Review of an article submitted to the conference

Approval status: Accept without acknowledging of remarks
Date Published: 16.06.2023 - 13:58
The article's title reflects the content and purpose of the article? 
Yes
Was the aim of the work clearly defined and successfully accomplished? 
Yes
Does the article embrace contemporary issues in the area? 
Yes
Does the article contain new and not published results? 
Yes
Was the article clearly written and easily understood? 
Easily understood
Conclusions illustrate the research results, recommendations and giving suggestions for future research 
Yes
The references are full and grounded? 
Yes
How adequate was the writing and used terminology? 
Adequate
Remarks and suggestions to the authors of the article 

Interesting work - compliments to the authors.

I would suggest just two amendments. Firstly, 'dissilicate' should be 'disilicate' throughout. Secondly, the second and third paragraphs of the Experimental section, between "To solve the problems..." and "...variable dynamic loads." read more like Introduction than Experimental, and I would consider moving these section to Introduction if it does not create problems with the placement of the Table. This is a suggestion, not a requirement.

I confirm that there is no conflict of interests regarding reviewed article. 
I have read this submission. I believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard, however I have insignificant reservations, as outlined above.