Next Article in Journal
Students’ Psychological Analysis for Classroom Teaching Strategies of Art Songs Based on STEAM Education
Next Article in Special Issue
Utilization of Nano Silica and Plantain Leaf Ash for Improving Strength Properties of Expansive Soil
Previous Article in Journal
Co-Creation of Sustainable Tourism and Hospitality Experiences: Education and Organizations in Search of New Business Models
Previous Article in Special Issue
Data-Driven Integrated Decision Model for Analysing Energetic Behaviour of Innovative Construction Materials Capable of Hybrid Energy Storage
 
 
Article
Peer-Review Record

Rheology, Mechanical Properties and Shrinkage of Self-Compacting Concrete Containing Cement Kiln and By-Pass Filter Dust

Sustainability 2024, 16(1), 320; https://doi.org/10.3390/su16010320
by Andreas Kounadis 1, Efstratios Badogiannis 1,*, Kosmas Sideris 2, Stelios Antiohos 3 and Ioannis Marinos 3
Reviewer 1:
Reviewer 2: Anonymous
Reviewer 3: Anonymous
Reviewer 4:
Sustainability 2024, 16(1), 320; https://doi.org/10.3390/su16010320
Submission received: 18 November 2023 / Revised: 22 December 2023 / Accepted: 25 December 2023 / Published: 29 December 2023
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Sustainability in Construction Materials)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Report on the manuscript

 Title:  Rheology, mechanical properties and shrinkage of self-com- 2 pacting concrete containing cement kiln and by-pass filter dust

 Authors:Andreas Kounadis, Efstratios Badogiannis, Kosmas Sideris, Stelios Antiochos, Ioannis Marinos

 In the paper, the effect of incorporating alternative waste materials, such as two by-products of the cement industry, namely cement kiln dust (CKD) and by-pass dust (BPD), into SCC as partial replacement for traditional filler material was investigated. The produced compositions were compared with reference mixtures containing only marble powder (MP) as a filler. I think the readers of this journal will appreciate the results of this manuscript.  Generally speaking, the manuscript is well written, the material is judiciously divided and organized and correct from scientific point of view. Some changes are, however, necessary. For these reasons I can recommend the acceptance of this paper after some corrections.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

We would like to sincerely thank you for your efforts to evaluate our work. Your comments were absolutely constructive and helped us to improve the quality and the impact of the paper. We really appreciate it.

All the additions we made are in bold in our response letter and highlighted in the revised paper.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This paper explores the incorporation of alternative waste materials, specifically cement kiln dust (CKD) and by-pass dust (BPD), into self-compacting concrete (SCC) as partial replacements for traditional filler material. The study compares the produced compositions with reference mixtures containing only marble powder (MP) as a filler. Through a comprehensive set of tests, including wet SCC-specific methods, compressive, flexural, and tensile splitting strength tests, as well as drying shrinkage determination, the research evaluates the fresh and hardened properties of SCC.

The article is very well documented with a generous experimental part, analyzing the content I have only a few general remarks:

Please place Table 1 after first citation in text.

Regarding the data presented in Table 3, it would be useful for easier understanding to define the terms w/c and w/p in the main text;

Please specify why did you choose 7, 21 and 90 days, in particular?

Being a paper based on multiple experimental investigations, please add pictures to show how the tests were conducted;

 

A practical conclusion for end users should be drawn at the end of the article.

 

Author Response

We would like to sincerely thank you for your efforts to evaluate our work. Your comments were absolutely constructive and helped us to improve the quality and the impact of the paper. We really appreciate it.

All the additions we made are in bold in our response letter and highlighted in the revised paper.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This paper presents a very comprehensive and advanced study related to self-compacting concrete (SCC) and its wide application. The authors thoroughly examined the rheological and mechanical properties of such cement materials. By adding cement kiln dust (CKD) and by-pass dust (BPD) to SCC, certain improvements were obtained, which are very pronounced in the case of BPD. Compressive strength is one of the properties that is significantly improved by adding BPD.

But what about adding CKD? How did it affect the mechanical properties of SCC? It seems to me that it had a negative effect because of its chemical properties

CKD must be considered and evaluated on a plant-by-plant basis since it varies in composition with respect to plant. CKD, when used alone, may result in decreased workability, setting times, and strength due to high alkali content. When using CKD with high alkali content, fly ash or blast furnace slag should be incorporated to prevent alkali-silica reaction problems. As with all other alternative cementitious materials, trial mixtures are required to achieve the desired cementitious properties. 

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Minor English corrections.

Author Response

We would like to sincerely thank you for your efforts to evaluate our work. Your comments were absolutely constructive and helped us to improve the quality and the impact of the paper. We really appreciate it.

All the additions we made are in bold in our response letter and highlighted in the revised paper.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 4 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

May be it will be useful to use ICDD card numbers to the comments to Fig.2 and Fig.3 because it seems to be not evident that only one card alone may to be attributed to some compounds mentioned.

 

Author Response

We would like to sincerely thank you for your efforts to evaluate our work. Your comments were absolutely constructive and helped us to improve the quality and the impact of the paper. We really appreciate it.

All the additions we made are in bold in our response letter and highlighted in the revised paper.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The authors made a series of changes trying to improve the work, reaching the limit of their capability and possibilities. 

Author Response

Thank you very much for your effort. We realy appreciate it.

Back to TopTop