Russian Metallurgy (Metally)

ISSN: 0036-0295 (Print) 1555-6255 (Online)

Description

Russian Metallurgy (Metally)  publishes results of original experimental and theoretical research in the form of reviews and regular articles devoted to topical problems of metallurgy, physical metallurgy, and treatment of ferrous, nonferrous, rare, and other metals and alloys, intermetallic compounds, and metallic composite materials. The journal focuses on physicochemical properties of metallurgical materials (ores, slags, matters, and melts of metals and alloys); physicochemical processes (thermodynamics and kinetics of pyrometallurgical, hydrometallurgical, electrochemical, and other processes); theoretical metallurgy; metal forming; thermoplastic and thermochemical treatment; computation and experimental determination of phase diagrams and thermokinetic diagrams; mechanisms and kinetics of phase transitions in metallic materials; relations between the chemical composition, phase and structural states of materials and their physicochemical and service properties; interaction between metallic materials and external media; and effects of radiation on these materials.

PEER REVIEW

Russian Metallurgy (Metally) is a peer reviewed journal. We use a double blind peer review format. Our team of reviewers includes 54 reviewers, both internal and external (66%). The average period from submission to first decision in 2017 was 20 days, and that from first decision to acceptance was 45 days. The rejection rate for submitted manuscripts in 2017 was 20%. The final decision on the acceptance of an article for publication is made by Editor-in-Chief and Deputy Editors-in-Chief.

Any invited reviewer who feels unqualified or unable to review the manuscript due to the conflict of interests should promptly notify the editors and decline the invitation. Reviewers should formulate their statements clearly in a sound and reasoned way so that authors can use reviewer’s arguments to improve the manuscript. Personal criticism of the authors must be avoided. Reviewers should indicate in a review (i) any relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors, (ii) anything that has been reported in previous publications and not given appropriate reference or citation, (ii) any substantial similarity or overlap with any other manuscript (published or unpublished) of which they have personal knowledge.

Browse Volumes & Issues