Hello senior brother, I would like to ask, can agricultural machinery be invested in this?

(0) 讚！ | 奋斗的小七

Hello senior, may I ask for your advice? Can agricultural machinery be used for this?

(0) 讚！ | 奋斗的小七

Does anyone know how long it usually takes for peer reviewers to approve a manuscript for publication? It's been over a month since I submitted mine to UR and I still haven't received any approval. I'm getting worried

(0) 讚！ | zaizai123

April 20, 2023: Submitted to Journal
April 21, 2023: With Editor
May 01, 2023: With Editor
June 07, 2023: Under Review
June 16, 2023: Required reviews complete
June 29, 2023: Required reviews complete
July 02, 2023: Revision and modification
July 12, 2023: Revision submitted to Journal
July 12: With Editor
July 22: Under review
July 23: Required reviews complete
July 31: Accept

(0) 讚！ | HMT

3.6: Submission
3.8: The editor replied, expressing interest in the content of the article, and requested that it be revised before resubmitting.
3.23: Resubmission, to be reviewed by the end of the month.
5.08: Minor revisions required. Two reviewers praised the content of the article and suggested only formatting changes. One reviewer raised four professional questions, which required minimal changes to the article and mainly needed clarification.
5.13: Revision requested.
6.06: Accepted.
This is an established journal that used to be in the first tier but is now in the second tier. However, it is still highly recognized at our school. The editors are quite efficient.

(0) 讚！ | 韩大大

My third article, Xiao Xiu returned.

(0) 讚！ | 周末也要学习呀

April 2022, end of the month, first draft
May 2022, end of the month, first reviewer; June 2022, end of the month, second reviewer
August 2022, end of the month, received comments
September 2022, end of the month, accepted after revisions

(0) 讚！ | 流体大牲1

Hello, may I ask if you are doing major repairs or minor repairs? My major repair was returned a few days ago.

(0) 讚！ | 周末也要学习呀

October 2021, initial submission.
By the end of November 2021, received reviewer comments. Both reviewers were very professional and raised many questions, which were very helpful for improving the overall article.
In January 2022, made revisions, and acceptance was confirmed in February.
Overall, I am very satisfied with the speed and professionalism of the review process. The journal primarily accepts experimental articles, preferably with in-depth mechanistic analysis.

(32) 讚！ | kai哥

Hello, may I ask which email you are inquiring about, thank you!

(0) 讚！ | Kev

Very fast!
2020.12.09 submitted
2020.12.09 submitted to Journal
2020.12.10 with editor
2020.12.14 under review
2020.12.30 under review
2021.02.03 minor revision
2021.02.26 revised version submitted
2021.02.26 under review
2021.02.27 under review
2021.03.29 sent inquiry letter
2021.03.31 accepted

(24) 讚！ | 和尚庙住持

Submitted Aug 01, 2020; Nov 09, 2020 Completed-Accept; Nov 09, 2020 Accept; Submitted Apr 03, 2019; Oct 28, 2019 Completed-Accept; Oct 28, 2019 Accept; Submitted Nov 20, 2019; Apr 05, 2020 Completed-Accept; Apr 05, 2020 Accept. My three submissions got accepted recently, and let’s write some feelings. The articles were all biased towards experimental fluids, and supported by a large amount of experimental data and theoretical analysis. It is still relatively easy to be accepted. However, the later one submitted feels a bit unworthy. It should have been submitted to a better journal. The editors responded quickly. When I encountered slower situations, I contacted the journal staff to appeal, and the status immediately changed.

(2) 讚！ | Kangaroo

It was with editor for about 10 days, and with review for 30 days. There were three reviewers: two required minor revisions, one directly accepted it without requiring any revision. It was resubmitted after the revision. About 4 days later, it was directly accepted. The editor was very responsible and very efficient. The reviewers were also very responsible and professional. The questions asked by the first reviewer involved grammar, graphics, and the accuracy of the information described in the text. The second reviewer didn't ask any questions. I felt that the third reviewer understood the content better, but he didn't know it in depth and was not professional. He mainly asked conceptual questions and put forward his own knowledge and understanding of the phenomena in the article. Therefore, we needed to rebut the reviewer’s opinions point by point, which was quite exhausting. The IF in the journal has risen significantly in recent years. I wish the journal better and better!!

(5) 讚！ | Bolanster

It was the first article accepted. It was a very good journal. The editor was Anthony Robinson from New Zealand. The efficiency was also very high, and the time was mainly spent on inviting the reviewers. I feel it is very suitable for the research novice with god idea to submit. The specific process: 2019/10/2, submission. It was under review in 3 days; 2020/03/22, the results of the first review were returned, and major revision was required. (2 months. There were 3 reviewers, one said that the idea and work was good, but the language and logic was not good. The second one said there was no innovation, and asked several difficult detailed problems on experiments. The third one said the article was good, but the grammar needed to be revised carefully); 2020/05/09, the revised manuscript was submitted; 2020/06/01, the results of the second review were returned and further revision was required. The manuscript was sent to the first and third reviewers by the editor. It maybe because the comments of the second reviewers, which were too sharp and lacking in logic. At the same, I also wrote my reply carefully. I wrote more than 10 pages of rebuttal, and skipped him directly. The first reviewer said it can be accepted directly, the third one said that it can be accepted after the revision of the grammar. There was one point which was strange, the time the editor given was 2 months, which shocked me. Finally, I submitted the manuscript after one week of revision; 2020/06/08, the manuscript was submitted at 12:50 after revising the grammar, and it was accepted after a nap.

(11) 讚！ | OER

This journal review feels very fast, it took only 3 months from submission to recruitment.

(0) 讚！ | Hardworking bird

is really a bit slow, the draft submitted in October 2017, said at the end of April 2018, after the small submission, after the submission, July 13th said that it was received, almost one yearLook for a job, find a good result, but fortunately, the result is OK, finally no waste

(3) 讚！ | Lukai

Submitted in February 2016, acceptd in August 2016, twice in the middle, the opinions of the experts are very professional, very in place.

(0) 讚！ | jiqiang_niu@163.com

I recently submitted a paper, already accepted. Submitted on May 30, with the editor for more than a month, became under review on July 2, required reviewers completed on July 20. I received the first review results on July 27. The two reviewers gave good evaluations. I think it should be minor revisions. I submitted the revise version on August 21, and the status became with editor soon. It should be now in the hands of the editor. It was not sent to reviewers. On September 13, it was accepted. I think I’m lucky. The two reviewers should be experts and reviewed the paper thoroughly.

(1) 讚！ | 匿名

2012 At the end of the year, they were urged once in the middle three months. The editor-in-chief said that the reviewers alsoDid not find good, after the state time has been changed a few times, change about two months.It’s been nearly nine months now, and I’m still reviewing it, I’m really slow!Looking forward to good results!

(0) 讚！ | 匿名

Don't remind me, my submission is still in the editor for 3 months, I sent an email to ask the editor, TMD directly gave me a rejection of the draft

(2) 讚！ | 匿名

5 At the end of the month, I have been with the editor for a long time. I have been there for half a month. Is it normal?

(0) 讚！ | 匿名

submitted to the first trial for a long time, almost four months, the first review of the problem is not too much, after receiving the serious change, the article format, the speed of the second trial changed, the speed is huge,I agreed to receive it the next day after submission.The editor is very good, very responsible, and many of the questions asked are answered, very patient, and very fast.Voted on January 25, received on June 12.If the article is good, it is recommended to select for this journal~

(0) 讚！ | 匿名

It seems that no insects say so fastwhat!The results were only three and a half months after the first trial, and the second trial was twenty days, and the third trial was received in a week.Personal feelings should be carefully revised, and every question of the reviewer should be carefully answered. The editor is very responsible.In short, it’s not bad. After submitting the manuscript for five months, the review speed is a bit slower.

(0) 讚！ | 匿名

Journal of heat transfer and fluid mechanics, the speed of submission is OK, one month, minor repair, but the second trial actually took two months, but fortunately accepted.Not bad journal

(0) 讚！ | 匿名

Since the previous review was very fast, I chose this journal later, but it seems that the speed of review is not only related to the editor, but also related to the reviewer. Of course,The editor directly decided the speed of the reviewer. My second post was very miserable. I spent a year, and there were countless reminders. The heart of the manuscript was gone. Fortunately, I finally received it, so everyone must pay attention to the manuscript.Which editor is

(0) 讚！ | 匿名