Mechanical Properties and Mineral Characteristics of Multi-Source Coal-Based Solid Waste Filling Materials under Different Proportioning
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Authors of this work have considered multi-source coal-based solid waste as the main raw material to develop low-cost, high-performance, low-carbon, energy-saving, and environmentally friendly filling material. Among other things, their results have shown that addition of desulfurization gypsum leads to a sudden decrease in compressive strength while accelerating the setting. Although this study might be interesting to the readers of the journal, I have a few suggestions for the authors that are given below.
1- The quality of writing must be improved. I have some difficulty understanding several portions of the ms.
2- The study does not accompany any kind of simulations, which should not be.
3- XRD data should be rigorously discussed. It is not so in the current version of the ms.
4- The elastic constants are not derived in this ms, even though the study mainly focused on the discussion of the mechanical properties of the materials considered.
5- Several figures are shown, but they are not really discussed. For example, I cannot see any basic science behind plots shown in Fig. 2. In fact, Fig. 1and 2 need rigorous discussion. Background references should be cited properly when discussing results.
I have given my comments to authors
Author Response
Response to the Reviewers
The authors would like to thank all the reviewers for their great comments on the manuscript. Their comments have been taken into consideration seriously while revising the manuscript. The revisions are underlined in the revised manuscript for easier tracking. Their comments/concerns are addressed as follows. Note that the line numbers referred to by the reviewers may change due to the revision of the manuscript. Due to the short modification time, the author did not come to polish the language of the modified part and will do so together in the next modification process.
Reviewer #1:
- The quality of writing must be improved. I have some difficulty understanding several portions of the ms.
This paper has been polished and revised by a translation agency. Details can be found in all red marked sections.
- The study does not accompany any kind of simulations, which should not be.
Generally, papers on numerical simulation research need to verify the accuracy of the simulation through actual experimental data. However, this article mainly studies the mechanical properties, solidification laws, and mineral crystal structure characteristics of multi source coal based solid waste filling materials for underground wells, which the obtained experimental data does not require simulation software to verify the reliability of the data. Therefore, papers dedicated to studying material properties only analyze and discuss experimental data, and no longer use simulated data for research.
- XRD data should be rigorously discussed. It is not so in the current version of the ms.
The author has made serious modifications to the XRD section. Page 12-15.
- The elastic constants are not derived in this ms, even though the study mainly focused on the discussion of the mechanical properties of the materials considered.
The purpose of this paper is to address the shortcomings of traditional cement filling materials such as high cement dosage, high preparation cost, slow mechanical properties and setting, and insufficient early strength. By utilizing DG and FA, the cement content is significantly reduced, the preparation cost is significantly reduced, and carbon emissions are also reduced. More importantly, DG and FA can also exert synergistic effects by regulating the setting time of filling materials and improving early strength. Therefore, this paper mainly focuses on reducing cement dosage, accelerating material setting, and improving early strength to enhance the adaptability of filling materials. The consideration of elastic modulus will be emphasized in the next paper.
5-Several figures are shown, but they are not really discussed. For example, I cannot see any basic science behind plots shown in Fig. 2. In fact, Fig. 1and 2 need rigorous discussion. Background references should be cited properly when discussing results.
The author has made careful revisions to the discussion section of Figures 1 and 2. Details can be found in all red marked sections.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.doc
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments to the Authors:
In this manuscript authors studied multi source coal-based solid waste as the main cementitious material, replacing Portland cement (PC), in a large proportion, significantly reducing the preparation cost of filling materials and, at the same time, leveraging the synergistic enhancement effect between multi-source coal based solid waste to alleviate the decreased mechanical performance caused by reduced PC content. However, the paper needs minor improvement before acceptance for publication. My detailed comments are as follow:
1. In the introduction section authors should introduced following relevent articles:
a. doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2023.130860
b. doi.org/10.3390/ijms222413383
2. The quality of the figure 1 and 2 should be improved.
3. There are few gramatical errors.
4. The wriiting of abstract and conclusion section should be improved.
5. What is future scope of such reaserch?
Author Response
Reviewer #2:
- In the introduction section authors should introduced following relevent articles:
- doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2023.130860
- doi.org/10.3390/ijms222413383
It has been revised. Page 17, line 502-505.
- The quality of the figure 1 and 2 should be improved.
It has been revised. Page 7 and 10.
- There are few gramatical errors.
It has been revised by the polishing agency.
- The wriiting of abstract and conclusion section should be improved.
It has been revised. Page 1, line 17-23. Page 16, line 433-450.
- What is future scope of such reaserch?
Due to the high consumption of Portland cement, high preparation cost, high energy consumption, high pollution, and high carbon emissions of traditional Portland cement filling materials. Multi source coal based solid waste well filling materials can not only achieve the resource utilization of waste DG and FA, but also significantly reduce Portland cement consumption and carbon emissions, which significantly reduce the preparation cost of filling materials and reduce environmental pollution.
Author Response File: Author Response.doc
Reviewer 3 Report
Review for the manuscript:
Entitled: " Mechanical properties and mineral crystal characteristics of multi-source coal-based solid waste filling materials under different proportioning"
for Crystals.
With ID: crystals-2462103
General comments
Comments for the Authors,
This work is well written, shows an introductory background material sufficient for someone not an expert in this area to understand the context and significance of this work, with good references to follow.
However, there are some major issues that should be addressed prior publication in Crystals.
The first point is its suitability regarding the scope of Crystals. I could see a better fitting in Journals like Materials whereas it may be of interest to most of the readers of this journal. Authors should justify the suitability of this manuscript in Crystals Journal.
Furthermore, Turnitin showed a similarity index of 27% across text, even in the results section, from the articles below:
https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1944/15/15/5318/htm
https://www.mdpi.com/2073-4352/12/8/1018
https://www.mdpi.com/2073-4360/14/19/3980
https://www.mdpi.com/2073-4352/12/6/804
https://www.mdpi.com/2073-4360/14/21/4761
Turnitin showed that 0% of qualifying text in this submission has been determined to be generated by AI.
Thus, authors should reduce the overlapping text and justify the novelty of the submitted work compared to the already published ones, from their group and others.
Authors should address these issues prior the publication of this study. Thus, I have opted to recommend a Major Revision for this manuscript.
Best regards
Author Response
Reviewer #3:
- The first point is its suitability regarding the scope of Crystals. I could see a better fitting in Journals like Materials whereas it may be of interest to most of the readers of this journal. Authors should justify the suitability of this manuscript in Crystals Journal.
This paper mainly studies the relationship between the mechanical properties and mineral crystal characteristics of multi source coal based solid waste underground filling materials. The formation and transformation characteristics of mineral crystals indicate their impact on the development of mechanical properties. Therefore, it is more suitable for publication in crystal journals.
- Furthermore, Turnitin showed a similarity index of 27% across text, even in the results section, from the articles below:
https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1944/15/15/5318/htm
https://www.mdpi.com/2073-4352/12/8/1018
https://www.mdpi.com/2073-4360/14/19/3980
https://www.mdpi.com/2073-4352/12/6/804
https://www.mdpi.com/2073-4360/14/21/4761
Thus, authors should reduce the overlapping text and justify the novelty of the submitted work compared to the already published ones, from their group and others.
The author has reduced the repetition rate of the entire content.
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
Authors of this work have considered my comments and have their paper revised. I am fine with the revision made. Thus, this paper may be interesting to the readers of the journal. It may be considered for possible publication.
Reviewer 3 Report
Review for the manuscript:
Entitled: " Mechanical properties and mineral crystal characteristics of multi-source coal-based solid waste filling materials under different proportioning"
for Crystals.
With ID: crystals-2462103.R1
Dear Authors,
General comments
Authors responded to my previous remarks thus the manuscript can be published.
Best regards
