Modeling the Properties of Sustainable Self-Compacting Concrete Containing Marble and Glass Powder Wastes Using Response Surface Methodology

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Dear Authors,

thank you for your manuscript, here will be following comments:

1. particular reason why SLUMP FLOW/SIEVE STABILITY are written in capital letters?

2. Lines 37-38: here you need to specify in which countries it happens; because for instance in most EU countries it is recycled at high percent; please add recent references;

3. in general the references cited should be updated with a focus on the last 10 years; a lot of research was conducted in years 2022-2023. Citations number is low for that period

4. Introduction is rather general and commonly used phrases would not be sufficient for it. Please elaborate it in a way it is unique just for your paper with a novelty and specific information written by you.

5. Adjuvant? the common term is admixture.

6. Sub-section 2.2: should be provided mix design in table with all materials densities, masses and volumes. What is the ratio between fine and coarse aggregates? please provide the complete mix designs first all 17 mixes from table 4. More derailed info should be given for mix preparations and documented with photos. 

7. In fact obtained results in table 4 are hard to believe, can you provide evidence with photos and incorporate all of them into text of your manuscript?

8. In general, all results predicted and experimental require more proof, for now those are just numbers without evidence. please provide it for both fresh and hardened properties testing.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

ok

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The paper researched the modeling the properties of sustainable self-compacting concrete containing marble and glass powders wastes using response surface methodology, which has the meaningful. But some revison needs to be completed.

1. In the introduction, why to chose the  response surface methodology to conduct the reserach on the properties is not systematacial. The related studies should be added to compare the merit and drawbacks among technology.

2.  The marble and glass powders wastes were used to form the concrete, what are the advantages? meanwhile, in the disucssion and analysis, the role mechnisam on properties should be explanied. 

3. Modeling of fresh properties tests was formed, and what do it rely on or based on? 

4. The relation beween predicted values and research values is how, which should be given and discussed in detail.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

The paper researched the modeling the properties of sustainable self-compacting concrete containing marble and glass powders wastes using response surface methodology, which has the meaningful. But some revison needs to be completed.

1. In the introduction, why to chose the  response surface methodology to conduct the reserach on the properties is not systematacial. The related studies should be added to compare the merit and drawbacks among technology.

2.  The marble and glass powders wastes were used to form the concrete, what are the advantages? meanwhile, in the disucssion and analysis, the role mechnisam on properties should be explanied. 

3. Modeling of fresh properties tests was formed, and what do it rely on or based on? 

4. The relation beween predicted values and research values is how, which should be given and discussed in detail.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This article experimentally explores the fresh and hardened characteristics of self-compacting concrete (SCC) through statistical modeling, focusing mainly on how incorporating waste marble powder and glass powder to replace fine aggregate affects the properties of SCC. The paper is well structured. The content and the delivery look excellent. 

1. Check for minor grammar mistakes and formatting errors.

2. I have noticed a variation in the notation used to represent p-values, with instances of "p-value," "p-Value," "P-value," "P-VALUE," "p," and "P" appearing interchangeably throughout the manuscript. Consistency in scientific writing, especially in statistical notation, is crucial for clarity and to avoid potential misunderstandings among readers.

3. The authors should provide a more detailed description of the experimental methods, how the experimental rests were obtained, tests used to evaluate the fresh properties of SCC, namely the Slump Flow Test, L-Box Test, and Sieve Stability Test, and the hardened properties tests.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

no further commentso

Comments on the Quality of English Language

ok