Monitoring and Analysis of Wave Characteristics during Pipeline End Termination Installation
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
In my opinion, this article brings significant argument regarding the treated subject. The studies and the experimental results are valuable, correctly defined and properly described.
Minor problems that I see are related to the fact that the article does not follow the provided template:
All figures and tables should be cited in the main text as Figure 1, Table 1, etc - for example; If there are multiple panels, in the figures, they should be listed as: (a) Name for the first panel; (b) Name for the second panel and the (a) and (b) must be bold - please see all the same figures (figure 7, figure 8, etc); The text following an equation need not be a new paragraph; All equations should be cited in the main text as in Equation (1) or only in (1) - for example; The format of paragraph (from line 317 to line 319) must be corrected; The format of References paragraph is correct defined? Please verify.Author Response
Dear Editors/ Reviewers,
We thank you for all the constructive response and the reviewers’ comments concerning our manuscript entitled “Monitoring and analysis of wave characteristics during pipeline end termination installation” (ID: processes-573579). The comments are all valuable and very helpful for improving the quality of our paper. We have studied the comments carefully and made corresponding revisions. The revised portions are highlighted in red in the resubmitted manuscript. Below are our replies to the reviewers’ comments:
Response to Reviewer 1 Comments
Point 1: All figures and tables should be cited in the main text as Figure 1, Table 1, etc - for example; If there are multiple panels, in the figures, they should be listed as: (a) Name for the first panel; (b) Name for the second panel and the (a) and (b) must be bold - please see all the same figures (figure 7, figure 8, etc).
Response 1: Thank you for your suggestion and reminder. The formats of all the figures have been revised, and the second panels have been put in bold. All figure and table titles have been revised, and all in-text references to them have been changed accordingly. We have checked the format of the figures carefully and made revise. The figure format has been updated. (L 188, 242, 266, 307, 345-348, 349-351, 360-363, 374, 383)
Point 2: The text following an equation need not be a new paragraph.
Response 2: The statements after each equation have been joined to the same paragraph as the equation. We have checked the format of the text following the equation carefully and made revise.
Point 3: All equations should be cited in the main text as in Equation (1) or only in (1) - for example.
Response 3: All equations are now cited according to the format “Equation (1)” and be checked and revised carefully. (L 144, 209, 222, 263)
Point 4: The format of paragraph (from line 317 to line 319) must be corrected.
Response 4: The format of the paragraph from line 301 to line 306 has been revised.
Point 5: The format of References paragraph is correct defined?
Response 5: The references have been reformatted according to the requirements of Processes.
We thank you for all the constructive advice and hope the revised manuscript will be found suitable for publication.Please find the attached file for the Response to Reviewer 1 Comments
Sincerely yours,
Lihao Yuan (Corresponding author)
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
The article makes a favorable impression and may be published after some typos will be corrected.
Some stylistic mistakes were detected in the paper, so the reviewer recommends to show the text of the article to a native speaker. It allows to avoid the misunderstanding between a writer and a English speaking reader. Moreover, some following typos were founded in the text:
1) (Between 145 and 146 lines) in formula 3, the dOmega is missed.
2) (Between 210 and 211 lines) in formula 12, there is dt, but dTau was obviously implied.
3) (Between 220 and 221 lines) in formula 16 the range of variables is incorrect. Obviously variable h must belongs to {1...m-1} instead {0..m-1}, since it not suitable to calculate m-1 when m=0.
4) (Between 220 and 221 lines), in figure 10, it’s not so clear, what exactly was meant as ordinate axis.
5) in 318th line, the “Figure 10a” is needed instead “Figure 10”.
Author Response
Dear Editors/ Reviewers,
Thank you for your response and the reviewers’ comments concerning our manuscript entitled “Monitoring and analysis of wave characteristics during pipeline end termination installation” (ID: processes-573579). The comments are all valuable and very helpful for improving the quality of our paper. We have studied the comments carefully and made corresponding revisions. The revised portions are highlighted in red in the resubmitted manuscript. Below are our replies to the reviewers’ comments:
Response to Reviewer 2 Comments
Point: Some stylistic mistakes were detected in the paper, so the reviewer recommends to show the text of the article to a native speaker. It allows to avoid the misunderstanding between a writer and a English speaking reader.
Response: The revised paper has been professionally edited by a native English speaker at Edanz Editing.
Point 1: In formula 3, the dOmega is missed.
Response 1: is the integral unit. For better clarity, the term has been changed to in Equation 3 (between lines 141 and 142).
Point 2: In formula 12, there is dt, but dTau was obviously implied.
Response 2: Thank you for noticing this typo. We have changed dt to (between lines 201 and 202).
Point 3: In formula 16 the range of variables is incorrect. Obviously variable h must belongs to {1...m-1} instead {0..m-1}, since it not suitable to calculate m-1 when m=0.
Response 3: The range of h has been changed to {1...m-1} in Equation 16 (between lines 210 and 211).
Point 4: In figure 10, it’s not so clear, what exactly was meant as ordinate axis.
Response 4: We have added an explanation of the ordinate axis in Figure 10 to the last paragraph on page 11 of the revised manuscript (lines 301 to 306).
Point 5: In 318th line, the “Figure 10a” is needed instead “Figure 10”
Response 5: We have made this change.
We thank you for all the constructive advice and hope the revised manuscript will be found suitable for publication. Please find the attached file for the Response to Reviewer 2 Comments
Sincerely yours,
Lihao Yuan (Corresponding author)
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
