Steel in Translation

ISSN: 0967-0912 (Print) 1935-0988 (Online)

Description

Steel in Translation  is a journal that represents a selection of translated articles from two Russian metallurgical journals: Stal’  and Izvestiya Vysshikh Uchebnykh Zavedenii. Chernaya Metallurgiya .

Steel in Translation  covers new developments in blast furnaces, steelmaking, rolled products, tubes, and metal manufacturing as well as unconventional methods of metallurgy and conservation of resources. Papers in materials science and relevant commercial applications make up a considerable portion of the journal’s contents. There is an emphasis on metal quality and cost effectiveness of metal production and treatment.

PEER REVIEW

The journal represents a selection of translated materials from two Russian ferrous metallurgical journals: Stal’ and Izvestiya Vysshikh Uchebnykh Zavedenii. Chernaya Metallurgiya.

Stal’ is a peer reviewed journal. We use a single blind peer review format. Our team of reviewers includes 12 reviewers, both internal and external (30%). The average period from submission to first decision in 2017 was 30 days, and that from first decision to acceptance was 15 days. The final decision on the acceptance of an article for publication is made by the Editorial Board.

Izvestiya VUZ. Chernaya Metallurgiya is a peer reviewed journal. We use a single blind peer review format. Our team of reviewers includes over 100 reviewers, both internal and external (72%). The average period from submission to first decision in 2017 was 2 days, and that from first decision to acceptance was 115 days. The final decision on the acceptance of an article for publication is made by the Editor–in-Chief and the Peer Reviewing.

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appropriate reference or citation, (ii) any substantial similarity or overlap with any other manuscript (published or unpublished) of which they have personal knowledge.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