Next Article in Journal
Coupling Coordination of “Urban Rail Transit—Social Economy” Composite System
Next Article in Special Issue
Mechanistic Analysis of Asphalt Pavements in Support of Pavement Preservation Decision-Making
Previous Article in Journal
Experimental Study on the Physical and Mechanical Characteristics of Roller Compacted Concrete Made with Recycled Aggregates
 
 
Article
Peer-Review Record

Novel Damage Index-Based Rapid Evaluation of Civil Infrastructure Subsurface Defects Using Thermography Analytics

Infrastructures 2022, 7(4), 55; https://doi.org/10.3390/infrastructures7040055
by Tianjie Zhang, Md Asif Rahman, Alex Peterson and Yang Lu *
Reviewer 1: Anonymous
Reviewer 2: Anonymous
Reviewer 3: Anonymous
Infrastructures 2022, 7(4), 55; https://doi.org/10.3390/infrastructures7040055
Submission received: 28 February 2022 / Revised: 1 April 2022 / Accepted: 5 April 2022 / Published: 8 April 2022
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Pavement Preservation Strategies)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The paper describes a study aimed at proposing a new numerical index for the assessment of damage in civil infrastructures through thermographic analysis. 

With reference to the state of the art, multiple investigation techniques are being studied to detect the inhomogeneities in terms of physical, geometric and structural characteristics of the subsurface. Specific studies are therefore directed towards high-efficiency and high-productivity techniques and procedures / protocols that, in addition to extensive and low-impact investigations, favor monitoring activities allowing the analysis of the evolution of the ongoing distresses.
With respect to these performances, the authors could highlight and quantify the benefits of the described technique in operational terms.

Investigation techniques on concrete structures based on thermographic analysis have been extensively investigated in the past giving satisfactory answers, but they inquire small areas and in very controlled environment. 

In order to validate the new damage index the authors should increase the number of samples adopted and a reasonable comparison with traditional techniques of measure should be carried out. 
The characteristics of the components and the mix designed adopted should be described more precisely. 

There is a lack of comparison between the proposed method and other studies. For the proposal of the new index it is appropriate to compare the experimental values of the mRMSE with standardized indices, usually adopted in contractual documents, such as in Pavement Management Systems.

In summary, the major limitation of the proposed index concerns the limited on field feasibility.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

  • Lines 73-75: Authors mention the main aim of the paper but it is also suggested to add how this study differs from previous efforts and how it goes beyond the current state of the art. 
  • Lines 222-223: Please mention what are the challenges occured in field environment.
  • Line 226: Authors use Styrofoam blocks to simulated air voids inside concrete beams. However, voids inside concrete beams will not purely consist of 'air' voids. Authors are kindly requested to comment on their view on this further.
  • Authors are encouraged to include a 'Next Steps and Future Research' section

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

The paper deals with an innovative methodology to quantify the defects detected by means of Infrared Thermography. The approach is of great interest in the field, and I appreciate the adoption of a methodology not involving the ML. Just a pair of suggestion to improve the quality of the submitted paper:

  1. The concrete samples used in the test should be better described (dimension, procedure of realization, concrete strength, etc), i.e. in a subsection dedicated
  2. Different concrete strength should be used to better assess the procedure
  3. The conclusion can be rewritten to summarize more objective parts of the paper, i.e. in a list point

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

The suggestions were included in the paper, therefore it can be published

Back to TopTop