Research on the Influence of Siltation Height of Check Dams the on Discharge Coefficient of Broad-Crested Weirs

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

In this work, the hydraulic characteristics and discharge coefficient of the broad-crested weir were investigated by physical experiment to study the range and degree of influence under different sediment siltation height on the overflow. The new formula of the discharge coefficient with sediment deposition was obtained by experimental data.

Some comments:

1.      Figure 14(a), the calculate value completely obscured the test data. It is recommended to move the test value to the front of the layer.

2.      Figure 15, what do the numbers in the vertical coordinates mean? The author should explain in the text.

3.      The phenomenon reflected in Figure 15 is interesting, with the positive and negative values of the error being (a) ---++; (b) -----; (c) +++++; (d) +----. Does this phenomenon occur by chance? I hope that the authors conduct a more in-depth study on this issue and not just limit it to the magnitude of the test error values.

4.      References are too few, please add them. It is recommended to cite more recent literatures.

5.      There are some formatting errors in the article, please correct them. For example, page 3, line 103, 104, 105.

6.      It is suggested that the author modify the English expression of the article.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

The topic of the article is interesting and stimulating. Here you can find my comments:

 

OVERALL: - Please, enlarge and re-arrange font sizes to guide the reader properly in all sections. All figures must be composed of HD images. It is mandatory to improve the scientific quality of the whole manuscript.

-      Please, pay attention to the JOURNAL TEMPLATE within the entire manuscript: in all sections, including tables, references, captions, units, equations, and Figures.

 

INTRODUCTION: Please, consider in the scientific background of your study the value of uncertainty quantification in post-processing of both numerical and experimental analysis corresponding to water resources (i.e.,

 

Lama, G.F.C., Errico, A., Francalanci, S., Solari, L., Chirico, G.B., Preti, F. 2020. Hydraulic Modeling of Field Experiments in a Drainage Channel Under Different Riparian Vegetation Scenarios. In Innovative Biosystems Engineering for Sustainable Agriculture, Forestry and Food Production; Coppola A., Di Renzo G., Altieri G., D’Antonio P., Eds.; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2020; 69–77; doi:10.1007/978-3-030-39299-4_8.

 

Box, W., Järvelä, J.,Västilä, K. 2021. Flow resistance of floodplain vegetation mixtures for modelling river flows. Journal of Hydrology, 601, 126593

 

Khan, M.A., Sharma, N., Lama, G.F.C., Hasan, M., Garg, R., Busico, G., Alharbi, R.S. 2022. Three-Dimensional Hole Size (3DHS) Approach for Water Flow Turbulence Analysis over Emerging Sand Bars: Flume-Scale Experiments. Water 14, 1889. https://doi.org/10.3390/w14121889).

 

METHODS: Please, insert a Figure for each sub-section. This could improve considerably the clarity of your manuscript.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

.     1. Some typo errors in the article should be corrected.

2. It is recommended to add some suggestions for future works in this area to improve the conclusion.
3. The Abstract should contain answers to the following questions: What problem was studied, and why is it important? What methods were used? What are the important results? What conclusions can be drawn from the results? What is the novelty of the work, and where does it go beyond previous efforts in the literature? Please include specific and quantitative results in the Abstract while ensuring that it is suitable for a broad audience. References, figures, tables, equations, and abbreviations should be avoided.
4. The "Introduction" section should be impressive and informative. Some relative papers are highly recommended to improve this section.

International Journal of Material Science Innovations, 2014, 2(1), 8-17

5. The mathematical equations must be double-checked.
6. The authors should try to give advantages of using their method compared to others.
7. The work does not provide a well-written conclusion section.
8. There is needed to more physically discussed.
9. Authors should specify the uncertainty of the tests.
10. How was the calibration of measuring devices?

 

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

OVERALL: Please, replace all Figures with HD images. This is mandatory for a clear understanding of your results.

 

INTRODUCTION: Please, consider in the scientific background of your study the value of both advanced experimental and modeling analysis of the prediction of natural phenomena (i.e.,

 

Lama, G.F.C., Crimaldi, M., De Vivo, A., Chirico, G.B., Sarghini, F. 2021b. Eco-hydrodynamic characterization of vegetated flows derived by UAV-based imagery, 2021 IEEE International Workshop on Metrology for Agriculture and Forestry (MetroAgriFor), 273–278, doi:10.1109/MetroAgriFor52389.2021.9628749.

 

Pirone, D., Cimorelli, L., Del Giudice, G., Pianese, D. 2022. Short-term rainfall forecasting using cumulative precipitation fields from station data: a probabilistic machine learning approach. J. Hydrol. 128949. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2022.128949.

 

Lama, G.F.C., Rillo Migliorini Giovannini, M., Errico, A., Mirzaei, S., Chirico, G.B., Preti, F. 2021b. The impacts of Nature Based Solutions (NBS) on vegetated flows’ dynamics in urban areas, 2021 IEEE International Workshop on Metrology for Agriculture and Forestry (MetroAgriFor), 2021, 58–63. doi:10.1109/MetroAgriFor52389.2021.9628438).

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

The authors have responded to my previous comments and revised the manuscript accordingly. I believe it is acceptable for publication in its form.

Author Response

We are very grateful for your approval of this paper and will continue to improve it. Thank you very much.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx