Analysis of Stability and Required Offset with Vibration Velocity Considering Conditions of Bedrock and Explosive Charges Using the TBM and NATM Extension Blasting Method
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The manuscript presents the effects of blasting vibrations on the TBM, TBM backup device, 16 and surrounding ground were examined during NATM application for rear expansion blasting af-17 ter pilot tunnel excavation using a TBM. The presented article is the next part of the cycle describing the work performed by the Authors – the Authors scrupulously refer to their publications (but do not duplicate the published materials).
The research methodology is explained, and the results of the experiments are properly presented. The results were discussed in easy to comprehend manner. The article ends with conclusions, which are rather a summary of the content of the article (which the authors confirm with the sentence 'The results are summarized below:'. In my opinion, this part of the article should be rewritten. This section should present the main findings of the study and suggest directions for further research.
In general, I evaluate the content presented to me for review positively. I have read it with great interest. The article has small shortcomings. In my opinion, after a minor correction, it is suitable for publication.
Correction Details:
- table 3 should appear on one page in its entirety.
- there should be an additional line between lines 162 and 163. It will increase the aesthetics of the work and make the patterns easier to read.
- the scale of the vertical axis in both charts of Figure 2. should be the same. This will make it possible to clearly identify the differences between the two charts.
Author Response
The authors deeply appreciate all the invaluable comments from the reviewers. These comments will be carefully considered in the manuscript.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Reviewer Comments on “applsci-1579610”
I completed the review of the paper entitled “Analysis of Vibration Velocity according to Bedrock Conditions and Explosive Power Factor using TBM and NATM Extension Blasting Method”. Please find my comments below:
+ @Abstract: Semantical error such as “Typical excavation methods for the underground spaces in urban areas include the new Austrian tunneling method (NATM), which uses explosives” NATM does not use explosives. Explosives are used in NATM excavation. The sentence must be changed.
+ @line28: “Explosive blasting” it is not a proper term please find another.
+@Figure3: To be honest I understood nothing from this figure. How could authors formulate it? At the end, there is invert which has not been excavated yet. Is it reasonable that TBM starts from right to left when seeing this figure?
At first, I thought that the paper is going around a real project. As I proceeded, I saw that it is a conceptual study. Who will apply this combination? Where will it be applied? These questions remained unanswered. And these questions are extremely important. That is why I don’t find it relevant to review it further, therefore I have to reject it.
Author Response
The authors deeply appreciate all the invaluable comments from the reviewers. These comments will be carefully considered in the manuscript.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
The subject of the article is very important for traffic improvement in urban area.
The article is well structured and the results are clearly presented.
Line 141 – 142 the references should be quoted
Table 5 the source of data should be quoted
Line 154 the number of the equation should be corrected
Line 188, 221, 256 the numbers of the figures should be corrected
Line 193 – 196 Such a statement should be supported by results of previous research or a new experiment and measurements. If there is not such a possibility, it is an assumption and the statement should be formulated in that sense.
Line 303 – 305 The sentence is not clear.
Author Response
The authors deeply appreciate all the invaluable comments from the reviewers. These comments will be carefully considered in the manuscript.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 4 Report
Kindly check your manuscript with plagiarism software.
Author Response
The authors deeply appreciate all the invaluable comments from the reviewers. These comments will be carefully considered in the manuscript.
I used a program used by a Korean public institution according to the reviewer’ comment. This resulted in a plagiarism rate of 5%. In addition, as a result of detailed comparison, each sentence has a plagiarism rate of 1%. Therefore, this paper is not plagiarism. The test result sheet is attached.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 4 Report
The paper entitled "Analysis of Vibration Velocity according to Bedrock Conditions and Explosive Charge using the TBM and NATM Extension Blasting Method" describes numerical analysis of blast-induced ground vibration with different types of rock and different powder factor.
The manuscript has some flaws in basics of Blasting and Blast-Induced Vibrations.
Basic comments are as follows:
- It is not exactly clear what is the main hypothesis of manuscript
- In conclusion or any part of manuscript it is not stated where this method is applicable, why did authors made this research, what contribution is achieved, why is their methodology better than already existing ones
- Discussion is mainly based on information, is the vibration velocity below or above certain standard (which should be a side note). The discussion should be, as per title of the manuscript, mainly about vibration velocity changes considering type of the rock and powder factor, and advantages and disadvantages of each approach
- The term in blasting for explosive/volume of rock is “powder factor” (not “power factor”)
- There are more blastholes in tunnel blasting design that are located between cut and contour ones
Specific comments are as follows:
- Line 58-61 – Section is contradictory to Line 73-75
- Table 5 – the last soil type should be “silt” not “slit”
- Figure 1 – if figure represents input for numerical analysis, the number of holes are too few and they are spaced too far to be able to break rock towards opening made by TBM. Even if the rock would break, it would produce a huge seismic impact
Author Response
The authors deeply appreciate all the invaluable comments from the reviewers. These comments will be carefully considered in the manuscript.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 3
Reviewer 4 Report
The paper entitled "Analysis of Stability and Required Offset with Vibration Velocity considering Conditions of Bedrock and Explosive Charge using the TBM and NATM Extension Blasting Method" describes numerical analysis of blast-induced ground vibration with different types of rock and different powder factor.
The Authors considered all comments when revising the paper. Still there are few things to be rectified:
- Line 86-90 – Sentence unclear, please modify
- Line 139 – replace word “for” with “to”
- Figures 3,5,6,7 – where necessary the axis titles and legend text should be slightly enlarged to be clearly visible
Author Response
The authors deeply appreciate all the invaluable comments from the reviewers. These comments will be carefully considered in the manuscript.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
