Experimental and Numerical Study on Flexural Behavior of Concrete Beams Using Notches and Repair Materials
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThis paper discusses the flexural behavior of concrete beams with notch and analyzes the enhancement effects of three strengthening materials. This research demonstrates a certain level of innovation, but the following aspects require further modification and improvement:
1. The introduction is too lengthy and lacks emphasis on the necessity and innovation of this research.
2. The notch size in Figure 2(b) is exaggerated, deviating significantly from the actual design dimensions.
3. The majority of Lines 199-245 are from the abaqus user manual and there is no need to include them in this manuscript.
4. Section 5.2 needs an explanation of why the strengthening effect of bacterial mortar is superior to that of cement mortar.
5. In Figure 11, regardless of the strengthening material used, the simulated ultimate loads are nearly identical (approximately 8.8 kN). This discrepancy with the experimental results is too significant, and the authors need to provide an explanation for this.
Comments on the Quality of English LanguageThe quality needs to be further improved.
Author Response
Response to Review Comments
(Manuscript ID: sustainability-2882832)
EXPERIMENTAL AND NUMERICAL STUDY ON FLEXURAL BEHAVIOR OF CONCRETE BEAM WITH NOTCH AND REPAIRING MATERIALS
Waseem Khan, Saleem Akhtar, Aruna Rawat, Anindya Basu
We are very grateful to the reviewers for their in-depth and thorough review of the manuscript titled “EXPERIMENTAL AND NUMERICAL STUDY ON FLEXURAL BEHAVIOR OF CONCRETE BEAM WITH NOTCH AND REPAIRING MATERIALS” (sustainability-2882832) authored by Waseem Khan, Saleem Akhtar, Aruna Rawat, Anindya Basu in Sustainability. The suggestions given by the reviewers have been quite important and therefore they have properly been incorporated in this revision of the manuscript. Further, to distinguish the corresponding major changes made in the main manuscript document from rest of the original text, those are highlighted with blue color font. We hope that the revisions have improved the manuscript to a level of the satisfaction of the reviewers and editor. Number-wise answers to the specific comments are attached .
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe submitted Essay with the Manuscript Number: "sustainability-2882832" and the title " Experimental and Numerical Study on Flexural Behavior of Concrete Beam with Notch and Repairing Materials" is an interesting research project that investigates the flexural behavior of concrete beams under different loading conditions and the effectiveness of various repair materials in enhancing the mechanical behavior. The study combines experimental testing and numerical analysis using the Concrete Damage Plasticity (CDP) model to compare and validate the results. By investigating various width-to-depth ratios of notches and comparing experimental results with Finite Element Method (FEM) simulations using the Concrete Damage Plasticity (CDP) model, the study has tried to establish a correlation between experimental and numerical results.
The results showed a reduction in load capacity as notch size increased, with bacterial mortar surpassing cement mortar and adhesive in terms of repair efficacy. Furthermore, the study accentuates the criticality of repair substance selection, considering variables such as repair duration, alterations in structural rigidity, tensile strength, ductility, longevity, economic considerations, and occupational safety.
The investigation presents an interesting topic. Nevertheless, segments require enhancement to conform to the requisite scientific benchmarks. It is advised to heed the ensuing observations and recommendations.
1. The introduction offers a foundational background, but the literature review seems somewhat constrained. To enhance the study's objectives, it is recommended to incorporate the following pertinent subjects:
(a) The latest advancement in the experimental exploration of mechanical characteristics of concrete beams also involves investigating and monitoring the damage using various nondestructive evaluation techniques.
(b) It is crucial to incorporate the fracture characteristics of the microstructure of cementitious specimens after mechanical testing, as this plays a significant role in comprehending the crack path during damage propagation on the fracture surface.
(c) Employing nondestructive techniques that account for the dispersion of fracture energy across the microstructure is essential for a deeper insight into the crack propagation paths during damage distribution on the fracture surface.
Relevant scholarly articles can be referenced to provide a comprehensive context and support for these critical areas, enriching the literature review and reinforcing the study's underpinnings.
-"Acoustic monitoring for the evaluation of concrete structures and materials," in Acoustic Emission and Related Nondestructive Evaluation Techniques in the Fracture Mechanics of Concrete (Second Edition), 2021.
-"Investigation of a new strengthening technique for RC deep beams using carbon FRP ropes as transverse reinforcements," Fibers, 2018.
2. All abbreviations should be named at the beginning of usage.
3. Better English and syntax are needed in the manuscript
4. The fonts, especially at the tables, are larger than the manuscript text. Also, the presentation of the document should be corrected according to the journal's requirements.
5. The expression should be corrected in the abstract: "the performance of the bacterial mortar in terms of the ultimate load was more." What was it more?
6. What are the dimensions of the concrete beams produced? What is the number of different specimens tested?
7. Figure 4 (e) shows a three-point bending test. How have the notches been made? A more detailed description is needed.
8. All the variables and equations presented should be described and appropriately named. A notation list presented in a new table could be helpful.
9. In Figure 8, why is there a big difference between the experimental and theoretical ultimate load in the solid beam rather than the notched beam? A theoretical explanation is needed.
10. A more detailed theoretical explanation is needed as to why, in Figure 11, the adhesive does not seem to present validation among the numerical and experimental results.
11. The innovation of the study is not clearly presented and justified.
Comments on the Quality of English LanguageExtensive editing of English language required
Author Response
Response to Review Comments
(Manuscript ID: sustainability-2882832)
EXPERIMENTAL AND NUMERICAL STUDY ON FLEXURAL BEHAVIOR OF CONCRETE BEAM WITH NOTCH AND REPAIRING MATERIALS
Waseem Khan, Saleem Akhtar, Aruna Rawat, Anindya Basu
We are very grateful to the reviewers for their in-depth and thorough review of the manuscript titled “EXPERIMENTAL AND NUMERICAL STUDY ON FLEXURAL BEHAVIOR OF CONCRETE BEAM WITH NOTCH AND REPAIRING MATERIALS” (sustainability-2882832) authored by Waseem Khan, Saleem Akhtar, Aruna Rawat, Anindya Basu in Sustainability. The suggestions given by the reviewers have been quite important and therefore they have properly been incorporated in this revision of the manuscript. Further, to distinguish the corresponding major changes made in the main manuscript document from rest of the original text, those are highlighted with blue color font. We hope that the revisions have improved the manuscript to a level of the satisfaction of the reviewers and editor. Number-wise answers to the specific comments given by the reviewers are attached.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe submitted manuscript “sustainability-2882832” entitled: “Experimental and Numerical Study on Flexural Behavior of Concrete Beam with Notch and Repairing Materials” an experimental and numerical study on the flexural behavior of concrete beams with notches and various repairing materials. The study aimed to investigate the ultimate flexural load of concrete beams with different width to depth ratios of notches under one-point loading. Additionally, the performance of repair materials (cement mortar, bacterial mortar, and adhesive) on notch concrete beams was examined. Concrete beam specimens were tested under one-point loading using a servo-hydraulic testing machine. A numerical analysis using the Concrete Damage Plasticity (CDP) model was conducted to simulate the behavior of the beams. In general, the submitted Article is very weak for publication as there are several disadvantages and limitations to consider:
1. The manuscript does not specify the exact number of experimental specimens used in the study. A small sample size could limit the generalizability of the findings and may not fully represent the variability in real-world conditions. Can you provide more details on the experimental setup, including the number of concrete beam specimens tested and testing procedures?
2. How were the properties of the repair materials (cement mortar, bacterial mortar, adhesive) determined, and what criteria were used to select these materials for the study?
3. What considerations were taken into account when selecting the range of notch sizes for the concrete beams, and how do these notch sizes relate to real-world structural conditions?
4. The study focuses on a specific set of parameters, such as notch sizes and repair materials. The simplification of conditions may not capture the full complexity of real-world scenarios where multiple factors can influence the behavior of concrete structures.
5. Some details, such as the exact testing procedures, material properties, and boundary conditions, are not fully described in the provided excerpts. More comprehensive information would provide a clearer understanding of the research methodology and results.
6. The numerical analysis using the Concrete Damage Plasticity (CDP) model relies on certain assumptions and input parameters. Inaccuracies in these assumptions or parameters could affect the accuracy of the numerical results and their correlation with experimental data. Could you elaborate on the assumptions and parameters used in the numerical modeling with the Concrete Damage Plasticity (CDP) model? How were these parameters validated or calibrated against experimental data?
7. How did the authors select the mesh size? Was there any parametric analysis conducted?
8. How did the authors calibrate the FE model to verify the accuracy of the results provided?
9. It is not clear how many different scenarios were run. Providing also a table of results along with the diagrams would make it easier for the reader.
10. On what basis di the authors select the particular cases to examine?
11. The authors have used the well-known CDP model without any modifications, which is acceptable, however there is no reason to include the whole CDP model as described in the ABAQUS manual or elsewhere. There are many publications on the CDP model and the authors can refer to these or juct the ABAQUS manual. All the equations and diagrams from part 3 (line 187 to line 242 should be deleted as they do not add anything new to the research.
12. The manuscript has also serious flaws and the overall quality, including value of contribution, methodology and presentation style is very low for a typical journal paper. I found the text difficult to understand and most of the figures are in low quality and must be replaced.
13. How do you envision the findings of this research contributing to practical applications in the field of concrete structure repair and strengthening? Are there specific recommendations for engineers or practitioners based on the study results?
Comments on the Quality of English LanguageEnglish needs to be edited. SOme sentences are too long and difficult to follow. There are several syntax error. Please revise.
Author Response
Response to Review Comments
(Manuscript ID: sustainability-2882832)
EXPERIMENTAL AND NUMERICAL STUDY ON FLEXURAL BEHAVIOR OF CONCRETE BEAM WITH NOTCH AND REPAIRING MATERIALS
Waseem Khan, Saleem Akhtar, Aruna Rawat, Anindya Basu
We are very grateful to the reviewers for their in-depth and thorough review of the manuscript titled “EXPERIMENTAL AND NUMERICAL STUDY ON FLEXURAL BEHAVIOR OF CONCRETE BEAM WITH NOTCH AND REPAIRING MATERIALS” (sustainability-2882832) authored by Waseem Khan, Saleem Akhtar, Aruna Rawat, Anindya Basu in Sustainability. The suggestions given by the reviewers have been quite important and therefore they have properly been incorporated in this revision of the manuscript. Further, to distinguish the corresponding major changes made in the main manuscript document from rest of the original text, those are highlighted with blue color font. We hope that the revisions have improved the manuscript to a level of the satisfaction of the reviewers and editor. Number-wise answers to the specific comments given by the reviewers are enclosed.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe current manuscript is acceptable.
Author Response
Response to Review Comments
(Manuscript ID: sustainability-2882832)
EXPERIMENTAL AND NUMERICAL STUDY ON FLEXURAL BEHAVIOR OF CONCRETE BEAM WITH NOTCH AND REPAIRING MATERIALS
Waseem Khan, Saleem Akhtar, Aruna Rawat, Anindya Basu
We are very grateful to the reviewers for their in-depth and thorough review of the manuscript titled “EXPERIMENTAL AND NUMERICAL STUDY ON FLEXURAL BEHAVIOR OF CONCRETE BEAM WITH NOTCH AND REPAIRING MATERIALS” (sustainability-2882832) authored by Waseem Khan, Saleem Akhtar, Aruna Rawat, Anindya Basu in Sustainability. The suggestions given by the reviewers have been quite important and therefore they have properly been incorporated in this second revision of the manuscript. Further, to distinguish the corresponding major changes made in the main manuscript document from rest of the original text, those are highlighted with blue color font. We hope that the revisions have improved the manuscript to a level of the satisfaction of the reviewers and editor. Number-wise answers to the specific comments given by the reviewers are provided below.
RESPONSE TO REVIEWER 1 COMMENTS
The current manuscript is acceptable.
Once again, the authors are thankful to the reviewer for the valuable comments. Thankfully, the changes have improved the quality of the manuscript significantly.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe answers to the comments and the modifications of the revised manuscript are accurate and reliable. Consequently, the revised paper is suitable for publishing.
Author Response
Response to Review Comments
(Manuscript ID: sustainability-2882832)
EXPERIMENTAL AND NUMERICAL STUDY ON FLEXURAL BEHAVIOR OF CONCRETE BEAM WITH NOTCH AND REPAIRING MATERIALS
Waseem Khan, Saleem Akhtar, Aruna Rawat, Anindya Basu
We are very grateful to the reviewers for their in-depth and thorough review of the manuscript titled “EXPERIMENTAL AND NUMERICAL STUDY ON FLEXURAL BEHAVIOR OF CONCRETE BEAM WITH NOTCH AND REPAIRING MATERIALS” (sustainability-2882832) authored by Waseem Khan, Saleem Akhtar, Aruna Rawat, Anindya Basu in Sustainability. The suggestions given by the reviewers have been quite important and therefore they have properly been incorporated in this second revision of the manuscript. Further, to distinguish the corresponding major changes made in the main manuscript document from rest of the original text, those are highlighted with blue color font. We hope that the revisions have improved the manuscript to a level of the satisfaction of the reviewers and editor. Number-wise answers to the specific comments given by the reviewers are provided below.
RESPONSE TO REVIEWER 2 COMMENTS
The answers to the comments and the modifications of the revised manuscript are accurate and reliable. Consequently, the revised paper is suitable for publishing.
Once again, the authors are thankful to the reviewer for the valuable comments. Thankfully, the changes have improved the quality of the manuscript significantly.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe authors have made some revisions, however they mostly provided answers to questions and comments and did not incorporate the suggestion in their manuscript. I strongly recomend deleting the CDP model equations and diagrams, they are just copied from the Abaqus manual, they do not provide anything new and do not also provide anything to the reader, as a potential reader would either be familiar with the model already. Since there were no changes or alterations to the model it is juct included to raise the pages of the manuscript, it does not serve anything. A pure reference to the CDP model would be enough.
Comments on the Quality of English Languageenglsh has been improved, still some check needed.
Author Response
Response to Review Comments
(Manuscript ID: sustainability-2882832)
EXPERIMENTAL AND NUMERICAL STUDY ON FLEXURAL BEHAVIOR OF CONCRETE BEAM WITH NOTCH AND REPAIRING MATERIALS
Waseem Khan, Saleem Akhtar, Aruna Rawat, Anindya Basu
We are very grateful to the reviewers for their in-depth and thorough review of the manuscript titled “EXPERIMENTAL AND NUMERICAL STUDY ON FLEXURAL BEHAVIOR OF CONCRETE BEAM WITH NOTCH AND REPAIRING MATERIALS” (sustainability-2882832) authored by Waseem Khan, Saleem Akhtar, Aruna Rawat, Anindya Basu in Sustainability. The suggestions given by the reviewers have been quite important and therefore they have properly been incorporated in this second revision of the manuscript. Further, to distinguish the corresponding major changes made in the main manuscript document from rest of the original text, those are highlighted with blue color font. We hope that the revisions have improved the manuscript to a level of the satisfaction of the reviewers and editor. Number-wise answers to the specific comments given by the reviewers are provided below.
RESPONSE TO REVIEWER 3 COMMENTS
The authors have made some revisions, however they mostly provided answers to questions and comments and did not incorporate the suggestion in their manuscript. I strongly recommend deleting the CDP model equations and diagrams, they are just copied from the ABAQUS manual, they do not provide anything new and do not also provide anything to the reader, as a potential reader would either be familiar with the model already. Since there were no changes or alterations to the model it is juct included to raise the pages of the manuscript, it does not serve anything. A pure reference to the CDP model would be enough.
We thank for this observation made by the reviewer. Accordingly, changes are made in the revised manuscript submitted herewith and the following references are added for the CDP model and also cited in the text:
- George, J., Rama, J. K., Kumar, M. S., Vasan, A. Behavior of plain concrete beam subjected to three point bending using concrete damaged plasticity (CDP) model, Materials Today Proceedings, 2017, 4(9), 9742-9746. doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2017.06.259.
- Hashim, D. T., Hejazi, F., Lei, V. Y. Simplified constitutive and damage plasticity models for UHPFRC with different types of fiber. International Journal of Concrete Structures and Materials 14, 2020, 1-21. org/10.1186/s40069-020-00418-9.
- , D., Zhang, Y. X., Richard, C. Y. Numerical modelling of 3D concrete printing: material models, boundary conditions and failure identification. Engineering Structures, 2024, 299, 117-104. doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2023.117104.
Once again, the authors are grateful to the reviewer for the valuable comments. Thankfully, the changes have improved the quality of the manuscript significantly.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 3
Reviewer 3 Report
Comments and Suggestions for Authorsthe authors incorporated the comments.
