Vibration Diagnosis of Sand Units in a Stone Crusher Plant: An On-Site Field Test

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Please find comments in the attached pdf. Grammar needs to be improved significantly. Suggestions have been made for the abstract and introduction, but the entire paper should be checked for grammatical errors.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Please refer to the attached file.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

The reviewed article consider the vibration problem in the artificial sand production plant. I found this paper very interesting. The research program is very simple because it is based on acceleration measurement only. However it this case the most difficult issue was to obtain the permission of measurement in the operating artificial sand production plant.

As the authors wrote these kinds of facilities are located rather outside the urbanized areas, so the vibration problem concerns rathe office buildings located on the plant premises. However, the working comfort people in such places are rather questionable, so the problem is real.

I do not have any complaints about the research program and results presentation. I have only one remark. I think that result presented in the frequency domain in Figure 8 (a) and (b) is the same so please provide the right one. I think that vibration amplitude will be different in the building which is 50 m away and 250 m away.

In my opinion, the Authors have to improve reference lists and the introduction section. In the introduction, the authors explain how these types of facilities work, where the vibration problem can occur, and presented used symbols and wrote the necessary definitions. However, the article has low scientific soundness. I think it is rather a popular science article, hence the small number of cited articles in the reference list. The accelerator measuring technique is well known, the vibration problem in these kinds of facilities is well known, so I think that in the introduction section should be placed another scientists results. Moreover, in my opinion, authors should write something about the resonant frequency of buildings and soils. The low-frequency work of presented devices is the near-resonant frequency of typical buildings. The soil topic is completely omitted in this publication. I understand that the article considers vibration problem in the buildings, however, vibration from the machines is transmitted to the soil and next to the nearest buildings. Thus, something about the damping ratio and resonant frequency of the soil also should be mentioned in the introduction. I think that when the authors expand the introduction, they should reach about 30 cited publications.

The article is general good and interesting, only the introduction and reference list should be expanded. Thus I will accept the article only after the above remarks will be included.

Author Response

Please refer to the attached file.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

The reference list was expanded. The introduction now presents the whole problem with other scientist's research results. However, the authors still did not write anything about the resonant frequency of the building and soil. But the article considers vibration problems strictly thus, I can agree that issues connected with resonance can be omitted. I want to pay attention to figures like Figures 1, 3, 4, 5, which present all schemes and blueprints. These figures are drawn with many details, and this helps the reader to understand the given problem.

In this form, I accept the article with pleasure.