| 查看: 1395 | 回复: 4 | ||
| 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 | ||
xiaotao2415铁杆木虫 (正式写手)
|
[求助]
Mechanism and Machine Theory 一审意见 已有2人参与
|
|
|
小弟初来乍到，投了Mechanism and Machine Theory 一审给了一个意见 请各位大神帮忙分析一下：小弟接下来应该怎么做。 Dear Mr. li, Reviewer's comments have been received for your paper. As you will appreciate, the reviewers have stated some significant reservations against publishing of your work in its present version. Thus I can not recommend your contribution for publication in its present form. However, the reviewers have indicated that the paper contains valuable results that may render it publishable after a suitable revision. Should you consider it possible to revise your paper according to the suggestions of the reviewers, please re-submit it by May 28, 2015 and I shall conduct a second review round. Otherwise, please let me know if you want me to close this submission process so that you may employ your contribution for other purposes. 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. Mechanism and Machine Theory Reviewers' comments: Reviewer #1: In general this paper offers a relatively novel solution to reducing spin losses in half-toroidal CVTs through the use of a carefully designed disc generatrix. Unfortunately the drawbacks introduced by utilising this particular design, including the reduced ratio range, and increased complexity in synchronising the discs, means this design currently has limited practical use. Nevertheless, the novelty in the design and the derivation of the related equations to help justify the design, make it a worthwhile research paper to encourage more research into a critical area of traction drive CVTs. In its current state the paper is let down somewhat by weak language and grammar. This reviewer has made some attempt to highlight a number of key language errors (see attached), however it is strongly recommended that the authors consider using a proof reading service to improve the language of the paper further. Additionally a number of other points should be considered before publishing: * The abstract 'oversells' the concept, without stating a rather large drawback in terms of the severely reduced transmission ratio range. It should also perhaps be mentioned that this design would require a more complex control mechanism due to the relative movement of the input/output discs and roller. For balance and fairness these points should be mentioned in the abstract. * Fig 1 could be improved. Theta not very clear and is explicitly referred to in text. * Churning losses are not mentioned when discussion CVT losses * The 'proof' shown at the top of 5 is not particularly clear. Whilst the general point is made, the authors could consider presenting this in a clearer way. * Page 5 states that by allowing both input and output discs to more axially and the roller to move translationally, the transmission is easy to control. This is questionable as the synchronisation between discs, whilst ensuring normal loads are suitable, would be relatively challenging compared to simpler half-toroidal CVTs. Perhaps the authors should consider some discussion on this point. * In Figure 7, the points A, A', D and D' are not explicitly clear. Consider adding points to the figure for clarity. * The addition of a nomenclature section could be useful due to the number of parameters used in equations and figures. 小弟的问题主要有这么几个： 1. 戏有多大； 2. 要不要找语言润色公司，原文让reviewer改了很多地方的语法，有些地方到底应该怎么改也没给我说的很明白；（如果需要请推荐一个公司） 3.为什么只有一个审稿人，这个杂志不是两个审稿人嘛？ |
回复此楼» 猜你喜欢
专硕310求调剂
已经有5人回复
-
081700化学工程与技术 一志愿中海洋 323 求调剂学校
已经有14人回复
-
085600，321分求调剂
已经有5人回复
-
一志愿东北大学085901土木专硕345求调剂
已经有3人回复
-
一志愿哈尔滨工业大学085600英一数二337分求调剂
已经有9人回复
-
工科11408，314求调剂，有项目经验，了解transformer，能训练模型。
已经有3人回复
-
348分环境工程·调剂
已经有11人回复
-
359求调剂
已经有3人回复
-
0703求调剂
已经有6人回复
-
一志愿0817化学工程与技术，求调剂
已经有26人回复
» 本主题相关价值贴推荐，对您同样有帮助:
- (机器学习最新参考书) Understanding Machine Learning - From Theory to Algorithms
已经有316人回复
- 请问有人用过 Elsevier Language Editing service 吗？
已经有3人回复
- 给Mechanism and Machine Theory 发了英文稿 这个是他们的评论。请大家指教怎么办。
已经有5人回复
- 二审审稿人提出新的问题难以回答如何办
已经有23人回复
- Mineral and metallurgical processing 审稿状态
已经有43人回复
- 近十年机械工程学科中国学者SCI发文居前100位期刊
已经有7人回复
- 近十年机器人学科中国学者SCI十大发文期刊
已经有8人回复
- Mechanism and machine theory 投稿第六拒
已经有28人回复
- 【分享】Mechanisms and Machine Theory 机械原理 英文版
已经有551人回复
- 近十年机械工程学科美国学者SCI发文居前100位期刊
已经有34人回复
- 振动类SCI期刊投稿求助
已经有11人回复
- Elsevier审稿结果
已经有17人回复
- 求：mechanism and machine theory投稿网址
已经有3人回复
- 请推荐 机械工程，或车辆工程的国际EI期刊有哪些
已经有14人回复
- JCIS审稿周期太长
已经有21人回复
- Reaction Kinetics, Mechanisms and Catalysis是不是不被SCI收录啊？
已经有7人回复
- <Mechanism and Machine Theory>审稿周期太长怎么办？？
已经有4人回复
- Elsevier SD(ScienceDirect)收录期刊-工程领域
已经有11人回复
- 请问虫虫高手告诉几个国外容易点的被sci收录的机械工程方面的期刊吧
已经有20人回复
old_yang
铁杆木虫 (著名写手)
- 应助: 310 (大学生)
- 金币: 12072.2
- 红花: 40
- 帖子: 1884
- 在线: 335小时
- 虫号: 3442136
- 注册: 2014-09-26
- 专业: 质谱分析
3楼2015-05-07 00:58:52
beyondiqv
木虫 (正式写手)
- 应助: 10 (幼儿园)
- 金币: 1754.6
- 散金: 266
- 红花: 4
- 帖子: 651
- 在线: 389.9小时
- 虫号: 766504
- 注册: 2009-05-09
- 专业: 机械动力学
【答案】应助回帖
★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★
感谢参与，应助指数 +1
xiaotao2415: 金币+10, ★★★很有帮助, 本来给您准备了5分，看到最后一句觉得您还要洗键盘就给10分了 2015-05-07 09:26:16
xiaotao2415: 金币+10, ★★★★★最佳答案, 中了 谢谢你 2015-07-03 09:31:52
感谢参与，应助指数 +1
xiaotao2415: 金币+10, ★★★很有帮助, 本来给您准备了5分，看到最后一句觉得您还要洗键盘就给10分了 2015-05-07 09:26:16
xiaotao2415: 金币+10, ★★★★★最佳答案, 中了 谢谢你 2015-07-03 09:31:52
|
1.论文稿被主编接受发表，有各种因素存在。按照审稿意见修改，按照主编的要求做，即可。戏有多大，没有讨论的价值。 2.最好找熟练英文写作的相关学者帮你修改写作。找语言润色公司不宜长久。最好你自己修改，这样对英语写作能力提升巨大。这是亲身经历和经验。 3.不同期刊的审稿政策不一样，这个不用担心。好好研究期刊主页，可以提升学术素养。 深夜刚撸完，手还黏糊，寂寞跟贴，不用谢！ [ 发自手机版 http://muchong.com/3g ] |
2楼2015-05-07 00:44:05
xiaotao2415
铁杆木虫 (正式写手)
- 应助: 17 (小学生)
- 金币: 5840.1
- 散金: 507
- 红花: 20
- 帖子: 806
- 在线: 239.7小时
- 虫号: 2924293
- 注册: 2014-01-10
- 性别: GG
- 专业: 传动机械学
5楼2015-07-03 09:31:18
