Experimental Study on Interface Frictional Characteristics between Sand and Steel Pipe Jacking
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
1) line 78: it is mentioned that “the stress-strain curve changed from softening type to softening type”. Please correct this statement. 2) In figure 2, it is hard to compare the different PSD curves. The authors are suggested to combine the PSD curves of different grain sizes to enhance the readability. 3) line 127: The authors should clarify on how the bentonite slurry proportion is decided. 4) What is the value of shearing rate considered for testing? Is there any relation between the applied shearing rate and pipe jacking rate? 5) line 147: It is hard to understand this sentence. Please make appropriate correction. 6) line 262: The order of variation of cohesion as given in the text is not in accordance with the values presented in Table 5. Please check and correct the same. 7) In conclusion, it is mentioned that 20% shear reduction is observed in case of slurry lubrication. Whereas in section 3.3, a different percentage of reduction is mentioned.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
Authors have attempted to study about the shear stress of steel pipe jacking and sand interface under different working conditions. Researchers have presented in detail about the experimental and analytical method to evaluate the performance. They used TSY-12D straight shear apparatus for testing with specimen of Q355, the size is 350mm×250mm×25mm. The inferred that the normal stress have no influence and the maximum shear stress between pipe and soil under lubricated slurry condition decreases about 20%. This research work is best suited for the publication in the applied sciences journal and prepared and formatted well. They have presented the paper in order and arrived at proper conclusions. The following comments point to be incorporated before the article is accepted for publication.
· Authors have failed to incorporated latest research works carried out related to this topic, hence it is necessary to included research works carried in 2021 and 2022.
· Further the review of research is not sufficient and they can compare their results with other research works
· What are the societal benefits of this research work or applications of the outcome of research required detailed discussion?
· Figure 3 is only discussed in the manuscript but the figure has (a and b), necessary to mention Figure 3a and Figure 3b and compare the variation with slurry and without slurry
· Author have used 25mm thickness of the plate for testing. What is the reason for 25mm thick plate alone used in this research? What is effect of the other thickness of the steel plate (example 2mm, 3mm). Discuss about trends with respect to thickness of steel plate
· Discuss about R2 values presented in Table 3 and 4 with respect to experimental results
· Typographical errors to be removed (example line number 165 and 170 no spacing after figure number). Need to check it for entire manuscript
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
