Time-Varying Analysis of Retaining Structures Enhanced with Soil Nails and Prestressed Anchors
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
In general, after reading the manuscript, I recommend the authors review the content in order to answer following question:
- After several readings of the manuscript, it is not easy to understand the overall process of the test developed. I strongly recommend including a general flowchart with the main steps followed.
- What is the Technical Specification for Retaining and Protection of Building Foundation Excavations and Specification for Soil Nailing in Foundation Excavations the author mentioned only at the end of the article?
- Is the aforementioned technical specification an international standard in the building industrial sector?
Please, move from the abstract to the final section the results of your research
Comments for author File: 
Comments.pdf
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
The paper "Time-varying Analysis on Retaining Structure Enhanced with Soil Nails and Prestressed Anchors" reports a work concerning the time-varying effects on the perfomance of the retaining Structures enhanced with soil nails and prestressed anchors. The topic of the paper is very current and of considerable interest both to the scientific community and to designers. The analysis was conducted considering a real case study subject to monitoring and the results obtained are compared with those obtained from the numerical analysis performed through commercial FEM software ABAQUS. The results obtained are discussed in detail in the different Sections of the paper. It is opionin of this reviewer that the manuscript can be published in Buildings Journal after the following improvements:
- check line 96-97 "The properties of every soil layer are listed in 96 Table 1. The average properties of every soil layer are listed in Table 1..." is it a ripetition?
- check the format of the Tables (in particular of the Table 3);
- add some dimension in Figure 2;
- Figure 9: remove the red underlines and specify better what is shown on the abscissa;
- in general, in the figures put the u.m. in square brackets;
- Section 3: describe better the FEM and consider as reported in 10.1016/j.engstruct.2020.110497 to justify the use of M-C strenght rule;
- line 310-314 and 315-318 it may be more convenient to report the data in two tables.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
In general, after reading the manuscript, I recommend the authors review the content in order to answer following question:
- After several readings of the manuscript, it is not easy to understand the overall process of the test developed. I strongly recommend including a general flowchart with the main steps followed. -> Still missing
- What is the Technical Specification for Retaining and Protection of Building Foundation Excavations and Specification for Soil Nailing in Foundation Excavations the author mentioned only at the end of the article? --> Still missing
- Is the aforementioned technical specification an international standard in the building industrial sector? --> Still missing
Please, move from the abstract to the final section the results of your research. --> Solved in the new version
Comments for author File: Comments.pdf
Author Response
Please see the attchment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
