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

botar

木虫 (正式写手)

应助: 11 (小学生)
金币: 2497.4
散金: 490
红花: 8
帖子: 970
在线: 232.8小时
虫号: 127499
注册: 2005-12-08
专业: 金属材料的磨损与磨蚀

[求助] Surface and Coatings Technology 外审意见 major revision 帮我看看有希望不？

我因年龄家庭负担原因，选择在本单位在职读博，三年了，几乎是一个人的战斗，从还没有一篇SCI，2011-2013，两年多里投了五次稿，直接被拒掉四次，这次给了一个大修。请前辈们给把把脉，这些修改意见修改后有没有接受的希望？谢谢！祝大家新年快乐！
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Dear Dr. **,

Reviewers have now commented on your paper.
Followling the advice of reviewer 2 I was considering to reject and recommend another journal. I still would like to encourage you to consider that option. Otherwise, please provide solid answers to the reviewers remarks.

For your guidance, reviewers' comments are appended below.

If you decide to revise the work, please submit a list of changes or a rebuttal against each point which is being raised when you submit the revised manuscript. THE CHANGES AND MODIFICATIONS OF THE MANUSCRIPT SHOULD BE HIGHLIGTHED IN COLOUR THROUGH THE TEXT OF THE REVISED MANUSCRIPT.

You are expected to return your Revision by 10 May 2013.

Yours sincerely,

Surface and Coatings Technology

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer #1:
Comments to Author:

two minor revisions are suggested

1. In page 5, para 2, there is a sudden appearance of word 'prickly ball'; I understand it is for the undissolved Cr3C2 carbide, but there is no mention about it in the test to confirm that what author meant as 'prickly ball' is the partially dissoved Cr3C2

2. The conclusion appears to be reproduction of the results; it is not 'concluding' your work. It can be rewritten with more impact so the 'conclusions' are clear and obvious.

Reviewer #2: This is formally well written work with good thermodynamics analysis. However, in my opinion this work is not in the main scope of present journal. There is no novelty in the experimental part and thermodynamics analysis would better pass in some other journal like Materials Chemistry and Physics. I could not see the connection between experimental and theoretical investigations.

* Highlights and conclusions do not make clear the novelty of this research. Highlight 1 and 4 bring the same information.
* I can't agree with conclusions part in the introduction. Formation of M7C3 carbides in Fe-based matrixes is well known process, also industrially established for more than 30 years.
* It is also not clear what is the link between calculations and experimental observations? How the dissolving of Cr3C2 does influence the nucleation behaviour?

General remarks:
* What was the vol. % of Cr3C2 powder in relation to matrix FeCrNiBSi powder?
* I would not name Cr3C2 as "substrate", maybe a "source". Usually in coatings "substrate" means a base material to be coated.
* Which way were the powders deposited - pasta, mixed together or separately?
* If the main idea of this research was to analyse formation of M7C3 from Cr3C2 I would suggest to use pure Ni or Fe as matrix and to look on a simple system. By the used matrix composition high amount alloying elements influences the reaction processes.

回复此楼