Wave Overtopping of Stepped Revetments
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
This is a very detailed experimental study of stepped revetments used for coastal protection. The authors compile previous data and findings as well as contributing new insight. It is very carefully conducted, with emphasis on uncertainties.
Author Response
The authors like to thank the reviewer to pay attention to the paper and its content. We appreciate the short comment and conducted the recommended spell check.
Reviewer 2 Report
1. Structure of the paper
The paper is based on an adequate number of hydraulic tests, and it includes many test results of other researchers. I appreciated the test structure and the way in which the results are reported through the figures.
I suggest only to further improve the clearness of the paper introducing an initial paragraph of notations, because of the many symbols involved (facultative).
2. Typos. The following typo errors have been found (in bold the added characters, in underlined the corrected words)
42 this is the paper
57 ……of the gained results on an analysis ………..
58 ……smooth slopes follows. The principle main processes ……….
63 ……post processing
113……have studied
132……the
176 …….should be adapted to
217 cotg α
Tab. 4 : cotg α =6; study [12] : check the value of R2=0,08
315 … applied
402 … affected
427 ….reduction
442 ….highlights
444 …covering
450 cotg α
458 …by water
466-467 If A correction for scale effects, such as provided by [38], is applicable for stepped revetments, has to should be determined by further research.
Author Response
The authors like to thank the reviewer to pay attention to the paper and its content. The given comments and suggestions were each for itself helpful and reasonable. As the third reviewer emphasized the length of the manuscript in its present version we refrain from adding an optionally section for notations as suggested by the reviewer. The revisions have been included to the paper using the track changes function, which should simplify the identification of changes to the reviewer.
Reviewer 3 Report
Please see the attached file.
Comments for author File: 
Comments.docx
Author Response
The authors like to thank the reviewer to pay attention to the paper and its content. The given comments on the structure of the paper and the language suggestions improved the paper. Detailed response to the comments are provided in an extra document. The revisions have been included to the paper using the track changes function, which should simplify the identification of changes to the reviewer.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Round 2
Reviewer 3 Report
Please see the attached file.
Comments for author File: Comments.docx
Author Response
The authors like to thank the reviewer for once more reviewing our revised manuscript. Responses to the questions are given in the attached document.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
