A General Framework for the Impact of Shield Tunnel Construction on Existing Tunnel in Soil
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
This paper proposes a general framework for the impact of shield tunneling construction on existing tunnels. Based on the results of numerical simulation and experiment, the risk classification standard of adjacent buildings is established. This framework has certain reference significance and reference value for deformation prediction and safety evaluation of adjacent buildings.
The topic of the thesis is very interesting and rigorous in content and logic, but there are still some issues that need to be revised.
1 The names and serial numbers of some charts are incorrect..
2 This article needs to add some references to the introduction.
3 The abstract needs some adjustments.
Author Response
1 The names and serial numbers of some charts are incorrect.
Answer: OK.
2 This article needs to add some references to the introduction.
Answer: OK.
3 The abstract needs some adjustments.
Answer: OK.
Reviewer 2 Report
In this paper authors tried to analysis the effects on an existing tunnel under newly adjacent excavation tunnel by numerical modelling and then Then, the displacement of adjacent tunnels and buildings is predicted using fuzzy gray theory and python software. Furthermore, authors provided the risk classifications.
There are few comments on paper which are following-
- Introduction heading should be consider 1 number not by zero, 0. Introduction
- Line 28- mentioned surrounding soil, is there only soil? Most of the times tunnel excavation in the rock mass. Author may be common words like natural earth materials so it will includes soil and rock mass.
- Line 36- don’t need to start from current status of foreign research heading. Literature review don’t have limitation either locally or globally. Its include all related to working area.
- Line 64- same as above statements.
- Authors should include more references in literature review section. There are several numerical modelling papers related to two tunnel excavation effects.
- Line 119 to 129- it seems authors only interested in tunnel excavation in the soil. So it’s my suggestion about change the title of MS, it should be include soil word in tunnel excavation.
- Line 130- change the heading as 2 Building 3D numerical model. Also same do next headings.
- Figure 1 & 2 and all results shows both tunnel excavated at same times, but the titles, abstract and introduction mentioned different stories that new tunnel excavation effects on existing adjacent tunnel. Authors should show firstly the existing tunnel stress and displacement distribution scenario, then excavate the new adjacent tunnel in step by step excavation (I mean excavation in parts like 5m, then 10m likewise) which is practically doing in field, not possible to excavate tunnel completely at same time. Then check the effects of new tunnel excavation in all steps.
- This MS needs major revision because of above said statements. There is no meaning to publish in this version.
Need improvement in English writing also.
Author Response
- Introduction heading should be consider 1 number not by zero, 0. Introduction
Answer: OK.
- Line 28- mentioned surrounding soil, is there only soil? Most of the times tunnel excavation in the rock mass. Author may be common words like natural earth materials so it will includes soil and rock mass.
Answer: OK.
- Line 36- don’t need to start from current status of foreign research heading. Literature review don’t have limitation either locally or globally. Its include all related to working area.
Answer: It has been deleted.
- Line 64- same as above statements.
Answer: It has been deleted.
- Authors should include more references in literature review section. There are several numerical modelling papers related to two tunnel excavation effects.
Answer: More references have been added.
- Line 119 to 129- it seems authors only interested in tunnel excavation in the soil. So it’s my suggestion about change the title of MS, it should be include soil word in tunnel excavation.
Answer: OK.
- Line 130- change the heading as 2 Building 3D numerical model. Also same do next headings.
Answer: They have been modified.
- Figure 1 & 2 and all results shows both tunnel excavated at same times, but the titles, abstract and introduction mentioned different stories that new tunnel excavation effects on existing adjacent tunnel. Authors should show firstly the existing tunnel stress and displacement distribution scenario, then excavate the new adjacent tunnel in step by step excavation (I mean excavation in parts like 5m, then 10m likewise) which is practically doing in field, not possible to excavate tunnel completely at same time. Then check the effects of new tunnel excavation in all steps.
Answer: The excavation simulation method is presented in Section 2.3 and Figure 2 has shown plastic zone in last step in fact.
- This MS needs major revision because of above said statements. There is no meaning to publish in this version.
Answer: Language has also improved.
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report
All suggestion has been incorporated except some minor things need to recheck which are
- Include few more references on tunnel excavation and stability which may be Stability Analysis of Shallow Depth Tunnel in Weak Rock Mass: 3D Numerical Modeling Approach
- Some of the references are cited but not included in the references list and vice versa.
Author Response
- Include few more references on tunnel excavation and stability which may be Stability Analysis of Shallow Depth Tunnel in Weak Rock Mass: 3D Numerical Modeling Approach
Answer: OK.
- Some of the references are cited but not included in the references list and vice versa.
Answer: Settlement prediction of soils surrounding subway tunnel has been cited.
