An Investigation into the Influence of Sample Height on the Consolidation Behaviour of Dredged Silt
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Line 23-24: At what consolidation pressure does the consolidation ratio of dredged silt become equal to the consolidation ratio of marine silt?
Line 105: Word "they" is capitalized.
Line 154: Here and hereafter, spaces between numbers and units are missing.
Line 161: Is there any data on high-pressure consolidation test for 3 cm and 4 cm high specimens?
Line 179-182: The curve has an upward concave shape for 3 and 4 cm high samples at pressures between 80 and 150 kPa. For a 2 cm high specimen, the curve is concave downwards, i.e. the specimen is in the elastic deformation stage at these pressures.
Line 191: No reason is given for this decrease.
Author Response
Research Article 2526750
Title: An Experimental Study of the Size Effect’s Impact on Consolidation Behaviour of Dredged Silt
Dear Reviewers,
Thank you very much for your invaluable comments on our manuscript.
We have carefully checked the first set of galley proofs and edited English language in this manuscript. And we responded to questions one by one. There is the responses to composition comments.
Thank you again and look forward to hearing from you soon.
Best regards
Yours sincerely
Responses to Reviewer 1’s Comments and Suggestions
Point 1: Line 23-24: At what consolidation pressure does the consolidation ratio of dredged silt become equal to the consolidation ratio of marine silt?
Response 1: We give an additional explanation on “At what consolidation pressure does the consolidation ratio of dredged silt become equal to the consolidation ratio of marine silt?
Detail on lines 21-26 (page 1):
(3) Given the disparate formation processes, stress histories, and material compositions between dredged and marine silts, the permeability coefficient of dredged silt is found to be superior to that of marine silt. Within the typical preloading pressure scope (50~300 kPa), the consolidation coefficient of dredged silt is lower compared to marine silt. However, as consolidation pressure significantly surpasses this threshold, the coefficient disparity between the two silts narrows.
Point 2: Line 105: Word "they" is capitalized.
Response 2: Line 93, we have revised “They” to “they”.
Point 3: Line 154: Here and hereafter, spaces between numbers and units are missing.
Response 3: We have added spaces between all numbers and units, as some red marks shown in this manuscript.
Point 4: Line 161: Is there any data on high-pressure consolidation test for 3 cm and 4 cm high specimens?
Response 4: There is not any data on high-pressure consolidation test for 3 cm and 4 cm high specimens.
Point 5: Line 179-182: The curve has an upward concave shape for 3 and 4 cm high samples at pressures between 80 and 150 kPa. For a 2 cm high specimen, the curve is concave downwards, i.e. the specimen is in the elastic deformation stage at these pressures.
Response 5: We give an additional description and revise on the above problems.
Detail on lines 169-175 (page 4):
As the consolidation pressure rises (p=25~150 kPa), the soil undergoes continuous compaction, establishing a renewed structural strength. This strength partially counters the added pressure, resulting in a gentler curve trajectory which aligns closely with a linear pattern. During this period, the soil's skeletal structure primarily experiences elastic deformation. With only a minor amount of film water being extruded, the de-formation is significantly less pronounced compared to the first phase, and the com-pression coefficient remains relatively low.
Point6: Line 191: No reason is given for this decrease.
Response 6: We have added an explanation for this decrease on the line 191.
Detail on lines 188-190 (page 5):
As the initial height of the sample increases, the drainage span under a specific con-solidation pressure also augments. Consequently, the rate of pore water discharge di-minishes, leading to a decreased rate of pore ratio change.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
This manuscript presents an experimental study on the size effect on the consolidation behavior of dredged silt. Overall, the manuscript is neither well-written nor well-organized.
In the section of Introduction, the brief discussion is suggested to incorporate, instead of merely showing what past researchers have done. The authors mentioned past studies investigating the size effect of consolidation behavior on fine-grained soils in Lines 64-82. The new contribution from this study should be sufficiently justified.
In section 2 Test Scheme, this section is poorly organized. Some information in Section 3.5 should be merged with this section since all of them are presenting soil properties.
In Lines 336-337: I did not find the SEM images in the manuscript.
In Lines 337-340: How did the authors estimate/calculate the mineral compositions based on XRD results? The method should be specified.
In section 3, some in-depth analysis should be added by comparing it to other results in published literature.
English language editing is suggested.
Author Response
Research Article 2526750
Title: An Experimental Study of the Size Effect’s Impact on Consolidation Behaviour of Dredged Silt
Dear Reviewers,
Thank you very much for your invaluable comments on our manuscript.
We have carefully checked the first set of galley proofs and edited English language in this manuscript. And we responded to questions one by one. There is the responses to composition comments.
Thank you again and look forward to hearing from you soon.
Best regards
Yours sincerely
Responses to Reviewer 2’s Comments and Suggestions
Quality of English Language
Point: (x) Moderate editing of English language required
Response: We have edited and polished English language in this manuscript.
Point 1: In section 2 Test Scheme, this section is poorly organized. Some information in Section 3.5 should be merged with this section since all of them are presenting soil properties.
Response 1: In this manuscript, An automatic air pressure consolidometer is mainly used to test the differences in consolidation behaviour of dredged silt samples of three varying heights from Qianwan, Shenzhen, China. Among the three kinds of silt samples in Section 3.5, the test process and results of two kinds of silt soil samples have been reported in relevant literatures. Sections 3.5 and 3.6 mainly are for comparative analysis on the three kinds of silt in the same area, it is not necessary to add some information in Section 3.5 in the section 2 “Test Scheme”.
Point 2: In Lines 336-337: I did not find the SEM images in the manuscript.
Response 2: There are the SEM images in the manuscript. The differences in consolidation and permeability characteristics between dredged silt and marine silt are analyzed based on the results of particle analysis tests and X-ray diffraction tests in Table 6.
Point 3: In Lines 337-340: How did the authors estimate/calculate the mineral compositions based on XRD results? The method should be specified.
Response 3: The mineral compositions of three types of silt samples have been given in the published literature.
Point 4: In section 3, some in-depth analysis should be added by comparing it to other results in published literature.
Response 4: We have added some in-depth analysis by comparing it to other results in published literature, as Figure 10 and 11.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Reviewer 3 Report
The manuscript has good content. But, the writing and typing needs to be improved and avoid redundancies.
In general, it presents problems with typing / expressing number units throughout the entire text.
In the last paragraph of the introduction should separate the objectives of the materials and methods and analysis of the results.
The manuscript would be improved by inserting a figure (map) of the location of the study area and the sampled points. At the very least, it should include the geographical coordinates of the locations sampled.
The figures must be edited, as they have problems expressing the units of magnitude in general.
The discussions and analysis of the results could be more robust if supported by greater bibliographic support, not just 3. They should especially consider references from this century.
The conclusions could be written succinctly.
Other suggestions are included in the manuscript.
Comments for author File: 
Comments.pdf
The manuscript has good content. But, the writing and typing needs to be improved and avoid redundancies.
In general, it presents problems with typing / expressing number units throughout the entire text.
The figures must be edited, as they have some problems expressing the units of magnitude in general.
Author Response
Research Article 2526750
Title: An Experimental Study of the Size Effect’s Impact on Consolidation Behaviour of Dredged Silt
Dear Reviewers,
Thank you very much for your invaluable comments on our manuscript.
We have carefully checked the first set of galley proofs and edited English language in this manuscript. And we responded to questions one by one. There is the responses to composition comments.
Thank you again and look forward to hearing from you soon.
Best regards
Yours sincerely
Responses to Reviewer 3’s Comments and Suggestions
Point: The manuscript has good content. But, the writing and typing needs to be improved and avoid redundancies.
Response: We have a further improvement on the writing and typing to avoid redundancies in a whole manuscript.
Point: Quality of English Language:
(x) Moderate editing of English language required
Response: We have edited and polished English language in this manuscript.
Point 1: In the last paragraph of the introduction should separate the objectives of the materials and methods and analysis of the results.
Response 1: We have separated the objectives of the materials and methods and analysis of the results in the last paragraph of the introduction.
Point 2: The manuscript would be improved by inserting a figure (map) of the location of the study area and the sampled points. At the very least, it should include the geographical coordinates of the locations sampled.
Response 2: We have inserted a figure of the location of the study area and the sampled points.
Point 3: The figures must be edited, as they have problems expressing the units of magnitude in general.
Response 3: We have edited some figures, as some red marks shown in this manuscript.
Point 4: The discussions and analysis of the results could be more robust if supported by greater bibliographic support, not just 3. They should especially consider references from this century.
Response 4: There are few research results on consolidation behavior of dredged silt considering its size effect. The references related to the discussions and analysis of the results of this manuscript has been consulted, and we have added two references in Section 3.
Jiang, H.H. Consolidation calculation of super-soft ground with vertical drains. Ph.D Thesis, China Academy of Railway Sciences, Beijin, China, 2009.
Wei, G.F. Study on compression characteristics of marine silt in Shenzhen bay. Science Technology and Engineering. 2013, 13, 795–798.
Point 5: The conclusions could be written succinctly.
Response 5: We have rewritten “Conclusions”.
Detail on lines 375-396 (page 11- page 12):
- The compression process of dredged silt samples of varying heights progresses through three distinct stages: small load disturbance, elastic deformation, and plastic deformation. During the small load disturbance stage, there is a minimal difference in the void ratio variations among samples of different heights. However, as one progresses through the elastic and plastic deformation stages, the rate of void ratio variation diminishes with an increase in the initial height of the samples.
- As the initial height of the dredged silt samples increases, both the cumulative stable strain and the compression index show a decline. The structural strength of the soil primarily hinges on the attributes, interconnections, and spatial arrangement of the soil particles. Consequently, the initial height of the sample exerts a minimal influence on the structural yield stress of the dredged silt.
- For dredged silt samples of different heights, the consolidation coefficient escalates with rising consolidation pressure, peaking at the structural yield stress. As the sample height increases, the consolidation coefficient of the dredged silt diminishes. Therefore, the potential influence of the size effect on the consolidation coefficient warrants further exploration.
- At lower consolidation pressures (typical preloading ranges), the consolidation coefficient of dredged silt is significantly lower than that of marine silt. However, as the consolidation pressure intensifies, the disparity between the two reduces. This observation suggests that, post a high preloading regimen, dredged silt might achieve, or even match, the drainage consolidation rate intrinsic to marine silt.
- The permeability coefficient of dredged silt contracts with increasing consolidation pressure, experiencing a ten-fold reduction within standard preloading loads. Consequently, employing a consistent permeability coefficient for projecting its consolidation settlement process could introduce substantial errors. Given the observable differences in particle composition and pore dynamics between dredged and marine silt, it's evident that under low consolidation pressures, the permeability coefficient of dredged silt exceeds that of marine silt
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report
Although there are some improvements in the revised manuscript, but the author did not sufficiently address my previous comments or gave suitable explanations. For example, SEM images are still not incorporated in the revised manuscript.
Author Response
Point 2: In Lines 336-337: I did not find the SEM images in the manuscript.
Response 2: We also agreed that it would be helpful to provide SEM images to improve the article. However, we are very sorry that I can not collect the SEM images of previous research results as shown in the reference [4]. In the manuscript, the differences in consolidation and permeability characteristics between dredged silt and marine silt are analyzed based on the results of particle analysis tests and X-ray diffraction tests in Table 6. The test results in Table 6 are originated from the reference [4], and make some comparative analysis by using these results in Table 6.
Detail on lines 325-327 (page 10):
The test results in Table 6 reveal that the marine silt in Shenzhen is dominated by kao-linite, followed by illite and chlorite. Meanwhile, which also indicates that dredged silt predominantly comprises illite/montmorillonite and kaolinite.
- Zhang, M.; Zhao, Y.M.; Gong, L.; Hu, R.H. Test study of coefficient of consolidation of fresh hydraulic fill ultra-soft in Shenzhen Bay. Chinese Journal of Rock Mechanics and Engineering. 2010, 29, 3157–3161. doi: CNKI:SUN:YSLX.0.2010-S1-083
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
