Clays and Clay Minerals in the Construction Industry

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Clay is a kind of natural material, which can be changed into different clay minerals by heat treatment. This paper introduces the composition and structure characteristics of clay minerals and clay minerals, and introduces their application in building industry.  New binders such as LC3 and geopolymer were prepared by using clay minerals.  These adhesives are considered superior to traditional adhesives in many ways.  Clay can also be made into various types of bricks. The work is well-structured, well written and will be of interest to readers. Comments are provided for the authors to address and undertake minor revisions:

• The literature survey in the Introduction should be improved. The major defect of this study is that the debate or arguments are not clearly stated in the introduction session. The review should be properly synthesized. Actually, this paper brings nothing wrong, but also provides nothing new to general readers. Many references were published before 2015. In the revised version, more state-of-the-art details should be included, and their corresponding novelty should be highlighted.
• The language in line 13 seems inappropriate, which can be change to: “Therefore, it is conducive to the sustainability of construction materials.”
• The abbreviations such as LC3 (line 14) and MK (line 81) should be presented in full name when they appear the first time.
• Review articles can cite more articles in recent years to show the latest research progress. Some previously published papers on clay stabilization have been omitted. Please consider the following

(a) Wu, J., Deng, Z., Deng, Y., Zhou, A., and Zhang, Y. 2021. Interaction between Cement Clinker Constituents and Clay Minerals and their Influence on the Strength of Cement-Based Stabilized Soft Clay. Canadian Geotechnical Journal. doi:10.1139/cgj-2021-0194.

(b) Wu, J., Liu, L., Deng, Y., Zhang, G., Zhou, A., and Xiao, H. 2021. Use of recycled gypsum in the cement-based stabilization of very soft clays and its micro-mechanism. Journal of rock mechanics and geotechnical engineering. doi:10.1016/j.jrmge.2021.10.002.

Author Response

Reviewer - 1

Clay is a kind of natural material, which can be changed into different clay minerals by heat treatment. This paper introduces the composition and structure characteristics of clay minerals and clay minerals, and introduces their application in building industry.  New binders such as LC3 and geopolymer were prepared by using clay minerals.  These adhesives are considered superior to traditional adhesives in many ways.  Clay can also be made into various types of bricks. The work is well-structured, well written and will be of interest to readers. Comments are provided for the authors to address and undertake minor revisions:

• The literature survey in the Introduction should be improved. The major defect of this study is that the debate or arguments are not clearly stated in the introduction session. The review should be properly synthesized. Actually, this paper brings nothing wrong, but also provides nothing new to general readers. Many references were published before 2015. In the revised version, more state-of-the-art details should be included, and their corresponding novelty should be highlighted.

Now the above suggestions have been incorporated

• The language in line 13 seems inappropriate, which can be change to: “Therefore, it is conducive to the sustainability of construction materials.”

Done

• The abbreviations such as LC3 (line 14) and MK (line 81) should be presented in full name when they appear the first time.

Done

• Review articles can cite more articles in recent years to show the latest research progress. Some previously published papers on clay stabilization have been omitted. Please consider the following

(a) Wu, J., Deng, Z., Deng, Y., Zhou, A., and Zhang, Y. 2021. Interaction between Cement Clinker Constituents and Clay Minerals and their Influence on the Strength of Cement-Based Stabilized Soft Clay. Canadian Geotechnical Journal. doi:10.1139/cgj-2021-0194.

(b) Wu, J., Liu, L., Deng, Y., Zhang, G., Zhou, A., and Xiao, H. 2021. Use of recycled gypsum in the cement-based stabilization of very soft clays and its micro-mechanism. Journal of rock mechanics and geotechnical engineering. doi:10.1016/j.jrmge.2021.10.002.

Above and many more latest references have been now included

 

Reviewer 2 Report

The manuscript entitled “Clay and Clay Minerals in Construction Industry” gathered the data on clays and clay minerals, and their usage in cement, concrete, geopolymers and bricks. The data and text consist mainly of well-known information. There are too many figures (35), of which most were taken from the literature or are irrelevant. The paper is written in the form suitable maybe for a Chapter in a book, but not the research review paper. As it is claimed in the instructions for authors in the Minerals journal, reviews should “provide concise and precise updates on the latest progress made in a given area of research”. This means that a review paper should summarize the previous results in the chosen subject and critically present them in an original way.

Therefore, information on clay minerals and their sheets are not required, since already been published many times.

There are many issues in this paper, like that you would need the consent of the authors and a journal to publish their figures, which I do not see is provided.

Are the clay minerals fractions below 5 µm, 2 µm, or 2 mm as stated in one moment? The paper was not written with suitable care and knowledge.

Also, geopolymer ceramics is also produced from clay (10.1016/j.clay.2022.106410), and that information is missing. Geopolymer cement was not just recently revealed, the production is already standardized.

What is the novelty of this work, among others?

We all know what the bricks look like (Fig. 35), so this figure does not add anything new to our knowledge.

 

The paper would need to be re-written, English improved, the storytelling must be smooth and logical, and only relevant figures and tables representing the novel results or their comparison, made from authors themselves would contribute to the quality of presentation.

 

In my opinion, this paper needs serious changes before the next review.

Author Response

Reviwer-2

The manuscript entitled “Clay and Clay Minerals in Construction Industry” gathered the data on clays and clay minerals, and their usage in cement, concrete, geopolymers and bricks. The data and text consist mainly of well-known information. There are too many figures (35), of which most were taken from the literature or are irrelevant. The paper is written in the form suitable maybe for a Chapter in a book, but not the research review paper. As it is claimed in the instructions for authors in the Minerals journal, reviews should “provide concise and precise updates on the latest progress made in a given area of research”. This means that a review paper should summarize the previous results in the chosen subject and critically present them in an original way.

Now it is modified as per suggestions

Therefore, information on clay minerals and their sheets are not required, since already been published many times.

Now all the structures related to clay minerals are merged in one Figure 2, just to give an idea.

There are many issues in this paper, like that you would need the consent of the authors and a journal to publish their figures, which I do not see is provided.

Copyrights are now taken

Are the clay minerals fractions below 5 µm, 2 µm, or 2 mm as stated in one moment? The paper was not written with suitable care and knowledge.

Now deleted

Also, geopolymer ceramics is also produced from clay (10.1016/j.clay.2022.106410), and that information is missing. Geopolymer cement was not just recently revealed, the production is already standardized.

Could not find but many other papers of 2022 are referred

What is the novelty of this work, among others?

Role of clay in construction industry is discussed in detail and given in one paper

We all know what the bricks look like (Fig. 35), so this figure does not add anything new to our knowledge.

Fig.35 is removed

 The paper would need to be re-written, English improved, the storytelling must be smooth and logical, and only relevant figures and tables representing the novel results or their comparison, made from authors themselves would contribute to the quality of presentation.

Many portions are rewritten and English improved

 In my opinion, this paper needs serious changes before the next review.

Drastically revised

 

Reviewer 3 Report

After reading your manuscript, I have a number of very important remarks.
1. The work is absolutely unstructured. No Methods/Materials section.
2. The introduction section contains known information about the structure of crystals of clay materials. This information needs to be shortened. In my opinion, it can be presented in the form of a comparative / analytical table.

3. It is very important that in the manuscript there is no connection between the purpose of the work and the conclusions.
4. The conclusions are written absolutely incorrectly.

Since your manuscript has a number of experimental studies, and does not have a Methods / Materials section, I think that you need to rewrite it very significantly, according to the requirements for articles in this journal.

There are a lot of figures in the manuscript that do not give any scientific information.

 

Author Response

Reviewer.3

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

After reading your manuscript, I have a number of very important remarks.
1. The work is absolutely unstructured. No Methods/Materials section.

The manuscript is drastically modified and structured. As regards, methodology, standard methods discussed in different literature, have been given. So methodology section is not written as common in review articles. However, if Editor/Reviewer want, it can be briefly written.

2. 
   The introduction section contains known information about the structure of crystals of clay materials. This information needs to be shortened. In my opinion, it can be presented in the form of a comparative / analytical table.

Introduction is now rewritten

3. It is very important that in the manuscript there is no connection between the purpose of the work and the conclusions.
   
   

The conclusions are written absolutely incorrectly

Since your manuscript has a number of experimental studies, and does not have a Methods / Materials section, I think that you need to rewrite it very significantly, according to the requirements for articles in this journal.

As replied for comment 1

There are a lot of figures in the manuscript that do not give any scientific information.

The figures are reduced from 35 to 22 and duiscussed

 

 

 

 

Reviewer 4 Report

Dear authors, thank you for your manuscript. Your review paper does not identify any novelty in the research. Therefore, you need to write it in a way that proves that you have a particular discussion and there is a significant input into the field of application of clays in building materials.

Major revision:

1. Introduction, line 40: please, add some references citing the use of clays in different industries.
2. The authors must give a description for each structure of clay, the figures are not enough!
3. Line 184: “as compared to that in the presence of 20CC alone (Fig.13)” not Fig.13 but Fig.12.
4. The authors must give a short description in the text about Fig.13, when the CSH seeds are used.
5. Line 186: “is increased in the cement with CCs (Fig. 13).” not Fig.13 but Fig.14-b.
6. Line 188: “the micrographs show long ettringite needles (Fig.14).” Fig.14-c and d.
7. Figure 15: increase the size of the labels and captions.
8. Line 207: remove “the e” in the sentence.
9. Figure 16: add the reference to the figure title. The same for all figures in the manuscript.
10. Line 221: change the word “prefabricated” by “new”
11. Line 235: Add the full title of LC3: Limestone calcined clay cement (CL3)
12. Line 243: “to 50% and strength and strength varies” you have repetition.
13. After analyzing the heat of hydration for LC3, it is worthy to describe the fresh state properties of LC3 such as rheology and the early shrinkage in comparison with OPC. Here are some references that can help: Ez-zaki, H.; Marangu, J.M.; Bellotto, M.; Dalconi, M.C.; Artioli, G.; Valentini, L. A Fresh View on Limestone Calcined Clay Cement (LC3) Pastes. Materials 2021, 14, 3037. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma14113037.
14. In equation (4), give a term to the coefficient z (and not numbers 1,2,3).
15. Figure 27. Solid and not soliud.
16. Line 337: “type (Na⁺, K⁺, Cs⁺)” Ca²⁺ and not Cs⁺.
17. In Geopolymer cement and concrete section, authors must describe the effect of some activators and mineral additives that can improve the activated calcined clays. For instance, how a chosen chemical activator can improve the technical properties as well as the environmental benefit. Also, combining calcined clays with additions such as limestone can promote more advantageous properties. Please, find below a recent study describing interesting findings: Mascarin L., Ez-zaki H., Garbin E., Bediako M., Valentini L., Mitigating the ecological footprint of alkali-activated calcined clays by waste marble addition, Cement and Concrete Composites 127, (2022) 104382. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconcomp.2021.104382.
18. In the Clay Bricks section, line 363: “(2) molding and mixing” mixing then molding.
19. The conclusion is very poor. The authors must mention the main findings of this review paper and clarify the beneficial use of clays in construction materials in terms of technical, economical and environmental points of view.

 

In the manuscript, we only see a very brief description of the figures without developing a discussion of the results found. The authors are asked to discuss more the results and give a further interpretation.

Author Response

Reviewer -  4

 

Dear authors, thank you for your manuscript. Your review paper does not identify any novelty in the research. Therefore, you need to write it in a way that proves that you have a particular discussion and there is a significant input into the field of application of clays in building materials.

Major revision:

1. Introduction, line 40: please, add some references citing the use of clays in different industries.

Introduction is completely changed with number of latest references

 

1. The authors must give a description for each structure of clay, the figures are not enough!

As one of the referees suggested deletion of structures, I merged all the structures in one as Fig.2

 

1. Line 184: “as compared to that in the presence of 20CC alone (Fig.13)” not Fig.13 but Fig.12.

Figs.12 and 13 are deleted

 

1. The authors must give a short description in the text about Fig.13, when the CSH seeds are used.

Figs. 13 is deleted

 

1. Line 186: “is increased in the cement with CCs (Fig. 13).” not Fig.13 but Fig.14-b.

Now Fig.3b incorporated

 

1. Line 188: “the micrographs show long ettringite needles (Fig.14).” Fig.14-c and d.

Modified

 

1. Figure 15: increase the size of the labels and captions.

Fig.15 is deleted

 

1. Line 207: remove “the e” in the sentence.

Removed

 

1. Figure 16: add the reference to the figure title. The same for all figures in the manuscript.

Now Fig.4 and the reference is included

 

1. Line 221: change the word “prefabricated” by “new”

The word new is included

 

1. Line 235: Add the full title of LC3: Limestone calcined clay cement (CL3)

Now Limestone calcined clay cement is written

 

1. Line 243: “to 50% and strength and strength varies” you have repetition.

Now deleted

 

1. After analyzing the heat of hydration for LC3, it is worthy to describe the fresh state properties of LC3 such as rheology and the early shrinkage in comparison with OPC. Here are some references that can help: Ez-zaki, H.; Marangu, J.M.; Bellotto, M.; Dalconi, M.C.; Artioli, G.; Valentini, L. A Fresh View on Limestone Calcined Clay Cement (LC3) Pastes. Materials 2021, 14, 3037. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma14113037.

Now the reference is included

 

1. In equation (4), give a term to the coefficient z (and not numbers 1,2,3).

Changed

 

1. Figure 27. Solid and not soliud.

Corrected

1. Line 337: “type (Na⁺, K⁺, Cs⁺)” Ca²⁺ and not Cs⁺.

Modified

 

1. In Geopolymer cement and concrete section, authors must describe the effect of some activators and mineral additives that can improve the activated calcined clays. For instance, how a chosen chemical activator can improve the technical properties as well as the environmental benefit. Also, combining calcined clays with additions such as limestone can promote more advantageous properties. Please, find below a recent study describing interesting findings: Mascarin L., Ez-zaki H., Garbin E., Bediako M., Valentini L., Mitigating the ecological footprint of alkali-activated calcined clays by waste marble addition, Cement and Concrete Composites 127, (2022) 104382. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconcomp.2021.104382.

Reference included

 

1. In the Clay Bricks section, line 363: “(2) molding and mixing” mixing then molding.

Changed

 

1. The conclusion is very poor. The authors must mention the main findings of this review paper and clarify the beneficial use of clays in construction materials in terms of technical, economical and environmental points of view.

 

Conclusion modified

In the manuscript, we only see a very brief description of the figures without developing a discussion of the results found. The authors are asked to discuss more the results and give a further interpretation.

Done

 

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

The reviewed version of the paper entitled “Clay and clay minerals in construction industry” is somewhat improved, but I do not see important issues being addressed. I would suggest you to respond to every remark of every reviewer, not to delete parts of reviews and present them by your own will. Not all the referees’ comments were addressed, nor discussed.

I still do not see the novelty in this work, since the paper is a collection of the figures taken from the literature. Still, there are clay minerals structures that are taken from other works and have been published many times. The basic division of clays into 2: 1 and 1:1 mineral groups should be bear in mind. Which of the clay minerals belong to which group? Are montmorillonite, smectite and bentonite of a similar origin? Ait seems the author is not aware of these important issues, as seen from Fig 2. which was suggested to be deleted from the paper already, but it stayed there as a sum of someone else’s randomly put figures, with no reference. Besides, metakaolin does not belong in the presented group of clay minerals. The sentence added to the abstract mentioning the structure of clay minerals is not necessary. In line 147, there is still the claim that clay minerals are fractions below 2 mm, which is not true.

There are remaining writing mistakes.

It would be better to use “clays and clay minerals”. Why do you use a big “C” when writing “clay”?

The title should be changed to "Clays and clay minerals in the construction industry”.

Change “Tensile str. With time for LC3 concretes” to “Change of tensile strength with time in LC3 concretes”.

 

I suggest you respond to all the questions from the first review, and from the second round if there are new ones from other reviewers.

Author Response

Rev.2

The reviewed version of the paper entitled “Clay and clay minerals in construction industry” is somewhat improved, but I do not see important issues being addressed. I would suggest you to respond to every remark of every reviewer, not to delete parts of reviews and present them by your own will. Not all the referees’ comments were addressed, nor discussed.

I have replied the queries of all the referees and referees 1, 3 and 4 are almost satisfied.

I still do not see the novelty in this work, since the paper is a collection of the figures taken from the literature. Still, there are clay minerals structures that are taken from other works and have been published many times. The basic division of clays into 2: 1 and 1:1 mineral groups should be bear in mind. Which of the clay minerals belong to which group? Are montmorillonite, smectite and bentonite of a similar origin? Ait seems the author is not aware of these important issues, as seen from Fig 2. which was suggested to be deleted from the paper already, but it stayed there as a sum of someone else’s randomly put figures, with no reference. Besides, metakaolin does not belong in the presented group of clay minerals. The sentence added to the abstract mentioning the structure of clay minerals is not necessary. In line 147, there is still the claim that clay minerals are fractions below 2 mm, which is not true.

There are latest informations about the subject, which have been included in this review article and as per suggestions Figure 2 is now deleted and line 147 changed.

There are remaining writing mistakes.

Maximum attempts have been made to minimise the mistakes

It would be better to use “clays and clay minerals”. Why do you use a big “C” when writing “clay”?

Now used as suggested

The title should be changed to "Clays and clay minerals in the construction industry”.

Changed

Change “Tensile str. With time for LC3 concretes” to “Change of tensile strength with time in LC3 concretes”.

Changed

I suggest you respond to all the questions from the first review, and from the second round if there are new ones from other reviewers.

All queries have been responded and the paper modified accordingly

 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Dear Authors,

line 129, 156, please write the literature

In the Conclusion section, you wrote a few sentences that talk about things that are generally known. For example, line 420, 429. This should be written in the Introduction. Make a correction.

Author Response

Rev.3

Comments and Suggestions for Author

Dear Authors,

line 129, 156, please write the literature

Now written but Fig.2 is deleted

In the Conclusion section, you wrote a few sentences that talk about things that are generally known. For example, line 420, 429. This should be written in the Introduction. Make a correction.

Sentence in line 420 is removed but in 429, modified

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 4 Report

Minor revision:

1. Line 143: “Bentonite is mainly formed by smectite clay minerals, hydrothermal synthesis and chemical alteration of volcanic ash. The formula for bentonite is (Na)0.7 (Al3.3Mg0.7) Si8O20(OH)4·nH2O.” Please, adjust the font size of the sentence according to the template of the journal.
2. Figure 2: Add the references to all figure's titles in the manuscript.
3. Line 314: Add the full term of “AAC blocks”.
4. Figure 18: “dimensional geopoilymer [86].” correct geopolymer.
5. References: “[16] Singh N.B., Middendorf B.,” the reference is incomplete.

Author Response

Rev.4

Comments and Suggestions for Minor revision:

 

1. Line 143: “Bentonite is mainly formed by smectite clay minerals, hydrothermal synthesis and chemical alteration of volcanic ash. The formula for bentonite is (Na)0.7 (Al3.3Mg0.7) Si8O20(OH)4·nH2O.” Please, adjust the font size of the sentence according to the template of the journal.

 

Done

 

1. Figure 2: Add the references to all figure's titles in the manuscript.

 

Fig.2 is now removed as per suggestions of one of the reviewers

 

1. Line 314: Add the full term of “AAC blocks”.

 

Alkali Activated Cement is now written for AAC

 

1. Figure 18: “dimensional geopoilymer [86].” correct geopolymer.

 

Corrected

 

1. References: “[16] Singh N.B., Middendorf B.,” the reference is incomplete.

 

Completed

 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf