|Participant||before April 29, 2017
||after April 29, 2017|
|Delegate||470 EUR||490 EUR|
|Student||270 EUR||290 EUR|
|Student banquet fee||95 EUR||115 EUR|
|Accompanying person||200 EUR||230 EUR|
Prices could be modificated due to the change of Czech Crown exchange rate, which is expected this year.
Registration fee includes USB stick with Conference proceedings, attendance at all scientific sessions, coffee breaks, lunches, reception, social program and banquet.
Students attending the banquet must pay an extra student banquet fee.
ECCOMAS and IFToMM members will have a 5% reduction on the fee.
ECCOMAS members are requested to provide written proof of being a current member of one of the National Associations affiliated to ECCOMAS.
Full time or Ph.D. student confirmation letter from their Department Head/Chair is required.
The accompanying person registration fee includes: reception, social program and banquet.
Please visit this website for more information whether you should obtain a visa.
The process of visa requests might take considerable time at Czech consulates and embassies and therefore you should apply for your visa at least 3 months before the conference takes place.
For full details about visa requirements and application procedures, visit an official web site of Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Czech Republic.
Official letter of Invitation to obtain a Visa
Since your visa request needs to be accompanied by a registration confirmation, you can ask for the Letter of Invitation in your on-line registration. Please note this letter is not a commitment on the part of the organisers to provide any financial support.
Submission of contributions
January 15, 2017 February 15, 2017
Notification of acceptance
February 28, 2017 March 17, 2017
Early bird registration
March 15, 2017 April 29, 2017
Full paper submission
April 1, 2017 May 9, 2017
Cancellation Terms and Conditions
Notification of cancellation must be made in writing (emailed or faxed) to the Conference Secretariat.
Registration cancellations will be accepted with a refund as follows:
- before 12 May 2017 will be subject to an administration charge of EUR 20
- from 12 May to 28 May 2017 — 50% refund
- on 29 May 2017 and later — no refunds will be given.
Substitutions may be made at any time without an extra charge. If you wish to substitute a registered participant, please contact the Conference Secretariat at the earliest opportunity.
The Conference Organisers cannot be held responsible for registration cancellations if a Visa application is denied.
Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement
Ethical guidelines for publication
The publication of a contribution in the peer-reviewed Proceedings of ECCOMAS Thematic conference on MULTIBODY DYNAMICS is an essential building block in the development of a coherent and respected network of knowledge. It is a direct reflection of the quality of the work of the authors and the institutions that support them. Peer-reviewed articles support and embody the scientific method. It is therefore important to agree upon standards of expected ethical behaviour for all parties involved in the act of publishing: the author, the proceedings editor, the peer reviewer, the publisher and the society.
Conference Scientific and Organizing Committies as a principal organizer of this conference takes its duties of guardianship over all stages of publishing extremely seriously and we recognize our ethical and other responsibilities. These ethical standards derive from ECCOMAS definition of the scope of the conference series and from the community's perception of standards of quality for engineering and scientific work, and its presentation.
We are committed to ensuring that advertising, reprint or other commercial revenue has no impact or influence on editorial decisions. In addition, Organizing and Scientific Committee of the particular conference will assist in communications with other journals and/or publishers where this is useful and necessary.
These ethical standards have been to a large extent compiled from the existing standards with respect to the recommendations provided by Elsevier publishing.
Duties of authors
Reporting standards: Authors of reports of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work.
Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behaviour and are unacceptable.
Review and professional publication articles should also be accurate and objective, and editorial opinion works should be clearly identified as such.
Data access and retention: Authors may be asked to provide the raw data in connection with a paper for editorial review, and should be prepared to provide public access to such data, if practicable, and should in any event be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication.
Originality and plagiarism: The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others that this has been appropriately cited or quoted. Plagiarism takes many forms, from "passing off" another's paper as the author's own paper, 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.
Multiple, redundant or concurrent publication: An author should not in general publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one conference proceedings, journal or other primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal or conference proceedings concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable.
Acknowledgement of sources: Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work. Information obtained privately, as in conversation, correspondence, or discussion with third parties, must not be used or reported without explicit, written permission from the source. Information obtained in the course of confidential services, such as refereeing manuscripts or grant applications, must not be used without the explicit written permission of the author of the work involved in these services.
Authorship of the paper: Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. Where there are others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be acknowledged or listed as contributors. The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors and no inappropriate co-authors are included on the paper, and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.
Hazards and human or animal subjects: If the work involves chemicals, procedures or equipment that have any unusual hazards inherent in their use, the author must clearly identify these in the manuscript. If the work involves the use of animal or human subjects, the author should ensure that the manuscript contains a statement that all procedures were performed in compliance with relevant laws and institutional guidelines and that the appropriate institutional committee(s) has approved them. Authors should include a statement in the manuscript that informed consent was obtained for experimentation with human subjects. The privacy rights of human subjects must always be observed.
Disclosure and conflicts of interest: All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflict of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed. Examples of potential conflicts of interest which should be disclosed include employment, consultancies, stock ownership, honoraria, paid expert testimony, patent applications/registrations, and grants or other funding. Potential conflicts of interest should be disclosed at the earliest stage possible.
Fundamental errors in published works: When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author's obligation to promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper. If the editor or the publisher learns from a third party that a published work contains a significant error, it is the obligation of the author to promptly retract or correct the paper or provide evidence to the editor of the correctness of the original paper.
Duties of the Scientific Committee
Publication decisions: The editor of the Proceedings of ECCOMAS Thematic conference on MULTIBODY DYNAMICS is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the proceedings should be published. The validation of the work in question and its importance to researchers and readers must always drive such decisions. The editor may be guided by the policies of the Scientific Committee and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The editor may confer with other editors or reviewers in making this decision.
Fair play: An editor should evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.
Confidentiality: The editor and any editorial staff must 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.
Disclosure and conflicts of interest: Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor's own research without the express written consent of the author. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Editors should recuse themselves (i.e. should ask a co-editor, associate editor or other member of the editorial board instead to review and consider) from considering manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or (possibly) institutions connected to the papers. Editors should require all contributors to disclose relevant competing interests and publish corrections if competing interests are revealed after publication. If needed, other appropriate action should be taken, such as the publication of a retraction or expression of concern.
Involvement and cooperation in investigations: An editor should take reasonably responsive measures when ethical complaints have been presented concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper, in conjunction with the publisher (or society). Such measures will generally include contacting the author of the manuscript or paper and giving due consideration of the respective complaint or claims made, but may also include further communications to the relevant institutions and research bodies, and if the complaint is upheld, the publication of a correction, retraction, expression of concern, or other note, as may be relevant. Every reported act of unethical publishing behaviour must be looked into, even if it is discovered years after publication.
Duties of reviewers
Contribution to editorial decisions: Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the paper.
Promptness: Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse himself from the review process.
Confidentiality: Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.
Standards of objectivity: Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.
Acknowledgement of sources: Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also call to the editor's attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.
Disclosure and conflict of interest: Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in a reviewer's own research without the express written consent of the author. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.