Design-Optimization of Conventional Steel Structures for Realization of the Sustainable Development Objectives Using Metaheuristic Algorithm

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

In this paper， One of the most important innovations of this article is the use of single-objective metaheuristic algorithms (SOO) to study the relationship of weight as an objective function with other objective functions, as well as to design and optimize multiple structural systems using multiple target optimization algorithms (MOO) with five target functions that it has finally ended with the introduction of an environmental structure with the least carbon footprint and water footprint. As a result of which the structure with intermediate steel moment-resisting frames with the shortest construction time was of 30.02% and the highest construction cost of 41.28% and the structure with intermediate steel moment-resisting frames with special steel concentric bracing with the lowest carbon footprint of 28.11% and water footprint of 28.09% among the studied structural frames. Finally, the structure with intermediate steel moment-resisting frames with special concentric steel bracing was introduced as a green structure. It has certain reference significance for engineering structures，however the following modifications are still needed：

1. The literature review lacks the current research status of the research methods of this article. The current literature review of this article is only some summary concepts. It is recommended that the literature review add the research status of the research methods of this article (Metaheuristic Algorithm).

2. The positions of figures and tables in the text should be revised throughout the text to make them consistent, For example, Table 2 and Table 3.

3. Specific references should be given to specifications mentioned in the text, for example, the steel design codes mentioned in line 224.

4. The images in Figure 7 to Figure 9 are not clear. Figure 18 is inconsistent with the other images. Suggest modifying the clarity of the entire text image.

5. Table 7 serial number error.

6. Where do all the formulas in the article come from? If it is obtained by fitting, the fitting curve of the data or formula is given.

7. Full text formulas should be aligned and checked.

8. There is no formula 6 in the text.

9. Figure 15: How to uniformly compare three different variables? What is the basis and process of each picture? For example in figure (a), To compare the weights of three different variables, is the total weight a simple superposition of three different weights? How to control the remaining variables unchanged?

10.Are the final phrases in sections 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6 of the conclusion mentioned in the article? If not, kindly include them in the relevant sections of the text.

Comments for author File: Comments.docx

Comments on the Quality of English Language

This article needs polishing. Multiple sentences are not smooth and fluent.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The article uses the gray wolf optimization algorithm, one of the metaheuristic algorithms, to optimize Conventional Steel Structures. It conducts a detailed and interesting analysis of the optimization results based on the structural weight, cost and construction time, water footprint and carbon footprint. The article should be revised in detail based on the comments before it can be accepted:

(1)The article should explain why the gray wolf optimization algorithm is used? Are other algorithms within the metaheuristic possible?

(2)The article should briefly review various algorithms in metaheuristic algorithms and explain the advantages, disadvantages and scope of application of each algorithm?

(3)The article only provides the relevant index limits in Table 4, but does not provide comparative data on the seismic performance index of the structure before and after optimization. If the optimization is at the expense of the degradation of relevant seismic indexes (such as inter-story displacement angle, displacement ratio, etc.) , then optimization is of little significance;

(4)The iterations of the algorithm are implemented through the branch connection with the SAP2000 numerical model, and the detail should be introduced;

(5)All results in the literature are set for a simple regular structure with a column spacing of 5m, a floor height of 3.2m and a 4-story structure. The author should explain whether the results of the article are applicable to different types of complex situations. If not, reasonable suggestions should be given;

(6)The article has made a detailed analysis and discussion of the optimized results, but it has not elaborated on the algorithm process and needs to be supplemented;

(7)The values of relevant indicators (such as Carbon dioxide produced in steel production, Water used for steel production, Wage coefficient) in Table 6 and Table 9 of the article should be based on a large number of relevant Iranian domestic literature. Please verify the above indicators, because the above indicators are important for the algorithm results are crucial; the article lacks formula 6, add it; the punctuation mark in line 408 is wrong, please modify it; the pixels in Figure 3 are small and unclear; “the intermediate steel moment-resisting frame” appears many times at the end of the article, which has been given an abbreviation SMRF, please use the abbreviation; line 158, there is only section 5.1, no 5.2, etc., the chapter setting is unreasonable.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Dear Authors,

Please find the attached file.

Best regards.

Comments for author File: Comments.docx

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Extensive amendments required.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

To the dear editor and the authors, I have checked and reevaluated the revised article. Besides, I studied concisely the other reviewer's comments and the authors' responses. Because most of my recommendations are addressed and fulfilled, the article is now suitable for eventual publication.

However, it is a well-established convention that the formal writing of an academic article is a preferable standard practice. Some modifications are still needed to achieve better results:

1. Section 2 serial number error, "3.2" should be changed to "2.3".

2. There are multiple spaces in the first paragraph of the article, please check the entire text.

3. Section 6.4, incorrect citation of "The amount of water used to produce materials for the structure is equal to the total weight of each element according to formula 5 in the amount of water used to produce each ton of steel according to table 6 ", Please check and verify.

4. Sometimes "formula" is used before the formula, and sometimes "equation" is used. Please unify them.

5. Please also unify the expression before the diagram with "Diagram" or "Figure".

6. The position of the formula also needs to be unified.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

None

Author Response

1. Section 2 serial number error, "3.2" should be changed to "2.3".

Reply: Thanks for your comments. The requested correction is applied and highlighted in Turquoise color.

2. There are multiple spaces in the first paragraph of the article, please check the entire text.

Reply: Thanks for your comments. The requested correction is applied.

3. Section 6.4, incorrect citation of "The amount of water used to produce materials for the structure is equal to the total weight of each element according to formula 5 in the amount of water used to produce each ton of steel according to table 6 ", Please check and verify.

Reply: Thanks for your comments. The requested correction is applied and highlighted in Turquoise color.

4. Sometimes "formula" is used before the formula, and sometimes "equation" is used. Please unify them.

Reply: Thanks for your comments. The requested correction is applied and highlighted in Turquoise color.

 

5. Please also unify the expression before the diagram with "Diagram" or "Figure".

Reply: Thanks for your comments. The requested correction is applied and highlighted in Turquoise color.

 

6. The position of the formula also needs to be unified.

Reply: Thanks for your comments. The requested correction is applied.

 

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Dear authors,

Thanks for considering the comments and addressing them all.

Best regards,

 

Author Response

Thanks for your attention and helpful comments, which enahnced the paper quality.