| 5 | 1/1 | 返回列表 |
| 查看: 3468 | 回復(fù): 13 | |||
| 當(dāng)前只顯示滿足指定條件的回帖,點擊這里查看本話題的所有回帖 | |||
chuzhaoxiang銀蟲 (小有名氣)
|
[交流]
International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 投稿交流 已有8人參與
|
||
|
International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 投稿交流 論文投稿2周后進入外審,3個月后收到系統(tǒng)自動發(fā)送的郵件說是外審已經(jīng)結(jié)束,進入Ready for Decision狀態(tài),可現(xiàn)在這個狀態(tài)已經(jīng)持續(xù)49天了,想催又不敢催,怕悲劇了,所以請教一下各位,有類似投稿經(jīng)驗的交流一下。 |
銀蟲 (小有名氣)
|
萬幸,投稿5個月左右返回一審意見,鄭院士給了一次寶貴的修改機會,大家?guī)兔Ψ治鲆幌聦徃逡庖,給些修改建議吧 Comments from the editors and reviewers: -Reviewer 1 The manuscript addresses the issue of analytically predicting the effective thermal conductivity (ETC) of low porosity granular geomaterials. Haigh’s (2012) model for predicting the ETC based on spherical particle embedded in unit cylindrical cell is extended for lower void ratio (e<0.5) has been developed. The work sounds original and reads well. Clarification on electrical analogy for thermal conductivity is explained very well. The pictorial representation of thermal unit cell and derivation of the formulas are noteworthy. However, following points needs to be clarified before considered for publication. 1. For quasi-hemispherical particle enclosed in the cylindrical cell, the radius of the inscribed spherical particles are allowed to grow till sqrt(2R). This assumption control the alpha and beta controlling parameters. Parameter alpha control the porosity (phi) of the system. A proper explanation is required based on physical or geometrial sense for justification of this assumption. 2. The curvature of the menisci holding the water at the particle contact is ignored. This plays a significant role in ETC computation. This should be mentioned in the assumption. 3. Soil Water Characteristic Curve (SWCC) provides better justification for change in ETC of geomaterials which is not limited to sand type materials only. A metion of this similarity is provide in the review of Dong et al. Geotech. and Geolog.Eng. 33, 202-221,(2015). Likos has developed an analytical expression considering this effect. Geotechnical and Geological Engineering, 33, 179–192. A mention of this work is relevant for this manuscript. 4. Some of the references regarding the numerical thermal conductivity evaluation are relatively old and need to be updated, I suggested recent relevant references by Lee et. al Geothermics 67 76-85 (2017). -Reviewer 2 In this research, a cylindrical unit cell model for predicting the effective thermal conductivity of two-phase or three-phase low porosity granular geomaterials is proposed. As understood by the reviewer, the model is simple geometry discretization of the unit particle into three-phase and assigning an initial thermal conductivity for each phase to fit the experimental data given in the last section of the paper. So, there is not that much difference between this model and fitting curve models exist in the literature (Chen 2008, Lu et al 2007). The general standard is far below what is expected for this journal. The main points will be: 1. While talking about three-phase heat transfer, considering only the conduction heat transfer is not valid. 2. Why consider only low porosity, in the literature, exists also models for low porosity as mentioned by authors: Gori and Corasaniti 2013. And most importantly why cylinder unit model, when eventually spatial correction is needed? 3. The model is only applicable to soils with the same sized particles and pores, which doesn’t exist in nature. There is also no thermal resistance in contacts. 4. The cylindrical unit cell is considered to be the REV, which is false. 5. The only water volume is the water bridges between the particles, which its volume depends on applied suction. What about the bulk water volume trapped between the particles? 6. Are the Equations given in this research derived by the authors or they are taken from literature? The references should be given. 7. Table 3 depicts the thermal conductivities given to each phase (Solids, Water and Air). How these parameters are determined? Isn’t this a fitting curve? The authors claim in the conclusion that their model represents the physical basis of heat conduction rather than empirical models’ curve-fitting to experimental results. 8. What about the effect of particle size on ETC? |
新蟲 (小有名氣)
新蟲 (初入文壇)
|
看來鄭院士最近忙,我等了一個月也是1號給的修改意見 發(fā)自小木蟲IOS客戶端 |
| 最具人氣熱帖推薦 [查看全部] | 作者 | 回/看 | 最后發(fā)表 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
[考研] 263求調(diào)劑 +4 | yqdszhdap- 2026-03-22 | 4/200 |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
[考研] 一志愿西安交通大學(xué)材料工程專業(yè) 282分求調(diào)劑 +11 | 楓橋ZL 2026-03-18 | 13/650 |
|
|
[考研] 材料與化工085600,總分304,本科有兩篇sci參與,求調(diào)劑 +4 | 幸運的醬醬 2026-03-22 | 5/250 |
|
|
[考研] 一志愿 西北大學(xué) ,070300化學(xué)學(xué)碩,總分287,雙非一本,求調(diào)劑。 +3 | 晨昏線與星海 2026-03-20 | 3/150 |
|
|
[考研] 275求調(diào)劑 +6 | shansx 2026-03-22 | 8/400 |
|
|
[考研] 305分求調(diào)劑(食品工程) +4 | Sxy112 2026-03-21 | 6/300 |
|
|
[考研] 384求調(diào)劑 +3 | 子系博 2026-03-22 | 4/200 |
|
|
[考研] 資源與環(huán)境 調(diào)劑申請(333分) +5 | holy J 2026-03-21 | 5/250 |
|
|
[考研] 280求調(diào)劑 +11 | 咕嚕曉曉 2026-03-18 | 12/600 |
|
|
[考研] 初試 317 +7 | 半拉月丙 2026-03-20 | 7/350 |
|
|
[考研] 一志愿南大,0703化學(xué),分?jǐn)?shù)336,求調(diào)劑 +3 | 收到VS 2026-03-21 | 3/150 |
|
|
[考研] 086500 325 求調(diào)劑 +3 | 領(lǐng)帶小熊 2026-03-19 | 3/150 |
|
|
[考研] 工科材料085601 279求調(diào)劑 +7 | 困于星晨 2026-03-17 | 9/450 |
|
|
[考研] 085410人工智能專碩317求調(diào)劑(0854都可以) +4 | xbxudjdn 2026-03-18 | 4/200 |
|
|
[考研] 288求調(diào)劑,一志愿華南理工大學(xué)071005 +5 | ioodiiij 2026-03-17 | 5/250 |
|
|
[考研] 328求調(diào)劑,英語六級551,有科研經(jīng)歷 +4 | 生物工程調(diào)劑 2026-03-16 | 12/600 |
|
|
[考研] 312求調(diào)劑 +8 | 陌宸希 2026-03-16 | 9/450 |
|
|
[考博] 26博士申請 +3 | 1042136743 2026-03-17 | 3/150 |
|
|
[考研] 一志愿蘇州大學(xué)材料工程(085601)專碩有科研經(jīng)歷三項國獎兩個實用型專利一項省級立項 +6 | 大火山小火山 2026-03-16 | 8/400 |
|
|
[論文投稿] 有沒有大佬發(fā)小論文能帶我個二作 +3 | 增銳漏人 2026-03-17 | 4/200 |
|