The Spatio-Temporal Evolution of Rock Failure Due to Blasting under High Stress
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The manuscript has studied the failure mechanism of rock under different initial stress conditions. Although the innovation has some limitations, I can see the efforts of the author. To improve the quality of the article, some contents can be revised:
1. The abstract can be simplified.
2. Except for the compressive strength, the proportion, process and other basic mechanical parameters of the sample are not clear.
3. Please check whether the units in Figure 3 are correct. What is the shortest and longest attenuation time of single blasting？
4. The prototype selected for the simulation parameters is granite, which is unknown whether it corresponds to the material of the concrete samples tested.
5. The connection between simulation and experiment needs to be further strengthened. How did they reveal the evolution mechanism?
6. Most of the references are too old, and some new blasting mechanisms can be appropriately added. For example: DOI: 10.1016/j.fuel.2022.123922
Author Response
Dear Editor and Reviewers:
On behalf of my co-authors, we thank you very much for giving us an opportunity to revise our manuscript, we appreciate editor and reviewers very much for their positive and constructive comments and suggestions on our manuscript entitled " The spatio-temporal evolution of rock failure due to blasting under high stress " (ID: applsci-2138319).
We have studied reviewer’s comments carefully and have made correction which we hope meet with approval. Revised portion are marked in blue in the paper. The main corrections in the paper and the responses to the reviewers' opinions are detailed in the annex.
We appreciate for Editors/Reviewers’ warm work earnestly, and hope that the correction will meet with approval. Once again, thank you very much for your comments and suggestions. Looking forward to hearing from you. Thank you and best regards.
Yours sincerely,
Corresponding author: Dawei Wu
E-mail: [email protected]
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
The authors investigate the failure characteristics of rock caused by blasting under high stress, and reveal the mechanism of rock fracture under the coupled effects of high geostress and blasting-induced stress. The authors survey the failure characteristics of rock in different initial stress states by high-precision acoustic emission, and research the influences of different initial stress fields on the extension of blasting-induced cracks and pattern characteristics of the damage zone based on numerical simulation. The author's research results are suitable for publication in Applied Sciences. Some suggestions are given below:
1. The English form of the paper is poor, there are several wrong statements. I strongly suggest a language revision by a native speaker.
2 It is suggested to conduct a novelty search on the references in the paper. Please add relevant research in relevant fields in recent years.
3. Please modify the pictures in the paper according to the requirements of the journal. The clarity of Figure 13 is very low and needs to be modified.
4. Please list the reference that can use cement to simulate rock in line 118. At the same time, why choose the samples with mean uniaxial compressive strength of 20 MPa.
5. In line 226, Figs 4 to 7 show the spatial location results of samples N1-1, N2-3, N3-1, and N4-2. These Figs should be provided more details.
6. It is better to list the parameter information of the emulsion explosives in a table.
7. Please add how to verify the correctness of the numerical model and its correlation with the type test.
8. It is necessary to appropriately increase the quantified conclusion.
Author Response
Dear Editor and Reviewers:
On behalf of my co-authors, we thank you very much for giving us an opportunity to revise our manuscript, we appreciate editor and reviewers very much for their positive and constructive comments and suggestions on our manuscript entitled " The spatio-temporal evolution of rock failure due to blasting under high stress " (ID: applsci-2138319).
We have studied reviewer’s comments carefully and have made correction which we hope meet with approval. Revised portion are marked in blue in the paper. The main corrections in the paper and the responses to the reviewers' opinions are detailed in the annex.
We appreciate for Editors/Reviewers’ warm work earnestly, and hope that the correction will meet with approval. Once again, thank you very much for your comments and suggestions. Looking forward to hearing from you. Thank you and best regards.
Yours sincerely,
Corresponding author: Dawei Wu
E-mail: [email protected]
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
Thanks for the author's revised, and the revised version is acceptable.
But I still have some questions that need to explain:
1. In the experiment, the shortest and longest decay time of blasting is 200 s and 500 s (N1-1), that is, the single blasting time can reach more than 3.3 min. Is it actual?
2. In the simulation process, the author only pays attention to the damage change within 500 μs. Obviously, it will continue, according to the author's experiment. Is it lead to further the damaged area?
In addition, the author needs to carefully check all the details of the manuscript and make careful corrections. Some typical examples are given, but not all:
1. There should be a space between numbers and units. line113-line118.
2. Please confirm whether the number label should be a subscript. line 165, line 336.
3. The numbers should be centered. There should be a header across pages. line 164.
4. Some indents and other format revisions. line167-line283.
5. Punctuation marks. line 222, line 465.
6. Alignment format of picture labels. line 242, line 246, line 250, line 254.
Author Response
Dear Editor and Reviewers:
On behalf of my co-authors, we thank you very much for giving us an opportunity to revise our manuscript, we appreciate editor and reviewers very much for their positive and constructive comments and suggestions on our manuscript entitled " The spatio-temporal evolution of rock failure due to blasting under high stress " (ID: applsci-2138319).
We have studied reviewer’s comments carefully and have made correction which we hope meet with approval. The second revised version is marked in red in the paper. The main corrections in the paper and the responds to the reviewer’s comments are as flowing.
We appreciate for Editors/Reviewers’ warm work earnestly, and hope that the correction will meet with approval. Once again, thank you very much for your comments and suggestions. Looking forward to hearing from you. Thank you and best regards.
Yours sincerely,
Corresponding author: Dawei Wu
E-mail: [email protected]
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
The authors investigate the failure characteristics of rock caused by blasting under high stress, and reveal the mechanism of rock fracture under the coupled effects of high geostress and blasting-induced stress. The authors survey the failure characteristics of rock in different initial stress states by high-precision acoustic emission, and research the influences of different initial stress fields on the extension of blasting-induced cracks and pattern characteristics of the damage zone based on numerical simulation. The author's research results are suitable for publication in Applied Sciences.
Author Response
Dear Editor and Reviewers:
On behalf of my co-authors, we thank you very much for giving us an opportunity to revise our manuscript, we appreciate editor and reviewers very much for their positive and constructive comments and suggestions on our manuscript entitled " The spatio-temporal evolution of rock failure due to blasting under high stress " (ID: applsci-2138319).
We have studied reviewer’s comments carefully and have made correction which we hope meet with approval. The second revised version is marked in red in the paper. The main corrections in the paper and the responds to the reviewer’s comments are as flowing.
We appreciate for Editors/Reviewers’ warm work earnestly, and hope that the correction will meet with approval. Once again, thank you very much for your comments and suggestions. Looking forward to hearing from you. Thank you and best regards.
Yours sincerely,
Corresponding author: Dawei Wu
E-mail: [email protected]
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
