Journal Guides5 min readUpdated May 16, 2026

Construction and Building Materials 'Under Review': What Each Status Means

If your Construction and Building Materials submission shows Under Review, here is what each status means and when to follow up.

Author contextSenior Researcher, Chemistry. Experience with JACS, Angewandte Chemie, ACS Nano.View profile

What to do next

Already submitted to Construction and Building Materials? Use this page to interpret the status and choose the next step.

The useful next step is understanding what the status usually means at Construction and Building Materials, how long the wait normally runs, and when a follow-up is actually reasonable.

See The Next StepAnthropic Privacy Partner. Zero-retention manuscript processing.Run Free Readiness ScanOr check your bibliography for retracted citations
Timeline context

Construction and Building Materials review timeline: what the data shows

Time to first decision is the most actionable number. What happens after varies by manuscript and reviewer availability.

Full journal profile
Time to decision~100-150 days medianFirst decision
Acceptance rate~30-35%Overall selectivity
Impact factor8.0Clarivate JCR

What shapes the timeline

  • Desk decisions are fast. Scope problems surface within days.
  • Reviewer availability is the main variable after triage. Specialized topics take longer to assign.
  • Revision rounds reset the clock. Major revision typically adds 6-12 weeks per round.

What to do while waiting

  • Track status in the submission portal — status changes signal active review.
  • Wait at least the journal's stated median before sending a status inquiry.
  • Prepare revision materials in parallel if you expect a revise-and-resubmit decision.

_Last reviewed: 2026-05-16._

Quick answer: Construction and Building Materials has a 2024 JCR impact factor of 7.7, accepts about 30 percent of submissions, and reports a median first-decision time of 4 to 8 weeks. If still Under Review past 2 weeks, you have likely cleared the initial editorial screen.

Submission portal and editorial contact: Construction and Building Materials uses Elsevier Editorial Manager at editorialmanager.com/conbuildmat. Editorial questions go through the Elsevier author portal at support@elsevier.com, referencing the manuscript ID.

Construction and Building Materials desk-rejects roughly 40 to 50 percent in 7 to 14 days. If past that window, peer review is active.

While you wait

A Construction and Building Materials submission readiness check flags materials-testing-completeness, scope-fit, and durability-evidence gaps that drive most desk rejections.

Construction and Building Materials's review pipeline

Status
What is happening
Typical duration
Submitted to Journal
Administrative processing
Day 0 to 2
With Editor
Editor evaluating desk-screen fit
Days 2 to 14
Under Review
Reviewers invited or actively reviewing
Days 14 to 56
Required Reviews Complete
Editor synthesizing reports
5 to 10 days
Decision in Process
Editor finalizing decision letter
3 to 7 days
Decision Sent
Reject, R&R, or accept
Check email

The editorial desk screen (about 40 to 50 percent rejected)

Construction and Building Materials editors evaluate materials-engineering significance, testing completeness, and durability-relevance. A desk rejection usually means scope mismatch or testing gaps.

Day 0: Editorial Manager upload

The editorialmanager.com/conbuildmat portal accepts the package and routes to a handling editor.

Days 1 to 14: Editor desk-screen

The handling editor reads the paper, evaluates scope and testing depth, and decides whether to invite reviewers.

Days 14 to 28: Reviewer invitations

Two to three reviewers with civil-materials expertise.

Days 21 to 56: Peer review

Reviewer reports return on a 4 to 8 week cadence.

Days 56 to 84: First editorial decision

Major revision is the most common outcome.

Days 84 to 240: Revision rounds and acceptance

Single-revision acceptances run roughly 4 to 6 months.

When to worry

  • Rejection within 1 to 5 days: Administrative issue or scope mismatch.
  • Rejection within 7 to 14 days: Desk rejection.
  • Still Under Review after 3 weeks: Good sign.
  • Still Under Review after 10 weeks: Reviewer delay.

Readiness check

While you wait on Construction and Building Materials, scan your next manuscript.

The scan takes about 1-2 minutes. Use the result to decide whether to revise before the decision comes back.

Check my next manuscriptAnthropic Privacy Partner. Zero-retention manuscript processing.Open status guideOr verify a citation in 10 seconds

What to do while waiting

  • Do not contact during the first 8 weeks unless urgent.
  • Prepare a point-by-point response template focused on testing methodology, durability evidence, and standards compliance.

How Construction and Building Materials compares to nearby alternatives

Feature
CBM
Cement and Concrete Research
Cement and Concrete Composites
Materials and Structures
Desk rejection rate
40 to 50 percent
50 to 60 percent
30 to 40 percent
30 to 40 percent
Desk decision speed
7 to 14 days
14 to 21 days
14 to 21 days
14 to 21 days
Total review time
4 to 8 weeks
6 to 10 weeks
6 to 10 weeks
8 to 12 weeks
Editorial bar
Broad construction-materials
Cement-and-concrete fundamental
Cement-composites applied
Structural-materials with RILEM focus

Submit if your paper passed the desk

If your CBM paper is Under Review past 2 weeks, you have likely cleared the desk screen.

Construction and Building Materials submission readiness check.

Think twice before assuming "Under Review" means safe

Editors retain discretion to reject after partial review. Our Construction and Building Materials manuscript fit check flags testing-completeness gaps before reviewers do.

For a free pre-upload diagnostic, use the Construction and Building Materials manuscript fit check.

Last verified: Construction and Building Materials author guidance, Elsevier Editorial Manager portal at editorialmanager.com/conbuildmat.

The Construction and Building Materials reviewer experience

Reviewer focus area
What CBM asks reviewers to evaluate
How to prepare
Materials testing completeness
Standard tests (compressive strength, flexural, durability) reported?
Include standard-compliant testing protocols
Standards compliance
ASTM, EN, or other standards followed?
Reference standards explicitly in methods
Durability evidence
Long-term behavior addressed?
Include accelerated-aging or long-term test data
Scope significance
Does the work advance construction practice?
Frame contribution around a construction-engineering decision
Reproducibility
Could another lab reproduce these tests?
Provide detailed mix designs and test protocols

In our pre-submission review work with Construction and Building Materials manuscripts

Three failure patterns generate the most consistent rejections.

Standards non-compliance. Test methods that don't reference ASTM/EN standards get flagged.

Durability evidence missing. Long-term performance is a key CBM concern.

Scope too narrow. Pure lab characterization without construction-practice implications.

Methodology note

This page was created from CBM's public author guidance, Elsevier Editorial Manager documentation, and Manusights review work.

Frequently asked questions

Your manuscript has cleared Elsevier Editorial Manager admin checks and is being evaluated, either by the handling editor or by external peer reviewers.

Construction and Building Materials reports a median first-decision time of 4 to 8 weeks. Desk decisions usually arrive within 1 to 2 weeks; full peer-review decisions land 6 to 12 weeks after submission.

Wait at least 8 weeks before inquiring. Contact the Elsevier portal at support@elsevier.com, referencing the manuscript ID.

A handling editor is evaluating the paper. The journal typically invites two to three reviewers with civil-materials expertise.

Yes. The 4 to 8 week median means roughly half of papers take longer.

Past 10 weeks is the right moment for a polite, factual inquiry. Silence in the first 5 weeks is normal.

References

Sources

  1. Construction and Building Materials journal homepage
  2. Elsevier Editorial Manager for CBM
  3. Elsevier publishing ethics

Best next step

Use this page to interpret the status and choose the next sensible move.

For Construction and Building Materials, the better next step is guidance on timing, follow-up, and what to do while the manuscript is still in the system. Save the Free Readiness Scan for the next paper you have not submitted yet.

Guidance first. Use the scan for the next manuscript.

Anthropic Privacy Partner. Zero-retention manuscript processing.

Internal navigation

Where to go next

Open Status Guide