of MPW and 2 pieces of NW.
79 what does it mean that one piece was stored properly? Be more specific. What kind o fan outdoor environment? Which use a class? Be more specific. For how long?
We agree with your suggestion and reorganized this part.
For the NW, one piece was wrapped in plastic film and placed indoors at 20°C to prevent natural cracking, and the other piece was placed in an outdoor environment. The outdoor environment had an average temperature of -1.5°C, an average wind speed of 2.5 m/s, and an average relative humidity of 50%. The wood remains under the influence of sunlight and humidity for a month, and natural cracking occurs in December in Beijing.
83 interval of taking pictures?
Took pictures of the three experimental groups at the same time after the NW was placed in an outdoor environment for one month.
86 how the samples were sawed into 300 mm × 200 mm × 80 mm size samples from 150 mm × 60 mm × 60 mm, mentioned in chapter 2.2? Or I don't understand something.
The samples for CT test include the experimental group in section 2.2. The MPW was sawed into a size of 300 mm × 200 mm × 80 mm, and scan it for analysis of MPW structural features. The MPW, NW and cracked NW of 150 mm × 60 mm × 60 mm were scanned to distinguish the internal structure of the three types of wood.
87 model of CT scanner is CT450-TY-ICT?
Yes, it is.
95 I don't understand this »In the growth ring area 95 where two adjacent cracks overlap, the vertical distance between two cracks at the middle 96 position is taken as the gap between the two cracks.«
Two adjacent cracks have a certain angle, so there must be a maximum distance and a minimum distance between the two cracks. The original text describes the average value of the maximum distance and the minimum distance as the distance between the two cracks. We have revised the previous statement.
99 missing space in 10mm
We agree with your suggestion and added space.
103 name of equipment?
VHX-6000.
104 traditional meaning light microscopy?
Yes, it is.
102-112 some part is more suitable for discussion. Especially the part where authors are discussing the advantages of #D microscopy compared to the »traditional« microscopy.
We agree with your suggestion and put the content of this part in the discussion.
117 which other information? Are important for this manuscript?
We deleted this part of the description.
119 psia is not in the International System of Units, the correct unit for pressure is Pa
We agree with your suggestion.
119 instead of using holes would be more appropriate to use term pores
We agree with your suggestion and changed to “holes”.
121 impregnated or penetrated?
We agree with your suggestion and changed to “penetrated”.
127 phenol-formaldehyde resin? Or some other. I suggest adding some references to the statement »a commonly used material for wood impregnation modification«
Yes, it is. We agree with your suggestion and add some references.
130 samples were dried to MC 0% sound more correct. How samples were dried? How long? How MC was determined?
We have added this part of the content. Drying temperature was 103℃, drying time was 72 h. The moisture content determination method referred to ISO 13061-1-2014.
139-140 some extra spaces between chapters 2.6 and 2.7
We agree with your suggestion and deleted extra spaces.
145 what kind of dye?
Acid dyes for wood.
147 what is a water supply device? Water pump? Why 90 °C and not 20 °C as in the phenolic resin penetration experiment?
This is a device similar to a water pump. This device will continue to provide water after the evaporation of the water in the dye liquor is reduced.
This part of the experiment is an experiment on wood staining. 90 ℃ is the condition to achieve the dyeing effect with the depth of the wood surface layer of 1-3 mm.
Results
154 Figure could be mentioned in the Material and Methods part or moved there.
We agree with your suggestion.
160 is shown. In my opinion, there is a lot of mistakes using proper tenses. Consider English text review.
We agree with your suggestion and reorganized the expression.
162-165 this is repeated from the Material and Methods part and it is not needed here, because it is not a result.
We agree with your suggestion.
170 in the Material and Methods part is not mentioned that wood samples were weighed before and after microwave treatment.
We have made supplementary content in 2.1.
172 Also, size measurement was not mentioned.
We have made supplementary content in 2.1.
175 degreasing? Is resin considered grease?
We deleted this part of the description, which is of no use to the article.
177 approximately and so specific number does not go together. Is meant on average?
We agree with your suggestion and deleted extra “approximately”.
182 adding the »column« names would make the figure easier to read and there would be no need to have so long a description of the figure.
We agree with your suggestion and modified the figure.
197 in line 68 you wrote that samples had no natural defects. In line 197 you mention knots, which are considered a defect in the wood. So I'm not sure what you meant by samples without natural defects.
In fact, it was difficult to avoid the presence of knots in larger wood samples. In CT imaging, internal knots that cannot be observed on the surface of the wood were observed. We have revised the description of sample selection.
196-199 is it sure that light colour is for higher density and a darker colour for lower density? Because from Figure 2a it seems that juvenile wood close to the pith is very light in colour and I would expect to have low density.
It really is. In fact, a part of the pith of radiata pine wood has a high density, which is even higher than that of most of the late wood structure of the wood. This can be seen in Figure 3a.
204 was temperature and air humidity monitored in the environment?
We have made a supplementary explanation in 2.2.
220 I do not understand this »so that the longitudinal cracks were completely penetrated«
There is an error in this sentence, we deleted this sentence.
234 symbol for angle (°) should be next to the number; correct is 10.0°, correct where needed.
We agree with your suggestion.
234-237 is it a coincidence that every number has .0 precision or it was not measured to the decimal point precision. In this case report just 10°, instead of 10.0°
We agree with your suggestion and reset the decimal point precision.
239 were cracks always close to the ray tissue? Did you check this with light microscopy? I would expect that in ray tissue is the lowest tensile strength and that is why cracks form there and that would explain why extension lines would intersect near the pith.
We have observed through an optical microscope that most of the cracks appear near the ray tissue. But there are also a small part of cracks appearing in the tracheid tissue. The currently known research shows that the tensile strength of the ray structure has the greatest impact on the formation of cracks in the wood.
246 sometimes it is written cross section and sometimes cross-section. I suggest using the same style everywhere
We agree with your suggestion and changed to “cross section”.
262 figure 3 is nice. 3b is not the same square as in 3a, it is a bit moved, consider moving it or changing the 3b figure. 3f is confusing to me, having a circular cross-section with bark. Consider replacing the figure. The symbol for angle is wrong in the y-axis of 3f, I don't understand the meaning »most« in the legend. Is it meant mean/average or something else? Write how you calculated these values in Materials and methods.
We have corrected the figure. This part of the content was supplemented in 2.3.
Are there measurements for naturally cracked wood?
Did you measure cross-sectional moisture content? Do you think it might influence the crack formation?
In this article, MPW is mainly studied, and natural wood is not measured. We will consider adding the measurement of cross-sectional moisture content in future studies. Moisture content will affect the formation of cracks, and we need to sort out more evidence. What we know is that if the moisture content of the whole wood is too high or too low, it will affect the generation of wood cracks.
Source: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/293011139_Compressive_strength_parallel_to_the_fiber_of_spruce_with_high_moisture_content/figures?lo=1
271 Title of this chapter is not completely in line with what is presented in it. Consider changing it a bit.
We agree with your suggestion and changed to “mercury intrusion experiment”.
277 where the ray structure intersects with the axial tracheids is called cross-field
We agree with your suggestion.
278 what kind of toning treatment, was not mentioned in the materials and methods part.
Super-depth of field microscope can adjust the color management of the observation interface. Set the software parameters through the computer connected to the microscope to improve the image contrast. Figure 4b shows the image of changing the color and contrast of the platform, and the original image is placed next to it.
284 what are the top, middle, and bottom ray groups?
We reorganized the description of this part.
288 Figure 4e is uncommon for wood anatomy. Usually would be rotated for almost 90°, to have pores aligned vertically and the border between early and latewood would be horizontal.
We agree with your suggestion and modified the figure.
317 probably missing t at the end of the chapter title
We agree with your suggestion. Uploading the website caused a lot of text formatting errors.
322 and naturally cracked wood? Was also impregnated with resin?
Naturally cracked wood is considered natural wood. In fact, when we are drying natural wood, cracks are common. The natural wood that was dried after impregnation with resin also showed a certain degree of cracking. In this experiment, whether the natural wood cracked was not considered as an influencing factor.
Figure 5 suggesting to make a figure in this way to have a better comparison, 5i is hard to understand
We agree with your suggestion and re-adjusted the figure.
344 end surfaces were not sealed?
The wood was immersed in resin as a whole, and there was no sealing measure.
Control was naturally cracked NW or you used NW, cracked NW and MPW? It is not too clear to me.
Naturally cracked wood is considered natural wood. In fact, when we are drying natural wood, cracks are common. The natural wood that was dried after impregnation with resin also showed a certain degree of cracking. In this experiment, whether the natural wood cracked was not considered as an influencing factor.
368 missing space 1.5 mm
We agree with your suggestion.
383 missing space 9 %
We agree with your suggestion.
Conclusions:
Very much interested in the mechanical properties of this kind of wood. Will you perform more tests?
In this article, we only study the permeability and crack distribution of MPW. We have done some tests on the mechanical properties and will publish them in a future article.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Dear Authors,
your study is interesting, briefly written (that's an advantage) and it's of considerable scientific importance.
There are some minor comments:
L.25 is it really true? Arctic? Large desserts? Ocenas? Thats also Earth.
L. 57-60, method description - wrong section for it.
L. 118-119 SI basic units of pressure please,
L. 145 also volume units.
Chapter 3.1 sounds like a methodology. Please provide results here.
L. 234 -237 is "0" needed after the dots?
L.383 Measurement method of voulme change? Statistical significance?
And the weakest point of your manuscript: no discussion.
Discussion with other studies is needed to justify the second paragraph of the conclusions.
Please post a discussion to validate your research.
Sincerely
Author Response
List of Responses
Dear reviewer:
Thank you for your comments concerning our manuscript entitled “High-permeability Wood with Microwave Remodeling Structure” (ID: 1394700). Those comments are all valuable and very helpful for revising and improving our paper, as well as the important guiding significance to our researches. We have studied comments carefully and have made correction which we hope meet with approval. Revised portion are marked in red in the paper. The main corrections in the paper and the responds to the reviewer’s comments are as flowing:
L.25 is it really true? Arctic? Large desserts? Ocenas? Thats also Earth.
The description of this sentence is indeed wrong. We deleted this description.
- 57-60, method description - wrong section for it.
We have modified this description.
- 118-119 SI basic units of pressure please,
We agree with your suggestion and changed to “Pa”.
- 145 also volume units.
We agree with your suggestion and changed to “m3”
Chapter 3.1 sounds like a methodology. Please provide results here.
We have modified this description.
- 234 -237 is "0" needed after the dots?
We have modified this description.
L.383 Measurement method of voulme change? Statistical significance?
We have made supplementary content in 2.1.
And the weakest point of your manuscript: no discussion.
Discussion with other studies is needed to justify the second paragraph of the conclusions.
Please post a discussion to validate your research.
We have revised the text and added relevant discussion sections.
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
