24小时热门版块排行榜

>论坛更新日志 (3704)
>导师招生 (304)
>休闲灌水 (163)
>招聘信息布告栏 (135)
>论文道贺祈福 (110)
>硕博家园 (87)
>文献求助 (62)
>虫友互识 (55)
>找工作 (43)
>考研 (41)
>生物科学 (29)
>博后之家 (28)
>考博 (23)
>基金申请 (20)
>医学 (18)
>教师之家 (14)

返回列表

【有奖交流】积极回复本帖子，参与交流，就有机会分得作者苗子玄灵的 10 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

苗子玄灵

木虫 (正式写手)

应助: 11 (小学生)
金币: 2577.5
散金: 1878
红花: 8
帖子: 818
在线: 71.2小时
虫号: 2539199
注册: 2013-07-09
专业: 工程热物理相关交叉领域

[交流] 这条论文审稿意见如何回复

最近投稿，审稿人给了这么一条意见，让我用结构网格，但我之前所有的东西都是用非结构网格做的，不想按他的意思改，二审回来时如下的意见，我现在该怎么办，请各位有经验的大神帮我出出主意吧，谢谢了！
It is obvious that the author does not intend to change the method of mesh generation. The author contends that tetrahedral meshes can effectively predict pump performance, providing an explanation through grid independence. However, the author's presentation of grid independence is insufficient, with only six contrasting cases provided, and the grid refinement does not adhere to standard grid independence criteria. Additionally, I am aware that some pump geometries pose challenges in generating hexahedral mesh structures, and the author might consider exploring the use of Cartesian grids as an alternative. Therefore, the numerical simulation approach starting from step one is controversial.

回复此楼