Discussion on the Relationship between Debris Flow Provenance Particle Characteristics, Gully Slope, and Debris Flow Types along the Karakoram Highway
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
(1) Why choose the gully slope coefficient as the quantitative relationship between the four types of debris flows and their sources and types, and this expression Eq. (3) looks strange. How to derive this expression? Moreover, the expression also lacks the physical quantity D of average particle size in Eq. (3)?
(2) How many statistics are there for each type of debris flow? How to verify the correctness and rationality of these quantitative statistical relationships? In addition, for this kind of statistical relationship, the commonly used method is cross validation, that is, part of the data is used for statistics and part of the data is used for validation.
(3) What are the differences in the physical mechanism and quantitative relationship analysis of these four types of debris flows? That is, what is the biggest innovation of this study?
(4) How can the results of this study, namely the quantitative relationship obtained from statistics, directly guide the prevention and control of debris flow disasters in highway engineering? That is, how to apply the research results?
Author Response
Response to Reviewer 1 Comments
Point 1: Why choose the gully slope coefficient as the quantitative relationship between the four types of debris flows and their sources and types, and this expression Eq. (3) looks strange. How to derive this expression? Moreover, the expression also lacks the physical quantity D of average particle size in Eq. (3)?
Response 1: For expression (3), the following explanation is made. Expression (3) is our definition of the gully slope coefficient. Select this coefficient to discuss the quantitative relationship between the source and type of debris flow. This is the definition and option that we have made by referring to the past articles（ Wang, X.F.; Zhang, D.S.; Zhang, C.G.; Fan, G.W. Mechanism of Mining-induced Slope Movement for Gullies Overlaying Shallow Coal Seams. Journal of Mountain Science, 2013, 10(03), 388-397.） and relying on empirical knowledge. The lack of its corresponding equivalent particle size of the average particle of the source () is because the definition of the gully slope coefficient here is not related to the equivalent particle size of the average particle. It is only when the relationship between the channel slope coefficient and the equivalent particle size of the average particle of the source is discussed later that the physical quantity of the equivalent particle size of the average particle () needs to be used.
Point 2: How many statistics are there for each type of debris flow? How to verify the correctness and rationality of these quantitative statistical relationships? In addition, for this kind of statistical relationship, the commonly used method is cross validation, that is, part of the data is used for statistics and part of the data is used for validation.
Response 2: There are 122 sets of data for the four types of debris flow, which are detailed as follows: 54 sets of data for rain type debris flow; 39 sets of data of rain glacier debris flow; 22 sets of data of the glacier ice lake break type debris flow; 7 groups of data of the freeze-thaw type debris flow.
The difference in the number of various types of debris flow data is due to the different length of different types of debris flow distributed on the Karakoram Highway. We selected the most distributed source particles in different regions as the average particle samples in the gully, and completed all the sampling of the selected highway stake number. The basic data of slope and source particle characteristics of four types of debris flow gullies developed along the Karakoram Highway were obtained by combining field measurement with indoor statistical analysis. Field measurement was carried out by Laser Craft, a laser rangefinder imported from the United States with an accuracy of 0.1 degrees, and the average particle equivalent particle size was calculated by using the equivalent volume size method in the particle equivalent particle size theory. Through on-site investigation and later indoor statistical analysis, we can determine the correctness and rationality of these quantitative statistical relationships. Because the data of each group is obtained from field survey, we will apply all the data to statistics to ensure accuracy and reliability.
Point 3: What are the differences in the physical mechanism and quantitative relationship analysis of these four types of debris flows? That is, what is the biggest innovation of this study?
Response 3: Different types of debris flows have different sizes of average particle equivalent particle size, so the quantitative relationship between debris flow gully slope coefficient and average particle equivalent particle size () is also different, forming different elliptic equations. The biggest innovation is that we arrived at the site of The Karakoram Highway to conduct our research, and the data groups are rich, real and timely. The data is collected and processed by subjective and objective fusion, field measurement and indoor statistical analysis fusion. The analysis of these data can help us better understand the provenance characteristics of different types of debris flows and their potential impact on the surrounding environment and human activities. In addition, we believe that the economic and military significance of The Karakoram Highway is very important, and the research of scholars from all countries on it is not perfect, so we need to pay more attention to The Karakoram Highway, which is known as one of the "ten most dangerous highways in the world".
Point 4: How can the results of this study, namely the quantitative relationship obtained from statistics, directly guide the prevention and control of debris flow disasters in highway engineering? That is, how to apply the research results?
Response 4: Among the three basic conditions for the formation of debris flow, the solid source condition is the most intuitive object for the study of debris flow, and the most easy to study but the most difficult to study quantitatively. This study starts with the quantitative analysis of the average particle size of debris flow and the channel coefficient, and finds that the relationship between the slope and the equivalent particle size of different debris flows is also different, so the conditions of different debris flows are also different, so there are different response measures for different debris flows. For example, plant measures are mainly used in the areas where soil erosion below poisoning occurs with engineering measures, engineering measures have better effect on rain-induced debris flow, and the construction of sand retaining dam reduces the amount of soil and sand loss. Our research can provide a theoretical support for the prevention and control of debris flow disasters.
Reviewer 2 Report
The comments can be referred from the attached file. Overall, the paper is written well however can be improved throughout the explanation of the results.
Comments for author File: 
Comments.pdf
Author Response
Response to Reviewer 2 Comments
Point 1: Re-write this sentence. Suggest to break down into two sentences since this sentence is lengthy.（23）
Response 1: We will revise this sentence to, Based on the methods of field measurement, indoor statistical analysis and theoretical research, this paper discusses the relationship between the four types of debris flows along the Karakoram Highway. The four types are the rain type, the rain glacier type, the glacier ice lake break type and the freeze-thaw type, and their particle characteristics and gully slope are also considered in the discussion. (19-23)
Point 2: suggest to standardize the font size（27-32）
Response 2: These letters belong to a part of the formula. In order to make the article look more smooth and beautiful, we will uniformly derive them from mathtype and quote them, which will be explained here. (27-31)
Point 3:Re-write this sentence. Suggest to break down few sentences. It is better to show the results in form of different sentences. （31）
Response 3: We changed this sentence into two sentences, The gully slope coefficientand the average particle equivalent diameterof the four types of debris flow are distributed in the ellipse with them as the axis. This ellipse quantitatively describes the relationship between the gully slope of the four types of debris flow and the corresponding provenance particle characteristics. (30-34)
Point 4: Check reference format（40 55 80）
Response 4: We modified the wrong reference format. The cross-reference method is adopted again. (43 57 83)
Point 5: Re-write this paragraph（149）
Response 5: We rewrote this paragraph, Figure 2 displays the distribution law of the provenance average particle equivalent diameter of the four types of debris flows developed along the Karakoram Highway, as identified in table 2. The analysis of these data can help us better understand the provenance characteristics of different types of debris flows. (151-154)
Point 6: Re-write this paragraph. Suggest to form into two sentences.（186）
重新写下这一段。建议形成两个句子
Response 6: We rewrote this passage into several sentences, The distribution area of the rain glacier type debris flow lies between the areas where rain type debris flow and glacier ice lake break type debris flow develop. The weather, physical weathering, ice and snow freezing and thawing effects of this type of debris flow are also intermediate between the two types. As a result, the provenance average particle equivalent diameter of this type of debris flow is between the other two types of debris flow. Analyzing these characteristics can help us better understand the differences and features of different types of debris flow, and develop effective prevention and response measures. (186-193)
Point 7: Suggest to elaborate more on each produced figure's analysis.（227 232 244）
Response 7: We have explained in detail the parts marked by the reviewer that need to be corrected, The slope of rain glacier type debris flow gully is an important factor affecting its occurrence and development. Based on research, it has been found that the slope of this type of gully is mostly distributed in the range of 5°to 35°. Additionally, the average particle equivalent diameter of the debris flow's provenance is another important characteristic, and it is mainly distributed in the range of 3 to 15 cm. The relationship between the slope and the average particle equivalent diameter of the gully is shown in Figure 5. (239-244)
The relationship between the slope coefficient () and the average particle equivalent diameter () of the rain glacier type debris flow gully is a key factor in understanding the characteristics and behavior of this type of debris flow. The relationship between these two parameters is shown in Figure 6, where it can be observed that there is a correlation between the slope coefficient and the average particle equivalent diameter. (248-253)
The slope of glacier ice lake break type debris flow gully and the average particle equivalent diameter of the debris flow are two important factors that influence the occurrence and development of this type of debris flow. The slope of the gully fluctuates mainly in the range of 5° to 30°, while the average particle equivalent diameter of the debris flow is mainly between 2 and 10 cm. The relationship between these two parameters is shown in Figure 7. This relationship can be used to predict the potential occurrence and severity of glacier ice lake break type debris flows in different gully slopes and particle sizes. (263-269)
Point 8: the unit must be closed to the number for the degrees. Avoid to use space（259）
Response 8: We deleted the space to the left of the degree sign in the article.
Point 9: Re-write this paragraph. Suggest to split into few sentences according to the explained parameters.（278）
Response 9: We rewrote this paragraph, To sum up: the relationship between the gully slope coefficient and the average particle equivalent diameter of four types of debris flow disasters (rain, rain glacier, glacier ice lake break, and freeze-thaw) developed along the Karakoram Highway can be expressed as an ellipse with both parameters as the axis. The elliptic expressions provide a quantitative representation of the changing relationship between the gully slope and the corresponding source particle characteristics of these debris flow events. The analysis of this relationship can aid in predicting the occurrence and severity of these events and designing effective prevention and control measures. Understanding the interplay between the gully slope and source particle characteristics is crucial in mitigating the damage caused by debris flow disasters along the Karakoram Highway. (301-310)
Point 10: Suggest to come out with introduction for the conclusion.（281）
Response 10: We added a summary statement before the conclusion, This paper draws several important conclusions. The characteristics of debris flow disasters vary significantly depending on their source and origin. The relationship between the gully slope and average particle equivalent diameter of the debris flow can be represented by an ellipse. The specific conclusions are as follows：
Point 11:Re-write this paragraph. Suggest to paraphrase avoid using same text as in the body content.（290 297）
Response 11:We rewrote these two paragraphs, This analysis shows that the slope coefficient of debris flow gullies along the Karakoram Highway is greater than 1, and it increases as the gully slope becomes steeper. In other words, gullies with higher slope coefficients have steeper slopes. (322-325)
The majority of debris flows that occur along the Karakoram Highway can be categorized into four types: rain type debris flows, rain glacier type debris flows, glacier ice lake break type debris flows and freeze-thaw type debris flows. These types of debris flows are characterized by their gully slope coefficients and the provenance average particle equivalent diameter, which are distributed in elliptical patterns. By analyzing these ellipses, we can better understand the relationship between the gully slope of each type of debris flow and the corresponding provenance particle characteristics.(326-333)
Point 12: Suggest to use another reference （reference 5、18）
Response 12: We replaced the fifth reference (website) and the eighteenth reference (website)
- Ding, M.; Huai, B.J.; Sun, W.J.; Wang, Y.T.; Zhang, D.Q.; Guo, X.Y.; Zhang, T. Surge-type glaciers in Karakoram Mountain and possible catastrophes alongside a portion of the Karakoram Highway.Nat. Hazards 2018, 90, 1017–1020.
- Li, T.; Zhou, Y.; Zhu, J.; Liu, J.P.Effect of fine aggregate gradation on the rheology of mortar. Constr. Build. Mater. 2022, 332, 127362.
Reviewer 3 Report
The reviewer determined that the authors must clarify the information provided in the draft.
In the text, references with errors. The title of the second chapter is not relevant to the information it contains. Instead, team, reviewer recommends research group. Please clarify equations 4; 5; 6; 7 (for 7 correct the number). Is it really less 1? What is their accuracy and is it really distributed according to the ellipse? Please provide more accurate slope angle values (line 206) when 0 or 45 degrees equation 3 doesn't make sense. Explain what the K471+860 mean.
Author Response
Response to Reviewer 3 Comments
Point 1: The reviewer determined that the authors must clarify the information provided in the draft.
Response 1: The information provided in the draft is true and valid and the parts that require clarification are described in detail below.
Point 2: In the text, references with errors.
Response 2: The wrong reference has been modified.
Point 3: The title of the second chapter is not relevant to the information it contains. Instead, team, reviewer recommends research group. Please clarify equations 4; 5; 6; 7 (for 7 correct the number). Is it really less 1? What is their accuracy and is it really distributed according to the ellipse? Please provide more accurate slope angle values (line 206) when 0 or 45 degrees equation 3 doesn't make sense.
Response 3: For the four equations 4; 5; 6; 7 (the number of 7 has been modified), the following explanation is made. These four equations are elliptic equations. Under the condition of removing the outliers, we confirm that the gully slope coefficientand the average particle equivalent diameter () of the four types of debris flow are distributed in the ellipse with the axis of the two, which is expressed in the mathematical formula as the elliptic equation is less than or equal to one.
In Table 2, we can intuitively see that the slope range of the four types of debris flows developed along the Karakoram Highway is within 0-45 degrees, but does not include the two special values of 0°and 45°. We will add notes to the end of the range.
Point 4: Explain what the K471+860 mean.
Response 4: It can be said that it is the mark of the railway mileage (position). K471 refers to 471 kilometers from a certain point, and +860 refers to the mileage ahead plus 860 meters.
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report
Reviewer would like to suggest the author to go through the paper due to minor changes need to be done e.g. in-text reference, font size, full stop sign and comma sign before do the final submission. Overall, the author responded the comments with required justification.
Author Response
Thank the reviewer for the valuable comments, which have effectively improved the quality of our manuscript. We will carefully check the details before final submission. Finally, I would like to thank the reviewer for the recognition of our article.
Reviewer 3 Report
Please check results of equations 4; 5; 6; 7. The reviewer does not like result of equation 6 at highest slope coefficient value. Also remove the reference error.
Author Response
Thank the reviewer for the comments. We have revised the reference errors.
At the same time we checked the results of equations 4; 5; 6; 7, which correspond to Fig. 4; 6; 8; 10 respectively. We marked that about 95% of the sample points are distributed in formula 4; most of the sample points are distributed in formula 5; for equation 6, it is stated that about 95% of the sample points are distributed in the ellipse expression, we removed 5% The sample point of the abnormal distribution of , that is, the result of the highest slope coefficient value mentioned by the reviewer, that point belongs to the abnormal point that we remove within 5% of the range, we will emphasize again, for equation 7, we will also mark it , most of the sample points are distributed in the ellipse expression. Thanks again to the reviewer for carefully reviewing the suggestions.
