Analytical Analysis of the Groundwater Drawdown Difference Induced by Foundation Pit Dewatering with a Suspended Waterproof Curtain
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
I recommend this manuscript is considered for publication. In this manuscript, the authors present an analytical model of drawdown inside and outside a foundation pit. The authors first obtain a solution of drawdown outside of the foundation pit, similar to a Theis type of solution but for partially penetrating wells. Then the authors assume a simplified, connected flowpath between the inside and outside of the foundation pit to obtain an equation to link the two drawdowns. The authors attempted to validate the analytical approach with numerical solutions and field data. Finally, sensitivity analysis study is performed based on the obtained analytical model. I list the following detailed issues which I think should be addressed.
1. Line 157-158: please explain the parameter u0.
2. Authors need to state how Boltzmann transformation can be used in this analytical work?
3.Table 1:Es is not the modulus of deformation, it’s E0.
4.What is the type of method that used to excavate this project?
5.Authors need to provide the stiffness and properties of the diaphragm walls as well as the braced systems.
Author Response
Thanks for your advice. I have responsed the reviewer's comments in this manuscript . Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
This manuscript aims to investigate the effects of sensitivity parameters on the drawdown difference. The analytical solution of unsteady flow and the formula of groundwater drawdown difference with suspended waterproof curtain are validated by comparing pumping test and finite element method (FEM), in which a good agreement is observed. In general, this manuscript has described a substantial amount of work from derivation of analytical solution to model comparison and validation and to sensitivity analysis. I believe the paper is appropriate for publication, but I have some minor comments need to be considered.
1. Line 27-30: authors need to state the importance from investigating the effects of sensitivity parameters on the drawdown difference.
2. Fig. 1 seems redundant and can be deleted. The paper deals with only the second scenario which is illustrated in Fig 2.
3. Line 104-107: authors need to clearly state the main factors that affect the mechanism of waterproof curtain.
4.Line 132-133,174: the porous medium and fluid is assumed to be slightly compressible, while conditions “Q1 from Eq. (15) and Q2 from Eq. (17) should have the same value” should be true if the fluid is incompressible. Please answer the question.
5. The parameter u0 is not defined.
6. Line 195-200: authors need to add photo indicate for the specific location of Nanchang Metro Line NO.4?
7. The distance from the excavation site to the adjacent structures should be provided.
8. The properties of the diaphragm wall and braced system, such as the stiffness and the amount of steel, need to be provided.
9. Authors used numerical models, however, the applied constitutive model should be provided.
10.Line 296-301: Sw is not a directly set value. Why is Sw an independent variable? How the values of Sw is controlled?
11.Line 365-366: Why is this conclusion drawn?
12. Tables: please delete the "/" before the unit in bracket, e.g., "/(kPa)" should be "(kPa)", please give a double check for all the unit.
13. Figures: please delete the "/" before unit and put the unit in a bracket, e.g. "/m" should be "(m)", please give a double check for all the unit in the figures.
14.There is no numerical simulation or experimental verification in the parameter analysis part. How do you verify that the variation of your analytic solution is correct?
15. Most of the information in Table 1 is irrelevant and thus should be removed.
Author Response
Thanks for reviewer's comments. I have responded to the reviewer's comments in this manuscript. Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Reviewer 3 Report
A very good and interesting article worth publishing.
What is the main question addressed by the research? Is it relevant and interesting?
The development of analytical calculation approaches in the context of dewatering measures is a very interesting issue for research.
How original is the topic?
The topic is very interesting and deals with a current issue.
What does it add to the subject area compared with other published material?
Existing scientific publications are listed and evaluated.
Is the paper well written? Is the text clear and easy to read?
The paper is well written and the text is clear and easy to read.
Are the conclusions consistent with the evidence and arguments presented?
Yes!
Do they address the main question posed?
The main question is answered very well.
Author Response
Thanks for reviewer’s comments.
