Study on Stability Discrimination Technology of Stope Arch Structure
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
In this study, the development process of rock strata arch structure is studied by theoretical analysis and particle flow numerical simulation, and the stability of the arch structure is analyzed. Both innovative and practical. Therefore, publication in a journal is recommended.
Author Response
Dear editors and reviewers,
Thank you very much for your valuable comments.
In this study, the development process of rock strata arch structure is studied by theoretical analysis and particle flow numerical simulation, and the stability of the arch structure is analyzed. Both innovative and practical. Therefore, publication in a journal is recommended.
Thank you very much for your support of our research work.
Reviewer 2 Report
The present article by Q. Li et al., has suggested the importance of ratio of arch height to bedrock thickness to judge the stability of arch structure in mining which is also supported by numerical analysis. The article is scientifically interesting to the researchers and also to academicians dealing with mining engineering. The article has a very outstanding content and should be accepted in its present format.
1. The article deals with theoretical simulation of an experimental mining data taking consideration of the relationship between rock strata height and arch height i.e. instability coefficient which concludes the identification of arch structure stability.
2. The simulation is carried out using Particle flow code (PFC) theory relating both microscopic and macroscopic mechanical properties of particles reproducing much similar results to that of actual mechanical behavior.
3. Again the numerical calculation involved in this article relies on the flat joint model which has greater advantage over the classical parallel bond model by considering continuous adjustment of numerical results along with the experimental process.
4. The article mostly wants to develop a concept on the stability study of the arch structure which is crucial while dealing with problems like stope pressure, surface subsidence etc. The authors are able to utilise particle flow numerical simulation, rock strata breaking theory etc.to generate some possible answer to the origin of question successfully.
Author Response
Dear editors and reviewers,
Thank you very much for your valuable comments.
Thank you very much for your support of our research work.
Reviewer 3 Report
Thank you for the authors to provide this work, I believe this work will be helpful for stability discrimination and evolution mechanism of stope arch structure for mining area. But, I still have a few concerns as follows:
1. The title should revise based on the development and contribution of the study because this is a technical paper.
2. The introduction part is short. Need to revise the introduction section for example in the 2nd Many studies have shown that ….Insert intensive key citations in this section and just highlight clear research gaps in this section.
3. Please add few lines in section 2 Method, before start subsection 2.1. Same comments in subsection 2.2. Rock strata breaking theory and arch structure height calculation method, add few lines before start new subsection 2.2.1. Also same comments 2.3. Numerical simulation of particle flow code, add few line before start subsection 2.3.1.
4. Please add few lines in section 3 Results, before start subsection 3.1.
5. You should revise the contain in Section 4 Discussion. Please make it clear Discussion for what?
6. Compared with the recently published works and this study.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 4 Report
The manuscript is generally well done. The development process of rock arch structure in stope was studied by theoretical analysis and numerical simulation. The research results have particular reference value for preventing ground disasters caused by underground coal mining. This manuscript is suggested to be accepted after minor revision, some comments listed in below:
1. Keywords do not reflect the purpose of the manuscript. Therefore, it is suggested to add keywords “rock strata breaking theory, surface subsidence”.
2. Check this sentence “The highest altitude is 1198.90 m, the lowest altitude is 1151.2 m, and the general altitude is 1150-1200 m” in section 2.1, the general altitude is higher than the highest altitude, lower than the lowest altitude.
3. In Table 1, the “E*” and “K*” have “*” with them, but there is nothing about “*” noted by the end of this table. Can you explain why * should be added.
4. The text in Figure 5 is not clear and suggested to be enlarged.
5. In the field of geotechnical engineering, there are many numerical simulation software. Please briefly explain why PFC is selected for this study.
6. It can be seen from Fig. 7 that the numerical model simulates the typical rock strata structure. Whether the author considers the influence of the interface between rock strata on the results, and if it is considered, how to select the parameters.
7. There are many introductions about PFC numerical simulation software. In this paper, it is only a simulation method and is suggested to be simplified.
8. The unit in Figure 9 should be in parenthesis.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 3 Report
The authors have revised the comments.
