Review of Material Parameter Calibration Method
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The study only mentions the EDEM software. It is recommended to include information on other softwares, e.g. Rocky Dem. Give a comparative analysis of them.
Insufficient attention has been paid to the particle size parameter. The issue of particle scalability in modelling should be explained more comprehensively.
The conclusions are unclear, duplicating the content of the article.
Lines 523-527 contain punctuation errors.
At line 477 sieving method was mentioned 6 times earlier in the text. Definition probably should be given with the first mention at line 106 including other mehods, their limitations, pros/cons, comparison.
Author Response
Response to Reviewer 1 Comments
Point 1: The study only mentions the EDEM software. It is recommended to include information on other softwares, e.g. Rocky Dem. Give a comparative analysis of them.
Response 1: The simulation usually adopts the discrete element simulation software EDEM, ROCKY DEM, PFC and so on. PFC is mainly used in the field of geotechnical mechanics, with two versions of PFC: 3D and 2D [14]. PFC3D performing well in simulating the tensile of fracturing . ROCKY DEM is used more in fragmentation, and the polyhedron modeling is more accurate, but it takes more time, and the current data is less than EDEM. EDEM is faster in terms of polyhedron calculation, has more reference materials, and has a relatively wide range of applications. I have described several discrete element software in the revised manuscript.
Point 2: Insufficient attention has been paid to the particle size parameter. The issue of particle scalability in modelling should be explained more comprehensively.
Response 2: The contact can be improved by adjusting the contact parameters to adapt to the situation of particle enlargement during simulation . Refer to the answer of point 5. See the revised manuscript for details.
Point3 : The conclusions are unclear, duplicating the content of the article.
Response 3: The conclusion will further clarify the logical problems and summarize that by points. The repetition of the content of the article has also been dealt with in the revised manuscript. The change shown as following Figures. Please see the revised article for details.
Point 4: Lines 523-527 contain punctuation errors.
Response 4: The extra punctuation has been removed. Punctuation errors have been revised and further checks for full text punctuation have been made.
Point 5: At line 477 sieving method was mentioned 6 times earlier in the text. Definition probably should be given with the first mention at line 106 including other mehods, their limitations, pros/cons, comparison.
Response 5: Particles size can be determined by sieving method, Laser Diffraction, digital image method, densitometer method, pipette method, etc.; The sieving method uses sieves with different apertures to vibrate and sieve particles, and it is suitable for particle sieving with the particle size greater than 0.075mm; Densitometer method, pipette method, Laser Diffraction, digital image method is suitable for particle size sieving with less particle size. Laser diffraction, digital image method is efficiency, but the accuracy needs to be verified. Modification has been reflected in the first mention of particle size sieving.
Thank you very much for your revise advices, it is very helpful for me. Hope you well.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.doc
Reviewer 2 Report
This manuscript of review of material parameter calibration method needs a revision.
- The English language and syntax need a big improvement.
- Some organization problems, for example, section 3 and section 4 have the same subject:
- Measurement Method of Material Intrinsic Parameters
- Measurement Method of Material Intrinsic Parameters
- Some technical problems, for example, in section 3.3, the authors do not understand that the shear modulus, Young's modulus, Poisson's ratio of particles CANNOT be obtained by triaxial compression tests …, the particle properties and the particle assembly properties are two different things.
Author Response
Response to Reviewer 2 Comments
Point 1: The English language and syntax need a big improvement.
Response 1: The English language and grammar have been revised and the native English speakers (PHD) are invited to review and revise. Please see the revised manuscript for details.
Point 2: Some organization problems, for example, section 3 and section 4 have the same subject:
Measurement Method of Material Intrinsic Parameters
Measurement Method of Material Intrinsic Parameters
Response 2: The organizational problem has been revised, and the title of Chapter 4 has been changed to "Measurement Method of Material Contact Parameters".
Point 3: Some technical problems, for example, in section 3.3, the authors do not understand that the shear modulus, Young's modulus, Poisson's ratio of particles CANNOT be obtained by triaxial compression tests …, the particle properties and the particle assembly properties are two different things.
Response 3: The shear modulus, Young's modulus, and Poisson's ratio can be determined by uniaxial compression test or tensile test, and the Young's modulus and Poisson's ratio can be determined by calculation, and the shear modulus can be determined by calculation. Some materials that are difficult to measure, such as dispersed particles, can be obtained through literature review or through parameter calibration, and the reliability of the parameters can be verified by experiments.
Thank you very much for your revise advice, it is very helpful for me.
Hope you well.
Author Response File: Author Response.doc
