2020.4.15 receive the manuscript; 2020.6.19 give the first review comments. The overall evaluation of the two reviewers was relatively positive, and they made some specific comments. Major revisions were required by the associate editor (in fact, the comments of the two reviewers had been returned early, and the associate editor did not give any comments for more than 20 days. I sent a reminder email and he gave it right away. It is suggested that the reminder should be sent.) 2020.7.3 Return the revised manuscript; 2020.7.5 Acceptance. (Two reviewers gave me the recommendation of acceptance on the first day after I returned the revised manuscript. The associate editor sent the notification of acceptance the next day.) Generally speaking, the review speed of this journal was relatively fast. Generally, the first reviewers' comments can be given within 2–3 months. There were 2–3 reviewers. The recognition in the industry is not bad. The self-citation rate is a bit high (but several journals in the industry have high self-citation rates, such as Journal of Constructional Steel Research, Engineering Structures, Composite Structures, and Construction and Building Materials).

(22) Thank | 烟雨江南0561

This is my second SCI paper in this journal, and the direction is bionic structural mechanics. Submitted on January 19, 2020. The revision comments were returned on February 17, with 5 reviewers, about no less than 52 comments, and the editor still gave 60 days to us for revising the manuscript. The revised version was submitted on April 16, and we just received the acceptance notice today on May 9. I’m so excited. Tomorrow will be the defense for my PhD dissertation. Comment: Both my papers followed the same train of thought, starting with modeling, following with analysis of mechanical properties, optimization design, and experimental verification. My level is not good, and every time the opinions of the journal reviewers are too frustrating. Great efforts were made to revise the manuscript every time. Fortunately, it was accepted, I’m going to graduate, and the IF is not bad.

(15) Thank | 老沙

2018.11.30, submission. 2018.12.15, first revision required. There were 3 reviewers. Reviewer 1 thought the idea is meaningful and proposes 16 revision comments; reviewer 2 thought it was good and experimental work are very valuable, and proposes 2 revision comments, suggesting accepting with minor revisions; review 3 did not make a statement, but proposed 2 comments and 2 detailed revision suggestions; 60 days for revision was given. 2019.3.7, first resubmission of the manuscript. 2019.4.22, second revision required, when reviewer 1 and reviewer 2 agreed to accept it, reviewer 3 accepted the first reply, but further gave another comment and requested a reply. 2019.4.7, second resubmission. 2019.4.22, reviewer 3 accepted the second revision and agreed to accept it. Now waiting for the proofreading. I felt that: 1. The review efficiency is quite high. The submission will turn to under review within a week or so. The first review will be completed within 30 days and 60 days will be given for revision. The second and third review must be completed within 7 days as required by the submission system.

(5) Thank | 老沙

Dr. Chen Yu at the School of Urban Construction of Yangtze University published five papers in one year in this journal as the first author and correspondent author: “Behaviour of bird-beak square hollow section X-joints under in-plane bending,” “Experimental and finite element analysis research on cold-formed steel lipped channel beams under web crippling,” “Behaviour of square hollow section brace-H-shaped steel chord T-joints under axial compression,” “Aluminum tubular sections subjected to web crippling,” and “Numerical investigation of concrete.” You can tell how unexceptional this journal is. Basically, as long as one reviewer agrees to accept a paper, the paper will be accepted.

(7) Thank | 梁梁

Big boss, how do you view the information as a reviewer?

(0) Thank | romantiii

Just want to ask, if there are two reviewers to review the manuscript, will it become RRC?

(0) Thank | good 1

By 2025, the number of reviewers for all Elsevier journals has increased. In the past, only 2 reviewers were needed, but this year at least 4/5 are required. The submission system also no longer recommends reviewers.

(0) Thank | Wang_C

A particularly good journal.
Submitted in November 24, revised in February 25, and accepted in March 25.
No review fees or page charges.
However, just two days ago, it dropped to Zone 2 in the CAS rankings, but it is still a top journal.
Who are these zoning organizations anyway? It's not like you run the journal, so what right do you have to "zone" it?
Let them zone it if they want, but they're so arbitrary about it. Some domestic journals even get labeled as Zone 1.
No wonder some universities are starting to not recognize the CAS zoning.

(1) Thank | ldsbuilder

Shivering.

(0) Thank | good 1

Yes, one acceptance, two minor revisions, and three major revisions. Among them, reviewer2# is the editor, who raised nearly 20 questions at once.

(0) Thank | 马孔多没下雨

2025.3.21 Required Reviews Complete  8/4/3
Recently, two reviews have been completed in succession, probably just glanced at them casually after submitting the funds in a hurry.

(0) Thank | dfh

Six reviewers, have they all provided feedback to you?

(0) Thank | good 1

I am still waiting for the reviewer's feedback, I have no idea what's going on, feeling frustrated.

(0) Thank | good 1

2024.12.26 submit;
2024.12.27 under reviewer;
2025.01.28 major revision (6 reviewers, over 60 comments, submission deadline extended);
2025.03.09 resubmit;
2025.03.21 accept.
The process was fast, but it ended up in Tier 2...

(0) Thank | 马孔多没下雨

The latest Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS) division, the major categories have been changed to 2 zones, and it remains in the top category.

(0) Thank | CC仗剑走天涯

Where did you see the restricted area?

(0) Thank | 李小洱海

ES and Thin-walled have both been published in the past two years. I feel that this journal is not as strict as ES. ES requires at least three people to make decisions, while this journal only requires two people at the time. Also, the probability of encountering strict reviewers in ES is higher than in this journal. Of course, this journal is still of good quality, and I hope it can return to the top tier in the future.

(2) Thank | CC仗剑走天涯

Oh, in 2025 it was downgraded to Zone 2.

(1) Thank | 科小研

The reviewer estimated that it would take about four hours to finish the battle.

(0) Thank | 想中的li

The article was submitted in April of the 24th year, and the editor in charge has been responsible for the review. The first review took 6 months, the second review took 5 months and is still under review. Despite numerous reminders, we have been unable to contact the editor. Last week, we decided to withdraw the submission. However, we are also unable to contact the editor for the withdrawal, which is really frustrating.

(1) Thank | havefun

The time given to reviewers is 30 days.

(0) Thank | Matttt

I submitted my contribution on 2025.03.04, but there has been no response from WE yet. Should I follow up?

(0) Thank | Alex YI

Xiao Hong, search for the Elsevier tracking plugin.

(0) Thank | dfh

How long is the current review period for reviewers? One reviewer came back in just 9 days, isn't that a tragedy?

(0) Thank | good 1

After urging the editor, the manuscript was submitted for review in just a few days.

(0) Thank | 自由的风