The MS has been improved. Here are some suggestions for further improvements.
P2 -
L4: Confusing! --> The model treats the ambient air and debris phases separately, (?)
L29: allows reliable numerical studies --> allows numerical studies
[would be better this way, because not all flows might be reliably modelled with just 2-parameters].
P3 -
L7: as defined in (Yu et al., 2013). --> as defined in Yu et al. (2013).
L21: full --> large
P4 -
L2-3: Why so, explain.
L6: core --> ad-hoc
L18: gradients and smaller than ten.: Sounds strange, re-formulate?
L31: Math symbols.
P5 -
remove , in eqn.
P6 -
L5: equation 1. --> (1).
L13-14: The simulated flow depths reproduce the laser signal with respect to both time and amplitude (Figure 3) and predicted run-out deposits replicate the water content sensitivity (Figure 4) but underestimate the effect.
--> The simulated flow depths tend to reproduce the laser signal for higher water content with respect to both time and amplitude (Figure 3) and predicted run-out areas replicate the water content sensitivity (Figure 4) but over- and under-estimate the effects.
L16: Figure 3 top --> Figure 3a
[also throughout the text indicate figure panels with a, b, c, etc., and refer in the text accordingly. This will help the reader to match fig. with text].
is accurately --> is more accurately
L19: the flow depth --> the exp flow depth
P8 -
L26: , or even a coupled Lagrangian particle simulation: Remove, or provide Refs.
P10 -
L33-34: For a physically meaningful comparison with SD it would be better also to mention error bars in experiments.
P11 -
L9: a widely applicable modeling framework --> a potentially widely applicable modeling framework
L12: to accurately --> to rather accurately
P12 -
L23: phase separations due to grain-size sorting --> phase separations and grain-size sorting
simulated --> simplified ?
L25: lower curve, upper curve --> inner curvature, outer curvature
[would be better to call this way, see, e.g., Pudasaini et al., 2005].
L33: partial slip --> the slip
P13 -
L32: to be taken into account --> to be taken into account as in Pudasaini and Fisher (2016) with the mechanical separation-fluxes, or
L34: However, the corresponding model extension would introduce new model parameters and higher numerical costs. As a consequence of: Remove.
[Such statements are not helpful from a physical point of view of naturally complex mixture debris flows].
P14 -
L1: our reduced approach without grainsize sorting effects, --> Our reduced approach without phase-separation and grainsize sorting effects,
[bacause, phase-separation and grainsize sorting are not the same, one or both can be present in mixture flows].
L7: grain-size sorting --> phase-separation and grain-size sorting
P15 -
[Some of the statements in L5-20 are not consistent with the complex nature of debris flow, so need to be re-formulatted].
L9: not to gain a perfect representation of the experiment, but: Remove.
P11-12: depend on many free parameters --> depend on several physical parameters
L13-14: Two-phase approaches, on the other hand, involve high numerical costs. --> Multi-phase approaches involve high numerical costs.
L14-16: In the case of two-phase coupling by drag between grain and fluid, the uncertainty in the drag between granular and fluid phases necessitates parameters that are difficult to quantify in case of the non-Newtonian suspension and non-spherical gravel grains. As a consequence, no previous: Remove.
[Applications might need simplifications. But, this is unnecessarily negative to the reality of complex mixture flows as the phases are not locked-up and evolve with interphase momentum exchanges].
L16-17: modeling approach has succeeded in predicting debris-flow behavior across such diverse experimental settings as those examined here,
--> Our modeling approach has succeeded in predicting debris-flow behavior across a diversed experimental settings as those examined here,
P16 -
L12: than a highly parameterized model (perhaps because the latter is over-fitted),
--> than a model with more parameters,
[In physical model the parameters emerge from the natural need and characterize the material and flow properties. But, again, as mentioned earlier, such statements do not help so much].
L13-18: Because such changes ... ... such information: Remove.
[This can in principle be done in any mechanics-based model as these statements basically concern with the initial and boundary conditions and erosion-deposition].
[The two sentences in L18-20 already explain enough about the main essence of the paper, from an application point of view].
L21: due to --> and
References:
P17-18 -
Check references, e.g., Pudasaini, S. --> Pudasaini, S. P., etc.
Figures:
Fig. 3: [also applies to other figures]
- increase the font sizes in label, legend, etc.,
- increase the curve thickness.
- in caption, mention which exp. it corresponds.
Fig. 8, 11:
Put a, b, c, d, ..., in panels and explain each panel clearly.
Fig. 9:
Still confusing the correspondnce between test and simulation. |