Geopolymers as Sustainable Material for Strengthening and Restoring Unreinforced Masonry Structures: A Review
, Roneh Glenn D. Libre, Jr. 2, Pauline Rose J. Quiatchon 1, Ithan Jessemar R. Dollente 1, Ernesto J. Guades 3, Michael Angelo B. Promentilla 2, Lessandro Estelito O. Garciano 2 and Jason Maximino C. Ongpeng 2
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
As attached
Comments for author File: 
Comments.pdf
Author Response
We, the authors, appreciate your good insights to improve the paper. Kindly see the attached reply to your comments.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
- We suggest adding MIP analysis in section 4.
- In subsection 2.1, it is hoped to list the number of literature on geopolymer annually included in the ScienceDirect database.
- In subsection 3.1、3.2、3.3, the author should describe the role of alkali activators, precursors, and additives briefly first.
- Please reformat Table 2 and Table 3.
- In lines 453 – 458, you can cite more references to specifically elucidate the role of fiber. For examples, Wang SN (2021) “Experimental study on material ratio and strength performance of geopolymer-improved soil”, Wang SN (2021) “Experimental study on mechanical properties of fiber-reinforced and geopolymer-stabilized clay soil”, Wang SN (2021) “Silty clay stabilization using metakaolin- based geopolymer”, et al.
- In subsection 2.2, you can explain the causes of an increase in the literature on geopolymer publication in 2017-2019, such as the application of geopolymer.
- In line 41, pisé de terre belongs to the French.
- In Figure 4, we suggest choosing contrasting colors when drawing.
Author Response
We, the authors, highly appreciate your good insights to improve our paper. Kindly see the attached reply to your comments. Thank you.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
This paper needs an extensive revision and improvement in the concept and evaluations with discussions:
1) Geoplymer for grouting should be critically discussed and compared with past works and signifcant literatures: The followings are recommended for this:
* Güllü, H., & Agha, A. A. The rheological, fresh and strength effects of cold-bonded geopolymer made with metakaolin and slag for grouting. Construction and Building Materials, 274, 122091.
*Güllü, H., Al Nuaimi, M.M.D. & Aytek, A. Rheological and strength performances of cold-bonded geopolymer made from limestone dust and bottom ash for grouting and deep mixing. Bull Eng Geol Environ (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10064-020-01998-2
* Güllü, H., Cevik, A., Al-Ezzi, K. M., & Gülsan, M. E. (2019). On the rheology of using geopolymer for grouting: A comparative study with cement-based grout included fly ash and cold bonded fly ash. Construction and Building Materials, 196, 594-610.
2) Alternate grout additions should be compared with geoplymer grout. Why geopolymer should be selected by users? This concept should be clearly presented and alternate ones should be compared with advantages and disadvantages: For a variety alternate grour the followings are recommnede to compare and criticize:
*Canakci, H., Güllü, H., & Alhashemy, A. (2019). Performances of Using Geopolymers Made with Various Stabilizers for Deep Mixing. Materials, 12(16), 2542.
* Canakci, H., Güllü, H. & Dwle, M.I.K. (2018) Effect of Glass Powder Added Grout for Deep Mixing of Marginal Sand with Clay. Arabian Journal for Science and Engineering 43 (4), 1583-1595 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13369-017-2655-3
3) The internal mechnisms in SEM pictures should be added from literature and the mechnanism of geopolymer should be critically discussed.
4) The organization iof paper as a review study is much poor regarding int., mat method, results and discussion and conc.. Ith should be restructured and written.
5) English of paper should be improved.
Author Response
We, the authors, highly appreciate your good insights to improve our paper. Kindly see the attached reply to your comments. Thank you.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 3 Report
Acceptable in this form
