Dynamic Mechanics and Energy Dissipation of Saturated Layered Phyllite
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
This is quite interesting in reading, but there are few suggestions I would like to mention for authors to incorporate.
1. Kindly Rewrite your abstract and conclusion, so that it can be better presented.
2. Few papers are suggested to be included in the introduction part.
- DOI:
- 10.1007/s10706-021-01927-4
- DOI:
- 10.1007/s10706-021-01879-9
There are several publications where authors have discussed about effect of orientation of dip angle and other rock discontinuities, authors must also add them in literature.
Author Response
Response to Reviewer 1 Comments
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.doc
Reviewer 2 Report
1. The authors did not do a comprehensive literature search. The studies conducted on the characteristics of dynamic behavior and energy dissipation in the presence of water have not been mentioned (for example: Zhou et al. 2021 and Ma et al., 2022). The authors should clearly explain in the introduction what the novelty of this research is compared to previous studies (for example: Qiu et al., 2017 and Ma et al., 2022).
Zhou, Y., Su, S., and Li, P. (2021). Mechanical Behavior, Energy Release, and Crack Distribution Characteristics of Water-Saturated Phyllite under Triaxial Cyclic Loading, Advances in Civil Engineering, 3681439.
Ma, L. H., Chen, J., Zhao, Y. F., Zhang, C., Liu, R., and Ren, S. (2022). Water Content and Bedding Angle Effects on the Mechanical Properties and Micro-/Macro-Failure Mechanism of Phyllite. Arabian Journal for Science and Engineering.
Qiu, J., Li, D., and Li, X. (2017). Dynamic failure of a phyllite with a low degree of metamorphism under impact Brazilian test. International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences, 94, 10–17.
2. Why are mineral composition and grain size distribution of phyllite specimens not presented in the paper?
3. In line 118, what do references 24 and 25 refer to? It seems that there is no need to refer.
4. Is there a coincidence situation between the stress wave curve "incident+ reflected" at the incident end and the stress curve "transmitted" at the transmitted end? Please show it in Fig 4. It is necessary to explain in the paper how this adaptation shows that the results are reliable.
5. The results of the experiments have not been well analyzed and it is necessary to provide more explanations by providing scientific reasons for all the results obtained from the experiments. The authors have reported only the graphs. In addition, the results should be compared with previous research.
What is the reason for the difference in the behavior of the sample at 60° stratification angle with other samples? (Figure 5b)
What is the reason for the decreasing trend and then increasing strength in Figure 6? Why is there a minimum point in the saturated sample, but not in the dry sample?
The difference between the trend of incident and reflected energy in saturated state and dry state (Figure 9) is not explained.
6. Based on the pattern of failures, can there be a general classification for failures?
7. It is recommended to briefly mention the limitations of Hopkinson device and the conducted study in the manuscript or the conclusion section.
8. According to comments 5-7, the conclusion section needs to be revised.
9. The manuscript contains many grammatical and language errors that need to be corrected to meet the level of the journal. For example:
Lines 37 and 50: “different angle”: different angles
Line 62: “are much accounted of the”: are much accounted for the
Line 65: “cause of the overall damage of rock”: cause of the overall damage to the rock
Line 74: “a large number of … plane”: a large number of … planes
Line 162: “From Fig. 5, as can be seen from Figure 5, the”: From Fig. 5, it can be seen that the
Figure 4: “Relected wave”: Reflected wave
Line 333: “c rushing energy”: crushing energy
Line 356: “the influence … vary”: the influence … varies
Author Response
Response to Reviewer 2 Comments
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.doc
Reviewer 3 Report
The manuscript presents a series of SHPB test results with energy dissipation calculations. Dynamic mechanical properties of the layered Phyllite are strongly dependent on stratification directions, and further research is necessary for this field. The topic is timely and will be of interest to the Minerals journal readers, and following revisions are necessary before it can be recommended for publication.
General comment: The topic is of interest, but it requires more transparency and further details on the work and its limitations.
As can be seen from the list of references in the manuscript, about 90% of the papers represent research of Chinese scientists. Undoubtedly, in recent years, Chinese scientists have shown an increased interest in research in the field of dynamic mechanical testing of rocks, but I recommend you refer to the works of scientists from all around the world. Many recent studies have been conducted in Australia and Europe in this field.
Line 12: incomplete sentence.
Line 15: Which mechanical parameters of the samples vary? (I assume dynamic compressive strength)
Line 23: replace "It indicates" to "these results indicates"
Line 34: …by the influence of mechanical properties of the bedding plane…
Line 42: Improper citation; remove "T."
Figure 1: In my opinion, the stratification angle 0 represents the applied dynamic load, and the stratification is parallel. But the authors decided to use the opposite inclination. This may cause some confusion while reading the manuscript. I recommend changing the stratification angle descriptions.
Line 120: Please add a brief explanation about your pulse shaping material.
Line 160: Dynamic compressive strength and Young's modulus comparisons are good measures, but since you have the whole stress-strain response, you can obtain the dynamic strain at the failure of each sample. I suggest including this dynamic mechanical parameter in your research outcomes as well.
Line 168: Elastic modulus is not a strength parameter! Young’s modulus is a property of the material that tells us how easily it can stretch and deform. Please updae the text.
Line 177: What is the main reason for this sharp decrease in terms of a mechanical point of view?
Line 192: the damage type cannot be differentiated from Figure 8. Please update this figure to show the failure planes/types better.
Ref [5] should be updated
Author Response
Response to Reviewer 3 Comments
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: Author Response.doc
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
Accepted.
Reviewer 2 Report
The authors responded to all the comments from my previous review.
