| 查看: 1013 | 回复: 4 | |||
luozh72金虫 (小有名气)
|
[交流]
投Chem Eng Sci审稿意见如下,咨询大家是否需要重投?谢谢!
|
|
两个审稿人,第一个审稿人小修,问题都很好回答.第二个审稿人,所问也觉得好回答.最终拒稿.所有意见如下.麻烦大家帮忙参考一下,是否接审稿意见修改重投该期刊并写一封反驳信还是改投它刊? Dear Dr. ----, Thank you for submitting your manuscript to Chemical Engineering Science. Your paper, referenced above, has been reviewed by experts in the field. Based on the comments of these reviewers, we regret to inform you that we are unable to accept your manuscript for publication in Chemical Engineering Science. The comments of the reviewers are included below in order for you to understand the basis for our decision, and we hope that their thoughtful comments will help you in your future studies. I draw your attention, in particular, to the comments of Reviewer 2, who is an expert in reactor modeling. While you may be disappointed by this decision, I would like to urge you to continue to consider Chemical Engineering Science for publication of future manuscripts. Sincerely, Alex T. Bell Chairman of the Board of Editors Chemical Engineering Science Chemical Engineering Science, Editorial Office E-mail: chemicales@elsevier.com Reviewers' comments: Reviewer #1: ----- I recommend this paper to be published after minor revision. Reviewer #2: The authors present a simulation study of the reaction of CO and ethyl nitrate to diethyl oxalate. The essence of the paper is to present a two-dimensional model in which side reactions are included. Previous work used a one-dimensional model with side reactions and a two-dimensional model without side reactions. In addition, a validation study is included using literature data. The model presented is standard, and the suthors have simplified it with many assumptions, for which no justification is given. the kinetics are taken from the literature, where the authors' "exponent-function" means "power-law" - the usual kinetics with Arrhenius temperature dependence. Parts of the model seem strange - in particular equation 25 must be wrong - they set dT/dz = c1 dT/dr at r = D/2? This is mathematically incorrect. In their conclusions the authors mention that the results are obvious - I agree. It is hard to see what the contribution is here, the methods used are old, and I get no confidence from the paper that they have been implemented correctly or that the simplifications made are reasonable. I would not accept this paper. 本文来自: 小木虫论坛 http://muchong.com/bbs/viewthread.php?tid=2845813&fpage=1 |
回复此楼» 猜你喜欢
职称评审没过，求安慰
已经有41人回复
-
回收溶剂求助
已经有7人回复
-
硝基苯如何除去
已经有3人回复
-
A期刊撤稿
已经有4人回复
-
垃圾破二本职称评审标准
已经有17人回复
-
投稿Elsevier的Neoplasia杂志，到最后选publishing options时页面空白，不能完成投稿
已经有22人回复
-
EST投稿状态问题
已经有7人回复
-
毕业后当辅导员了，天天各种学生超烦
已经有4人回复
-
求助文献
已经有3人回复
-
三无产品还有机会吗
已经有6人回复
nono2009
超级版主 (文学泰斗)
No gains, no pains.
-
专家经验: +21105 - 应助: 28684 (院士)
- 贵宾: 513.911
- 金币: 2555210
- 散金: 27828
- 红花: 2147
- 沙发: 66666
- 帖子: 1602255
- 在线: 65200.9小时
- 虫号: 827383
- 注册: 2009-08-13
- 性别: GG
- 专业: 工程热物理与能源利用
- 管辖: 科研家筹备委员会
2楼2011-02-10 16:14:02
★
小木虫(金币+0.2):抢了个小板凳，给个红包
小木虫(金币+0.2):抢了个小板凳，给个红包
| 祝福 |
3楼2011-02-10 16:14:44
ziyeweng
铁杆木虫 (著名写手)
- 应助: 78 (初中生)
- 金币: 12705.7
- 散金: 5
- 红花: 100
- 沙发: 1
- 帖子: 1478
- 在线: 820.2小时
- 虫号: 898876
- 注册: 2009-11-10
- 性别: GG
- 专业: 光学
4楼2011-02-10 16:31:16
关键先生
铁杆木虫 (正式写手)
学霸
- 应助: 2 (幼儿园)
- 金币: 7037.3
- 散金: 208
- 红花: 3
- 帖子: 901
- 在线: 164.8小时
- 虫号: 140930
- 注册: 2005-12-20
- 专业: 化工系统工程
5楼2011-07-11 10:06:55