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

jxy200511151

金虫 (小有名气)

应助: 0 (幼儿园)
金币: 1424.8
散金: 8
帖子: 294
在线: 189.1小时
虫号: 1229087
注册: 2011-03-11
性别: GG
专业: 化工热力学和基础数据

[求助] 求助求助

The review of your paper is now complete, the Reviewers' reports are below. We kindly ask you to revise the paper considering the Reviewers' remarks and suggestions presented below. When this process is completed, the paper may be acceptable for publication in ENERGY.
........................................
Thank you very much for expressing your interest in ENERGY.
Sincerely,
Jiri Jaromir Klemes
Editor
Energy

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer #2:
I have gone though the new version of the paper.

I see it no more than a co-generation process paper,using the waste energy from an engine source and utilizes it in an absorption system.
It is not a new engine.

It cant be compared with engines in any measure.There is nothing new in the idea, no Exergy recovery or regeneration, leaving alone the economic value involved with additional equipment.

The answers are repetitive description and explanation. No numerical values for comparison.The author says ,the system has no ability for work production .How does he call it ENGINE?

Reviewer #3: The revised article enables more thorough understanding of the presented ideas. Discussion of the previous works in the field is now improved, but seems not to be complete in view of the ideas presented recently by Setzler et al. or by Turk et al. At least two issues still need to be clarified.
..................
Concluding, the revised paper is improved, but still needs to address some problems stated above, if it is to be considered acceptable for publication in the ENERGY.

Comments from the Editor
Some other issues to deal with:

Using multiple references is not very helpful for a reader. If you need to use more references at least a short assessment/justification should be provided.

This can be even considered as a kind of plagiarism if references are used without proper justification, detailed study and assessment

America is NOT a country, you probably mean USA.

貌似第二个审稿人说的文章一无是处，但是编辑好像When this process is completed, the paper may be acceptable for publication in ENERGY.这是什么情况呀，求助

回复此楼