Getting Published

[MRM]

I was wondering what everyone's experiences were when trying to get technical material published.

Here's the situation; I've completed a self-financed project involving writing a technical paper.

I submitted the paper as a technical note to ASTM geotechnical testing journal in May 2004. About 4 months later, I was delighted to get a response (rejecting it in its current form) along with some great comments to improve it. I did some more work and made the improvements along with some others I was able to think of. I resubmitted the revised paper in November 2004.

I received word from the GTJ secretary stating that it was again rejected and the comments are attached. This was not a surprise as I thought it would have to go through at least a few more iterations before it would be ready. The problem is this; even though the attached letter said that the revised paper was reviewed and that comments were attached, comments weren't attached. I contacted the secretary asking if the comments were available because it appeared they were left off. She responded a few days later stating only, "The revised paper was reviewed and rejected." No comments regarding the revised paper review were included.

A couple of questions,
1) Although I have never been one to give up when I hit some bumps in the road, is trying to get technical material published possible considering I'm unknown to the technical community? Should I wait until I'm a little better known, or after I get a PhD?
2) Does this sound like it is just an isolated incident of a secretary not wanting to go too far out of their way to give someone a simple answer to a reasonable question, or are most publications geared this way to an unknown individual?
3) Since I've finished my first paper, I've been working on a second for the last 8 months or so. I will admit that it has more substance than the first. When I go to try to publish the second, is there a particular publication that anyone could recommend? How about submitting it to a conference such as the U of Minn. geotechnical conference, for example. I would enjoy presenting it somewhere if it is worthy.

What say you? As always, thanks for your opinions.

 

[MRM]

Absolutely love the idea of the "ETJPE." If there is a web maintenance fee of some kind, I would certainly be willing to contribute to help maintain such a site.

If there's any concern I have at the moment, I'd like to be sure there is a meaningful peer review process of some kind between us, the members. I'm not saying to have a set, rigid format for the entries, but some system that we can control the quality of what goes in. I may want to someday include some of my publications (from ETJPE) in the reference section of other journals. Is this what we all have in mind, or am I missing the point of your original suggestions for such a site. Let me know if your vision is more relaxed publishing site.

Based on the limited amount of what I know about the experience levels of the members of "Foundations by Terzaghi forum," I think that the reviews would indeed have much meaning to anyone who might find these papers, and certainly any practicing engineer out there.

By the way, BigH and SlideRuleEra, I'd like to take you up on your generous offer to help review my paper. Also, if you have VAD's email, would you please forward it if possible? VAD, I didn't see your email, but would like you to have a look if the offer still stands...

Look for that tonight sometime. I need to run to the office to put this into pdf format. Thanks again!

 

[MRM]

Ha! That was sort of confusing for me just now... As I submitted my previous post, I noticed Mccoy's post for the first time. It was not visible before. I basically echoed what Mccoy said, I guess...

 

[VAD]

MRM:

I don't understand, I posted same and saw it before submitting post. Here it is email address vishnu@tricolor.queensu.ca

 

[MRM]

I just sent the draft version to BigH, SlideRuleEra, and VAD. I did have some trouble sending it to you, VAD, using hotmail. I tried again using outlook. Let's see if you get it.

 

[BigH]

I suggest we get the site - I'd rather go with our own site than a free site; I don't think $60/yr is prohibitive.

With SlideRuleEra basically gone for August, I think that this gives us a chance to catch our breath and sit down to look at the structure needed; how to referee; say having a "publishing" every three months with a real-time area of the site for the under-review status. I'm quite willing to review papers - we should have say 2 or 3 of us look at it and, as I am sure we all have some network types, we might be able to get a Vic Milligan, or Fred Matich or even John Focht II to take a glance too. I think you all have my email so don't hesitate to contact each this way too. Perhaps MRM, Mccoy, VAD and I can kick some ideas about for a week or so. I will also start a new thread as this seems to have taken over MRM's original post - but [cook}x3 for MRM's post to kick-start something that can be so good!

 

[VAD]

MRM:

I forwarded corrected e-mail address to SlideRuleEra and BIG H. I look forward to receiving same.

BIG H:

I would be available for reviewing papers as well. I have done previously for ASCE Geotech and Conference Proceedings in previous years.

We need to establish a paper length limitation. I would encourage photos as they tell a lot.

At least 3 referees per paper may be sufficient. Need to have someone to be responsible for/clearing house for review comments to authors. Would be useful to have forum provide their comments as done for topics. Author can respond to those. I can overview my past review info. I will have to do a search.

Time for review as noted by BigH needs to be established.

We should look at the needs of practicing engineers in establishing what we want to publish. Case studies would be particularly useful - ones which illustrate how day to day problems are tackled and solved despite that these may not
novel for publication in other journals. We should be catering to enlighten or provide information for new graduates/junior, and intermediate engineers on how problems are approached and solved in the real world. Issues, success and failures, and how to avoid pitfalls etc.

Others may have many more ideas to add.

 

[MRM]

It sounds like things are heading in a good direction for the journal. I like all the ideas. Of course, we'll also take submitted papers seriously and offer real comments and not leave some people hanging, right?...I'm just kidding now; I know we will. I'll still be checking into ASTM this week. Perhaps there was simply a mix up over there somehow. I'm giving them the benefit of the doubt.

However, I will now be submitting this paper to the ETJPE for consideration instead. I've got one or two more small projects and notes I've been working on as well that are unrelated to the "larger project" I keep mentioning. I will also submit those to the ETJPE in the future.

VAD, I meant to comment earlier on the Texas A&M full scale shallow footing load test paper. That is definitely an example of an extremely useful paper. I obtained a copy a couple of years ago or so. I, too, participated in the study...just 10 years after it was published is all! I was pleased to see that my techniques gave me results that were right in there with the actual values. That's good stuff.

 

[VAD]

MRM:

Hope you got e-mail address. I have not received copy of paper as yet.

Regards

 

[MRM]

VAD,
Hmmm...I'll do some checking, and I'll try sending it to you again if necessary.
Thanks

 

[SlideRuleEra]

VAD - I just sent MRM your corrected email address a few minutes ago.

MRM - Also forwarded your draft paper to VAD at about the same time.

I know that communications will be somewhat slowed because of our differing locations.

I'm in South Carolina, on Eastern Daylight Time - I know that BigH is on the opposite side of the world in India. Where are the rest of you?

http://www.SlideRuleEra.net

 

[MRM]

Michigan here.

 

[VAD]

Sunny Alberta - at least for today and a few days to come.

 

[emmgjld]

I have yet to thank BigH for the invitation to enter this forum. So .. A Big THANK YOU to the BigH!!

I have been just watching the activity going on. Too much office work to do. I too have contemplated a paper or 3, but the time is never available.

- Western Colorado, USA -

 

[Mccoy]

I'm in Italy,
time-wise approximately in between India and the USA.
Probably, ASCE geotech would be the best reference as to reviewing procedures and stuff, so VAD's review info would be most welcome.
I'm ready to "kick some ideas about" as BigH goes, I'll wait for the new thread to be posted.

 

[MRM]

Well, I've received comments back from BigH, SlideRuleEra, and VAD. I would like to thank them once again for their time and effort in reviewing my paper. I certainly wasn't expecting that kind of treatment! Their level of interest in helping me went above and beyond. In looking at the comments briefly, I already know that they'll help improve the paper greatly! I'll be planning my corrections soon based on the comments. Thanks again!

 

[MRM]

There’s been an interesting development in the last couple of days. At the end of July as you know, after taking Mccoy’s and other’s advice, I began to look into the problem of why I couldn’t get a straight answer from the ASTM staff. After close to 20 days of e-mailing, talking to them, bothering them, etc. my paper has been accepted after all! It certainly was not easy. Near the end, I really only wanted an acceptable reason (or even a reply) from ASTM as to why my paper was not accepted and why no reviewer’s comments were available even though I was told previously that there were. They have informed me that it will appear in the March 2006 issue of ASTM Geotechnical Journal.

I’m in a bit of a quandary now since I had told everyone earlier that I intended on trying to have the paper published in the ETJPE instead of the ASTM journal. I hope you’ll understand if I allow ASTM to publish this particular paper. I assure you that I have a few more projects that I am working on at this moment. I will attempt to have those published in the ETJPE. I feel badly about that, but I need to take this opportunity being my first paper and all-especially after all the “back and forth” I had to go through with the ASTM staff.

Once again, I thank everyone for their input. I especially thank BigH, SlideRuleEra, and VAD for their review of the paper and their valuable comments. Believe me; those comments will help me on these upcoming papers, so they will still go to good use. (please see next thread for more details)

 

[Mccoy]

MRM,
congrats for your paper, your problems are understandable but at this point, having followed the whole issue, I too feel that the right thing to do would be to publish on ASTM. I'm sure you'll be able to refine your ideas (I saw you are already working at it) and submit to ETJPE.

 

[MRM]

Thanks for the response, Mccoy.

I've actually got quite a few "irons in the fire," in terms of topics for papers for the ETJPE. In addition to the second phase of the limit density paper, I'm working on such topics as; lake marl consolidation and secondary compression, some frost related material, and several pile load test/estimates comparisons. I think that most would make interesting reads for others and I want to be able to share them. I also think they would be right a home in our journal.

It will be nice to get this first paper in ASTM under my belt though. I think that this is the confidence boost that I needed about now after working on it for 2+ years!

 

[BigH]

MRM - as I told you off site - you are to be congratulated and damn proud! We all are, I am sure, proud of your accomplishment. That's what colleagues are for!! Here's a few of my favourite "claps" for you!

 

[SlideRuleEra]

MRM - Congratulations on getting your paper published! That will really look good on your record.

http://www.SlideRuleEra.net