Mechanical Properties of Short Polymer Fiber-Reinforced Geopolymer Composites
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
- Need multiple grammar revisions, also please see spelling at different places
- Need better introduction? need to mention what are geopolymers? Mention different class or classification based on different material used (different types of geopolymers)? Different types of reinforcements used other than polymer fibers? What are its defects and benefits? and then finally why you need polymer fibers?
- Also, different polymer fibers have different inherent properties (crystallinity, thermal stability, mechanical properties etc.). Therefore, different fibers can have different influence on the composites. Need a section in this review, comparing the inherent properties of different polymer fibers used in geopolymer composites.
- In the introduction, authors have been talking about fracture toughness, or energy absorbed before fracture. However, the fracture toughness has not been compared or mentioned from any references. Fracture toughness is important for polymer fiber composites.
- Page 3 Line 114-115- Do you have the flexural strength for geopolymer composite without fibers? Page 3 line 123 - 0.5% FE fibers?
- Need to be consistent with terms. Sometimes control samples, in some places geopolymers.
Author Response
- Need multiple grammar revisions, also please see spelling at different places
The grammar revision have been made.
- Need better introduction? need to mention what are geopolymers? Mention different class or classification based on different material used (different types of geopolymers)? Different types of reinforcements used other than polymer fibers? What are its defects and benefits? and then finally why you need polymer fibers?
The information for the introduction has been added (Section 1)
- Also, different polymer fibers have different inherent properties (crystallinity, thermal stability, mechanical properties etc.). Therefore, different fibers can have different influence on the composites. Need a section in this review, comparing the inherent properties of different polymer fibers used in geopolymer composites.
The sections 4 and 5 are rearranged. The new information is added to section 4.
- In the introduction, authors have been talking about fracture toughness, or energy absorbed before fracture. However, the fracture toughness has not been compared or mentioned from any references. Fracture toughness is important for polymer fiber composites.
The sections 4 and 5 are rearranged. The new information is added to section 4.
- Page 3 Line 114-115- Do you have the flexural strength for geopolymer composite without fibers? Page 3 line 123 - 0.5% FE fibers?
The information have been verified and corrected. There is lack of information for the plain matrix in the article.
- Need to be consistent with terms. Sometimes control samples, in some places geopolymers.
The terms are described if the author mark it in the article. The different authors used different parameters and it is not always possible to unify it. This explanation will be added into the text.
Reviewer 2 Report
The review reports the current development of short polymeric fiber-reinforced geopolymer composites. The work is well organized in giving an overview for almost all polymeric fibers that are used in cementitious composites at the moment. However, the manuscript is lack of an overall picture and some important aspects for what is currently known in the field (as detailed below).
- The manuscript mentioned mainly compressive and flexural strength of fiber-reinforced geopolymer when it comes to mechanical properties. However, there are so many other aspects that need to be discussed.
- First, tensile strength was mentioned but not thoroughly, while this should be the main contribution of fibers in composites. The authors should keep in mind that the main aim of using fibrous reinforcement is not about increasing in mechanical strength, but improving the tensile performance of the composites. Please improve your work with better overview about the tensile behavior of reinforced composites.
- Second, some important mechanical properties were missed e.g., stiffness, fracture toughness, ductility, etc. Please clarify why the authors left these properties out. Otherwise, consider to improve your work by adding these missing information.
- There are many information from other articles that were referred incorrectly.
- In Table 1, many works used volume fraction in their recipes but the authors mentioned them as weight fraction. Some examples are Ref. 21, 33, 35, 60, and 61. Therefore, please double check all references and correct the information.
- In Table 2, some information seems to be paradox. For instance, Ref. 33, the compressive strength reduced, while flexural strength increase? Please clarify this. The percentage of increase/reduction was also miscalculated. Please double check and correct all data and calculation in this table.
- When it comes to composite materials, an important factor is the interfacial property between fibers and matrix. This piece of information is missing in this work, but very important to explain at macro scale for mechanical properties. Please provide a thorough discussion on this aspect based on many published works about single fiber pullout, design for engineered cementitious composites.
- The authors are asked to improve the English in this manuscript. Several typos were found: line 78 (king?), line 123 (FE?), line 161 (propertied?). In addition, the authors need to keep consistency in using either American or British English (i.e., fiber vs. fibre).
- Line 341, H2O or H2O2?
Author Response
- The manuscript mentioned mainly compressive and flexural strength of fiber-reinforced geopolymer when it comes to mechanical properties. However, there are so many other aspects that need to be discussed.
The most common investigated properties are compressive and flexural strength, because of that the article is focused on this properties. The flexural strength is related with tensile properties. The tensile strength is not always investigated in building materials because of the work characteristic for this kind of materials.. Nevertheless the additional information is added. The sections 4 and 5 are rearranged. The new information is added to section 4.
- First, tensile strength was mentioned but not thoroughly, while this should be the main contribution of fibers in composites. The authors should keep in mind that the main aim of using fibrous reinforcement is not about increasing in mechanical strength, but improving the tensile performance of the composites. Please improve your work with better overview about the tensile behavior of reinforced composites.
The sections 4 and 5 are rearranged. The new information is added to section 4.
- Second, some important mechanical properties were missed e.g., stiffness, fracture toughness, ductility, etc. Please clarify why the authors left these properties out. Otherwise, consider to improve your work by adding these missing information.
This research are relatively rarely presented in the articles. The overall summaries for this kind of research has been added. The sections 4 and 5 are rearranged. The new information is added to section 4.
- There are many information from other articles that were referred incorrectly.
The information have been verified and corrected.
- In Table 1, many works used volume fraction in their recipes but the authors mentioned them as weight fraction. Some examples are 21, 33, 35, 60, and 61. Therefore, please double check all references and correct the information.
The information have been verified and corrected.
- In Table 2, some information seems to be paradox. For instance, Ref. 33, the compressive strength reduced, while flexural strength increase? Please clarify this. The percentage of increase/reduction was also miscalculated. Please double check and correct all data and calculation in this table.
The information have been verified and corrected. This position was wrongly referred in the tables à It was replaced by [35].
- When it comes to composite materials, an important factor is the interfacial property between fibers and matrix. This piece of information is missing in this work, but very important to explain at macro scale for mechanical properties. Please provide a thorough discussion on this aspect based on many published works about single fiber pullout, design for engineered cementitious composites.
The sections 4 and 5 are rearranged. The new information is added to section 4.
- The authors are asked to improve the English in this manuscript. Several typos were found: line 78 (king?), line 123 (FE?), line 161 (propertied?). In addition, the authors need to keep consistency in using either American or British English (i.e., fiber vs. fibre).
The English revision have been made.
- Line 341, H2O or H2O2?
The information have been verified and corrected.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
Please go through multiple grammar revisions
Author Response
The grammar have been checked.
Reviewer 2 Report
After the revision, the clarification and quality of this work have been improved. However, Figure 1 (the new figure) contains incorrect info. Rock wool and mineral wool cannot be organic fibers. Also, basalt fiber is a man-made material and not a natural one. Please correct these points.
Author Response
I have been changed classification.
