Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

1. Abstract is somehow difficult to understand. Suggest rewriting in a better way.

2. The presented results and discussions were very interesting. However, the overall writing is not up to standard. Suggest to have a language proof read first.

English very difficult to understand/incomprehensible

Author Response

Ref: applsci-2389639

Title: Soil Deformation Investigation on a Piled-raft Foundation Pit Under-crossed by Super-large Diameter Shield Tunnel

Journal: Applied Sciences

Dear editors and reviewers:

We would like to express our gratitude to the reviewers for their time and efforts to our manuscript. The reviewers’ comments contribute to a significant improvement of the manuscript’s academic level.

We have read the three reviewers’ comments, and carefully revised the manuscript. The manuscript has been revised in close accordance with their comments and suggestions. You can find the modified and revised parts which are underlined text with red color. In addition, a one-by-one response to the three reviewers’ comments has been attached separately.

 

We are looking forward to further information on this manuscript.

 

Yours sincerely,

 

Yue Jiang, Yanlin Li, Aijun Yao, Xiangzhi Gao, Hui Li

 

May 7th, 2023

 

 

Corresponding author: Yanlin Li

The Key Laboratory of Urban Security and Disaster Engineering, Ministry of Education

Beijing University of Technology, Beijing 100124, China

Email: liyanlin955@emails.bjut.edu.cn

Reply to #1 reviewer

Comments-1:

Abstract is somehow difficult to understand. Suggest rewriting in a better way.

Reply:

We appreciate the reviewer’s valuable suggestions.

The abstract has been modified by a native speaker and reorganized, we hope you like it.

 

Comments-2:

The presented results and discussions were very interesting. However, the overall writing is not up to standard. Suggest to have a language proof read first.

Reply:

We appreciate the reviewer’s valuable suggestions.

The language quality of this manuscript has been thoroughly checked and improved by a native speaker. We hope you like it.

Reviewer 2 Report

The paper is well organized; however, there are some points that should be clarified.

·         Can you explain more about the validation process of the numerical models used in this research? How confident are you that these models accurately represent the actual project site?

·         You mentioned that the closer the two shield machines are, the greater the settlement at the bottom of the foundation pit will be. How close is "close"? Did you explore the effects of different distances between the two machines on settlement?

·         You proposed two correction coefficients to correct the surface settlement curve based on the unique load characteristics of the project. How did you determine these coefficients? Are they specific to this project or can they be applied to other similar projects?

·         Can you discuss the potential long-term effects of the excavation on the surrounding soil and structures? Have you conducted any follow-up monitoring after the completion of the project to observe any ongoing settlement or deformation?

 

·         In your conclusion, you stated that the modified settlement curves can provide a possible way for rapid calculation of negative skin friction distribution. Can you explain more about how this calculation can be done and how it can be used in practice by engineers?

 

Author Response

Ref: applsci-2389639

Title: Soil Deformation Investigation on a Piled-raft Foundation Pit Under-crossed by Super-large Diameter Shield Tunnel

Journal: Applied Sciences

Dear editors and reviewers:

We would like to express our gratitude to the reviewers for their time and efforts to our manuscript. The reviewers’ comments contribute to a significant improvement of the manuscript’s academic level.

We have read the three reviewers’ comments, and carefully revised the manuscript. The manuscript has been revised in close accordance with their comments and suggestions. You can find the modified and revised parts which are underlined text with red color. In addition, a one-by-one response to the three reviewers’ comments has been attached separately. You can find it in attached file.

 

We are looking forward to further information on this manuscript.

 

Yours sincerely,

 

Yue Jiang, Yanlin Li, Aijun Yao, Xiangzhi Gao, Hui Li

 

May 7th, 2023

 

 

Corresponding author: Yanlin Li

The Key Laboratory of Urban Security and Disaster Engineering, Ministry of Education

Beijing University of Technology, Beijing 100124, China

Email: liyanlin955@emails.bjut.edu.cn

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

The paper would benefit from addressing the following suggestions:

1. The lack of details on determination of soil properties, such as the derivation of parameters in Table 1, needs to be addressed. Also, the impact of changes in saturation and surrounding pressure on elastic parameters should be discussed, as these factors significantly influence soil properties. I recommend referring to studies such as doi:10.1061/(ASCE)GT.1943-5606.0000990 and doi:10.1016/j.soildyn.2022.107247 for further insights on this topic.
2. The Mohr-Coulomb criterion, when combined with a linear elastic model, implicitly assumes that soil behaves elastically before failure. While this may be suitable for some conditions, the criterion lacks accuracy when dealing with accumulated deformation and fails to account for stress-induced anisotropy, which could be crucial in this study. The authors should justify their choice of using this criterion and consider the limitations mentioned. Relevant discussions can be found in the following papers: doi:10.1007/s00466-020-01945-8 and doi:10.1139/cgj-2020-0620, among others.
3. The validation presented in this study is somewhat limited, as it primarily focuses on settlements while excluding various other parameters which may be important and highlight the likely limitations of the proposed approach. To provide a more comprehensive evaluation, it is essential for the authors to include a balanced discussion on these limitations within both the main text and conclusion.
4. The authors should expand on item 2 in the conclusion by discussing the specific conditions under which uplift occurs. 

It’s good.

Author Response

Ref: applsci-2389639

Title: Soil Deformation Investigation on a Piled-raft Foundation Pit Under-crossed by Super-large Diameter Shield Tunnel

Journal: Applied Sciences

Dear editors and reviewers:

We would like to express our gratitude to the reviewers for their time and efforts to our manuscript. The reviewers’ comments contribute to a significant improvement of the manuscript’s academic level.

We have read the three reviewers’ comments, and carefully revised the manuscript. The manuscript has been revised in close accordance with their comments and suggestions. You can find the modified and revised parts which are underlined text with red color. In addition, a one-by-one response to the three reviewers’ comments has been attached separately. You can find it in attached file.

 

We are looking forward to further information on this manuscript.

 

Yours sincerely,

 

Yue Jiang, Yanlin Li, Aijun Yao, Xiangzhi Gao, Hui Li

 

May 7th, 2023

 

 

Corresponding author: Yanlin Li

The Key Laboratory of Urban Security and Disaster Engineering, Ministry of Education

Beijing University of Technology, Beijing 100124, China

Email: liyanlin955@emails.bjut.edu.cn

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

All comments are responded, and the paper can be considered for possible publishing.

Reviewer 3 Report

My comments were addressed.