Thermal Characteristics of Fireproof Plaster Compositions in Exposure to Various Regimes of Fire

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

the experimental part is similar ( not new) to the one presented in a reference by the authors in Fire.

Eq. (3) needs some discussion , namely how q is found and checking the sign( + or -) of the second term in the RHS.

A simple one dimensional analysis is also recommended.

 

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

The article is current, the chosen methods are suitable. But I think the Material and Methods section should be supplemented. The main differences between the individual samples were not clear to me. E.g. I did not understand the difference between No. 1.1 and No. 1.2. It may be appropriate to summarize the differences in the samples in a table.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

There are some aspects to be clarified before suggesting its publication:

1. The literature cited in the first two paragraphs of 1. Introduction is not extensive enough. It is necessary to add literature from some well-known journals.
2. The cited literature for Figure 1 need to be clarified.
3. In lines 73 and 79, the literature discussing dry and wet installation methods needs to be added. The relevance to the subject of this study needs to be stated.
4. In line 123, this study was described that he results of the study were obtained by a simulation method. However, the cited references did not have much research paper on numerical simulations. More literature descriptions are necessary to demonstrate that the adopted method is feasible.
5. In line 130, the authors need to state in more detail why these 3 items were being explored.
6. The software package (SP) ELCUT is the tool used in this study. It is necessary to have more literature on how this tool has been adopted and what studies have been published. At the same time, the functional introduction of the tool is also described.
7. Please describe the features of FGBU VNIIPO EMERCOM of Russia in Line 177.
8. In the content of 3.1. Results of experiments on steel structures, description of test conditions and procedures is necessary. Readers will want to know under what steps the results are achieved.
9. Some software operation screens are suggested to be displayed in 3.2. Results of simulation in SP ELCUT.
10. The curves of Figures 9, 10 and 11 showed a high degree of similarity between the simulation and experimental results. The parameters of the simulation need to be specified, even listed. Readers can judge the plausibility of the results from these descriptions.
11. In section 3.3. Discussion, the discussion should discuss the effects of each parameter item by item. The current way of discussing is not easy to obtain logical thinking, so that it is impossible to judge whether the conclusion is correct or not.
12. The current conclusions seemed to only illustrate the trend of the results, and further reasons were not analyzed in detail. The authors are encouraged that an in-depth analysis should be carried out from the viewpoint of the thermal properties of the material.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

response was fine!

Author Response

Dear Reviewer, thank you for your detailed analysis of our manuscript!

Reviewer 3 Report

The authors have responded to my comments item by item. No further comments.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer, thank you for your detailed analysis of our manuscript!