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

Two minor revisions, two rejections. The rejections citing lack of innovation, while the editors rejected due to insufficient research maturity.

(1) Thank | let me biye

In my second year of graduate school, I was lucky enough to have my first article accepted for publication on the first try.

(0) Thank | 常山李子龙

Please review the submission process:
5.15: Submit to journal
5.15: With editor
5.17: Rejected, reason being the need to reduce Manuscript size to around 5Mb
5.18: Compress pdf and resubmit to journal
5.22: Under Review
6.19: Major revision: Editor provided 14 template suggestions. Based on the feedback from three reviewers, it seems to be two minor revisions and one major revision or rejection. The two minor revisions feedback adds up to nearly 20 suggestions, while the major revision or rejection feedback has only three or four very difficult to address.
7.16: Revised and with Editor on the same day. Response Letter was 51 pages long. Added validation, deepened analysis, and two large figures were included in the entire article.
7.18: Under Review
7.22: All three first-round reviewers accepted the revision.
8.07: With Editor
8.08: Minor Revision: Two out of three reviewers agreed to accept (the reviewer with feedback for major revision or rejection did not provide feedback to the editor and the decision was made without waiting, very fortunate). The editor only requested further adjustment of file size.
8.10: Accepted on the same day as the revision. The editor's efficiency is truly very fast, as decisions the editor needs to make typically come back within two days.

(0) Thank | 常山李子龙

My paper also had good comments from the reviewers, but the editor rejected it after major revisions. They offered me another chance to resubmit, so I suspect it may be because the image format did not meet the editor's requirements. Can you resubmit yours as well?

(0) Thank | yyycy

Did the reviewers reject it after the editor reviewed it?

(0) Thank | 倾听SC

May I ask what the reason for rejection is?

(0) Thank | qyzxwxf

Please translate the following paragraph into English: 11

(0) Thank | qyzxwxf

After a major revision, it was rejected. The reply stated that the image quality still did not meet the standards, and provided an example image for reference. However, there was no attachment. Do any of you have the same problem? Are there any example image templates available? Thank you.

(0) Thank | lllkko

Basically, the editing process is very fast, mainly due to the reviewers. P.S. After submission, the corresponding author will receive a URL to update the review progress in real-time. Progress updates can also be obtained by entering the article code directly into the mobile WeChat service account.

(0) Thank | joylewis1001

4.27 we
5.1 ur
7.2 major revision, editor gave 7 formatting suggestions, 2 reviewers gave over 10 suggestions
7.30 Submitted first draft, was a bit rushed because needed to add experiments
7.31 ur
8.10 ac (review process was still quite fast, one reviewer finished in two days, another in a week, grateful)

(0) Thank | joylewis1001

Is four months too long? Did the big shot finally put pressure on them?

(0) Thank | 不流泪的双鱼

So fast, how long does it usually take for we?

(0) Thank | 太空挖矿

6.4STJ
6.10UR
7.7Major
8.4submit
8.7RRC/Accept

(0) Thank | Optimus123

I have already made changes to the format, but the editor has given me 14 more formatting suggestions. I really don't know how to make the changes, as I had already made most of them before.

(0) Thank | 倾听SC

Congratulations! It's been quite a ride.

(0) Thank | 大大大大tree

Finally fulfilled my wish~ After nearly half a year of turmoil, everything has finally settled.

It was submitted around the end of March and beginning of April, and then it was in the "with editor" status for a long time. I sent a reminder email and it was "under review" on the same day.

In late June, the reviews came back with feedback from four reviewers, requiring major revisions. The feedback was very professional and I was given 20 days to make the revisions.

Submitted again on July 11-13, and it was "with editor"/"under review". On July 29th, received the decision for revision.

Accepted on August 4th. The end, celebrate~*★,°*:.☆(￣▽￣)/$:*.°★* 。

(1) Thank | 溺水的小鱼

Reply to [Ajun needs to work hard]: Changes must be made, the chief editor's personality is very mysterious, even if the second review does not continue to change the format, the submission will be rejected immediately.

(0) Thank | zleepc

When submitting the manuscript, the editorial department has provided more than ten suggestions on the format, which have been revised before submission. Now, after the first review, in addition to the reviewer's comments, there are still more than ten suggestions on the format. Do I need to make further revisions?

(0) Thank | 阿君要努力

Note down, the second article in Zone One
4.25 STJ/WE
4.29 Rejection
5.22 Major revision resubmitted after nearly a month, STJ/WE
6.03 UR
6.19 RRC
6.26 Major Revision (44 comments from 2 reviewers, very professional and detailed)
7.23 Revision Submitted (last-minute revision)
7.29 RRC/Accept
The whole process took three months, the editorial speed was fast, and most of the time was spent on paper revisions.

(1) Thank | 大大大大tree

The opinions of the two reviewers are conflicting, therefore we need to find another evaluator.

(0) Thank | _ieee

7.26 Rejection of submission.

(0) Thank | let me biye