Bond Behavior of Glass Fine Aggregate Reinforcement Concrete after Chloride Erosion under Deicing Salt

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The authors have extensively researched "Bond Behavior of Glass Fine Aggregate Reinforcement Concrete after Chloride Erosion". But, most of the content used by the author in the manuscript matched his work published earlier.  Do careful revision and address the following comments.

Modify the title by enhancing the specific the type of chloride environments studied.

Mention the specific results in abstract, such as the percentage increase in bond strength and stiffness, to understand the impact of glass fine aggregate (GFA) on concrete's bond behavior under chloride erosion.

The keywords are well-chosen, covering essential topics and methods of the study. Ensuring all major concepts are included will enhance the manuscript's visibility.

The introduction provides a solid background and justification for the research. However, explicitly stating the research gaps the study aims to fill could strengthen the narrative.

It's suggested to briefly discuss previous findings on the bond behavior of concrete reinforced with other types of fine aggregates under similar conditions for a comprehensive overview.

The concrete mixture proportions are well-tabulated. Include rationale for choosing specific GFA contents in the experimental design.

This section thoroughly discusses the outcomes, supported by figures and tables. It would be beneficial to compare these results with those of other studies to contextualize the findings within the broader field of research. Even some texts are similar to the text which you published earlier, cite those manuscript.

The discussion on the bond mechanism of GFARC is good. and also Clarify, how these mechanisms differ or align with those observed in natural aggregate reinforced concrete under similar conditions would enhance the discussion section.

The conclusions summarize the key findings and implications. Expanding this section to include potential applications of these findings in real-world scenarios and suggestions for future research would provide readers with a forward-looking perspective.

Author Response

Dear Editors and Reviewers,

Thank you for your letter and for the reviewers’ comments concerning our manuscript entitled “Bond Behavior of Glass Fine Aggregate Reinforcement Con-crete after Chloride Erosion under Deicing Salt” ID:( coatings-2945378). Those comments are all valuable and very helpful for revising and improving our paper, as well as the important guiding significance to our researches. We have studied comments carefully and have made correction which we hope meet with approval.

Best regards, Fengchi Wang and Yanfeng Li.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

SPECIFIC QUESTIONS

1.       What does the ultimate bond strength represent in the context of concrete reinforcement?

2.       How does the ultimate bond strength change with varying levels of chloride concentration and aggregate replacement rate, as depicted in Figure 6?

3.       Explain the significance of the growth rate of ultimate bond strength (ω1) and its relation to chloride corrosion, as illustrated in Figure 7.

4.       Discuss the trend observed in the growth rate of ultimate bond strength (ω2) concerning chloride concentration and GFARC content, as shown in Figure 8.

5.       What inference can be drawn from the downward trend of ω1 with the increase in aggregate replacement rate under chlorine erosion?

6.       How does the addition of glass sand affect the peak slip and bond stiffness of reinforced concrete under different levels of chloride erosion, as shown in Figures 10 and 11?

7.       Explain the observed differences in bond stiffness between NARC and GFARC groups under various chloride concentrations.

8.       What mechanisms contribute to the bond force between deformed steel and concrete, as described in the text and depicted in Figure 12?

9.       How does the addition of glass sand impact the resistance of GFARC to chloride-ion corrosion, as discussed in the text?

10.   Summarize the conclusions drawn regarding the bond performance of GFARC compared to NARC, considering its resistance to chloride ion erosion and overall suitability for reinforced concrete structures.

SPECIFIC QUESTIONS

1.       What does the ultimate bond strength represent in the context of concrete reinforcement?

2.       How does the ultimate bond strength change with varying levels of chloride concentration and aggregate replacement rate, as depicted in Figure 6?

3.       Explain the significance of the growth rate of ultimate bond strength (ω1) and its relation to chloride corrosion, as illustrated in Figure 7.

4.       Discuss the trend observed in the growth rate of ultimate bond strength (ω2) concerning chloride concentration and GFARC content, as shown in Figure 8.

5.       What inference can be drawn from the downward trend of ω1 with the increase in aggregate replacement rate under chlorine erosion?

6.       How does the addition of glass sand affect the peak slip and bond stiffness of reinforced concrete under different levels of chloride erosion, as shown in Figures 10 and 11?

7.       Explain the observed differences in bond stiffness between NARC and GFARC groups under various chloride concentrations.

8.       What mechanisms contribute to the bond force between deformed steel and concrete, as described in the text and depicted in Figure 12?

9.       How does the addition of glass sand impact the resistance of GFARC to chloride-ion corrosion, as discussed in the text?

10.   Summarize the conclusions drawn regarding the bond performance of GFARC compared to NARC, considering its resistance to chloride ion erosion and overall suitability for reinforced concrete structures.

Author Response

Dear Editors and Reviewers,

Thank you for your letter and for the reviewers’ comments concerning our manuscript entitled “Bond Behavior of Glass Fine Aggregate Reinforcement Con-crete after Chloride Erosion under Deicing Salt” ID:( coatings-2945378). Those comments are all valuable and very helpful for revising and improving our paper, as well as the important guiding significance to our researches. We have studied comments carefully and have made correction which we hope meet with approval.

Best regards, Fengchi Wang and Yanfeng Li.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

This study delves into the bond between concrete containing fine glass aggregate and reinforcements, particularly under the influence of Chloride corrosion.

The chosen topic struck me as both original and pertinent. It offers valuable insights into the behavior of a specific type of reinforced concrete subject to deterioration from Chloride corrosion. While the bond behavior between steel reinforcement and concrete has been extensively studied, this investigation stands out by examining the interplay of two competing factors: corrosion and fine glass aggregate.

From what I gathered, the authors have dissected the adverse effects of Chloride ion ingress into reinforced concrete into two distinct phenomena: concrete erosion and steel corrosion. Concrete erosion refers to the gradual peeling of the concrete cover of the steel over time, whereas steel corrosion entails the corroded steel exerting radial pressure on the concrete, resulting in longitudinal cracks along the reinforcements. However, I believe the authors should provide a clearer explanation of how these two phenomena were replicated in their experimental setup. I couldn't find a precise mention of the method used to induce corrosion in the steel bars. Based on the figures, it seems that an accelerated corrosion regime was employed to prepare corroded specimens for mechanical testing. Nonetheless, accelerated corrosion might not fully capture the detrimental effects of Chloride erosion. Therefore, the authors may need to justify this aspect of the testing process. Additionally, a more explicit elucidation of the experimental results regarding bond-slip behavior under varying levels of Chloride corrosion and steel corrosion would be beneficial.

Regarding Fig. 12, the source of the microscopic images wasn't evident. I suggest that the authors provide clarification on this matter.

Furthermore, it would be helpful if the authors included some practical recommendations on incorporating fine glass aggregate concrete in projects for practitioners.

Author Response

Dear Editors and Reviewers,

Thank you for your letter and for the reviewers’ comments concerning our manuscript entitled “Bond Behavior of Glass Fine Aggregate Reinforcement Con-crete after Chloride Erosion under Deicing Salt” ID:( coatings-2945378). Those comments are all valuable and very helpful for revising and improving our paper, as well as the important guiding significance to our researches. We have studied comments carefully and have made correction which we hope meet with approval.

Best regards, Fengchi Wang and Yanfeng Li.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

The authors addressed all the review comments raised and the paper can be accepted for publication 

Reviewer 2 Report

Accepted for publication