| 查看: 2329 | 回复: 20 | |||
| 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 | |||
felicity6056至尊木虫 (知名作家)
|
[交流]
文章审稿意见回来了，请虫子们帮忙看看意见是正面的还是负面的？ 已有11人参与
|
||
|
Combining a 20-steps reduced mechanism and CFD code, this paper predicts the ethylene/air combustion and soot formation. The results show that this 20-steps reduced mechanism can provide results with the similar accuracy and less CPU times with the detailed reaction model. This paper also analyzes how the soot nucleation, growth, oxidation is influenced by air velocity and temperature. All these indicate that the authors did a lot of work in this area. Some suggestions are as follows: 1. The authors should clarify how many species are assumed in quasi-steady state? If the detailed mechanism is reduced too far, that is, too many species are assumed in quasi-steady state, the input problem results will not be well reproduced. Please add some explanations on this point. 2. In “3 validation of reduced chemistry” part (Fig4, 5), authors need to compare the 20-steps reduced mechanism results with the data by Gibbs, Law or Scholte too, not only limited to comparison with GRI 3.0? It would make the paper more convictive. Moreover, the unit scales of left and right y axis in Fig.2, 4(b) and 5 are not consistent, which make readers confused. 3. In 4.3 results part, please interpret the reasons why the parameters (temperature, soot nucleation rate, growth rate and oxidation rate) appear different distributions in the three cases calculated at different equivalence rates and air velocities. Although the distribution of the results are described in detail, the difference and the reasons are little demonstrated. |
回复此楼» 猜你喜欢
能否退出参与的面上项目解除限项
已经有24人回复
-
号外号外
已经有8人回复
-
filecode，4个jtjc了
已经有17人回复
-
人气不行了
已经有9人回复
-
没有任何消息-是不是就凉了
已经有6人回复
-
如果此刻你正在为国基感到焦虑，不妨来听听这首《基金之外》
已经有5人回复
-
2026国自然函评费到账
已经有19人回复
-
建议基金发布提前给出明确的时间点
已经有16人回复
-
今日不放榜？网传国自然预计 8 月 27 日可查结果
已经有21人回复
-
估计是周四
已经有4人回复
» 本主题相关价值贴推荐，对您同样有帮助:
- 急，请大家帮忙看看这个审稿意见，困惑.......
已经有13人回复
- 请各位帮忙看以下审稿意见，不知道如何修改！
已经有3人回复
- 帮忙看看这个审稿意见是什么意思
已经有4人回复
- 【求助】有劳虫友高手帮忙看看acs审稿意见，多谢！
已经有5人回复
- 投稿有答复了，些许激动请大家帮忙看看，谢谢大家！（在13楼增加第二封审稿意见）
已经有32人回复
- 投了一篇文章，审稿结果是“major revision”，帮忙看看评审意见，有戏没？
已经有32人回复
- 审稿意见回来了，大家帮忙看一下。。
已经有9人回复
- 文章的审稿意见，大家帮忙看看！
已经有6人回复
- 大家帮忙看这样的审稿意见还有必要改吗，还是改投别的期刊呀！
已经有23人回复
- 虫友们帮忙看看审稿意见哦
已经有13人回复
- 审稿意见，大家帮忙看看
已经有8人回复
- 请大家帮忙看看如何回复审稿意见
已经有4人回复
- 审稿意见回来，一个审稿人让据，编辑说大修，大家帮我看看希望大不
已经有24人回复
felicity6056
至尊木虫 (知名作家)
- 应助: 6 (幼儿园)
- 贵宾: 0.033
- 金币: 10209.1
- 散金: 389
- 红花: 6
- 帖子: 6701
- 在线: 1054.7小时
- 虫号: 762546
- 注册: 2009-05-04
- 专业: 化石能源储存与输送
8楼2010-06-29 19:05:15
felicity6056
至尊木虫 (知名作家)
- 应助: 6 (幼儿园)
- 贵宾: 0.033
- 金币: 10209.1
- 散金: 389
- 红花: 6
- 帖子: 6701
- 在线: 1054.7小时
- 虫号: 762546
- 注册: 2009-05-04
- 专业: 化石能源储存与输送
2楼2010-06-29 17:26:24
3楼2010-06-29 17:49:25
4楼2010-06-29 18:13:38
20