24小时热门版块排行榜

返回列表

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

海宝心声

木虫 (著名写手)

应助: 5 (幼儿园)
金币: 4195.4
散金: 1988
红花: 14
帖子: 2735
在线: 253.1小时
虫号: 3761577
注册: 2015-03-24
专业: 结构工程

[交流] 请帮忙分析一下，主编的意思是拒绝，建议重投吗？已有11人参与

文章审稿22天，从10月1日开始，到今天，只有一个审稿人，感觉审稿意见不是很犀利，但主编拒稿了，请帮忙分析一下，谢谢您们了。
问如何理解系统状态中的reject和due on？
dear dr. gou:
your manuscript has been quickly reviewed by a reviewer and the comments are attached at the bottom of this letter. in view of the criticisms made, the editors have decided that your manuscript is not suitable for publication in ffems. i hope this quick decision would allow you to reconsider or resubmit the manuscript elsewhere without delay.

thank you for considering ffems for the publication of your research.

yours sincerely,

prof. youshi hong
editor-in-chief
fatigue & fracture of engineering materials & structures,
ffems@wiley.com

reviewer(s)' comments to author:

reviewer: 1

comments to the author
review comments for the paper entitled “xxxxxxxx”

after reading this paper, this reviewer hesitates to recommend the publication of this paper in ffems.

the topic of this paper is a traditional one and the methods are ordinary, which contain little new information.

xxxxxxxxxxxxx

the test data were quoted from ref. 28 which is a master’s thesis and is not easy to be accessed. in the relevant description, it is not clear how the torsion load was applied.

in p.5, line 3 from the bottom, it reads “xxxxare shown in figure 5 (c).” in fact, fig. 5(c) is a photograph showing the tested specimen and the cracking image, which is not the result that is commonly understood with obtained values.

overall, the novelty as well as the quality of this paper is insufficient to merit its publication in ffems.

date sent:

22-oct-2020

SZJLKHBPX~REW40$47EYHBL.png

回复此楼