Experimental analysis of the stick-slip characteristics of faults at different loading rates

Bao-xin Jia; Zong-xian Gao; Xiu-hui Han; Jia-xu Jin; Jian-jun Zhang

doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0231464

Peer Review History

Original SubmissionJanuary 1, 2020
24 Feb 2020 Decision Letter - Peitao Wang, Editor PONE-D-19-35929 Experimental Analysis of Stick-Slip Characteristics of Faults at Different Loading Rates PLOS ONE Dear Dr. Jia, Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process. We would appreciate receiving your revised manuscript by Apr 09 2020 11:59PM. When you are ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file. If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. To enhance the reproducibility of your results, we recommend that if applicable you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io, where a protocol can be assigned its own identifier (DOI) such that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript: A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). This letter should be uploaded as separate file and labeled 'Response to Reviewers'. A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. This file should be uploaded as separate file and labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'. An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. This file should be uploaded as separate file and labeled 'Manuscript'. Please note while forming your response, if your article is accepted, you may have the opportunity to make the peer review history publicly available. The record will include editor decision letters (with reviews) and your responses to reviewer comments. If eligible, we will contact you to opt in or out. We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript. Kind regards, Peitao Wang Academic Editor PLOS ONE Journal Requirements: When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements. Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The PLOS ONE style templates can be found at http://www.journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=wjVg/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and http://www.journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=ba62/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf 1. Please amend your Methods section to include the origin and vendor information and other characteristics of all materials and equipment used, in enough detail for another researcher to replicate the findings. [Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.] Reviewers' comments: Reviewer's Responses to Questions Comments to the Author 1. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions? The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented. Reviewer #1: Yes Reviewer #2: Yes ******** 2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously? Reviewer #1: N/A Reviewer #2: Yes ****** 3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available? The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified. Reviewer #1: Yes Reviewer #2: Yes ****** 4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English? PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here. Reviewer #1: No Reviewer #2: Yes ****** 5. Review Comments to the Author Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters) Reviewer #1: 1) The authors conduct an interesting experimental study on stick-slip characteristic of faults at different load rates, which is extensively and intensively used in underground mine operations worldwide. As reviewer, I am very pleased to suggest the manuscript to be accepted for publication through aforementioned minor revisions. All comments and suggestions are as follows; 2) The English of the paper needs some editing. There are many typos in the paper 3) Introduction The introduction is well articulated and the objective is well defined. However, the English needs to be edited 4) Materials and Methods - The English needs to be edited 5) Please note, too many details are missed in this section. Why you choose the granite rock as the materials? It also didn’t give the interface roughness information which is important for evaluating the slide characters. The load equipment details, and why you choose such a series of load rates and a 25MPa vertical load? Moreover, give more details about the CCD and high speed camera. 6) Results and Discussion 7) The English needs to be edited, and you should explain what’s driving the phenomenon. 8) The results about the first stick-slip time varying the load rate are already well-known; they are not new. The reviewer suggests to the author to get more familiar with deformation and stress state in the interface which are responsible for the stick-slip character. 9) The results is lack of the mechanisms that can explain the phenomenon, the author should give more details. Reviewer #2: This manuscript focuses on the fault stick-slip at different loading rates, and double-sided shear tests were conducted and the digital speckle correlation method were adopted for analysis. Besides the description of relevant experimental results, this article lacks theoretical analysis. Although the authors cited the empirical formulas of relevant scholars, they did not carry out an in-depth comparative analysis or not obtained new formulas containing the loading rate factor for reference. Therefore, this article also needs to be greatly improved and modified. Major revision is suggested. In addition, there are some details that need to be modified, as follows: 1)Some citations cannot be found in the references. Please check the full text carefully, for example: Guo et al.(2014). 2)More stick-slip stages are suggested to illustrate in Table 1 and Figure 3, only three stick-slip stages are not enough. 3)Fig. 9 shows the relationship between the magnitude and the actual stress drop under different loading rates, but there are so little points for some loading cases, such as 8,10,15μm/s. In addition, these data show that linear fitting may not be appropriate, please consider it. 4)Lines 221 to 227, please avoid this writing style, you can add a chart to explain it. Moreover, “For a given specimen, the slip displacement of the fault stick-slip increased as the stress drop increased.” In opinion of the reviewer, the stress drop should attribute to the sudden increase in displacement, not the opposite. ****** 6. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files. If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public. Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review?** For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy. Reviewer #1: No Reviewer #2: No [NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files to be viewed.] While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email us at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step. Attachments Attachment Submitted filename: comments for the tgeo-2019-0111 paper.docx https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0231464.r001
Revision 1
13 Mar 2020 Author Response -Reviewer 1 The authors conduct an interesting experimental study on stick-slip characteristic of faults at different load rates, which is extensively and intensively used in underground mine operations worldwide. As reviewer, I am very pleased to suggest the manuscript to be accepted for publication through aforementioned minor revisions. All comments and suggestions are as follows; 1) The English of the paper needs some editing. There are many typos in the paper Authors’ response: Thank you for your suggestion. It has been modified as required in the manuscript. 2) Introduction The introduction is well articulated and the objective is well defined. However, the English needs to be edited Authors’ response: Thank you for your suggestion. It has been modified as required in the manuscript. 3) Materials and Methods The English needs to be edited Authors’ response: Thank you for your suggestion. It has been modified as required in the manuscript. 4) Please note, too many details are missed in this section. Why you choose the granite rock as the materials? It also didn’t give the interface roughness information which is important for evaluating the slide characters. The load equipment details, and why you choose such a series of load rates and a 25MPa vertical load? Moreover, give more details about the CCD and high speed camera. Authors’ response: Thank you for your question. (1)Granite is the most widely distributed in the stratum.The fault slip encountered in practical engineering generally occurs in the geological conditions of granite.It is universal to choose granite as experimental material. (2)Under the condition of 25MPa vertical load, the roughness has little effect on the friction coefficient, and has great effect on the friction property. The main research object of this paper is the characteristics of fault stick slip. The main variable in the experiment is the loading rate. From the following calculation formulas,t can be known that the interface roughness is not a calculation parameter when calculating the magnitude of fault stick-slip and the stress drop.So it is not necessary to give the interface roughness. (3)The load equipment details have been added in the Materials and Methods section. The content is as follows:“The experimental loading device was a RLJW-2000 hydraulic servo testing machine with a maximum axial load of 3000 kN and a maximum horizontal load of 1500 kN. The data recording frequency range of the loading device was 1×10−5 to 30 Hz; and the strain loading rate was 1×10−7 to 1×10−2 mm/s.” (4)The higher the loading rate, the more stable the sliding.The lower the loading rate, the more unstable the sliding, and the more prone to stick-slip. Therefore, when the loading rate is small, the speed rate of each test increases less. (5)When the loading rate is greater than 10, the speed rate of each test increases greatly.When the vertical pressure is less than 20 MPa, the surface roughness of the sample has a greater effect on the friction coefficient. When the vertical pressure is greater than 30 MPa, the sample will have some deformation. 25 MPa selected by comprehensive consideration. (6)Details of CCD cameras and high-speed cameras have been added in the materials and methods section.The content is as follows:“CCD is the most commonly used image sensor for machine recording. In this experiment, the model of the CCD camera used was acA1600-20gm.”and “The high-speed camera was an industrial digital camera, which converted digital image capture targets into image signals and sent them to a dedicated image processing system. The image system performed various operations on these signals to extract the features of the targets. The high-speed camera model used in this experiment was a Photron Fast Cam SA1.1. ” 6) Results and Discussion The English needs to be edited, and you should explain what’s driving the phenomenon. Authors’ response: Thank you for your suggestion. It has been added as required in the Conclusions.The content is as follows:“(4) As the loading rate increased, although the sliding properties of the fault did not change, the magnitude and the stress drop of the fault also exhibited the characteristics of stable sliding.” 8) The results about the first stick-slip time varying the load rate are already well-known; they are not new. The reviewer suggests to the author to get more familiar with deformation and stress state in the interface which are responsible for the stick-slip character. Authors’ response: Thank you for your suggestion. It has been modified as required in the Conclusions section of the manuscript. 9) The results is lack of the mechanisms that can explain the phenomenon, the author should give more details. Authors’ response: Thank you for your suggestion. Theoretical analysis and interpretation were added to the Results and discussion.The content is as follows:lines 229 to 239,lines 254 to 259,lines 291 to 296,lines 322 to 335. -Reviewer 2 This manuscript focuses on the fault stick-slip at different loading rates, and double-sided shear tests were conducted and the digital speckle correlation method were adopted for analysis. Besides the description of relevant experimental results, this article lacks theoretical analysis. Although the authors cited the empirical formulas of relevant scholars, they did not carry out an in-depth comparative analysis or not obtained new formulas containing the loading rate factor for reference. Therefore, this article also needs to be greatly improved and modified. Major revision is suggested. Authors’ response: Thank you for your suggestion.Theoretical analysis and interpretation were added to the Results section of the manuscript.The content is as follows:lines 229 to 239,lines 254 to 259,lines 291 to 296,lines 322 to 335. In addition, there are some details that need to be modified, as follows: Some citations cannot be found in the references. Please check the full text carefully, for example: Guo et al.(2014). Authors’ response: Thank you for your suggestion.We modified the format of the references. 2)More stick-slip stages are suggested to illustrate in Table 1 and Figure 3, only three stick-slip stages are not enough. Authors’ response: Thank you for your suggestion.We changed the original three stick-slip stages to six. 3)Fig. 9 shows the relationship between the magnitude and the actual stress drop under different loading rates, but there are so little points for some loading cases, such as 8,10,15μm/s. In addition, these data show that linear fitting may not be appropriate, please consider it. Authors’ response: Thank you for your suggestion.As the loading rate increases, the sliding will tend to be stable, and the number of stick-slips will decrease. So there are fewer points. The fitted lines for the points of 8, 10, and 15 μm / s are yellow, green, and red line segments, as shown in the following figure. We can find that the two fit well. 4)Lines 221 to 227, please avoid this writing style, you can add a chart to explain it. Moreover, “For a given specimen, the slip displacement of the fault stick-slip increased as the stress drop increased.” In opinion of the reviewer, the stress drop should attribute to the sudden increase in displacement, not the opposite. Authors’ response: Thank you for your suggestion.We changed “For a given specimen, the slip displacement of the fault stick-slip increased as the stress drop increased.” to “For a given specimen, the increase in the stress drop occurred due to the sudden increase in the slip-slip displacement of the fault.” Attachments Attachment Submitted filename: Response to Reviewers.docx https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0231464.r002
25 Mar 2020 Decision Letter - Peitao Wang, Editor Experimental Analysis of the Stick-Slip Characteristics of Faults at Different Loading Rates PONE-D-19-35929R1 Dear Dr. Jia, We are pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been judged scientifically suitable for publication and will be formally accepted for publication once it complies with all outstanding technical requirements. Within one week, you will receive an e-mail containing information on the amendments required prior to publication. When all required modifications have been addressed, you will receive a formal acceptance letter and your manuscript will proceed to our production department and be scheduled for publication. Shortly after the formal acceptance letter is sent, an invoice for payment will follow. To ensure an efficient production and billing process, please log into Editorial Manager at https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/, click the "Update My Information" link at the top of the page, and update your user information. If you have any billing related questions, please contact our Author Billing department directly at authorbilling@plos.org. If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper to enable them to help maximize its impact. If they will be preparing press materials for this manuscript, you must inform our press team as soon as possible and no later than 48 hours after receiving the formal acceptance. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org. With kind regards, Peitao Wang Academic Editor PLOS ONE Additional Editor Comments (optional): Reviewers' comments: Reviewer's Responses to Questions Comments to the Author 1. If the authors have adequately addressed your comments raised in a previous round of review and you feel that this manuscript is now acceptable for publication, you may indicate that here to bypass the “Comments to the Author” section, enter your conflict of interest statement in the “Confidential to Editor” section, and submit your "Accept" recommendation. Reviewer #1: All comments have been addressed Reviewer #2: All comments have been addressed ******** 2. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions? The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented. Reviewer #1: Yes Reviewer #2: Yes ****** 3. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously? Reviewer #1: N/A Reviewer #2: Yes ****** 4. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available? The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified. Reviewer #1: Yes Reviewer #2: Yes ****** 5. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English? PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here. Reviewer #1: Yes Reviewer #2: Yes ****** 6. Review Comments to the Author Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters) Reviewer #1: The English of the paper have been reedited and meets the requirement of this journal, i agree that the editor can accept this paper. Reviewer #2: It is a second round review. The authors reviesed the manuscript carefully and the quality of the paper is much improved. I suggest the manuscript be accepted for publication. ****** 7. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files. If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public. Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review?** For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy. Reviewer #1: No Reviewer #2: No https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0231464.r003
Formally Accepted
2 Apr 2020 Acceptance Letter - Peitao Wang, Editor PONE-D-19-35929R1 Experimental Analysis of the Stick-Slip Characteristics of Faults at Different Loading Rates Dear Dr. Jia: I am pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been deemed suitable for publication in PLOS ONE. Congratulations! Your manuscript is now with our production department. If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper at this point, to enable them to help maximize its impact. If they will be preparing press materials for this manuscript, please inform our press team within the next 48 hours. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information please contact onepress@plos.org. For any other questions or concerns, please email plosone@plos.org. Thank you for submitting your work to PLOS ONE. With kind regards, PLOS ONE Editorial Office Staff on behalf of Dr. Peitao Wang Academic Editor PLOS ONE https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0231464.r004

Open letter on the publication of peer review reports

PLOS recognizes the benefits of transparency in the peer review process. Therefore, we enable the publication of all of the content of peer review and author responses alongside final, published articles. Reviewers remain anonymous, unless they choose to reveal their names.

We encourage other journals to join us in this initiative. We hope that our action inspires the community, including researchers, research funders, and research institutions, to recognize the benefits of published peer review reports for all parts of the research system.

Learn more at ASAPbio .