Next Article in Journal
A Late Cambrian Continental Convergent Margin in the North Qilian Orogenic Belt, Northwestern China: Geochemical and Geochronological Evidence from Hongtugou Mafic Rocks
Previous Article in Journal
Flotation of Copper Ores with High Cu/Zn Ratio: Effects of Pyrite on Cu/Zn Separation and an Efficient Method to Enhance Sphalerite Depression
 
 
Article
Peer-Review Record

Investigation of Dealumination in Phosphate-Based Geopolymer Formation Process: Factor Screening and Optimization

Minerals 2022, 12(9), 1104; https://doi.org/10.3390/min12091104
by Marwa Zribi, Basma Samet and Samir Baklouti *
Reviewer 1:
Reviewer 2: Anonymous
Reviewer 3: Anonymous
Minerals 2022, 12(9), 1104; https://doi.org/10.3390/min12091104
Submission received: 4 August 2022 / Revised: 23 August 2022 / Accepted: 25 August 2022 / Published: 30 August 2022
(This article belongs to the Section Clays and Engineered Mineral Materials)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Manuscript Number: minerals-1877088

Title: Screening and optimization of factors influencing dealumination process during phosphate based geopolymers formation, using Plackett–Burman and central composite designs

 

Reviewer’s comments:

This manuscript is a meaningful and interesting topic. The logical writing structure and rich test results are eye-catching. By using Plackett–Burman and central composite designs, the authors achieve two objectives: the first one is presented in screening the last different factors that can influence dealumination process in phosphate based geopolymers composite formation. The second one is the optimization of the significant factors to determine the optimum values of each factor. However, there are still several improvements as follows. 

 

(1) Line 6-10, if affiliations of three authors are identical, please list one.

(2) Line 26, “P/Al molar ratio = 2.0 curing temperature ≈ 70 °C and curing time = 4.76 h.”, missing comma. Please correct into “P/Al molar ratio = 2.0, curing temperature ≈ 70 °C, and curing time = 4.76 h.”

(3) Line 34, “It ‘is” should be corrected into “It is”.

(4) In the Abstract, please add the content about experimental method.

(5) Line 84, the subtitle “2.1. Materials and preparation” is unable to cover related content due to the presence of characterization method. 

(6) All equations need to be indicated in the text with the relevant serial numbers. Such as: “Equation (1),…, Equation (5), Equation (6), Equation (7)”. Also, please unify the expressions, such as: Eq.2, Equation 2, or Equation (2)?.

(7) In all Equations and contexts, the variables are italicized.

(8) Line 252, there are no high pixels for Figure 4. Please redraw the figure.

(9) Another, Line 2-4, the title needs to be concise and condensed.

Author Response

Please see the attachement

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

 

In this study, phosphate based geopolymers obtained from two aluminosilicate precursors with different mineralogical composition are investigated. Nine factors influencing geoplymer was explored using P-B design, the research is interesting, and it is recommended to be accepted after minor revision.

 

1. In the introduction, some of the latest literatures on phosphoric acid-base geopolymer should be cited to replace some old references. Please see, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2022.127450

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2021.123947

 

2. The contents of section 3.1 should be placed in the part of test materials, which is the basic materials and not the test results,

Author Response

Please see the attachement.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

-We live now in a climate emergency so its most strange that the authors have not start the paper by mentioning exactly that. It seems that they are not aware about the words of a Professor of Physics at the University of Oxford authored a paper where one can read the following:

 “Let’s get this on the table right away, without mincing words. With regard to the climate crisis, yes, it’s time to panic”

Pierrehumbert, R., 2019. There is no Plan B for dealing with the climate crisis. Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, pp.1-7.

So please start the introduction by draw a connection between environmental degradation and resource efficiency.

 

-The reference list has an unacceptable percentage of self-citations

 

- The literature review must be improved by citing important papers published in the field and not publications like the one by Davidovits that has no research record on phosphate based geopolymers. Check the following publications:

Wang, Y. S., Dai, J. G., Ding, Z., & Xu, W. T. (2017). Phosphate-based geopolymer: Formation mechanism and thermal stability. Materials Letters190, 209-212.

Dong, T., Xie, S., Wang, J., Chen, Z., & Liu, Q. (2020). Properties and characterization of a metakaolin phosphate acid–based geopolymer synthesized in a humid environment. Journal of the Australian Ceramic Society56(1), 175-184.

Djobo, J. N. Y., & Stephan, D. (2022). The reaction of calcium during the formation of metakaolin phosphate geopolymer binder. Cement and Concrete Research, 106840.

 

- Page 2 line 80 “in the obtained biomaterials (geo-polymers)”

Comment: Why do authors claim that geopolymers are biomaterials ?

 

 

Author Response

Please see the attachement.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 3 Report

The revised paper can be accepted

Back to TopTop