Next Article in Journal
Buffer Sizing in Critical Chain Project Management by Brittle Risk Entropy
Next Article in Special Issue
Experimental and Numerical Investigation of the Cross-Sectional Mechanical Behavior of a Steel–Concrete Immersed Tube Tunnel
Previous Article in Journal
LES Analysis of the Effect of Snowdrift on Wind Pressure on a Low-Rise Building
Previous Article in Special Issue
Numerical Study on the Seismic Behavior of Eccentrically Braced Composite Frames with a Vertical Low-Yield-Point Steel Shear Link
 
 
Article
Peer-Review Record

Dynamic Analysis of a Steel–Concrete Composite Box-Girder Bridge–Train Coupling System Considering Slip, Shear-Lag and Time-Dependent Effects

Buildings 2022, 12(9), 1389; https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings12091389
by Ce Gao 1,2, Li Zhu 1,*, Bing Han 1, Qing-Chen Tang 1 and Rui Su 1
Reviewer 1:
Reviewer 2:
Buildings 2022, 12(9), 1389; https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings12091389
Submission received: 8 August 2022 / Revised: 26 August 2022 / Accepted: 1 September 2022 / Published: 5 September 2022
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Steel-Concrete Composite Structures: Design and Construction)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The study proposes a computation program of the dynamic characteristics of a composite box girder bridge-train coupling system considering shear lag, interface slip, and time-dependent effects. However, major changes should be done as follows:

1.      In the abstract, the objective of the manuscript is missing and also the results are not clear which reflects the novelty of the study. The percentages should include reflecting the effects of the studied parameters (considering shear lag, interface slip, and time-dependent).

2.      The details on the proposed dynamic model are blurry and need to be improved and clearly describe.  

3.      The geometry models and materials did not clearly present

4.      The validation of the proposed dynamic model is missing

5.      The information in Figure 1 did not present well. Please add more details and clarify each symbol in this figure.

6.      Titles of sections 2 and 2.1, and 2.2 are almost similar and need to be revised.

7.      Lines 164 to 172 are blurry and did not present the results. Please revise.

8.      In line 181 “Figure 5. and Fig. 6…” incorrect format. Please revise the manuscript.

9.      Several repeated sentences are observed in one paragraph such as “The increase in vertical acceleration slows with increasing time” , and “The dynamic response of vertical acceleration increases with time” Please revise

10.  The results are not clearly presented and much-repeated information is presented which does not reflect the manuscript's novelty.

11.  The conclusion is too long and needs to be revised.

12.  Extensive English language editing is necessary.  

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

Attached please find my response.

Thanks.

Li Zhu

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

attached

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

Attached please find my response.

Thanks.

Li Zhu

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

The authors  have addressed the suggested comments and the paper can be further published after English language editing 

Back to TopTop