Frequently observed errors when writing papers

This is intended to become an extensive list of errors/areas for improvement when writing technical papers. It is not well structured yet, but it will grow over time

• If you mention a technical device used, name it. Do not hide behind terms like "a commercial device", a paper must be precise and clear at each sentence
• Figures
  • If you enter a figure it is intended to document content. You do not need to describe the figure in the text extensively (this is different to other documents). Figures in articles are in ideal cases shortening the text and required space and making things more understandable at the same time.
  • However, the caption of the figure must be informative. So do not just write "Diagram of Force/Displacement curve", write "Interdependency of Force and Torque for actuator xyz under radial load with xx% friction impact, showing a stick-slip at 0.2 mm"... today's style in paper make it possible to understand almost the complete engineering-paper by just reading the captions from the figures and the abstract. Frequently the captions are multiple lines long. However stay compact and precise in your wording!
  • Use subfigures! If there is empty space left/right of your figure you are wasting space. Then combine figures to "Fig. 1: a) A nice flow in a field b) Detail of a bee in approach to a chrysanthemum"
• Check for German/English pitfalls. Use tools like "grammerly" if you do not feel comfortable. A list of typical German/English pitfalls
  • Wrong usage of "have" in the sense of "haben/hat/hatte" which usually changes to simple past in English like: "The authors have reviewed ..." → "The authors reviewed"
  • Reduce length of sentences! It is not good in German neither, but in English it is a no-go. Split sentences which are longer than two lines. Don't tell me that it does not work. It works in 95% of cases!
• Improve your skills in technical English. Typical technical-english specialities:
  • use "ing" (continous) form instead of which (or similar) terms. "The product was good, which lead to...." → "The product was good leading to a .... "
  • Avoid filling words and complicated references, sharpen your sentences:
    • "...desribes a setup which is shown in fig. 2. and ... " → "describes a setup shown in fig. 2 and ..." → or even better "describes a setup (fig. 2) and ..."
    • "A voltage bandpass , see schematics in fig. 3, that attenuates the main frequency..." → "A voltage bandpass (fig.3) attenuating the main frequency..."