A Comprehensive Review and Analysis of Nanosensors for Structural Health Monitoring in Bridge Maintenance: Innovations, Challenges, and Future Perspectives

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Nanosensors are a promising tool for structural health monitoring (SHM) in the context of bridge maintenance. It can be comprehensive monitoring of bridge conditions with high sensitivity, fast response, and multi-parameter detection function. This review clearly describes the various types of nanosensors. The current status and future challenge are provided comprehensively. However, some issues should be concerned in the list below,

1.      How are the data in Figure 1 calculated and counted? And there is no description of Figure 1 in the text. Is the description of Figure 2 in the text modified to the description of Figure 1 in line 85?

2.      It is suggested to include an overview figure that describes the types of nanosensors used in the SHM at the first place. Probably the category of mechanism and functions can as well benefit for making an overall understanding to this field.

3.      The article mentions in the abstract to provide a comprehensive explanation of the integration strategies. It seems that a more comprehensive explanation needs to be provided in section 3.6.

 

  

The English usage in this manuscript is good. 

Author Response

1. Thank you for your thoughtful inquiry regarding the data derivation in Figure 1, which aims to illustrate the significance of various facets of Structural Health Monitoring (SHM) in bridge maintenance. The depicted ratings on the x-axis, show the importance of SHM across diverse aspects and were procured and computed through a robust methodology. Initially, a multi-disciplinary panel of experts with profound experience in bridge maintenance and SHM was assembled, ensuring a precise and insightful evaluation of each highlighted aspect, such as enhanced safety and optimized maintenance. We fixed that on line 89 in the text. We also fixed the wrong figure numbering.
2. An overview figure is added at the beginning of the results. In addition to the text in blue.
3. paragraphs 3.6.3 and 3.6.4 were added.

Once again, thank you for your perspicacious review and for the time and expertise you have invested in evaluating our manuscript. We anticipate that the enhancements, catalyzed by your thoughtful feedback.

Reviewer 2 Report

 

 

 

 

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Thank you for the valuable comments!

1. Reference 10 is removed.
2. Done in line 89 in blue.
3. Figure 2 is removed.
4. The figure is replaced with a pie chart. These estimates aim to reflect a general trend in the research field and should be interpreted with caution. Mechanical exfoliation and CVD are observed to be among the most common methods for producing graphene for sensor applications, attributed to their ability to yield high-quality graphene sheets. On the other hand, epitaxial growth, chemical synthesis, and molecular beam epitaxy, while utilized in certain applications, appear less frequently in the surveyed literature. Future work with a systematic meta-analysis approach may provide a more quantified and statistically validated distribution of these techniques. This was added to the text and figure caption "

   Figure 3 illustrates the relative prevalence of various graphene fabrication techniques, estimated based on an extensive review of the available literature. It is crucial to note that the specific percentages assigned to each technique—Mechanical Exfoliation (30%), CVD (40%), Epitaxial Growth (15%), Chemical Synthesis (10%), and Molecular Beam Epitaxy (5%)—are approximations derived from the author's observations across numerous studies and do not represent precise quantitative data from a single source or dataset."

5. Section 4 is updated.
6. Sorry for that, we tried to revise the sections accordingly. 
7. The whole section 5 is updated.
8. The whole section 5 is updated.
9. A new discussion section is added.
10. A new discussion section is added.
11. A new discussion section is added.
12. A new discussion section is added.
13. A new discussion section is added.

Once again, thank you for your perspicacious review and for the time and expertise you have invested in evaluating our manuscript. We anticipate that the enhancements, catalyzed by your thoughtful feedback.