Mineral Additives to Enhance Early-Age Crack Resistance of Concrete under a Large-Temperature-Difference Environment

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Dear Authors,
I evaluate the article as good, and it is methodologically extensive. The research results are well presented in it. The discussion of the results is also evident.
I have the following remarks for the paper:
1. The authors write several times in the paper about significant differences (large differences according to the authors) in temperature between day and night in the region of Western China (the first sentence of the abstract, lines 41 to 44, lines 161-163). In line 44, they cite literature position no. 1 (I could not find journal Dam and Safety). I recommend defining the differences in temperature between day and night and the seasons of the year by giving the numbers at least in one place of the text.
2. there are no items listed in the bibliography list as 11 and 12 in the content of the article,
3. there is no reference to Table 2 in the text (chapter 2.1 Materials).
With kind regards,
reviewer 

Author Response

♥ Dear Editor,

Thank you very much for your letter and the comments from the referees about our manuscript, Mineral Additives to Enhance Early Age Crack Resistance of Concrete under the Large-Temperature Difference Environment. We have addressed the questions raised by the reviewers on a point-to-point basis and clearly indicated the changes made in red font in the manuscript using red font. In addition, according to your suggestion, we have our manuscript checked using a professional English editing service. We submit here the revised Manuscript as well as a list of changes. If you have any question about this paper, please don’t hesitate to let me know.

Once again, thank you very much for your help to our paper processing.

Sincerely yours,

For your guidance, the response to each reviewer’s comments is appended below.

♥ Dear reviewer 1:

Thank you for your comments on our manuscript.

• The authors write several times in the paper about significant differences (large differences according to the authors) in temperature between day and night in the region of Western China (the first sentence of the abstract, lines 41 to 44, lines 161-163). In line 44, they cite literature position no. 1 (I could not find journal Dam and Safety). I recommend defining the differences in temperature between day and night and the seasons of the year by giving the numbers at least in one place of the text.

Response: We have been carefully read the above sentences, and realized there were some mistakes, so all of them were corrected in this paper. In line 50, we replaced the literature No. 1 and quoted it to give a numerical illustration of the large temperature difference between day and night in northwest China.

• there are no items listed in the bibliography list as 11 and 12 in the content of the article.

Response: We added the contents of literature No. 11 and literature No. 12 (line 63 to 66).

• there is no reference to Table 2 in the text (chapter 2.1 Materials).

Response: We added the content of Table 2 in lines 138 to 140.

Thank you again for your valuable comments.

Reviewer 2 Report

Abstract

Lines 14-15: Could the authors state include some of the temperatures mentioned in the Abstract?

Lines 16-19: More details of the concrete samples needed. For example, what was the curing temperature? Any reason for the four samples chosen for the tests?

Lines 20-28: Results were poorly summarised. I expect some results of strength or mechanical properties included in the Abstract. This is very important. Can the results specimens be expressed in percentages as well?

Introduction

Lines 38-41: Sentence is too long and infested with grammatical errors. Sentence can be divided into two and framed to reflect authors thoughts.

Lines 41-45: Too long sentence. Authors should critically read through the manuscript and correct grammatical and typographical errors.

Lines 116-123: The large temperature difference which is the object of the study should be stated.

Line 122: ''understand of toughening'' should be ''understanding of toughened''

2. Experimental Program

Lines 270 - 289: Equations (9) - (12) just came from nowhere? There was no description how they were developed. Authors should clarify these.  

Authors should read the manuscript to correct grammatical and typographical errors.

Author Response

♥ Dear Editor,

Thank you very much for your letter and the comments from the referees about our manuscript, Mineral Additives to Enhance Early Age Crack Resistance of Concrete under the Large-Temperature Difference Environment. We have addressed the questions raised by the reviewers on a point-to-point basis and clearly indicated the changes made in red font in the manuscript using red font. In addition, according to your suggestion, we have our manuscript checked using a professional English editing service. We submit here the revised Manuscript as well as a list of changes. If you have any question about this paper, please don’t hesitate to let me know.

Once again, thank you very much for your help to our paper processing.

Sincerely yours,

For your guidance, the response to each reviewer’s comments is appended below.

♥ Dear reviewer 2:

Thank you for your comments on our manuscript.

• Lines 14-15: Could the authors state include some of the temperatures mentioned in the Abstract?

Response: We added a description of the large temperature differences in northwest China in line 16.

• Lines 16-19: More details of the concrete samples needed. For example, what was the curing temperature? Any reason for the four samples chosen for the tests?

Response: In line 18, we added the reason for setting up four groups of concrete specimens, namely, "To study the macroscopic mechanical properties and microstructure of concrete containing different content of mineral admixtures". In line 21, we added the exposure temperature conditions of concrete specimens.

• Lines 20-28: Results were poorly summarised. I expect some results of strength or mechanical properties included in the Abstract. This is very important. Can the results specimens be expressed in percentages as well?

Response: In lines 25 to 30, we add a quantitative description of strength and mechanical properties, namely, "The average compressive strength growth rate of concrete from day 3 to day 14 is 83.25% higher than that of OC concrete when 15% fly ash and 15% slag are added. And the fracture energy of the concrete is maximized when 15% fly ash and 20% slag are added, which is 50.67% higher than that of OC concrete."

• Lines 38-41: Sentence is too long and infested with grammatical errors. Sentence can be divided into two and framed to reflect authors thoughts.

Response: We divide the long sentences into short sentences and mark the project names with quotation marks. We rewrote the original sentence as "Since the implementation of the "Western Development Strategy" and the "One Belt, One Road" initiative, the infrastructure construction in the western part of China has been developing rapidly. A large number of infrastructure projects, including the “Qinghai-Tibet Railway”, have been built."

• Lines 41-45: Too long sentence. Authors should critically read through the manuscript and correct grammatical and typographical errors.

Response: We divide the long sentences into short sentences and mark the project names with quotation marks. We rewrote the original sentence as "And a large number of infrastructure projects, including the “South-North Water Transfer Project” and other water transfer projects, will be developed or are being developed in the western part of China. The western region is developing rapidly economically and socially. The infrastructure construction has made great progress, gradually solving the contradiction of unbalanced and insufficient development in the east and west of China. "

• Lines 116-123: The large temperature difference which is the object of the study should be stated.

Response: We added the large temperature difference as the research object in line 123.

• Line 122: ''understand of toughening'' should be ''understanding of toughened''.

Response: We replaced "toughening" with ''toughened'' at line 133.

• Lines 270 - 289: Equations (9) - (12) just came from nowhere? There was no description how they were developed. Authors should clarify these.  

Response: We changed the title of line 281 as "Test Methods for pore structure". The sources of Equations (9) - (12), derived from the "Test code for hydraulic concrete” (SL352-2020)", are described in line 300.

At last, thank you for your arduous work and instructive advice.