| 查看: 3467 | 回復: 13 | |||
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結束,進入Ready for Decision狀態(tài),可現(xiàn)在這個狀態(tài)已經持續(xù)49天了,想催又不敢催,怕悲劇了,所以請教一下各位,有類似投稿經驗的交流一下。 |
新蟲 (小有名氣)
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? |
|
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 |
鐵桿木蟲 (職業(yè)作家)
酷酷文曲
|
我看懂了,第一個審稿人認為文獻小修后可發(fā)表,第二個覺得文章?lián)Q湯不換藥,沒有新意,然后列了一堆質疑問題,所以應該是大修或拒的意思。那文章的價值創(chuàng)新性可能要針對性的重申了。 發(fā)自小木蟲Android客戶端 |

木蟲 (著名寫手)
銀蟲 (小有名氣)
木蟲 (著名寫手)
| 最具人氣熱帖推薦 [查看全部] | 作者 | 回/看 | 最后發(fā)表 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
[考研] 08工科 320總分 求調劑 +11 | 梨花珞晚風 2026-03-17 | 11/550 |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
[考研] 尋找調劑 +4 | 倔強芒? 2026-03-21 | 4/200 |
|
|
[考研] 298求調劑一志愿211 +3 | 上岸6666@ 2026-03-20 | 3/150 |
|
|
[考研] 生物學調劑 +5 | Surekei 2026-03-21 | 5/250 |
|
|
[考研] 303求調劑 +5 | 安憶靈 2026-03-22 | 6/300 |
|
|
[考研] 384求調劑 +3 | 子系博 2026-03-22 | 4/200 |
|
|
[考研] 材料求調劑 +5 | @taotao 2026-03-21 | 5/250 |
|
|
[考研] 考研調劑 +3 | 呼呼?~+123456 2026-03-21 | 3/150 |
|
|
[考研] 279求調劑 +5 | 紅衣隱官 2026-03-21 | 5/250 |
|
|
[考研] 初始318分求調劑(有工作經驗) +3 | 1911236844 2026-03-17 | 3/150 |
|
|
[考研] 332求調劑 +4 | ydfyh 2026-03-17 | 4/200 |
|
|
[考研] 求調劑 +3 | Ma_xt 2026-03-17 | 3/150 |
|
|
[考研] 材料 336 求調劑 +3 | An@. 2026-03-18 | 4/200 |
|
|
[考研] 324分 085600材料化工求調劑 +4 | llllkkkhh 2026-03-18 | 4/200 |
|
|
[考研] 一志愿華中科技大學,080502,354分求調劑 +5 | 守候夕陽CF 2026-03-18 | 5/250 |
|
|
[考研] 321求調劑 +9 | 何潤采123 2026-03-18 | 11/550 |
|
|
[考研] 一志愿西南交通 專碩 材料355 本科雙非 求調劑 +5 | 西南交通專材355 2026-03-19 | 5/250 |
|
|
[考研] 一志愿福大288有機化學,求調劑 +3 | 小木蟲200408204 2026-03-18 | 3/150 |
|
|
[碩博家園] 湖北工業(yè)大學 生命科學與健康學院-課題組招收2026級食品/生物方向碩士 +3 | 1喜春8 2026-03-17 | 5/250 |
|
|
[考研] 275求調劑 +4 | 太陽花天天開心 2026-03-16 | 4/200 |
|