Study on Shear Resistance and Structural Performance of Corrugated Steel–Concrete Composite Deck

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

1. This paper carries out a comprehensive study on the shear resistance and structural performance of corrugated steel-concrete composite deck. By applying finite-element analysis, the authors perform parametric analysis and structural design optimization that can be designed to ensure optimum performance. My major concern is the application of the ABAQUS software, in which the authors may try to validate the reliability of the selected model and mesh discretization. 

2. The authors defined some symbols, and it may be better to add a diagram clearly and comparatively illustrating the symbols to explain the differences. 

3. The authors should explain more on the possible mechanism reasons that may cause the phenomena in the optimized performance. 

4. The authors should involve more advanced studies in the literature review on material studies, for example, "https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compscitech.2020.108460".

5. Please explain the representativeness of the scenario set-up to demonstrate on the application guidance in practical engineering. 

Author Response

The authors defined some symbols, and it may be better to add a diagram clearly and comparatively illustrating the symbols to explain the differences. 

Sorry, I'm not sure which part of the symbols you're talking about, but in the text the relevant symbols have corresponding diagrams or text descriptions.

Reviewer 2 Report

THIS PAPER IS WELL PRESENTED AND IT CAN BE ACCEPTED IN THE PRESENT FORM

MODERATE ENGLISH CORRECTION REQUIRED APPROPRIATELY

Author Response

Thanks to your comments, we have made changes to the corresponding grammatical issues raised by other reviewers

Reviewer 3 Report

Dear Editor,

 

This manuscript is aimed to investigate the shear performance and slip of a new composite bridge deck structure, which uses the corrugated steel plate as the base plate, and analyze the shear performance and slip of the composite bridge deck based on the structure of pegs and PBL perforated steel plate as the shear connection key. Although, the authors have been reported interesting data, the manuscript should be revised by minor revision. The detailed problems are following: 

1) English texting should be fundamentally revised. There are some grammatical mistakes so that some parts of statements are confusing.

 2) The abstract is relatively long. It should be shorter. It is proposed that only the main founding are reported in this section.

 3) The introduction section should be shorter. It is very long.

 4) It is necessary to split the experimental procedures from the results.   

 5) The results are interesting. 

English texting should be fundamentally revised. There are some grammatical mistakes so that some parts of statements are confusing.

Author Response

The abstract is relatively long. It should be shorter. It is proposed that only the main founding are reported in this section.

We have shortened the abstract.

The introduction section should be shorter. It is very long.

We shortened the introduction.

 

Reviewer 4 Report

The authors have worked on the paper titled “Study on Shear resistance and structural performance of corru-2 gated steel-concrete composite deck”. The work is interesting; however, I have the following concerns which should be addressed.

After the introduction, a small discussion about methodology, formulation of the problem, materials and methods should be discussed before discussing about Finite element studies.

Line 210- it is not clear what type of unit cell is used for the study.

Line 220- why the C3D8R unit cell was employed? Was it recommended by the software or any other reasons behind it? “which is more accu-220 rate and less prone to shear locking”- how do you conclude this?

Line 242- suddenly experimental studies are discussed here, even though in the current work the authors have not done any experimental work.

Line 294- there is no figure 5(h), but has been mention the text, authors should clarify

Line 314- on what basis the heights were chosen? Are there any standards or previous studies or is it chosen based on the application?

Line 431- The loading values of 500 kN to 630 kN, are these values close to the real-life situations or what is the basis for doing this?

Line 458- what is wheel load?

Finally, since the authors have used FEM studies, how do you validate the results? Since validation is a very foundation for any research, the authors have to clarify on that.

Some notes on the content of the paper:

In the abstract line 10- “Nowadays, the rapid development….”, should be written as “Nowadays, with the rapid development….”,

There are very long complicated sentences in many places in the article which makes it very difficult for the readers to follow. These sentences can be broken down into simpler and ore clear sentences. Some examples are given below-

Line 14 to 19, line 29-35, line 69-71 and 72-74.

Authors are requested to identify and modify such sentences throughout the article.

Avoid making use of first person like “we, our, us “etc on the journal articles. Example-Line 15 and 195.

Line 235-rephrase the sentence, it is not clear.

The overall quality of the English is fine , however the sentence formation in may places are too long and complicated and should be broken down into simpler sentences.

 

Author Response

 It is not clear what type of unit cell is used for the study.

The unit type of shell cell, it's mentioned in the text.

Why the C3D8R unit cell was employed? Was it recommended by the software or any other reasons behind it? “which is more accu-220 rate and less prone to shear locking”- how do you conclude this?

The C3D8R unit cell is more accurate and less prone to shear locking, it's mentioned in the text.

Suddenly experimental studies are discussed here, even though in the current work the authors have not done any experimental work.

The experimental study here refers to the localized roll-out experiments of corrugated steel-concrete composite bridge deck slabs in engineering examples.

There is no figure 5(h), but has been mention the text, authors should clarify

Figure 5(h) here has been modified to Figure 6b

What is wheel load?

Concentrated loads on wheels

In the abstract line 10- “Nowadays, the rapid development….”, should be written as “Nowadays, with the rapid development….”,

Changes have been made to the abstract

There are very long complicated sentences in many places in the article which makes it very difficult for the readers to follow. These sentences can be broken down into simpler and ore clear sentences. Some examples are given below

Line 14 to 19, line 29-35, line 69-71 and 72-74.

Authors are requested to identify and modify such sentences throughout the article.

We have revised the relevant sentences

Avoid making use of first person like “we, our, us “etc on the journal articles. Example-Line 15 and 195.

Modified

Line 235-rephrase the sentence, it is not clear.

Sentence has been modified

Reviewer 5 Report

Review Report

Study on Shear resistance and structural performance of corrugated steel-concrete composite deck

 

This research provides a theoretical reference for practical engineering application of the shear performance and slip of the new composite bridge deck structure, which uses the corrugated steel plate as the base plate and analyze the shear performance and slip of the composite bridge deck based on the structure of pegs and PBL perforated steel plate as the shear connection key.  It is considered a good addition in this field. The characterization of the prepared material using different techniques and the  analysis of the figures are clear. The English language is good, and the review of the results was excellent. The conclusion gave an adequate summary of the research in precise points. However, there are some  minor observations that must be considered and corrected for the search to come out properly for publication.

·       Some sentences in whole the manuscript is very long. Authors must shorten some long sentences. One of the important conditions for writing research papers is to clarify the idea in the fewest words.

·       Some figures need resolution because they look faded such as figs. 7, 10, 11, 12, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21.

Author Response

We have changed some of the long sentences in the text, but these images are already the latest version of what we have

Reviewer 6 Report

Both experimental part and computational part of the paper are conducted and presented appropriately. In my opinion the paper is good and can be approved for publication 

Author Response

Thank you for your review, we have made corresponding changes to the manuscript

Round 2

Reviewer 4 Report

That authors have made the changes and the work can be accepted for publication.

Regards

Very minute changes may be required with respect to the grammar. Overall quality is good.