Prediction of Compression Index from Secant Elastic Modulus and Peak Strength of High Plastic Clay Ameliorated by Agro-Synthetic Waste Fibers for Green Subgrade

Sr. No.

Comment

Reply

1

Does the sentence in the lines 72 to 74 (“Both polyester and banana fibers act in a combined pattern due to which the clay shows adhesive forces between clay and fibers in addition to cohesiveness of clay particles.”) have a reference?

Reference has been added.

2

In topic 2 – Materials and Methods, it’s good to know where the clay came from, which region of the world, in order to the results could contribute with other studies with the same kind of soil;

The region has been mentioned in the manuscript. 

3

In topic 3.1 – Classification Tests, please show the granulometric curve of the soil;

The granulometric curve has been added in the manuscript.

4

In topic 3.2 – Compaction and CBR Tests, please show the

compaction curve at least for the clay;

The compaction curve has been added in the manuscript.

5

Please explain why do the authors used the 20% to 32% of

moisture contents to the undrained consolidated triaxial test (CU);

All the combinations of mixtures were studied at optimum moisture content (OMC) and maximum dry density.

But for the evaluation of effect of initial preparation moisture content on compression index (in consolidation test) and peak compressive strength (in triaxial test), the samples of clay were prepared on a wide range of initial preparation moisture content starting from 20 % (near optimum moisture content) to the 32% (near plasticity index i.e., 34%) to compare the results with Park and Lee (2011)

6

The test results showed in this paper are consistent;

It is submitted that the results in this research are precise compared with literature.

7

The topic 3.8 – Environmental Impact it is not the focus of the

work, in my opinion it must be excluded of this paper;

As suggested, environmental impact has been excluded of this paper.

8

Please take a look in general in the text to correct some

vocabulary and grammar mistakes. Some words used in the text

are uncommon, please review it.

The vocabulary and grammar mistakes in the text have been corrected.

9

Sr. No.

Comment

Reply

1

Does the sentence in the lines 72 to 74 (“Both polyester and banana fibers act in a combined pattern due to which the clay shows adhesive forces between clay and fibers in addition to cohesiveness of clay particles.”) have a reference?

Reference has been added.

2

In topic 2 – Materials and Methods, it’s good to know where the clay came from, which region of the world, in order to the results could contribute with other studies with the same kind of soil;

The region has been mentioned in the manuscript. 

3

In topic 3.1 – Classification Tests, please show the granulometric curve of the soil;

The granulometric curve has been added in the manuscript.

4

In topic 3.2 – Compaction and CBR Tests, please show the

compaction curve at least for the clay;

The compaction curve has been added in the manuscript.

5

Please explain why do the authors used the 20% to 32% of

moisture contents to the undrained consolidated triaxial test (CU);

All the combinations of mixtures were studied at optimum moisture content (OMC) and maximum dry density.

But for the evaluation of effect of initial preparation moisture content on compression index (in consolidation test) and peak compressive strength (in triaxial test), the samples of clay were prepared on a wide range of initial preparation moisture content starting from 20 % (near optimum moisture content) to the 32% (near plasticity index i.e., 34%) to compare the results with Park and Lee (2011)

6

The test results showed in this paper are consistent;

It is submitted that the results in this research are precise compared with literature.

7

The topic 3.8 – Environmental Impact it is not the focus of the

work, in my opinion it must be excluded of this paper;

As suggested, environmental impact has been excluded of this paper.

8

Please take a look in general in the text to correct some

vocabulary and grammar mistakes. Some words used in the text

are uncommon, please review it.

The vocabulary and grammar mistakes in the text have been corrected.

9

Sr. No.

Comment

Reply

In page 3 line 89, the authors mentioned that “Cc is an essential part of consolidation settlements models”, and in page 3 line 91-93, the authors mentioned that “is a significant geotechnical parameter

used in the determination of settlement of clay”, these two

parts may be duplicated.

Duplication of sentences has been corrected by deleting following:

“is a significant geotechnical parameter

used in the determination of settlement of clay”,

2

Some words can be abbreviated by quoting them again after giving their full name and abbreviation. For example, the compression index on line 102 can be replaced by Cc.

The ‘compression index” in line 102 has been replaced by Cc.

3

In page 6, Please place Figure 2 after line 178, usually with a text explanation followed by a figure. Similarly, Figure 11 should be placed after line 367.

Fig.2 and 11 have been placed after the relevant text of the figures.

4

In page 6 line 189, “CBR” should be replaced with “California bearing ratio”, as the definition of “CBR” was not previously provided.

In page 6, line 189, the “CBR” has been replaced with “California bearing ratio”

5

The relevant content on dry density and moisture content was not mentioned in section 3.1, but these two terms were mentioned in section 2.1, the logic of the previous and subsequent chapters is not closed.

The relevant content on dry density and moisture content has been mentioned in section 3.1.

6

In page 13 line 345, try not to display a table on two pages, such as Table 4 and 5. Please adjust their position in the text.

The position of tables 4 and 5 has been adjusted in the manuscript, so that table is not displayed on two pages.

7

In page 20 line 473, the content of section 3.7 is not mentioned in the first chapter introduction at first, so please add relevant content in the first chapter.

The relevant content has been added in the introduction section.

8

In page 21 line 496, the author mentioned that “increases the strength of clay up to 157%”, but this is not an environmental impact, please delete it or adjust its position.

The environmental impact has already been deleted as suggested in review.

9

In page 22 line 520, the author mentioned that “inferring feasible

use of CPB in wet seasons”, but there is relevant information on whether it can be used during the rainy season in lines 525-531. So please delete the content of line 520.

The line ““inferring feasible use of CPB in wet seasons”, has been deleted from conclusions.

10

There are still some minor errors in this paper, such as the word 'clay' is an uncountable noun and not being written as' clays', and trying to unify the font color as much as possible.

The comment is incorporated

Sr. No.

Comment

Reply

1

Brief Comment: Thank you for giving me an opportunity to review the manuscript “Prediction of Compression Index from Secant Elastic Modulus and Peak Strength of High Plastic Clay Ameliorated by Agro-Synthetic Waste Fibers for Green Subgrade”. This manuscript requires major revisions before final considered for publication in the Sustainability MDPI journal. My specific comments are

Manuscript has been revised as per the direction of the reviewer

2

Abstract:

The abstract lacks a clear problem statement and objectives of the study at the beginning. Please state it accordingly.

Keywords are too lengthy. Please revise them and add more relevant and short keywords.

Abstract has been modified.

Key words added

3

Introduction:

Line 33: Remove “)”.

Line 61: so many decades? How many years? Please be specific here.

The comment is incorporated

4

This section should be restructured and subheadings should be provided in order to differentiate the different sections within it.

Please provide location names and geo-coordinates of the sample collection sites.

Table 1: Please provide results as mean followed by the standard deviation of at least three subsequent analyses. Also, be consistent with the decimal points in each value. The same comment goes for data given in Table 2 and others.

Figure 2 and others: Define the terms (C, CP, CB, CBP) within the figure caption.

C, CP, CB, CBP has been added in the figure caption

5

Results and discussion:

The result section requires extensive reorganization and logical reasons behind the trend of findings. Comparison with previous studies is also poor.

An appropriate test of significance must be carried out for data given in Table 4-5 and similar. The mean comparison among different clay/fiber mixtures must be done and add significant marks/letters (* or a,b,c).

Results and discussion part is revised.