EDITORIAL POLICYaudience about new researches and developments in all fields of nondestructive testing, evaluation and structural health monitoring. The focus of the journal is on practical matters of various NDT methods/techniques/instruments applied to real objects within all industries, civil engineering, and transportation. Publications should contain testing results of real objects and be of interest for practitioners. Each published material must be verified and proved experimentally or/and in practice; this condition is essential.
NDT World publications include:
- papers and review articles describing the results of testing method application to a real object(s) as well as results of research and development in the following fields:
- all NDT methods and techniques, including radiography, ultrasound, eddy currents, magnetic properties and magnetic particle inspection, thermal and dye penetrant imaging, optical and mechanical testing, et al.;
- novel NDT techniques and combination of techniques for characterizing hidden flaws and distributed damage;
- novel nondestructive evaluation systems for pipeline inspection; inspection at railways; structural health monitoring; residual resource evaluation;
- conventional and novel sensors/transducers/probes and their applications both for inspection and process control;
- inspection of material properties and their degradation in service;
- new NDT equipment and instruments;
- normative documentation and metrological provision for NDT;
- articles re-printed from foreign journals or specially prepared by foreign scientists that are of interest to Russian NDT-specialists;
- technical and scientific overviews of:
- NDT at different enterprises and within different industries;
- foreign technical and scientific journals;
- Internet news;
- other regular features:
- general aspects of NDT in education, training and certification;
- exhibitions and conferences reviews;
- calendar of forthcoming exhibitions and conferences.
Target audience of the journal embraces Russian and CIS NDT researchers/inspectors, plant/production NDT-managers, engineers of all industries, civil engineering, and transportation. Publications are also of interest to the wide range of readers including technicians, academics and scientists as well as students and young graduates.
NDT of Metalware
Other headings are presented in the following list:
Eddy Current Inspection
NDT in the Railways
Structural Health Monitoring
Abstracts of the Articles Published in Other Sources
NDT World Events
A double-blind peer review method is mandatory for processing of all scientific manuscripts submitted to the editorial staff of NDT World. This implies that neither the reviewer is aware of the manuscript authorship, nor the author maintains any contact with the reviewer.
1. The Editor-in-Chief or deputy Editor-in-Chief (hereinafter referred to as Editor) chooses a specialist for peer review. Peer reviews may be performed by leading experts in corresponding areas of science. The review process is limited to 2 weeks, though in some cases the schedule may be adjusted at the reviewer’s request.
2. A reviewer has an option to refuse the assessment in case there is any conflict of interest that may affect perception or interpretation of the manuscript.
3. Upon completion of the examination the reviewer is expected to present to the Editorial Board one of the following recommendations:
- accept the paper for publication without amendment;
- send the paper for additional peer review;
- return the paper to the author for correction according to the reviewer's comments;
- reject the paper (with the mandatory justification).
5. If the author(s) and the reviewer meet insoluble disagreements regarding revision of the manuscript, the Editor-in-Chief resolves the conflict by his own authority.
6. A positive review does not guarantee the acceptance as the final decision in all cases lies with the Editorial Board. The final decision-making authority in all cases lies with the Editor in-Chief.
7. Original reviews of submitted manuscripts remain deposited for 3 years.
COPE's Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors). The Editorial Board requires that all the parties involved in publishing operation (authors, reviewers, editors, publishers, distributors, readers) should be guided by these principles.
The Editorial Board:
- observes and safeguards the publishing ethics formulated below;
- maintains the integrity of the academic record;
- precludes business needs from compromising intellectual and ethical standards;
- is always willing to publish corrections, clarifications, retractions and apologies when needed;
- does not allow plagiarism and fraudulent data.
Publication and Authorship
The submitted manuscripts should:
- follow the focus and scope of the journal;
- present new nontrivial information which hasn't been published earlier;
- not contain plagiarism and fraudulent information;
- be supplemented with the complete list of the used sources, as well as with information on the financial support, if any;
- meet the existing standards of scientific paper preparation.
- confirm the participation of each of them in the research performed;
- ensure novelty, originality and validity of research results;
- provide real and authentic data of their study; misleading or falsified statements are unacceptable;
- take part in finalizing the paper after peer review process;
- advance well-reasoned objections if necessary, or correct mistakes;
- immediately notify the Editor, if they find significant errors or inaccuracies in the manuscript in the course of its reviewing or after publication.
1. All publications significant for the study should be referred to.
2. Borrowed quotations or statements should be accompanied by references to their authors and sources. Overquoting and plagiarism of any kind are unethical and unacceptable.
3. Submission of a paper implies that the results reported have not been published and are not being considered for publication elsewhere. If some fragments of the manuscript have been published, the authors should refer to the earlier paper and indicate differences between the new and earlier papers.
4. Submitting the same article to more than one journal is forbidden.
Peer Reviewers Responsibilities
Peer reviewers make an expert review of a manuscript according to the following principles:
1. Reviewers provide an objective and substantiated estimation of results presented in the manuscript. Personal criticism of the author(s) is not allowed.
2. A reviewer notifies the Editor if he/she does not have the expertise to assess all aspects of the manuscript or cannot be impartial because of conflict of interests. He/she should ask the Editor to excuse himself/herself from the review process.
3. The manuscript received for reviewing is considered confidential. It may not be given for information or discussion to third persons not authorized by the Editor.
4. Reviewers identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer also draws the Editor’s attention to any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript and any other published paper of which the reviewer has personal knowledge.
5. Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript are not used in a reviewer’s own research without the written consent of the author. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. A reviewer should not consider manuscripts in which he/she has a personal interest.
The Publisher and the Editorial Board stick to the following rules:
1. The Publisher and the Editorial Board are completely responsible for deciding which of the manuscripts submitted to the journal should be published.
2. The Editor makes an impartial decision on publication by evaluating the intellectual content of the manuscript, its significance and reliability of provided data as well as its conformity to the journal’s focus and scope.
3. Editorial decisions are not influenced by the origins of the manuscript including nationality, ethnicity, political beliefs, race, or religion of the authors.
4. The Editor does not accept a manuscript for publication in the event that there are sufficient grounds to suspect plagiarism.
5. Editors reserve the right to reduce and to edit the text of articles.
6. Editors do not allow any possible conflict of interests to arise.
7. In cases of suspected publication misconduct by any participant of the editorial process, public investigation must be pursued.
8. If a paper containing significant inaccuracies has been published, it should be revised so that the revisions are accessible to readers and indexing systems.
9. Editors ensure the reviewers remain anonymous.
Peer reviewers are not paid for the peer reviewing.