24小时热门版块排行榜    

CyRhmU.jpeg
南方科技大学公共卫生及应急管理学院2025级博士研究生招生报考通知
查看: 2433  |  回复: 15
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

botar

木虫 (正式写手)


[交流] 第一篇投稿被拒,帮我看看审稿人的意见,是否可以采纳,修改重投

个人感觉,第一个审稿人,态度不太认真,站在拒稿的角度上审稿。第二个意见较具体,相对客观一些。请大家帮我看看,给点指导意见。谢了先。
Comments for the Author:




Reviewer #1:

1.The disign of experiments in this paper lacks scientific approach. The results cannot give good reference value for extensive use.

2.The related works should be well documented.

3.Is the water-dipping process more effective than conventional approaches?The research does not provide clear conclusions. According to the author's ideas(shorten the solidification time in lower region),the air-cooled method may be better (safe and easy operation).

4.The sections of principles of numerical simulation of casting solidification are well documented in many books and papers. I recommend the deletion of that.
  


Reviewer #2:

1) The article should be modified, 1) English, 2) technology term, 3) The text should be clear & systemmatic,
Example:
a)"..The shell mold contained the following types of substrates: face coats,
intermediate coats, and backup coats. Each coat was made of two layers: a slurry layer and a stucco layer. In this study, the shell mold was made of zircon and fused silica materials, and the thickness of shell mold approximately is 8 mm" , this is previously known!
b) Abstrat: No focus.
c) The case of molding should be clear as a contribution, Re-design molding.
d) "2.1 Governing equations in numerical simulation" should be strengthed & verified according to data, discussion....
e) The case size of simulation molding can be clearly explained and discussed.

2) The key parameters of the water-dipping process is old technology. Both FEM code and ProCAST are commercialized software, and they have already been used in foundry industry for many year.
回复此楼

» 猜你喜欢

» 本主题相关价值贴推荐,对您同样有帮助:

» 抢金币啦!回帖就可以得到:

查看全部散金贴

已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

ou0551

木虫 (正式写手)



botar(金币+1):谢谢参与
botar(金币+1): 谢谢,你说这个很重要。 2012-02-22 23:39:07
我觉得最关键还是在英语方面下功夫。很多审稿人看见英语不好,或者表述不清楚,连看的心情都没有,干脆找几个问题出来,拒掉。
16楼2012-02-22 16:47:22
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖
查看全部 16 个回答

botar(金币+1):谢谢参与
The related works should be well documented
2楼2012-02-20 23:39:53
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

botar

木虫 (正式写手)


引用回帖:
: Originally posted by leimiao_hit at 2012-02-20 23:39:53:
The related works should be well documented

谢谢,该意思是否说明文章需要更多的实验来证明。
3楼2012-02-21 00:27:50
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

visitor958

至尊木虫 (文坛精英)



botar(金币+1):谢谢参与
当然可以修改重投了,不过要认真修改,最好增加内容及讨论。
4楼2012-02-21 00:29:42
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖
简单回复
wjchen5楼
2012-02-21 00:41   回复  
botar(金币+1):谢谢参与
普通表情 高级回复(可上传附件)
信息提示
请填处理意见