Advanced Analysis of Collision-Induced Blast Fragmentation in V-Type Firing Pattern

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

I read the paper entitled "Comparison of firing patterns in surface blasting with emphasis on collision induced fragmentation, using RSA and ANN", carefully.

The following comments may help the authors to modify the article.

 

1- Title of article is long. I strongly recommended to modify it.

 

2- The main question is about innovation. Many researchers as you mentioned in literature review, worked on fragmentation using RSA and ANN, so I cannot find any innovation, please explain it in article.

 

3- The rock boundaries in Table 5, part 4.1 is not drawn correctly. How can you reduce the effect of software errors? Did you check the results with another technique or software?

 

4- The unit of the mean fragmentation size in table 6 is absent.

 

5- In Figure 7, there are 16 input parameters but in Table 10 and Figure 8, There are 14. Where are the rest parameters?

 

6- What is the ree in Figure 8?

 

7- Some parameters were used twice in your model. For example, B and S were considered individually and also you consider B*S. I believe any parameters should be used once.

 

8- The obtained results are vague. According to the results, B and S have a little effect on fragmentation, while many references believe that this parameters are the most important parameters. please explain it.

 

9- The references are mostly old fashion and more than 8 references are belonging to the authors. Please modify it.

 

10- The free face is more important than drilling pattern. because of two free face, V-pattern is more suitable than others. So, I think the results was clear before of research. please explain it.

Author Response

Dear Sir,

Thanks for points raised by you to make this article better. I am submitting revised manuscript as a attached file.  Please see the attachment.

Please find point-by-point responses in below table: -

Sl.No.	Comments	Rectification
1	Title of article is long. I strongly recommended to modify it.	Advance analysis of collision induced blast fragmentation in V-type firing pattern
2	The main question is about innovation. Many researchers as you mentioned in literature review, worked on fragmentation using RSA and ANN, so I cannot find any innovation, please explain it in article.	This article is focused on the influence of In-flight collision between rock fragments during blasting on fragmentation and is first of its kind study documenting the influence of V-type firing pattern on fragmentation.
3	The rock boundaries in Table 5, part 4.1 is not drawn correctly. How can you reduce the effect of software errors? Did you check the results with another technique or software?	Figure corrected. There is an option of manually editing the fragment boundaries in the software, which helps to minimise the error. The software has been used in several SCI publications and is a standard one from a reputed organisation. The systemic errors match those of the other reputed software(s).
4	The unit of the mean fragmentation size in table 6 is absent.	The unit (m2) placed at appropriate place.
5	In Figure 7, there are 16 input parameters but in Table 10 and Figure 8, There are 14. Where are the rest parameters?	Thanks for pointing out. Correct figure inserted.
6	What is the ree in Figure 8?	Thank for pointing out, the correct form ree as explained in symbols is given now.
7	Some parameters were used twice in your model. For example, B and S were considered individually and also you consider B*S. I believe any parameters should be used once.	The product (B x S) represents the interaction between the two variables and such representation are typical of advanced ANOVA. Hence retained.
8	The obtained results are vague. According to the results, B and S have a little effect on fragmentation, while many references believe that these parameters are the most important parameters. please explain it.	It is reflected and evident from the ANOVA. However, these assume subordinate role as specific charge considers the effect in totality as it is ratio of charge per hole and (B x S x Hb). Since such variables are treated individually and as factors also, these assume subordinate role in the analysis with ANN.
9	The references are mostly old fashion and more than 8 references are belonging to the authors. Please modify it.	Corrected.
10	The free face is more important than drilling pattern. because of two free face, V-pattern is more suitable than others. So, I think the results was clear before of research. please explain it.	Our study is focused on impact of collision process on fragmentation and the tests were conducted in accordingly. Even with two free faces such phenomena is not observed in Diagonal firing. Hence the assumption that the result was known is not correct. There is little information available on the said mechanism in the published domain.

Regards,

Lalit Singh Chouhan

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Overall comments:

This study focuses on the comparison of rock fragmentation size under different firing patterns, including line firing pattern, diagonal firing pattern and V-type firing pattern. The mechanism of the influence of firing patterns on rock fragmentation effect was introduced at the first stage. Then based on the blasting excavation in a limestone mine, a series of full scale blasting trials were conducted to study the impacts of firing patterns on the fragmentation size using Fragalyst software. Finally, the RSA and the ANN were carried out to investigate the relationships between blast variables of various firing patterns and rock fragmentation. This paper is of significance for improving the rock fragmentation in particle engineering. However, the details of the experiment design and the interpretations of the test results are still unclear, which will further affect the understanding of this paper.

In summary, I think this paper still need a major revision before publication, detailed comments are listed as follows:

 

(1) Section 3, section 4 and section 5 can be combined into one section, as the contents presented in those sections are related to the onsite experiments.

 

(2) The objectives and effect of different firing patterns on rock fragmentation during rock blasting are summarized in section 2, but the comparative analysis is not sufficient to explain the inherent causes for those differences of fragmentation size under different kinds of firing patterns. Please add some explanation.

 

(3) The onsite charging structures and initiation modes were not described in detail. Please add more information.

 

(4) Figure 1 shows the photos of rock fragmentation in onsite experiments, but the description of those photos is not enough to clarify the influences of firing patterns on rock fragmentation. Please add gradation distribution curves of different kinds of firing patterns.

 

(5) I am confused with the parameters of RF in Figure. 5. Why it is different for various firing patterns and how to use it in practical engineering. Please explain it.

 

(6) Can the authors explain how to obtain the curve of the importance of blast variables by ANN in Figure 8.

 

(7) Section 5.2 shows the feasibility of ANN in the prediction of mean fragmentation size, but how does this relate to the comparison of firing patterns. Please add some explanation.

 

(8) All the figures need to be polished, the current figures especially affect the quality of the paper.

 

(9) The abstract and conclusions need further revision to show the innovations of this paper.

Author Response

Dear Sir,

Thanks for points raised by you to make this article better. I am submitting revised manuscript as a attached file.  Please see the attachment.

Please find point-by-point responses in below table: -

Sl.No.	Comment	Rectification
1	Section 3, section 4 and section 5 can be combined into one section, as the contents presented in those sections are related to the onsite experiments.	Corrected
2	The objectives and effect of different firing patterns on rock fragmentation during rock blasting are summarized in section 2, but the comparative analysis is not sufficient to explain the inherent causes for those differences of fragmentation size under different kinds of firing patterns. Please add some explanation.	Explained.
3	The onsite charging structures and initiation modes were not described in detail. Please add more information.	Included in chapter 3.
4	Figure 1 shows the photos of rock fragmentation in onsite experiments, but the description of those photos is not enough to clarify the influences of firing patterns on rock fragmentation. Please add gradation distribution curves of different kinds of firing patterns.	Corrected.
5	I am confused with the parameters of RF in Figure. 5. Why it is different for various firing patterns and how to use it in practical engineering. Please explain it.	There were some mistakes in the figure which have been corrected. Also, simulations while keeping two factors constant and varying the third factor involved 3 x 3 iterations for three variables. The behaviour of under such iterations for changes in variables is explained and similar is the case with the RF.
6	Can the authors explain how to obtain the curve of the importance of blast variables by ANN in Figure 8.	Explained
7	Section 5.2 shows the feasibility of ANN in the prediction of mean fragmentation size, but how does this relate to the comparison of firing patterns. Please add some explanation.	Explained.
8	All the figures need to be polished, the current figures especially affect the quality of the paper.	Corrected
9	The abstract and conclusions need further revision to show the innovations of this paper.	Revised

 

Regards,

Lalit Singh Chouhan

 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

The corrections are acceptable.

Reviewer 2 Report

The manuscript has been sufficiently improved and I agree to publish it in Sustainable.