Ground-Borne Vibration Model in the near Field of Tunnel Blasting
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
This article is about one of the most important issues of blasting engineering, vibration, which has an important impact on the selection of explosives and blasting design. In this paper, the authors have come up with a logical path to compare Sadovsky's classic model method with their new prediction model. Finally, the comparison of experimental data with the output results of this new model has been compared to prove the enhanced efficiency of the new model for more realistic prediction. This article can be considered for publication after minor modifications.
Please use quantitative data in the abstract to compare the two models.
Please revise the Figures for greater quality and resolution.
New related articles may be cited in your work.
Minerals | Free Full-Text | An Evaluation on the Impact of Ore Fragmented by Blasting on Mining Performance (mdpi.com)
Minerals 2022, 12(2), 258; https://doi.org/10.3390/min12020258
The article's English academic language can also get better.
In the introduction section, the present tense is usually used for published reports and literature.
Line 37: To control ground vibration production due to blasts, there is the need to impose certain maximum allowable vibration amplitudes that affect the infrastructures.
In your results section, unlike the past participle or passive past participle is used.
Line 393: The case study shows that for the prediction of vibration in the near blasting area, it is necessary to distinguish the vibration data according to the type of blasting holes and the position of the measuring points relative to the working face before using Sadovsky formula to predict, so as to improve the prediction accuracy.
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
In this paper, a new method based on the principle of dimensional analysis was proposed to predict the ground borne vibration caused by blasting. The author needs to modify the following issues.
This paper should highlight the innovation of the article inside the introduction. As far as the reviewer is concerned, the authors have only performed a nonlinear fitting to the dataset without obvious innovation.
The introduction should use the past tense for the previous work of others.
Figures 2-5 are of very poor quality and unclear, these figures must be redrawn.
The correlation coefficient R2 between predicted and observed values should be given in Figure 6.
The results of the nonlinear fits in the paper, except for Equation 30, do not exceed 0.8 in R2, which raises doubts about the necessity and correctness of the fitting effect. The authors must give an explanation and clarification in the article.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
The paper was revised according to the journal rules. The topic treated is focused on the accurate prediction of blasting vibration for tunnels.
Few revisions are required and they are reported below:
- I suggest to revise the abstract including more results achieved from the manuscript
- in the introduction section "However, given the several safety...consequences" I suggest to add references and possible case studies from the literature
- in section 2.4 the approach followed could be assimilated to a Buckingham π theorem
- being an experimental and modelling work, it might be appropriate to add a section on the uncertainty analysis of the measurements conducted
- I suggest to add a section where the details of the instruments used are described in depth (case 3 needs to be revised)
- figure 2 - 5 should be revised
- the discussion section needs to be improved adding more considerations and comparing the results achieved with literature studies
- please revise the manuscript, there are few mistakes
- perhaps the discussion on other geological structures could be expanded, perhaps pointing to some case studies in the literature
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 4 Report
This paper deduced the classical Sadovsky formula based on the principle of dimensional analysis, and proved the feasibility of using this principle to derive the prediction model of blasting vibration. Some interesting results were obtained. The reviewer considers that this manuscript can be accepted after some revisions.
(1) The results calculated by this approach showed a better agreement with monitored data, and thus provided a better solution for prediction of blasting vibration. The paper was interesting but dealt with a limited subject.
(2) In the Introduction, the first two sentences should be reorganized.
(3) The meanings and values of K and α of Sadovsky formula should be explained at their first appearance.
(4) The authors should explain the low value of R2 in the study.
(5) The authors should highlight the importance of this work.
(6) The formats of some references in the text were incorrect.
(7) The resolutions of some figures were relatively low. Please check all the figures in this manuscript.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report
I have no other comments.
Reviewer 3 Report
The paper was revised according to the suggestions
