| 查看: 1149 | 回复: 10 | |||
[交流]
corrosion science状态求助已有3人参与
|
大神们给看看，投稿一个多月了，还是这状态，正常么？ aa.jpg |
回复此楼» 猜你喜欢
小孩7岁，上一年级，不自信，学习较差
已经有28人回复
-
傅克酰基化，产率大于百分之一百，求解，很急
已经有10人回复
-
兄弟们帮我看看这两个结构怎么合成
已经有4人回复
-
299求调剂
已经有15人回复
-
特别资助审核状态
已经有5人回复
-
国家资助博士后BC档出校后资助的概率多大？
已经有3人回复
-
基金和生小孩
已经有34人回复
-
估计今年青基又没戏
已经有4人回复
-
下雨了
已经有17人回复
-
杭州国企和浙江高校如何选择？
已经有19人回复
» 本主题相关价值贴推荐，对您同样有帮助:
- Corrosion Science 审稿进度参考
已经有10人回复
- 研三快毕业了，重金求助投稿事宜
已经有3人回复
- 投稿 science of the total environment 格式
已经有13人回复
- science的拒稿状态是什么？
已经有5人回复
- Corrosion Science 投稿至今with editor 已经两个半月了，怎么办？
已经有19人回复
- corrosion science投稿状态求助
已经有33人回复
- 投稿状态求助，谢谢！
已经有7人回复
- 投稿Corrosion Science被拒，求大牛给分析~~
已经有23人回复
- 求助corrosion science 论文的格式要求
已经有3人回复
- Corrosion Science投稿
已经有20人回复
- 求助CrystEngComm投稿编辑的选择
已经有8人回复
- sent back to author 状态 求助
已经有22人回复
- 投稿意见求助（plos one “minor revision”）
已经有8人回复
- Corrosion Science投稿
已经有15人回复
- Radio Science 投稿格式问题
已经有4人回复
- corrosion science 被拒，大家看看，还能再投吗？
已经有25人回复
- Pest Management Science 投稿状态求助
已经有8人回复
- Corrosion science投稿编辑提问求助——重金求助
已经有14人回复
- 求问corrosion science这种证明开录用证明?
已经有12人回复
- Corrosion Science 投稿状态
已经有13人回复
- 求助--投过science of the total environment 的前辈帮忙看一下，谢谢
已经有7人回复
- Elsevier投稿求助-Composites Science and Technology & Structural Safety
已经有12人回复
- Corrosion Science 退修
已经有7人回复
- 关于Corrosion Science投稿
已经有5人回复
- Elsevier修改稿提交求助
已经有7人回复
lehigh_73
金虫 (著名写手)
- 应助: 173 (高中生)
- 金币: 1234.8
- 红花: 11
- 帖子: 1108
- 在线: 312.2小时
- 虫号: 233382
- 注册: 2006-03-29
- 性别: GG
- 专业: 金属结构材料
2楼2014-04-24 21:23:10
3楼2014-04-24 22:05:16
苍穹
银虫 (小有名气)
- 应助: 0 (幼儿园)
- 金币: 22.6
- 散金: 10
- 帖子: 150
- 在线: 44.3小时
- 虫号: 1212435
- 注册: 2011-02-24
- 性别: GG
- 专业: 金属结构材料
4楼2014-04-26 11:35:07
5楼2014-04-26 13:19:43
6楼2014-04-26 15:36:36
7楼2014-04-26 22:27:18
★
小木虫: 金币+0.5, 给个红包，谢谢回帖
小木虫: 金币+0.5, 给个红包，谢谢回帖
|
Reviewers' comments: (1) The research highlights are unintelligible. Possibly because of the undefined symbols, or possibly because of poor highlights. However, they are not acceptable. (2) No mesure of reproducibility. The order of the polarisation curves in each figure appears totally random. Any trends here, must come from a statistically derived scatter band through reproducibility experiments. (3) Do not use the word "anti-corrosion". There are correct and accepted words for this. (4) The introduction should not describe "low cost". That is irrelevant and there are no costs or reference to this provided. (5) The word "behavior" should be used in singular form only. The same is true for "literature", "discussion" and "research". (6) Polarization curves show no pitting potentials. It is hard to see where these numbers come from. (7) No trends are shown in Fig 3. In addition, the parameters are all independent of the chloride concentration, which for `Epit at least, is nonsense. (8) The use of 5 mV/s is too fast to determine any form of corrosion parameter to be determined. It will not give a icorr, Ecorr or Epit. (9) It is hard to see how these electrodes were made. The only description is Fig 1, which is a poor photo. Does the electrode have only one side with exposed metal, or are both sides exposed. The image in Fig 1 appears to show the left end fully coated and the right end fully exposed. Without a full description, the electrochemistry is not clear at all. (10) The XPS spectra in Fig 5 are after "electrochemically corroded in 1 M NaCl solution". However, the caption does not state at what potential, or whether this was after some potential scan. Perhaps it was after one of the polarization curves? Whatever it is, it is undefined. (11) Further, if it is after polarisation curve measurement, then the XPS does not show any sort of passive film, since the metal has been corroding actively. Mostly what is seen here is corrosion product. The problem with this paper is that it does not tell the reader exactly what was done and how it was done. (12) The current density scale in Fig 2 is a complete mystery. The units of the y axes are "10 mA/mm^2". What does this mean???? (13) There are many further major problems with this paper, both in the poor description of what was done, in the analysis of the results and in the interpretation. The subject is interesting, but the paper is not rigorous. (14) The paper should not be published in this present state. Reject. |
8楼2014-04-27 20:06:49
9楼2014-04-27 22:01:42
苍穹
银虫 (小有名气)
- 应助: 0 (幼儿园)
- 金币: 22.6
- 散金: 10
- 帖子: 150
- 在线: 44.3小时
- 虫号: 1212435
- 注册: 2011-02-24
- 性别: GG
- 专业: 金属结构材料
10楼2014-04-28 12:36:57
1(金币+5)