Influence of the Analytical Segment Length on the Tram Track Quality Assessment
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
This paper addresses a very interest issue, which is the track geometric quality assessment for tram track. Generally, this paper is well organized and provide a lot of useful information which can guide the track maintenance work for tram system. Detail comments are as below:
1) It might be better if the authors could present the inspection trolley as well as the process of data acquisition of the track geometry.
2) Please describe the current quality management scheme for similar projects (tram or subway system) in the world as well as the previous research on the determination of the track segment length problem, since the current rigid segmentation (i.e. 200m) is obviously not suitable for tram system.
3) Please specify the key methodology employed in this research. Does this paper propose new method in track quality analysis, or just conduct comparative analysis using existing methods?
4) Please double-check the use of single or plural nouns. For example, i) Line 106 “...due to the small stops distance”; ii) Line 127, “...five geometry parameters values...”
Author Response
Dear Reviewer,
Thank you very much for taking the time out of your busy schedule to review the paper and many thanks for your comments as well as your affirmation of our work. We have revised the paper very carefully according to your suggestions, and all the modified content has been marked in red font in the updated manuscript. Detailed explanations of all the issues are as follows.
Point 1: It might be better if the authors could present the inspection trolley as well as the process of data acquisition of the track geometry.
Under your guidance, we gave a more detailed presentation of the inspection trolley as well as the process of data acquisition of the track geometry. The modified content is marked in red font on page 5, lines 189-205 in the updated manuscript.
Point 2: Please describe the current quality management scheme for similar projects (tram or subway system) in the world as well as the previous research on the determination of the track segment length problem, since the current rigid segmentation (i.e. 200m) is obviously not suitable for tram system.
Thank you for your valuable suggestion. We have enhanced the literature review to show the limitations of the previous studies. The modified content is marked in red font on page 2, lines 69-81 in the updated manuscript.
Point 3: Please specify the key methodology employed in this research. Does this paper propose new method in track quality analysis, or just conduct comparative analysis using existing methods?
Thank you for your valuable suggestion. Your remark made us realize that this was indeed an oversight of ours and we did not specify the key methodology employed in our research. We have supplemented the Introduction section with this information. The modified content is marked in red font on page 3, lines 135-47 in the updated manuscript.
Point 4: Please double-check the use of single or plural nouns. For example, i) Line 106 “...due to the small stops distance”; ii) Line 127, “...five geometry parameters values...”
Thank you for your valuable suggestion. We have proofread the text and corrected the use of single and plural nouns where necessary.
Reviewer 2 Report
This is very interesting research and has practical applications not only for tram lines, but also for other types of rail transport, for example, narrow-gauge railways and industrial railways. It would also be of interest in the future to study the dependence of the dynamic load of the rail track on the influence of the rolling stock, as well as the assessment of the influence of the technical condition of the track on the dynamics and comfort of the rolling stock.
Author Response
Dear Reviewer,
Thank you very much for taking the time out of your busy schedule to review the paper and many thanks for your comment as well as your affirmation of our work. Regarding your comment on future studies on the assessment of the influence of the technical condition of the track on the dynamics and comfort of the rolling stock, we are pleased to share that we did conduct parallel vehicle acceleration measurements on tram tracks in Osijek and are currently investigating this issue on tram tracks in Zagreb. Our initial results are promising and should be made public soon.
Reviewer 3 Report
This paper explores the effect of reducing the analytical segment length in the condition assessment of the tram network in the City of Osijek, Croatia. Two synthesized track quality indices were calculated for the 27.5 kilometers of tracks on consecutive 200-, 100-, 50- and 25-meters-long analytical segments. The reduction of the segment length increased the res-olution of the track quality analysis in both cases, while the index based on a weighted value of geometry deviations proved less sensitive to this reduction. Some advice for authors:
The abstract needs to be revised to highlight the purpose and significance of the research in this paper.
Literature review needs to be enhanced to show the limitations of the previous studies.
The authors use a number of abbreviation in the paper (although there are corresponding explanations), but it is still recommended to add a table in a appropriate section to make a unified description for the convenience of readers.
The language in the manuscript also needs polishing.
Author Response
Dear Reviewer,
Thank you very much for taking the time out of your busy schedule to review the paper and many thanks for your comments as well as your affirmation of our work. We have revised the paper very carefully according to your suggestions, and all the modified content has been marked in red font in the updated manuscript. Detailed explanations of all the issues are as follows.
Point 1: The abstract needs to be revised to highlight the purpose and significance of the research in this paper.
Under your guidance, we have revised the abstract to give a more detailed presentation of the purpose and significance of the research. The modified content is marked in red font on page 1, lines 10-27 in the updated manuscript.
Point 2: Literature review needs to be enhanced to show the limitations of the previous studies.
Thank you for your valuable suggestion. We have enhanced the literature review to show the limitations of the previous studies. The modified content is marked in red font on page 2, lines 69-81 in the updated manuscript.
Point 3: The authors use a number of abbreviation in the paper (although there are corresponding explanations), but it is still recommended to add a table in a appropriate section to make a unified description for the convenience of readers.
Thank you very much for your valuable suggestion. We have created a table of abbreviations, acronyms, and symbols used in the manuscript and placed it in Appendix A on page 17, lines 533-534 in the updated manuscript.
Point 4: The language in the manuscript also needs polishing.
Thank you for your valuable suggestion. We have proofread the text and corrected the language.
