Defensible Spaces

Reviewer 1

Reply

Please give more details in text about Figure 5.

Please provide more details in text about Figure 7.

Line 154-155 “Table 2 shows how the United States Department of Defense correlates blast effect, and the damages may cause the building”. I do not understand please explain.

Line 214-219 “Nowadays, many countries are facing unstable political situations, conflicts, and wars. Most of these attacks targeting the countries' infrastructure to paralyze inhabitants' daily behavior also affect the stability of any country. The idea behind bombing and blasts in the fourth generation wars is not to kill as many people as possible, and it works on the mental image of destruction and frillier of physical environments like buildings, streets, and the environment.”

I do not understand please explain.

On behalf of the co-authors, I would like to thank the reviewer for his/her careful reading and constructive suggestions. The points raised by the reviewer are carefully addressed/clarified as presented below.

Figure 5. caption updated to (Figure 5. Diagram showing the expected different effects of bomb blast on the building envelop such as the blast waves forces affecting the elevations and downward pressure affecting the roofs causing the building’s destruction. Source: (Y.M.).)

Figure 7. caption updated to ( Diagram showing the proposed guidelines for designing buildings within warzone areas, such as; increasing the use of low-rise buildings instead of high-rise buildings, decreasing the number of facade openings for minimizing and resisting the possible destruction effects. Source: (Y.M.). )

Line 154-155 updated to (Table 2 shows how the United States Department of Defense correlates the type of blast effect and the predicted building damages and injury to be avoided through design [22].)

Line 214-219 was more explained through rephrasing to be (Nowadays, many countries are facing unstable political situations, conflicts, and wars. Most of these attacks target the countries' infrastructure to affect their stability and paralyze inhabitants' daily activities and behaviour. The idea behind bombing and blasts in the fourth generation wars is not only to kill as many people as possible, but it targets the inhabitants’ mental image and health by creating images of destruction of the physical environments.) See lines (229-233)

Once again, we thank the reviewer for his/her time and availability, and for the valuable comments that helped improving this paper.

Reviewer 2

Reply

Progress in improving safe spaces in both peace and wartime is always an interesting question. In the case of buildings that can be affected by conflicts, the problem is usually more dramatic and must be combated by working to eradicate those conflicts, making special design of buildings unnecessary. However, since there are still countries in a war zone, it is not a bad idea to be prepared for this. In this sense, the idea presented is interesting, although it is understood that it is not excessively new, so it is convenient to further develop the points that differentiate it from other proposals already made in the past, some of them not referenced. On the other hand, it is a proposal, which must include real data or some type of simulation that verifies that the proposal is viable and effective. A comparison of the data of results obtained by other already proven designs that pursue the same end and that have been subjected to such circumstances should also be included. In this case, the advantages and disadvantages observed in each design should be referenced.
In general, the document must be completed in this sense, including the bibliography in this regard. Otherwise, it would be a proposal that, although it is interesting, would not be adequately developed from the point of view of a correct scientific methodology.

On behalf of the co-authors, I would like to thank the reviewer for his/her careful reading and constructive suggestions. The points raised by the reviewer are carefully addressed/clarified as presented below.

The authors  added a strengths and limitations section to cover the reviewers raised issues.

See Lines  214-227.

Also, the English was revised and the spelling mistakes were corrected.

Once again, we thank the reviewer for his/her time and availability, and for the valuable comments that helped improving this paper.

Reviewer 1

Reply

Unfortunately, I have forgotten one comment

Line 192-197 "Accordingly, when applying the core system separately in tall buildings the effect of lateral loads from outside will appear, that may cause the failure of the core itself and leave the buildings to hazards figure (6-a) while connecting the cores in high rise building will act defensible towards the lateral loads. While, figure (6-b) shows the proposed usage of the connected core in low-rise building in defending the lateral forces from the outside due to the pressure of loads."

You can cite the following study

"Dynamic behavior of buildings with non-uniform

stiffness along their height assessed through coupled

flexural and shear beams" DOI 10.1007/s10518-016-0009-2

On behalf of the co-authors, I would like to thank the reviewer for his/her careful reading and constructive suggestions. The points raised by the reviewer are carefully addressed/clarified as presented below.

The requested reference is added  (no.25) and cited see line 197

Once again, we thank the reviewer for his/her time and availability, and for the valuable comments that helped improving this paper.

Reviewer 2

Reply

It is still considered that the presented proposal, although interesting, should be developed in a more adequate way from the point of view of a correct scientific methodology, however, with the changes made, we have no objection to the publication of the work, if the editor considers it appropriate, based on the mention of the authors, that the entries published in the Encyclopedia are short, factual articles on various scientific topics, generally of lesser length that do not require much novelty. or innovation.

On behalf of the co-authors, I would like to thank the reviewer for his/her careful reading and constructive suggestions. The points raised by the reviewer are carefully addressed/clarified as presented below.

The authors mentioned clearly in the introduction that (this entry paper is a humble try to tackle the problem of the effect of war’s destructive images and its effect on inhabitant’s psychological perceptions about safety and well-being.) lines 32-34

Also, based on that entries papers are  usually short, factual articles and differs from the traditional detailed long articles, the authors added a strengths and limitations section and mentioned to cover the reviewer’s raised point and mentioned clearly (The findings and the proposed solutions are limited to be just a starting point of an idea. The authors understand the importance of including real data or some type of simulation and comparing the data and results obtained by other scholars. However, as this is an entry paper, the authors only aimed to shed light on the problem and its possible solutions with intending and recommending more research efforts about this concept in the future.) see lines 220-225.

Once again, we thank the reviewer for his/her time and availability, and for the valuable comments that helped improving this paper.