Next Article in Journal
Pyrolysis Process for the Recycling of Cork Dust Waste from the Processing of Cork Agglomerate Caps in Lightweight Materials
Previous Article in Journal
Nondestructive Surface Crack Detection of Laser-Repaired Components by Laser Scanning Thermography
 
 
Article
Peer-Review Record

Bond Characteristics of a Deformed Steel Bar Embedded in Donut-Type Voided Slab

Appl. Sci. 2022, 12(11), 5666; https://doi.org/10.3390/app12115666
by Joo-Hong Chung 1, Hyung-Suk Jung 2 and Hyun-Ki Choi 2,*
Reviewer 1:
Reviewer 2: Anonymous
Appl. Sci. 2022, 12(11), 5666; https://doi.org/10.3390/app12115666
Submission received: 2 May 2022 / Revised: 24 May 2022 / Accepted: 25 May 2022 / Published: 2 June 2022
(This article belongs to the Section Civil Engineering)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

This study evaluated the investigated the bond characteristics of embedded deformed steel bar in donut type biaxial voided slabs. The manuscript is a practical research study and should draw the interest of engineers, particularly civil engineers. However, there are some minor concerns that need to be addressed before publication.

1- The Abstract does not clarify the gap in research, and the innovative side of the paper. Please shortly identify the scientific problem, i.e. what is currently the research gap and how the authors investigated this issue to be addressed. A brief summary of the results needs to be included in the last sentence of the Abstract.

2- The first few sentences of the Introduction Section need to be referenced! Moreover, Section 1.2 can be part of the Introduction, so the reviewer believes that the numbering title of 1.2 can be removed. Moreover, this section also needs to be cited based on the references used. Several sentences in the introduction are not cited correctly.

3- The reviewer believes that the Introduction Section needs to be majorly improved by more updated research studies in this regard. The introduction is short, it means that the authors have not yet investigated other research studies.

4- Please double-check the manuscript for missing abbreviations, particularly for equations and Tables. In some tables, some words, or equations (such as W, W/C) are not specified in the manuscript.

Author Response

Thank you for your helpful comments and suggestions on my work. Based on your comments and suggestions, this paper is revised. 

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

In this study, This study investigated the bond characteristics of embedded deformed steel bar in donut type biaxial voided slabs. The donut 20 type void-shaper make concrete inner cover formed between steel bar and void-shaper due to the shape of void and arrangement
21 of void-shaper. Generally, some part of donut type biaxial voided slab has smaller inner cover thickness than 2.5db. It was affected 22 to the bond condition of deformed bar which is affected to bond strength of that. Furthermore, inner cover thickness changes along
23 the longitudinal deformed bar due to the shape of void. Therefore, donut type voided slab was divided 3 regions according to the 24 shape of void such as ‘Insufficient region’, ‘Transition region’, ‘Sufficient region’. In this study, pull-out tests were performed to
25 find out the effect of bond condition by the region due to voids. Main variables are inner cover thickness, embedded length and 26 bond location which is affected by void shape. Bond characteristics of donut type biaxial voided slab were evaluated through 27 comparison of bond stress-slip relationship, maximum bond strength and bond stress distribution of each regions. And the 28 calculation method of bond strength of donut type biaxial voided slab was suggested based on the test results.

 The manuscript is well organized and has good content. In the opinion of the reviewer, this manuscript note could be accepted after the minor corrections.

  • Authors are recommended to emphasis the novelty and significance of the study in more detail (Research background and purpose).
  • It is recommended that in the introduction section, preliminary explanations on the subject of the work be provided first and then segmentation be done.
  • The tables are well presented
  • Figure 8 It is not very clear to use a higher quality figure.
  • The colors used in Figure 3 are not very clear when printing. It is recommended to use other colors to draw this shape to have a higher quality when printing.
  • Authors are recommended to provide a more complete explanation in the results and discussion section.
  • Some of the references provided are old. It is suggested that a number of related topics that are newer and have been published in the last five years be used in the article.

 

 

Author Response

Thank you for your helpful comments and suggestions on my work. Based on your comments and suggestions, this paper is revised. 

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Back to TopTop