Computational Fluid Dynamics Modeling of Concrete Flows in Drilled Shafts
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsIn current work, the authors introduced a three-dimensional computational fluid dynamics (CFD) model, developed a numerical model combining the finite volume method with the Volume of Fluid (VOF) method for interface tracking, to describe the flow of concrete under non-Newtonian conditions during drilled shaft construction. The Carreau constitutive model was used to represent the non-Newtonian rheological properties of concrete. Overall, the structure of the paper is complete, but the main issue is that the complex model used has not been sufficiently validated.
The rheological properties of concrete are very complex. The author needs sufficient reasons to prove why they chose a simple shear-thinning model.
Before using the model for more complex engineering case calculations, it is necessary for the author to validate both mathematical and numerical models adopted; otherwise, any calculated results would be meaningless.
Comments on the Quality of English LanguageNo detail comments
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe paper does not sound scientific. This paper has many scientific flaws. First of all, there is a significant lack of previous literature review in the introduction. It is filled with so many pictures from online and is in low quality in scientific matters. There is not sufficient information in regards to the layout of the computational process. The results have low standard in presentation. For example, some figures are very ambiguous in the context. Therefore, I do not recommend its publication in Fluids.
Comments on the Quality of English LanguageThe English language needs substantial editing.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsNo more comments
Comments on the Quality of English LanguageNo more comments
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe revised version of the manuscript was significantly improved. I recommend it’s publication in current version in Fluids.
