Investigation of the Static Characteristics of a Geogrid-Reinforced Embankment
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
1. Figures 2, 6, and 7 should be lowered not to overlay the text above.
2. Subheading 3.2 should be moved to the next page.
3. The conclusion should be more exact, supported by the results obtained.
Author Response
Dear Editors and Reviewers:
Thank you for your letter and for the reviewers’ comments concerning our manuscript entitled “Investigation of the Static Characteristics of Geogrid Reinforced Embankment” (applsci-2053526). Those comments are all valuable and very helpful for revising and improving our paper, as well as the important guiding significance to our research. We have studied the comments carefully and have made a correction which we hope meets with approval. Revised portions are marked in Track in the paper. Mark the modified part of the paper with Track.
1. Figures 2, 6, and 7 should be lowered not to overlay the text above.
Response: Figures 2, 6, and 7 have been moved down.
2. Subheading 3.2 should be moved to the next page.
Response: Subtitle 3.2 has been moved to the next page.
3. The conclusion should be more exact, supported by the results obtained.
Response: We have modified the conclusion. Thank you very much for your suggestions.
We tried our best to improve the manuscript and made some changes in the manuscript. These changes will not influence the content and framework of the paper. And here we did not list the changes but marked them in red in the revised paper.
We appreciate for Editors/Reviewers’ warm work earnestly and hope that the correction will meet with approval.
Once again, thank you very much for your comments and suggestions
Yours sincerely,
Yanfu Duan
Corresponding author:
Name: Jianjun Cheng
E-mail: chengdesign@163.com
Author Response File: 
Author Response.doc
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments for author File: 
Comments.pdf
Author Response
Dear Editors and Reviewers:
Thank you for your letter and for the reviewers’ comments concerning our manuscript entitled “Investigation of the Static Characteristics of Geogrid Reinforced Embankment” (applsci-2053526). Those comments are all valuable and very helpful for revising and improving our paper, as well as the important guiding significance to our research. We have studied the comments carefully and have made a correction which we hope meets with approval. Revised portions are marked in Track in the paper. Mark the modified part of the paper with Track.
1.As such, the submitted manuscript needs language editing of whole MS as the
manuscript has number of incomplete or misspelled words and grammatical errors. The manuscript is difficult to follow without language editing.
Response: Dear experts, I am very sorry about the difficulty in reading the article. According to your opinion, MS has been edited. The incomplete and misspelled words and grammatical errors were corrected.
2.Author(s) have used some software or in-house developed software. They are advised to add one paragraph for software details used for simulation of Geogrid reinforced embankment in their study.
Response: Midas GTX NX is adopted as the simulation software, which has been introduced in Section 2.5 of this article.
3. The legend text in the Figure 16 is to be corrected because of repetition of legend.
Response: We are very sorry for our mistake in writing the legend. We have modified the legend.
We tried our best to improve the manuscript and made some changes in the manuscript. These changes will not influence the content and framework of the paper. And here we did not list the changes but marked them in red in the revised paper.
We appreciate for Editors/Reviewers’ warm work earnestly and hope that the correction will meet with approval.
Once again, thank you very much for your comments and suggestions
Yours sincerely,
Yanfu Duan
Corresponding author:
Name: Jianjun Cheng
E-mail: chengdesign@163.com
Author Response File: Author Response.doc
Reviewer 3 Report
Review of the manuscript by Yanfu Duan et al.
Investigation of the Static Characteristics of Geogrid Reinforced Embankment
Submitted to Applied Sciences (2053526)
GENERAL COMMENTS
The paper deals with the overall displacement, fill pressure, and internal tension under static force of the geogrid reinforced earth levee. Some numerical simulations and data monitoring results are presented, and some interesting phenomena are shown and illustrated. However, the manuscript seems like a technique report or experiment one. and no significant theoretical improvement is found. More importantly, the creativity and innovation of this manuscript are not described very clearly, and more illustrations should be added. According to the high-quality standards of the Applied Sciences, the paper CAN NOT be considered for publication in the present version. Some major and minor comments are summarized as follows.
MAJOR/MINOR COMMENTS
u The Abstract should be re-written completely. The present version seems not like an abstract at all.
u The INTRODUCTION is essentially a disordered list of concise (sometimes vague and imprecise) statements about what other authors did in the past in the field. The mere sum of these statements is far from a coherent analysis of the current state of the art and certainly does not suffice to support the paper’s motivations. The authors must relate the referenced works to each other by highlighting the advancements and significant theoretical/applied results of each piece of research. The motivation of the manuscript should be illustrated more clearly and concisely.
u The background of this huge project should be described more specifically.
u The readability of manuscript and some figures should be improved.
u The illustrations and analyses of the monitoring data should be more clearly. Especially, some significant results should be pointed out in detail.
u The numerical simulations of displacement analyses should be described more clearly.
u Some comparisons between the monitoring and simulation are presented, but these quantitative differences should be illustrated more specifically.
u It seems that some conclusions are not new, and it is too wordy.
Author Response
Dear Editors and Reviewers:
Thank you for your letter and for the reviewers’ comments concerning our manuscript entitled “Investigation of the Static Characteristics of Geogrid Reinforced Embankment” (applsci-2053526). Those comments are all valuable and very helpful for revising and improving our paper, as well as the important guiding significance to our research. We have studied the comments carefully and have made a correction which we hope meets with approval. Revised portions are marked in Track in the paper. Mark the modified part of the paper with Track.
1. The Abstract should be re-written completely. The present version seems not like an abstract at all.
Response: The abstract has been rewritten.
2. The INTRODUCTION is essentially a disordered list of concise (sometimes vague and imprecise) statements about what other authors did in the past in the field. The mere sum of these statements is far from a coherent analysis of the current state of the art and certainly does not suffice to support the paper’s motivations. The authors must relate the referenced works to each other by highlighting the advancements and significant theoretical/applied results of each piece of research. The motivation of the manuscript should be illustrated more clearly and concisely.
Response: The introduction has been revised. Connecting some References. Reference [25] was replaced.
3. The background of this huge project should be described more specifically.
Response: This project is a bullet proof wall project of an anti-terrorism base in Xinjiang. I'm very sorry, because it involves some secrets, so I can't describe it in detail.
4. The readability of manuscript and some figures should be improved.
Response: The whole article has been modified, including Figure 2, Figure 5, Figure 8, Figure 10, Figure 12, Figure 14 and Figure 16.
5. The numerical simulations of displacement analyses should be described more clearly.
Response: The displacement analysis of numerical simulation has been clearly described in Section 3.4.
6. Some comparisons between the monitoring and simulation are presented, but these quantitative differences should be illustrated more specifically.
Response: Section 3.5 of the article compares the monitoring and simulation.
7. It seems that some conclusions are not new, and it is too wordy.
Response: We are very sorry for our mistake. The conclusion has been modified according to your comments.
We tried our best to improve the manuscript and made some changes in the manuscript. These changes will not influence the content and framework of the paper. And here we did not list the changes but marked them in red in the revised paper.
We appreciate for Editors/Reviewers’ warm work earnestly and hope that the correction will meet with approval.
Once again, thank you very much for your comments and suggestions
Yours sincerely,
Yanfu Duan
Corresponding author:
Name: Jianjun Cheng
E-mail: chengdesign@163.com
Author Response File: Author Response.doc
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report
I have reviewed the resubmitted manuscript titled “Investigation of the Static Characteristics of Geogrid Reinforced Embankment”. Authors have conducted the two-dimensional numerical analysis to study the characteristics of Geogrid reinforced embankment under static loadings. It is found that authors have improved the MS by incorporated the comments and the manuscript may be accepted for the publication.
Comments for author File: Comments.docx
Author Response
Dear Editors and reviewers,
Thank you for accepting our paper entitled "Study of Static Properties of Geogrid-Reinforced Embankments" (applsci-2053526).You have worked hard.We sincerely thank the editors/reviewers for their enthusiastic work.Thank you again for your work on our paper.
Your sincerity,
Yanfu section
Corresponding Author:
Name: Cheng Jianjun
E-mail :chengdesign@163.com
Author Response File: Author Response.doc
Reviewer 3 Report
The authors have satisfyingly answered to almost all the points raised in my initial review.
My opinion is that the paper has been improved, and according to the high quality of AP, the paper could be acceptable after the grammar is double checked.
Author Response
Dear Editors and reviewers,
Thank you for accepting our paper entitled "Study of Static Properties of Geogrid-Reinforced Embankments" (applsci-2053526). You have worked hard. We sincerely thank the editors/reviewers for their enthusiastic work. Thank you again for your work on our paper.
Your sincerity,
Yanfu Duan
Corresponding Author:
Name: Cheng Jianjun
E-mail: chengdesign@163.com
Author Response File: Author Response.doc
