Effect of Various Proportions of Rice Husk Powder on Swelling Soil from New Cairo City, Egypt
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
With the hope of success, the research conducted is in line with the interests of many researchers and has a suitable scientific burden. Please read the comments in the text of the article and make the desired corrections.
In the explanations of Figure 5 and according to Table 6, Please explain why the situation changes after 15%.
How to combine the soil with the additive is unclear. It is recommended to combine the soil with the additive and prepare the samples in a separate section entitled "soil sample preparation" add full details to the article.
it is recommended to provide soil granulation curve.
it is recommended that SEMs be taken from the samples if possible and the results added along with the analysis.
It is recommended that the author present his / her research limitations and suggestions for future research and improvement at the end of the article.
Only one 2021 article is available in the references, it would have been better to use newer articles.
Comments for author File: 
Comments.pdf
Author Response
Dear Reviewer,
Please find attached the submission of the carefully revised version of the manuscript in Ref., following the minor comments and modification of the Reviewer.
Below is a detailed list of the changes made in response to the Reviewer’s minor comments (in italics), which outlines every change made a point by point. The changes are marked in the manuscript text (Red font).
1- In the explanations of Figure 5 and according to Table 6, Please explain why the situation changes after 15%.
Answer: Thank you very much. The explanation is provided with red color in the revised manuceript as follows: The primary reason for these changes is the reduction in clay content in the soil mixture or may be an excessive accumulation of cations on the clay [7]. And more explanation is provided about the mechanism with green color in the revised manuscript at the request of one of the reviewers as follows: The increase in PL and decrease in PI is primarily caused by the flocculation of clay particles and the increasing number of coarse particles in the mixture. The reaction compounds decrease the repulsion forces between clay particles transmitting the flocculated structure with some cementing or bonding, which should have been responsible for the decrease of the free swell and PI. In addition, the reduction in swelling is attributed to the reduction in the thickness of the diffuse double layer (DDL), which results in the flocculation of clay particles. In terms of order, the reduction in the thickness of DDL makes the soil skeleton shrink and causes a decrease in repellent forces, thus contributing to the flocculation of clay particles, which later became granular or formed hydrogen bonds (Akbulut and Arasan, 2010). The bond is sufficiently strong that van der waals forces, so there is not interlayer swelling in the presence of water. (Mitchell and Soga, 2005).
2- How to combine the soil with the additive is unclear. It is recommended to combine the soil with the additive and prepare the samples in a separate section entitled "soil sample preparation" add full details to the article.
Answer: Thank you for this valuable comment. The combination of the soil with the additives and prepare of samples is provided in a separate section with subtitle '' Soil sample preparation'' with red color in the revised manuscript.
3- it is recommended to provide soil granulation curve
Answer: Thank you very much. The figure is provided in the revised manuscript Fig. 3
4- it is recommended that SEMs be taken from the samples if possible and the results added along with the analysis
Answer: Thank you for this valuable comment. I'm very sorry, It will be difficult to do this test at the present time because this device is not available at the university, and I will have to do it in another place, and this will require a long time due to the Corona pandemic.
5- It is recommended that the author present his / her research limitations and suggestions for future research and improvement at the end of the article
Answer: Thank you for this valuable comment. Suggestions have been added at the end of the article with a red color.
6- Only one 2021 article is available in the references, it would have been better to use newer articles.
Answer: Thank you for this valuable comment. Some references have been added to the introduction and results and discussion sections such as:
Ganta, M; Baskar, R; Rama, J.S.K. Rice husk ash as a potential supplementary cementitious material in concrete solution towards sustainable construction. Innov Infrastru Solution, 2022, 7 (1):51. DOI: 10.1007/s41062-021-00643-5
Kiełbasiński, K.; Dobak, P.; Kaczmarek, Ł.; Kowalczyk, S. The Influences of Local Glacitectonic Disturbance on Overconsolidated Clays for Upland Slope Stability Conditions: A Case Study. Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, 10718. https://doi.org/10.3390/app112210718
Duong, N.T; Nguyen, Nu. Effect of different types of rice husk ash on some geotechnical properties of cement-admmixed soil. Iraq Geol J, 2020, 35 (2C):1-12. DOI: 10.46717/igj.53.2c.1Rs-2020-09-01.
- Jai, A; Choudhary, A.K; Jha, J.N. Influence of rice husk ash on the swelling and strength characterisrics of expansive soil. Geotech Geol Eng, 2020, 38: 2239-2302. DOI.org/10.1007/s10706-019-01087-6.
- Daryati, M.A; Ramadan, M.A. Improvement of expansive soils stabilized with rice husk ash (RHA). J Phys Conf Series, 2020, 1625 (012006): 12006. DOI: 10.1088/1742-6596/1625/1/012006.
Reviewer 2 Report
A method for stabilizing expansive soil with different proportions of rice husk powder was proposed, and the physical properties of the soil were studied. The purpose of the thesis is clear, the overall content is good, and the proposed method has good application value. I think this article can better solve the problems listed below. 1. In lines 81-95, the author listed previous studies on stabilizing expansive soil with additives such as RHA and fly ash, but the additive used by the author is RHP. Is there any literature that also studies the effect of RHP on the properties of expansive soils? Please explain the shortcomings of current research in this field. 2. Please emphasize the innovation of this article. 3. From which depth soil sample does the engineering properties shown in Table 1 come from? Are the engineering properties of soil samples at different depths the same? 4. Lines 141-142, "The percentage of RHP should be determined based on the pH value of about 12." Why is this pH value chosen as the basis? 5. In Table 3, "<50" should be changed to ">50". 6. The 210th line, "where the S value is 48%,...", but the swelling potential shown in Table 1 is 48.5%, which is inconsistent. please check carefully. 7. The content of section 3.2 is duplicated with section 3.1 and needs to be deleted. 8. In Table 6 and Figure 5, why do LL, PL and PI show opposite trends when the amount of RHP added exceeds 15%?
Author Response
Dear Reviewer,
Please find attached the submission of the carefully revised version of the manuscript in Ref., following the minor comments and modification of the Reviewer.
Below is a detailed list of the changes made in response to the Reviewer’s minor comments (in italics), which outlines every change made a point by point. The changes are marked in the manuscript text (Blue font).
1- In lines 81-95, the author listed previous studies on stabilizing expansive soil with additives such as RHA and fly ash, but the additive used by the author is RHP. Is there any literature that also studies the effect of RHP on the properties of expansive soils? Please explain the shortcomings of current research in this field
Answer: Thank you for this valuable comment. Most of the previous studies used RHA in the stabilization process, but there are a few studies that used RHP, and it was added in the introduction part of the revised version with blue color as follows:
Canakci et al. [20] This paper presents the results of a laboratory study on the feasibility of using waste, lignin and rice husk in the form of powder (RHP) and ash (RHA) to improve the strength and consistency of an expanding soil. Soil mixed with RHP ranged from 5% to 20%. The LL decreased from 148% to 132.2%, PI from 119.28% to 99.28%, swelling pecent decreased from 11% to 8.25%, while the PL increased from 24.72% to 32.94%. The ideal value of RHP was 20%.
2- Please emphasize the innovation of this article
Answer: Thank you heartily.The innovation of the article is presented to the end of the introduction section of the revised manuscript with blue color.
3- From which depth soil sample does the engineering properties shown in Table 1 come from? Are the engineering properties of soil samples at different depths the same?
Answer: Thank you for this valuable comment.Yes, and it is the same layer and its depth ranges from 1.5 meters to 3 meters. Hence, it has the same engineering properties.
4- Lines 141-142, "The percentage of RHP should be determined based on the pH value of about 12." Why is this pH value chosen as the basis?
Answer: Thank you for this valuable comment. All ratios from 5% to 25% of RHP were determined on the basis of the pH about12. Increased or decreased pH of soil samples as a result of physical properties and chemical analysis of the individual mixture. (Hoddinott and Lamb, 1990) reported that a decrease in soil pH was due to the exchange of cations on the surface of clay particles, a strong cation valence and an acidic environment reduce the thickness of the double layer around the clay particles
5- In Table 3, "<50" should be changed to ">50".
Answer: Thank you for this valuable comment.The correction is provided.
- The 210th line, "where the S value is 48%,...", but the swelling potential shown in Table 1 is 48.5%, which is inconsistent. please check carefully.
Answer: Thank you for this valuable comment.The correction is provided in the text of the results and discussion section.
- The content of section 3.2 is duplicated with section 3.1 and needs to be deleted.
Answer: Thank you for this valuable comment.The correction is provided.
- In Table 6 and Figure 5, why do LL, PL and PI show opposite trends when the amount of RHP added exceeds 15%?
Answer: Thank you very much. The primary reason for these changes is the reduction in clay content in the soil mixture or may be an excessive accumulation of cations on the clay [7]. And more explanation is provided about the mechanism with green color in the revised manuscript at the request of one of the reviewers as follows: The increase in PL and decrease in PI is primarily caused by the flocculation of clay particles and the increasing number of coarse particles in the mixture. The reaction compounds decrease the repulsion forces between clay particles transmitting the flocculated structure with some cementing or bonding, which should have been responsible for the decrease of the free swell and PI. In addition, the reduction in swelling is attributed to the reduction in the thickness of the diffuse double layer (DDL), which results in the flocculation of clay particles. In terms of the order, the reduction in the thickness of DDL makes the soil skeleton shrink and causes a decrease in repellent forces, thus contributing to the flocculation of clay particles, which later became granular or formed hydrogen bonds (Akbulut and Arasan, 2010). The bond is sufficiently strong that van der Waals forces, so there is no interlayer swelling in the presence of water. (Mitchell and Soga, 2005).
We thank the Reviewer a lot for the useful and valuable comments that have helped improve the manuscript.
Hoping that all the careful review is sufficient for the direct acceptance of the manuscript, thank you for your time and consideration.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
20 „Simple” – better to use „small” or „insignificant”; the antonym of „simple” is rather „complicated”
25 after „the plasticy was reduced” - worth to add „by this way of stabilizitation”
27 „very detailed results 1003 kN/m2 to 489 kN/m2 „; more generalization of values according to metrological analysis ( 2 or 3 significant figures) – this remark is advised in next part of the text, too
28 „typical amount” (?) - better „optimal amount” - it is your conclusion obtained from presented researches
48 „engineering cancer” is a metaphore and it should mark by inverted commas „ ”
General remark:
necessary to point out that shrinkage and swelling is caused by changes of moisture and it allude to the climate in Egypt
72 Why 1999 yr is treated as so important time for increasing of abnormal rate of pollution ( is it possible to show the source of this opinion ? )
75 „the author” : who ? authors of this paper or another researchers. We find informations about plenty applications of RHA by another authors in next sentences.
78 „unconfined compressive strength (UCS)” It is the parameter using generally for rocks and its application for testing of remoulded soils require the description of procedure. This parameter isn’t used in next your researches. I propose cross it out.
94 Mpa – correct to MPa
Figure 1 The map of all Egypt isn't necessary. The better solution is showing the map of Nil Delta with new developing area in the background of Cairo agglomeration
108 – 122 The description of geological conditions shows main stratigraphical formations. What is origin of swelling minerals in marine miocen (primary or modified by weathering process, too).
Is it possible to show schematic geological cross section near sampling area with thickness of swelling formation (for example as little zoom in fig 2) ?
Table 1: to add - dimension of specific gravity and free swell index.
Tabl 2: to explain - the term „washed husk” in the text.
Is chemical composition depend on technique of husk powder preparation ?
Fig 3: to add the source of chart and to explain the blue point
Fig 4: to describe axis – parameters and value
222 What is a percentage share of analysed minerals in tested samples
Tab 6 The plasticity limit decreace remarkable for RHP > 15%
How explain this phenomenon ? Partly decreasing trend isn’t observed in more important swelling results (see tab 7).
Fig 6 and 7 shows the better recomendation of crucial value (15% RHP)
Author Response
Dear Reviewer,
Please find attached the submission of the carefully revised version of the manuscript in Ref., following the minor comments and modification of the Reviewer.
Below is a detailed list of the changes made in response to the Reviewer’s minor comments (in italics), which outlines every change made a point by point. The changes are marked in the manuscript text (Orange font).
1- 20 „Simple” – better to use „small” or „insignificant”; the antonym of „simple” is rather „complicated
Answer: Thank you for this valuable comment.The correction is provided with orange color in the revised manuscript.
2- 25 after „the plasticy was reduced” - worth to add „by this way of stabilizitation
Answer: Thank you for this valuable comment. This sentence has been added with orange color in the revised manuscript.
3- very detailed results 1003 kN/m2 to 489 kN/m2 „; more generalization of values according to metrological analysis ( 2 or 3 significant figures) – this remark is advised in next part of the text, too.
Answer: Thank you very much. More values made after processing are mentioned in the revised text with orange color.
4- 28 „typical amount” (?) - better „optimal amount” - it is your conclusion obtained from presented researches
Answer: Thank you for this valuable comment.The correction is provided with orange color.
5- 48 „engineering cancer” is a metaphore and it should mark by inverted commas „ ”
Answer: Thank you for this valuable comment.The correction is provided.
6- necessary to point out that shrinkage and swelling is caused by changes of moisture and it allude to the climate in Egypt
Answer: Thank you for this valuable comment. This sentence has been added with orange color in the revised manuscript.
7- Why 1999 yr is treated as so important time for increasing of abnormal rate of pollution (is it possible to show the source of this opinion? )
Answer: Thank you very much. 1999 year is removed.
8- the author” : who ? authors of this paper or another researchers. We find informations about plenty applications of RHA by another authors in next sentences.
Answer: Thank you very much. The author of this paper, and has been added to the revised manuscript.
9- 78 „unconfined compressive strength (UCS)” It is the parameter using generally for rocks and its application for testing of remoulded soils require the description of procedure. This parameter isn’t used in next your researches. I propose cross it out
Answer: Thank you very much. The UCS is deleted, while in Rahman and Ahmed [22] PI was added instead of UCS.
10- Figure 1 The map of all Egypt isn't necessary. The better solution is showing the map of Nil Delta with new developing area in the background of Cairo agglomeration
Answer: Thank you very much. The location map of the study area has changed.
11- 108 – 122 The description of geological conditions shows main stratigraphical formations. What is origin of swelling minerals in marine miocen (primary or modified by weathering process, too)
Answer: Thank you very much. The origin of swelling mineal is primary and the mudstones are middle to thick layers that are interpreted as representing a fluvial-fluviomarine deposition system [27].
12- Is it possible to show schematic geological cross section near sampling area with thickness of swelling formation (for example as little zoom in fig 2) ?
Answer: Thank you very much. There is a previous literature concerned with the thickness of the swelling formation and determine this thickness, which is and made cross section also, and I will mention it in the geological section of the revised manuscript with orange color. You can check the refercnce through this link. https://www.curresweb.com/mejas/mejas/2016/430-441.pdf
Saad, A.M.. Mechanical behavior and geoelectrical analysis of shallow foundation beds at industrial area, New Cairo–Egypt. Mid. East J. Appl. Sci, 2016,
14- Is chemical composition depend on technique of husk powder preparation?
Answer: Thank you very much. No
15- Fig 3: to add the source of chart and to explain the blue point
Answer: Thank you very much. The source of chart and explanation of the blue point is provided in the revised manuscript with orange color.
16- Fig 4: to describe axis – parameters and value
Answer: Thank you very much. The axis – parameters and value is deccribed.
17- 222 What is a percentage share of analysed minerals in tested samples
Answer: Thank you very much. The montmorillonite is about 59% and the kaolinite is about 41%.
18- Tab 6 The plasticity limit decreace remarkable for RHP > 15%
How explain this phenomenon ? Partly decreasing trend isn’t observed in more important swelling results (see tab 7).
Answer: Thank you very much. The explanation is provided with red color in the revised manuceript as follows: The primary reason for these changes is the reduction in clay content in the soil mixture or may be an excessive accumulation of cations on the clay [7]. And more explanation is provided about the mechanism with green color in the revised manuscript at the request of one of the reviewers as follows: The increase in PL and decrease in PI is primarily caused by the flocculation of clay particles and the increasing number of coarse particles in the mixture. The reaction compounds decrease the repulsion forces between clay particles transmitting the flocculated structure with some cementing or bonding, which should have been responsible for the decrease of the free swell and PI. In addition, the reduction in swelling is attributed to the reduction in the thickness of the diffuse double layer (DDL), which results in the flocculation of clay particles. In terms of order, the reduction in the thickness of DDL makes the soil skeleton shrink and causes a decrease in repellent forces, thus contributing to the flocculation of clay particles, which later became granular or formed hydrogen bonds (Akbulut and Arasan, 2010). The bond is sufficiently strong that van der waals forces, so there is not interlayer swelling in the presence of water. (Mitchell and Soga, 2005).
We thank the Reviewer a lot for the useful and valuable comments that have helped improve the manuscript.
Hoping that all the careful review is sufficient for the direct acceptance of the manuscript, thank you for your time and consideration.
Reviewer 4 Report
Dear Authors,
I found the study as an innovative approach to geotechnics. Revision is positive with the minor and a few more serious corrections.
Please consider revising the manuscript by addressing the below comments:
1) Title of the paper is correctly formed. Alternatively, please consider the title with fewer words: Effect of various proportions of Rice Husk Powder on swelling soil from New Cairo City (Egypt).
2) Introduction: please try to include references showing the broad context of the clay issue. For example after line 38 “The study area suffers from a number of problems, the most important of which is the presence of clay layers in the different geological formations, which have a serious impact on urbanization” As experience from different worldwide places shows (1,2,…): various clay properties can play a fundamental role in determining geotechnical conditions.
- Characteristics of the London Clay from the Terminal 5 site at Heathrow Airport. Hight et al. 2007 (https://doi.org/10.1680/geot.2007.57.1.3);
- Kiełbasiński, K.; Dobak, P.; Kaczmarek, Ł.; Kowalczyk, S. The Influences of Local Glacitectonic Disturbance on Overconsolidated Clays for Upland Slope Stability Conditions: A Case Study. Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, 10718. https://doi.org/10.3390/app112210718
3) In the methods section there is no need to describe standardized elementary tests procedures - just describe the most important ones and refer to the appropriate source. Please supplement the number of samples/tests dedicated to individual parameters. In table 1, complete the tests statistics (mean value, standard deviation, etc.).
4) Results and discussion section:
Tables nr 3, 4, 5 should be as one, or they can be described by text.
I don't understand; some text in chapter 3.1. and 3.2. is repeated. I marked it in yellow. Please verify.
Chapter 3.3 should not be entitled Effect of PH on Atterberg Limits?
In table 6, complete the tests statistics (mean value, standard deviation, etc.).
Discussion - the results should be compared to other published recent papers about a similar topic. Perhaps it is worth putting a graph showing the generalized results of this research against other soil stabilization methods.
It is suggested to extend the interpretation of the tests results by, for example, using the relationship to determine other parameters (e.g. strength) based on Attneberg limits (paper “Relationships between strength properties and Atterberg limits of fine-grained Soils” Shimobe and Spagnoli, 2021 https://doi.org/10.1080/17486025.2021.1940317 or paper “Atterberg limits in relation to other properties of fine-grained soils” Dolinar and Skrabl, 2013).
Please, explain in more detail the Figure 5 - why linear trends are not observed.
Please expand the explanation of the mechanism of RHP action (line 295).
Try to add several international references within 5 years back from today
5) Please ensure re-checking and proofreading the paper, e.g. line 45 (is “Construction of this kind of soil…”; change word construction on structure or composition), in chapter 2.3, line 296, line 304 (remarks in pdf file).
Best regards
Comments for author File: Comments.pdf
Author Response
Dear Reviewer,
Please find attached the submission of the carefully revised version of the manuscript in Ref., following the minor comments and modification of the Reviewer.
Below is a detailed list of the changes made in response to the Reviewer’s minor comments (in italics), which outlines every change made a point by point. The changes are marked in the manuscript text (Green font).
1) Title of the paper is correctly formed. Alternatively, please consider the title with fewer words: Effect of various proportions of Rice Husk Powder on swelling soil from New Cairo City (Egypt).
Answer: Thank you for this valuable comment. The title have changed to (Effect of various proportions of Rice Husk Powder on swelling soil from New Cairo City, Egypt) in the revised manuscript with green color.
2- Introduction: please try to include references showing the broad context of the clay issue. For example after line 38 “The study area suffers from a number of problems, the most important of which is the presence of clay layers in the different geological formations, which have a serious impact on urbanization” As experience from different worldwide places shows (1,2,…): various clay properties can play a fundamental role in determining geotechnical conditions.
- Characteristics of the London Clay from the Terminal 5 site at Heathrow Airport. Hight et al. 2007 (https://doi.org/10.1680/geot.2007.57.1.3);
- Kiełbasiński, K.; Dobak, P.; Kaczmarek, Ł.; Kowalczyk, S. The Influences of Local Glacitectonic Disturbance on Overconsolidated Clays for Upland Slope Stability Conditions: A Case Study. Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, 10718. https://doi.org/10.3390/app112210718
Answer: Thank you very much. This part is added to the introduction part with green color in the the introduction and reference sections of the revised manuscript.
.3- In the methods section there is no need to describe standardized elementary tests procedures - just describe the most important ones and refer to the appropriate source. Please supplement the number of samples/tests dedicated to individual parameters. In table 1, complete the tests statistics (mean value, standard deviation, etc.).
Answer:Thanks.The number of samples/tests and the test statistics is provided.
4- Results and discussion section:
Tables nr 3, 4, 5 should be as one, or they can be described by text
Answer: Thank you for this valuable comment.The tables no. 3,4,5 are tabulated in one table no. 3.
I don't understand; some text in chapter 3.1. and 3.2. is repeated. I marked it in yellow. Please verify.
Answer:Thank you heartily.The section 3.1 is deleted in the revised manuscript.
Chapter 3.3 should not be entitled Effect of PH on Atterberg Limits?
Answer: thank you very much. The correct tittle is Effect of RHP on Atterberg Limits
In table 6, complete the tests statistics (mean value, standard deviation, etc.).
Answer: Thank you for this valuable note. The test statistics are provided in table 6 with green color.
Discussion - the results should be compared to other published recent papers about a similar topic. Perhaps it is worth putting a graph showing the generalized results of this research against other soil stabilization methods.
Answer: Thank you for this valuable note. The comparison to other publised paper is provide in the end of the revised manuscript with green color.
It is suggested to extend the interpretation of the tests results by, for example, using the relationship to determine other parameters (e.g. strength) based on Attneberg limits (paper “Relationships between strength properties and Atterberg limits of fine-grained Soils” Shimobe and Spagnoli, 2021 https://doi.org/10.1080/17486025.2021.1940317 or paper “Atterberg limits in relation to other properties of fine-grained soils” Dolinar and Skrabl, 2013)
Answer: Thank you for this valuable note. This method of interpretation needs more samples of clay and I will use it in the next paper.
Please, explain in more detail the Figure 5 - why linear trends are not observed.
Answer: Thank you very much. The explanation is provided with red color in the revised manuscript at the request of one of the reviewers as follows: The primary reason for these changes is the reduction in clay content in the soil mixture or may be an excessive accumulation of cations on the clay [7].
Please expand the explanation of the mechanism of RHP action (line 295).
Answer:Thank you heartily. More explanation is provided about the mechanism with green color in the revised manuscript as follows: The increase in PL and decrease in PI is primarily caused by the flocculation of clay particles and the increasing number of coarse particles in the mixture. The reaction compounds decrease the repulsion forces between clay particles transmitting the flocculated structure with some cementing or bonding, which should have been responsible for the decrease of the free swell and PI. In addition, the reduction in swelling is attributed to the reduction in the thickness of the diffuse double layer (DDL), which results in the flocculation of clay particles. In terms of the order, the reduction in the thickness of DDL makes the soil skeleton shrink and causes a decrease in repellent forces, thus contributing to the flocculation of clay particles, which later became granular or formed hydrogen bonds (Akbulut and Arasan, 2010). The bond is sufficiently strong that van der waals forces, so there is not interlayer swelling in the presence of water. (Mitchell and Soga, 2005).
Try to add several international references within 5 years back from today
Answer: Thank you for this valuable comment. Some references have been added such as
Duong, N.T; Nguyen, Nu. Effect of different types of rice husk ash on some geotechnical properties of cement-admmixed soil. Iraq Geol J, 2020, 35 (2C):1-12. DOI: 10.46717/igj.53.2c.1Rs-2020-09-01.
Jai, A; Choudhary, A.K; Jha, J.N. Influence of rice husk ash on the swelling and strength characterisrics of expansive soil. Geotech Geol Eng, 2020, 38: 2239-2302. DOI.org/10.1007/s10706-019-01087-6.
Daryati, M.A; Ramadan, M.A. Improvement of expansive soils stabilized with rice husk ash (RHA). J Phys Conf Series, 2020, 1625 (012006): 12006. DOI: 10.1088/1742-6596/1625/1/012006.
Ganta, M; Baskar, R; Rama, J.S.K. Rice husk ash as a potential supplementary cementitious material in concrete solution towards sustainable construction. Innov Infrastru Solution, 2022, 7 (1):51. DOI: 10.1007/s41062-021-00643-5
12- 5) Please ensure re-checking and proofreading the paper, e.g. line 45 (is “Construction of this kind of soil…”; change word construction on structure or composition), in chapter 2.3, line 296, line 304 (remarks in pdf file)
Answer: Thank you for this valuable comment.The correction is provided.
We thank the Reviewer a lot for the useful and valuable comments that have helped improve the manuscript.
Hoping that all the careful review is sufficient for the direct acceptance of the manuscript, thank you for your time and consideration.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report
This paper proposes methods to stabilize swelling soil with different proportions of rice husk powder, and studies the physical characteristics of the soil.
Authors have made detailed answers and revisions to the questions raised by the reviewers. The quality of the paper has been significantly improved.
Author Response
Dear Reviewer
Thank you very much for your recommendations.
Best Regards
Reviewer 4 Report
Dear Authors,
The article looks very good now.
One final change - please correct table 1:
The lines contain parameters, in the second column their value (here add information that it is an average value). You added 3 lines regarding statistics, which are not clear what parameters they refer to. It will be clearer if you add e.g. 2 columns standard deviation, the number of test samples), which will relate to the individual parameters listed in the lines.
Good luck and best regards
Author Response
Dear Reviewer,
Please find attached the submission of the carefully revised version of the manuscript in Ref., following the minor comments and modification of the Reviewer.
Below is a detailed list of the changes made in response to the Reviewer’s minor comments (in italics), which outlines every change made a point by point. The changes are marked in the manuscript text (Red font).
Comment: The lines contain parameters, in the second column their value (here add information that it is an average value). You added 3 lines regarding statistics, which are not clear what parameters they refer to. It will be clearer if you add e.g. 2 columns standard deviation, the number of test samples), which will relate to the individual parameters listed in the lines.
Response: Thank you very much. Table 1 corrected in the manuscript. Table 1 describes the measured parameters for the parent soil. Therefore, each parameter has one value and doesn't need to add the statistical values (Mean value, standard deviation and variance) in the table. In table 4, after the classification of parent soil, we have introduced the statistical values.
We hope to answer your question.
We thank the Reviewer a lot for the useful and valuable comments that have helped improve the manuscript.
Hoping that all the careful review is sufficient for the direct acceptance of the manuscript, thank you for your time and consideration.
Best wishes,
This manuscript is a resubmission of an earlier submission. The following is a list of the peer review reports and author responses from that submission.
