Submission of the Articles
Teksty można przesyłać przez Internet:
or via postal mail at the following address:
Redakcja „Gaz, Woda i Technika Sanitarna” 00-043 Warszawa, ul. Czackiego 3/5 p. 216
WYTYCZNE DLA AUTORÓW
The article must be accompanied by a brief summary in Polish and English, keywords and biographical note of the authors (first name, last name, academic titles, affiliation, e-mail address, postal address for correspondence and telephone to the editor).
The article should be divided into numbered subtitles, e.g. preface, introduction, experimental part (methods of testing, results and analysis), summary and conclusions. Literature, to which the author refers to in the text, should be compiled at the end of the article in the following order: name (s), initials of the author (s), title of article, journal title, volume, number, year of publication, page number.
According to the recommendations of the MSH, evaluation of articles for the possibility of their publication is based on the following criteria:
1. Originality
- whether the article contains updates regarding the topics presented,
- contribution to the state of the art,
- whether corresponds to the substantive level of the magazine,
- whether the reported issues are important for the development of science and practical applications.
2. Layout
- Whether the article presents a logical structure and a clarity of argument,
- The title – is equivalent to the content of the article,
- Summary – does it reflect the content of the article,
- Introduction – whether it describes what the author intended to achieve and clearly presents the issues raised in the article (introduction may include a review of the literature on the topic, the description of the experiment, hypothesis, general plan of the experiment or methods used).
- Test methods – detailed explanation how the results were obtained. It is also taken into account whether the test methods are appropriately selected, whether they are accurately described (if the methods are new), if the author has described accurately enough how to perform tests / measurements? Results – whether the author logically and clearly explains what has stated in trials?, or made a correct analysis of the results?
- Results – whether the author logically and clearly explains what has stated in trials?, or made a correct analysis of the results?
- Summary / Conclusions – whether contained statements / conclusions are supported by the results of research?, whether the author showed how the results relate to expectations and previous studies ?, or, whether the results confirm or contradict earlier theories?
- Figures and tables: whether published figures and tables clearly illustrate the results of research and that are understandable to the reader?, or are relevant to illustrate the article?
Previous Studies
- If an article contains the earlier studies, whether there are corresponding references?
4. Ethical Issues
- Plagiarism: if the article is not a copy of another job?
5. Odpłatność za publikację
- The volume of the article should not exceed 12 typewritten pages.
- Having qualified scientific article as consistent with the profile of the magazine, the Editor-in-Chief after any consultation with the editors of the Thematic Editors selects two independent reviewers from outside of the research unit, affiliated by the author of the publication. Reviewer’s choice is made from recognized authorities in the field, and the chosen reviewer must guarantee:
- independence of opinion,
- no conflict of interest, expressed in particular by the lack of direct personal or business relationships with the author of the article, or direct scientific cooperation in the past two years, preceding the year of preparation reviews
- confidentiality as to the substantive content of materials and comments about them.
- After selecting Reviewers, Editor-in-Chief in contact with them, defining the subject of the article (description or summary), the required scope of the review and the date of its preparation.
- After accepting the offer by the Reviewers, Editors send to them the full text of the article requiring the review.
- Review of an Article shall be standard “double blind review” procedure, which means that the Authors and Reviewers do not know their identities. Before sending the article to the Reviewer, the Editor makes every effort to remove from the content any information that might identify the author of the article. Editors allow other procedures of review in a justified case but the Reviewer is then obliged to sign a declaration of no conflict of interest.
- Personal details of the Reviewers are confidential and can only be declassified at the request of the author, and with the consent of the Reviewer, especially in the case of negative review or article containing issues open to debate. At least once a year the Editors publish a full list of cooperating Reviewers.
- The Reviewer prepares the review free or sometimes for a fee (on a contract for work). In the former case, the Editor sends the tax and review forms together with the text of the article reviewed. In addition to the review form, the Reviewer may also convey its observations in the form of comments included in the electronic version of the article under review.
- Upon receipt of the reviews, Editors:
- can inform the Author of its receipt (for the review not requiring amendments, or in the case of the need to introduce only minor editorial changes)
- directs the review containing critical comments to the author who makes any amendments required in the case of comments, with which he disagrees – prepares a response to the review,
- directs again the article to the Reviewer after necessary changes made by the Author – if the Reviewer considers it necessary to re-review it.
- The final decision about printing a scientific article is made by the Editor on the basis of comments made in the review and the final version of the article supplied by the Author.
- In the case of a review disqualifying the article, Editor-in-Chief decides to reject the work or directs the article to another Reviewer.
- In the case of a review disqualifying the article, Editor-in-Chief decides to reject the work or directs the article to another Reviewer.
- Prof. dr hab. D. Eng. Andrzej Kotowski – Politechnika Wrocławska
- Prof. dr hab. D. Eng. Ryszard Błażejewski – Uniwersytet Przyrodniczy Poznań
- Prof. dr inż. Marek Gromiec – Wyższa Szkoła Ekologii i Zarządzania Warszawa
- Prof.ndz.dr inż Monika Żubrowska-Sudoł-Politechnika Warszawska
- Dr inż. Józef Trela – Uniwersytet Sztokholmski .Szwecja
- Prof. dr inż.Elżbieta Płaza-Royal Institute of Technology ,Szwecja
- Dr inż. Anna Lersson ,Green Bussiness Norwey. Norwegia
- Dr inż. Agnieszka Speicher ,Landesamt für Natur, Umwelt und Verbraucherschutz NRW. Niemcy
(on the basis of COPE guidelines – Committee on Publication Ethics)
Heating, Heating, Ventilation – as a scientific journal is obliged to take action to comply with ethics in scientific publications, publishing high-quality articles and counteracting unethical phenomena in science.
Adherence to ethical principles is expected equally to all participants in the process of publication: authors, editors, reviewers and publishers.
Editor`s Responsibilities
Editor evaluates the material in a completely objective and fair ways, without discrimination against the authors based on race, gender, sexual orientation, religion, political beliefs, ethnicity and geography. His decisions is based solely on the contents of the article analysed taking into account its originality, scientific merit, clarity of presenting issues, the validity of studies or information for the scientific and technical community in the field.
Editor treats all materials received from authors as confidential, and does not provide information about them to people who are not directly involved in the publication process (authors, editors, reviewers, etc.), and does not use them in his own scientific activity without the written permission of the author.
Editor enables the author publication of polemics when the author`s article has been subjected to criticism in the journal.
Editor does not block the possibility to publish negative research results.
Editor with the Editorial Board pay special attention to existing legal requirements for copyright.
Reviewer’s Responsibilities
The task of the review process is to help the Editor-in-Chief and Editorial Board in making decisions about the publication of the article and helping the author and possible assistance in correcting or improving his work. The reviewer should objectively assess whether he can undertake the preparation of the article review taking into account the scope of factual material and timeframes specified by the Editorial Board. Reviewer does not undertake the preparation of the review if he finds the existence of a conflict of interest arising e.g. from financial, personal or business relationships with any of the authors, company or institution.
Reviewer treats all materials received from the Editor as confidential, and does not provide information about them to third parties without the consent of the Editor, and does not use them in his own scientific activity without the written permission of the author.
Review should be prepared in an objective, clear and unambiguous way, with no personal references and no critical remarks unless supported by concrete arguments.
The Reviewer should inform the Editor in the case of significant similarities in the article content to those found in other publications that he knows.
Author`s Responsibilities
The author sends to the Editor only original and unpublished materials. It is unacceptable submitting articles to several publications at the same time.
The article should be prepared taking into account the proper citation of sources, and should present methods, studies and results in a clear and legible manner so as to allow tracing the course of Author`s procedure and possible repetition of studies by other researchers in the field. The article should take into account the state of art in the field, and the results should be carefully and objectively presented and analysed. If the partial results have been published, the Author should inform the Editor and put the relevant information in the article.
The author confirms that the research data used in the publication have not been fabricated or manipulated.
The authorship of the article is limited to people who have had a significant impact on the concept, assumptions, methods, research and interpretation of results and substantive development of the article. All persons who have made significant contribution to the article must be listed as co-authors. The Author declaring publication should disclose the contribution of individual authors to the publication and ensure that all contributors accept the application to the Magazine and the final version of the article.
The Author should notify the Editorial Board of the observed significant errors in his publications and interact with the Editor in correction or rectification.
The Author should keep the test data source for possible making them available on request to the Editor or authorized institutions.
The Author acknowledges in the justified case that all studies have been carried out with respect for ethical and formal principles being in force in the field of science (e.g. the consent of the bioethics committee).
The Author should inform about the funding sources of the publication, contribution of research institutions, associations and other entities (financial disclosure) and about possible conflicts of interest that may be associated with the publication of the article.
Acting in case of unethical practices
In a situation where there is a suspicion of misconduct in the case of an article published or filled on paper, in particular concerning the phenomenon of plagiarism, “ghost-writing” and “guest authorship”, the Editor-in chief is taking action to clarify the matter, first asking for comment on the author. In the case of proven misconduct violating ethics rules significantly, the Editor takes further steps, which may include, among others, publication of information about the unreliability detected and notification the employer of the Author Any manifestations of misconduct in science are documented by the Editors.
Prosimy Autorów o pisanie prostych wzorów oraz oznaczeń w tekście z klawiatury. Wzory zawierające kreski ułamkowe, pierwiastki i inne symbole niedostępne z klawiatury muszą być wstawiane jako obiekt Microsoft Equation 3.0. Wykaz literatury (w nawiasach kwadratowych, na końcu artykułu) powinien być utworzony w stylu Chicago:
Sformalizowany zapis bibliograficzny:
autor #1 nazwisko #1 imię, autor#2 imię #2 nazwisko . rok . „tytuł” . czasopismo. tom (zeszyt) : strony.
Proszę zwrócić uwagę na oddzielenie partii danych kropkami, natomiast cudzysłowu używamy przy oznaczeniu tytułu artykułu. Zastosowanie tej techniki zdecydowanie polepszy czytelność wpisu. Numer zeszytu wpisujemy w nawiasie. Uwaga! Znaku dwukropka używamy przed wstawieniem numeru stron, na których został zamieszczony artykuł w danym czasopiśmie. Wyjątek – jeśli imię autora nie można napisać w pełnej wersji, prosimy wpisać inicjał imienia.
Pozycje literatury na końcu artykułu powinny być ułożone w porządku alfabetycznym, w nawiasach kwadratowych, powołania w tekście również w nawiasach kwadratowych.
Przykład
Kawlewski Krzysztof, Eugeniusz Świtoński. 2013. „Zastosowanie algorytmów genetycznych w optymalizacji sterowania ruchów roboczych suwnicy pomostowej”. Transport Przemysłowy i Maszyny Robocze 19 (1) : 37–41.
W przypadku publikacji w czasopiśmie oczekujemy: nazwiska i imienia autorów, roku, tytułu artykułu, tytułu czasopisma, zeszytu i stron, na której znajduje się publikacja.
Źródło: PBN
