Preparation of Conductive Asphalt Concrete Based on the Action Mechanism of Conductive Phase Materials

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Dear Authors,

Article overview:

The paper Preparation of Conductive Asphalt Concrete Based on the Action Mechanism of Conductive Phase Materials by Xiujun Li, Zhipeng Zhang, Heng Zhang, Huaiyu Ma and Fangzhi Shi is well suited for journal Coatings.

The authors have prepared a well-prepared article about the research on the use of carbon fiber powder to increase electrothermal properties of conductive asphalt concrete. The article is interesting, scientifically valuable, it has practical applications. It is a typical research article.

The title of article is in accord with article. The abstract is correct. Keywords - no comments.  The introduction is relatively short. The paper contains parts in good order: introduction, materials and methods, results and discussion, conclusions.

The length of the abstract is good, enough to put a lot of information, summarize the article, but not too long for the reader who wants to get information about the content of the article and decide whether to read the whole.

Introduction present background of analyzed problem, literature review shows important achievements of earlier articles. The authors recognized knowledge gaps in the literature on this topic. In the last two paragraphs of the introduction they specified their own contribution presented in the article.

Main part of manuscript - the authors discussed in detail the materials used and the methodology of the experiments carried out. Results are clear. The experiments were very well documented. The authors included graphical diagrams of experiments, photos of research, and photos of research results.

Conclusions. Please provide the main conclusions in order of numbering.

General comments:

1. Literature is only 26 items, there should be more. Work from various centers around the world should be analyzed.

2. Conclusions are given clearly. Can the authors add a comment on how the given parameters translate into aspects of the practical application of the tested material?

Detailed comments:

- Table 4 – should be “MPa”

- The article was written enough well in English, is understandable for a reviewer, a person who does not speak English as a mother tongue.

Conclusion

The paper is substantially good, well-prepared and scientifically valuable. Some additional work should be done, in line with the reviewer's comments.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer:

Thank you for your comments concerning our manuscript entitled “Preparation of Conductive Asphalt Concrete Based on The Action Mechanism of Conductive Phase Materials” (ID: coatings-2954355). Those comments are all valuable and very helpful for revising and improving our paper, as well as the important guiding significance to our researches. We have studied comments carefully and have made correction which we hope meet with approval. Revised portion are marked in red in the paper. The main corrections in the paper and the responds to the reviewer’s comments are as flowing:

Responds to the reviewer’s comments:

1. Response to comment: (Literature is only 26 items, there should be more.)

Response: References from various centers around the world have been increased to 31 items.

2. Response to comment: (Add a comment on how the given parameters translate into aspects of the practical application of the tested material.)

Response: Comment marked in red was added to the third item in the conclusion (Pg. 17 ln 413-415).

3. Response to comment: (Table 4 – should be “MPa”)

Response: We are very sorry for our negligence of this, and it's been corrected and marked red.

We appreciate for your warm work earnestly, and hope that the correction will meet with approval.

Thank you very much for your comments and suggestions.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

The work presented in the manuscript is very well done. Credit to the authors. I have three small comments for authors to consider:

1. At start of the Introduction sections authors used very long sentences. I would recommend to rewrite the section pg. 1 ln 26 -44.

2. Introduction, pg. 2 ln 56 - 58, statement missing reference. Also could authors give more information on the financial cost (economic) implication of the use graphene in the asphalt concrete mix?

3. Pg. 4 ln 119, Section 2.2 test methods: The study based on the AFM - please define the acronym 'AFM' here: Atomic Force Microscope.  

I recommend the manuscript publication after minor corrections.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer:

Thank you for your comments concerning our manuscript entitled “Preparation of Conductive Asphalt Concrete Based on The Action Mechanism of Conductive Phase Materials” (ID: coatings-2954355). Those comments are all valuable and very helpful for revising and improving our paper, as well as the important guiding significance to our researches. We have studied comments carefully and have made correction which we hope meet with approval. Revised portion are marked in red in the paper. The main corrections in the paper and the responds to the reviewer’s comments are as flowing:

Responds to the reviewer’s comments:

1. Response to comment: (Rewrite the section pg. 1 ln 26 -44.)

Response: This section has been rewritten (pg. 1 ln 26 -44.)

2. Response to comment: (Pg. 2 ln 56 - 58, statement missing reference, give more information on the financial cost (economic) implication of the use graphene in the asphalt concrete mix.)

Response: References and more information on the financial cost (economic) implication of the use graphene in the asphalt concrete mix were added.

3. Response to comment: (Define the acronym 'AFM' at Pg. 4 ln 119: Atomic Force Microscope.)

Response: The acronym 'AFM' was defined. At the same time the acronym ‘MD’ was defined.

We appreciate for your warm work earnestly, and hope that the correction will meet with approval.

Thank you very much for your comments and suggestions.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf