Editorial Policies

Focus and Scope

Challenge Journal of Concrete Research Letters is an international, quarterly published and open access scholarly journal that publishes original research articles as well as short communications, review articles, case studies, discussions, book reviews and letters to the editor in all areas of concrete research.

Challenge Journal of Concrete Research Letters (CJCRL) -formerly known as Concrete Research Letters- publishes as rapidly as possible manuscripts of high quality which address eminent topics related to concrete performance, production, durability, sustainability and applications. Being an international, peer-reviewed, online and open-access journal, CJCRL presents a world-wide forum for the dissemination of knowledge among engineers, scientists and mathematicians working in the field of concrete.

Concrete is one of the most commonly used structural materials. Since it has been used in construction industry, it powers the constructional evolution. As so far there is no substitute for concrete to take place at least in the near future, concrete will remain important to sustain our growth and maintain the quality of life for humanity. Primary aim of CJCRL is to encourage academic challenges in concrete research to seek for the global truth. Therefore, the Journal intends to publish at least a review or discussion at each issue. A double blind peer-review policy is followed in order to increase the scientific quality of the published papers. CJCRL publishes review articles, case studies, short communications, discussions, book reviews, challenges to previous published papers, and diaries on international events related to any aspect of concrete.

The submission, review and publication processes in CJCRL are comprehensively web-based in order to facilitate the major goal of rapid publication. In addition to its distinguished fast publication time, CJCRL is the first publisher journal of short-communications devoted exclusively to concrete research starting in March 2010. CJCRL publishes four issues annually, aiming for bi-monthly publication frequency in the near future.

ISSN 2548-0928
ISSN 2180-1371 (from 2010 to 2016)


Section Policies

Letters to the Editor

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Research Articles

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Case Studies

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Short Communications

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed


Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed


Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Peer Review Process

1. Manuscript Submission
Authors upload their studies to our submission system. Submission of an article implies that the work described has not been published previously. The submitted documents must follow predetermined guidelines to conceal author identity.

2. Editorial Check
Within 5 days of submission, each manuscript undergoes a preliminary review by the Editor-in-Chief. The Editor-in-Chief might directly invite reviewers or forward to the Section Editors for the purpose of additional evaluation. Editors assess submissions and perform a check for suitability. Identity information is removed as necessary.

3. Reviewer Assignment
At least three expert reviewers are selected and assigned by editors. Reviewer identities are kept confidential.

4. Double-Blind Review
Reviewers evaluate the study and provide feedback. Author identity remains undisclosed to the reviewers.

5. Editorial Decision
The Editor-in-Chief make publication decisions based on at least two or more reviewer comments, focusing on the quality and originality of the work.
- A manuscript may be declined for review if the editor considers it outside the scope of the journal. The English level of each manuscript is checked by the editorial office before transferring it to the editor. If the level of English used is not adequate, the manuscript can be declined or sent back to the author by the editor.
- If most reviewers recommend acceptance or rejection of the manuscript, the Editor-in-Chief makes the final decision accordingly. For a manuscript to be rejected for publication, it must receive two negative reviews. The editor might also serve as a reviewer. If the editor receives one positive and one negative review, a third reviewer must be obtained. At this point, the deadline for the third reviewer is shortened to expedite the review process.
- If the reviewers recommend revisions, revision on the manuscript is requested considering the reviewer comments. Authors may either proceed with the revision or decline the revision of the manuscript. There is no guarantee that the revised paper will be accepted for publication. If the authors choose to proceed, they revise the paper and submit it to the Journal, along with a letter explaining how the reviewers' comments have been addressed. The Editor-in-Chief assesses the revised manuscript and makes the acceptance/rejection decision.
- If the reviewers recommend resubmission, they review the revised manuscript and provide their comments. The Editor-in-Chief evaluates the re-revised manuscript and makes the acceptance/rejection decision.

6. Author Notification
Authors receive notifications regarding the outcomes. Revision and amendments may be requested if necessary.

7. Final Acceptance
Following revisions, the manuscript moves to the final acceptance stage, becoming ready for publication.

Double-Blind Peer-Review Policy

At Tulpar Academic Publishing, we are committed to maintaining the highest standards of integrity and impartiality in our peer-review process. To ensure unbiased evaluations and a fair evaluation environment, we adhere to a double-blind peer-review policy.

Author Anonymity
Authors are required to submit manuscripts without any information that may disclose their identity. This includes removing author names, affiliations, and any other identifying details from the main document and supplementary files.

Reviewer Anonymity
Reviewers are carefully selected based on their expertise, and their identities are kept confidential throughout the review process.
Our editorial team ensures that communication between authors and reviewers is managed in a way that preserves anonymity.

Editorial Oversight
Editors facilitate the peer-review process without revealing the identities of authors and reviewers.
Editorial decisions are based solely on the quality, relevance, and originality of the work.



Open Access Policy

This journal provides immediate open access to its content on the principle that making research freely available to the public supports a greater global exchange of knowledge.

Being in line with Budapest Open Access Initiative definition, Tulpar Academic Publishing agrees that removing access barriers to scientific literature will accelerate research, enrich education, share the learning of the rich with the poor and the poor with the rich, make this literature as useful as it can be, and lay the foundation for uniting humanity in a common intellectual conversation and quest for knowledge.

"Open access" is the free availability of scientific literature on the public internet, permitting any users to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of these articles, crawl them for indexing, pass them as data to software, or use them for any other lawful purpose, without financial, legal, or technical barriers other than those inseparable from gaining access to the internet itself. The only constraint on reproduction and distribution, and the only role for copyright in this domain, should be to give authors control over the integrity of their work and the right to be properly acknowledged and cited.


Editorial Commitments

The Editorial Board is comprised of Editor-in-Chief, Associate Editor(s), editorial board members, web editors, guest editor, editor assistants.

The chair of the editorial board is the Editor-in-Chief. The last decision for articles are taken by Editor-in-Chief.

Associate Editor(s)
An associate editor, who commissions articles, coordinates peer review process.

Editorial Board Members
Having place in editorial board of CJCRL provides an academic prestige to the board members. Additionally, the role of the editorial board members are to advise and support the Editor-in-Chief.

Objectives of the editorial board are as described below:
1. Provide input on editorial needs and review manuscripts, as requested.
2. Help to identify peer reviewers and provide second opinions on papers (i.e. where there is a conflict between reviewers).
3. Complete assigned reviews in a timely fashion. Offer mutually respectful and constructive review of manuscripts to assist in providing the highest quality papers.
4. Identify key topics to include in the journal and invites key authors on these topics to submit an article.
5. Each Editorial Board member of CJCRL should review at least one article in three years.
6. Approaching potential contributors.
7. Identify appropriate conferences for editors to attend.
8. Endorse the journal to authors, readers and subscribers and encourage colleagues to submit their best work.

Manuscript Editor
Manuscipt editor is responsible for format/language requirement before publishing articles. Formatting staffs directly reports to only manuscript editor.

Web Editor
Web editor is particularly responsible for the Journal's online content to inform all interested scholars about recent published issues.

Guest Editor
Guest editor migth be invited by Editor-in-Chief, Associate Editor and Journal Manager to handle special issues and books.

Technical Staff
Article submission problems, user account problems or general queries are handled by technical staffs.

Journal Managers
Journal managers of each journal are selected from the same field of research interest. Web editors, manuscript editors and all administrative staff works under the journal managers. The most important duty of journal managers is to follow the innovations for their journals' improvements. Journal manager names are preferred to be hidden in most cases.

Contact staff evaluate received e-mails for Journal Manager. If it is believed that some issues can not be solved by journal staff, then e-mails are forwarded to Journal Managers.


Disclosure Policy

If there is no conflict of interest, authors should state in their cover letter that “The author(s) declare(s) that there is no conflict of interest regarding the publication of this paper.”


Submission & Publication Charges

Challenge Journal of Concrete Research Letters does not require any kind of submission or publication charges.


The Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement

Tulpar Academic Publishing is committed to meeting high standards of ethical behavior at all stages of the publication process across all our journals. In our ethical standards and procedures, we set out general expectations for authors, editors, reviewers and publishers. Ethical standards for publication exist to ensure high-quality scientific publications, public trust in scientific findings, and that authors receive credit for their research. Allegations of misconduct will be investigated fully, as outlined on the relevant pages below. Our commitment to maintaining the integrity of scholarly communication is reflected in these processes. Complaints against a journal, its staff, editorial board or publisher should be directed to the editorial office (contact details are provided on each journal homepage) or alternatively info@tulparpublishing.com.

Ethical Procedures
- Allegations of Misconduct
Appeals Process
Complaints Process
Conflicts of Interest

Participant Commitments
Authors' Commitments
Reviewers' Commitments
Editors' Commitments
Publisher's Commitments

Allegations of Misconduct

Publication Policies and Procedures

Tulpar Academic Publishing is committed to upholding the highest standards of publication ethics and addressing allegations of misconduct with the utmost seriousness. Our policies and procedures for the identification and handling of allegations, including plagiarism, falsification, and fabrication of data, are comprehensive and align with the guidelines set forth by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

Identification Process

  • Authors: Manuscripts undergo rigorous peer review, plagiarism checks, and editorial scrutiny.
  • Reviewers: Reviewers are instructed to report any ethical concerns.
  • Editors: Editors are vigilant in identifying and addressing misconduct.
Dealing with Allegations
  • Thorough Investigation: Allegations are investigated promptly and impartially.
  • Informed Decision-Making: Decisions are based on evidence, and involved parties are informed transparently.
  • Correction or Retraction: Appropriate actions, including correction or retraction, are taken if misconduct is substantiated.
Preventive Measures
  • Awareness: Authors, reviewers, and editors are educated about ethical standards.
  • Clear Guidelines: Policies on authorship, citation, and data integrity are communicated clearly.

Appeals Process

Author Appeal Mechanism

We understand the importance of providing a fair and transparent process for authors who may wish to appeal editorial decisions. Tulpar Academic Publishing has established a robust appeals mechanism to address author concerns and ensure a thorough and impartial review of any appeal.

Submission of Appeals

  • Authors dissatisfied with editorial decisions may submit an appeal.
  • Appeals must be submitted in writing, outlining the grounds for reconsideration.
Review of Appeals
  • Appeals are reviewed by an independent editorial committee.
  • The committee assesses the validity of the appeal and reviews the original decision.
Communication of Findings
  • Authors are informed of the outcome of the appeal in a timely manner.
  • The decision of the appeals committee is final.
  • The appeals process maintains the confidentiality of all parties involved and ensures impartiality.

Complaints Process

Author Complaint Mechanism

At Tulpar Academic Publishing, we are committed to addressing author concerns through a transparent and effective complaints process. Our goal is to ensure that any complaints raised by authors are handled with the utmost care and attention.

Submission of Complaints

  • Authors may submit a complaint if they have concerns regarding editorial processes or decisions.
  • Complaints should be submitted in writing, clearly outlining the nature of the issue.
Review of Complaints
  • A designated complaints committee, separate from the editorial team, will review the submitted complaints.
  • The committee will conduct an impartial investigation into the concerns raised.
Communication of Findings
  • Authors are informed of the findings and outcomes of the complaints review process.
  • The journals are committed to resolving complaints in a fair and timely manner.
  • The complaints process maintains the confidentiality of all parties involved and ensures impartiality.

Conflicts of Interest

Journal Policies and Transparency

At Tulpar Academic Publishing, we prioritize transparency and integrity in scholarly publishing. To address potential conflicts of interest involving editors, authors, and reviewers, we have established clear policies and guidelines.

Editorial Team

  • Editors involved in the decision-making process must disclose any potential conflicts of interest that may compromise objectivity.
  • The journals prohibit editors from handling submissions where they have a personal, professional, or financial connection to the author(s).
  • Authors are required to disclose any financial or personal relationships that could be perceived as influencing the research or its interpretation.
  • The editorial teams assess these disclosures to ensure a fair and unbiased review process.
  • Reviewers are asked to declare any conflicts of interest that may affect their ability to provide an impartial review.
  • The journals ensure that reviewers are not assigned to manuscripts where a conflict of interest exists.

Authors' Commitments

Content of the Submission

Authors of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed and the results, followed by an objective discussion of the significance of the work. The manuscript should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Review articles should be accurate, objective and comprehensive, while editorial ‘opinion’ or perspective pieces should be clearly identified as such. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable.

Authors should ensure that they have written and submit only entirely original works, and if they have used the work and/or words of others, that this has been appropriately cited. Publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the work reported in the manuscript should also be cited. Plagiarism takes many forms, from “passing off” another’s paper as the author’s own, to copying or paraphrasing substantial parts of another’s paper (without attribution), to claiming results from research conducted by others. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable.

Papers describing essentially the same research should not be published in more than one journal or primary publication. Hence, authors should not submit for consideration a manuscript that has already been published in another journal. Submission of a manuscript concurrently to more than one journal is unethical publishing behaviour and unacceptable.

The publication of some kinds of articles (such as clinical guidelines, translations) in more than one journal is sometimes justifiable, provided that certain conditions are met. The authors and editors of the journals concerned must agree to the secondary publication, which must reflect the same data and interpretation of the primary document. The primary reference must be cited in the secondary publication.

Authorship of the Submission

All listed authors must have made a significant scientific contribution to the research in the manuscript and approved all its claims. It is important to list everyone who made a significant scientific contribution, including students and laboratory technicians.

Only persons who meet these authorship criteria should be listed as authors in the manuscript as they must be able to take public responsibility for the content: (i) made significant contributions to the conception, design, execution, data acquisition, or analysis/interpretation of the study; and (ii) drafted the manuscript or revised it critically for important intellectual content; and (iii) have seen and approved the final version of the paper and agreed to its submission for publication. All persons who made substantial contributions to the work reported in the manuscript (such as technical help, writing and editing assistance, general support) but who do not meet the criteria for authorship must not be listed as an author, but should be acknowledged in the “Acknowledgements” section after their written permission to be named as been obtained. The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate coauthors (according to the above definition) and no inappropriate coauthors are included in the author list and verify that all coauthors have seen and approved the final version of the manuscript and agreed to its submission for publication.

Conflicts of interest on the Research

Authors must declare all potential interests in a ‘Conflicts of interest’ section, which should explain why the interest may be a conflict. If there are none, the authors should state “The author(s) declare(s) that there is no conflict of interest regarding the publication of this paper.” Submitting authors are responsible for co-authors declaring their interests. Declared conflicts of interest will be considered by the editor and reviewers and included in the published article.

Funding Sources on the Research

Authors must declare current or recent funding (including for article processing charges) and other payments, goods or services that might influence the work. All funding, whether a conflict or not, must be declared in the ‘Acknowledgments’.

Review Requirements for the Submission

Authors are obliged to participate in the peer review process and cooperate fully by responding promptly to editors’ requests for raw data, clarifications, and proof of ethics approval, patient consents and copyright permissions. In the case of a first decision of "revisions necessary", authors should respond to the reviewers’ comments systematically, point by point, and in a timely manner, revising and re-submitting their manuscript to the journal by the deadline given.

Erratum on the Publication

When authors discover significant errors or inaccuracies in their own published work, it is their obligation to promptly notify the journal’s editors or publisher and cooperate with them to either correct the paper in the form of an erratum or to retract the paper. If the editors or publisher learns from a third party that a published work contains a significant error or inaccuracy, then it is the authors’ obligation to promptly correct or retract the paper or provide evidence to the journal editors of the correctness of the paper.

Reviewers' Commitments

Contribution to the Decision-making Process

Reviewers are expected to contribute to the decision-making process, and to assist in improving the quality of the published paper by reviewing the manuscript objectively, in a timely manner. Peer review assists editors in making editorial decisions and, through editorial communications with authors, may assist authors in improving their manuscripts. Peer review is an essential component of formal scholarly communication and lies at the heart of scientific endeavor.

Confidentiality of the Review

Reviewers must maintain the confidentiality of any information supplied by the editor or author, and not retain or copy the manuscript. Any manuscripts received for review are confidential documents and must be treated as such; they must not be shown to or discussed with others except if authorized by the Editor-in-Chief (who would only do so under exceptional and specific circumstances). This applies also to invited reviewers who decline the review invitation.

Conflicts of interest on the Review

Reviews should be conducted objectively and observations formulated clearly with supporting arguments so that authors can use them for improving the manuscript. Personal criticism of the authors is inappropriate.

Reviewers should be aware of any potential conflicts of interest (financial, institutional, collaborative or other relationships between the reviewer and author) and should immediately alert the editor to these, if necessary withdrawing their services for that manuscript so that alternative reviewers can be contacted.

Unpublished material disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in a reviewer’s own research without the express written consent of the authors. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for the reviewer’s personal advantage. This applies also to invited reviewers who decline the review invitation.

Editors' Commitments

Independence of the Editorial Process

Editors will act in a balanced, objective and fair way while carrying out their expected duties, without discrimination on grounds of gender, sexual orientation, religious or political beliefs, ethnic or geographical origin of the authors.

Editors evaluate submitted manuscripts exclusively on the basis of their academic merit (importance, originality, study’s validity, clarity) and its relevance to the journal’s scope, without regard to the authors’ race, gender, sexual orientation, ethnic origin, citizenship, religious belief, political philosophy or institutional affiliation. Decisions to edit and publish are not determined by the policies of governments or any other agencies outside of the journal itself. The Editor-in-Chief has full authority over the entire editorial content of the journal and the timing of publication of that content.

Confidentiality of the Submission

Editors and editorial staff will not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.

Conflicts of interest on the Submission

Editors handle submissions for sponsored supplements or special issues in the same way as other submissions, so that articles are considered and accepted solely on their academic merit and without commercial influence.

Editors and editorial board members will not use unpublished information disclosed in a submitted manuscript for their own research purposes without the authors’ explicit written consent. Privileged information or ideas obtained by editors as a result of handling the manuscript will be kept confidential and not used for their personal advantage. Editors will recuse themselves from considering manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships/connections with any of the authors, companies or institutions connected to the papers; instead, they will ask another member of the editorial board to handle the manuscript.

Decision on the Submission

Editors ensure that all submitted manuscripts being considered for publication undergo double-blind peer-review by at least two reviewers who are expert in the field. The Editor-in-Chief is responsible for deciding which of the manuscripts submitted to the journal will be published, based on the validation of the work in question, its importance to researchers and readers, the reviewers’ comments, and such legal requirements as are currently in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The Editor-in-Chief may confer with other editors or reviewers in making this decision.

Editors will adopt and follow reasonable procedures in the event of complaints of an ethical or conflict nature, in accordance with the policies and procedures of the Society where appropriate. To give authors a reasonable opportunity to respond to any complaints. All complaints should be investigated no matter when the original publication was approved. Documentation associated with any such complaints should be retained.

Editors (in conjunction with the publisher and/or society) will take responsive measures when ethical concerns are raised with regard to a submitted manuscript or published paper. Every reported act of unethical publishing behaviour will be looked into, even if it is discovered years after publication.

Publisher's Commitments

Tulpar Academic Publishing shall ensure that good practice is maintained to the standards outlined above. For recent and future journals, more detailed ethical procedures will be set out and brought to the attention of journal editors and editorial boards in the process of time.

In cases of alleged or proven scientific misconduct, fraudulent publication or plagiarism, the publisher, in close collaboration with the editors, will take all appropriate measures to clarify the situation and to amend the article in question. This includes the prompt publication of an erratum, clarification or, in the most severe case, the retraction of the affected work.  The publisher, together with the editors, shall take reasonable steps to identify and prevent the publication of papers where research misconduct has occurred, and under no circumstances encourage such misconduct or knowingly allow such misconduct to take place.

In the event that there are documented violations of any of the above mentioned policies in any journal, regardless of whether or not the violations occurred in a journal published by Tulpar Academic Publishing, the following sanctions will be applied:

  • Immediate rejection of the infringing manuscript.
  • Immediate rejection of every other manuscript submitted to any journal published by Tulpar Academic Publishing by any of the authors of the infringing manuscript.
  • Prohibition against all of the authors for any new submissions to any journal published by Tulpar Academic Publishing, either individually or in combination with other authors of the infringing manuscript, as well as in combination with any other authors. This prohibition will be imposed for a minimum of 36 months.
  • Prohibition against all of the authors from serving on the Editorial Board of any journal published by Tulpar Academic Publishing.
In cases where the violations of the above policies are found to be particularly egregious, the publisher reserves the right to impose additional sanctions beyond those described above.


Policy of Screening for Plagiarism

Papers submitted to the Journal will be screened for plagiarism using Similarity Check / iThenticate plagiarism detection tools. Editorial management of the Journal will immediately reject papers leading to plagiarism or self-plagiarism.



Copyright & Licensing Information

Tulpar Academic Publishing allows the author(s) to hold the copyright without restrictions and will retain publishing rights without restrictions.

Tulpar Academic Publishing allows the users to copy, distribute and transmit an article, adapt the article, even commercially, as long as the original work is attributed.



Abstracted & Indexed by

Index Copernicus
Bielefeld Academic Search Engine
Google Scholar

* More information regarding the last status could be requested from cjcrl@challengejournal.com.