| 查看: 3694 | 回复: 13 | |||
| 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 | |||
chuzhaoxiang银虫 (正式写手)
|
[交流]
International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 投稿交流 已有8人参与
|
||
|
International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 投稿交流 论文投稿2周后进入外审，3个月后收到系统自动发送的邮件说是外审已经结束，进入Ready for Decision状态，可现在这个状态已经持续49天了，想催又不敢催，怕悲剧了，所以请教一下各位，有类似投稿经验的交流一下。 |
回复此楼» 猜你喜欢
售SCI一区文章，我:8.O.55.1.O.54,科目齐全,可伽急
已经有4人回复
-
售SCI一区文章，我:8.O.55.1.O.54,科目齐全,可伽急
已经有5人回复
-
售SCI文章，我:8O5.5.1.O.54,科目齐全,可+急
已经有3人回复
-
售SCI一区T0P文章，我:8O.55.1.O.54,科目全,可伽急
已经有3人回复
-
售SCI文章，我:8O5.5.1.O.54,科目齐全,可+急
已经有3人回复
-
售SCI一区T0P文章，我:8O.55.1.O.54,科目全,可伽急
已经有3人回复
-
售SCI一区文章，我:8.O.551.O.5.4,科目全,可伽急
已经有4人回复
-
售SCI-T0P文章，我:8O.5.5.1.O.54,科目齐全,可+急
已经有4人回复
-
售SCI一区T0P文章，我:8.O.55.1.O.54,科目齐全,可+急
已经有3人回复
-
售SCI一区T0P文章，我:8O.55.1.O.5.4,科目齐全,可+急
已经有6人回复
wenqu
铁杆木虫 (职业作家)
酷酷文曲
- 应助: 2 (幼儿园)
- 金币: 5926.1
- 散金: 2230
- 红花: 10
- 沙发: 13
- 帖子: 3026
- 在线: 500.5小时
- 虫号: 3355025
- 注册: 2014-08-06
- 性别: GG
- 专业: 传热传质学
★
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
|
我看懂了，第一个审稿人认为文献小修后可发表，第二个觉得文章换汤不换药，没有新意，然后列了一堆质疑问题，所以应该是大修或拒的意思。那文章的价值创新性可能要针对性的重申了。 发自小木虫Android客户端 |
7楼2019-01-31 23:02:53
thomasadmy
新虫 (小有名气)
- 应助: 0 (幼儿园)
- 金币: 232.1
- 散金: 40
- 帖子: 64
- 在线: 4.4小时
- 虫号: 4370835
- 注册: 2016-01-20
- 专业: 金属基复合材料
2楼2018-11-26 15:51:32
chuzhaoxiang
银虫 (正式写手)
- 应助: 2 (幼儿园)
- 金币: 475.3
- 散金: 20
- 红花: 1
- 帖子: 302
- 在线: 559.6小时
- 虫号: 1822619
- 注册: 2012-05-17
- 性别: GG
- 专业: 传热传质学
|
万幸，投稿5个月左右返回一审意见，郑院士给了一次宝贵的修改机会，大家帮忙分析一下审稿意见，给些修改建议吧 Comments from the editors and reviewers: -Reviewer 1 The manuscript addresses the issue of analytically predicting the effective thermal conductivity (ETC) of low porosity granular geomaterials. Haigh’s (2012) model for predicting the ETC based on spherical particle embedded in unit cylindrical cell is extended for lower void ratio (e<0.5) has been developed. The work sounds original and reads well. Clarification on electrical analogy for thermal conductivity is explained very well. The pictorial representation of thermal unit cell and derivation of the formulas are noteworthy. However, following points needs to be clarified before considered for publication. 1. For quasi-hemispherical particle enclosed in the cylindrical cell, the radius of the inscribed spherical particles are allowed to grow till sqrt(2R). This assumption control the alpha and beta controlling parameters. Parameter alpha control the porosity (phi) of the system. A proper explanation is required based on physical or geometrial sense for justification of this assumption. 2. The curvature of the menisci holding the water at the particle contact is ignored. This plays a significant role in ETC computation. This should be mentioned in the assumption. 3. Soil Water Characteristic Curve (SWCC) provides better justification for change in ETC of geomaterials which is not limited to sand type materials only. A metion of this similarity is provide in the review of Dong et al. Geotech. and Geolog.Eng. 33, 202-221,(2015). Likos has developed an analytical expression considering this effect. Geotechnical and Geological Engineering, 33, 179–192. A mention of this work is relevant for this manuscript. 4. Some of the references regarding the numerical thermal conductivity evaluation are relatively old and need to be updated, I suggested recent relevant references by Lee et. al Geothermics 67 76-85 (2017). -Reviewer 2 In this research, a cylindrical unit cell model for predicting the effective thermal conductivity of two-phase or three-phase low porosity granular geomaterials is proposed. As understood by the reviewer, the model is simple geometry discretization of the unit particle into three-phase and assigning an initial thermal conductivity for each phase to fit the experimental data given in the last section of the paper. So, there is not that much difference between this model and fitting curve models exist in the literature (Chen 2008, Lu et al 2007). The general standard is far below what is expected for this journal. The main points will be: 1. While talking about three-phase heat transfer, considering only the conduction heat transfer is not valid. 2. Why consider only low porosity, in the literature, exists also models for low porosity as mentioned by authors: Gori and Corasaniti 2013. And most importantly why cylinder unit model, when eventually spatial correction is needed? 3. The model is only applicable to soils with the same sized particles and pores, which doesn’t exist in nature. There is also no thermal resistance in contacts. 4. The cylindrical unit cell is considered to be the REV, which is false. 5. The only water volume is the water bridges between the particles, which its volume depends on applied suction. What about the bulk water volume trapped between the particles? 6. Are the Equations given in this research derived by the authors or they are taken from literature? The references should be given. 7. Table 3 depicts the thermal conductivities given to each phase (Solids, Water and Air). How these parameters are determined? Isn’t this a fitting curve? The authors claim in the conclusion that their model represents the physical basis of heat conduction rather than empirical models’ curve-fitting to experimental results. 8. What about the effect of particle size on ETC? |
3楼2018-12-01 23:15:19
★ ★
小木虫: 金币+0.5, 给个红包，谢谢回帖
paperhunter: 金币+1, 鼓励交流 2018-12-04 12:54:10
小木虫: 金币+0.5, 给个红包，谢谢回帖
paperhunter: 金币+1, 鼓励交流 2018-12-04 12:54:10
|
看来郑院士最近忙，我等了一个月也是1号给的修改意见 发自小木虫IOS客户端 |
4楼2018-12-04 00:11:21
30