| 查看: 1639 | 回复: 3 | |||
hhgbhh金虫 (小有名气)
|
[求助]
外审意见回来，大家评论评论
|
|
Editorial Summary Manuscript BEENG-1464 studies temperature distributions in deep concrete box girders bridges under the solar radiation, a topic of potential interest to the bridge engineering community. The manuscript was reviewed by two expert Reviewers that found some merits but also many issues related to the form (poor English) and contents (many parts of the presented study and its relations with previously published works on the same subject require clarifications and improvements, discrepancy between title and actual contents), as detailed in the following review reports. Thus, the submitted manuscript cannot be accepted for publication in its current version and must be accurately revised in its form (comprehensive English language revision) and contents (each comment by the two Reviewers requires careful consideration) and then re-reviewed by the same two Reviewers before it could be considered for publication. Reviewer #2: This paper, even though titled "thermal gradients and their effects on the deep concrete box girder under solar radition," only discussed and evaluated temperature variations and gradients for a deep concrete box girder. For better knowledgeable for engineers and researchers, this reviewer strongly recommend that this paper should evaluate the effects of the thermal gradients on the structural behavior of the girder such as stresses and deformations using experimental, analytical, and/or numerical studies. In addition, this reviewer recommends the authors revise and discuss the following things: Reviewer #3: The content of the paper is modern and within the scopes of the Journal. It is always very interesting to compare theoretically predicted temperature distributions in bridges situated in different Countries and submitted to very different boundary conditions with extended collections of measured data and the present paper contains such results. The scientific method is correct and the results agreed with the data obtained by similar researches. Some error in the English syntax. Three remarks about the references: |
回复此楼» 猜你喜欢
366求调剂
已经有8人回复
-
0854调剂
已经有7人回复
-
272分材料子求调剂
已经有52人回复
-
一志愿哈工大 085600 277 12材科基求调剂
已经有31人回复
-
290求调剂
已经有16人回复
-
材料工程085601，270求调剂
已经有35人回复
-
085600材料与化工349分求调剂
已经有4人回复
-
22408 352分求调剂
已经有5人回复
-
268分085602化学工程调剂
已经有30人回复
-
211本科材料化工求调剂
已经有18人回复
» 本主题相关价值贴推荐，对您同样有帮助:
- 外审无意见 是不是意味着要退稿
已经有26人回复
- 中国电机工程学报，有一个外审当天回来了，没有审稿意见，文章状态还是外审中
已经有24人回复
- 审稿意见回来了，论文该如何修改？
已经有31人回复
- 怎么两个外审专家意见回来后，怎么又多了一个外审专家啊？什么情况啊？
已经有10人回复
- 一个外审意见已经回来了还有一个没回来。。。。
已经有26人回复
- 对评审专家的意见如何修改
已经有6人回复
- 请大家帮忙看看评语！！！
已经有69人回复
- 外审后退修,录用的可能性有多大?
已经有13人回复
- 电子与信息学报回来的一个意见，现在已经辗转到第四个审稿专家了，大家帮忙看看
已经有28人回复
- 《电网技术》杂志投稿，外审
已经有8人回复
- 11月1日下午刚送外审，11月2日傍晚显示已有一个审稿意见回来了，说明什么，被拒绝了？
已经有25人回复
- 终审 审回来 请教大家
已经有6人回复
- 外审10几天就回来了，等待主编裁决，忐忑
已经有20人回复
- 审稿意见回来了，大家帮忙看看！非常感谢！接受了散金币哈！
已经有13人回复
- 电子与信息学报的一个外审意见,大家帮忙看看+第二个外审意见已回
已经有33人回复
- 外审意见回来了，应该是major revise。想让大家看看，有多大机会录用
已经有29人回复
- 外审后状态又改成内审了，但编辑却没有给我审稿意见是什么意思？
已经有6人回复
- 两个外审意见回来了，可是状态还是外审中，是不是催催杂志社
已经有7人回复
- 中国电机工程学报投稿退修后是什么审稿流程？
已经有10人回复
- 主编预审完直接外审没有意见
已经有6人回复
- 外审回来，帮忙看看录用机会大不大？
已经有11人回复
- 迷茫，外审回来，主编给的评语，帮忙看看
已经有45人回复
星野朔夜
金虫 (正式写手)
- 应助: 96 (初中生)
- 金币: 1440.2
- 散金: 766
- 红花: 6
- 帖子: 470
- 在线: 283小时
- 虫号: 2300080
- 注册: 2013-02-26
- 性别: GG
- 专业: 水产资源与保护学
2楼2013-11-22 17:18:26
hhgbhh
金虫 (小有名气)
- 应助: 1 (幼儿园)
- 金币: 1096.5
- 散金: 10
- 帖子: 152
- 在线: 408.2小时
- 虫号: 1716685
- 注册: 2012-03-26
- 性别: GG
- 专业: 结构工程
|
给你贴出来  1)Most of all, Fig 4 and Figs 9-14 show lots of temperature distriutions and variations in the box girder section. The authors need to reduce temperature figures and describe the effects of the temperature distriubtion in the girder section regarding the thermal behavior of the girder in more detail. The paper shows lots of temperatuare figures but unfortunately harldy find technical and engineering meanings with not showing specific, technical words and numbers. In particular, temperautre of the deck slab is the highest in Fig. 4, but the temperature of the web is larger thatn that of the deck. The reviewer recommends that the authors need to evaluate the temperature effects in Sections of "Temperature distributions in the deep concrete box girder" in more detail from a technical standpoint. Also, Section of "Temperature predicting model of the concrete box girder" require reviewing the errors of the notation and the variables along with references. 2)The authors need to describe how to determine the words or phrases of "the worst conditions," "the most critical," "the effective temperature," "average temperature," and "significant warming, stablising, and dropping trend," used in the paper. In addition, the authors should tell the result temperatures along with the time and the date, as well as how you select the days for the analysis, not just saying that "the weather experienced a significatn warming trend. The reviewer recommends that the authors should more focus on the quantitative and technical description for the words and phrases used in the paper. 3) For the concrete box girder, the reveiwer think that sevearl codes including AASHTO provide the transverse temperature diffrences for the calucation of thermal deformation caused by environmental effect. Furthermoe, there are sevearl recent papers studying on the transverse temperature diferences in I-bridge girders, which would also be helpful for the box girder. The reviewer recommends that The authors review sevearl related papers including the below papers: - "Investigation of Extreme Environmental Conditions and Design Thermal Gradients during Construction for Prestressed Concrete Bridge Girders," ASCE Bridge Engineering, Vol. 17 No. 3, May/Jne 2012. - "Analysis of Thermal Environmental Effects on Precast, Prestressed Concrete Bridge Girders: Temperature Differentials and Thermal Deformations," Advances in Structural Engineering, Vol. 15 No. 3, March 2012. 4) Finally, the reviewer recommends that the authors need to correct somewhat lots of English errors with a Native speakers final proofreading. 1) The original title of the F. Kehlbeck paper was “Einfluss der Sonnenbestrahlung bei Brueckenbauwerken” , Werner Verlag, Duesseldorf, 1975. Here it is reported as “The influence of solar radiation on the bridge structure”, Liu,X.F. China Railway Publishing House, Beijing , 1981 (in Chinese) as it was published in China. I fear there could be some copyright irregularity. 2) A research very similar to that of the present paper was carried out by M.Froli and Others on a prestressed concrete girder bridge in Italy. The results were published on Structural Engineering International N° 4, 1996. This contribute has been cited many times by different Authors among which also Virlogeaux when he studied the thermal behaviour of Normandy Bridge. Why the Authors of the present paper decided not to cite this work? 3) Comparisons between the proposed temperature profiles and those recommended by different Standards do not comprise Eurocode N°1, Part 2.5 “Thermal Actions”. Why? |
3楼2013-11-22 17:23:17
sculhf
荣誉版主 (知名作家)
断翼天使
-
专家经验: +1 - 应助: 243 (大学生)
- 贵宾: 4.018
- 金币: 43307.9
- 散金: 1634
- 红花: 64
- 沙发: 16
- 帖子: 7675
- 在线: 2007.8小时
- 虫号: 497659
- 注册: 2008-02-02
- 性别: GG
- 专业: 凝聚态物性 II ：电子结构
- 管辖: 基金申请
4楼2013-11-22 17:45:30
