I agree with John. high impact means potential high number of citations and you need citations to keep it high. So, unless you envisage some breakthrough result (over a resonably large field) or potentially a high number of citations for your work (and this is what the editors check), no high impact journal would accept it!

What I do not understand is why you WANT "an impact factor larger than 2". Are you interested in doing research or in checking the bibliometry?

My suggestion is to try to send your mansucript to the journal that can guarantee the maximum of visibility of your work. Be sure that if teh manuscript is clear and you clearly state what's new and how it can make a difference, you'll get a good number of citations.Too often people think about impact factor. Honestly, I prefer someone pubishing in Unknown Journal of Good Science and be cited 1000 times versus someone publishing on Nature and being ignored or cited a fistful of times (95% of articles in Nature). You don't do research for the impact factor, but to advance the science!

Thank you Pejman Malekinejad......for valuable information about list of journal, but it is difficult to find which journals are publishing energetic materials work.

I don't get what you mean with high energetic materials. Can you tell anything about the chemical composition of what you are working with?

I am assuming you are working in crystalline aggregates. If so crystal growth and Design publishes works on energetic materials. CGD has an impact factor around 4.

Roman Kubrin, HEMs means explosives, eg RDX, HMX, CL-20.

Mr. Michael Rogers, i am preparing nanoparticles of Above compounds.

CGD publishers publishing on cocrystals of HEMs not nanoparticles of HEMs.

An easy rule: check your references. Is any specific journal more present than others? There is your best option then.

You can go to the link below

http://ascelibrary.org/journal/jhtrbp

Point of Manel is correct But to get it accepted in high impact journals requires much more! Editors play a key role in the selection of reviewers. If he/she is impressed, you are lucky. Now a days, even if the paper content good, they will also see the citation potential. Some reviewers are very honest and positive to any papers they receive. But there is another catagory- never appreciate or recommend a paper for publication, even if the paper is good. Editors wisely choose one of these based on his first impression of your manuscript!

I agree with John. high impact means potential high number of citations and you need citations to keep it high. So, unless you envisage some breakthrough result (over a resonably large field) or potentially a high number of citations for your work (and this is what the editors check), no high impact journal would accept it!

What I do not understand is why you WANT "an impact factor larger than 2". Are you interested in doing research or in checking the bibliometry?

My suggestion is to try to send your mansucript to the journal that can guarantee the maximum of visibility of your work. Be sure that if teh manuscript is clear and you clearly state what's new and how it can make a difference, you'll get a good number of citations.Too often people think about impact factor. Honestly, I prefer someone pubishing in Unknown Journal of Good Science and be cited 1000 times versus someone publishing on Nature and being ignored or cited a fistful of times (95% of articles in Nature). You don't do research for the impact factor, but to advance the science!

I fully agree with Matteo.

Dear matteo Leoni, Thank you for suggestion. i am presently doing PhD and i am interested in further studies thats why i prefer to research by leaving govt. job. but the present situation is for PDF position first they checking number of publication and their impact factor then only they will call to interview. this was my few seniors experience. if i publish small journals they won't prefer to give PDF then I only suffer finally.

one more my question for you please give your advice.

i am made a experimental set up which is known technique but it can produce nanoparticles of organic compounds below 100 nm. i prefered one compounds drug nanoparticles and going to publish. i want to prepare some more compounds with same experimental set up. with same experimental set up only changing targeted compounds. is it good for my PhD. ?

Thank you to all...

In fact, there are quite a few journals you can send your work to. such as Journal of Materials Chemistry, Eur. J. Chem.. The key part is the writing of introduction part.

If your results are good you can try

Small, Nanoresearch, Nanotechnology (IF 3.84)

For more

http://www.scimagojr.com/index.php

Hello Raj, I have published some of my energetic materials work in Small.

Propellants, explosives, pyrotechnics (PEP) is also a very good & often cited journal in our discipline.

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/10.1002/(ISSN)1613-6829

ya i agree wit you Andrew Plummer, PEP journal is not good impact factor....it is just 1.2.....and they will taken 6 months to accept my paper. they done twice revised for every revision 3 months.

it was frustrating

I agree with Matteo: The Good Science Journal is a nice one to publish. I really prefer to look for example in Thin Solid Films better than Nature as much as many tricks and experimental details can be found in TSF, and I like to write that kind of articles too that in some extent are read by an interested audience. Of course I do not neglect the oportunity to publish in higher impact journals when groundbreaking results are obtained after very hard work. Nevertheless some evaluation systems ask you to publish continously and better if it is in high impact journals, considering high impact those indexed for example in JCR Q1. This is tricky in some countries, because most of the time money to do research and technitians and equipments are issues to solve then the so called high impact science is difficult to do with limited resources. On the other hand if the evaluation sytems ask for many publications to keep your productivity grants payed many people prefer to do three articles with the material that could be used  for a very good, complete article that could then collect many cites, thats the so called articulitis. How to solve the dilemma? Quality, quantity, impact factors, visibility? That is the question...

A useful MOOC course regarding publishing in High-impact journals. Discounted course link pasted below:

https://www.udemy.com/publishing-in-impact-factor-journals-tips-and-tricks/?couponCode=ABC100

I found a good review article in sciencedirect.com

Giving you the link here, then download the PDF. Hope it will help in some extent.

Article How to publish a scientific manuscript in a high-impact journal