Influence of Elevated Temperatures on the Mechanical Performance of Sustainable-Fiber-Reinforced Recycled Aggregate Concrete: A Review

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Thanks for this comprehensive review study. Application of different types of fibers in construction industry research is a well-known topic that significantly has been studied by researches. However, it seems that application of fiber is more of a research topic rather a practical matter in real world projects. The expectation is that the authors to elaborate on this matter and investigate some reference that touching real world examples.

The authors have obtained copyright to the used figures from other sources which is a credit to them and their study.

It is recommended to elaborate on relations of circular economy concepts with your study and in articular in fiber industry if there is any example.  

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

1. "In recent times, with the increasing emphasis on sustainable development and environ- 9 mental protection awareness, the applications of fiber reinforced recycled aggregate concrete 10 (FRAC) in practical engineering have become greatly essential" Sustainable development has nothing to do with FRC, it is a strength enhancing measure, please address this.
2. Line 12: Is all FRC materials subjected to fire fails? What about steel, basalt fibers?
3. Why the word sustainable is added in title? I am not seeing any content related to it in article.
4. Line 20: at elevated temperatures are evaluated.- Actually authors had not evaluated, they referenced evaluation of other researchers, find an optimum sentence here.
5. Line 23-27 is too generic, while writing an abstract for a review article more effectiveness is needed, this is too descriptive and non pointing towards what is discussed really.
6. Line 34- are depleting more rapidly by the construction sector- Rewrite properly resources are not only depleted by this sector or write as natural resources needed for construction.....
7. Title of article and first two para of introduction seems to be disconnected, this article is about FRC... Focus there only, volume building of article is not necessary and this article has its own merit.
8. Line 59-63 reference needed, its mandatory.
9. Line 99-101: A general statement most of the authors make but there are huge list of articles, please be considerate.
10. Fig 1 is outcome of literature review, can you provide citation there for important authors
11. Line 115-118 is non scientific, is this a bibliometric article or review article? If its review article this mentioning is not required, even if its bibliometric article please be clear and particular on which database, what keywords, how many years are used in this study.
12. Line 117-124 no keyword related to fire performance is used this is a serious lacuna in this work, please check, your title and search string has no real scientific connection.
13. What is the use of fig 2 in a review article? The interpretation is not so clear, please note that number of publications in a domain has many meanings.
14. Line 128, this not only indicates the interest of authors but also multiple factors... Please interpret clearly.
15. Section 3 title says "What is the use of fig 2 in a review article? The interpretation is not so clear, please note that number of publications in a domain has many meanings." but content is focusing on temperature concept, please check once. Read line 142 from there it shifts to Temperature issues and I feel something not correct, have you missed any paragraphs between this two para?
16. Line 146: There are many studies which even have provided mathematical models to predict, please check.
17. Section 3 is the weakest section which is not linked properly, every para is unique and provide good information but not connected properly. Ex read line 154 and 157 separately you will understand the poor content flow.
18. Is fig 3 related to concrete or mortar, surely they both are different or wrong mentioning is there in the SEM image, please check.
19. Fig 4 and major content is about recycled concrete aggregate but other portions on FRC, I am bit confused, please be specific.
20. Fig 5-9 is the major content of this paper, give more priority to this portion and write clearly. Read line 270, it is introducing PP, this kind of sentences should be before section 3 not here, like this lot of writing related errors are there, please check, read and improve content flow.
21. Refer table 3 and fig 1 glass fiber is missing in one, added in one.
22. Fig 18(a), word is missing in image please check
23. Fig 19 depict degree symbol properly
24. Section 5 is discussions, why discussion a separate section in a review paper when it can be in each section.
25. Positioning of fig 24,25 is improper it should be in previous sections
26. References are taken from very few journals, is it done with reference tailing? Almost four to five journal references form major chunk of references, this is a major concern since the title is an established one and have huge references from many journals.

 

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

Hello

The article is recommended for further processing