Towards the Use of Novel Materials in Shipbuilding: Assessing Thermal Performances of Fire-Doors by Self-Consistent Numerical Modelling

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

I would like to compliment the Authors for a well designed study That covers both experimental and numerical investigation of an interesting and real-life applicable topic. Bellow are my comment to try to improve the paper before publishing:

 

1. General suggestion - It would be better to avoid "marketing" of the investigated material. You refer to it as "innovative" throughout text. What is today innovative tomorrow is not. Please use the technically appropriate, engineering, name whenever possible instead of "innovative".

 

2. Abstract. Line 20-21: "improved acoustic and mechanical properties". This i not proven in the study, especially the acoustic part. Please rephrase / exclude. 

 

3. Introduction - Generally, it is poorly written (level bellow compared to the rest of the text). It should be revisited and extensively proof-read.

 

4. Line 118 - Please provide as much technical info as possible about Searox - SL 440, since the sty is centered around it as well as the explanation why it is chosen. A word more about the gel matrix of the material would be interesting. 

 

5. General comment - How is the connection between the steel sheets and the foam core established? Is it laminated together or just held mechanically?

6. There are two references to "preliminary study [ref.12]" in the text. Please relay also the main points from that study rather than just a redirecting link.

 

7. What is the difference in information shared in Fig. 8. - 9. and Fig. 10?

 

8. Conclusion - I suggest revisiting this section, listing more specifically rather then descriptively, perhaps with the most important numbers, what is done and what are the lessons learnt (without marketing for the investigated material). Widen this section, it is important to the reader.

 

9.  Line 414-414 - "eco-friendly, sustainable, non-hazardous" - This are strong claims, not proven in the paper. While perhaps re-using fiberglass waste contributes to some sort of circular economy glass fiber and polyester resin filer is definitely not eco-friendly and non-hazardous. 

 

Best regards

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

REVIEWER COMMENTS ON__Towards the use of novel materials in shipbuilding:  assessing fire-doors thermal performances by self- consistent numerical modelling

 

General Comments

The subject matter of the work is interesting and worthy of study.

However, the presentation of the work (especially the introduction) needs to be improved. The content of the introduction is sparse and arrangement of the introduction is poor. Each paragraph should address a point or two. The paragraphs should be arranged so that authors’ thoughts and arguments follow a logical pattern.

The abstract needs to be rewritten and presented in the formal language consistent with scientific articles. Authors should include important results from the work in the abstract especially the important factors the observed to affect fire-proof properties of their novel materials and door design. The improvement in door dimensions and weight obtained (“ 37% thinner and 61% lighter”) need to be highlighted in the abstract.

Though this is a numerical work, authors need to introduce the reader to present fire-proofing materials and up-coming substitutes with a comparison of their relevant properties and the benefits of these properties to fire-proof door design. This can be presented with clarity in a tabular form.

Sufficient information is not provided in the introduction from previous work on the range of factors that affect the ability of fire-doors to achieve good performance. Additionally, your innovative material used in the present work was never introduced to readers in the introduction. Including these pieces of information into the manuscript in a logical manner convinces the reader that the authors have a good understanding of the intricacies of the problem and thus increase confidence in their simulated outputs.

To help address these lapses suggestions have been given in the specific comments below.

 

Specific Comments

LINE 2-4: Slight changes are recommended for the article title. Change article title from “Towards the use of novel materials in shipbuilding:  assessing fire-doors thermal performances by self-consistent numerical modelling” to “Towards the use of novel materials in shipbuilding: assessing thermal performances of fire-doors by self-consistent numerical modelling”.

 

LINE 20: Replace “again” with “against”.

LINE 21: Replace “mechanic” with “mechanical”

LINE 21: Delete “as”.

LINE 21: Insert “and” before “based”.

LINE 23-28: The sentence “Thanks to the adoption of the validated FEM analysis, it has been possible to assess the performance  of the new material and to demonstrate that, contrarily to common believe, the effective thermal insulation capacity is not necessarily the critical factor in determining the fire-resistance of the fire-door, rather, by suppressing thermal bridges originated at the door edges, even less thermally performing materials can be employed in the door thus optimizing other properties of interest such a mechanical qualities and/or soundproofing capability.” Is too long and difficult to understand.

Sentences in the abstract are better when short, succinct, and in the passive voice. Rewrite the sentence and break oi into at least two sentences that convey your thoughts with better clarity.

 

LINE 33: Replace “The continuous growing of” with “The increasing demand for”

LINE 36: Delete “the” before “fire propagation”.

LINE 36: Rewrite the sentence “Thus, fire-doors design is an actual relevant issue.” Like this “Hence, appropriate design of fire doors  is of utmost importance.” 

LINE 41: Replace “fire-resistance” with “fire-resistant”.

LINE 41: Delete “as well”.

LINE 42: Instead of “Rock wool…….” Write “ For fire-proofing rock wool………”

LINE 43: Replace “release of fibres when managed may represent” with “

release of fibres due to damage to the doors may present”

LINE 45: Rewrite the sentence “Accordingly, research for its substitutes is of strong interest” thus “As a consequence, there is a strong research interest for substitute materials.”

LINE 47: Replace “assess the compliance with mandatory requirements” with “ensure compliance with established mandatory requirements.”

LINE 48: Replace “compliance” with “compliance test”.

LINE 49: Replace “open to innovation” with “open doors to greater innovation(s)”.

LINE 49: Replace “as different door design and materials…” with “as different door designs incorporating new materials…”

LINE 55: Replace “reveals lack of details, assessment of the validity of the results and…..” with “reveal lack of details in assessment of the validity of the results, and ……”.

LINE 58: Replace “affects” with “affect”.

LINE 59-60: Rewrite the sentence “We have addressed in a preliminary study [12] the issue of modelling the FTP test with aim of introducing innovation in this field” thus “In a preliminary study [12], we addressed the issue of modelling the FTP test aimed at introducing innovation in this field.”

LINE 60-63: Rewrite the sentence “These preliminary results highlighted the critical importance of thermal bridges originated at the door edge in determining the fire-resistance and allowed to propose a design of a novel thinner door, yet the thermal modelling was linked to the specific door investigated.” thus “Though thermal modelling in this preliminary work was still linked to the specific door investigated,  the preliminary results highlighted the critical importance of thermal bridges originating at the door edge(s) in determining the fire-resistance and thus allowed us to propose a design for a novel thinner door.

LINE 64-66:  First, Join this paragraph to the preceding paragraph. Secondly, Rewrite this paragraph “Thus, a general, self-consistent fully detailed, validated and ready-to-use FEM methodology cannot be derived from the previous works, precluding the forecasting capability which is the strength of computational methods. This aspect is therefore addressed here. “ thus: “Since a general, self-consistent, fully detailed, validated and ready-to-use FEM methodology for fire-door designs cannot be derived from the previous works, thus precluding the forecasting capability which is the strength of computational methods, we attempt to address this challenge in the present work.”

After this sentence your materials and method should follow.

LINE 67-78: Much of the materials in this paragraph should be in your second paragraph (lines 42-45).

LINE 73-78: This section comprised of three sentences should be re-written to point out  with better clarity what was actually done in the present work and inserted at the end of Line 63.

LINE 93: Corresponding properties of the “innovative foam” should be presented along with that of other materials in Table 1.

LINE 97: Write “3-6%” instead of “3÷6%”

LINE 101: Write “20-80 °C” instead of “20÷80 °C”.

LINE 117: Replace “by” with “of”.

LINE 172: Write “kinematic” instead of “cinematic”.

LINE 187-188: Please rephrase this sentence “Then assessing of the reliability of the numerical modelling of the fire-test is focused.” for better clarity.

LINE 194: Write “ground” instead of “grinded”.

LINE 194: Use “Full-stop (.)” instead of “colon (:)”

LINE 202: Delete “as”.

LINE 207: Replace “fairly well the” with “fairly well to the”.

LINE 225: Write “2.5-40.0” instead of “2.5÷40.0”.

LINE 255: Replace “used thermocouples” with “thermocouples used”.

LINE 296: Replace “of” with “as”.

LINE 296: Replace “it is just” with “but”.

LINE 304: Insert “(hc)” after “heat convection coefficient”.

LINE 311: Replace “well fit” with “ fit well to”.

LINE 312: Replace “analysed the preliminary study” with  “as observed from the analysis in the preliminary study”

LINE 317-318: Replace “Noticeable, the presented self-consistent procedure can properly fit also the results….” With “Noticeably, the presented self-consistent procedure can also properly fit to the results……”

LINE 320: Replace “because of the use” with “due to the use”.

LINE 323: Replace “well” with “quite”.

LINE 327: Replace “source” with “sources”.

LINE 331: Replace “correct” with “appropriate”.

LINE 333: Replace “use variable” with “use of variable”.

LINE 335: Replace “trace” with “track”.

LINE 337: Replace “appears” with “appear”,

LINE 339: Replace “constrains” with “constraints”.

LINE 340: Replace “constrains” with “constraints”.

LINE 343: Replace “above discussed” with “discussed earlier”.

LINE 344-345: Replace “approptiate size” with “appropriate mesh size”.

LINE 350: Use full-stop instead of colon(:).

LINE 350: Replace “that” with “which” and delete the coma (,) after the word “x-direction”.

LINE 355: Replace “different pattern” with “difference in the pattern”

LINE 357: Delete “relative”.

LINE 357: Replace “here presented” with “presented here”.

LINE 359: Replace “a relative distance” with “relative distances”.

LINE 360: Replace “relative distance comprised between” with “relative distances  between”

LINE 372: Delete “as here reported”,

LINE 373-374: Rephrase the sentence: “Specifically, the present door is 37% thinner and 61% lighter than the door reported in the preliminary study [12]” like this “Specifically, the results indicate the feasibility of a door 37% thinner and 61% lighter than the door reported in the preliminary study [12]”.

LINE 375: Delete “even”, and merge this paragraph with the preceding paragraph.

LINE 378: Replace “reached, clearly evidencing …..” with “reached; a clear evidence…..”

LINE 386: Replace “Consistently” with “Incidentally”.

LINE 395: Delete “the”.

LINE 396: Replace “the” with “its”.

LINE 400: Replace “by” with “of”.

LINE 414: Replace “thanks to the numerical model developed, …..” with “Based on the numerical model developed,…….”.

 

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.docx