Characteristics of Energy Dissipation in T-Shaped Fractured Rocks under Different Loading Rates

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The ms is well organized with good data to be published. The following are key concerns to improve  the ms 

1. The Fig. 2 list so many samples, please be clear of how many samples you used in this paper and give a clear introduction to the samples. 

2. Definition of the Ue/U should be provided in the abstract. 

3.The second paragraph of the Introduction is much too long. The authors listed too many names, while the key scientific progresses are not illustrated. 

Please re-organize the whole paragraph by concise the whole statement and also following scientific logic. 

Almost a third of the present length is enough. 

 

4. The figures can be largely condensed, with  too many blanks in the figures. 

 

5. Does figure 3 need references or change to an actual tested result. 

 

6. Do you use fissure, crack or fractures, please unified the terminologies. 

 

7. Revise the figures with necessary unites definition, do no use "/" before units and add necessary blank. 

 

8. Concise the conclusions and highlight the key findings. 

 

9. Conduct a careful proof reading before resubmission. 

 

10 Other comments see the attached pdf. 

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

The Introduction should be carefully improved.

And a concise the whole English statement is necessary. 

Author Response

Dear Editor and Reviewers,

Thank you very much for your letter and valuable suggestions, which helped us improve both the content and language of this paper. We have revised the paper according to the reviewers’ suggestions and would like to resubmit it (sustainability-2522037) for your consideration. We have addressed the comments raised by the reviewers, and the amendments are highlighted in blue in the revised manuscript. Efforts were also made to correct any mistakes and improve the English quality of the manuscript.Please see the attachment

If you have any questions about this paper, please do not hesitate to let us know.

 

With kindest regards,

Yours sincerely,

 

Yong Zhang

Author Response File: Author Response.doc

Reviewer 2 Report

In this paper, the authors applied field measurement and Time series method to analyze the logging data and evaluate the ground characteristics. After careful evaluation and expert review, although there are several mistakes about grammar and handwriting, I think this paper is up to publication standards. Here are the reasons and explanations for the revision of your manuscript:

1. Keywords should be checked and noticed.

2. Introduction section should be divided effectively in several paragraphs to make the structure sense.

3. The source of Figure 3 should be added with a brief introduction of the energy mechanism.

4. Line 202-205, The long sentence should be divided into two sentences.

5. The word of fracture instead of fissure, the same below.

6. Line 429-432, The long sentence should be divided into two sentences.

7. No.1 part of Conclusion should be simplified. 

Author Response

Dear Editor and Reviewers,

Thank you very much for your letter and valuable suggestions, which helped us improve both the content and language of this paper. We have revised the paper according to the reviewers’ suggestions and would like to resubmit it (sustainability-2522037) for your consideration. We have addressed the comments raised by the reviewers, and the amendments are highlighted in blue in the revised manuscript. Efforts were also made to correct any mistakes and improve the English quality of the manuscript.Please see the attachment

If you have any questions about this paper, please do not hesitate to let us know.

 

With kindest regards,

Yours sincerely,

 

Yong Zhang

Author Response File: Author Response.doc

Reviewer 3 Report

 

This manuscript mansions that T-shaped fractured rocks in the engineering rock
mass with different inclination angles, numbers, and cross patterns will cause
slope landslides, cavern collapse, roof fall and other disasters under the action
of external forces. In this paper, the compression test of T-shaped fracture
specimen was carried out under different loading rates. The characteristics of
energy dissipation of T-shaped fracture specimen are analyzed by changing the
fracture inclination angle and loading rate. The results show that when the crack
angle is 45° and 90°, the elastic strain energy and dissipated energy decrease as
the secondary crack angle increases. At the peak point, as the secondary crack
angle increases from 0°, the total absorbed energy, elastic strain energy, and
dissipated energy of the T-shaped fractured rocks also increase, with Ue/U
increasing while Ud/U decreasing. The increase in loading rate leads to an
increase in Ue/U and a decrease in Ud/U at the peak point of the T-shaped
fractured rocks specimen. The increasing of loading rate leads to an increase
in the total absorbed energy and elastic energy at the peak point of the T-shaped
fractured rock, while the dissipated energy decreases. Research on the mechanics
and energy characteristics of T-shaped fractured rocks has practical guiding value
for the safety and stability evaluation of various rock projects.  The manuscript is well organized and has good content. In the opinion of the
reviewer, this manuscript note could be accepted after the major revisions and
re-evaluation.

 1-     Authors are recommended to emphasis the novelty and significance of the study in more detail.

      2-     Some Latin words such as Ø are not placed in the correct location in the text. It is recommended to revise this words.

      3-     It is recommended to review the relationships presented in the text once carefully.

      4-     The symbols mentioned in Figure 14 are similar in two adjacent diagrams and cannot be recognized in the print. It is recommended to change the symbols of the diagrams in this way.

      5-     The colors used in Figure 3 are not very clear when printing. It is recommended to use other colors to draw this shape to have a higher quality when printing.

       6-     Authors are recommended to provide a more complete explanation in the “Impact of Loading Rate” section.

        7-     It is recommended to remove the numbering in the conclusion section

 

 

Minor editing of English language required

Author Response

Dear Editor and Reviewers,

Thank you very much for your letter and valuable suggestions, which helped us improve both the content and language of this paper. We have revised the paper according to the reviewers’ suggestions and would like to resubmit it (sustainability-2522037) for your consideration. We have addressed the comments raised by the reviewers, and the amendments are highlighted in blue in the revised manuscript. Efforts were also made to correct any mistakes and improve the English quality of the manuscript.Please see the attachment

If you have any questions about this paper, please do not hesitate to let us know.

 

With kindest regards,

Yours sincerely,

 

Yong Zhang

Author Response File: Author Response.doc

Reviewer 4 Report

The manuscript presents a study investigating the energy characteristics of T-shaped fractured rocks under varying loading rates. The authors conducted compression tests on T-shaped fracture specimens with different inclination angles and analyzed energy dissipation patterns. The findings offer insights into how these fractures contribute to slope instability and geological hazards. Overall, the study addresses a pertinent topic, and the methodology appears rigorous. However, there are several key points that require clarification and revision before the manuscript can be considered for publication.

Major Comments:

The introduction should offer a more concise and engaging overview of the problem. Explicitly highlight the significance of T-shaped fractures in practical rock projects, their potential hazards, and the existing gaps in understanding. It would also be beneficial to discuss and reference intrinsic flaws in relation to this context (e.g., [Reference: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sandf.2020.03.007]).

The manuscript's credibility relies heavily on the clarity of the compression test methodology. The current description lacks sufficient detail regarding the experimental setup, specimen preparation, and loading configurations. Providing a comprehensive account of these aspects is crucial for ensuring reproducibility. Additionally, it might be worthwhile to consider mentioning the application of deep learning methods in civil engineering (e.g., [Reference: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrmge.2022.08.002]) in the context of future work or conclusion.

While the manuscript briefly touches on the effect of loading rates on energy characteristics, a more comprehensive discussion is warranted. Delve into the potential reasons behind the observed trends and establish how they align with existing literature. Moreover, addressing the validation of model calculations is crucial for establishing the accuracy of the study's findings.

Minor Comments:

Certain sentences appear awkwardly structured and could benefit from revision for improved clarity and fluency. Additionally, it is vital to maintain consistent formatting throughout the manuscript to enhance readability.

 

Ensure that the manuscript's references adhere to the preferred citation style of the journal consistently.

please see the above text.

Author Response

Dear Editor and Reviewers,

Thank you very much for your letter and valuable suggestions, which helped us improve both the content and language of this paper. We have revised the paper according to the reviewers’ suggestions and would like to resubmit it (sustainability-2522037) for your consideration. We have addressed the comments raised by the reviewers, and the amendments are highlighted in blue in the revised manuscript. Efforts were also made to correct any mistakes and improve the English quality of the manuscript.Please see the attachment

If you have any questions about this paper, please do not hesitate to let us know.

 

With kindest regards,

Yours sincerely,

 

Yong Zhang

Author Response File: Author Response.doc

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

The ms is generally well revised and can be accepted now. 

Reviewer 3 Report

The desired corrections have been made. I my opinion article can be accepted.

Minor editing of English language required

Reviewer 4 Report

I have no further comments.

I have no further comments.