Vibration Test and Control of Factory a Building under Excitation of Multiple Vibrating Screens

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Dear Authors

Firstly, I want to congratulate you a nice research program with a perspective on recommendations for real-world applications. As a practicing engineer I value academic studies for their applicability. Presented subject is vital and important as the problems with vibrations affecting buildings adjacent to worksites and heavy industry factories can be reported world-wide. I was often involved in dynamic monitoring of structures neighbouring to shock and vibration sources and I appreciate any new developments in that field of knowledge.

My general and detailed comments are given below with a set of suggested references. None of the proposed papers is co-authored by me so I have no personal gain from my reference suggestions. Please do not consider them as a mandatory list but rather just like some inspiring proposals.

1. Your contribution is quite well structured. Abstract covers briefly the content of the study.
2. Introductory part is well written, but it is very short (comprehensive). Please develop your motivation, in order to state clearly the goals of your study and the profits for the "State of the Art" in the discipline. I found that over 50% of your reference list are Chinese references. Usually, it wouldn't bother me, if the problem under study had just a local, Chinese importance. But your study is focused on issues of global importance (or, better to say, local problem appearing worldwide). That is why I'd suggest to widen your reference list, considering articles from other countries, based on other (maybe different) approach to the problem. That could be beneficial for the quality of your study, but also for its future citing potential, helping to focus other researchers’ attention on your work.
3. Please magnify (if possible) the descriptions in Figures 1,2,3.
4. Concerning Figure 4. Please try to adjust the same range of data in vertical axis of figures 'a' and 'b', and 'c' and 'd'. That would make the information provided clear in terms of accelerations and velocities, respectively.
5. Concerning "vibration control", I noticed that you used "passive" solution over the foundations. Did you consider any measures to modify the ground below foundations to reduce harmful, ground-transmitted vibrations?
6. Concerning your "Conclusions", I'd strongly recommend to split this section into "Discussion" and "Conclusions". Discussion of your results is so far limited to a statement: "vertical vibration velocity of the factory building structure is 2.06cm/s, the maximum vibration acceleration is 0.21m/s² and the frequency is 14.49Hz, which is larger than the allowable value of the national building vibration standard in China". From my European perspective, such a comment is almost useless because I do not know Chinese standards. I can quickly compute that presented values are bigger than allowable in the light of German standards (DIN4150) but a short discussion, maybe with presentation of international criteria (German - DIN, British Standard, AASHTO from USA and other available codes reported in the literature) would be appreciated.
7. Conclusions should be drawn from (and after) Discussion.
8. Concerning the reference list - I just made a list of papers that attracted my attention and seem to be very relevant. Most of them are recent and open-access. Please feel free to make your own selection and/or your quick search in databases.

1. Czech, K.; Gosk, W. Impact of the operation of a Tri-Band Hydraulic Compactor on the Technical Condition of a Residential Building. Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, 336. https://doi.org/10.3390/app9020336
2. Czech, K.; Gosk, W. Analysis of the Vibration Propagation Induced by Pulling out of Sheet Pile Wall in a Close Neighbourhood of Existing Buildings. Procedia Eng. 2016, 143, 1460–1467. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2016.06.172
3. Wyjadlowski, M. Methodology of dynamic monitoring of structures in the vicinity of hydrotechnical works—selected case studies. Studia Geotech. Mech. 2017, 39, 121–129. https://doi.org/10.1515/sgem-2017-0042
4. Athanasopoulos, G.; Pelekis, P. Ground vibrations from sheetpile driving in urban environment: Measurements, analysis and effects on buildings and occupants. Soil Dyn. Earthq. Eng. 2000, 19, 371–387. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0267-7261(00)00008-7
5. Ekanayake, S.; Liyanapathirana, D.; Leo, C. Influence zone around a closed-ended pile during vibratory driving. Soil Dyn. Earthq. Eng. 2013, 53, 26–36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2013.06.005
6. Herbut, A. Wave generator as an alternative for classic and innovative wave transmission path vibration mitigation techniques. PLoS ONE 2021, 16(6 June), e0252088. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0252088
7. Dobrzycki, P.; Kongar-Syuryun, C.; Khairutdinov, A. Vibration reduction techniques for Rapid Impulse Compaction (RIC). Journal of Physics: Conf. Ser. 2020, 1425(1), 012202. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1425/1/012202
8. Golik, V.I.; Kongar-Syuryun, C.B.; Michałek, A.; Pires, P.; Rybak, A. Ground transmitted vibrations in course of innovative vinyl sheet piles driving. Journal of Physics: Conf. Ser. 2021, 1921(1), 012083. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1921/1/012083

Best regards

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

Please improve the English language, the language of the research and correct grammatical errors - Increase the references to the topic of the research - Increase interest in the form of vibration waves in the origin and clarify their types, numbers and different forms of vibrations - Pay more attention to the abstract and conclusions and put the conclusions in the form of points with an explanation of the most important methods used in resisting vibrations and preserving the origin Industrial - State the reason for using steel structures in industrial structures 

Author Response

Please see the attachment。

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Dear Authors

I noticed that your cautiously addressed all of my comments and recommendations. The work in its actual form may be published in Buildings, and I believe that it has a citing potential because provides discussion in the light of various international codes of practice. 

Best regards

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

you cover all points 

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

This manuscript is a resubmission of an earlier submission. The following is a list of the peer review reports and author responses from that submission.

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The paper presents a case study of floor vibration in a factory building induced by machine operation including vibration measurement, FE modelling of the building and implementation of vibration reduction device.

The work is worth to be published but it needs to be significantly revised.

1. The descriptions at several locations of the paper are inaccurate and incorrect. For example, in the Abstract: Line 13 “coincide with vertical natural frequency of the factory structure”, it is the floors of the building rather than the building experiencing vibration. Line25: “This study provides guidance for the vibration control design of similar screening factory buildings”. It provides a case study rather than guidance.
2. Line 54: “The strong vibration brings some threats to the safety of the operators”. Is there any basis that vibration at a level of 2.06cm/s can cause a safety problem? Vibration is considered as a serviceability problem that may cause discomfort or annoying to people and is normally measured by accelerations, it needs a justification why velocity was measured in this study.
3. The planes of the second and third floors should be provided together with the elevation in Figure 1 with indication of North and South, and x, y and z axes. The quality of Figure 4 should be improved and put together with Figure 1. Only the key measurement points need to be indicated the measurement point A, B D and E that were used to measure the vibrations before and after the installation isolation devices.
4. Figures 2 and 3, and tables 1 and 2 can be removed. Tables 3 and 4 can be simplified to including only the key positions where vibration data are provided. There was no need to have so many measurement points on floors.
5. It needs a description of the vibration source, such as the directions of the motion of equipment, operation frequency, how they are connected to the supporting floors etc.
6. Figures 6 and 7 can be removed.
7. The measurements and calculation showed that the equipment caused the floor vibration rather than the building vibration. Most of the vibration modes listed in Tables 8 and 9 are not relevant, which indicates that the floors should be modelled in some details in addition to the building.
8. Section 4: When investigating vibration control, the parameters of the models should be provided, preferred in a tabular form. How was the modal mass of the floor worked out? Both the models before and after taking vibration measures should be shown to support the results in Table 12.
9. The photos in Figure 17 should be re-selected to show clearly before and after the implementation of vibration isolation device.
10. Table 14. The positions of measurement points A, B, D, E should be clearly indicated in Figure 4.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

The paper entitled “Vibration Test and Control of Factory Building Under Excitation of Multi Vibrating Screens” provides a very interesting research work about possible mitigation strategies of vibrations induced by industrial screens. The manuscript is well written, easy to read and provides very useful information about how to monitor and decrease the amplitude of vibration motions in structural systems. However, a number of revisions are suggested, in order to increase the value of the manuscript.

 

1. The Reviewer thinks that the INTRODUCTION section is too short and excessively focused on the main topic of the article. Authors are suggested to provide an additional initial paragraph, which describes all possible vibrations which could lead to damage into a given structural systems (industry/earthquake/wind/blasts induced vibrations) and other protection strategies (like seismic isolation for earthquakes). In addition, a brief description of the commonly adopted sensors for Structural Health Monitoring purposes is needed. This paragraph would lead to a bigger picture of the covered topics for the reader. Among the others, the following references are suggested:

 

Graziotti F., Penna A., Magenes G. [2018] A comprehensive in situ and laboratory testing programme supporting seismic risk analysis of URM buildings subjected to induced earthquakes. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering, DOI:10.1007/s10518-018-0478-6.

Ponzo C.F., Di Cesare A., Telesca A., Pavese A., Furinghetti M. [2021], Advanced Modelling and Risk Analysis of RC Buildings with Sliding Isolation Systems Designed by the Italian Seismic Code, Applied Sciences, DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/app11041938.

Furinghetti M., Pavese A., Lunghi F., Silvestri D. [2019] “Strategies of Structural Health Monitoring for Bridges based on Cloud Computing”, Journal of Civil Structural Health Monitoring, DOI: 10.1007/s13349-019-00356-5.

Clemente P., Bongiovanni G., Buffarini G., Saitta F. [2019] “Structural health status assessment of a cable-stayed bridge by means of experimental vibration analysis”, Journal of Civil Structural Health Monitoring, Volume 9, Issue 5, 1 November 2019, Pages 655-669.

 

2. Graphical representations of Fourier’s transforms of signals shown in Figure 5 should be added, in order to better highlight the main characteristics of the frequency content of both signals.

 

3. Additional references and description about the procedures adopted for modal frequencies and damping ratios should be provided in Section 2.3.

 

4. In Section 3.1 additional details about the FEM model of the structures should be provided, especially about the adopted FEM elements (linear or non-linear? Is there any non-linear link?) and internal constraints (floor rigid diaphragm?) and typology of analysis.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

Authors have significantly improved the quality of the manuscript. Thus, the article can be accepted for publication in its revised form.