Effect of Moisture Content on the Permanent Strain of Yellow River Alluvial Silt under Long-Term Cyclic Loading

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

 

 The study shows that the static strength of silt decreases with the in-14 crease of moisture content, and the attenuation of static strength is mainly caused by the decrease 15 of cohesion. Moisture content and cyclic deviator stress have a significant impact on the permanent 16 strain of silt.

 

However, there are several issues that must be addressed by the authors before the paper is to be accepted. These comments are listed as follows:

 

1. The title should be written better. A title sentence should be considered without verbs and additional letters.
2. The abstract part must be edited. Some important results should be mentioned in it.

3.      The section of the introduction is written very poorly. The purpose of the research is not clear. The authors should explain in the last paragraph of the introduction how the problems are introduced and solved.  

4.      What does the research address the main question? This issue should be clearly stated in the manuscript.

5.      What is the main innovation of the paper? This issue should be specified in the abstract and introduction sections.

6.      To enrich the technical literature, some works about the used approaches can be added to the references.

7. If some abbreviations are used, they must be previously defined (For example, MES model in line 62).
8. The conclusion part of the manuscript is very poorly interpreted. This section needs to be reviewed and the results better displayed.
9. The paper requires extensive editorial work.

 

-

Author Response

Please see the attachment

 

 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

1）The combination of the liquid limit and plasitic index is above the A line for the testing soil, that means the soil is low liquid limit clay.

2) The equilibrium moisture content is related to the soil type, climate, and undergrand water table,etc.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

 

The manuscript is well presented by the authors and their efforts are highly appreciated. However I have few minor comments on the manuscript.  The comments were added below for further improvement. I hope the comments will be helpful in strengthening the manuscript.

 

Abstract

 -The abstract lacks an explanation on the significance of empirical model results

 

Introduction

The introduction section is well written, but it would be more effective for the authors to concentrate on explaining the significance of their research and how it addresses any existing gaps in knowledge.

 

Experimental methods

 -       How was the grain size analysis performed? please mention in the text

-                   Please include the reference for equations 1

-        Results and discussion

 -       The results are well written however the discussion part is very poor.

-       are there similar studies to compare the results with?

-       A comparison table of obtained model results with existing literature could add great value to this section.

 Summary and Conclusion

-          This section majorly contains summary and lack of conclusions.

-          Need a proper conclusion and be precise in conclusions.

-          The conclusion part misses the recommendation for future studies

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf