友情提示:以下期刊信息可能会有更新,仅供参考,请在投稿前自行登录期刊官网仔细核实。
期刊名
APPLIED THERMAL ENGINEERING
APPL THERM ENG
ISSN / eISSN
1359-4311
目标和范围
Applied Thermal Engineering disseminates novel research related to the design, development and demonstration of components, devices, equipment, technologies and systems involving thermal processes for the production, storage, utilization and conservation of energy, with a focus on engineering application.
The journal publishes high-quality and high-impact Original Research Articles, Review Articles, Short Communications and Letters to the Editor on cutting-edge innovations in research, and recent advances or issues of interest to the thermal engineering community.
The journal publishes high-quality and high-impact Original Research Articles, Review Articles, Short Communications and Letters to the Editor on cutting-edge innovations in research, and recent advances or issues of interest to the thermal engineering community.
研究方向
力学
热力学
能源与燃料
CiteScore
11.30
查看趋势图
CiteScore 学科排名
类别 | 分区 | 排名 |
---|---|---|
Chemical Engineering - Fluid Flow and Transfer Processes | Q1 | #3/96 |
Chemical Engineering - Mechanical Engineering | Q1 | #35/672 |
Chemical Engineering - Industrial and Manufacturing Engineering | Q1 | #34/384 |
Chemical Engineering - Energy Engineering and Power Technology | Q1 | #33/272 |
Web of Science 核心收藏夹
Science Citation Index Expanded (SCIE) | Social Sciences Citation Index (SSCI) |
---|---|
Indexed | - |
类别 (Journal Citation Reports 2024) | 分区 |
---|---|
ENERGY & FUELS | Q2 |
ENGINEERING, MECHANICAL | Q1 |
MECHANICS | Q1 |
THERMODYNAMICS | Q1 |
H-index
129
出版国家或地区
ENGLAND
出版商
Elsevier Ltd
出版周期
Monthly
年文章数
2076
Open Access
NO
通讯方式
PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD, THE BOULEVARD, LANGFORD LANE, KIDLINGTON, OXFORD, ENGLAND, OX5 1GB
认证评论
5.20 External review;
6.15 External review comments received, 4 reviewers, 3 major revisions, 1 rejection, editor suggested major revisions;
6.30 Revised manuscript submitted;
7.3 External review;
8.2 External review comments received, first two experts agreed to accept, third expert still suggested major revisions, fourth expert still rejected, raised concerns about the structure I proposed, editor suggested major revisions again;
8.20 Revised manuscript submitted, providing specific details of the structure to the fourth expert;
8.21 Discussion with editor;
9.10 External review, followed up once, editor replied considering whether external review is necessary;
10.6 External review comments returned, still suggested major revisions, fourth expert agreed, but it seems the third expert never received the modification instructions, raised some repetitive questions, still need to explain each point;
10.18 Revised manuscript submitted, included the modification instructions from the first two times, an editor sent an email reminder to send the modification instructions to the third expert;
10.21 External review;
11.10 External review comments returned, minor revisions, the third expert still raised some minor issues;
11.15 Revised manuscript submitted;
11.17 Accepted.
After 6 months, 3 major revisions, and 1 minor revision, finally got accepted. It was a nerve-wracking journey for my first SCI paper. Good revisions can still have a high chance of success, and I am grateful to the editor for giving me the opportunity.
22.10.23 With Editor
22.11.8 Under Review
23.2.4 Major revise
23.2.24 Revision Submitted to Journal
23.3.1 Under Review
23.3.27 Required Reviews Complete
23.4.11 Decision in process
23.4.13 Accept
The editor's decision greatly determines the speed of the entire process. A colleague who submitted their paper to ATE two months later than me was accepted on the same day as me, but their processing time in WE, RRC, and DIP was much shorter than mine. The handling speed of the Editor-in-Chief, Christos Markides, is relatively slow.
Based on experience, papers that enter the editing stage at the beginning of the month are usually processed faster than those that enter at the end of the month, and each stage generally does not exceed 21 days. If there has been no progress for a long time, it is polite to send an email to inquire about the status (preferably indicating that it is not a reminder for the paper). I couldn't bear the wait after 14 days in RRC, so I gently reminded them.
There were two reviewers for the first review. Reviewer 1 rejected the paper, while Reviewer 2 accepted it directly, but required major revisions. I carefully and positively answered all the questions and pointed out any misunderstandings by the reviewers. The second review did not have any comments and the paper was accepted, although the wait was agonizing.
Publish scientific posters with Peeref
Peeref publishes scientific posters from all research disciplines. Our Diamond Open Access policy means free access to content and no publication fees for authors.
Learn MoreCreate your own webinar
Interested in hosting your own webinar? Check the schedule and propose your idea to the Peeref Content Team.
Create Now