Mechanical Properties and Damage Constitutive Model of Thermally Damaged Basalt

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Mechanical Properties and Damage Constitutive Model of Thermally Damaged Basalt. I have reviewed the manuscript titled above. The uniaxial compression test and acoustic emission monitoring are carried out on basalt subjected to different temperatures in this manuscript. This manuscript can be beneficial from an engineering perspective. However, it contains some flaws that need to be addressed. The main issues are discussed below.

1.      There is an obvious formatting error in the first paragraph of the Abstract and Introduction. Please read through the text again and check for similar formatting errors.

2.      Try to explain all the parameters right after the first time you introduce them in a clear manner.

3.      The overall quality of figures and tables throughout the manuscript should be improved (i.e., Figure 9 and Table 1).

4.      The Introduction of this article does not adequately introduce the current research progress on the the rock damage evolution law, and the current research deficiencies are not clarified. More relevant references are needed. Please improve the Introduction.

5.      The reviewer recommends that the authors should discuss the physical meaning of the Formulas 1 and 2.

6.      The proposed method is based on Formula 6. When a and b are obtained through regression analyses using existing data, the model describes the relationship between the axial strain and the axial stress well.

7.      The authors should provide a detailed explanation of why the Formula 6 were chosen and how they contribute to the proposed method. The authors should add the other explanation. The following study also uses the same Formula.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0013795215000460?via%3Dihub

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0020768322002554?via%3Dihub

8.      I can see that the model is useful for organizing the existing data, but it may be difficult to apply the model to estimate the strain of other rocks without prior information. It would be helpful for readers to understand the value of the proposed model if you could add some information about the physical meaning of those parameters or the characteristics of those parameters over different rocks.

9.      There are problems in literature 23. In other words, line 328 and line 536 don't match.

10.   There exist some grammar errors and misspellings. The English should be edited by the native English speakers.

 11.   Conclusion tells nothing. Conclusion must be re-written.

While acknowledging the authors' hard work, it is currently not possible to consider this research for publication in sustainability. It is recommended to make major revisions to the paper.

Extensive editing of English language required

Author Response

请参阅附件。

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

This work investigated the mechanical properties and damage constitutive model of basalt after different temperatures. The relationship between acoustic emission (AE) characteristic and fracture behavior during different uniaxial compression tests was also explored. The present research is interesting for readers. However, the overall quality of the manuscript should be improved for potential publication.

1.      The shorten of abstract is needed as it is too long.

2.      Add the citation of international standard in Line 115.

3.      It is necessary to provide more details about AE monitoring during compression tests such as the type of AE monitoring system, the location of AE sensor, etc.

4.      The authors claimed “The damage evolution process of rock samples can be divided into four stages.” Please mark different damage stages in the figure for readers’ better understanding.

5.      The authors must provide more relevant high-quality English journal papers instead of papers in Chinese (References 20-24).

6.      Add the error bar in Figure 5.

7.      In addition to count, there are many time-domain AE parameters such as energy, information entropy, amplitude, RMS, rise time and so on. Why did you only use count to characterize the damage behavior? Could other AE parameters be used for damage identification in your work? Please discuss.

8.      The title of section 5.2.1 is “Constitutive model based on acoustic emission parameters”. However, no information about acoustic emission is found in this section.

9.      The authors failed to investigate the frequency domain characteristics including the peak frequency, frequency centroid, etc. It has been reported by many investigations (for example, the following references) that the information related to damage mode are generally encoded with the frequency domain of AE waveforms. The authors claimed “as the treatment temperature increases, the failure mode of rock samples transitions from shear failure to tensile failure”. Therefore, I suggest the authors to extract some frequency features and tie them to the change in failure mode. The citation of the following journal papers is also recommended.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijfatigue.2022.106860

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2019.07.042

10.   The English needs an improvement.

The English needs an improvement.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

The presented article clearly applies in nature. The experimental data presented are complete and verified. At the same time, I believe there is practically no section in the article discussing the results of the experiments compared to the literature data. At the moment, the article looks more like a technical report.

I would recommend increasing the scientific component of the work. 

1. It makes sense to analyze the annealed samples using x-ray phase analysis and DSC to determine the temperature and order of phase transformations if any.

2. Load-strain curves should be analyzed using Weibull distribution. 

3. It would be ideal to add a study of samples with a different composition to prove that the proposed model works with any basalts.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 4 Report

16-18 line, 47-56 line: Layout;

62 line, 65 line......: correct the citation; is it not necessary to write the author in square brackets when citing?

110 line: country?

114 line: density g/cm³;

Figure 4 photos are too small; first picture citation then picture;

I did not understand whether the samples shown in Figure 4 were compressed at high temperature or after exposure to temperature?;

The entire research methodology into one section: for example, lines 281-290 into section 2.2;

There is not a single conclusion that is related to the literature review and the use of rocks in storage;

The conclusions are drawn very much, missing the differences in percentages of the determined numbers;

General non-specific conclusions should be written in the discussion section, and specific ones should be written in the conclusions section, because the conclusions are not specific and too broad;

References: what does the letter J mean example: "diagram[J].Journal"?

The studies are interesting, but there is no strong connection between the problem at hand and the final results, for example in the conclusions.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Accept in present form

Minor editing of English language required

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

非常感谢您帮助我们发布和修改我们的文章。

此致敬意

真诚的，

作者

Reviewer 2 Report

Thanks for considering my comments. However, I notice the iThenticate report shows a very high percent match of 43% and therefore I must reject the manuscript. Please further reduce the amount of wording duplication in the manuscript.

In addition, after revision, there are still some errors and therefore the quality of the manuscript needs further improvement.

1. In line 156, PAC refers to Physical Acoustics Corporation.

2. Provide the operating frequency of the sensor used in your test.

3. In Figure 8, why the peak frequency of many AE signals are so small (below 10 kHz)? This is different with general frequency results of AE signals generated during the damage of rock materials. Give the definition or calculation formula of peak frequency.

4. In line 267-269, the authors claimed "The high propagation speed and low propagation scale of microcracks can induce acoustic emission signals with high peak frequency, while the acoustic emission signals with low peak frequency correspond to the generation of microcracks with low propagation speed and high propagation mode. " What is the foundation of your claim?

Moderate editing of English language required

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf