Construction and Building Materials Submission Process
Construction and Building Materials's submission process, first-decision timing, and the editorial checks that matter before peer review begins.
Senior Researcher, Oncology & Cell Biology
Author context
Specializes in manuscript preparation and peer review strategy for oncology and cell biology, with deep experience evaluating submissions to Nature Medicine, JCO, Cancer Cell, and Cell-family journals.
Readiness scan
Before you submit to Construction and Building Materials, pressure-test the manuscript.
Run the Free Readiness Scan to catch the issues most likely to stop the paper before peer review.
How to approach Construction and Building Materials
Use the submission guide like a working checklist. The goal is to make fit, package completeness, and cover-letter framing obvious before you open the portal.
Stage | What to check |
|---|---|
1. Scope | Manuscript preparation |
2. Package | Submission via Elsevier system |
3. Cover letter | Editorial assessment |
4. Final check | Peer review |
Decision cue: Construction and Building Materials uses Elsevier's Editorial Manager. The journal is high-volume and covers a wide scope, but editors screen for practical construction relevance, not just material characterization. A paper that describes a cement additive without performance data under realistic conditions will stall early.
Quick answer
Construction and Building Materials handles submissions through Editorial Manager. After upload, editors assess whether the work fits the journal's scope and has enough engineering relevance to justify review. The journal publishes across materials science, structural engineering, and building technology. The acceptance rate is roughly 25 to 30%, with first decisions typically arriving in 6 to 10 weeks.
Papers need to connect material properties to construction applications. Characterization without performance testing, or lab results without practical context, are common reasons for early rejection.
Stage | What happens | Typical timing |
|---|---|---|
Upload via Editorial Manager | Manuscript enters the system | Same day |
Editorial office check | Staff verify completeness and format | 1 to 3 days |
Editor triage | Handling editor assesses scope and quality | 1 to 2 weeks |
Peer review | 2 to 3 reviewers evaluate | 4 to 8 weeks |
Decision | Accept, revise, or reject | 6 to 10 weeks total |
Revision | Authors revise and resubmit | 30 to 60 days typically |
Publication | Online within 2 to 3 weeks of acceptance | Monthly print issues |
Before you open Editorial Manager
The submission portal is at Elsevier's Editorial Manager for this journal. Register if you don't have an Elsevier account.
Confirm these are ready:
- manuscript as an editable source file (.doc, .docx, or .tex, not PDF)
- all figures as separate high-resolution files
- graphical abstract (strongly encouraged)
- highlights (3 to 5 bullet points, each concise)
- data availability statement
- CRediT author contributions for all authors
- declaration of competing interests
- generative AI declaration (Elsevier now requires authors to disclose any AI tool use in manuscript preparation)
The AI declaration requirement
Elsevier requires all authors to declare the use of generative AI in manuscript preparation. This is a newer requirement. If you used ChatGPT, Copilot, or any generative AI tool to assist with writing, data analysis, or figure preparation, you must disclose it. AI tools cannot be listed as authors.
Step-by-step submission flow
1. Log in and select article type
Go to Editorial Manager, log in, and start a new submission. Select the article type: Research Article, Short Communication, or Review.
2. Enter metadata
Provide the title, abstract, and keywords. The abstract should clearly state the construction application, not just the material science. Editors use the abstract and highlights to make initial scope judgments.
3. Write the highlights
3 to 5 highlights are required. Each should be a concise sentence summarizing a specific finding. Focus on results and their construction relevance. "Developed a novel geopolymer binder" is weak. "Geopolymer binder achieved 45 MPa compressive strength with 40% recycled aggregate replacement" is specific and useful.
4. Upload manuscript and figures
Upload the manuscript as an editable file. PDF is not accepted as a source file. Figures go as separate high-resolution uploads. Tables should be in the manuscript body.
5. Prepare supplementary data
Supplementary material goes as separate files. This is where detailed mix designs, full test data series, additional micrographs, and extended statistical analyses belong. Reference it in the main text.
6. Complete declarations
Provide CRediT author contributions, competing interest declarations, data availability, funding information, and the AI use declaration. All are required before the manuscript can proceed to editorial review.
7. Submit and track
After submission, track progress through Editorial Manager. The status updates follow Elsevier's standard system.
What happens during editorial triage
The handling editor evaluates the manuscript for scope, quality, and construction relevance. This is where many submissions fail.
Editors are asking:
- does this paper address a real construction or building materials problem?
- are the experimental methods appropriate and well-described?
- does the study include performance testing under realistic conditions, not just material characterization?
- is the work incremental, or does it advance understanding or practice?
- are the results benchmarked against existing materials or methods?
Papers that describe new materials without connecting them to construction performance get desk rejected. The journal's scope includes innovative construction materials, but the operative word is "construction," not just "materials."
Common triage failures
- cement or concrete studies with only lab-scale characterization and no durability data under real service conditions
- nanomaterial modifications (graphene oxide, nano-silica, carbon nanotubes) added to concrete without demonstrating practical performance improvement at realistic dosages
- recycled aggregate or waste material studies without systematic comparison to conventional materials at equivalent mix proportions
- sustainability claims based on material substitution alone without lifecycle assessment or cost-benefit context
- review articles submitted without prior editor invitation or discussion (unsolicited reviews are rarely accepted)
- papers that describe synthesis or characterization of a material that could be used in construction but present no construction testing data
What happens during peer review
Papers that pass triage go to 2 to 3 reviewers. Construction and Building Materials uses single-anonymous review (reviewers are anonymous, authors are visible). The journal's reviewer pool includes both academic researchers and practicing engineers, which means practical relevance is weighted alongside scientific rigor. Reviewers expect the paper to demonstrate why the results matter for real construction practice, not just for materials science understanding.
Reviewers evaluate:
- experimental rigor and reproducibility
- practical relevance to construction industry
- comparison to state of the art
- statistical treatment of results
- quality of figures and data presentation
Understanding the decision
- Accept: uncommon on first round. Usually after minor revision.
- Minor revision: small changes needed. Respond within 30 days.
- Major revision: substantive concerns about methodology, data, or interpretation. Typically 30 to 60 days to revise. Returns to reviewers.
- Reject: the paper does not meet the journal's standards for scope or quality.
- Transfer: Elsevier may suggest transfer to a related journal (Case Studies in Construction Materials, Journal of Building Engineering) with reviewer context.
Editorial Manager status meanings
- Submitted to Journal: your manuscript is in the system
- With Editor: a handling editor is reviewing or assigning reviewers
- Under Review: sent to external reviewers
- Required Reviews Complete: reviewers returned reports
- Decision in Process: editor preparing decision
- Revise: you have been asked to revise
If "With Editor" persists beyond 3 weeks, a polite inquiry through the system is reasonable.
How this journal compares to nearby alternatives
Feature | Construction and Building Materials | Cement and Concrete Research | Journal of Building Engineering | Case Studies in Construction Materials |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Scope | Broad: all construction materials and methods | Narrow: cement, concrete, and related binders | Building performance and engineering | Case studies, applied construction |
Selectivity | ~25 to 30% acceptance | ~20% acceptance | ~30% acceptance | ~40% acceptance |
Impact factor | 8.0 | 11.4 | 6.4 | 6.2 |
Review speed | 6 to 10 weeks | 6 to 12 weeks | 4 to 8 weeks | 4 to 6 weeks |
Best for | Applied construction materials research | Fundamental cement and concrete science | Building-scale engineering studies | Practical case study documentation |
Choose when | Material meets construction performance testing | The work is deeply about cement chemistry | The focus is building performance, not material | The study is application-first, not science-first |
Submit if
- the study connects material properties to construction performance
- experimental results include realistic testing conditions (not just lab characterization)
- the work is benchmarked against existing materials or methods
- the highlights are specific and results-oriented
- the AI declaration and all Elsevier required declarations are complete
Think twice if
- the paper describes material synthesis without construction application data
- the results are only at lab scale without discussion of practical implications
- the work fits better in a pure materials science journal
- the comparison to state of the art is missing
- the manuscript is submitted as PDF rather than an editable source file
Before you submit, check your readiness score with a free scan. It takes about 60 seconds and evaluates methodology, citations, and journal fit.
Sources
On this page
Final step
Submitting to Construction and Building Materials?
Run the Free Readiness Scan to see score, top issues, and journal-fit signals before you submit.
Anthropic Privacy Partner. Zero-retention manuscript processing.
Need deeper scientific feedback? See Expert Review Options
Where to go next
Same journal, next question
- Construction and Building Materials Submission Guide: Requirements, Formatting and What Editors Want
- How to Avoid Desk Rejection at Construction and Building Materials
- Construction and Building Materials Review Time: Time to First Decision and Publication
- Construction and Building Materials Acceptance Rate: How Hard Is It to Get Published?
Supporting reads
Conversion step
Submitting to Construction and Building Materials?
Anthropic Privacy Partner. Zero-retention manuscript processing.