Review Reports

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Dear authors,

please find the attached file with some comments.

 

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

please see the attachment. I can also provide a completely changed manuscript (with track changes) upon request. 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

This paper describes a relatively simple methodology to determine the erosion and deposition parameters, using conventional near-bed observations of bed level, sediment concentration and flow velocity. The paper has practical importance related to erosion and deposition process of cohesive sediment. In order to be published in JMSE, however, further descriptions and explanations are highly required as listed below.

(1)    Page 2. Influence of deploying the tripod: After deployment of the tripod on the estuary bottom, no deformation of the bottom due to the tripod, i.e., local scouring or deposition of sediment?

(2)    Page 3. Table 2, ALEC: It’s a company’s name! Instead, write the name of the instrument based on its measurement function, similar to others.

(3)    Page 4. GM94 has been proposed for wave-current boundary layer over rough bottom. The boundary layer measured by the present authors always lies in rough turbulent regime? Was it confirmed that the flow regime does not lie in no transitional nor smooth turbulent? Further descriptions for flow regime in the boundary layer measured by the present study are highly required.

(4)    Page 4. It is noted that TKE varies spatially in the vertical direction. Is the deployment height (probably 0.25m in Table 1) is suitable for this estimation? The definition “near-bed velocity” is too qualitative, without discussion in connection with wave boundary layer thickness. The height z=0.25m is outside the wave boundary layer? How far from the outer edge of the wave boundary layer? Such a detailed descriptions are required to apply the TKE method.

(5)    Page 4. How to define the fluctuating component in Eq.(7)?: In general, the fluctuating component can be obtained by subtracting ensemble averaged value from the instantaneous velocity. How did you obtain the ensemble averaged velocity under wave motion? More detailed definition is required in this paper. For more details, see Eqs. (4) and (5) in the following paper.

Jensen, B.L., Sumer, B.M. and Fredsoe, J.: Turbulent oscillatory boundary layers at high Reynolds numbers, J. Fluid Mech. (1989), vol. 206, pp. 265-297.

(6)    Showing raw data of velocity with finer time axis, rather than that in Fig.4 (b), will be highly useful and straightforward to understand how weak the wave motion is, although it is mentioned in Fig.2’s caption that “wave-induced shear stress is very small.” Or showing water surface elevation data?

Author Response

please see the attachment. I can also provide a completely changed manuscript (with track changes) upon request.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

The reviewer confirmed that the paper has been revised sufficiently in response to the reviewer's comments. Now the reviewer recommends the paper for publication in JMSE, MDPI.