A Novel Three-Dimensional Composite Isolation Bearing and Its Application to the Mitigation of Earthquakes and Traffic-Induced Vibrations
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report (Previous Reviewer 1)
Comments and Suggestions for Authors
The author have addressed all the comments.
Reviewer 2 Report (Previous Reviewer 3)
Comments and Suggestions for Authors
The authors made the required corrections thus the manuscript can be finally accepted for publication.
This manuscript is a resubmission of an earlier submission. The following is a list of the peer review reports and author responses from that submission.
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for Authors
Comments
This research proposes a new type of three-dimensional isolation bearing for the mitigation of both earthquakes and traffic-induced vibrations. The analytical hysteresis model of the proposed isolation bearing is derived and experimentally validated, and the vertical compression performance of the proposed isolation bearing is tested and analyzed. At last, the mitigation effect of the proposed isolation bearing on traffic-induced vibrations is validated through an experimentally test. The new proposed 3D vibration isolation bearing can effectively block horizontal vibrations caused by earthquakes and vertical vibrations due to traffic. However, compared with the existing theoretical research, the innovation is insufficient, and the research is inadequate enough to be suitable for publication in Sustainability, there are some critical issues that should be clarified or addressed by the authors in the following (not in order of significance):
1. The Introduction section appears disorganized. Please re-organize it to enhance readability and clarity.
2. The main purpose of this study is to propose and test the mechanical properties and the mitigation effect for earthquakes and traffic-induced vibrations of the new-proposed isolation bearing. In Section 3.1-3.2, the author focused on the performance testing of the isolation bearing using hysteresis tests in horizontal and vertical direction. However, the author did not compare the performance of structures with new-proposed isolation bearing and traditional bearing. It is highly recommended to add this part to prove the good seismic performance of new-propose isolation bearing.
3. In Section 3.3, only acceleration time histories of the test were shown herein. The displacement time histories of the isolation bearing and traditional bearing should also be depicted.
4. The tables and figures should be carefully revised according to the guideline of the journal of Sustainability.
5. It is highly recommended that the author adds line number. Adding line numbers can be a helpful reference tool for editors and reviewers to make comments.
6. It is recommended that the authors to clearly emphasize the limitations of this manuscript and provide some comments on the future study in this area.
7. A double check of the English language should be conducted throughout the manuscript.
Comments on the Quality of English Language
A double check of the English language should be conducted throughout the manuscript.
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for Authors
This manuscript proposes a new type of 3-D isolation bearing that consists of the TRB, the ARFSB, and the DCFPB. Tests on the mechanical properties and the vibration isolation effect of the proposed isolation bearing are performed. Overall, the proposed isolation bearing is promising for the mitigation of both earthquakes and traffic-induced vibrations, and the manuscript is well organized. However, the following concerns could potentially hamper the publication of this manuscript:
- The test of the mitigation effect for traffic-induced vibrations was performed on the TRB rather than the proposed bearing. Such a discrepancy would harm the credibility of the corresponding mitigation effect of the proposed isolation bearing. Therefore, could the author provide any explanation for using the test on the TRB to demonstrate the mitigation effect of the proposed isolation bearing?
- Subsection 2.1 states that the design of the proposed isolation bearing can enhance the overall stability and anti-overturning ability. However, such a statement lacks solid arguments. I suggest providing more demonstrations on this point.
- Subsection 3.2 indicates the proposed isolation bearing is sensitive to axial loads. Nevertheless, neither the corresponding cause nor influence were discussed. It would be better if the authors could analyze this point more.
In addition, the font sizes of the figures are too small to read. Please adjust accordingly.
Comments on the Quality of English Language
The authors should check the English writing.
Reviewer 3 Report
Comments and Suggestions for Authors
The manuscript illustrates a three-dimensional seismic isolator capable of mitigating both seismic and traffic-induced vibrations. Such a device is made up of a thick rubber bearing, an auto-recentering flat sliding bearing, and a double concave friction pendulum bearing. The authors propose an hysteretic model to simulate the device’s transverse response. In addition, the axial behavior of the proposed isolator is experimentally investigated and its capability to mitigate traffic-induced vibrations is validated through a field test.
The paper addresses a topic of current interest since it is crucial to guarantee not only the seismic protection of structures but also the detrimental effects due to traffic-induced vibrations. However, before considering the work for publication, the authors have to carefully address all the following issues:
1) In the list of abbreviations the authors write: “ARFSB and auto-reset flat sliding bearing”. Maybe, it is necessary to delete the “end”. Please, check it.
2) In the introduction section (line 4), the authors use the verb “allow”. Please, add “for” after it.
3) In the introduction section, the authors should better describe the classification of sliding bearings and cite the related recent literature [ https://doi.org/10.7712/120119.7304.19506 ]. Indeed, according to the type of sliding surface, sliding bearings can be classified into two main categories, namely, Flat Surface Sliding Bearings (FSSBs) and Curved Surface Sliding Bearings (CSSBs).
4) To make the state of art fully updated, in the introduction section, it is necessary to remember that, recently, the biaxial hysteretic behavior exhibited by FREBs has been experimentally tested to allow its use in real applications [ https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2022.115118 ].
5) At the end of the introduction section, it would be very useful to briefly illustrate the organization of the entire manuscript.
6) As far as the proposed isolator is concerned, could you clearly specify the reason why you decided to adopt the upper lead rubber bearing? Does it contribute to the transverse response of the entire device or is it only adopted for the vertical isolation?
7) In Figure 4, the experimental hysteresis loops are quite irregular since the transverse force seems oscillating when plotted against the transverse displacement. Could you explain why does this happen? In Figure 5a, the situation becomes worse.
8) At page 7, the following sentence “Afterward, the proposed isolation bearing” has no sense. Please, check it.
9) How do you define the behavior of the proposed device: rate-dependent or rate-independent?
10) In the conclusion section, the authors may mention the possibility of studying the effectiveness of their device by performing nonlinear time history analyses and evaluating work and energy components.
Comments on the Quality of English Language
none
