About the Journal

Focus and Scope

This journal encompasses Original Research Articles and Review Articles (only selected/invited authors). We accept manuscripts covering the following topics:

  1. Energy Conversion
  2. Manufacturing
  3. Construction
  4. Advanced Material
  5. Nano Material
  6. Physics
  7. Transportation Engineering
  8. Energy Resources
  9. Robotics
  10. Solid State technology
  11. Other subjects related to Mechanical Engineering

Peer Review Process

  1. Every article published in Piston must be reviewed by at least 2 reviewers.
  2. Piston implements a double-blind review system.
  3. Every manuscript submitted to Piston will go through plagiarism screening by editors and reviewers assisted by Turnitin
  4. Having considered novelty, objectivity, methods, significance, conclusion, and references of the manuscript reviewer will present one of the following recommendations:
    • Accept Submission: Accept the manuscript without as-is without revision
    • Revision Required: The reviewer produces a list of required revisions. After revision is done the manuscript can proceed to the editing stage without having to go through another review stage.
    • Resubmit for Review: The Reviewer produces a list of required revisions. After revision is done manuscript will be returned for re-review.
    • Resubmit Elsewhere: Recommend to decline the manuscript so that it can be published in a more suitable journal.
    • Decline Submission: Recommend to decline the manuscript because of failure to meet acceptable quality standards for publication.
  5. Article acceptance by the editor depends on novelty, significance, validity, originality, clarity of the manuscript, and whether or not the manuscript matches the journal's focus and scope.

Publication Frequency

PISTON is published semi-annually every January-June and July-December every year

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.

This journal is an open access journal which means that all content is freely available without charge to users or / institutions. Users are allowed to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to full-text articles in this journal without asking prior permission from the publisher or author. This is in accordance with the Budapest Open Access Initiative.


Journal History

  1. Piston first obtained P-ISSN on Jan 19, 2016. (P 2541- 3511)
  2. Since the second edition (Vol. 1, No. 2), there has been a change of chief editor from Bambang Herlambang, S.Si, M.Si to Ersam Mahendrawan, M.Pd
  3. In 2019 the date of the first publication has been changed from 19/01/16 to  01/07/2019 to reflect the actual first publication
  4. Piston received the P-ISSN on Sept 19, 2019. (E 2686 - 2247)
  5. Piston was Indexed by Crossref in 2019
  6. The reference form changed from IOP style to IEEE style was started on the issue Vol. 3 No. 1
  7. Piston has been accredited to Sinta 4 which's based on The Decree of The Director General of Higher Education, Research, and Technology Indonesia, Number 158/E/Kpt/2021 about Scientific Journal Accreditation Rating Period I Year 2021
  8. The header of the template form changed was started on the issue Vol. 6 No. 1. 

Article Publication Charge

Publishing an article in this journal requires an Article Publication Fee which will be invoiced to the submitting author upon acceptance of the article.
Publication Fee: IDR 450,000
Other than this Article Publication Fee, there are no other charges (e.g. submission fees, page charges, etc).

Refund Policy
An Article Publication Charge is due once an article has been accepted for publication. The submitting author assumes responsibility for the Article Publication Charge, and the Publisher will not issue refunds of any kind.

Submission Steps


  1. Please format your manuscript according to the template given. Any manuscript that doesn't follow the provided format will be rejected. It is also highly recommended that you use reference management software such as Zotero or Mendeley
  2. After your manuscript is ready you can proceed to register your username and password with us. You can do so by clicking on the Register link in the Navigation Bar above. You will be required to fill in all the compulsory fields (marked by *).
  3. When you are done just click on the Register button.


  1. After you are registered you can proceed to log in. You can do so either from our right sidebar or by clicking on the login button on the navigation bar above
  2. Once you are logged in you can click on the New Submission link
  3. Fill in all the required fields (marked by *)
  4. When you are done you can click on the Finish Submission button and your manuscript will reach our Editor-in-Chief


  1. After submission, you can track the progress by logging in to our website. Although we do have an automatic e-mail system for correspondence it is highly recommended that you log in regularly to check your manuscript's progress
  2. If your manuscript is considered unsuitable for our Journal the status will change to Archived. Otherwise, the status of your submission will change to In Review when the assigned editor has found a suitable reviewer. The typical review process takes around two months
  3. If no changes are required status of the submission will change to In Editing. Otherwise, it will change into either Revision Required (minor revision) or Resubmit for Review (major revision
  4. You can make revisions to your submission by clicking on the title and uploading a newer version of your manuscript in the Upload Author Version field
  5. This process will continue until the manuscript is either accepted or rejected


  1. When your manuscript has been accepted its status will change to In Editing
  2. At this stage, you will only need to wait until the publication's scheduled time (either January or July) until the manuscript is published. Once the manuscript has been published you will see the Volume and Number in the status
  3. PISTON doesn't require any APC (Article Processing Charge) both for publication and submission
  4. The author is entitled to 1 (one) single copy of the print version (postal charge may apply)

Publication Ethics

Piston of Technical Engineering is a peer-reviewed national journal. This statement clarifies the ethical behavior of all parties involved in the act of publishing an article in this journal as well as allegations of research misconduct, including the author, the chief editor, the Editorial Board, the peer-reviewer­­­­­ and the publisher Universitas Pamulang. This statement is based on COPE’s Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors.

Ethical Guideline for Journal Publication
The publication of an article in a peer-reviewed PISTON journal 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 behavior for all parties involved in the act of publishing: the author, the journal editor, the peer reviewer, the publisher, and the society.

Department of Mechanical Engineering, Universitas Pamulang as the publisher of Piston: Technical Engineering takes its duties of guardianship over all stages of publishing extremely seriously, and we recognize our ethical and other responsibilities. We are committed to ensuring that advertising, reprint, or other commercial revenue has no impact or influence on editorial decisions. Also, the Department of Mechanical Engineering, Universitas Pamulang, and Editorial Board will assist in communications with other journals and/or publishers where this is useful and necessary.

Allegations of Research Misconduct
Research misconduct means fabrication, falsification, citation manipulation, or plagiarism in producing, performing, or reviewing research and writing an article by authors, or in reporting research results. When authors are found to have been involved with research misconduct or other serious irregularities involving articles that have been published in scientific journals, Editors have a responsibility to ensure the accuracy and integrity of the scientific record.

In cases of suspected misconduct, the Editors and Editorial Board will use the best practices of COPE to assist them to resolve the complaint and address the misconduct fairly. This will include an investigation of the allegation by the Editors. A submitted manuscript that is found to contain such misconduct will be rejected. In cases where a published paper is found to contain such misconduct, a retraction can be published and will be linked to the original article.

The first step involves determining the validity of the allegation and an assessment of whether the allegation is consistent with the definition of research misconduct. This initial step also involves determining whether the individuals alleging misconduct have relevant conflicts of interest. If scientific misconduct or the presence of other substantial research irregularities is a possibility, the allegations are shared with the corresponding author, who, on behalf of all of the coauthors, is requested to provide a detailed response. After the response is received and evaluated, additional review and involvement of experts (such as statistical reviewers) may be obtained. For cases in which it is unlikely that misconduct has occurred, clarifications, additional analyses, or both, published as letters to the editor, and often including a correction notice and correction to the published article are sufficient.

Institutions are expected to conduct an appropriate and thorough investigation of allegations of scientific misconduct. Ultimately, authors, journals, and institutions have an important obligation to ensure the accuracy of the scientific record. By responding appropriately to concerns about scientific misconduct, and taking necessary actions based on evaluation of these concerns, such as corrections, retractions with replacement, and retractions, PISTON journal will continue to fulfill the responsibilities of ensuring the validity and integrity of the scientific record.

Publication decisions
The editor of the Piston: Journal of Technical Engineering journal is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published. The validation of the work in question and its importance to researchers and readers must always drive such decisions. The editors may be guided by the policies of the journal's editorial board and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. The editors may confer with other editors or reviewers in making this decision.

Complaints and Appeals
PISTON journal will have a clear procedure for handling complaints against the journal, Editorial Staff, Editorial Board, or Publisher. The complaints will be clarified to a respected person with respect to the case of the complaint. The scope of complaints includes anything related to the journal business process, i.e. editorial process, found citation manipulation, unfair editor/reviewer, peer-review manipulation, etc. The complaint cases will be processed according to COPE guidelines. The complaint cases should be sent by email to: piston@unpam.ac.id.

Fair Play
An editor at any time evaluates manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.

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.

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.
  • Acknowledgment of Sources
    Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that 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
    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.

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 behavior and are unacceptable.
  • Data Access, Retention and Reproducibility
    Authors are 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. Authors are responsible for data reproducibility.
  • 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.
  • Multiple, Redundant, or Concurrent Publication
    An author should not, in general, publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.
  • Acknowledgment 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.
  • Authorship and Contributorship of the Article
    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 in 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.
  • Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest
    All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflicts 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.
  • Fundamental errors in published work
    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.

Ethical Oversight
If the research work involves chemicals, humans, animals, procedures, or equipment that have any unusual hazards inherent in their use, the author must clearly identify these in the manuscript in order to obey the ethical conduct of research using animals and human subjects. If required, Authors must provide legal ethical clearance from an association or legal organization. If the research involves confidential data and business/marketing practices, authors should clearly justify this matter whether the data or information will be hidden securely or not.

Intellectual Property (Copyright Policy)
The Authors submitting a manuscript do so on the understanding that if accepted for publication, copyright publishing of the article shall not be assigned/transferred to Piston: Journal of Technical Engineering and Department of Mechanical Engineering Pamulang University as Publisher of the journal.

Post-Publication Discussions and Corrections
PISTON journal accepts discussion and corrections on published articles by readers. In case the reader gives discussions and corrections toward a published article, the reader can contact by email to Editor in Chief by explaining the discussions and corrections. If accepted (by the Editor in Chief), the discussions and corrections will be published in the next issue as a Letter to the Editor. Respected Authors can reply/answer the discussions and corrections from the reader by sending the reply to the Editor in Chief. Therefore, Editors may publish the answer as a Reply to Letter to the Editor.


Plagiarism is the practice of stealing other people's work and representing them as one's own. To prevent this authors are required to rewrite any quote from other people's works in their own words and mention the source as a reference.

Piston Journal forbids any forms of plagiarism. During the selection process, plagiarism checks will be done in two phases. The first phase will be conducted using commercial software while the second phase will be undertaken by the reviewers. Authors caught performing plagiarism will be given one chance to explain themselves. If the editor finds the explanation to be unsatisfactory the paper will be rejected and the author will be blacklisted from submitting future works. Whenever possible authors will also be reported to the relevant authorities (e.g. Ethics Department where the author works or the relevant Professional Association).

Conflict of Interest

Conflict of Interest is a situation where a person is involved in two interests that are working against each other. Every party involved in manuscript publication needs to declare any possible conflict of interest before the manuscript is published. For example, the author needs to declare the source of research funding to ensure that it doesn't interfere with the result. Meanwhile, reviewers will also need to declare if they know, accidentally or otherwise the identity of the author which means that double-blind peer review is no longer possible. If properly declared conflict of interest will not stop a manuscript from being published by itself. In this situation, the final decision will be made by the editor.


Piston: Journal of Technical Engineering with registered numbers ISSN 2541-3511 (print) and 2686-2247 (online) has been indexed on: