Optimizing Thin‐Walled Structures: Analysis of Cold‐Formed Steel Columns With Concrete Infills, Web Stiffeners, and CFRP Strengthening

The comment raises important points regarding the practical implications of the FEM-analytical deviation and the assessment of CFRP properties. My understanding is that a 10% deviation between FEM and analytical results falls within acceptable engineering tolerances, especially considering the complexities of material nonlinearity and boundary conditions in structural analysis. However, further clarification on how this deviation affects design safety margins would be valuable.

Regarding CFRP properties, the study likely adheres to standardized material specifications rather than specific commercial brands to ensure broader applicability. If this assumption is correct, confirming the relevant CFRP standards used would help contextualize the findings. As for long-term durability, it seems the study primarily focuses on static loading conditions. Could the authors clarify whether fatigue performance was considered in any capacity? 

Thank you for your clarification. It’s helpful to know that the study primarily focuses on static loading conditions. Exploring fatigue performance as an extension of this work could provide valuable insights, especially considering the long-term structural integrity of CFRP-strengthened CFS columns. Do you anticipate that fatigue behavior would significantly differ between the various reinforcement configurations studied, particularly those with square web stiffeners? It would be interesting to see how these enhancements influence durability under cyclic loading.

Thank you for your thoughtful response. I agree that predicting fatigue behavior without a dedicated study is challenging, but it is interesting to consider whether reinforcement configurations, particularly those with square web stiffeners, might influence fatigue resistance differently.