Compaction Quality Inspection and Uniformity Analysis of Soil-Rock Mixed Subgrade
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Dear authors,
thank you for your efforts to compile the article.
-Most of the results written in the abstract section are from the basics of geotechnical engineering, the results must be numerical and very specific.
-What is the role and influence of Rock-Soil in this research? Isn't it suitable for other soils? And in principle, there has been no analysis of the effect of the soil type on the results.
- This journal is dedicated to a sustainable environment, while the article deals more with the principles of geotechnics and soil mechanics, how to express the topic in the scope of the journal?
-In line 206 of page 7, what is the accuracy of the measurement with the surveying camera? Because this diagram is shown with numbers in millimeters, in other words, can the display of these numbers with their tolerance be shown and reliable?
-What is the novelty of this study? while the following article is also there?
https://doi.org/10.1155/2021/8894042
-As the esteemed researcher knows, geogages have been used in projects for many years and a lot of data has been extracted from this equipment, and this study has not introduced a specific practical achievement in the research method.
-In line 287 of Figure 11, write the variable drawn in the figures is the percent of soil compaction(%).
best regards
Author Response
Please see the attachment。
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
This article is about compaction control using GeoGauge
The topic is original because an effective practical in situ method is described.
Key field studies are described and dependencies on roller passes are shown.
Conclusions and publications are well collected and described.
More research on other soils should be done at a later stage.
Describe the method of static and dynamic plate testing in the state of the art review. e.g.
10.1520/JTE20180128
10.7409/rabdim.022.012
10.7409/rabdim.016.006
Comparing the ratios of primary and secondary modulus is useful in evaluating soil compaction.
Provide details of the soil being tested, grain size curve, organic matter content, etc.
Interesting article, well presented results.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
Dear Authors,
The paper shows the use of the GeoGauge device in determining the compaction quality of the soil and rock mixture. The topic is contemporary and deserves to be addressed, also because it is non-destructive. You designed the experiment well. My comments for correcting the work would be as follows:
Comment 1:
Pay attention, throughout the text, to the use of a full stop as the end of a sentence. In many cases, you used a semicolon, which I think is not a good solution and that a period is a better option (for example - Line 141, Line 146, Line 147, Line 322 etc.). “range; When the water content”. “mixture is 8.0%; When the 146”.
Comment 2:
Pay attention to the use of lowercase and uppercase letters throughout the text. This should also be adapted to comment 1 that I wrote. If a new sentence begins, then a capital letter is used.
Some of the examples are:
Line 17 – based instead Based.
Line 325- this instead This.
Comment 3:
Expand the literature review. It would be good if you wrote some more references in terms of using the GeoGauge instrument.
Comment 4:
Try to explain Figure 1 with several sentences to understand the difference between indoor tests and field tests.
Comment 5:
Line 77- Can you explain which are mechanical and which are physical indexes? “GeoGauge detection method evaluates the compaction quality of subgrade through mechanical indexes, while the settlement difference method evaluates the compaction quality of subgrade through physical indexes.”
Comment 6:
Line 78 - This sentence is not understandable. What does it refer to? If it refers to the chapters after this sentence, it would be good to list the chapters and sections so that this sentence would make sense.
“The specific contents are as follows [12-14].”
Comment 7:
Line 107 - separate the words-“ differenceof the“.
Comment 8:
Line 137- Sentences should be written more comprehensibly.The fact that you stated that the slope is increasing should be defined in relation to what is increased (in relation to the slope of the curve before 8%). For this reason, I think that in better terms the slope before 8% is milder and that after humidity of 8% it is steeper compared to the slope before 8%.
Comment 9:
I would rather say that it is adopted as polyline fitting in your case. I say this based on the pictures. Perhaps it would be better to adopt in the diagrams that it is really polylieran to better see that for 94% compaction the maximum stiffness is at 7.7%.
Comment 10:
Line 197-The period is missing at the end of the sentence.
Comment 11:
You should state how many total points were observed. We see that the measurement was made every 10 m from km 27+860 to km 28+000. This would make the diagrams in Figures 6 and 7 more understandable.
Comment 12:
Line 173- Whether it is Zhunzunqin or Zunqin Expressway?
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
Dear authors
Thank you for answering all the questions and questions carefully and it is acceptable.
Author Response
Thank the reviewers and editors for accepting this manuscript.
Reviewer 3 Report
Dear Authors,
Thank you for providing us with the corrected version of the scientific paper. It is obvious that you have implemented most of my suggestions. I am not entirely satisfied with the corrected version. Some of the additional suggestions would be:
· There are still a lot of technical errors in the text. I know that it is not the point of the review to correct all technical errors, but these errors affect the impression of the scientific work. For example, in the summary, in all the new sentences they added, which are indicated in yellow, they used a semicolon instead of a period at the end of the sentence.
· Some sentences still don't make sense. It makes no sense to write a sentence like this. (Line 67 - Jozef Vlcek [15] According to research shows that GeoGauge is more portable and are more usable in cramped areas or difficult accessible places.). References must be connected to the rest of the text, such as "According to the expressions of Jozef Vlcek[15] …..”
· The sentence that I requested to be corrected was corrected by the authors, but the meaning is still not clear to me. (The principle of GeoGauge detection and the principle of differential settlement detection are as follows [18-20].). Reference numbers cannot be listed and written without mentioning the principles involved.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
