Analysis of the Working Response Mechanism of Wrapped Face Reinforced Soil Retaining Wall under Strong Vibration

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The purpose of this paper is to study the seismic performance of reinforced retaining wall with envelope under strong earthquake. Through the dynamic response analysis of wrapped reinforced retaining wall under strong vibration, the similarities and differences of dynamic response under different peak acceleration are explored. The natural vibration frequency and damping ratio of retaining wall are calculated by time domain identification method, and the acceleration amplification analysis is carried out to reveal its seismic working mechanism. Based on cumulative seismic permanent displacement and WSDOT ( Washington State Department of Transportation ) specification limits, the deformation range of reinforced retaining wall with wrapped surface is divided into three stages. This is a paper with rich content, clear logic and practical reference value, which provides a theoretical reference for the design and application of such retaining walls in high-intensity areas. However, the following modifications are needed :

1. There is a large blank on page 16 of the article and it is suggested to adjust the text.

2. The pictures in this paper do not clearly indicate ( a ), ( b ) specifically refers to which ; fig. 6 shows a large interval between the image name and the image ; the example in Fig. 11 also suggests staining to correspond to the actual color of the curve in the figure ; for the two pictures in line 465, there is a problem of confusion in the style of the above picture, while the name of the following picture is incomplete. It is recommended to check the process when importing pictures.

3. The conclusion part is too lengthy to simply retell the results of the simulation experiment, and it is suggested to simplify the extraction.

4. Line 268 of this paper corrects the linear acceleration amplification factor in the acceleration response analysis. It is suggested that how to correct the appropriate analysis and whether the simulation calculation can ensure the reliability.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer, Thank you for taking time out of your busy schedule to review the manuscript. Your opinions are of great help to improve the quality of the manuscript. Now we have carefully corrected and replied the manuscript for this revision. The revision instructions are as follows.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

As in the File

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Dear Reviewers, Thank you for taking time out of your busy schedule to review the manuscript. Your opinions are of great help to improve the quality of the manuscript. Now we have carefully corrected and replied the manuscript for this revision. The revision instructions are as follows.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

The manuscript is written properly.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer, Thank you for taking time out of your busy schedule to review the manuscript. Your opinions are of great help to improve the quality of the manuscript. Now we have carefully corrected and replied the manuscript for this revision. The revision instructions are as follows.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 4 Report

 

The paper is innovative. Some aspects must be adequately addressed.

 

The general comment is on the acceleration time series. It is not clear the use you make of them. You just take the peak, without more advanced analysis of the response right?

The dynamic force were estimated from existing models or based on the acceleration records?

 

Fig.1 Please insert a schematic illustration of this structural system and improve the quality of the actual case picture.

 

Literature review. The introduction can be improved by also including these studies in the reference list. Additional comments can be introduced on the effect of the backfilling on the lateral response of structural systems and in general on soil-structure interaction estimated from shake table tests.

Xue, J., Aloisio, A., Lin, Y., Fragiacomo, M., & Briseghella, B. (2021). Optimum design of piles with pre-hole filled with high-damping material: Experimental tests and analytical modeling. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 151, 106995

 

Wilson, P., & Elgamal, A. (2015). Shake table lateral earth pressure testing with dense c-ϕ backfill. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 71, 13-26.

 

Fiorentino, G., Cengiz, C., De Luca, F., Mylonakis, G., Karamitros, D., Dietz, M., ... & Nuti, C. (2021). Integral abutment bridges: Investigation of seismic soil‐structure interaction effects by shaking table testing. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics, 50(6), 1517-1538.

 

-How did the authors carry out the dynamic identification under white noise excitation? Did they give as input to the shake table a white noise? What identification method did they use?

 

Line 249 “It can be seen from Fig. 6 that with the increase of storey height,” why the storey? Is it not a term referring to buildings?

 

Please describe and discuss Eq.5. The symbols, hi, H? Where does it come from? Be more explicit

 

It is not clear how the authors obtained the forces and Kdyn. From Eq.7 or from the acceleration data?

 

Fig.14. Please use sub-captions (a) and (b), and the x-axis of Fig.14a is not visible. Please be careful. The same comments apply to Fig 15.

 

Please add a reference to Eq.8.

 

The discussion section is very small, consider adding it to the conclusions.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer, Thank you for taking time out of your busy schedule to review the manuscript. Your opinions are of great help to improve the quality of the manuscript. Now we have carefully corrected and replied the manuscript for this revision. The revision instructions are as follows.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 4 Report

The authors addressed the reviewer's concerns. The paper can now be considered for publication.

This manuscript is a resubmission of an earlier submission. The following is a list of the peer review reports and author responses from that submission.