| 查看: 2677 | 回复: 5 | ||
| 【悬赏金币】回答本帖问题，作者tang410将赠送您 30 个金币 | ||
| 当前只显示满足指定条件的回帖，点击这里查看本话题的所有回帖 | ||
tang410新虫 (正式写手)
|
[求助]
一审意见大修，二审接收的希望大不？如何回复意见？谢谢 已有2人参与
|
|
|
Please find appended our referees' reports on your paper; unfortunately, the referees feel that additional changes are necessary before publication is possible. Further revision of the paper might satisfy the referees if the comments in their reports are addressed. If you decide to revise the work, please submit a list of changes or a rebuttal against each point which is being raised when you submit the revised manuscript. Reviewers' comments: Reviewer #1: The paper could have been interesting from an engineering standpoint chiefly for those Countries that have territory resources and no problems to erect new overhead lines. 1. Such a number of mistakes and anacolutha renders the paper almost unreadable. The authors ought to perform a complete revision of the text. 2. From a technical standpoint, it is necessary to write that the circuits of the overhead lines are in electrical parallel otherwise all the research of the authors is meaningless (as it has been demonstrated in the paper Benato, R.; Dambone Sessa, S.; Guglielmi, F. Determination of Steady-State and Faulty Regimes of Overhead Lines by Means of Multiconductor Cell Analysis (MCA). Energies 2012, 5, 2771-2793). 3. Also the title has grave mistakes. I propose to modify it with: Research on the unbalance degree of four-circuit overhead lines on the same tower with different phase sequence arrangements . 4. The text is strewn with grave mistakes; only some of the worst ones: 1）CASSON theory is CARSON theory 2）All the complex numbers must be underlined 3) Self and mutual impedances and not self and mutual impedance factors. 4) Reference 2 Oberto is Roberto. 5) Symmetry parameter and not parameter symmetry 6) Head of the line is sending-end and the end of the line is the receiving-end. 5. In the highlights: The basic evaluation index of parameter symmetry has been definite …has two grave mistakes It should be: The basic evaluation index of symmetry parameter has been defined Moreover, a very similar paper has been published in Electrical Power and Energy Systems 85 (2017) 67-76 entitled Research on the electric unbalance degree of multiple transmission lines non-parallelly erected entirely in one common corridor by Jun Zhu , Guangning Wu, Chaoqun Shi , Degang Gan, Yongxing Cao, Chi Wu and does not appear in the reference section. Reviewer #2: In my opinion, the paper number 1392, in the present form is not yet suitable to be published in ESPR journal. However, I believe that the subject may be largely improved becoming of interest. Thus, I would suggest the Authors to proceed in their work, improving the contribution in terms of both reference list and language. |
回复此楼» 猜你喜欢
我不理解！
已经有27人回复
-
要骂人了，新模版改版就是要淡化问题凝练这种虚的东西，结果有个评委还在说凝练得不够
已经有16人回复
-
基金系统什么内容也没有
已经有10人回复
-
科研人应该花精力去思考如何解决问题，而不是去凝练问题
已经有8人回复
-
学科评审组评审是指会评吗？
已经有5人回复
-
梦想
已经有8人回复
-
面上合作单位盖章
已经有9人回复
-
面上函评意见出来了，像什么等级？
已经有17人回复
-
为什么资助数各大高校都创新高，自己申请怎么就这么难
已经有14人回复
-
小白求助 投论文要求的highlights应该如何写
已经有4人回复
cqupenghao
铁杆木虫 (著名写手)
- 应助: 231 (大学生)
- 金币: 6211.3
- 散金: 5205
- 红花: 45
- 帖子: 2430
- 在线: 557.7小时
- 虫号: 1077272
- 注册: 2010-08-18
- 性别: GG
- 专业: 资源化工
6楼2017-06-14 19:59:17
2楼2017-05-19 09:53:53
3楼2017-05-19 09:54:17
4楼2017-06-14 18:38:52
30