Next Article in Journal
Decision-Based Routing for Unmanned Aerial Vehicles and Internet of Things Networks
Next Article in Special Issue
Support Vector Machine (SVM) Application for Uniaxial Compression Strength (UCS) Prediction: A Case Study for Maragheh Limestone
Previous Article in Journal
Cognitive Reorganization Due to Mental Workload: A Functional Connectivity Analysis Based on Working Memory Paradigms
Previous Article in Special Issue
Three-Dimensional Stability Analysis of Ridge Slope Using Strength Reduction Method Based on Unified Strength Criterion
 
 
Article
Peer-Review Record

Improved Surrounding Rock Classification Method for the Middle Rock Pillar of a Small Clear-Distance Tunnel

Appl. Sci. 2023, 13(4), 2130; https://doi.org/10.3390/app13042130
by Jianxiu Wang 1,2,*, Ansheng Cao 1, Zhao Wu 1, Xuezeng Liu 1,2,*, Zonghai Li 3, Lihua Lin 3, Xiaotian Liu 1, Huboqiang Li 1 and Yuanwei Sun 1
Reviewer 1:
Reviewer 2: Anonymous
Reviewer 3:
Reviewer 4:
Appl. Sci. 2023, 13(4), 2130; https://doi.org/10.3390/app13042130
Submission received: 14 January 2023 / Revised: 30 January 2023 / Accepted: 4 February 2023 / Published: 7 February 2023
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Predictive Modeling in Mining and Geotechnical Engineering)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

1- In Equation 1, definition of Vpm and Vpr should be revised.

2- The following sentence should be revised and rewritten:

"Kv was determined by the square of the ratio of the acoustic longitudinal wave of the same rock mass to that of the rock, as shown in Equation (1):"

3- Concerning numerical simulation,

a) the model should be explained clearly.

b) The fine mesh region of the model should be indicated.

c) The validity of the model should be investigated thoroughly.

d) Loading of the model and analysis type (static or dynamic) should be stated.

e) What material model was used for soil? I think Mohr-Coulomb model was used for soil and elastic behavior was used for lining according to Table 9.

3- In Page 17, it was stated that "The total score of the middle rock pillar, T, is the sum of T1-T6."

Why was not weight factor used for obtaining the total score (T)?

 

 

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Dear Author,

Thanks for submitting your manuscript to the Applied Sciences.

Please find the notes and minor points for improvement in the attached pdf file. It is suggested to use foxit reader. 

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

This paper presents a real time case study of the classification standard for middle rock pillar associated with Xiamen Haicang Evacuate Channel project. 

Six indices from geometric, physical and mechanical factors that included integrity, hardness, combination of the main structural planes of the middle rock pillar and tunnel axis, permeability, initial stress state and geometric state were evaluated.

A classification index was established from basic and auxiliary indices.

The vertical and horizontal deformation, stress, and plastic zone of the central area of the intermediate rock mass obtained by numerical simulation were used as the quantitative and grading basis of the width-span ratio index of the middle rock pillar.

A quantitative and qualitative evaluation method along with specific scoring method(with 5 grades) was proposed to grade the middle rock pillar.

The classification has solved the uncertainty problem caused by discrete mass parameters and subjective human errors. 

Following  are the suggestions are to be incorporated in the manuscript

1.Figure 5 a & b are not clear. Separate high clarity graphs can be aligned one after the other.

2.Figure 6 can be scaled up and can be presented with higher clarity.

3.In section 3.3.2 Width-Span Ratio, the numerical simulation is described. A separate section for the numerical simulation will provide better understanding.

4.It is better to express boundary conditions and compatibility equations involved in numerical modeling in detail.

5.Explanation and comparison of stress analysis using stress contours will improve the quality of the paper.

Overall, the quality of the paper is good and much required realistic case study with respect tunnel engineering. It is helpful in providing enhanced details about classification of tunnel strata for any new design concept.

 

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 4 Report

Your proposed new rating system is specialized in the application of a small little pillar in twin tunnels, does your rating system has applicability in mining?  A new proposed rating system must be linked with the well considered systems such as RMR and Q (and QTBM) systems.

·       Add MRMR mining rock mass rating classification system

LAUBSCHER, D.H, 1990. A geomechanics classification system for the rating of rock mass in mine design. J. S. Atr. Inst. Min. Metal/., vol. 90, no. 10. pp 257-273.

Jakubec, J., & Laubscher, D. H. (2000). The MRMR rock mass rating classification system in mining practice. Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy Publication Series, 7.

·    You need to emphasise the advantages over other systems that have been used for years and therefore have been implemented and verified in many cases.

·       I would recommend that the calibration be done for scores 0-100.

·     Missing a proposed correlation with an existing system (such as RMR or Q) that would make it easier to implement and accept.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

The responses made by the authors are satisfactory. No more revisions are needed.

Back to TopTop