24小时热门版块排行榜    

CyRhmU.jpeg
查看: 2270  |  回复: 8

303137309

新虫 (小有名气)

[求助] Materials letters 审稿意见回来了

Dear ....,

The reviewer(s) and editor have evaluated your manuscript . As you will see from the comments below and on http://ees.elsevier.com/mlblue/, moderate revision has been requested. Given that the requested revisions are moderate the new version is required within one month (30 days).

.........

I hope that you will find these comments to be of use to you and am looking forward to receiving your revision.

Thank you for submitting your work to this journal.



Kind regards,


Aldo Boccaccini
Editor-in-Chief
Materials Letters

..........................................................
Important note: If a reviewer has provided a review or other materials as attachments, those items will not be in this letter.  Please ensure therefore that you log on to the journal site and check if any attachments have been provided.  

COMMENTS FROM EDITORS AND REVIEWERS


Reviewer #1: Dear editor:
Thank you for inviting me to review this manuscript (.....). The author's investigation focus on the mullite based ceramics proppant fabricated method and its mechanic properties. Their research activity is more interesting and research results are not bad. Therefore, I feel that the paper merits publication in Materials Letter. However, several points are necessary for clarity before publication.
1. The author mentioned that they used the dynamic sintering method to fabricate the proppant. However, the author didn't give more detail description for dynamic sintering method. It is seemly more important to fabricate the low density mullite-based ceramics proppant. So, the author should supply the details for this method.
2. The Fig. 1 not clearly, it is better for author redraw the XRD patterns for the samples and give the reference PDF file of mullite. The caption for Fig. 1 has one mistake, the (a) bauxite calcined at 1300 C, should be calcined at 1200 C.
3. As shown as Fig. 3, the micrographs of proppant fracture section is not clear indicate the difference between two sintering temperature. So, it is better for author supplied the high magnification micrographs of proppant fracture section. The microstructure of proppant made from natural bauxite should be supplied too.
4. page 5, line 7, the author mentioned that: "the reaction between the glass phase and alumina to form secondary mullite is detrimental to the densification. For this reason, a higher breakage ration was observed in B-samples."  The conclusion is without enough experimental results support, such as phase analysis and microstructure analysis.
5. Page 6 and line9: the author mentioned that: "compared with A-samples 1355, the bigger pores were observed in A-specimens 1400 (sintering at 1400 C), which may be due to the expansion of gas in the pores in proppants with the increase of sintering temperature", however, here it is missing the direct experiment results too. What kinds gas will be produced at the temperature of 1400C?
是小修还是中修呢?对于审稿意见和修改搞提交的几个疑问。
审稿意见疑问:
对于意见1和2可以完全按照审稿意见修改。对于审稿意见3,。我觉得图片已经能明显反应试样的却别,同时现在的实验检测条件也确实不能做到更高倍数的SEM。我该怎么回复呢。添加另一个试样的sem可以做到,但放大倍数和我之前的一样。对于审稿意见4, "the reaction between the glass phase and alumina to form secondary mullite is detrimental to the densification. ”这句话我是引用别人文章里面的话,这个我该怎么回复呢?对于审稿意见5,可以回答。总体来说,我这个文章可以中吗?
修改稿疑问:
我直接用Revision Notes来点对点的回复吗?还需要cover letter吗?
修改后的手稿里面还需要有图片?图片是单独做成文档上传?
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:

已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

Terminology

铁杆木虫 (正式写手)

1,moderate revision,中修。

2,如果现阶段倍数的SEM没有办法说明问题,那么可能是文字下面得下功夫再精确点去描述,要不就是你把SEM撤了就好了,既然看不出的话。

3,引用别人的话你要清晰指出来嘛。

4,用notes点对点回复是必要的。然后cover letter无论什么时候都是要的啦。

5,图片还是要上传高像素的,怎么传都可以。
2楼2015-02-07 10:24:37
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

303137309

新虫 (小有名气)

引用回帖:
2楼: Originally posted by Terminology at 2015-02-07 10:24:37
1,moderate revision,中修。

2,如果现阶段倍数的SEM没有办法说明问题,那么可能是文字下面得下功夫再精确点去描述,要不就是你把SEM撤了就好了,既然看不出的话。

3,引用别人的话你要清晰指出来嘛。

4 ...

感谢
3楼2015-02-09 13:57:26
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

wmywade

铜虫 (小有名气)

楼主,你的文章under review多久返回的审稿意见呢?
4楼2015-02-26 23:50:40
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

303137309

新虫 (小有名气)

引用回帖:
4楼: Originally posted by wmywade at 2015-02-26 23:50:40
楼主,你的文章under review多久返回的审稿意见呢?

一個月吧

[ 发自手机版 http://muchong.com/3g ]
5楼2015-02-27 11:02:28
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

澹遥

木虫 (正式写手)

引用回帖:
5楼: Originally posted by 303137309 at 2015-02-27 11:02:28
一個月吧
...

楼主,你的文章一审是Major Review?
Asgoodaswater
6楼2015-02-27 11:31:43
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

303137309

新虫 (小有名气)

引用回帖:
6楼: Originally posted by 澹遥 at 2015-02-27 11:31:43
楼主,你的文章一审是Major Review?...

Moderate revision. 這個期刊沒有大修的 大修就據稿了
7楼2015-02-27 11:57:22
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

澹遥

木虫 (正式写手)

引用回帖:
7楼: Originally posted by 303137309 at 2015-02-27 11:57:22
Moderate revision. 這個期刊沒有大修的 大修就據稿了...

那还是有戏的,好好改改吧
Asgoodaswater
8楼2015-02-27 14:09:52
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

SCI_13

新虫 (著名写手)

楼主,你好~
最近我也投了MAter lett 这个期刊,得到了审稿人回复意见,
但有几个问题不太明白,能不能指导指导,
尤其是editor 说了很多比较官方的语言,我不知道怎么回复,
然后审稿意见如何进行回复我不太懂,还望学兄指教。
梦想还是有的,万一实现了呢。
9楼2017-02-07 16:00:13
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖
相关版块跳转 我要订阅楼主 303137309 的主题更新
信息提示
请填处理意见