Enlarged Head Pressure-Dispersed Anchor Cable for Foundation Pit Engineering Purposes
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The presented manuscript describes the behavior of a newly designed anchor cable system. The manuscript presents a number of simulation methods to compare the new design with the traditional one. Presented results are supported with described models and presented materials parameters for simulation models. Overall, all aspects of the construction were presented and supported by the calculations and discussions. The manuscript is well-written and in my opinion, its big advantage is an overview of the exact place and problem of the developed anchor structures and a description of the real-world project where such structures will work. I can recommend only minor improvements before publication:
1 – Please add the affiliation of the fourth author to the list. There are only three mentioned yet.
2 – In my opinion, a manuscript with such a big number of figures and results must be supported with more than 15 references. Please add references and demonstrate them in the appropriate text of the manuscript.
Author Response
Response To Reviewer 1 Comments
Dear Reviewer 1,
Thank you very much for your letter and for the reviewers’ comments concerning our manuscript entitled “Comparative Analysis of the Enlarged Head Pressure and Tension Anchor Cable Based on FLAC3D Software”(applsci-2017075). The name of the manuscript was changed to “Enlarged Head Pressure Dispersed Anchor Cable for Foundation Pit Engineering Purposes”. Those comments are all valuable and very helpful for revising and improving our manuscript. We have studied the comments carefully and have made correction which we hope meet with approval. Revised portions are marked in the manuscript. The main corrections in the manuscript and the responses to the reviewer’s comments are as following.
Point 1: Please add the affiliation of the fourth author to the list. There are only three mentioned yet.
Response 1: We modified the list of author affiliations.
Point 2: In my opinion, a manuscript with such a big number of figures and results must be supported with more than 15 references. Please add references and demonstrate them in the appropriate text of the manuscript.
Response 2: We added 10 references to enrich the article.
Best regards.
Yours sincerely
Linghe Kong
18 November 2022
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
The paper conducted comparative analysis of the enlarged head pressure and tension anchor cable. Through a case study, the anchoring capacity of the enlarged head pressure dispersed anchor cable and enlarged head tension-type anchor cable was analyzed and compared using the FLAC3D software. The development process of the plastic zone of the soil around the enlarged head anchor solid is verified by simulation method. The spherical plastic zone space formed at the enlarged head anchorage end is conducive to the load transfer between the anchor solid and the surrounding soil, and reduces the displacement of the anchor solid in the soil.
Comments and Suggestions for further improvement are as follows.
1. On page 6, line 4, the sentence “It can be seen from the Figure 4 that……” should be changed to “It can be seen from the Figure 6 that……”.
2. In section 1.3, there is no significant change in the slope near point B in Figure 6, how to determine the “end-pressing inflection point” ?
3. On page 6, after point B, as the displacement of the anchor cable continued to increase, there is no significant change of the ratio of end resistance to Pull F, how to prove that the end resistance at the variable section of the anchor cable becomes more and more important?
4. On page 7, line 7, the sentence “Generally, OA section……uplift resistance” is repeated.
5. The title and unit of the vertical axis should be marked in Figure 23. The spacing of the horizontal axis in Figure 23 should be increased for more intuitively show the comparison of different working conditions.
6. The expression of cases and work conditions are best to be unified.
7. Since the horizontal displacement of piles and surface settlement are small, mm is recommended as the unit in the figures.
8. There is no unit in the horizontal axis in Figure 26.
9. The quality of the chart can be further improved.
10. Part of the content description is simple and can be further supplemented.
11. Your article needs to be edited carefully, paying attention to grammar and sentence structure, so that readers can more easily understand the goals and results of the research.
Author Response
Response To Reviewer 2 Comments
Dear Reviewer 2,
Thank you very much for your letter and for the reviewers’ comments concerning our manuscript entitled “Comparative Analysis of the Enlarged Head Pressure and Tension Anchor Cable Based on FLAC3D Software”(applsci-2017075). The name of the manuscript was changed to “Enlarged Head Pressure Dispersed Anchor Cable for Foundation Pit Engineering Purposes”. Those comments are all valuable and very helpful for revising and improving our manuscript. We have studied the comments carefully and have made correction which we hope meet with approval. Revised portions are marked in the manuscript. The main corrections in the manuscript and the responses to the reviewer’s comments are as following.
Point 1: On page 6, line 4, the sentence “It can be seen from the Figure 4 that……” should be changed to “It can be seen from the Figure 6 that……”.
Response 1: Thank you very much for your correction. We have corrected the mistakes.
Point 2: In section 1.3, there is no significant change in the slope near point B in Figure 6, how to determine the “end-pressing inflection point” ?
Response 2: Compared with the curve after point B, the curve from point A to point B has some changes and the slope decreases. When it approaches point B, the curve tends to be smooth. For more clarity, we connected AB and drew a auxiliary line.
Point 3: On page 6, after point B, as the displacement of the anchor cable continued to increase, there is no significant change of the ratio of end resistance to Pull F, how to prove that the end resistance at the variable section of the anchor cable becomes more and more important?
Response 3: The end resistance accounts for more and more in the pull-out resistance, and the end resistance ratio is larger and larger. After point B, the end resistance accounts for more than 25%.
Point 4: On page 7, line 7, the sentence “Generally, OA section……uplift resistance” is repeated.
Response 4: Thank you for your correction. We have deleted the duplicate part.
Point 5: The title and unit of the vertical axis should be marked in Figure 23. The spacing of the horizontal axis in Figure 23 should be increased for more intuitively show the comparison of different working conditions.
Response 5: Thank you very much for your suggestion. We have modified Figure 23. Because we deleted some unimportant pictures, the number of Figure 23 is now Figure 22.
Point 6: The expression of cases and work conditions are best to be unified.
Response 6: Thank you very much for your correction. We have corrected the mistakes.
Point 7: Since the horizontal displacement of piles and surface settlement are small, mm is recommended as the unit in the figures.
Response 7: Thank you very much for your suggestion. We have modified and adjusted some pictures.
Point 8: There is no unit in the horizontal axis in Figure 26.
Response 8: Thank you very much for your correction. We have corrected the mistakes. Because we deleted some unimportant pictures, the number of Figure 26 is now Figure 25.
Point 9: The quality of the chart can be further improved.
Response 9: Thank you very much for your suggestion. We have modified and adjusted some pictures.
Point 10: Part of the content description is simple and can be further supplemented.
Response 10: Thank you very much for your suggestion. We have added some contents to explain.
Point 11: Your article needs to be edited carefully, paying attention to grammar and sentence structure, so that readers can more easily understand the goals and results of the research.
Response 11: Thank you very much for your suggestion. We will revise our paper.
Best regards.
Yours sincerely
Linghe Kong
18 November 2022
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
The paper's main objective is to compare the behaviour of the new type of anchor cable - enlarged head pressure dispersed anchor cable - with the traditional solution of tension anchor cable.
Some major changes are recommended.
It is not correct to include in the title the reference to software. It is recommended that authors reformulate the title, deleting that reference and including the application: "for foundation pit engineering purposes".
The section of introduction needs to be included.
The structure of the paper should be revised.
The methodology, results and discussion should be more explicit.
Figure 3 should include a legend of the notation used for stresses.
In Figure 6, the title of the horizontal axle needs to be corrected.
Some figures (from numerical simulations) should be enlarged.
The total number of figures should be excessive, considering the paper's length.
The final section of the conclusions should also include suggestions for further studies on the topic of the paper.
Few references are included regarding be a scientific paper. More up-to-date references should be included.
I do not feel qualified to comment on the English quality of the text, but I recommend a general revision and checking for errors.
Author Response
Response To Reviewer 3 Comments
Dear Reviewer 3,
Thank you very much for your letter and for the reviewers’ comments concerning our manuscript entitled “Comparative Analysis of the Enlarged Head Pressure and Tension Anchor Cable Based on FLAC3D Software”(applsci-2017075). The name of the manuscript was changed to “Enlarged Head Pressure Dispersed Anchor Cable for Foundation Pit Engineering Purposes”. Those comments are all valuable and very helpful for revising and improving our manuscript. We have studied the comments carefully and have made correction which we hope meet with approval. Revised portions are marked in the manuscript. The main corrections in the manuscript and the responses to the reviewer’s comments are as following.
Response to comment:
Point 1: It is not correct to include in the title the reference to software. It is recommended that authors reformulate the title, deleting that reference and including the application: "for foundation pit engineering purposes".
Response 1: Thank you very much for your suggestion. We absolutely believe it is necessary. We have revised the title to “Enlarged Head Dispersed Anchor Cable for Foundation Pit Engineering Purposes”.
Point 2: The section of introduction needs to be included.
Response 2: We added the title of the introduction.
Point 3: The structure of the paper should be revised.
Response 3: After adding the title of the introduction, we revised the ranking of the papers.
Point 4: The methodology, results and discussion should be more explicit.
Response 4: Thank you very much for your suggestion. We have added some contents to explain.
Point 5: Figure 3 should include a legend of the notation used for stresses.
Response 5: We modified Figure 3 and explained it. “As shown in Figure 3, when the anchor cable is subject to tension F and produces displacement or deformation, the variable section of enlarged head anchor cable will produce end resistance σ1, and shear stress τf will be generated between the soil and the anchor cable. The soil mass in the plastic zone is further squeezed by the enlarged head and the surrounding soil mass, and further enhances the pressure σ2 of the soil mass on the enlarged head.”
Point 6: In Figure 6, the title of the horizontal axle needs to be corrected.
Response 6: We modified Figure 6 and reinserted the correct image.
Point 7: Some figures (from numerical simulations) should be enlarged.
Response 7: Thank you very much for your suggestion. We have modified and adjusted some pictures.
Point 8: The total number of figures should be excessive, considering the paper's length.
Response 8: We deleted some less important pictures.
Point 9: The final section of the conclusions should also include suggestions for further studies on the topic of the paper.
Response 9: Further research recommendations are as follows: There are still many deficiencies in the research on the enlarged head pressure dispersed anchor cable as changing the size of the enlarged head, further research is needed on the force and deformation laws of the enlarged head and the interaction with the surrounding soil mass. The influence of changing the anchor cable tension at different embedded plates on the enlarged head and the plastic zone of the surrounding sol and the anchoring effect can also be analyzed and studied.
Point 10: Few references are included regarding be a scientific paper. More up-to-date references should be included.
Response 10: We added 10 references to enrich the article.
Point 11: I do not feel qualified to comment on the English quality of the text, but I recommend a general revision and checking for errors.
Response 11: Thank you very much for your suggestion. We will revise our paper.
Best regards.
Yours sincerely
Linghe Kong
18 November 2022
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report
The manuscript has been well improved. All comments are addressed.
