MATERIALS & DESIGN

I struggled to address some comments from the reviewers because two reviewers did not agree on a few points. The first reviewer had a bad opinion of my paper; the second did not, and the third reviewer also had a positive opinion. Thanks to the third reviewer, we could revise the paper, and it was then accepted. The whole process was a bit nerve wracking, that is, after the first submission, after the reviewer comments came back, the paper’s status became “under review.” The review process is pretty fast, two weeks. I would recommend this journal.

(3) Thank | 小君5280

I feel that this journal has not been interested in metal materials, especially steel materials research. The second day of submission is directly rejcet.The reason is that the amount of submission is large and does not conform to the mainstream of the journal.I regret to inform you that your submission did not obtain priority ranking to take it into further consideration for publication in Materials and Design.

(0) Thank | jmzhang

Received after 5 months.The medical method was introduced into the microstructural characterization of cement-based materials in an original way, and the results of the simulation were verified by experimental results.Because the innovation is more significant, the editor is accepted on the premise that a reviewer has repeatedly refused to approve the manuscript.Personal experience1. Since 2018, the journal has placed great emphasis on innovation. I am the only one to submit in cement-based materials without being rejected by the second.2. To be careful, the reviewer suggested rejecting the manuscript, and the editor agreed to amend it. Therefore, I seriously changed it from beginning to end.

(5) Thank | alexseu345@gmail.com

17 was submitted on October 12th, and many reviewers were changed in the first instance. On January 8th, 18th, the opinions were returned.Affirmation of innovation, a suggestion to reject the draft, but the rejection of the comments is a bit a layman.Modified on February 9th, I hope to have good results.MD seems to be somewhat repulsive to materials such as cement. If innovation is limited, it may not give the opportunity for trial.

(2) Thank | alexseu345@gmail.com

Because there is no experiment, the editor directly refuses

(0) Thank | 咪咪虾条

is very fast, but unfortunately three shots and three rejections. Fortunately, two of them are transferred to the journal of materials science directly to the journal

(0) Thank | 莫名

7 months, wait for this result

(0) Thank | 淡淡的

said that because there is no experiment, only the simulation, so directly refused, less than three daysRefused, the speed can be

(0) Thank | 天性

The editor found 6 reviewers, each reviewer gave 10 comments, and the reviewer wrote more than 8000 words, 33 pages, IAlso drunk

(3) Thank | BIT-Dr.Mu

2017.9.15 was rejected by Carbon and started to submit in MD2017.9.20 under review2017.10.25 revision2017.11.20 submit20171.11.25 revision2017.12.4 submit2017.12.7 accept

(2) Thank | BIT-Dr.Mu

In August, revise was requested in September, two reviewers, the first reviewer 7 comments, and the second 25 were small questions, not feeling too much.Professional, changed back to fifteen days, the second reviewer refused, the editor gave revise, returned on October 20, 30under review, more than ten days or under review, the latest partition became a top journal, I hopeCan, I hope this article graduated.

(0) Thank | 595235528@qq.com

, edit sebastiani to find 9 reviewers, and return the review comments of 6 reviewers in the first instance, which took 2 months. Response wrote 20Page 1.5 times the word line, the second trial takes about 20 days.

(5) Thank | 710894592@qq.com

is very fast.11 days for review.Return to the review comments one week.Modified back in a week.Receive notification after 13 days.Six reviewers have raised many comments and questions.But there is only one overhaul.The rejection of some of the comments did not affect the final result, and the reviewer agreed to accept it.

(2) Thank | lgxbuaa@126.com

is very fast.11 days for review.Return to the review comments one week.Modified back in a week.Receive notification after 13 days.Six reviewers have raised many comments and questions.But there is only one overhaul.The rejection of some of the comments did not affect the final result, and the reviewer agreed to accept it.

(0) Thank | lgxbuaa@126.com

2016.12.16, submitted;2017.3.31, revise;2017.4.24, accept.The speed is amazing.

(1) Thank | myprojectile@126.com

Speed ​​is amazing, two days for review, 30 days for review comments, overhaul, return within one week, one week reception, twoDay proof, lasted less than 50 days

(0) Thank | 小青次年

just got an article, modified three times, from submission to acceptance for 70 days, compared to the requirements of the article 16 years ago is indeed more strict, just calculated the real-time impact factor, this yearThe impact factor is broken 4.5 without suspense, I hope this journal will be better and better.

(1) Thank | lc

has been submitted, has been 2 months and 20 days, still under review, during the email, once asked, said that he has received a reviewer's opinion, and thenWaiting for the second reviewer to return comments, in the torment, check the status almost every day, see others' papers as fast, and speechless.

(0) Thank | n

Submission of a week of tragedy, listed several articles I published before, saying that there is no new ideaHeart service oral ~

(2) Thank | 没昵称

7.17 submission7.18 with editor7.27 under review8.30 under editor evaluation9.9 revise Two reviewers commented, did not say overhaul minor repairs, the first reviewer 5 comments, feeling minor repair, the second 11 comments, very deep10.8 Submit a revised draft11.3 Returning the revised comments, only the first reviewer's opinion remains, or the old question, because the last time he did not change according to his request.11.11 Submit a second revision11.14 acceptPersonally feel that the article should conform to the characteristics of the journal. One or two highlights can capture the appetite of the editor. If the content is not novel enough, do the homework in the details or pictures. The hope of submitting the trial is great. Of course, the quality cannot be a big problem, otherwise the reviewer cannot pass.This is the level.Then there is luck.

(2) Thank | 独钓寒江个雪

9.14 selectd two weeks later repair deadlineBefore the repair of the second day accept

(0) Thank | 儿时问月

7 Submitted on the 31st of the month, once overhauled in the middle, minorly repaired once, repaired and repaired after almost one month, let Xiao Xiu, minor repairGo back directly to the third day.

(0) Thank | yanyan111

Submission: 2016.07.4Modified: 2016.10.31Receive: 2016.11.09

(0) Thank | tangpeng@gxu.edu.cn

with editor One monthUnder review three monthsThe middle email editor asked once, and replied that there was still a review comment that did not come back.It’s almost four months now, there is no news yet. What is the situation?The review time given by this journal is half a month.Dear God, is it necessary to ask again?!

(0) Thank | qkp@sina.com

with editor has been going on for 14 days, so I am looking forward to

(5) Thank | jiayou