Mechanical Mechanism and Dynamic Characteristics of Barge–Whole Bridge Collision Behaviours

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The literature review needs to be thoroughly enhanced.

The results should be elaborated and should be clearly correlated with previous studies.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

Dear authors, thank you for an interesting article. Nevertheless before its publication I would suggest the following improvements:

- Figures 8, 12, 17, 21, 28  show contour areas of some quantity (maybe damage or stress) which is however not described or mentioned. Also the color scale should be included in the figures.

- Over all the study should contain also some sort of validation that the used mesh size is sufficient for the analyzed problem. Some sensitivity study on the mesh type or finite element size should be included.

- The last conclusions are rather general it would be useful for readers if more specific conclusions or suggestion could be made, for instance on suitable mesh size, material models and boundary conditions or superstructure modelling.

With best regards

Reviewer 3

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

This study intends to evaluate the impact of collusion with the bridge columns (piers) by utilizing FE modeling to analyze the entire structure. the topic is relatively interesting but there are a few points that the reviewer believes can enhance the manuscript as following:

1. The start of the intorudction is generally important and should have some detailed or preferably quantitative information. Also the sentences should be cited and cannot be just made by the authors. Based on the above, the reviewer would highly recommend the researchers to rewrite the first paragraph with some valid info and proper references.

2. Before moving to the literature review, the authors need to discuss the development of FE in general. Based on this the reviewer would suggest the authors to address this in the second paragraph of the introduction. as an example the authors can see The effect of limestone and bottom ash sand with recycled fine aggregate in foam concrete and check how it is organized.

 

3. Similar to above, the last paragraph of the introduction also needs to have more references.

 

4. where is the methodology section? is it section 2? Then the authors should have:

   2. Materials and method

      2.1. XXXX

5. Another issue with the manuscript is that the findings are not compared to other studies in this area. One cannot just make assumptions and report findings. The authors need to discuss that how each of the results compare to previous studies' findings.

 

 

 

 

 

Author Response

Please see the attachment.