Study on the Impact Mitigation Effect of Artificial Rock Backfill Layers for Submarine Pipelines Based on Physical Model Tests and Numerical Simulations
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for Authors
The topic is important to the pipeline industry, and the paper is well structured. However, the manuscript requires improvement. Here are my comments.
- Reduce the length of the abstract by focusing on highlighting key points and main novelty.
- Ensure referencing style matches journal requirements.
- The introduction is good, however, more recent works in this topic should be add with discussion. The introduction is good, but more recent studies on this topic should be included and discussed.
- If the authors did not layout the figure, please cite the relevant citation.
- Include a flowchart outlining the study steps.
- Why did the authors choose to use DNV-RP-F107 standards?
- What are the limitations and future directions in this field? Include this in the conclusion section.
Comments on the Quality of English Language
The quality of English language should be improved.
Author Response
Please, see the attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for Authors
Please, see the attachment.
Comments for author File: 
Comments.pdf
Author Response
Please, see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for Authors
I obtained the revised version of the paper “Study on the Impact Mitigation Effect of Artificial Rock Backfill Layers for Submarine Pipelines Based on Physical Model Tests and Numerical Simulations”. In general, I accept the responses and explanations provided by the authors, however, I still have tiny objections:
In Response 2, the authors write: Regarding the potential energy term “Wz” in Equation 13, the variable “z” represents the penetration depth of the anchor into the rock protection layer, rather than the falling height of the anchor in water. This has also been clarified in more detail in the revised manuscript.
OK, but it should be clearly written in the text that “z” represents the penetration depth of the anchor into the rock protection layer. It has been done in line 194, but the text “z is the relative to the final penetration depth in the rock protection layer” (lines 198-199) is completely unnecessary and confusing.
In Response 7, the authors write: “Equation (19) is used to calculate the scaling relationship of the anchor impact force F. After obtaining the scaling relationship, the real force can be calculated from Figure 10 and used for comparison with the numerical simulation results in Figure 15. The application of the equation has been indicated in Lines 449 and 474.
It is too far from Fig. 10. The comment about scaling relationship must be provided just next to this figure. Moreover, I still insist that the forces presented in this graph should be transformed into real forces with use of the scale coefficients lambda. If the authors want a reader to do the calculations by him-/herself, they should provide and clearly present appropriate numerical data required to Form. (19). A convenient solution would be, in my opinion, a small supplement, for example in a form: „Using Form. (19), one can calculate that a real value corresponding to the force FA = 288.83 N is equal to … and to the force FA = 82.54 N is equal to …”. To be honest, in the present form I cannot assess in what extent the forces from Fig. 10 correspond to those from Fig. 14.
Comments on the Quality of English Language
Regarding the editorial and linguistic aspects – there are still tiny errors (punctuations and typos) – e.g. „5.5kpa” instead of „5.5 kPa” in line 262, “Equation (13).” instead of “Equation (13):” in line 195, “in this context” instead of “In this context” in line 196 etc. However, I am sure that the Editors will thoroughly revise the text in this respect.
Author Response
Thank you very much for your valuable suggestions. For a detailed response, please refer to the attached file.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
