版块导航: 正在加载中...

登录注册

应《网络安全法》要求，自2017年10月1日起，未进行实名认证将不得使用互联网跟帖服务。为保障您的帐号能够正常使用，请尽快对帐号进行手机号验证，感谢您的理解与支持！

24小时热门版块排行榜

北京石油化工学院2026年研究生招生接收调剂公告

返回列表

ming815zhao

木虫 (正式写手)

应助: 3 (幼儿园)
金币: 2336.6
散金: 1568
帖子: 309
在线: 442.1小时
虫号: 530198
注册: 2008-03-21
性别: GG
专业: 催化化学

[求助] ACS审稿意见 —— 如何答复？已有1人参与

投了一票ACS的文章，其中一个审稿人（意见是小修）给了比较外围的评论。
请各位高手指点一下，评审意见的准确意思是什么？如何答复比较妥当？
万分感谢！

Most importantly to be of the practical significance that they authors are talking about, the materials not only need to be supported, but supported on large particles, typically mm in size. One of the pressing issues in nanoparticle catalyst syntheses is how can the interior pores of 10A or so be wetted by nanoparticles of similar size at a mm distance within the particle. Using fine powder supports gets around this issue but it is not a fair comparison. In most cases, one would make an eggshell on a larger particle support and this could definitely limit how much material can be placed on the support without having large particles easily agglomerated. This is a key issue in there type of materials and it is not touched on in this paper. So in summary some of the data presented here is interesting, but the syntheses is not really scaleable to very large quantity catalyst formulation and the supports used are also not ones that can be used for real applications. So there is a bridge that must be crossed and I would have liked to have seen that described or worked on if this is going to be rated as a top 20% paper. So the beginning of an excellent study is here but there is much still lacking. The journal will decide if this is enough to meet their publication criteria- it just seems to me that this paper is directed toward practical applications and in that vein, it falls short of addressing some key issues.

回复此楼

» 猜你喜欢

1楼 2017-07-12 21:14:02

已阅回复此楼关注TA 给TA发消息送TA红花 TA的回帖

zspcceshi5

木虫 (正式写手)

★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★
温心若水: 金币-20, 屏蔽内容, 违规存档, 请认真应助，遵守版规 2017-07-17 17:01:33

本帖内容被屏蔽

2楼2017-07-17 10:28:56