Application of Sustainable Concrete in the Seismic Evaluation of an Innovative Type of Buckling Restrained Brace

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

This manuscript evaluates the “Application of sustainable concrete in an Innovative type of  Buckling Restrained Brace”. The manuscript is elaborately described and contextualized with the help of previous and present theoretical background and empirical research. All the references cited are relevant to this area of research and also adequate. The methods/analytical study are clearly stated. The result and discussion of the research poor and it should be improved. The conclusions part is missing.  The manuscript needs Major revision and require many modifications throughout the manuscript.

1. State the need of doing this research in the abstract.

2. State your recommendations after carrying out this research to the research community at the end of abstract,

3. The sentence “Non-conventional aggregates such as lightweight aggregate, recycled/reused aggre gates, recycled concrete, screening, crushed glass aggregate, waste plastic aggregate, recycled scrap tire aggregate, and recycled asphalt pavement aggregate are becoming more popular. They reduce waste materials, CO2 emissions, and embodied energy, therefore their use contribute to sustainability’ need more citations. You can use the following works

https://doi.org/10.3390/ma15124272

https://doi.org/10.1504/IJESD.2019.099491

https://doi.org/10.12989/sem.2022.83.3.387

https://doi.org/10.1002/suco.201900390

https://doi.org/10.1007/s13762-020-02900-z

https://doi.org/10.1002/suco.201900162

4. Introduction part is too lengthy and vague

5. In many places, the unit kN is used capital “K”. Correct it as small ‘k’ throughout the manuscript.

6. How your work differs from the past studies?

7. Give the novelty of your work.

8. Theory is more. But result and discussion is vey less.

9. Conclusion is missing

10. The manuscript structure is not as per Sustainability journal norms

Reviewer 2 Report

My comments are following:

1.Highlight the type of article in format of page 1.

2. Please revise the manuscript title to be more clear. 

3. Abstract poorly written and aims and outline of this study not highlighted.

4. Introduction section, please provide flow chart of this study. 

5. Figs. 8, 15, 16, 17, 18 and 19 should revise and provided high quality figures.

6. Manuscript not well organized, please re-organized the sections provided in this study.

7. Please check the Tables format. 

8. very poor discussion provided by authors, more details and explain for the presented data should provide.

9. Please check section 14 well.

10. Any conclusions for this study?!

11. Text need professional proofreading.