Calculation Method of Stable Bearing Capacity of Fastener-Type Steel Pipe Formwork Support Upright Rod

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The study on "Calculation method of stable bearing capacity of fastener-type steel pipe formwork support upright rod" is interesting, however major corrections should be made". 

The format of the publication of an article should be sectioned according to the format of the journal, delimiting, title, introduction, material and methods, results, discussion, conclusions and references.

 

 

The discussion section with support of references should be described.

 

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

1.      Revise the abstract according to the journal guidelines. The abstract should be a single paragraph and should follow the style of structured abstracts, but without headings: 1) Background: Place the question addressed in a broad context and highlight the purpose of the study; 2) Methods: Describe briefly the main methods or treatments applied. Include any relevant preregistration numbers, and species and strains of any animals used. 3) Results: Summarize the article's main findings; and 4) Conclusion: Indicate the main conclusions or interpretations. The abstract should be an objective representation of the article: it must not contain results which are not presented and substantiated in the main text and should not exaggerate the main conclusions.

2.      The authors have discussed the field problem; however, the research novelty is not expressed properly.

3.       Figures description must be enough for self-explanation and label the major components.

4.      Figure 3 is blurting. Revise it.

5.      Define the abbreviations and symbols.

6.      The literature is very limited. Writing equations is not enough.

7.      Discuss the figures in details.

8.      What special results the authors have shown from the theoretical calculations?

9.      Express your results in details parallel to the existing literature.

10.   Numerical modelling results and their discussion?

11.   The conclusion must be concise and must be based on the findings of this article.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

The work is devoted to the actual and popular topic of increasing the strength of building structures. The material is presented consistently, but some statements are questionable. (I will indicate below). The mathematical apparatus is beyond doubt. The structure of the article almost corresponds to the requirements of the journal.

1. Line 30-41 you must specify the source. 773 cases and almost 41 tons of people died. This means that at least 53 people died in each case. Are all accidents related to deforestation? Is everything right? If yes, please indicate the source of this information.

2. The article completely lacks a review of existing calculation methods. In line 109, the author refers to the formula and bases his research on it. Are there other formulas and methods? In the article, it is necessary to finish off the section “review of existing methods” and analyze the world experience in this area. It is also necessary to expand the literature review (List of References) to at least 25-40 sources.

3. You need to add a "discussion" section. Where the authors showed the positive and negative aspects of their study.

 

Conclusion. This type of work cannot be accepted. Two missing sections need to be added. In this form, the work is similar to a lab report rather than a scientific study.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

Concise the conclusion 

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

Good afternoon dear author. Thank you for such a complete answer to the question about traumatism. Your article has been greatly improved. It could be recommended for publication, but you have not eliminated one remark. According to the rules adopted in the academic and scientific community, the article should provide a detailed review of existing solution methods. What is reflected in the bibliography. As a rule, such a list includes 35-40 sources. In your work, the bibliography contains 18 sources. Some of which are not in the public domain. I understand that it is quite difficult for you to find research on this topic, so I take the liberty of recommending you a few publications.

https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings13030820

https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings13030705

https://doi.org/10.3390/rs15051264

https://doi.org/10.3390/photonics10030242

https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings12122076

I found all these publications using the search engine https://www.mdpi.com/search?q=construction+formwork in total 77 documents on this topic were found there. I would also recommend including the following works in the bibliography:

https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/990/1/012068

https://doi.org/10.1109/ElConRus54750.2022.9755852

https://doi.org/10.1109/ElConRus51938.2021.9396250

https://doi.org/10.3390/informatics9030062

 

These works will allow you to show that the scope of your scientific research is more extensive.

Conclusion. The article needs to be improved. In general, the work is positive and the authors have done a great job. After completing the list of references, I will recommend this work for publication.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx