| 8 | 1/1 | 返回列表 |
| 查看: 1899 | 回復(fù): 7 | ||
walker2008金蟲 (小有名氣)
|
[求助]
SCI 投稿,不知如何答復(fù),高手請指點!。 已有5人參與
|
|
PEER REVIEW COMMENTS: The work described in this paper has the potential to be both interesting and useful. However, at present, only five specimens have been tested in order to investigate three parameters. This number of tests is certainly OK for a preliminary study but, in the opinion of this reviewer, is insufficient to generate enough data to justify a full journal paper (in view of the number of parameters being investigated). The height/with ratio of the columns is low (2:1) and the consequences of this on the results should be discussed. Hopefully, more tests will be conducted since, as mentioned above, there is certainly the potential for a full paper here. 這是第一次專家意見,意思應(yīng)該是嫌試件數(shù)量少,要求補試驗。我的實驗是5個1.5m(截面500mm的2個,截面450mm的3個)的鋼管混凝土柱軸壓試驗,足尺試件。再增加數(shù)量也不可能,我看也沒有明確拒絕,就回復(fù)了下。說是這是足尺試驗,不可能像縮尺試件(截面尺寸小于200mm,大多在150mm左右,高度不超過500mm)數(shù)量那么多,成本太高。由于是足尺試驗,別人做的很少,這是創(chuàng)新點,而且由于接近實際工程中柱子截面尺寸,試驗結(jié)果不必轉(zhuǎn)化可以直接為實際工程提供參考。還有些別的原因等等。 2)The height/width ratio 文中是3:1,并不是2:1,。可能是專家搞錯了,我回復(fù)說是不是筆誤,并將文中原話引出。 I am pleased to say that the editorial advisory board has provisionally accepted your paper for publication , subject to it being revised to take account of the referees' comments below. PEER REVIEW COMMENTS The concern of this reviewer is that neither of his comments made in his original review of the paper have been properly addressed. 1. Only five specimens have been tested in order to investigate three paramaters. This reviewer sympathises with the financial constraints imposed on the authors (as indicated in the covering letter) but this does not negate the original point and no revision has been made to the paper with regards to this. Please comment in the text on the specimen/parameter ratio and what constraints that this may impose on the applicability of the results. 2. Please comment in the text of the paper, as requested, on the height/width ratio of the specimens as, at 3:1, this would seem marginal. 這是第二次回復(fù),看編輯的意思應(yīng)該是要接收,但必須按專家意見修改,高手指點下,尤其是第一條(the specimen/parameter ratio,有這個試件/參數(shù)比值嗎,有什么要求嗎),應(yīng)該怎么回復(fù)。【椭竿@篇文章畢業(yè)了!跪求指點啊---- ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |

金蟲 (小有名氣)

鐵桿木蟲 (著名寫手)
金蟲 (小有名氣)
|
審稿人就是覺得你用5根試件測3個參數(shù)有點不夠嚴謹,試件數(shù)太少,他讓你多做些測試,結(jié)果你說經(jīng)費緊張,然后他接受了你的說法,讓你在文中說明一下這種情況對試驗結(jié)果的運用有哪些影響。 我覺得所謂的試件/參數(shù)比應(yīng)該沒有什么標準吧,但是圈內(nèi)人可能會有個默契,看幾篇這方面的文章看看人家平均每個參數(shù)用幾根試件,簡單統(tǒng)計一下唄。你是做結(jié)構(gòu)試驗的,應(yīng)該有這方面的感覺,比如大概要達到多少 |
木蟲 (著名寫手)
銀蟲 (正式寫手)

鐵桿木蟲 (著名寫手)

| 8 | 1/1 | 返回列表 |
| 最具人氣熱帖推薦 [查看全部] | 作者 | 回/看 | 最后發(fā)表 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
[考研] 280求調(diào)劑 +7 | 咕嚕曉曉 2026-03-18 | 8/400 |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
[考研] 354求調(diào)劑 +5 | Tyoumou 2026-03-18 | 8/400 |
|
|
[考研] 304求調(diào)劑 +6 | 曼殊2266 2026-03-18 | 6/300 |
|
|
[考研] 求調(diào)劑,一志愿:南京航空航天大學大學 ,080500材料科學與工程學碩,總分289分 +4 | @taotao 2026-03-19 | 4/200 |
|
|
[考研] 329求調(diào)劑 +9 | 想上學吖吖 2026-03-19 | 9/450 |
|
|
[考研] 260求調(diào)劑 +3 | 朱芷琳 2026-03-20 | 3/150 |
|
|
[考研] 289求調(diào)劑 +6 | 懷瑾握瑜l 2026-03-20 | 6/300 |
|
|
[考研] 353求調(diào)劑 +3 | 拉鉤不許變 2026-03-20 | 3/150 |
|
|
[考研] 286分人工智能專業(yè)請求調(diào)劑愿意跨考! +3 | lemonzzn 2026-03-17 | 4/200 |
|
|
[考研] 085600材料與化工求調(diào)劑 +6 | 緒幸與子 2026-03-17 | 6/300 |
|
|
[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] 328求調(diào)劑,英語六級551,有科研經(jīng)歷 +3 | 生物工程調(diào)劑 2026-03-17 | 7/350 |
|
|
[考研] 312求調(diào)劑 +8 | 陌宸希 2026-03-16 | 9/450 |
|
|
[考研] 085601求調(diào)劑 +4 | Du.11 2026-03-16 | 4/200 |
|
|
[考研]
|
zhouzhen654 2026-03-16 | 3/150 |
|
|
[考研] 東南大學364求調(diào)劑 +5 | JasonYuiui 2026-03-15 | 5/250 |
|
|
[考研] 中科院材料273求調(diào)劑 +4 | yzydy 2026-03-15 | 4/200 |
|
|
[考研] 0856求調(diào)劑 +3 | 劉夢微 2026-03-15 | 3/150 |
|
|
[考研] 326求調(diào)劑 +3 | mlpqaz03 2026-03-15 | 3/150 |
|
|
[考研] 070305求調(diào)劑 +3 | mlpqaz03 2026-03-14 | 4/200 |
|