Editorial Workflow

The entire editorial workflow is performed using the online Annotum System.  If a manuscript is submitted for publication, the manuscript will be checked by the journal’s editorial office to ensure that it is suitable to go through the normal peer review process. If the Editor finds  that the manuscript may not be of sufficient quality to go through the normal peer review process, or that the subject of the manuscript may not be appropriate for the journal’s scope, the manuscript shall be rejected with no further processing. Submissions by anyone other than one of the authors will not be accepted. If the Editor finds that the submitted manuscript is of sufficient quality and falls within the scope of the journal, they will assign the manuscript to 3 external reviewers for peer-review. The reviewers submit their reports on the manuscripts along with their recommendation of one of the following actions to the Editor:

  • Publish Unaltered,
  • Consider after Minor Changes,
  • Consider after Major Changes
  • Reject: Manuscript is flawed or not sufficiently novel.

When all reviewers have submitted their reports, the Editor can make one of the following editorial recommendations: Publish Unaltered, Consider after Minor Changes, Consider after Major Changes, Reject to corresponding Author.  If the Editor recommends Publish Unaltered, the manuscript is accepted for publication. If the Editor recommends  Consider after Minor Changes, the authors are notified to prepare and submit a final copy of their manuscript with  the required changes suggested by the reviewers. The Editor reviews the revised manuscript after the minor changes  have been made by the authors. Once the Editor is satisfied with the final manuscript, the manuscript can be accepted. If the Editor recommends  Consider after Major Changes, the recommendation is communicated to the authors. The authors  are expected to revise their manuscripts in accordance with the changes recommended by the reviewers and to submit their  revised manuscript in a timely manner. Once the revised manuscript is submitted, the Editor can then make an editorial recommendation which can be  Publish UnalteredConsider after Minor Changes, or  Reject. If the Editor recommends rejecting the manuscript, the rejection is immediate. Also, if the majority of the reviewers recommend rejecting the manuscript, the rejection is immediate. The editorial workflow gives the Editors the authority to reject any manuscript because of inappropriateness of its subject, lack of quality, or incorrectness of its results. The Editor cannot assign himself/herself as an external reviewer of the manuscript. This is to ensure a high-quality, fair, and unbiased peer-review process of every manuscript submitted to the journal.
http://www.mechanical-engineering.name/?page_id=22
www.mechanical-engineering.name
crawl=CC-MAIN-2018-17
17252
application/http; msgtype=response
sha1:5HNZJUDQEC2Y4ZWDB65BEPLCWZYR6N53
<urn:uuid:e1eba854-e0ff-4ded-8eae-68bb542619af>
2018-04-21T03:36:27Z
66.96.149.32
text/html
sha1:DCFZB5Y4CCK4L6BRUHYZZSQJ7M25BI6V
<urn:uuid:0bc63a50-aac6-44a2-96e0-8ceadbcb9c7c>
http://www.mechanical-engineering.name/?page_id=22
response
<urn:uuid:8b7d4083-3bdc-41bc-8a13-437fd5465ef9>
robots: classic
hostname: ip-10-35-148-49.ec2.internal
software: Nutch 1.6 (CC)
isPartOf: CC-MAIN-2018-17
operator: Common Crawl Admin
description: Wide crawl of the web for April 2018
publisher: Common Crawl
format: WARC File Format 1.0
conformsTo: http://bibnum.bnf.fr/WARC/WARC_ISO_28500_version1_latestdraft.pdf