The Quality of ETICS in the Context of Energy and Social Changes (Case Study)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The paper addresses a very topical subject, the production, durability and maintenance issues of Exterior Insulation Finishing System (EIFS) applications. The author demonstrates advanced knowledge and command of the study area in which this topic is situated. However, the discussion of the theoretical underpinnings of the study is very shallow and only adequately positions this study in the current empirical research field. This has an impact on the research design, which, although clearly stated, has its key components (research questions, hypotheses and methods) not adequately developed and discussed (e.g., how can a single case be sufficient to generalise the findings?). Even if in the current status, the paper is adequately referenced and the findings appropriately discussed, the above shortcomings require its major revisions to all its parts.

Author Response

• A discussion of the theory has been added.
• The discussion has been extended.
• All chapters have been revised and supplemented.
• Appendix B has been added to explain the evaluation.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

The work is written clearly and presents issues related to the quality of building insulation systems, which are widespread especially in Central Europe. Nowadays, when we spend more and more time on saving energy, good user-friendly insulation systems are of even greater importance.

Author Response

without comments

Reviewer 3 Report

The paper focuses on the quality of external composite ETICS façade systems from a long- 7 term perspective in the context of energy and social changes and subsequent paths of housing construction, including reconstructions and renovations of prefabricated housing developments.

The paper is well written and the originality of the paper sounds good.

Author Response

without comments

Reviewer 4 Report

The manuscript discusses the quality of external composite ETICS façade systems from a long-term perspective in the context of energy. The following comments have been made in order to elevate the quality and readability of this manuscript.

1. The ETICS term should also be written in full form in the abstract.
2. Figures 4 and Fig. 5 should be replaced with high-resolution images.
3. The Material and method section is to be reduced up to line 114.
4. The image acquisition method and experimental methods.
5. The results section should start from 2. Analysis and Evaluation of Apartment building Number 1.
6. At the end merge the Result and Discussion section.
7. The conclusion section should be written properly to address the outcome of this study. Please write all outcomes is pointwise.
8. Could you please discuss the importance and significance of your study in conclusion?
9. Also, add the suggestion or recommendations in the conclusion.
10. Please improve the language and correct any grammar mistakes in the manuscript.

 

Best wishes,

Author Response

• The term "ETICS" has been added in full.
• Figures 4 and 5 have been updated.
• The reduction to line 114 has been performed.
• The methods were supplemented (image acquisition and experimental methods).
• The results section was adjusted as recommended.
• The final part has been supplemented and corresponds to the significance of the case study.
• The importance of the study was added.
• The proposal and recommendation have been supplemented.
• Grammatical proofreading were provided by „Comapany PRESTO Translation Services“, ltd. In Prague.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 5 Report

The present paper is a real case study based on sampled data of external composites ETICS facades and the consequences of biodegradations after years. Results are of interest showing the development of microorganisms in Norths facades between others. Despite the fact that sampled data comes from a high number of years ago, it was sampled in two houses which cannot be considered as representative for research work. It is a case study showing interesting results but an increase in the number of buildings analysed that let the authors develop a statistical study which may get conclusions that can be considered as representative. In this sense, the paper needs to increase the definition of the moist air conditions that let microorganisms grow and how to prevent this showing possible solutions.
Finally, the paper format is adequate but with too much short discussion At the same time, the paper format is good and the English style must be revised.

Author Response

• The conclusions and evaluations were adequately related to research from previous years. Probabilistic methodologies and risk analysis were used here.
• The issue of humidity has been supplemented (among other things, the issue of humidity has been described in detail in other articles by the author).
• The discussion was added.
• Grammatical proofreading were provided by „Comapany PRESTO Translation Services“, ltd. In Prague.

 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 4 Report

Please see attached pdf file. The structure of the manuscript is contradicting and should be improved.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Comments and additions - see Annex Review_4 and revised article.

 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 5 Report

After different changes, the paper was improved. Despite this,m their scientific methodology needs more buildings to get a statistical differentiation and characterization. but the methodology still can be improved.

Author Response

Comments and additions - see Annex Review_5 and revised article.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 3

Reviewer 4 Report

Thanks for modifying the manuscript as per the comments.