Common Defects of Prefabricated Prestressed Elements for Industrial Construction

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The manuscript attempts to classify typical errors occurring during the design, production and use of prefabricated, prestressed concrete girders and slabs manufactured in Poland for industrial buildings since the 1950s. The outcomes of the present study could be extended also for other countries since the prestressing technique is almost standard worldwide.

The article is well written and the topic is rather interesting. The reviewer suggests for its publication after the following minor revisions are addressed:

·       In the Introduction, it is suggestable to add a brief recall about the paper objectives and contents

·       When discussing about defects on prestressed RC bridges, authors may add this reference that is inherent to this topic:

o   Matos J.C., Nicoletti V., Kralovanec J., Sousa H.S., Gara F., Moravcik M., Morais M.J. Comparison of Condition Rating Systems for Bridges in Three European Countries. Appl. Sci., 13(22), 12343, 2023. DOI: 10.3390/app132212343.

·       Generally, each section (from Section 2  to 4) could be improved by the addition of tables and schemes for the schematic summarization of the main common errors and evidences.

Author Response

Dear reviewer, thank you very much for all your fruitful comments. We have included responses to your comments in the attached file.

"Please see the attachment."

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

1. Provide more detailed explanations and examples for each type of defect or error discussed.
2. Include more references to relevant literature and research to support the claims and findings presented in the manuscript.
3. Consider expanding the discussion to include mitigation strategies or best practices for avoiding or addressing the identified defects and errors.
4. Ensure consistency in terminology and terminology definitions throughout the manuscript.
5. Discuss the potential impact of emerging technologies or advancements in prefabricated prestressed elements on mitigating defects and errors.
6. Address any limitations or potential biases in the analysis of defects and errors in prefabricated prestressed elements.
7. Provide a comprehensive conclusion summarizing the key findings and suggesting avenues for future research in the field.
8. Revise the abstract to succinctly summarize the main findings and contributions of the manuscript, highlighting its significance for the field of industrial construction and prefabricated prestressed elements.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Minor editing of English language required

Author Response

Dear reviewer, thank you very much for all your fruitful comments. We have included responses to your comments in the attached file.

"Please see the attachment."

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

REVIEWER’S COMMENTS (buildings-2885352-peer-review-v1)

The manuscript presents a study on classifying typical errors occurring during the design, production and use of prefabricated, prestressed concrete girders and slabs manufactured in Poland for industrial buildings since the 1950s. The manuscript needs a minor revision for it to be accepted for publication.

1)    Abstract: The authors need to highlight the major findings on common defects prefabricated prestressed elements for industrial constructions.

2)    Lines 42-43: Reference is required for this statement “The dominant feature of construction at that time was standardization.”

3)    Figure 5: The authors should designate the two images as Figure 5 (a) and (b)

4)    Figure 6: The authors should designate the two images as Figure 6 (a) and (b)

5)    Line 232: The authors should avoid the use of lumped up references such as [15-19]. The authors should rather give a brief finding of each of the 5 references.

6)    In lines 9-10, the authors indicated the study covers prefabricated elements used in industrial construction whereas in line 453, the indicated that the study covers prefabricated elements used in industrial and residential construction. The authors need to reconcile this information.

7)    Conclusion: The authors need to highlight the most typical cases of defects and damage to prestressed elements classified in their study.

 

Author Response

Dear reviewer, thank you very much for all your fruitful comments. We have included responses to your comments in the attached file.

"Please see the attachment."

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

I am satisfied with the corrections and improvements made in the manuscript.