Seismic Effectiveness of Multiple Seismic Measures on a Continuous Girder Bridge
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The authors present an interesting approach to the effect of seismic measures. While the formulation is simple in nature, the validation is not clear if it is matching what's formulated.
1) What are the measures used in the validation study? How are they related to the formulation?
2) What are the parameters used in these simulations for both the materials and seismic measures?
3) What is generally the calibration procedure, and how would it impact the final conclusions?
4) What is referred to as "Designed deformation"? Is it following a certain code?
5) The authors only presented the final results of simulations. What are the finite element model(s) details?
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
This paper describes the effect of multi-seismic measures on a girder bridge. The background, object and methods are well explained, and the enough calculation results and discussions are also shown in this paper. Therefore, this paper will be useful for the research on seismic measures and the reviewer recommends to publish this paper. Before publication, the reviewer requires three minor revisions as listed. Please consider and modify the manuscript before publication.
The Introduction seems to be a little long. Because the result of this paper is also long, it is better for the Introduction to focus on the problem and the originality of this paper. Although the model validation was discussed in section 4, the difference between the experimental and analytical values was observed and the reason of this difference was not clarified clearly. (The author concluded that “the difference may be due to the measuring instrument used for the test cannot accurately simulation in numerical analysis”) To increase the reliability of calculated results shown in section 5, the variation of experimental results (error bar) for Fig. 6(c) and (d), or more experimental and analytical results under different conditions should be added if possible. There seems to be some grammatical errors and typos. Please check the manuscript again. (The check by a native English speaker is preferable)Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
No further comments
