The directions related to my research are as follows: 1. Structural mechanics; 2. Behaviour and application of advanced materials; 3. Strain localization and other effects of nonlinearity. Although it is far inferior to JMPS and IJSS in the field of solid mechanics, and some articles have obvious flaws, it is actually a good journal. The IF has risen, and the editor-in-chief has become more and more strict. I hope that the journal will become better and better.

(81) Thank | 王兴仁

2018 (575), 2005 (107), 1992 (47), 2017 (515), 2004 (103), 1991 (49), 2016 (343), 2003 (110), 1990 (50), 2015 (292), 2002 (143), 1989 (38), 2014 (277), 2001 (161), 1988 (46), 2013 (227), 2000 (135), 1987 (37), 2012 (162), 1999 (46), 1986 (41), 2011 (108), 1998 (66), 1985 (54), 2010 (173), 1997 (53), 1984 (47), 2009 (86), 1996 (46), 1983 (63), 2008 (151), 1995 (45), 1982 (37)

(2) Thank | 1421653134@qq.com

2006 (134), 1993 (43), 2018 (575), 2005 (107), 1992 (47), 2017 (515), 2004 (103), 1991 (49), 2016 (343), 2003 (110), 1990 (50), 2015 (292), 2002 (143), 1989 (38), 2014 (277), 2001 (161), 1988 (46), 2013 (227), 2000 (135), 1987 (37), 2012 (162), 1999 (46), 1986 (41), 2011 (108), 1998 (66), 1985 (54), 2010 (173), 1997 (53), 1984 (47), 2009 (86), 1996 (46), 1983 (63), 2008 (151), 1995 (45), 1982 (37)

(3) Thank | 1421653134@qq.com

Only one reviewer. Very detailed review and comments.

(12) Thank | zj

Can you help me decide whether I should write a letter to ask the editor?

(0) Thank | 溺水的小鱼

I would like to ask, I WE four days ago and still WE now. If there is no feedback on the same day, does that mean there is no chance?

(0) Thank | 溺水的小鱼

Is it under review? How long does it take to change the status?

(0) Thank | 溺水的小鱼

Is it necessary to compress? What does it mean? Has the OP solved it?

(0) Thank | H-vienna

It has been 4 days, has it been edited to look decent?

(0) Thank | 溺水的小鱼

Please pray that the third reviewer will be kinder and more accepting. However, the two new reviewers invited have not accepted yet. If time passes and they still do not respond, the editor will invite others again. It feels like if they don't accept on the first day, they won't accept at all.

(0) Thank | 442

Reply 442: Yes, if a new reviewer has been invited, it means there may be one positive and one negative review that needs arbitration, or it could be that one of the reviewers' comments are too perfunctory and lack reference value.

(0) Thank | 快乐打工人

After I became UR following RRC, two reviewers provided feedback, and now two more have been invited. Is it because of the two left-leaning opinions?

(0) Thank | 442

Take note:
250410 WE

(0) Thank | 嘻哈fo

Could you please clarify if there is no hope for resubmitting to this journal? I am currently unsure of what needs to be changed. Should I continue submitting to this journal or switch to another one? Thank you very much.

(0) Thank | 一蓑烟雨11

Just the standard reply, many people respond like this.

(0) Thank | 机械工程

(1) After submission, the editor provided significant revisions, with a one-month deadline for resubmission. The requirements are as follows:
1. The depth of analysis and technical discussion needs to be further improved.
2. The writing needs to be improved. Some parts, such as being too lengthy. The conclusions should be stronger and organized into several substantive and interconnected paragraphs, rather than just bullet points. The language in this area is lacking.
3. More thought needs to be given to how to present this material. Basic materials (such as basic mathematical models, graphics that look like technical drawings, repetitive charts, etc.) should be moved to appendices or deleted; similar graphics should be classified as so-called panel graphics.
4. Mathematical formulas need to be more concise.
5. Broaden and update the literature review to better connect with current efforts in the field of mechanical science; for papers like this, we expect no fewer than 80 journal papers, including 25 recent papers (2023/24->) to be critically discussed. Do not cite textbooks or manuals.
... and a total of 14 similar format suggestions.

(2) After the revisions were submitted, the editor rejected the manuscript within the system, and then replied as follows:
This is a significant improvement, but please carefully review and fully address all of my concerns. Once completed, please resubmit without responding to my comments.
For other journals that may be more suitable for your manuscript, please refer to our journal finder.

(3) The question is, was it because the previous 14 suggestions were not addressed properly? They did not specify where to make changes, only requesting a resubmission of the revised manuscript, and only the main text to be submitted.

(0) Thank | 一蓑烟雨11

2024.11.06 submitted
2024.11.06 with editor
2024.11.07 under review
2025.01.05 major revision (reviewed by three reviewers, one accepted, two revised)
2025.02.14 resubmitted
2025.02.14 under review
2025.03.01 accepted

(0) Thank | li_xiao

The editor is too busy, and when he looked at it today, it was already sent for the second review. It took 12 days for it to be sent for the second review with the editor.

(0) Thank | 可乐猫#

I have been back for 5 days, always waiting, the date changed the day before yesterday, but still no response, I don't know what's going on, very anxious.

(0) Thank | 快乐打工人

One month passed after the revisions were completed and submitted, but there has been no response from the editor for 10 days. The date on the submission has remained the same, and it is unclear whether the editor is busy or if something else is going on.

(0) Thank | 可乐猫#

Hi guys, may I ask for your opinions on "expanding and updating the literature review in order to better link with current work in the field of mechanical science; for papers like this, we expect to critically discuss no fewer than 80 journal papers, including 25 recent papers (2023/24->). Do not cite textbooks or manuals." Does the term "manuals" in this context include various industry standards, such as AASHO LRFD bridge design specifications, GB/T 50081-2019, ASTM D7205, etc.?

(0) Thank | Timeless ZL

What documents should be included when submitting LaTeX? Do other cls, sty, and bst files need to be embedded in the tex file, or should they be submitted as separate files?

(0) Thank | 嘻哈fo

Just submitted the file for the first time, it was too large, so I resubmitted it (within less than a day of the first submission). This is the second time, and it has been three days since the first submission.

(1) Thank | wangyans

I have just submitted my contribution as well, we can communicate and exchange ideas together.

(0) Thank | 阿布321

If you don't understand, please ask. I would like to inquire about submitting a latex manuscript for the first time. The journal's homepage requires the submission of the .tex main file, .bib references, and source files for figures and tables. When I was writing the latex document, I did not embed the cls, sty, and bst files into the main tex document. Can I submit the cls, sty, and bst files separately when submitting? In other words, the final submission would include: tex, cls, sty, bst, bib, Figs. Could experienced colleagues who have already submitted manuscripts please explain this to me? Thank you!

(0) Thank | 嘻哈fo