Focus and Scope

Revista Facultad de Ingeniería (Rev. Fac. Ing), created in 1986, is an open-access international scientific journal devoted to various sub-areas of engineering, such as: Environmental, Electronic, Metallurgical and Materials, Systems and Computing, among others. The Journal is edited by the Universidad Pedagógica y Tecnológica de Colombia and aims to contribute to the dissemination of impact research through the publication of articles, in English and Spanish, on research and innovation, reviews, and reflections, which represent an original production in the field of engineering. The presentation of articles for publication in the Journal has no associated cost, since this is funded by the publishing institution. The Journal articles are published in https://revistas.uptc.edu.co/index.php/ingenieria/

The Journal until 2019 maintained a quarterly periodicity, however, by determination of the Editorial Board, from the year 2020, it will change to a model of continuous publication. Articles are received for publication throughout the year.

Revista Facultad de Ingeniería (Rev. Fac. Ing) has an Editorial Board that evaluates and endorses the contents that will integrate the different numbers of this publication. In the evaluation and assessment process, the Journal uses the “double blind peer review” evaluation model, that is, the authors and the peers are anonymous throughout the process. This same model applies to articles that are sent by members of the Editorial Board.

The Journal only considers for evaluation unpublished works, that is, the ones that have not been published in any medium: journals, reports or any publication of a scientific or informative nature; however, the Journal will publish articles previously disseminated in scientific events, as long as the full text has not been published in the event's report. The Journal refrains from publishing any work that fails to comply with the originality or the code of ethics, or that is offensive or attacking people or companies. By submitting the article, the authors guarantee that they do not infringe copyright and that the paper has not been published elsewhere nor is it being submitted for evaluation to be published in another print or electronic publication.

Likewise, due to the high demand for articles received for the publication process, the Editorial Board reserves the right to reject an article without sending it to the peer review process and according to the preliminary review of the Editorial Board for the breach of the guidelines of author or by editorial priority.

It is important to point out that a translation is not considered an article, nor those revisions or states of art that do not present innovation on the analyzed subject.

The number of articles published in each issue will correspond to the demand for received works and the favorable evaluation of them, always complying with the quality parameters of the Journal.

Editorial Process

The author or authors must submit their articles to the OJS platform (https://revistas.uptc.edu.co/index.php/ingenieria/about/submissions). 

  1. The articles, for their examination, must be sent together with a letter of originality, which also states that the sent version has been approved by all authors.
  2. The documents submitted for publication must be written in Spanish or English, complying with the necessary conditions of coherence, cohesion, clarity, specificity, relevance and centrality that make them communicable.
  3. The reception of an article does not automatically imply its publication, since it must first meet the review and evaluation criteria, which takes an estimated time of 4 to 8 weeks, depending on the editorial flow of the Journal. Initially, each received article is reviewed by the Editorial Team, which verifies compliance with the guidelines for authors of the Journal, and in case of non-conformity, the article will be returned to the authors for adjustment. In this review, the Editorial Team also submits the document for analysis with anti-plagiarism software, and if it finds an important match it will reject it.
  4. When the paper passes the preliminary review, it is submitted for evaluation by two expert peers, under the double-blind peer review model, which are selected by the Editorial Board of the Journal based on their research or academic career; they issue their concept and observations on the originality and quality of the paper, taking into consideration the guidelines for evaluators. The criteria issued by the peers can be: a) Approved, b) Approved with changes, c) Rejected.
  5. In case one of the evaluations is negative and another positive, it will be sent to a third pair: this last process is also carried out when after twenty days no response is received from any of the evaluating peers.
  6. When the concept of the evaluating peers is Approved with changes, the Editorial Board notifies the authors of the comments in order to make the adjustments and informs the deadline for submitting the corrected article, which is usually fifteen calendar days. The corrected article must be sent within the established period along with a document in which each of the observations made by the peers is fulfilled. The Committee will evaluate that the article responds to the comments of the evaluators and maintains compliance with the rules of the Journal, otherwise the article will be returned to the authors. In the event that the article is rejected, it may not be sent back to the Journal unless it has been previously approved by the Editorial Team after a claim process has been filed according to the Journal's policies (For the submission of claims, consult section 12 of this guideline for authors).
  7. Papers that are approved and papers received with adjustments undergo a process of proofreading, editorial layout and marking. The final version, in PDF format, will be sent to the author for approval or remission of comments. Once the Editorial Team applies the modifications suggested by the authors, if any, the article is assigned to a number of the Journal, according to its programming.

The Editorial Board of the Journal reserves the right not to publish papers that do not conform to the required criteria or that do not send the corrections suggested by the evaluators in the stipulated time.

Review Process

Peer evaluation is a vital process in the scientific publication that guarantees the quality, originality, relevance and innovation of the articles that are submitted for publication, and therefore requires a high degree of responsibility.

The evaluating peer must verify that the subject of the submitted article is within their area of ​​expertise and that there is no conflict of interest (labor, personal, academic or moral) to carry out the evaluation; The reviewer has fifteen days, from the delivery of the article, to deliver his concept. Peers must be impartial and handle complete confidentiality in the evaluation.

To facilitate the opinion process on the relevance of publication of the article, the peers will be given an Evaluation Form along with the article, which can be consulted by the authors on the Journal's website. 

Open Access Policy

This Journal provides open access to it's content, based on the principle that providing the public with free access to research helps a greater global exchange of knowledge. 

Ethics and publication malpractice statement

Revista Facultad de Ingeniería, adheres to the 'Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors' (http://publicationethics.org/files/u2/Best_Practice.pdf) and to the ethical provisions of COPE (Committe On Publication Ethics), as well as to the provisions of Habeas Statutory Data-Law 1266 of 2008 for the management of personal information in databases.

The following aspects are highlighted for the authors:

  1. All documents submitted for the publication process in Revista Facultad de Ingeniería must have gone through a review process by the authors, respecting the policies defined by the Journal.
  2. The texts derived from research done with people or organizations must have the corresponding authorization, which must be sent with the article.
  3. Each submitted paper to the Journal must be original. A paper that is translated from another language is not considered original.
  4. Although it is not considered autoplagium that the authors base their statements on the sections of definitions, theoretical framework or methodologies of other works they have developed, it is essential that the contributions and conclusions are not the same as those published, either by authors or by others.
  5. All authors must declare that the content of the article is original and that it has not been published, nor is it being considered for publication in any other printed or electronic medium.
  6. Any person who appears as the author of the work must have participated in the research process and in the preparation of the material presented to the Journal. It is expected that persons who did not participate in the activities described will not appear as authors; who only participated in part of these can appear in the acknowledgments section.
  7. When the author is a member of the Editorial Board of the Journal, it will be disabled for reviews and decisions about his paper.

The following aspects are highlighted for the evaluating peers:

In order to evaluate the papers, the Editorial Board invites people with research trajectory according to the area of ​​each of the submitted articles; However, if the pair considers that it does not comply with the profile, does not have the time or presents a conflict of interest to evaluate a document, it must be informed so that the Editorial Board assigns another person to evaluate the work.

  1. The evaluating peers must present a concept that is as clear and rigorous as possible, without using offensive language, so that the Editorial Board can make the decision on the acceptance or rejection of a paper.
  2. The sent documents to the evaluators of Revista Facultad de Ingeniería are confidential and, therefore, the review of these is limited to evaluative purposes. The citation of these as unpublished manuscripts or the use of their contents before publication constitute an inappropriate and unauthorized use. 

In addition to the above, it is reminded that plagiarism in articles will be penalized by vetoing the author (s) for two years. It is recalled that plagiarism is the action by which segments of other authors' works are reproduced or paraphrased without their corresponding referencing or recognition. It is plagiarized when: 

  1. Fragments of other people's works without quotes or source reference are included or used in the work.
  2. It is copied and pasted directly from other sources without indicating that it is a textual quotation and without referencing the source.
  3. Images, tables or diagrams are included without recognition of their origin.

 It is pertinent to clarify that plagiarism, whether conscious or not, is a serious and prosecutable offense.

All other provisions, not expressed in the previous section, will be resolved based on the provisions of the COPE Code of Conduct and Good Editorial Practices.

 Article Considerations

By submitting an article, the authors accept that the paper: has not been previously published (only the publication of the abstract in a scientific event is excepted); It is not under evaluation in any other publication; In its final version it has been approved by all authors. To verify the originality of the articles, they will be analyzed with the TurnItIn plagiarism detection software.

Conflict of Interest

In the process of sending the article, the author who makes the submission must state all conflicts of interest related to the work in the section intended for that purpose. If the article is approved, this information will be included in the final text, in a Conflict of Interest section.

Authors Attribution

Revista Facultad de Ingeniería requests that before sending an article, an evaluation of the attribution of authorship by each author is made, that is, that the contribution of each author to the paper can be clearly determined. The Journal suggests using the criteria for authorship of the CRediT taxonomy (Contributor Roles Taxonomy). Likewise, it is requested that within the article, in its final version, a Contribution Section of the Authors be included where the contribution of each author is reported in the article.

The Journal considers as the author, the one who performs:

  1. Significant contributions to the approach, justification and / or design of the work
  2. The acquisition, analysis or interpretation of work data
  3. The writing or critical revision of the text generating scientific contributions of relevance for the development of the paper.

Likewise, every person who appears as an author must assume responsibility for all aspects mentioned in the work, so they must be fully available to answer any questions about the accuracy or completeness of any part of the paper.

People who do not meet the above conditions must not be included as authors, however, they must be recognized in the acknowledgments of the article.

Additionally, authors should review in detail the order in which they are presented before submitting the article. Any addition, removal or change in the order of the name of the authors during the evaluation process or after acceptance of the article must be requested by official letter signed by all the authors sent to the Editorial Board by email justifying the request to change the list of authors. The Editorial Board will review the case and apply it when it is justified. 

Publication of Retractions and Corrections

The Journal, in the cases that are considered necessary, will publish corrections and retractions of the published works. The first case (corrections) corresponds to the publication of an additional document to the work, in which it recognizes the mistakes and its respective correction is presented. In the case of retractions, a document is published in which the involuntary or intentional inaccuracies of the document are recognized; These inaccuracies may be, among others, plagiarism or presentation of data or manipulated images that invalidate the obtained results.

Self-archiving

The Journal manages the PKP Preservation Network Self-archiving System, which is the PKP Preservation Network that provides free preservation services for journals managed under OJS that meet the basic criteria.

Suggestions, Claims and Consultations

If you may have any questions or complaints related to the editorial process or the final decision of a submitted article, you can send an email to the Editor in Chief at revista.ingenieria@uptc.edu.co The Editor-in-Chief will personally review the query or complaint and attempt to respond as soon as possible, if necessary the Editor in Chief may consult other members of the Editorial Team.

In the same vein, the Journal receives suggestions from its authors and readers, with the aim of continually improving its editorial processes, these suggestions should be sent to the same email and will be answered, when required, by the Editor in Chief.