1. Submit: 2024.2.18
2. Under review: 2024.2.28
3. Major revision: 2024.3.17
The first major revision, more than 20 suggestions for improvement, the reviewer's comments were very good and meaningful.
4. Submit: 2024.4.15
5. Minor revision: 2024.5.14
The second minor revision, only one small issue.
6. Submit: 2024.5.29
7. Accept: 2024.6.1
The process was very fast, with a response approximately once a month. Thanks to Editor Hua-Xin Peng!

(0) 讚！ | 夜肖

I have been in contact with the editor. The email did not specify which editor it was, only mentioned the editor team. I submitted on 5.2, heard back from the editor on 5.5, but it is still unclear whether it will be sent for review

(0) 讚！ | kitty123

Persistence is victory

(0) 讚！ | 宏星闪耀

The first SCI paper was quite tortuous. This article had been submitted to other top-tier journals in the first two months, but all were desk rejected. Considering that the perspective and application of this article were very novel and cutting-edge, it was revised significantly and submitted to CC.
8.24 submitted
8.25 with editor
9.6 comments from the first reviewer
9.8 comments from the second reviewer
9.12 major revisions and resubmission (minor revisions from one reviewer, rejection from another)
9.16 resubmit (argued with the reviewer who rejected in the cover letter, no major changes to the article)
10.17 with editor
11.1 under review
No reviewers found during the process, kept being invited
12.14 3 review comments (minor revisions from one reviewer, 2 direct acceptances)
12.28 accept
This article took a long time, handled by 3 editors, 2 rounds of revisions, but overall not many additional experiments were added. Immediately referenced the second article for submission after the acceptance of the first paper, hoping for smoother submissions in the future

(15) 讚！ | zaneparker

8.14 with editor
8.21 Under review
9.28 Major Revision
10.11 返稿，with editor
10.12 Accept

(0) 讚！ | kit—letpub

I suggest you write a rebuttal letter directly to the editor, I have done it before. It's really annoying when you come across a stupid reviewer

(0) 讚！ | peipeipeiper

It took a month for the manuscript to be reviewed by two reviewers, one positive and one negative. The editor didn't give a chance for arbitration and just rejected it. The reviewer who gave a negative evaluation is the most irresponsible one I have ever encountered, with mindless criticism throughout. It feels like the article was not even read carefully. I'm speechless and will not submit to this journal again in the future

(0) 讚！ | 霍金斯

Can I ask if these details about the author's affiliation count towards the word count?

(0) 讚！ | Greentea23

The editor in the United States works very slowly

(0) 讚！ | 任小肖

It has been 7 days since I've been with my editor, Professor Peng Huaxin

(0) 讚！ | gaoxz

Could you please let me know which editor is available?

(0) 讚！ | gaoxz

Why is the link to the journal's official website missing on LetPub? It used to be there.

(0) 讚！ | Duan Minghan

The required reviews have been ongoing for a month, even the customer service in Esweil replied that this situation is not common, but they couldn't reach the editing team either. They can only continue to keep track of it and ask for patience while waiting.

(0) 讚！ | 任小肖

The status with the editor has been more than 20 days, and the Required Reviews Completed status has also been more than 20 days. The editor's processing is really slow!

(0) 讚！ | 任小肖

Excuse me, has anyone recently selected Tianxi Liu as the editor for submission? It has been 20 days since being "with editor," and no one has taken care of it.

(0) 讚！ | 任小肖

May I ask, how long does it take for the papers of this journal to be indexed after acceptance?

(0) 讚！ | 科研小朋友0524

The text translates to: "Looking at others' sharing, the processing of this journal seems quite fast. However, after submitting my own two weeks ago, it is still 'with editor,' without rejection or any further processing."

(16) 讚！ | 任小肖

Congratulations, which editor?

(0) 讚！ | lp刘鹏

May I ask, who is the editor-in-chief?

(0) 讚！ | lp刘鹏

2023/05/22 Submission: Choose Xin-Hua Peng as the editor-in-chief;
2023/05/24 Under Review;
2023/06/20 Required Reviews Complete; Waiting for editorial decision;
2023/06/25 Major Revision Required.

(0) 讚！ | lilycheung

Submit directly for review after submission, and request revisions based on the reviewer's comments ten days later. If unlucky, the editor is Limin Zhou from Southern University of Science and Technology. It is said that Liu Tianxi is very fast and very good.

(0) 讚！ | 浅澜

The word count of the table is also included in the calculation (counted as part of the selection in Word). I have also asked some senior students who have submitted their work, and according to them, manuscripts with 2500 words from introduction to conclusion have been accepted in some cases. However, some people say that it is not so strictly enforced (adding an abstract only increases the word count by about 150). Thank you for your advice, I will consider modifying this question and try again later.

(0) 讚！ | pr1133

The journal in the field of composite materials is considered good in the second quartile, with two articles published in three years. Overall, the speed is acceptable.

(0) 讚！ | 双和

The number of words from the abstract to the conclusion has exceeded 2500, and it seems that the words in the table should also be included in the total word count.

(0) 讚！ | dudupipi

I have submitted twice and received a reply stating "your submission does not meet the requirement of Short Communication". The main text has 2495 words, 5 figures, 3 tables, 4 highlights, and 4 keywords. Each time it was rejected, no specific issues were mentioned. I'm wondering if there is anyone who can give me some guidance on where the problem might be?

(0) 讚！ | pr1133