Development and Intervention Proposal with Earthen Refurbishments with Vegetal Origin Gel (VOG) for the Preservation of Traditional Adobe Buildings

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The article should be reviewed in terms of English for overall language improvement, for the correct use of technical terms, and to respect English collocation.

CONTENT QUESTIONS (the number is the line number)

Introduction

The introduction should be clear if it is addressing the Mexican context or the International context or departing from the international to arrive at the national context. This is important because the situation is not the same in every country, and, for e.g., the connection of the earth with low income is not happening everywhere. In some countries, nowadays, building with earth is for a high level of the population.

31 - the reference to the Nk’Mip Desert Cultural Centre does t make sense - why is this reference from 2006?

  36- 37 "rich in sand, silt and clays" lacks rigour. The relative percentages of the different components will determine different construction techniques or their adaptation. being rich, cumulatively, in sand, silt and clays could mean 1/3 of each ...

FORMAL QUESTIONS (the number is the line number)

12-13 repeating 3 times the verb use

55-56 recovery repeated

57 - "required to put in value" ?

60 and following - the characterization of today's paradigm is longer than it should be

83 - "covered" - Plastered?

89 "additives by mass"

111 - "volcanic ashes" are not organic 

140 "being very appreciated properties for the vernacular structures" - unscientific 

183 - repeat "aggregate"

194 - "to be 25%, with respect to clay" - the 25% are not used in all the shown tests, and no explanation is given (table 4)

233 - "inclemency"  ...less rigorous

conclusion

the fact that only during six months were tested in the "real world" is not an issue addressed in the conclusion, and it should be.

Also, the fact that the introduction of organic materials could cause problems over time was not addressed.

Author Response

Dear reviewer,

We want to thank you for the revision and the recommendations on the paper entitled “Development and intervention proposal with earthen refurbishment with vegetal origin gel (VOG) for the preservation of traditional adobe buildings”. We have worked in the article since the reception of the review.

Thank you for your comments, they were very useful and helped us to realize some mistakes and flaws in the document. We have followed all the recommendations of all the reviewers, helping to improve the quality of the document and making it more rigorous. Some of the changes you will see are these:

• The English language of the article has been revised to improve the overall language and the correct use of the terms used.
• The introduction has been modified, starting from a more generic international context, to focus on the specific context of Mexico, and more specifically on the area where the intervention has been carried out together with the community of Santa Ana Chapitiro, Patzcuaro, Mexico.
• Bibliographical references have been modified and completed, and some statements have been modified to improve the scientific rigour of the text and its comprehension.
• Formal issues have been corrected, such as the use of the verb "to use" or the repetition of the words "recovery" and "aggregate". Suggested words and expressions have also been modified, such as "required to put in value" or "additives by mass".
• The explanation concerning the use of volcanic ashes by the Romans has been improved.
• The percentage of water and VOG in Table 4 has been corrected, as the percentages did not correspond to the values explained in the text.
• The conclusions have been extended, taking into account that the coatings applied in the community of Santa Ana Chapitiro have only been studied for 6 months, and that further studies will be carried out in the future to find out how they have evolved and the possible problems over time.

 

We frankly believe that the document could be a real alternative, in the long term, to improve the vernacular architecture made of adobe. Bringing new solutions to a current problem, from the point of view of sustainability and linking local communities.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

The research is considered relevant, consistent and well addressed, but some issues are suggested for improvement:

1.- The state of the art on VOG should be completed.  Background information, similar studies and international applications are not presented. There is also a lack of international assessment of the current use of land-based materials.

2.- Line 158: acronyms must be explained (EPSEB-UPC) (FIC-UMSNH)

3.- In order to understand and situate the case study, it is necessary to geographically locate the town of Santa Ana Chapitiro. 

4.- The test planning is considered to be complete but the number of samples for each dosage is considered to be low. In order to draw consistent conclusions, some correlation with results from similar studies should be established, where possible.

5.- The sources of the figures are missing.

6.- Discussion is lacking and conclusions are of little relevance. It is considered that there is a lack of in-depth analysis of the results of the trials carried out and, above all, of the correlation with similar trials carried out at the international level. 

Author Response

Dear reviewer,

We want to thank you for the revision and the recommendations on the paper entitled “Development and intervention proposal with earthen refurbishment with vegetal origin gel (VOG) for the preservation of traditional adobe buildings”. We have worked in the article since the reception of the review.

Thank you for your comments, they were very useful and helped us to realize some mistakes and flaws in the document. We have followed all the recommendations of all the reviewers, helping to improve the quality of the document and making it more rigorous. Some of the changes you will see are these:

• We have expanded the state of the art of the text, and especially that related to the use of VOG. We have completed the historical background and highlighted the results of other similar studies previously conducted with VOG.
• Explanations of acronyms have been incorporated (EPSEB-UPC) and (FIC-UMSNH).
• The geographical location of the town of Santa Ana Chapitiro has been added to understand and situate the case study.
• It has been specified in the text that the number of samples used in each of the tests was determined as required by the standards specified in the document.
• Photographic sources have been included in the document.
• The conclusions have been extended, incorporating a better comparison of the results obtained in the laboratory, and taking into account that the coatings applied in the community of Santa Ana Chapitiro have only been studied for 6 months, and that further studies will be carried out in the future to find out how they have evolved and the possible problems over time. The international context is also considered.

 

We frankly believe that the document could be a real alternative, in the long term, to improve the vernacular architecture made of adobe. Bringing new solutions to a current problem, from the point of view of sustainability and linking local communities.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

There is nothing to comment on. All the comments proposed have been achieved.