24小时热门版块排行榜    

查看: 2713  |  回复: 8
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

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

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
查看全部 9 个回答

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
最具人气热帖推荐 [查看全部] 作者 回/看 最后发表
[硕博家园] 售SCI一区文章,我:8.O.55.1.O.54,科目齐全,可伽急 +3 ASdOkHsho7FD 2026-08-28 5/250 2026-08-29 06:40 by gy1nBQXYQJqL
[基金申请] 投票:  有多少人是今天查系统知道结果的? +16 爱看书的可乐 2026-08-26 18/900 2026-08-29 06:26 by winsaint
[教师之家] 售SCI-T0P文章,我:8O.5.5.1.O.54,科目齐全,可+急 +3 ASdOkHsho7FD 2026-08-28 5/250 2026-08-29 06:21 by gy1nBQXYQJqL
[考研] 售SCI一区文章,我:8.O.55.1.O.54,科目齐全,可伽急 +3 ASdOkHsho7FD 2026-08-28 5/250 2026-08-29 05:13 by gy1nBQXYQJqL
[基金申请] 国自然评审意见 +11 wangmingqi 2026-08-28 15/750 2026-08-29 00:17 by fangyl2005
[基金申请] 系统查不到 +11 董八千 2026-08-26 11/550 2026-08-28 18:06 by Leogzhya
[基金申请] 有没有仍没收到信息的 +3 德尚中行 2026-08-27 3/150 2026-08-28 15:24 by rongshuxia
[教师之家] 导师吐槽:我怎么摊上了这么个极品研究生! +8 苏东坡二世 2026-08-23 8/400 2026-08-28 14:41 by lkforward
[基金申请] 基金不中,共勉 +11 eulota 2026-08-26 11/550 2026-08-28 14:22 by 火星超人xi
[基金申请] 基金系统什么内容也没有 30+4 winsaint 2026-08-27 9/450 2026-08-28 11:06 by maolC
[基金申请] 哪位高人中了,把查询到的截图贴出来让我看看,让我长长见识 +5 yuleib84 2026-08-26 6/300 2026-08-28 00:02 by yudaoqian88
[基金申请] 怎么看青基中了没有啊 +5 叶九微 2026-08-26 5/250 2026-08-27 10:35 by l_zh2008
[文学芳草园] 梦想 +3 myrtle 2026-08-26 3/150 2026-08-27 10:01 by angelyueyi
[基金申请] 2026年的国家社科基金项目通讯评审的新规则与新动向、新挑战 +7 process2012 2026-08-23 10/500 2026-08-26 19:23 by hmhminy
[基金申请] 出来了 +9 trojank 2026-08-26 9/450 2026-08-26 14:25 by 宝贝虫子
[基金申请] 为什么国自然不能直接公布 +4 bjdxyxy 2026-08-26 4/200 2026-08-26 13:12 by qingmu1201
[基金申请] 某些机构,以效率低为荣,以效率低作为存在感 +9 yuleib84 2026-08-25 10/500 2026-08-25 17:14 by alexon
[基金申请] 如果此刻你正在为国基感到焦虑,不妨来听听这首《基金之外》 +8 scalable 2026-08-24 8/400 2026-08-25 12:52 by jnhyjjm
[基金申请] 没有任何消息-是不是就凉了 +9 图啦图啦 2026-08-24 10/500 2026-08-25 11:59 by 南海小哥
[教师之家] 跳槽后在研项目怎么办? +5 简单化xn 2026-08-22 10/500 2026-08-23 12:38 by 简单化xn
信息提示
请填处理意见