Energy Dissipation and Stress Equilibrium Behavior of Granite under Dynamic Impact

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

REVIEW

on article

 

A Relevance of Energy Dissipation and Stress Equilibrium

Time Law under Dynamic Impact of Granite

 

Zhenyang Xu, Yixuan Wu, Xiu Lin, Lianjun Guo, Zhihang Hu

 

SUMMARY

The article submitted for review is relevant. It considers the relevance of energy dissipation and the law of stress balance under dynamic impact on granite. The research question is that the uniformity of stresses in the rock before damage occurs can reflect the degree of fragmentation of the rock, and the stress equilibrium time is an important indicator for evaluating uniformity. The authors conducted a fairly in-depth study.

In the article, by studying the influence of the size and deformation rate of rocks, experimental experimental tests of granite samples were carried out depending on the size and conditions of the deformation rate. The data was processed and thoroughly analyzed, all the necessary calculations were performed, and a number of important conclusions were obtained. A relationship has been established between the time of establishment of stress equilibrium and energy dissipation, and it has been proved that the most rapidly growing period of the energy dissipation curve is approximately equal to the time of stress equilibrium in the rock. The length-to-diameter ratio of a granite sample helps to better maintain stress uniformity before crushing the rock.

Thus, the study is original, has novelty and practical significance. However, at the same time article has several shortcomings that need to be corrected.

COMMENTS

1.      Perhaps, the title of the article should be changed, removing the word "Relevance". I think a better title would be "Energy Dissipation and Stress Equilibrium Time Law under Dynamic Impact of Granite". However, this is at the discretion of the authors".

2.      The Abstract is presented rather vaguely, it should be concretized, indicating the relevance, tasks, the problem being solved, and present the main results, paying attention to the quantitative characteristics of the data obtained. Editors strongly encourage authors to use the following style of structured abstracts, but without headings: (1) Background: Place the question addressed in a broad context and highlight the purpose of the study; (2) Methods: Describe briefly the main methods or treatments applied; (3) Results: Summarize the article's main findings; and (4) Conclusions: Indicate the main conclusions or interpretations. The Abstract should be an objective representation of the article.

3.      Perhaps, the keywords should be clarified. I recommend adding two or three more words or phrases that will reflect the research problem, in particular, energy dissipation and the law of stress balance during dynamic impact on granite.

4.      The Introduction is presented too concisely, it should be supplemented with a large number of sources analyzed over the past five years in order to speak about the scientific novelty and relevance of the study. In addition, it is necessary to formulate and add the purpose, objectives of the study, the scientific problem, and the scientific novelty of the study more clearly.

5.      I would like to see a more extended preamble in line 96. Why were such materials chosen and what is the reason for this? Information is provided that samples of gray and white granite were obtained from the Xinyang mine in Henan province. The strength of granite is weaker than that of other types. This statement should be supplemented in more detail.

6.      In addition, subsection 2.1 is very small, a more detailed description and interpretation of Figure 1 should be given.

7.      It is methodologically incorrect to end a section or subsections with a drawing; it should be given a textual interpretation. In addition, the low quality of Figure 1 is striking, it should be presented in a higher resolution.

8.      Subsections 2.2., 2.3. and subparagraphs 2.3.1., 2.3.2., 2.3.3. are also very small and need a deeper description. Figure 2 is also of rather poor quality.

9.      Subsection 2.3.3 ends with a table, authors should give its interpretation after the table itself.

10.    In Formula 1 in paragraph 2.3.4. there are poorly distinguishable characters, you should check this formula.

11.    Figure 3 is also very low quality; you should enlarge it in size and improve the quality of resolution.

12.    Figure 4 shows a broken line graph that reflects the initial stress equilibrium time. The nature of this graph should be explained and its clear interpretation point by point should be given. Probably, such a graphical representation is not entirely successful; this figure should be analyzed. Figure 5 is also quite low quality.

13.    In Figures 6 and 7, as well as in Figure 9, the color scheme is unsuccessfully chosen.

14.    Figure 8 needs more textual interpretation to explain the elements depicted in it. It is denoted as the rate of energy dissipation under various impact loads but needs further explanation.

15.    Figure 11 is also quite low quality, it needs to be presented in a better form with a higher resolution. In addition, in the description under Figure 11, you should add what a, b, c, d, e are.

16.    In general, it is necessary to improve the design of figures, or rather, the design of the first mention of them must be brought to a single style; check that before each figure there is the first mention of it in the text; if the figure consists of parts a, b, c and so on, then it is necessary to explain these parts in the caption. In this form, the design of figures, captions to them and references to them does not meet the requirements for high-level publications. Everything needs to be carefully checked and corrected. Please, check all figures for requirements of the Applied Sciences journal. At least 1000 pix for the shorten side and 300 DPI resolution.

17.    The article needs serious revision in terms of discussion, the results obtained and comparison of these results with the results obtained earlier by other authors. Without the "Discussion" section, the article does not look sufficient for publication, it should be strengthened and finalized.

18.    The section "Conclusions" is very concise, it is necessary to reveal more scientific novelty and scientific results. In addition, it is necessary to add prospects for the development of the study.

 

19.    The list of references should be numbered and the number of sources increased by adding more recent sources published in the last five years.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

The paper investigates the size and strain rate effects of rocks, five different sizes of granite specimens with different length-diameter ratios were prepared and Hopkinson impact tests were conducted under four strain rate conditions. A energy balance factor was introduced to compare and analyze the stress equilibrium time of five kinds of long-diameter granite specimens. 

The paper is a very preliminary state, with many issues to consider. English needs to be checked by a native speaker. 

Formula (5) needs to be written.

Figures 8 and 9 are not clear and need to be reconsidered.

Figures 10 and 13: not clear if the points represent the datas or if lines refer to analytical formulations.

Conclusion: they need to be rewritten. The outcomes need to be discussed in the previous section (discussion) and some points need to be discussed: limitations, future perspectives... 

 

Therefore, the reviewer thinks that the paper is not ready to be accepted

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

All my comments were taken into account and appropriate corrections were made in the text. The article looks much better. I recommend the article for publishing. Just bring it to the Applied Sciences template. 

Reviewer 2 Report

The paper is improved and now ready to be accepted