Numerical Simulation of Two-Dimensional Dam Failure and Free-Side Deformation Flow Studies

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Please read the attachment. Thank you. 

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

We gratefully appreciate for your valuable suggestion and comment. Those comments are valuable and very helpful. We have read through comments carefully and have made corrections. 

We rewrote the introduction section, added an overview of different simulation methods. We added a manuscript outline at the end of the introduction section. 

The provided references are very helpful and we cited them in this paper. 

We divided the entire paper into 6 parts for better reading. Other comments and suggestions like typo and format are also considerated and addressed.

Thank you again for your warm and kind review of this paper.

Reviewer 2 Report

The paper requires major revisions:

1-Dam breach literature needs more reviews based on various numerical models (artificial intelligence models, computational fluid dynamics, finite element method, and SPH).

2- Details of the observed data and their qualifications should be described.

3-Stability limit of governing equations should be investigated.

Author Response

We gratefully appreciate for your valuable suggestion and comment. Those comments are valuable and very helpful. We have read through comments carefully and have made corrections. 

1. We rewrote the introduction section, added an overview of different simulation methods. We introduced artificial intelligence models, computational fluid dynamics, finite element method, and SPH. We added a manuscript outline at the end of the introduction section. We divided the entire paper into 6 parts for better reading.
2. Thank you for your comments. Details of the observed data and their qualifications are described in Section 3 4 and 5.
3. Thank you for your comments. Stability limit of governing equations like time-size are discussed in Introduction. Please see line 92-94.

Thank you again for your warm and kind review of this paper.

Reviewer 3 Report

The article is interesting. However, it requires supplementation. I have set out my comments below. 

1. Give more examples of disasters in the introduction.

2. Give more examples and briefly describe examples of research relating to the problem being studied.

3. Please write out the Navier Stokes equation to the form used 2D or 3D. Please also clearly write if the calculations were 2D or 3D I refer to point 2.

4. No statement, e.g. in graphical or tabular form, of all test schemes.

5. Please describe exactly which turbulence models were used.

6. The article states that CFD methods were used. Please describe if an own program was used or an existing program was used.

7. How were the flow rates used in the calculations selected?

8. How was the model scaled to reality (real object)?

9. Please describe which obstacles relate to which elements of the structure in reality.

10. The authors not have done another calculation with the water in the lower stand and the elements of the structure.

11. No discussion referring to the research of others.

Author Response

We gratefully appreciate for your valuable suggestion and comment. Those comments are valuable and very helpful. We have read through comments carefully and have made corrections. 

1. Yes, we added examples of disasters in the beginning. Please see line 25-39.
2. We rewrote the introduction section, added an overview of different simulation methods. We introduced artificial intelligence models, computational fluid dynamics, finite element method, and SPH. We added a manuscript outline at the end of the introduction section. We divided the entire paper into 6 parts for better reading.
3. Thank you for your comment. We write out the  two-dimensional continuity equation and Navier-Stokes equations in vector form.
4. Thank you for your comment. We added some diagrams.
5. Thank you for your comment. The realizable k-ε turbulence model is used. This turbulence model is suitable for a wide range of flow types, including swirling uniform shear flow, free flow (jet and mixing layer), cavity flow, and boundary layer flow. This turbulence model can perform well for dam break simulation with flow separation. Please see line 211-214.
6. The simulations were carried out in the commercial CFD software STAR-CCM+.
7. The initial flow rate is set as 0. The flow of water breaks the dam under the action of gravity.
8. It is determined based on Froude number similarity and scale ratio. In order to provide sufficient comparison with the model test and verify reliability, the computational model size of the numerical simulation is usually consistent with the size of the model test.
9. These obstacles can be reflected in buildings downstream of the dam, such as residential buildings, embankments, seawalls, and cofferdams.
10. Thank you for your comment. The present study only considers dam breaks with a single liquid. Future research will focus on the multi-fluid dam break simulation and calculations with the water in the lower stand and the elements of the structure.
11. Thank you for your comment. we added discussions in Introduction.

Thank you again for your warm and kind review of this paper.

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

The authors have answered my questions. The manuscript is strongly suggested for publication. 

Reviewer 2 Report

Accept as is

Reviewer 3 Report

The authors of the article responded in detail to the comments in the text.  I propose that the article be accepted for publication.