Reliability Assessment Approach for Fire Resistance Performance of Prestressed Steel–Concrete Box Girder Bridges

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This paper proposes a probability method to evaluate the fire safety performance of prestressed steel-concrete beam bridges. The subject is exciting and falls within the scope of the Journal. The English language has to be improved. The reviewer wishes to draw the attention of the authors to the following points:

1. First, to assist the reader, this reviewer asks the author to begin by stating the primary purpose of this section in a few sentences.

2. In the "Introduction" section, the authors must underline with greater attention the main novelties of the paper and the purpose to be achieved.

 

3. Please provide more detailed explanations in the Finite Element Analysis section.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

The English language has to be improved. 

Author Response

Comments on the Quality of English Language: The English language has to be improved.

Response: Thank you very much for your comments, we have revised the English language in the revised manuscript.

This paper proposes a probability method to evaluate the fire safety performance of prestressed steel-concrete beam bridges. The subject is exciting and falls within the scope of the Journal. The English language has to be improved. The reviewer wishes to draw the attention of the authors to the following points:

Response: Thank you very much for your comments, we have corrected the manuscript according to the reviewer comments.

Question 1: First, to assist the reader, this reviewer asks the author to begin by stating the primary purpose of this section in a few sentences.

Response: Thanks a lot for your comments, we have added the relative illustration about the primary purpose of sections in the revised manuscript.

Question 2: In the "Introduction" section, the authors must underline with greater attention the main novelties of the paper and the purpose to be achieved.

Response: Thank you very much for your kindly comments, we have added the novelty and the achieve purpose at “Introduction” section in the revised manuscript.

Question 3: lease provide more detailed explanations in the Finite Element Analysis section.

Response: Thanks a lot for your kindly comments, we have added more detailed explanations in the Finite Element Analysis section in the revised manuscript.

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

It is recommended to review some parts of the text in order to correct the excessive repetition of words.

Tables 13 to 20 and 21 to 28: The results commented by the authors are slightly intuitive. Therefore, a more detailed discussion is recommended, which could justify the Reliability Analysis approach.

Finally, it is recommended a better and more detailed conclusion, about the parameters in study and those whose randomness were more severe for the structure.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

The article was written in high quality of English.

It is only recommended to review some parts of the text in order to avoid excessive repetition of words.

Author Response

Comments on the Quality of English Language: The article was written in high quality of English. It is only recommended to review some parts of the text in order to avoid excessive repetition of words.

Response: Thank you very much for your comments, we have revised the repetition words in the revised manuscript.

Question 1: It is recommended to review some parts of the text in order to correct the excessive repetition of words.

Response: Thank you very much for your comments, we have corrected the repetition words in the revised manuscript.

Question 2: Tables 13 to 20 and 21 to 28: The results commented by the authors are slightly intuitive. Therefore, a more detailed discussion is recommended, which could justify the Reliability Analysis approach.

 

Response: Thank you very much for your kindly comments, we have added more details about the Reliability Analysis approach in the discussion section.

Question 3: Finally, it is recommended a better and more detailed conclusion, about the parameters in study and those whose randomness were more severe for the structure.

Response: Thanks a lot for your kindly comments, we have added the detail of parameter sensitivities in the conclusion of the revised manuscript.