The study presents a robust analysis, but certain aspects of the experimental methodology and data interpretation merit further discussion. Specifically, Figure 4 shows mass-loss measurements derived from the scale and infrared camera, with a noted discrepancy in rates attributed to particle ejection. Could the authors clarify whether particle ejection rates were validated through additional techniques, such as particle counting or high-speed imaging, to ensure consistency across measurements? Additionally, the geometrical model described in Section 5 assumes negligible tensile strength for particle clusters, which may oversimplify the cohesion dynamics of water-ice grains. Were any sensitivity analyses performed to assess the model’s robustness under varying tensile strength assumptions?
My understanding is that the discrepancy between the scale and infrared camera data was attributed to particle ejection, which was inferred based on indirect measurements. If additional validation techniques such as particle counting or high-speed imaging were not employed, incorporating these methods in future studies could enhance measurement accuracy and confirm ejection rates more directly.
Regarding the geometrical model, assuming negligible tensile strength simplifies the analysis but may not fully capture the cohesive forces within water-ice grains under varying conditions. If sensitivity analyses on tensile strength were not performed, exploring how different cohesion values impact model predictions could provide further insight into the robustness of the results. Could the authors clarify whether these aspects were considered or if they are planned for future investigations?