About the Journal

Scope

The journal presents the results of scientific research in the field of friction and wear, discusses topical issues of friction and wear theory, modern methods of studying the processes that develop on the surface layers of contacting bodies during friction, as well as methods of increasing the wear resistance of materials and restoring the surfaces of parts.

The collection is designed for scientific and engineering staff dealing with friction and wear.

Language: Ukrainian and English.

 

Review procedure

 

  1. This Regulation governs the procedure for peer review and submission of manuscripts received by the editorial office of the scientific and technical journal “Problems of Friction and Wear”.
  2. The purpose of peer review is to improve the quality of scientific articles published in the journal through the evaluation of submitted materials by highly qualified experts..
  3. The peer review procedure is anonymous for both reviewers and authors and is carried out by independent reviewers (double-blind peer review).
  4. All reviewers must adhere to ethical standards in scientific publishing and act objectively and impartially.
  5. Only scientific articles prepared in strict accordance with the Requirements for Manuscripts and that have passed an initial editorial screening are admitted to peer review
  6. Provided that the above requirements are met, the manuscript is forwarded to the technical editor
  7. Тhe technical editor assigns a registration code to the manuscript and removes information identifying the author(s) (manuscript anonymization).
  8. The anonymized manuscript is sent by e-mail to a member of the Editorial Board responsible for the relevant scientific field corresponding to the content of the article.
  9. The Editorial Board member who receives the anonymized manuscript completes a standard review form (download the form) and selects one of the following recommendations: accepted for publication; revision required; rejected.
  10. In the event of rejection or the need for revision, the reviewer must provide a written, reasoned explanation of the grounds for such a decision.
  11. The time limit for preparing review recommendations is two weeks from the date of receipt of the manuscript.
  12. Reviewers’ recommendations are sent by e-mail to the technical editor.
  13. The final decision on the manuscript is made at a meeting of the Editorial Board, taking into account the received peer reviews.
  14. The editorial decision is communicated to the author(s). Manuscripts requiring revision are returned to the author(s) together with the review text containing specific recommendations for improving the manuscript. The anonymity of reviewers is guaranteed by the editorial office
  15. The revised version of the manuscript is submitted for a second round of peer review. In the event of a repeated negative review outcome, the manuscript is rejected and is not subject to further consideration.
  16. The editorial office does not enter into correspondence or discussion with authors of rejected manuscripts.

 

ФОРМА РЕЦЕНЗУВАННЯ

REVIEWER INSTRUCTIONS

 

 

Title of the article

Назва статті та код

 

 

Reviewer

Рецензент

 

 

Scientific title

вчене звання

 

 

Institution

Установа

 

 

Date when you received the article for review

 

Дата, коли отримали

статтю для огляду

 

Date when you submit-ted the review

 

Дата, коли представили огляд

 

 

Please give concise and reasoned scientific-methodological remarks in the table below. Confidential comments for the editor can be written at the end of the form. The re-view is anonymous for the authors.

 

Подайте короткі і обґрунтовані науково-методичні зауваження в таблиці нижче. Огляд є анонімним для авторів.

REVIEWER EVALUATION FORM - ФОРМА ОЦІНКИ РЕЦЕНЗЕНТОМ

 

Questions for reviewers

 

Питання для рецензентів

 

 

Yes/ No

Так / Ні

 

N o t e

Примітки

Is the topic scientifically relevant considering the journal profile?

Чи відповідає тема науковому профілю журналу

 

 

 

Is the topic scientifically relevant and useful?

Чи є тема науково актуальною і практично корисною

 

 

 

The article's title reflects the content and purpose of the article

Назва статті відображає зміст і мету

 

 

 

The abstract is concise and relevant

Анотації розкривають короткий зміст статті

 

 

 

The key words provide adequate index entry for the article

Ключові слова адекватні статті

 

 

 

The introduction contains a clearly stated objectives

Вступ містить чітко поставлені цілі

 

 

 

Is the scientific argument logical and persuasive

Наукова аргументація логічна і переконлива

 

 

 

Are the empirical research results methodologically correctly presented? Give possible suggestions in case you think

some amendments and refinements are needed.

Результати дослідження методологічно правильно представлені?

Дайте можливі пропозиції у разі, якщо поправки та уточнення є необхідні.

 

 

 

Conclusions illustrate the research results, findings and recommendations showing what is new and giving suggestionsfor future research

Висновки – підсумовуються результати досліджень та прослідковуються  подальші перспективи досліджень

 

 

 

 

Should some parts of the article be shortened, deleted, extended or refined?

Чи можуть або повинні деякі частини статті бути скорочені, розширені чи перероблені

 

 

 

Would you recommend some refinements in terms of styleor language?

Чи рекомендували б Ви деякі уточнення з точки зору стилю і мови викладу

 

 

 

The references are full and grounded?

Чи задовільною є кількість, якість та доцільність посилань й літературних джерел

 

 

 

Is the article in compliance with the Instructions for authors,i.e. are the abstract, key words, literature, references and table and figure marks written upon the instructions

Стаття оформлена відповідно до Інструкції для авторів (абстракт, ключові слова,  література,  посилання, таблиці малюнки та інше)

 

 

Reviewer’s additional opinions, remarks and recommendations:

Додаткові думки, зауваження та рекомендації рецензента:

 

Recommendation for the editor (circle one) Рекомендації для    редактора (зазначити):

  • to published without changes - рекомендовано до публікації
  • to published after minor changes - рекомендовано опублікувати після доопрацювання
  • to rejected - не рекомендовано до публікації

Confidential remarks for the editor:

Конфіденційно для редактора: