Mechanism Analysis of Floor Water Inrush Based on Criteria Importance though Intercrieria Correlation
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
In this manuscript, the authors use objective weights to analyze water inrush paths and mechanisms. Relying on the well-established software COMSOL, the methodology is appropriate. The research results are of certain significance, and it is recommended to accept. However, the manuscript has some flaws. The comments related to the present manuscript are summarized below, The manuscript should be carefully edited before resubmission.
1. The title and abstract can be adjusted appropriately, the location of the fault fracture is only part of the water inrush path, the weighting analysis in the article is more inclined to the water inrush path and mechanism.
2. Figures suggestion for further optimization. Such as Figure 1, the Chinese character should be replaced with English.
3. Some sentences need to be improved. Line 27 “will reach” and line 71”will be”: pay attention to the use of tense in the article.
4. Lines 69-74: rewrite the sentence starting from “Based on the above reasons …”. It is too long and difficult to comprehend.
5. In Figure 2, there are two paths of water inrush flow, not involving the path of water inrush flow in the roof, and later in Figure 5, seepage is partially reflected in the roof, so that the analysis should be considered to correspond with the results.
6. Line 117: revise ”coefficientνof”.
7. Line 175-177: revise the sentence starting from “Under the combined influence …”.
8. The numerical simulation should describe the boundary conditions in detail, and Table 1 should be supplemented with the lithological parameters in terms of seepage.
9. References need to be improved. It is recommended to add more foreign literature, especially the latest articles.
Author Response
We sincerely thank the reviewer for thoroughly examining our manuscript and providing very helpful comments to guide our revision.We heve tride our best to revise the manuscript according to your kind and constructon comments and suggestions.
1.Response: We revised the title of the manuscript to "Mechanism Analysis of Floor Water Inrush Based on CRITIC Weight", and modified the abstract part accordingly.
2.Response: We have modified Figure 1 and changed the Chinese into English.
3.Response: Line 27 “will reach” and line 71”will be” have been corrected.We polished the content of the article.
4.Response: Lines 69-74:we revised this sentence to make it smooth.
5.Response: Because the water body of the confined aquifer of the floor is subjected to the combined action of mining stress and high water pressure, the confined water of the aquifer has a certain uplift in the aquiclude, but the uplift strength and range are limited. The fault has good water conductivity compared with the intact rock layer, and the uplift route of the confined water of the aquifer is still dominated by the fault.Therefore, the water inrush path in Fig 2 has the value and significance of research.
6.Response: Line 117: we revised ”coefficient ν of”.
7.Response: Line 175-177:we revised this sentence to make it smooth.
8.Response: We have supplemented the seepage parameters in Table 1 and detailed the boundary conditions of the numerical simulation in lines 224 to 238.
9.Response:We have improved the references, citing articles from the last five years.
The above modifications will not affect the conclusions in the manuscript.
Finally, thank you again for taking the time to review our manuscript.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
The study can be accepted for publication before address these problems:
1) Please take care the Fig. 1, and correct it.
2) This study should add a discussion section before the conclusion section, and to address the changes in fault properties, the hysteresis effects of the coal seam gas desorption (Rock and Soil Mechanics, 2018, 39(06): 1001-1009. DOI: 10.16285/j.rsm.2016.1924 (In Chinese)) and water-rock interaction (Chinese Journal of Rock Mechanics and Engineering, 2022, 41(6): 1193-1207. DOI:10.13722/j.cnki.jrme.2021.0941 & Engineering Geology, 2020, 279: 105869. DOI: 10.1016/j.enggeo.2020.105869) on the water pressure and the risk of the water inrush. If possible, please mention the advantages and disadvantages of this study,or the future research.
3) The abbreviations CRITIC should be marked with the full name when it first appears in the context.
Author Response
We sincerely thank the reviewer for thoroughly examining our manuscript and providing very helpful comments to guide our revision.We heve tride our best to revise the manuscript according to your kind and constructon comments and suggestions.
1.Response: We have modified Figure 1 and changed the Chinese into English.
2.Response: We added the discussion section before the conclusion. We analyzed the feasibility and shortcomings of the method. In future research, the research object can be appropriately increased, and the method of comprehensive analysis of subjective weight and objective weight can be used to make the results more accurate and scientific, so as to predict the path of floor water inrush more accurately and reduce losses. At the same time, we have improved the citation of references.
3.Response: We added the full name CRITIC (Criteria Importance Though Intercrieria Correlation) in line 280.
The above modifications will not affect the conclusions in the manuscript.
Finally, thank you again for taking the time to review our manuscript.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
The authors use mature numerical simulation software and analysis method, the results are scientific.The manuscript can be accepted for publication before address these problems:
1.The content of Figure 1 have error characters.
2. Line 177: revise ”path is formed. 1”.
3.Line 197-201:variables should be represented in italics.
4.Line 251: There is a error in sentence expression, “from” should be changed to “with”.
5.In chapter 4.1 “ith” and ”jth” should be represented in italics.
6.The authors lack corresponding discussion in the manuscript.The findings and their implications should be discussed in the broadest context possible. Future research directions may also be highlighted.
Author Response
We sincerely thank the reviewer for thoroughly examining our manuscript and providing very helpful comments to guide our revision.We heve tride our best to revise the manuscript according to your kind and constructon comments and suggestions.
1.Response: We have modified Figure 1 and changed the Chinese into English.
2.Response: Line 177: we revised ”path is formed. 1”.
3.Response: Line 197-201:we modified the format of the variables.
4.Response: Line 251:we changed “from” to “with” in the sentence.
5.Response:In chapter 4.1, we have standardized the expression “ith” and “jth”.
6.Response: We added the discussion section before the conclusion. We analyzed the feasibility and shortcomings of the method. In future research, the research object can be appropriately increased, and the method of comprehensive analysis of subjective weight and objective weight can be used to make the results more accurate and scientific, so as to predict the path of floor water inrush more accurately and reduce losses.
The above modifications will not affect the conclusions in the manuscript.
Finally, thank you again for taking the time to review our manuscript.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report
This manuscript can be accepted. The Discussion section can be improved if the authors think it is necessary. Please move the sentence “Shang ...." in line 67~69 to Discussion section, and evaluate the influence of water-interaction on the risk and disater potential of the water inrush.
Author Response
We sincerely thank the reviewer for thoroughly examining our manuscript and providing very helpful comments to guide our revision.We have tried our best to revise the manuscript according to your comments.
We have modified the discussion section of the manuscript and further explained why objective weights are used to analyze water pressure and principal stress.
Finally, thank you again for taking the time to review our manuscript.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.doc
