Torts Structural Outline
Torts 2010 Outline 美国侵权法学习笔记
A. PRIMA FACIE CASETo establish a prima facie case for intentional tort liability, it is generally necessary that the plaintiff prove the following:(i)Act by defendant;(ii) Intent; and(iii) Causation.1.Act by DefendantThe “act” requirement for intentional tort liability refers to volitional movement ondefendant’s part.Examples: 1) Chauncey tripped and was falling. To break the fall, Chaunceystretched out his hand, which struck Darby. Even thoughmovement was reflexive, it was not volitional.2) Lulu suffered an epileptic heart attack. During the course of it,she struck Darby. This is not a volitional act.3) Chauncey pushed Lulu into Darby. Chauncey has committed avolitional act; Lulu has not.2. IntentThe requisite intent for this type of tort liability may be either specific or general.a. Specific IntentAn Actor “intends” the consequences of his conduct if his goal in acting isto bring about these consequences.b. General IntentAn actor “intends” the consequences of his conduct if he knows withsubstantial certainty that the consequences will result.Example: D, five years old, pulls a chair out from under P as she issitting down. Even if D did not desire that she hit theground, if he knew with substantial certainty that she wastrying to sit and would hit the ground, he will have theintent necessary for batter. [Garrat v. Dailey]c. Actor Need not Intend Injury (Eggshell Skull Doctrine)The intent of the actor that is relevant for the purposes of intentional tortsis the intent to bring about the consequences that are the basis of the tort.Thus, a person may be liable even for an unintended injury if he intendedto bring about such “basis of the tort” consequences.Example: A intends to kick B and does so. B’s leg gets infected andfalls off. The actor intended to bring about harmful oroffensive contact to B. Hence, he will be liable even thoughit was not intended that B’s leg fall off. [V ogsburg v.Putney]d. Transferred Intent1) General RuleThe transferred intent doctrine applies where the defendant intends tocommit a tort against one person but instead (i) commits adifferent tort against that person, (ii) commits the same tort asintended but against a different person, or (iii) commits adifferent tort against a different person. The intent to commit a tortagainst o ne person is transferred to the other tort or to the injuredperson.Example: A swings at B, intending only to frighten him. A’s blowlands on C. A’s intent to commit assault on B istransferred to C, and A’s act constitutes battery on C.2) Limitations on Use of Transferred IntentTransferred intent may only be invoked in the following circumstances:a) Assault;b) Battery;c) False imprisonment;d) Trespass to land; ande) Trespass to chattels.e. Motive DistinguishedA person’s motive is not relevant when analyzing their liability underintentional torts.f. Minors and Incompetents Can Have Requisite IntentUnder the majority view, both minors and incompetents will be liable fortheir intentional torts3. CausationThe result that gives rise to liability must have been legally caused by thedefendant’s act or something the defendant set in motion.B. PRIMA FACIE CASE – INTENTIONAL TORTS TO THE PERSON1. Batterya. Prima Facie CaseTo establish a prima facie case for battery, the following elements must beproved:1) An act by the defendant which brings about harmful or offensivecontact to the plaintiff’s person;2) Intent on the part of the defendant to bring about harmful or offensivecontact to the plaintiff’s person; and3) Causation.b. Harmful or Offensive ContactAny contact must be deemed harmful or offensive by a reasonable personof ordinary sensibilities. Contact is deemed “offensive” if the plaintiff hasnot expressly or impliedly consented to it (see D.1., infra).c. Meaning of “Plaintiff’s Person”Anything connected to the plaintiff’s person is viewed as part of theplaintiff’s person.Example: Chauncey grabbed Lulu’s purse, which was hanging fromher shoulder. He may be liable for battery.d. CausationThe defendant is liable for both “direct” and “indirect” contact.Examples: 1) Chauncey, intending to set a trap, dug a hole in the roadupon which Lulu was going to walk. Lulu fell in. Causationexists.2) Horace struck a glass door so that the breaking glass cutBowater. Causation exists.e. Apprehension Not NecessaryA person may recover for battery even though he is not conscious of theharmful or offensive contact when it occurs (e.g., unauthorized surgeryperformed on unconscious patient).f. Transferred IntentDoctrine applies in battery cases.g. Actual Damages Not RequiredNot necessary to sustain a prima facie case for battery that plaintiff proveactual damages. Plaintiff can recover nominal damages even though hesuffered no severe actual damage. In a majority of jurisdictions, punitivedamages may be recovered where defendant acted with malice.2. Assaulta. Prima Facie CaseTo establish the prima facie case for assault, the following elements must beproved:1) An act by the defendant creating a reasonable apprehension in plaintiffof immediate harmful or offensive contact to plaintiff’s person;2) Intent on the part of the defendant to bring about apprehension ofimmediate harmful or offensive contact with the plaintiff’s person; and3) Causationb. Construction of “Apprehension”1) Requirement of ReasonablenessThe apprehension of harmful or offensive contact must be a reasonableone. Courts generally will not protect a plaintiff against exaggerated fears of contact (unless defendant knows of the unreasonable fear and uses itto put plaintiff in apprehension). In determining whether theapprehension in a given case is reasonable, the courts will apply areasonable person test.a) Fear, Intimidation, etc., – DistinguishedApprehension is not the same as fear or intimidation.“Apprehension here is used in the sense of expectation. Thus,one may reasonably apprehend an immediate contact although hebelieves he can defend himself or otherwise avoid it.b) Knowledge of Act RequiredFor there to be an apprehension, the plaintiff must have beenaware of the defendant’s act. Contrast this with battery, in whichthe plaintiff need not be aware of the contact at the time thereof.c)Defendant’s Apparent Ability to Act Is SufficientA person may be placed in reasonable apprehension ofimmediate harmful or offensive contact even though thedefendant is not actually capable of causing injury to theplaintiff’s person. For such apprehension to be reasonable,however, it is necessary that the defendant have the apparentability to bring about such contact.Example: Jan points an unloaded gun at Myron. Myrondoes not know that the gun is not loaded.Myron’s apprehension of immediate harmful oroffensive contact is reasonable.d) Effect of Words(1) Overt Act requiredSome overt act is necessary. Words alone, however,violent, generally do not constitute an assault becausethey cannot create reasonable apprehension ofimmediate harmful or offensive contact. A differentresult might occur when such words are accompanied bysome over act, e.g., a clenching of the fist. Moreover,words may negate an assault by making unreasonableany apprehension of immediate contact, even thoughdefendant commits a hostile act.Example: James shakes a clenched fist whiletalking to Myron, and says, “If I wren’tsuch a good guy, I’d hit you.” There isno reasonable apprehension of harmfulor offensive contact.(2) Conditional Threat is SufficientNote that if the words and act combine to form aconditional threat, an assault will result.Example: Robber points a gun at Plaintiff andsays, “Your money or your life.” Robberis liable for an assault.2) Requirement of ImmediacyThe apprehension must be of immediate or harmful contact. Threats offuture contact are insufficient. Similarly, there is no assault if thedefendant is too far away to do any harm or is merely preparing for afuture harmful act.d. Transferred Intent Appliese. No Requirement of Damages3. False Imprisonmenta. Prima Facie CaseTo establish a prima facie case for false imprisonment, the following elementsmust be proved:1) An act or omission to act on the part of the defendant that confines orrestrains the plaintiff to a bounded area;2) Intent on the part of the defendant to confine or restrain plaintiff to a boundedarea; and3) Causation.b. Sufficient Methods of Confinement or RestraintActionable confinement or restraint may result in a variety of ways:1) Physical Barriers2) Physical ForceFalse imprisonment will result where plaintiff is restrained by the use ofphysical force directed at him or a member of his immediate family.3) Direct Threats of ForceDirect threats of force by the defendant to the plaintiff’s person orproperty or against persons of the plaintiff’s immediate family canconstitute false imprisonment.c. Time of ConfinementIt is immaterial, except as to the extent of damages, how short the timeperiod of the confinement is.d. Awareness of ImprisonmentPlaintiff must be aware of confinement; unless he was injured whileunaware.e. What is a bounded area?For an area to be “bounded,” the plaintiff’s freedom of movement in alldirections must be limited; the area will not be characterized as bounded if thereis a reasonable means of escape of which plaintiff is aware.f. Doctrine of transferred intent appliesg. No Requirement of Damages4. Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress (IIED)a. Prima Facie CaseTo establish a prima facie case for IIED, the following elements must be proved:1) An act by defendant amounting to extreme and outrageous conduct;2) Intent on part of defendant to cause plaintiff to suffer severe emotionaldistress, or recklessness as to the effect of defendant’s conduct;3) Causation; and4) Damages – severe emotional distressb. Extreme and Outrageous Conduct“Outrageous conduct” is conduct that transcends all bounds of decencytolerated by society. In the absence of such conduct by defendant, it is generallyheld that an average person of ordinary sensibilities would not suffer the kind ofsevere mental injury that is contemplated by the tort.c. IntentDefendant liable not only for intent but also for reckless conduct; i.e., acting inreckless disregard of a high probability that emotional distress will result.d. Causation In Bystander Cases(i) Third person was present and suffered mental or physical harm and was aclose relative of the person targeted.(ii) Third person was present and suffered physical harm and was not a closerelative of the person targeted.e. Actual Damages RequiredActual damages are required, but it’s not necessary to prove physical injuries torecover. It is necessary to establish severe emotional distress.D. DEFENSES TO THE INTENTIONAL TORTS1. ConsentA defendant is not liable for an otherwise tortious act if the plaintiff consented to thedefendant’s act. Consent may be given expressly; it may also be implied from custom,conduct, or words, or by law.a. Express (Actual) ConsentExpress (actual) consent exists where the plaintiff has expressly shown awillingness to submit to defendant’s conduct.1) Consent by Mistake2) Consent Induced by Fraud3) Consent Obtained by DuressConsent obtained by duress may be held invalid. Note, threats offuture action do not constitute legal duress sufficient to invalidateconsent.b. Implied ConsentPlaintiff’s consent may be implied in a given case. There are two basickinds of implied consent, apparent consent and implied by law.1) Apparent ConsentApparent consent is that which a reasonable person would inferfrom the plaintiff’s conduct.Example: D is a doctor going to give P an inoculation. P holds upher arm and says nothing. Doctor inoculates her. P’s conductconstitutes implied consent.a) Inferred from Usage and CustomA person is presumed to consent to the ordinary contacts ofdaily life.2) Consent Implied by LawEmergency situations.c. Capacity RequiredIncompetents, drunks, and very young children are deemed incapable ofconsent to a tortious act.d. Criminal ActsA majority view is that a person cannot consent to a criminal act.Restatement of Torts takes contrary position and allows consent to acriminal act.e. Exceeding Consent GivenIf the defendant goes beyond the act consented to and does somethingsubstantially different, he is liable; e.g. consent to perform a tonsillectomyis not consent to perform an appendectomy.2. Self-DefenseWhen a person has reasonable grounds to believe that he is being or is about tobe, attacked, he may use such force as is reasonably necessary for protectionagainst potential injury.a. When is Defense Available?1) Reasonable BeliefThe actor only needs to have a reasonable belief as to the other party’sintentions; i.e., apparent necessity, not actual necessity, is sufficient.Thus, reasonable mistake as to the existence of danger does not makedefense unusable.2) Retaliation Not AllowedSelf-defense is limited to the right to use force to prevent the commissionof a tort. One may never use force when there is no longer any threat.3) Retreat Not NecessaryA substantial majority of courts hold that one does not need to attempt toescape, but may stand his ground (and even use deadly force whennecessary to prevent death or serious bodily harm to himself). A growingmodern trend would impose a duty to retreat before using deadly forcewhere this can be done safely unless the actor is in his own home.4) Not Available to Aggressorb. How Much Force May Be Used?One may use only that force that reasonably appears to be necessary to preventthe harm. One may not use force likely to cause death or serious bodily injuryunless he reasonably believes that he is in danger of serious bodily injury. If morethan necessary is used, the actor loses the privilege of self-defense.c. Extends to Third-Party InjuriesIf one, in the act o defending himself, accidentally injures a bystander, he isnevertheless protected by self-defense privilege.3. Defense of Othersa. When Is Defense Available?The actor need only have a reasonable belief that the person being aided wouldhave the right of self-defense. Thus, even if the aided person had no defense, hisdefender is not liable as long as he reasonably believed that the person aidedcould have used force to protect himself.b. How Much Force May Be Used?The defender may use as much force as could have been used in self-defense ifthe injury were threatened to him.4. Defense of Propertya. When Is Defense Available?Generally, one may use reasonable force to prevent commission of a tort againsther property.1) Request to Desist Usually RequiredA request to desist must precede use of force, unless circumstances makeit clear the request would be futile or dangerous.2) Effect of MistakeReasonable mistake is allowed as to the property owner’s right to useforce in defense of property where the mistake involves whether anintrusion has occurred or whether a request to desist is required.3) Limited to Preventing Commission of TortOnly allowed to prevent commission of a tort. Once permanentlydispossessed, actor may not use force to recapture it.You can use deadlyforce to deter people, but not to punish them.4) Superseded by Other PrivilegesNecessity, right of reentry, right to enter upon another’s land to recapturechattels, et cetera.b. How Much Force May Be Used?One may use reasonable force to defend property. But, she may not use forcethat will cause death or serious bodily harm (unless the invasion of property alsoentails a serious threat of bodily harm to the owner).1) Difference between test in self-defense when using deadly force: indefense of property threat of death or serious bodily harm must only belikely; in self-defense it must be imminent.5. NecessityA person may interfere with the real or personal property of another where theinterference is reasonably and apparently necessary to avoid threatened injury from anatural or other force and where the threatened injury is substantially more serious thanthe invasion that is undertaken to avert it.a. Public NecessityWhere the act is for the public good (e.g. shooting a rabid dog; destroying housesto prevent a fire from spreading in a city), the defense is absolute.b. Private NecessityWhere the act is solely to benefit any person (the actor, the owner of the land, orsome other third person) or to protect any property from destruction or seriousinjury (e.g. tying up to a dock in a storm), the defense is qualified; i.e.the actormust pay for any injury caused (but doesn’t have to pay punitive damages).If you violate someone’s privilege of necessity:1) They have the privilege of self-defense2) You must pay for the damage that results to their persons orpropertyExamples: 1) Family P moors boat to a dock during a violent storm. D’semployee unmoors boat. Family P’s boat crashes on the rocks.Family P sues, arguing they had the necessity to moor at D’sdock to prevent serious bodily harm and loss of property. [Ploofv. Putnam]2) P wharf owner sues D boat owner who moored his boat to P’swharf during a violent storm. During the storm D’s boat causeddamage to P’s wharf. While D had the right to moor there fromnecessity, it was qualified. He owes P for the damages boatcaused to the wharf.6. DisciplineA parent or teacher may use reasonable force in disciplining children, taking into accountthe age and sex of the child and the seriousness of the behavior.III. NEGLIGENCEA. ABANDONING “DUTY”•Duty approach gives judges more power•New approach makes judge explain the standard, but leaves the ultimate decision up to the jury•We always owes everyone else a duty; however, in certain contexts the type of duty owed is simply different; e.g., when rescuing someone from drowning you can’t be found negligentbecause you acted negligently in the process of trying to save them, but you do have a dutynot to intentionally harm them.B. MEHLMANS’ PRIMA FACIE CASETo establish a prima facie case for negligence, the following elements must be proved:1. Was the defendant negligent?2. Did the plaintiff suffer an injury (to person or property)?3. Was D’s negligence the actual cause of the injury?4. Was D’s negligence the proximate cause of the injury?C. PROVING LITTLE “n” NEGLIGENCE1. The General Standard of Carea. The Reasonable PersonDefendant’s conduct is measured against the reasonable, ordinary, prudentperson. This reasonable person has the following characteristics, measured by anobjective standard.1) Same Physical Characteristics as DefendantHowever, a person is expected to know his physical handicaps and isunder a duty to exercise the care of a person with such knowledge; e.g., itmay be negligent for an epileptic to drive a car.2) Average Mental AbilityDefendant must act as would a person with average mental ability.Unlike the rule as to physical characteristics, individual mentalhandicaps are not considered; i.e., low IQ is no excuse. Likewise,insanity is no defense, and the defendant is held to the standard of areasonable person under the circumstances. [Learned Hand’sdefinition].3) Same Knowledge as Average Member of CommunityDefendant is deemed to have knowledge of things known by the averagemember of the community, e.g., that fire is hot. Again, the individualshortcomings of the particular defendant are not considered. On the otherhand, a defendant with superior knowledge to that of an average personis required to use that knowledge.2. Particular Standard of CareSome persons are held to a standard of conduct different from that of the ordinaryperson.a. ProfessionalsA person who is a professional or has special skills is required to possessand exercise the knowledge and skill of a member of the profession oroccupation in good standing in similar communities. (For specialists anational standard of care usually applies).b. ChildrenMost courts take the view that a child is required to conform to thestandard of care of a child of like age, education, intelligence, andexperience. This permits a subjective evaluation of factors.1) Minimum Age for Capacity to Be Negligent2) Children Engaged in Adult ActivitiesWhere a child engages in an activity that is normally one thatonly adults engage in, most cases hold that he will be required toconform to the same standard of care as an adult in such anactivity, e.g., driving a car, flying an airplane, et cetera.c. People With Physical Disabilities / Distinct Physical Defectsd. Possessors of Land1) Invitees2) Licensees3) Trespassersa) Child Trespasserse. Common Carriersf. Automobile Driver to Guest3. Restatement View§ 292 – Utility of Actor(i)Social value attached to interest(ii)Will interest be advanced by the actor’s conduct(iii)Can actor advance the interest in a less dangerous way?§ 293 – Magnitude of Risk(i)Social value of interests imperiled(ii)Probability actor’s conduct will cause harm(iii)Extent of potential harm(iv)# of potential people harmedWhen § 292 > § 293 → no duty4. Hand’s Balancing TestN = B < L x PB = Burden D would have had to bear to avoid riskL = Gravity of potential injuryP = Probability that harm will occur from D’s conductB = Cost to D and broader social utility; would society be better off if allDs in similar position were permitted to act as D did; if yes, D might have toconform in every instance increasing the overall cost. [Louisiana Power –would have had to insulate all exposed currents].5. Special Rulesa. Violation of Criminal Statute1) No EvidenceThe violation of the statute has no bearing on whether the defendant wasnegligent. This could be because the violation of the statute had nothingto do with the injury. For example, fishing without a fishing license.[Brown v. Shyne: court considered the violation of a statute requiringphysicians to have licenses did not amount to any evidence of negligencein the giving of medical care].2) Some EvidenceViolation of the statute can be considered in proving Ds negligence, butit will not suffice to prove negligence on its own. [Brown v. Shyne].3) Prima Facie EvidenceViolation of the statute in itself amounts to negligence. However twodefenses exist: (1) possible to violate statute when utility of violationoutweighs obedience and (2) when it’s safer to disobey than to follow theprovision. [Tedla: Court considered violation of the statute as evidence,but reasoned that because in the particular circumstance it was safer forthem to violate the statute, they were justified in doing so and were notnegligent].4) Per SeViolation of the statute is in itself negligence; thus per se is another kindof prima facie evidence. The difference is that it only has one defense asopposed to two. The only defense to per se violation of a statute is whenthe utility of violating the statute outweighs the cost of obeying it.[Martin v. Herzog: not having one’s lights on while driving in the darkis never safe and therefore cannot be excused based on this justification.It can only be justified when the utility of violating the statute outweighsthe risk; e.g., driving a car without headlights to warn the town of animpending flood.•Violation of statute may be excusable if it was impossible for Dunder the circumstances to comply with the statute. [ Bush v.Harvey Transfer Co.].5) Strict LiabilityThis takes us out of negligence. But it essentially says that whenviolation of the statute is in itself wrong and violator is guilty even ifthey do not meet all the elements of the prima facie case for negligence.[See dissenting opinion in Brown v. Shyne].Violation of statute may be excusable if it was impossible for Dunder the circumstances to comply with the statute. [ Bush v.Harvey Transfer Co.].b. CustomWhat is usually done may be evidence of what ought to be done,but what ought to be done is fixed by standard of reasonableprudence whether usually complied with or not.1) When there is proof of an accepted practice and evidence that Dignored this practice it is some evidence in proving that D was negligent.[Trimarco v. Klein].2) Even when no custom has been established, if the utility of adopting thatcustom outweighs the cost (see Learned Hand’s formula) then the courtmay find the failure to conform to the new standard of care as negligent.[T.J. Hooper].3) Typically the standard of care for professionals is that which anormal professional would do; Helling deviated from this rulefinding that custom among a medical practice is not enoughreason to do a fairly inexpensive test for a condition that cancause serious harm. Expanded on T.J. Hooper. [Helling v.Carey]c. Res Ipsa LoquiturThis is a rule of circumstantial evidence; its application varies by jurisdiction; translate to“the thing speaks for itself.”One can prove presumption of actor’s negligence when:(i) Accident would not ordinarily happen, unless someone in the defendant’s“class” was negligent.(ii) Instrumentality of the injury was in the defendant’s control•This element is on the decline in many jurisdictions (see Rest. 3d Torts)•Escola rule: D must only have had control at the time the negligent actoccurred, not necessarily when the accident happened.D. ACTUAL CAUSE (CAUSATION IN FACT)Before the defendant’s conduct can be considered a proximate cause of plaintiff’s injury, it must first be a cause in fact of the injury. Several tests exist:1. Standard Test “But For Causation”a. “But For” TestAn act or omission to act is the cause in fact of an injury when the injury wouldnot have occurred but for the act. Both direct and circumstantial evidence canprove “but for test.” [Hoyt v. Jeffers (saw mill spark)]. Conjecture not enough[Smith v. Rapid Transit]. Normally plaintiff must prove “but for” test in order toshow causation. But, not always: see additional tests.Example: Failure to provide a fire escape is a cause of death of one who isthereby unable to flee a fire, but it is not the cause of death ofone who suffocated in bed.2. Additional Tests (Exceptions) – burden shifts to defendants; once established thenall Ds jointly and severally liablea. Indivisible Harm “Substantial Factor”Where several causes concur to bring about an injury – and any onealone would have been sufficient to cause the injury – it is sufficient ifdefendant’s conduct was a “substantial factor” in causing injury.(i) All Ds wrongdoers(ii) Each D caused some of the harm(iii) P cannot show which D caused which part of the harmb. Summer’s Exception(i) All Ds must be wrongdoers(ii) Impossible to tell if all Ds actually caused harm(ii) All potential Ds must be sued(iii) Burden shifts to defendants to prove they didn’t cause harm(iv) Jointly but not severally liableExample: Alex and Basil both negligently fire shotguns inClara’s direction. Clara is hit by one pellet, butshe cannot tell which gun fired the shot. Underthe alternative causes approach, Alex and Basilwill have to prove that the pellet was not theirs.If unable to do this they may both be liable.c. Ybara Exception(i) Not all Ds wrongdoers(ii) All Ds had control(iv) All motivated by “conspiracy of silence”Example: P was having an appendicitis surgery. A group of doctorsand nurses performed different parts of the procedure.When P awoke his arm was seriously damaged, but therewas no way to tell who caused the injury.。
tosca structure拓扑方法
tosca structure拓扑方法
TOSCA Structure是一款标准无参结构优化系统，可以对具有任意载荷工
况的有限元模型进行拓扑、形状和加强筋优化。
在优化过程中，可以直接使用已经存在的有限元模型。
TOSCA Structure的拓扑方法主要包括以下步骤：
1. 确定优化目标和约束条件：根据实际需求，确定优化目标，如刚度最大化、质量最小化等，并设置相应的约束条件，如体积比、最大/最小厚度等。
2. 建立有限元模型：根据实际结构，建立相应的有限元模型，包括几何模型、材料属性、边界条件等。
3. 定义设计变量：选择需要优化的设计变量，如节点坐标、截面尺寸等。
4. 确定优化算法：根据实际情况，选择合适的优化算法，如遗传算法、粒子群算法等。
5. 运行优化：将以上信息输入TOSCA Structure中，运行优化程序，得到
最优解。
6. 结果分析：对最优解进行详细的分析，如应力分布、应变分布等，并根据分析结果进行结构优化设计。
总之，TOSCA Structure的拓扑方法是一种高效、精确的结构优化方法，可以帮助工程师快速找到最优的结构设计方案。
船舶英语常用词汇（三）
船舶英语常用词汇（三）今天我们讲解船舶结构的常用英语词汇：1.ballast tank 压载舱2.double bottom tank 双层底舱3.Skeleton 骨架4.Total longitudinal strength 总纵强度5.Torsional strength 扭转强度6.Transverse strengthen 横向强度7.Local strength 局部强度8.Docking strength 坐坞强度9.Rigidity 刚度10.Stress concentration应力集中11.transverse framing system 横骨架式结构12.longitudinal framing system 纵骨架式结构bined framing system 纵横混合式结构14.frame，beam肋骨，横梁15.shell plate. inner bottom plating, deck plating外板，内底板，甲板板16.longitudinal member 纵向构件transverse member横向构件17.sole weight 自重点击 航运精英圈 关注我，加★星标★18.strengthdeck强力甲板，shelterdeck遮蔽甲板，bulkhead deck 舱壁甲板，freeboard deck干舷甲板，tonnage deck 量吨甲板19.margin plate内陆边板20.basic construction plan基本结构图central fore-and-aft plane construction plan纵中剖面图21.inner bottomconstruction plan内底结构图double bottom construction plan双层底图22.shell expansion plan外板展开图23 transverse cross-section nlan横剖面图24.strake列板，flatplatekeel平板龙骨，side strake舷侧列板，fbilge strake毗列板，sheer strake舷顶列板，deck stringer上田板边板25.floatability 抗沉性26.face plate面板，flanging 折边27.bilge drainage污水沟28.main frame主肋骨，tweendeckframe甲板间肋骨，peakframe尖舱肋骨,intermediate fame中间肋骨，webfame加强肋骨29.side stringer舷侧纵桁，sidelongitudinal舷侧纵骨，deckqirder甲板级桁，deck longitudinal甲板纵骨30.qunwale舷边(舷顶列板和甲板边板连接处)31.crack arrest止裂32.bulwarkplating舷墙板，buttress bracket支撑肘板，armrest扶手33.hatch end beam舱口端梁，half beam半横梁，web beam 加强横梁34.tripping bracket防倾侧肘板35.cantilever beam悬梁臂36.sheer curve舷弧线37transverse bu khead横向舱壁longitudinalbulkhead红向舱壁38.fore peak tank bulkhead=collision bulkhead 防碰撞舱壁39.wash bulkhead制荡舱壁40.symmetrical corrugated bulkhead对称槽型舱壁41.symmetrical trapezoid bulkhead 对称梯形舱壁42.panting beam强胸横梁43.raised floor 升高肋板44.stem post首柱stern post尾柱45.transomfloor尾肋板，solepiece底骨。
tor 英文 工作大纲
tor 英文工作大纲Title: TOR Work OutlineIntroduction:The TOR (Terms of Reference) is a crucial document that outlines the scope, objectives, and deliverables of a specific project or task. In this article, we will explore the essential components of a TOR in the context of an English work outline.1. Background and Context:Provide an overview of the background and context of the project/task. This section should include details such as the purpose of the project, its relevance, and any existing conditions or challenges that need to be addressed.2. Objectives:Clearly state the objectives of the project/task. These objectives should be specific, measurable, achievable, relevant, and time-bound (SMART). Break down the objectives into primary and secondary goals for clarity.3. Scope:Define the scope of work by outlining the boundaries and limitations of the project/task. This section should highlight the activities, deliverables, and expected outcomes. It is essential to be concise and specific when defining the scope to avoid ambiguity.4. Methodology:Describe the methodology or approach to be used in executing the project/task. Explain the steps, processes, or techniques that will be employed to achieve the objectives. If applicable, discuss any tools or resources that will be utilized.5. Timeline and Milestones:Create a timeline that outlines the project/task schedule. Include key milestones and deadlines for each stage of the work. This section helps to ensure proper time management and allows for tracking progress throughout the project/task.6. Roles and Responsibilities:Identify the individuals or teams involved in the project/task and assign specific roles and responsibilities to each. Clearly define the main stakeholders, project manager, team members, and any external contributors. This section helps establish accountability and promotes effective collaboration.7. Communication Plan:Outline the communication plan for the project/task. Specify the frequency, methods, and channels of communication between team members, stakeholders, and other relevant parties. Emphasize the importance of regular updates, progress reports, and feedback mechanisms.8. Risk Assessment and Mitigation:Identify potential risks, challenges, or obstacles that may arise during the project/task. Evaluate the impact and likelihood of occurrence for each riskand propose mitigation strategies to minimize or eliminate them. This section demonstrates proactive planning and risk management.9. Budget:Include a budget summary for the project/task, if applicable. Provide an estimate of the expected costs, including any resources, materials, or services required. If there are cost constraints, mention them and suggest how to optimize resources without compromising quality.10. Evaluation and Monitoring:Outline the evaluation and monitoring mechanisms to assess the progress, quality, and adherence to the TOR. Define the key performance indicators (KPIs) or evaluation criteria that will be used. Discuss how feedback and lessons learned will be incorporated for continuous improvement.Conclusion:In conclusion, a properly structured TOR plays a vital role in ensuring project/task success. By following the outlined sections, a comprehensive and effective work outline can be created, guiding the team towards achieving the desired outcomes. Remember, adapt this article according to specific project/task requirements and use appropriate formatting and documentation standards.。
压力管道设计技术规定
（2）起自供热主管网的分支管道，其最高工作压力和设计压力应等于该供热主管 分支处的最高工作压力。
（3）热水热力网供、回水管道的设计压力均取用循环水泵最高出口压力加上循环 水泵与管道最低点地形高差产生的静水压力。 2.2.5 设计温度
《压力管道设计技术规定》是我公司压力管道设计的作业指导书，压力管道各级设 计人员必须认真学习并严格执行，努力提高自己的业务水平，扎实工作，为确保设计的 压力管道安全运行而做出努力。
无锡市恒安特种设备工程有限公司 执行董事：
二 OO 九年五月五日
1
管道设计技术规定
1 总则
1.1 本规定适用于本公司 GB2、GC2、GC3 级压力管道设计、材料、制造、安装、检验 和试验的要求； 1.2 设计压力或设计温度高于《城市热力网设计规范》CJJ34 规定、在厂界以外敷设的 热力管道，其管道布置按《城市热力网设计规范》CJJ34 执行，其余按《火力发电厂汽 水管道设计技术规定》DL/T5054 执行，此类管道级别为 GB2 级。 1.3 本规定为设备布置、管道布置、管件材料和管道机械的设计原则，本公司 GB2、GC2、 GC3 压力管道设计应符合本规定的要求。 1.4 本规定引用的标准均为现行有效版本，压力管道设计标准化人员应至少每月一次上 网检索标准的有效性，及时取得最新版本的标准并作废旧标准。
（2）保密项目和简单项目可由设计人员根据委托单位的介绍编制工艺流程框图， 经校审后由委托单位确认。
3
2.3.3 设备资料 委托单位应提供与项目有关的所有设备的资料，包括设备图纸、使用说明书、安全
阀校验报告等。未采购设备的设计条件应由双方共同确定。 2.3.4 设计压力
2D truss structure
4 定义装配件
在窗口左上角的Module列表中选择Assembly功能模块
点击左侧工具区中的 Instance>Create. （Instance Part），或在主菜单中选择
在弹出的Create Instance 对话框中， 前面创建的部件会自动被选中，默认参 数为 Instance Type：Dependent， 点击OK。
8 提交分析
在窗口左上角的Module列表中选择 Job 功能模块 点击左侧工具区中的 （Job Manager），或在主菜单中选择 Job>Manager。弹出Job Manager对话框，点击Create。修改name，点击 Continue，弹出Edit Job对话框，各参数保持默认值，点击Ok。 在 Job Manager对话框中点击Submit。看到对话框中的Status 提示依次变 为 Submitted, Running 和Completed，则表示对模型的分析已经完成。 点击对话框中的Results，自动进入Visualization模块。
7 划分网格
在窗口左上角的Module列表中选择 Mesh 功能模块，并将Object 选项设 为Part。 点击左侧工具区中的 （Seed Edges），框选整个部件，点击中键确定 ，弹出Local Seeds 对话框，将Method选为 By Number，Number of Elements设为1，点击Ok。 点击左侧工具区中的 （Mesh Part），框选整个部件，点击中键，弹 出Element Type 对话框。选择单元类型为T2D2。 点击左侧工具区中的 （Mesh Part），然后中键确定。
9 后处理
显示未变形图：点击左侧工具图中的 （Plot Undeformed Shape） 显示变形图：点击左侧工具区中的 （Plot Deformed Shape） 点击左侧工具区中的 （Allow Multiple Plot States），可将变形图与未 变形图同时显示出来，如左下图所示 显示云纹图： 点击左侧工具区中的 （Plot Contours） 保存视图区画面：在主菜单中选择file>print，在弹出的Print对话框中，将 destination选为file，在File name 后面输入要保存的目录和文件名，将 Format 改为需要的格式，如PNG，点击确定即可
octet truss模型结构参数
octet truss模型结构参数一、概述Octet Truss模型是一种广泛应用于工程领域的杆件组合模型，主要用于模拟桁架结构。
在本文中，我们将介绍如何构建和使用一个Octet Truss模型，并讨论其结构参数。
二、建立模型1. 导入必要的软件包和库，如Python中的PyTruss库。
2. 创建八个杆件，形成八边形形状。
3. 为每个杆件设置长度和角度。
4. 添加节点，定义连接方式。
5. 连接杆件和节点，形成完整的模型。
三、结构参数1. 杆件长度：杆件的长度直接影响模型的刚度和稳定性。
需要根据实际工程要求，合理选择杆件的长度。
2. 杆件角度：杆件之间的角度会影响模型的几何形状和受力情况。
需要综合考虑工程要求和受力分析，合理设置杆件角度。
3. 节点位置：节点是杆件之间的连接点，其位置对模型的刚度和稳定性有很大影响。
需要合理选择节点位置，确保模型在受力时能够保持稳定。
4. 约束条件：在模型中添加适当的约束条件，可以确保模型在受力时能够按照预期方式变形。
需要根据工程要求和受力分析，合理设置约束条件。
5. 载荷分布：载荷是模型所承受的外加压力或张力。
需要合理分配载荷，确保模型在承受载荷时能够保持稳定。
四、分析参数影响1. 杆件长度变化对模型的影响：随着杆件长度的增加，模型的刚度和稳定性会提高，但会增加计算难度和时间。
2. 杆件角度变化对模型的影响：随着杆件角度的变化，模型的几何形状和受力情况也会发生变化。
需要综合考虑工程要求和受力分析，选择合适的杆件角度。
3. 节点位置变化对模型的影响：节点位置的变化会影响模型的刚度和稳定性，以及载荷的分布。
需要合理选择节点位置，确保模型在受力时能够保持稳定并有效传递载荷。
4. 约束条件设置对模型的影响：适当的约束条件可以确保模型在受力时能够按照预期方式变形，但过多的约束条件可能会限制模型的灵活性。
需要合理设置约束条件，以获得最佳的模型性能。
五、优化模型结构参数根据分析结果，可以对模型的结构参数进行优化，以提高模型的性能和稳定性。
FM 对自动喷淋系统要求
Байду номын сангаасClass Number 1630
November 2013
©2013 FM Approvals LLC. All rights reserved
Foreword
The FM Approvals certification mark is intended to verify that the products and services described will meet FM Approvals’ stated conditions of performance, safety and quality useful to the ends of property conservation. The purpose of Approval Standards is to present the criteria for FM Approval of various types of products and services, as guidance for FM Approvals personnel, manufacturers, users and authorities having jurisdiction. Products submitted for certification by FM Approvals shall demonstrate that they meet the intent of the Approval Standard, and that quality control in manufacturing shall ensure a consistently uniform and reliable product. Approval Standards strive to be performance-oriented. They are intended to facilitate technological development. For examining equipment, materials and services, Approval Standards: • • must be useful to the ends of property conservation by preventing, limiting or not causing damage under the conditions stated by the Approval listing; and must be readily identifiable.
DB33∕T 1136-2017 建筑地基基础设计规范
5
地基计算 ....................................................................................................................... 14 5.1 承载力计算......................................................................................................... 14 5.2 变形计算 ............................................................................................................ 17 5.3 稳定性计算......................................................................................................... 21
主要起草人： 施祖元 刘兴旺 潘秋元 陈云敏 王立忠 李冰河 （以下按姓氏拼音排列） 蔡袁强 陈青佳 陈仁朋 陈威文 陈 舟 樊良本 胡凌华 胡敏云 蒋建良 李建宏 王华俊 刘世明 楼元仓 陆伟国 倪士坎 单玉川 申屠团兵 陶 琨 叶 军 徐和财 许国平 杨 桦 杨学林 袁 静 主要审查人： 益德清 龚晓南 顾国荣 钱力航 黄茂松 朱炳寅 朱兆晴 赵竹占 姜天鹤 赵宇宏 童建国浙江大学 参编单位： （排名不分先后） 浙江工业大学 温州大学 华东勘测设计研究院有限公司 浙江大学建筑设计研究院有限公司 杭州市建筑设计研究院有限公司 浙江省建筑科学设计研究院 汉嘉设计集团股份有限公司 杭州市勘测设计研究院 宁波市建筑设计研究院有限公司 温州市建筑设计研究院 温州市勘察测绘院 中国联合工程公司 浙江省电力设计院 浙江省省直建筑设计院 浙江省水利水电勘测设计院 浙江省工程勘察院 大象建筑设计有限公司 浙江东南建筑设计有限公司 湖州市城市规划设计研究院 浙江省工业设计研究院 浙江工业大学工程设计集团有限公司 中国美术学院风景建筑设计研究院 华汇工程设计集团股份有限公司
多边形直骨架实现
同的活动链，如图 6 所示。
图 6 split 事件处理示意图，虚线为活动链
更新链表指针： 图 6 所示是一种最简单的情况，在这种情况中 Vb 和 Vb->next 还尚未被处理，但是在多 数时候，Vb 或者 Vb->next 可能已经被处理，不在活动链上了，这时候的处理过程会比较复 杂，有时候还会出现多次 split 的现象，关于上述这些复杂情况的处理方法，请见接下来的 轮廓边被多个凹点所分裂的情况分析， 在这里只描述如图 6 所示的最简单的情形下链表的连 接关系。 V1->next Vb->next V1->prev Va->prev V1->actNext Vb->next Vb->next->actPrev V1 V1->actPrev Va->actPrev Va->actPrev->actNext V1 V2->next Va V2->prev Vb V2->actNext Va->actNext Va->actNext->actPrev V2 V2->actPrev Vb Vb->actNext V2 3) 如果 V1 的 actPrev 的 actPrev 指向 V1 自己， 则说明在 V1 所在的活动链中只剩下 两个顶点，那么输出边 (V1, V1->actPrev) 到骨架的边列表中，并标记 V1 、
图 2 多向链表在发生 edge 事件的前后变化 优先队列：由于整个直骨架的构造算法是基于扫描线算法，因此优先队列这种数据结构 是主要用来在 O(lgn)的时间内插入新的事件点，在 O(1)的时间内取出下一个事件点。在 我们的算法实现的过程中，由于针对于每一个事件点都只有两种操作插入和取出，不存 在在算法执行的过程中某个事件点的键值发生改变的情况，因此用 STL 中提供的 priority_queue 就可以满足需求了。
基于多层级特征融合的隧道衬砌裂缝病害检测算法研究
Value Engineering———————————————————————基金项目:辽宁省教育厅科学研究经费项目：基于图像语义分割的隧道衬砌病害检测技术研究（LJKMZ20222114）；辽宁省交通高等专科学校教育教学成果培育项目：“基于产教融合、课证融通的信息技术人才培养研究”（2023JYJXCG05）。
作者简介:贾睿（1982-），男，辽宁沈阳人，副教授，硕士研究生，研究方向为人工智能、机器学习、计算机视觉；武旭娟（1989-），女，山西吕梁人，工程师，硕士研究生，研究方向为人工智能、计算机视觉、交通信息化；赵红岩（1975-），男，辽宁沈阳人，教授，博士研究生，研究方向为人工智能、计算机应用、大数据。
1研究背景近几十年来，我国隧道建设有了很大的进展，在总里程和使用面积上有了很大飞跃，隧道交通工程正由“建设为主”向“建养并重”转变。
[1]国内外的调查研究表明，在隧道的日常使用过程中，由于各种外部环境的影响，隧道出现不同程度的裂缝、渗漏水、涂层脱落等常见病害，这些病害会威胁到隧道结构的安全性、稳定性及耐久性，严重影响交通质量[2]。
因此，高效的隧道病害检测方法可以为养护部门提供有力的技术支撑，是交通安全领域中重要的研究方向，具有重要的研究价值。
根据隧道裂缝检测技术的不同，目前方法主要分为：基于图像处理的方法和基于深度学习的方法[3]。
基于图像处理的裂缝检测方法简单高效，包括边缘和轮廓检测、形态学处理等，但这些方法多采用人工设计的裂缝特征算子，易受光照、阴影和路面障碍等因素影响，检测准确率不高，难以应对场景复杂多变的不同裂缝病害。
基于深度学习的裂缝检测方法自动提取输入图像的浅层局部特征信息及高层全局特征信息，两者结合能定位物体边界和识别物体分类，有效解决了传统方法对于人工特征工程的依赖。
目前将深度学习应用于隧道裂缝检测的主要方式有：裂缝图像分类、裂缝区域检测、裂缝语义分割[4]。
其中图像分割技术更加符合隧道裂缝检测业务需求，能够适应裂缝尺寸变化多样性，识别裂缝区域轮廓，获取裂缝定量评估信息。
optistruct 单元类型
optistruct 单元类型
OptiStruct是一种常用的有限元分析软件，它支持多种单元类型用于建模和分析结构。
以下是OptiStruct常用的一些单元类型：
1. 线性单元，包括线性弹性单元（如线性弹簧单元）、线性弹塑性单元等，用于模拟结构的线性行为。
2. 六面体单元，包括六面体线性单元、六面体非线性单元等，用于建模立方体或矩形结构。
3. 四面体单元，包括四面体线性单元、四面体非线性单元等，用于建模复杂的几何形状。
4. 三角形单元，包括线性和非线性的三角形单元，用于建模复杂的曲面结构。
5. 梁单元，用于模拟梁的行为，包括梁单元、梁弯曲单元等。
6. 壳单元，用于模拟薄壳结构的行为，包括壳单元、壳弯曲单元等。
除了以上列举的单元类型，OptiStruct还支持其他一些特殊用途的单元类型，如轴对称单元、壳单元等。
选择合适的单元类型取决于所要分析的结构类型、几何形状和所需精度等因素。
在实际应用中，工程师需要根据具体情况选择合适的单元类型来进行建模和分析，以获得准确可靠的结果。
基于局部特征的图像目标识别技术研究
技术原理
在特征匹配阶段，通常采用相似性度量方法来确定特征之间的相似程度。常 用的相似性度量方法包括欧氏距离、余弦相似度、汉明距离等。这些方法能够计 算出两个特征之间的差异，从而判断它们是否匹配。
实验方法
实验方法
为了验证基于局部特征的图像目标识别技术的有效性，我们进行了一系列实 验。首先，我们采集了不同类型的数据集，包括自然图像、医学图像和工业图像 等。然后，我们采用不同的基于局部特征的算法进行目标识别，包括SIFT、SURF 和ORB等。在实验过程中，我们设置了不同的参数，并对实验结果进行了分析和 比较。
应用场景
应用场景
基于图像不变量特征的自动目标识别技术可以广泛应用于军事、安全监控、 智能交通等领域。例如，在军事领域中，我们可以利用该技术来自动识别和跟踪 敌人；在安全监控领域中，我们可以利用该技术来自动检测和报警异常行为；在 智能交通领域中，我们可以利用该技术来自动识别和分类交通车辆。
结论
结论
谢谢观看
文献综述
金字塔，快速有效地提取局部特征，具有较高的效率和准确率；ORB算法则综 合了SIFT和SURF算法的优点，同时采用旋转不变性和仿射不变性进行特征匹配， 具有较快的速度和较好的效果。
文献综述
然而，现有的基于局部特征的图像目标识别技术仍存在一些不足之处，例如 对复杂背景和光照变化的鲁棒性较差、特征匹配的精度和效率有待提高等。因此， 针对这些问题，未来的研究方向包括改进现有算法、开发新型特征描述符和使用 深度学习等方法进行目标识别。
文献综述
文献综述
基于局部特征的图像目标识别技术的研究始于20世纪90年代，其目的是通过 提取图像中局部特征，实现目标与背景的分离和识别。目前，该领域已经取得了 许多研究成果，其中最具代表性的算法包括SIFT、SURF、ORB等。
国外关于有限元方面的书籍
Ainsworth, M. and Oden, J. T., A Posterior Error Estimation in Finite Element Analysis , 2000
Backstrom, G., Fields of Physics on the PC by Finite Element Analysis, 1994
Backstrom, G., Fields of Physics by Finite Element Analysis, An Introduction, 1998
Baldwin, K., ed., Modern Methods for Automating Finite Element Mesh Generation, 1986, CP
Baran, N. M., Finite Element Analysis on Microcomputers, 1988
Argyris, J. H. and Mlejnek, H. P. Computerdynamik der Tragwerke, Band III Die Methode der Finiten Elemente, 1996
Ashwell, D. G. and Gallagher, R. H., eds. Finite Elements for Thin Shells and Curved Members, 1976
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
结构力学英语词汇
结构力学结构力学structural mechanics 结构分析structural analysis结构动力学structural dynamics拱Arch三铰拱three-hinged arch抛物线拱parabolic arch圆拱circular arch穹顶Dome空间结构space structure空间桁架space truss雪载［荷］snow load风载［荷］wind load土压力earth pressure地震载荷earthquake loading弹簧支座spring support支座位移support displacement支座沉降support settlement超静定次数degree of indeterminacy机动分析kinematic analysis结点法method of joints截面法method of sections结点力joint forces共轭位移conjugate displacement影响线influence line三弯矩方程three-moment equation单位虚力unit virtual force刚度系数stiffness coefficient柔度系数flexibility coefficient力矩分配moment distribution力矩分配法moment distribution method力矩再分配moment redistribution分配系数distribution factor矩阵位移法matri displacement method单元刚度矩阵element stiffness matrix单元应变矩阵element strain matrix总体坐标global coordinates贝蒂定理Betti theorem高斯--若尔当消去法Gauss-Jordan elimination Method屈曲模态buckling mode复合材料力学mechanics of composites复合材料composite material纤维复合材料fibrous composite单向复合材料unidirectional composite泡沫复合材料foamed composite颗粒复合材料particulate composite层板Laminate夹层板sandwich panel正交层板cross-ply laminate斜交层板angle-ply laminate层片Ply多胞固体cellular solid膨胀Expansion 压实Debulk 劣化Degradation 脱层Delamination脱粘Debond 纤维应力fiber stress 层应力ply stress 层应变plystrain 层间应力interlaminar stress 比强度specific strength 强度折减系数strength reduction factor 强度应力比strength -stress ratio 横向剪切模量transverse shear modulus 横观各向同性transverse isotropy 正交各向异Orthotropy 剪滞分析shear lag analysis 短纤维chopped fiber 长纤维continuous fiber 纤维方向fiber direction 纤维断裂fiber break 纤维拔脱fiber pull-out纤维增强fiber reinforcement 致密化Densification最小重量设计optimum weight design 网格分析法netting analysis混合律rule of mixture失效准则failure criterion蔡--吴失效准则Tsai-W u failure criterion达格代尔模型Dugdale model断裂力学fracture mechanics概率断裂力学probabilistic fracture Mechanics格里菲思理论Griffith theory线弹性断裂力学linear elastic fracture mechanics, LEFM弹塑性断裂力学elastic-plastic fracture mecha-nics, EPFM断裂Fracture脆性断裂brittle fracture解理断裂cleavage fracture蠕变断裂creep fracture延性断裂ductile fracture晶间断裂inter-granular fracture准解理断裂quasi-cleavage fracture穿晶断裂trans-granular fracture裂纹Crack裂缝Flaw缺陷Defect割缝Slit微裂纹Microcrack折裂Kink椭圆裂纹elliptical crack深埋裂纹embedded crack［钱］币状裂纹penny-shape crack预制裂纹Precrack短裂纹short crack表面裂纹surface crack裂纹钝化crack blunting裂纹分叉crack branching裂纹闭合crack closure裂纹前缘crack front裂纹嘴crack mouth裂纹张开角crack opening angle,COA裂纹张开位移crack opening displacement, COD裂纹阻力crack resistance裂纹面crack surface裂纹尖端crack tip裂尖张角crack tip opening angle, CTOA裂尖张开位移crack tip opening displacement, CTOD 裂尖奇异场crack tip singularity Field裂纹扩展速率crack growth rate稳定裂纹扩展stable crack growth定常裂纹扩展steady crack growth亚临界裂纹扩展subcritical crack growth 裂纹［扩展］减速crack retardation止裂crack arrest止裂韧度arrest toughness断裂类型fracture mode滑开型sliding mode张开型opening mode撕开型tearing mode复合型mixed mode撕裂Tearing撕裂模量tearing modulus断裂准则fracture criterionJ 积分J-integralJ 阻力曲线J-resistance curve断裂韧度fracture toughness应力强度因子stress intensity factor HRR 场Hutchinson-Rice-Rosengren Field 守恒积分conservation integral有效应力张量effective stress tensor应变能密度strain energy density能量释放率energy release rate内聚区cohesive zone塑性区plastic zone张拉区stretched zone热影响区heat affected zone, HAZ延脆转变温度brittle-ductile transition temperature固体力学弹性力学elasticity弹性理论theory of elasticity均匀应力状态homogeneous state of stress应力不变量stress invariant应变不变量strain invariant应变椭球strain ellipsoid均匀应变状态homogeneous state of strain应变协调方程equation of strain compatibility拉梅常量Lame constants各向同性弹性isotropic elasticity旋转圆盘rotating circular disk楔wedge开尔文问题Kelvin problem布西内斯克问题Boussinesq problem艾里应力函数Airy stress function克罗索夫--穆斯赫利什维利法Kolosoff-Muskhelishvili method 基尔霍夫假设Kirchhoff hypothesis板Plate矩形板Rectangular plate圆板Circular plate环板Annular plate波纹板Corrugated plate加劲板Stiffened plate,reinforced Plate中厚板Plate of moderate thickness弯［曲］应力函数Stress function of bending 壳Shell扁壳Shallow shell旋转壳Revolutionary shell球壳Spherical shell［圆］柱壳Cylindrical shell锥壳Conical shell环壳Toroidal shell封闭壳Closed shell波纹壳Corrugated shell扭［转］应力函数Stress function of torsion 翘曲函数Warping function半逆解法semi-inverse method瑞利--里茨法Rayleigh-Ritz method松弛法Relaxation method莱维法Levy method松弛Relaxation量纲分析Dimensional analysis自相似［性］self-similarity影响面Influence surface接触应力Contact stress赫兹理论Hertz theory协调接触Conforming contact滑动接触Sliding contact滚动接触Rolling contact压入Indentation各向异性弹性Anisotropic elasticity颗粒材料Granular material散体力学Mechanics of granular media 热弹性Thermoelasticity超弹性Hyperelasticity粘弹性Viscoelasticity对应原理Correspondence principle褶皱Wrinkle塑性全量理论Total theory of plasticity 滑动Sliding微滑Microslip粗糙度Roughness非线性弹性Nonlinear elasticity大挠度Large deflection突弹跳变snap-through有限变形Finite deformation格林应变Green strain阿尔曼西应变Almansi strain弹性动力学Dynamic elasticity运动方程Equation of motion准静态的Quasi-static气动弹性Aeroelasticity水弹性Hydroelasticity颤振Flutter弹性波Elastic wave简单波Simple wave柱面波Cylindrical wave水平剪切波Horizontal shear wave竖直剪切波Vertical shear wave体波body wave无旋波Irrotational wave畸变波Distortion wave膨胀波Dilatation wave瑞利波Rayleigh wave等容波Equivoluminal wave勒夫波Love wave界面波Interfacial wave边缘效应edge effect塑性力学Plasticity可成形性Formability金属成形Metal forming耐撞性Crashworthiness结构抗撞毁性Structural crashworthiness 拉拔Drawing破坏机构Collapse mechanism回弹Springback挤压Extrusion冲压Stamping穿透Perforation层裂Spalling塑性理论Theory of plasticity安定［性］理论Shake-down theory运动安定定理kinematic shake-down theorem 静力安定定理Static shake-down theorem率相关理论rate dependent theorem载荷因子load factor加载准则Loading criterion加载函数Loading function加载面Loading surface塑性加载Plastic loading塑性加载波Plastic loading wave简单加载Simple loading比例加载Proportional loading卸载Unloading卸载波Unloading wave冲击载荷Impulsive load阶跃载荷step load脉冲载荷pulse load极限载荷limit load中性变载nentral loading拉抻失稳instability in tension加速度波acceleration wave本构方程constitutive equation完全解complete solution名义应力nominal stress过应力over-stress真应力true stress等效应力equivalent stress流动应力flow stress应力间断stress discontinuity应力空间stress space主应力空间principal stress space静水应力状态hydrostatic state of stress对数应变logarithmic strain工程应变engineering strain等效应变equivalent strain应变局部化strain localization应变率strain rate应变率敏感性strain rate sensitivity应变空间strain space有限应变finite strain塑性应变增量plastic strain increment累积塑性应变accumulated plastic strain永久变形permanent deformation内变量internal variable应变软化strain-softening理想刚塑性材料rigid-perfectly plastic Material 刚塑性材料rigid-plastic material理想塑性材料perfectl plastic material材料稳定性stability of material应变偏张量deviatoric tensor of strain应力偏张量deviatori tensor of stress应变球张量spherical tensor of strain应力球张量spherical tensor of stress路径相关性path-dependency线性强化linear strain-hardening应变强化strain-hardening随动强化kinematic hardening各向同性强化isotropic hardening强化模量strain-hardening modulus幂强化power hardening塑性极限弯矩plastic limit bending Moment塑性极限扭矩plastic limit torque弹塑性弯曲elastic-plastic bending弹塑性交界面elastic-plastic interface弹塑性扭转elastic-plastic torsion粘塑性Viscoplasticity非弹性Inelasticity理想弹塑性材料elastic-perfectly plastic Material 极限分析limit analysis极限设计limit design极限面limit surface上限定理upper bound theorem上屈服点upper yield point下限定理lower bound theorem下屈服点lower yield point界限定理bound theorem初始屈服面initial yield surface后继屈服面subsequent yield surface屈服面［的］外凸性convexity of yield surface 截面形状因子shape factor of cross-section沙堆比拟sand heap analogy屈月艮Yield屈服条件yield condition屈服准则yield criterion屈服函数yield function屈服面yield surface塑性势plastic potential能量吸收装置energy absorbing device能量耗散率energy absorbing device塑性动力学dynamic plasticity塑性动力屈曲dynamic plastic buckling塑性动力响应dynamic plastic response塑性波plastic wave运动容许场kinematically admissible Field静力容许场statically admissible Field流动法则flow rule速度间断velocity discontinuity滑移线slip-lines滑移线场slip-lines field移行塑性铰travelling plastic hinge塑性增量理论incremental theory of Plasticity 米泽斯屈服准则Mises yield criterion普朗特--罗伊斯关系prandtl- Reuss relation特雷斯卡屈服准则Tresca yield criterion洛德应力参数Lode stress parameter莱维--米泽斯关系Levy-Mises relation亨基应力方程Hencky stress equation赫艾--韦斯特加德应力空间Haigh-Westergaard stress space 洛德应变参数Lode strain parameter德鲁克公设Drucker postulate盖林格速度方程Geiringer velocity Equation连续过程continuous process碰撞截面collision cross section通用气体常数conventional gas constant燃烧不稳定性combustion instability稀释度dilution完全离解complete dissociation火焰传播flame propagation组份constituent碰撞反应速率collision reaction rate燃烧理论combustion theory浓度梯度concentration gradient阴极腐蚀cathodic corrosion火焰速度flame speed火焰驻定flame stabilization火焰结构flame structure着火ignition湍流火焰turbulent flame层流火焰laminar flame燃烧带burning zone渗流flow in porous media, seepage达西定律Darcy law赫尔-肖流Hele-Shaw flow毛［细］管流capillary flow过滤filtration爪进fingering不互溶驱替immiscible displacement不互溶流体immiscible fluid互溶驱替miscible displacement互溶流体miscible fluid迁移率mobility流度比mobility ratio渗透率permeability孑匕隙度porosity多孔介质porous medium比面specific surface迂曲度tortuosity空隙void空隙分数void fraction注水water flooding可湿性wettability地球物理流体动力学geophysical fluid dynamics 物理海洋学physical oceanography大气环流atmospheric circulation海洋环流ocean circulation海洋流ocean current旋转流rotating flow平流advection埃克曼流Ekman flow埃克曼边界层Ekman boundary layer大气边界层atmospheric boundary layer大气-海洋相互作用atmosphere-ocean interaction 埃克曼数Ekman number罗斯贝数Rossby unmber罗斯贝波Rossby wave斜压性baroclinicity正压性barotropy内磨擦internal friction海洋波ocean wave盐度salinity环境流体力学environmental fluid mechanics斯托克斯流Stokes flow羽流plume理查森数Richardson number污染源pollutant source污染物扩散pollutant diffusion噪声noise噪声级noise level噪声污染noise pollution排放物effulent工业流体力学industrical fluid mechanics流控技术fluidics轴向流axial flow并向流co-current flow对向流counter current flow横向流cross flow螺旋流spiral flow旋拧流swirling flow滞后流after flow混合层mixing layer抖振buffeting风压wind pressure附壁效应wall attachment effect, Coanda effect简约频率reduced frequency爆炸力学mechanics of explosion终点弹道学terminal ballistics动态超高压技术dynamic ultrahigh pressure technique 流体弹塑性体hydro-elastoplastic medium热塑不稳定性thermoplastic instability空中爆炸explosion in air地下爆炸underground explosion水下爆炸underwater explosion电爆炸discharge-induced explosion激光爆炸laser-induced explosion核爆炸nuclear explosion点爆炸point-source explosion殉爆sympathatic detonation强爆炸intense explosion粒子束爆炸explosion by beam radiation 聚爆implosion起爆initiation of explosion爆破blasting霍普金森杆Hopkinson bar电炮electric gun电磁炮electromagnetic gun爆炸洞explosion chamber轻气炮light gas gun马赫反射Mach reflection基浪base surge成坑cratering能量沉积energy deposition爆心explosion center爆炸当量explosion equivalent火球fire ball爆高height of burst蘑菇云mushroom侵彻penetration规则反射regular reflection崩落spallation应变率史strain rate history流变学rheology聚合物减阻drag reduction by polymers 挤出［物］胀大extrusion swell, die swell 无管虹吸tubeless siphon剪胀效应dilatancy effect孑L压［误差］效应hole-pressure［error］effect 剪切致稠shear thickening剪切致稀shear thinning触变性thixotropy反触变性anti-thixotropy超塑性superplasticity粘弹塑性材料viscoelasto-plastic material滞弹性材料anelastic material本构关系constitutive relation麦克斯韦模型Maxwell model沃伊特-开尔文模型Voigt-Kelvin model宾厄姆模型Bingham model奥伊洛特模型Oldroyd model幂律模型power law model应力松驰stress relaxation应变史strain history应力史stress history记忆函数memory function衰退记忆fading memory应力增长stress growing粘度函数voscosity function相对粘度relative viscosity复态粘度complex viscosity拉伸粘度elongational viscosity拉伸流动elongational flow第一法向应力差first normal-stress difference第二法向应力差second normal-stress difference 德博拉数Deborah number魏森贝格数Weissenberg number动态模量dynamic modulus振荡剪切流oscillatory shear flow宇宙气体动力学cosmic gas dynamics等离［子］体动力学plasma dynamics电离气体ionized gas彳亍星边界层planetary boundary layer阿尔文波Alfven wave泊肃叶-哈特曼流］Poiseuille-Hartman flow哈特曼数Hartman number生物流变学biorheology生物流体biofluid生物屈服点bioyield point生物屈服应力bioyield stress电气体力学electro-gas dynamics铁流体力学ferro-hydrodynamics血液流变学hemorheology, blood rheology血液动力学hemodynamics磁流体力学magneto fluid mechanics磁流体动力学magnetohydrodynamics, MHD磁流体动力波magnetohydrodynamic wave磁流体流magnetohydrodynamic flow磁流体动力稳定性magnetohydrodynamic stability生物力学biomechanics生物流体力学biological fluid mechanics生物固体力学biological solid mechanics宾厄姆塑性流Bingham plastic flow开尔文体Kelvin body沃伊特体Voigt body可贴变形applicable deformation可贴曲面applicable surface边界润滑boundary lubrication液膜润滑fluid film lubrication向心收缩功concentric work离心收缩功eccentric work关节反作用力joint reaction force微循环力学microcyclic mechanics微纤维microfibril渗透性permeability生理横截面积physiological cross-sectional area 农业生物力学agrobiomechanics纤维度fibrousness硬皮度rustiness胶粘度gumminess粘稠度stickiness嫩度tenderness渗透流osmotic flow易位流translocation flow蒸腾流transpirational flow过滤阻力filtration resistance压扁wafering风雪流snow-driving wind停滞堆积accretion遇阻堆积encroachment沙漠地面desert floor流沙固定fixation of shifting sand流动阈值fluid threshold通类名词力学mechanics牛顿力学Newtonian mechanics经典力学classical mechanics静力学statics运动学kinematics动力学dynamics动理学kinetics宏观力学 macroscopic mechanics,macromechanics 细观力学mesomechanics微观力学 microscopic mechanics,micromechanics 一般力学general mechanics固体力学solid mechanics流体力学fluid mechanics理论力学theoretical mechanics应用力学applied mechanics工程力学engineering mechanics实验力学experimental mechanics计算力学computational mechanics理性力学rational mechanics物理力学physical mechanics地球动力学geodynamics力force作用点point of action作用线line of action力系system of forces力系的简化reduction of force system 等效力系equivalent force system刚体rigid body力的可传性transmissibility of force 平行四边形定则parallelogram rule力三角形force triangle力多边形force polygon零力系null-force system平衡equilibrium力的平衡equilibrium of forces平衡条件equilibrium condition平衡位置equilibrium position平衡态equilibrium state分析力学analytical mechanics拉格朗日乘子Lagrange multiplier拉格朗日［量］Lagrangian拉格朗日括号Lagrange bracket循环坐标cyclic coordinate循环积分cyclic integral哈密顿［量］Hamiltonian哈密顿函数Hamiltonian function正则方程canonical equation正则摄动canonical perturbation正则变换canonical transformation正则变量canonical variable哈密顿原理Hamilton principle作用量积分action integral哈密顿--雅可比方程Hamilton-Jacobi equation 作用--角度变量action-angle variables 阿佩尔方程Appell equation 劳斯方程Routh equation拉格朗日函数Lagrangian function 诺特定理Noether theorem 泊松括号poisson bracket边界积分法boundary integral method 并矢dyad运动稳定性stability of motion 轨道稳定性orbital stability 李雅普诺夫函数Lyapunov function 渐近稳定性asymptotic stability 结构稳定性structural stability 久期不稳定性secular instability 弗洛凯定理Floquet theorem 倾覆力矩capsizing moment 自由振动free vibration 固有振动natural vibration 暂态transient state环境振动ambient vibration 反共振anti-resonance 衰减attenuation库仑阻尼Coulomb damping 同相分量in-phase component 非同相分量out-of -phase component 超调量overshoot参量［激励］振动parametric vibration模糊振动fuzzy vibration临界转速critical speed of rotation阻尼器damper半峰宽度half-peak width集总参量系统lumped parameter system相平面法phase plane method相轨迹phase trajectory等倾线法isocline method跳跃现象jump phenomenon负阻尼negative damping达芬方程Duffing equation希尔方程Hill equationKBM 方法KBM method, Krylov-Bogoliu-bov-Mitropol'skii method 马蒂厄方程Mathieu equation平均法averaging method组合音调combination tone解谐detuning耗散函数dissipative function硬激励hard excitation硬弹簧hard spring, hardening spring谐波平衡法harmonic balance method久期项secular term自激振动self-excited vibration分界线separatrix亚谐波subharmonic软弹簧soft spring ,softening spring软激励soft excitation邓克利公式Dunkerley formula瑞利定理Rayleigh theorem分布参量系统distributed parameter system优势频率dominant frequency模态分析modal analysis固有模态natural mode of vibration同步synchronization超谐波ultraharmonic范德波尔方程van der pol equation频谱frequency spectrum基频fundamental frequencyWKB 方法WKB method, Wentzel-Kramers-Brillouin method 缓冲器buffer风激振动aeolian vibration嗡鸣buzz倒谱cepstrum颤动chatter蛇行hunting阻抗匹配impedance matching机械导纳mechanical admittance机械效率mechanical efficiency机械阻抗mechanical impedance随机振动stochastic vibration, random vibration隔振vibration isolation减振vibration reduction应力过冲stress overshoot喘振surge摆振shimmy起伏运动phugoid motion起伏振荡phugoid oscillation驰振galloping陀螺动力学gyrodynamics陀螺摆gyropendulum陀螺平台gyroplatform陀螺力矩gyroscoopic torque陀螺稳定器gyrostabilizer陀螺体gyrostat惯性导航inertial guidance姿态角attitude angle方位角azimuthal angle舒勒周期Schuler period机器人动力学robot dynamics多体系统multibody system多刚体系统multi-rigid-body system机动性maneuverability凯恩方法Kane method转子［系统］动力学rotor dynamics转子［一支承一基础］系统rotor-support-foundation system 静平衡static balancing动平衡dynamic balancing静不平衡static unbalance动不平衡dynamic unbalance现场平衡field balancing不平衡unbalance不平衡量unbalance互耦力cross force挠性转子flexible rotor分频进动fractional frequency precession 半频进动half frequency precession油膜振荡oil whip转子临界转速rotor critical speed自动定心self-alignment亚临界转速subcritical speed涡动whirl。
韧性设计推荐的架构威胁建模方法
韧性设计推荐的架构威胁建模方法威胁建模是一个非常有用的工具，它的核心是「像攻击者一样思考」。
威胁建模可以在产品设计阶段、架构评审阶段或者产品运行时开展，强迫我们站在攻击者的角度去评估产品的安全性，分析产品中每个组件是否可能被篡改、仿冒，是否可能会造成信息泄露、拒绝攻击。
常见的威胁建模方法有：攻击树、TVRA、STRIDE等。
1、攻击树建模攻击树模型是Schneier提出的一种系统攻击分类方法。
这种方法采用树形结构描述攻击逻辑，使安全分析人员从系统面临攻击威胁的角度思考安全问题。
2、TVRA这种方法XXX用的比较多。
TVRA指威胁脆弱性风险评估，它是所有安全工作的基础。
反恐、反盗窃、电子和物理安全方面的专家提供的信息，能够对关键资产、基础设施和人员进行前瞻性和预见性的保护。
3、STRIDEXX是最早提出的STRIDE安全建模方法的。
STRIDE代表六种安全威胁：身份假冒（Spoofing）、篡改（Tampering）、抵赖（Repudiation）、信息泄露（Information Disclosure）、拒绝服务（Denial of Service）、特权提升（Elevation of Privilege）。
STRIDE模型很好的一点在于，它能让你洞察所需的抑制措施的本质。
使用预构建的威胁树可以确保不会忽略已知的攻击。
威胁建模的作用更偏向于确保产品架构、功能设计的安全，无法保证编码的安全，但是输出的威胁建模报告中包含了全面的安全需求，这些安全需求不仅包括大的方案设计，如要认证、鉴权、审计，也可以包括安全细节的实现，比如具体的认证方式、密码使用哪种安全算法存储，使用什么方法生成安全随机数等。
所以，威胁建模虽不能保证编码的安全，但可以指导研发人员编写出安全的代码，同时也可以辅助渗透测试人员开展安全测试。
简单的来说，威胁建模就是通过结构化的方法，系统的识别、评估产品的安全风险和威胁，并针对这些风险、威胁制定消减措施的一个过程。
Torque-outline
Torque –rotational force
T = Fsinθ = Fd┴ r
Fsin θ F
O d
θ
Φ
F cos θ
Line of action
Torque- Using the
wrench example.
• r is the distance between the pivot point and the point of application of F and d is the perpendicular distance from the pivot point to the line of action of F. The line of action of a force is an imaginary line extending out both ends of the vector force. From the right angle we can see d = r sinΦ. This quantity d is the moment arm (lever arm) of the force. The moment arm represents the perpendicular distance from the rotation axis to the line of action of F.
Angular force-angular kinetics
• Movement does not occur without an external force.
• The line of action and the point of application are critical because the type of motion depends upon these characteristics.
TurningTorso 瑞典扭转大厦 英文分析
TURNING TORSO
ARCH631 Structural Case Study
Katie Bodolus Cameron Burke Cameron Christian Lance Kubiak Lauren Sobecki
Introduction Background Concept Structural Features Slab Core Spine Foundation Structural Analysis Lateral Loads Wind Loads Construction Façade References
Twists 90 degrees from the ground level to the top floor
CONCEPT
Introduction Structural Components Structural Analysis Construction References
Each floor consists of a square section around the core and a triangular part supported by an external steel structure
Introduction Structural Components Structural Analysis Construction References
The system consists of a spine column at the corner of each floor plus horizontal and diagonal elements that reach to each side of the glazed spine
土木工程专业英语全部
Lesson 1Compression MembersNew Words1. achieve achievement2. eccentricity center, 中心; ec centric 偏心的；ec centricity 偏心，偏心距3. inevitable evitable 可避免的avoidable; in evitable 不可避免的unavoidable4. truss 桁架triangular truss, roof truss, truss bridge5. bracing brace 支柱，支撑；bracing, 支撑，撑杆6. slender 细长，苗条；stout; slenderness7. buckle 压曲，屈曲；buckling load8. stocky stout9. convincingly convince, convincing, convincingly10. stub 树桩，短而粗的东西；stub column 短柱11. curvature 曲率；curve, curvature12. detractor detract draw or take away; divert; belittle，贬低，诽谤；13. convince14. argument dispute, debate, quarrel, reason, 论据（理由）15. crookedness crook 钩状物，v弯曲，crooked 弯曲的16. provision 规定，条款Phrases and Expressions1. compression member2. bending moment shear force, axial force3. call upon (on) 要求，请求，需要4. critical buckling load 临界屈曲荷载critical 关键的，临界的5. cross-sectional area6. radius of gyration 回转半径gyration7. slenderness ratio 长细比8. tangent modulus 切线模量9. stub column 短柱10. trial-and-error approach 试算法11. empirical formula 经验公式empirical 经验的12. residual stress 残余应力residual13. hot-rolled shape 热轧型钢hot-rolled bar14. lower bound 下限upper bound 上限16. effective length 计算长度Definition （定义）Compression members are those structural elements that are subjected only to axial compressive forces: that is, the loads are applied along a longitudinal axis through the centroid of the member cross section, and the stress can be taken as f a=P/A, where f a is considered to be uniform over the entire cross section. 受压构件是仅受轴向压力作用的构件，即：荷载是沿纵轴加在其截面形心上的，其应力可表示为…，式中，假定f a在整个截面上均匀分布。
- 1、下载文档前请自行甄别文档内容的完整性，平台不提供额外的编辑、内容补充、找答案等附加服务。
- 2、"仅部分预览"的文档,不可在线预览部分如存在完整性等问题,可反馈申请退款(可完整预览的文档不适用该条件!)。
- 3、如文档侵犯您的权益，请联系客服反馈,我们会尽快为您处理(人工客服工作时间：9:00-18:30)。
TORTS:CASES, PROBLEMS, AND EXERCISES THIRD EDITIONTABLE OF CONTENTS∙Chapter 1 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY OF TORT LAW o A. WHAT IS A TORT?o B. THE CASEBOOK METHOD OF STUDYING TORTSo C. PROCEDURAL STAGES OF A TYPICAL TORT CASEo D. THE DEVELOPMENT OF FAULT-BASED TORT LIABILITY▪BROWN v. KENDALL▪NOTE∙Chapter 2 INTENTIONAL TORTSo A. BATTERY▪ 1. Intent▪GARRATT v. DAILEY (279 P.2d 1091)▪NOTES▪PROBLEMS▪SHAW v. BROWN & WILLIAMSON TOBACCO CORP. (973 F.Supp. 539)▪NOTES▪PROBLEMS▪ 2. Contact and Offensiveness▪FISHER v. CARROUSEL MOTOR HOTEL, INC. (424 S.W.2d627)▪NOTES▪PROBLEMSo B. ASSAULT▪HOLLOWAY v. WACHOVIA BANK & TRUST CO. (428 S.E.2d 453)▪NOTE▪PROBLEMSo C. FALSE IMPRISONMENT▪TEICHMILLER v. ROGERS MEMORIAL HOSPITAL, INC. (597N.W.2d 773)▪NOTES▪PROBLEMSo D. TRESPASS TO LAND▪AMPHITHEATERS, INC. v. PORTLAND MEADOWS (198 P.2d 847)▪NOTES▪BRADLEY v. AMERICAN SMELTING AND REFINING CO. (709 P.2d 782)▪NOTES▪PROBLEMSo E. TRESPASS TO CHATTELS▪COMPUSERVE, INC. v. CYBER PROMOTIONS, INC. (962 F. Supp.1015)▪NOTES▪PROBLEMSo F. CONVERSION▪BERGERON v. AERO SALES, INC (134 P.3d 964)▪NOTES▪PROBLEMSo G. INTENTIONAL INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS▪FIGUEIREDO-TORRES v. NICKEL (584 A.2d 69)▪CALDOR, INC. v. BOWDEN (625 A.2d 959)▪NOTES▪PROBLEMS∙Chapter 3 DEFENSES TO INTENTIONAL TORTSo A. INTRODUCTIONo B. CONSENT▪Smith v. Calvary Christian Church (614 N.W.2d 590)▪NOTES▪PROBLEMS▪Hackbart v. Cincinnati Bengals, Inc. (601 F.2d 516)▪NOTE▪PROBLEMo C. SELF DEFENSE▪Roberts v. American Employers Insurance Company (221 So. 2)▪NOTES▪PROBLEMSo D. DEFENSE OF PROPERTY▪Katko v. Briney (183 N.W.2d 657)▪NOTES▪PROBLEMSo E. NECESSITY▪ 1. Private Necessity▪Ploof v. Putnam (71 A. 188)▪Vincent v. Lake Erie Transp. Co. (124 N.W. 221)▪NOTES▪PROBLEMS▪ 2. Public Necessity▪United States v. Caltex (philippines), Inc. (344 U.S. 149)▪NOTES▪PROBLEMSo F. SUMMARY PROBLEM∙Chapter 4 NEGLIGENCEo A. INTRODUCTIONo B. THE DUTY STANDARD▪ 1. The Reasonably Prudent Person Standard of Care▪Vaughan v. Menlove (132 Eng. Rep. 490)▪NOTES▪ 2. Minors▪Charbonneau v. Macrury (153 A. 457)▪NOTE▪Daniels v. Evans (224 A.2d 63)▪PROBLEMS▪ 3. The Elderly▪PROBLEMS▪ 4. Mental Disabilities▪Breunig v. American Family Insurance Co. (173 N.W.2d 619)▪NOTES▪PROBLEMSo C. BREACH OF DUTY: CALCULUS OF RISK▪United States v. Carroll Towing Co. (159 F.2d 169)▪NOTES▪PROBLEMS▪Grimes v. Norfolk Railway Co. (116 F. Supp. 2)▪Brotherhood Shipping Co. v. St. Paul Fire & Marine Insurance Co. (985F.2d 323)▪PROBLEMSo D. THE ROLE OF CUSTOM▪ 1. Introduction▪Mayhew v. Sullivan Mining Co. (76 Me. 100)▪THE T.J. HOOPER (60 F.2d 737)▪Doe v. Cutter Biological, Inc. (971 F.2d 375)▪NOTE▪PROBLEMS▪ 2. Custom as Applied in Medical Malpractice▪Brune v. Belinkoff (235 N.E.2d 793)▪PROBLEMS▪Helling v. Cary (519 P.2d 981)▪PROBLEMS▪Canterbury v. Spence (464 F.2d 772)▪NOTESo E. CRIMINAL STATUTES, CIVIL STATUTES, AND NEGLIGENCE PER SE▪ 1. Overview▪Osborne v. Mcmasters (41 N.W. 543)▪PROBLEM▪ 2. Is the Statute Designed to Protect this Particular Plaintiff from this Risk of Injury?▪PROBLEMS▪ 3. How Are Relevant Statutes Applied? What is the Jury’s Role?▪Martin v. Herzog (126 N.E. 814)▪NOTE▪PROBLEMS▪ 4. Negligence Per Se Applied▪Vesely v. Sager (486 P.2d 151)▪NOTES▪Brown v. Shyne (151 N.E. 197)▪PROBLEMSo F. PROOF OF NEGLIGENCE▪ 1. Overview▪Baltimore & Ohio R.r. v. Goodman (275 U.S. 66)▪Pokora v. Wabash Ry. (292 U.S. 98)▪Wilkerson v. Mccarthy (336 U.S. 53)▪ 2. Res Ipsa Loquitur▪Byrne v. Boadle (159 Eng. Rep. 299)▪NOTE▪Larson v. St. Francis Hotel (188 P.2d 513)▪NOTE▪Brown v. Poway Unified School District (843 P.2d 624)▪PROBLEM▪ 3. Res Ipsa in Medical Malpractice▪Ybarra v. Spangard (154 P.2d 687)▪PROBLEMS∙Chapter 5 CAUSE IN FACTo A. “BUT-FOR” CAUSATION▪Lyons v. Midnight Sun Transportation Services (928 P.2d 1202)▪NOTE▪PROBLEMSo B. PROVING BUT-FOR CAUSE: THE SLIP AND FALL CASE▪Dapp v. Larson (659 N.Y.S.2d 130)▪Williams v. Emro Marketing Company (494 S.E.2d 218)▪NOTES▪PROBLEMSo C. MULTIPLE CAUSES AND THE “SUBSTANTIAL FACTOR” TEST ▪Anderson v. Minneapolis, St. Paul & Sault Ste. Marie Ry. Co. (179 N.W.45)▪Dillon v. Twin State Gas & Electric Co. (163 A. 111)▪NOTES▪PROBLEMSo D. CAUSE IN FACT AND PROOF OF MATHEMATICAL PROBABILITIES ▪Weymers v. Khera (563 N.W.2d 647)▪NOTES▪PROBLEMS▪Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (43 F.3d 1311)▪QUESTIONS▪PROBLEMS▪EXERCISE∙Chapter 6 PROXIMATE CAUSEo A. INTRODUCTORY PROBLEM: JURY INSTRUCTIONS ON PROXIMATE CAUSEo B. THE DIRECT CAUSE TEST▪In Re An Arbitration Between Polemis And Furness, Withy & Co., Ltd. (3 K.B. 560)▪NOTES▪PROBLEMSo C. FORESEEABILITY AS A DUTY LIMITATION▪Palsgraf v. Long Island R. Co. (162 N.E. 99)▪NOTES▪PROBLEMSo D. FORESEEABILITY AND THE RISK RULE▪Overseas Tankship (u.k.), Ltd. v. Morts Dock & Engineering Co., Ltd. (the Wagon Mound)▪NOTES AND QUESTIONS▪PROBLEMSo E. FORESEEABILITY AND THE EXTENT OF HARM▪Stoleson v. United States (708 F.2d 1217)▪NOTES AND QUESTIONS▪PROBLEMSo F. FORESEEABILITY AND INTERVENING CAUSES▪Herman v. Markham Air Rifle Co. (258 F. 475)▪Derdiarian v. Felix Contracting Corp. (414 N.E.2d 666)▪NOTES AND QUESTIONS▪PROBLEMS▪Marshall v. Nugent (222 F.2d 604)▪NOTES AND QUESTIONS▪PROBLEMS▪Mclaughlin v. Mine Safety Appliances Company (181 N.E.2d 430)▪NOTES AND QUESTIONS▪PROBLEMS▪Watson v. Kentucky & Indiana Bridge & R. Co. (126 S.W. 146)▪Brauer v. New York Central & H. R.r. Co. (103 A. 166)▪NOTES AND QUESTIONS▪PROBLEMS▪EXERCISEChapter 7 MULTIPLE TORTFEASORSo A. JOINT AND SEVERAL LIABILITY▪Carolina, C. & O. Ry. v. Hill (89 S.E. 902)▪NOTES▪PROBLEMSo B. THEORIES OF JOINT LIABILITY▪ 1. Concert of Action▪Bierczynski v. Rogers (239 A.2d 218)▪NOTES▪ 2. Enterprise Liability▪Hall v. E. I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co. (345 F. Supp. 353)▪NOTES▪ 3. Alternative Liability▪Summers v. Tice (199 P.2d 1)▪NOTES▪ 4. Market Share Liability▪Sindell v. Abbott Laboratories (607 P.2d 924)▪NOTES▪PROBLEMS▪Hamilton v. Accu-tek (62 F. Supp. 2)▪NOTES▪PROBLEMo C. INDEMNITY AND CONTRIBUTION▪National Health Laboratories, Inc. v. Ahmadi (596 A.2d 555)▪Bervoets v. Harde Ralls Pontiac-olds, Inc. (891 S.W.2d 905)▪NOTES▪PROBLEMSCHAPTER 8 DAMAGES FOR PERSONAL INJURIESo A. ECONOMIC LOSSES CAUSED BY PHYSICAL INJURY▪Seffert v. Los Angeles Transit Lines (364 P.2d 337)▪PROBLEMS: LOST WAGES▪PROBLEMS: MEDICAL EXPENSESo B. FUTURE DAMAGES AND DISCOUNTING TO PRESENT VALUE ▪Jones & Laughlin Steel Corp. v. Pfeifer (462 U.S. 523)▪NOTE▪PROBLEMS: FUTURE LOST WAGES▪PROBLEMS: FUTURE MEDICAL EXPENSES▪PROBLEMS: FUTURE LOST WAGES AND MEDICAL EXPENSES▪NOTE ON STRUCTURED SETTLEMENTSo C. NON-ECONOMIC LOSSES: PAIN AND SUFFERING▪Mcdougald v. Garber (536 N.E.2d 372)▪NOTES▪PROBLEMSo D. MITIGATION▪Colton v. Benes (176 Neb. 483)▪NOTE▪PROBLEMo E. LOSS OF CONSORTIUMo F. COLLATERAL BENEFITS▪Helfend v. Southern California Rapid Transit District (465 P.2d 61)▪NOTESo G. PUNITIVE DAMAGES▪Sturm, Ruger & Co., Inc. v. Day (594 P.2d 38)▪NOTE▪PROBLEMS▪State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company v. Campbell (123 S.Ct. 1513)▪NOTES∙Chapter 9 LIMITED DUTY: SPECIAL LIMITATIONS ON THE SCOPE OF DUTYo A. INTRODUCTION▪Yania v. Bigan (155 A.2d 343)▪NOTESo B. “MISFEASANCE” VS. “NON-FEASANCE”▪Weirum v. Rko General, Inc. (539 P.2d 36)▪NOTESo C. EXCEPTIONS TO THE “NO-DUTY” RULE▪ 1. Defendant’s Negligence Places the Plaintiff in a Position of Peril▪Day v. Waffle House, Inc. (743 P.2d 1111)▪NOTES▪ 2. Voluntarily Assumed Duties▪Florence v. Goldberg (375 N.E.2d 763)▪PROBLEMS▪ 3. Special Relationships▪Farwell v. Keaton (240 N.W.2d 217)▪NOTE▪Tarasoff v. Regents Of University Of California (551 P.2d 334)▪PROBLEMo D. PUBLIC VERSUS PRIVATE DUTIES▪Thompson v. County Of Alameda (614 P.2d 728)▪NOTESo E. CONTRACTUAL DUTIES▪PROBLEM▪Soldano v. O’daniels (190 Cal. Rptr. 310)▪NOTE▪PROBLEMo F. NEGLIGENT INFLICTION OF (SOLELY) EMOTIONAL INJURIES ▪Dziokonski v. Babineau (380 N.E.2d 1295)▪NOTES▪Thing v. La Chusa (771 P.2d 814)▪NOTES▪PROBLEM∙Chapter 10 PREMISES LIABILITY: DUTIES OF OWNERS AND OCCUPIERS OF LANDo A. COMMON LAW “STATUS” CATEGORIES OF ENTRANTS▪Holzheimer v. Johannesen (871 P.2d 814)▪NOTES▪Palmtag v. Gartner Construction Co. (513 N.W.2d 495)▪NOTES▪PROBLEMSo B. SPECIAL CATEGORIES OF ENTRANTS▪ 1. Trespassing Children▪Mozier v. Parsons (887 P.2d 692)▪NOTES▪PROBLEMS▪ 2. Firefighters, Police Officers, and Other Public Officials: The “Firefighter’s Rule”▪Chapman v. Craig (431 N.W.2d 770)▪PROBLEM▪ 3. Social Guests▪Hambright v. First Baptist Church-eastwood (638 So. 2)▪NOTESo C. RECREATIONAL PREMISES▪Reed v. Employers Mutual Casualty Co. (741 So. 2)▪NOTES▪PROBLEMo D. CRIMINAL ASSAILANTS▪Mcclung v. Delta Square Ltd. Partnership (937 S.W.2d 891)▪NOTEo E. ABOLITION/MODIFICATION OF COMMON LAW “STATUS”CATEGORIES▪Rowland v. Christian (443 P.2d 561)▪NOTES▪Jones v. Hansen (867 P.2d 303)▪NOTESo F. LESSORS OF REAL PROPERTY▪Coggin v. Starke Brothers Realty Co., Inc. (391 So. 2)▪NOTES▪Pagelsdorf v. Safeco Ins. Co. Of America (284 N.W.2d 55)▪NOTE▪PROBLEM∙Chapter 11 WRONGFUL DEATHo▪Moragne v. States Marine Lines, Inc. (398 U.S. 375)▪NOTES▪O’grady v. Brown (654 S.W.2D 904)▪NOTES▪Murphy v. Martin Oil Co. (308 N.E.2d 583)▪Bullard v. Barnes (468 N.E.2d 1228)▪NOTE▪PROBLEMS∙Chapter 12 DEFENSESo A. DEFENSES BASED ON THE PLAINTIFF’S CONDUCT▪ 1. Contributory Negligence▪Butterfield v. Forrester (103 Eng. Rep 926)▪NOTES▪PROBLEMS▪ 2. Comparative Negligence▪Bradley v. Appalachian Power Company (256 S.E.2d 879)▪NOTES AND QUESTIONS▪PROBLEMS▪Stehlik v. Rhoads (645 N.W.2D 889)▪NOTES AND QUESTIONS▪PROBLEMS▪ 3. Assumption of the Risk▪ a. Express Assumption of the Risk▪Wolf v. Ford (644 A.2d 522)▪PROBLEMS▪ b. Implied Assumption of the Risk▪Murphy v. Steeplechase Amusement Co., Inc. (166 N.E. 173)▪NOTES AND QUESTIONS▪Davenport v. Cotton Hope Plantation Horizontal PropertyRegime (508 S.E.2d 565)▪NOTES▪PROBLEMSo B. OTHER DEFENSES: LIMITATIONS AND IMMUNITIES▪ 1. Statutes of Limitation and Repose▪Garcia v. Texas Instruments, Inc. (610 S.W.2d 456)▪PROBLEMS▪Nelson v. Krusen (678 S.W.2d 918)▪NOTE▪PROBLEMS▪ 2. Immunities▪ a. Family Immunities▪Bonte v. Bonte (616 A.2d 464)▪NOTE▪PROBLEMS▪Shoemake v. Fogel, Ltd., A.t. (826 S.W.2d 933)▪PROBLEMS▪ b. Charitable Immunity▪ c. Governmental Immunity▪ d. Municipal Immunity▪Cuffy v. City Of New York (505 N.E.2d 937)▪NOTES▪PROBLEMS▪Aguehounde v. District Of Columbia (666 A.2d 443)▪PROBLEMS▪ e. Federal Immunity▪NOTE▪Berkovitz v. United States (486 U.S. 531)▪NOTESChapter 13 VICARIOUS LIABILITYo A. RESPONDEAT SUPERIOR▪Fruit v. Schreiner (502 P.2d 133)▪Wong-leong v. Hawaiian Independent Refinery, Inc. (879 P.2d 538)▪NOTES▪PROBLEMo B. EMPLOYER-EMPLOYEE RELATIONSHIP▪ 1. Who Is an “Employee”?▪Buitrago v. Rohr (672 So. 2)▪Ermert v. Hartford Insurance Co. (559 So. 2)▪NOTES▪PROBLEM▪ 2. Was the Employee Acting Within the “Scope of Employment”?▪Courtless v. Jolliffe (507 S.E.2d 136)▪NOTES▪PROBLEMS▪ 3. “Frolics” and “Detours”▪Faragher v. City Of Boca Raton (524 U.S. 775)▪NOTES▪PROBLEM▪ 4. Employer’s Vicarious Liability for Intentional Torts▪Sunseri v. Puccia (422 N.E.2d 925)▪NOTES▪Plummer v. Center Psychiatrists, Ltd. (476 S.E.2d 172)▪NOTES▪PROBLEMS▪ 5. Vicarious Liability for Punitive Damages▪Brueckner v. Norwich University (730 A.2d 1086)▪NOTES▪PROBLEMo C. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTORS▪Bagley v. Insight Communications Co., L.p. (658 N.E.2d 584)▪NOTES▪PROBLEMSo D. JOINT ENTERPRISES, JOINT VENTURES, AND PARTNERSHIPS ▪Cullip v. Domann (972 P.2d 776)▪Esquivel v. Murray Guard, Inc. (992 S.W.2d 536)▪NOTES▪PROBLEMSChapter 14 COMMON LAW STRICT LIABILITYo A. ANIMALS▪Sinclair v. Okata (874 F. Supp. 1051)▪NOTES▪PROBLEMSo B. ABNORMALLY DANGEROUS ACTIVITIES▪Fletcher v. Rylands▪Rylands v. Fletcher (37 L.J. Ex. 161)▪NOTES▪Siegler v. Kuhlman (502 P.2d 1181)▪NOTES▪Indiana Harbor Belt Railroad Co. v. American Cyanamid Co. (916 F.2d 1174)▪NOTES▪PROBLEMS▪Cambridge Water Co. v. Eastern Counties Leather Plc. (2 A.C. 264)▪NOTES▪PROBLEM∙Chapter 15 NUISANCEo A. PRIVATE NUISANCE▪ 1. General Principles of Liability▪Clinic & Hospital, Inc. v. Mcconnell (241 Mo. App. 223)▪NOTE▪PROBLEMS▪Winget v. Winn-dixie Stores, Inc. (130 S.E.2d 363)▪NOTES▪PROBLEMS▪ 2. Remedies▪Boomer v. Atlantic Cement Company (257 N.E.2d 870)▪NOTES▪Spur Industries, Inc. v. Del E. Webb Development Co. (1494 P.2d700)▪NOTES▪PROBLEMo B. PUBLIC NUISANCE▪State v. H. Samuels Company, Inc. (211 N.W.2d 417)▪NOTES▪Union Oil Co. v. Oppen (501 F.2d 558)∙Chapter 16 PRODUCTS LIABILITYo A. HISTORICAL BACKGROUND: NEGLIGENCE ASSAULTS THE CITADEL OF PRIVITY▪Thomas v. Winchester (6 N.Y. 397)▪NOTES▪PROBLEMS AND QUESTIONS▪Macpherson v. Buick Motor Co. (111 N.E. 1050)▪NOTES AND QUESTIONS▪PROBLEMS▪Escola v. Coca Cola Bottling Co. Of Fresno (150 P.2d 436)▪NOTES AND QUESTIONSo B. THE NEXT ASSAULT ON THE CITADEL: BREACH OF WARRANTY ▪Henningsen v. Bloomfield Motors, Inc. (161 A.2d 69)▪NOTES AND QUESTIONSo C. STRICT LIABILITY IN TORT▪NOTE▪PROBLEMSo D. THE DEFINITION OF “DEFECTIVE”▪ 1. Manufacturing Defects▪Ford Motor Company v. Gonzalez (9 S.W.3d 195)▪NOTES AND QUESTIONS▪PROBLEMS▪ 2. Design Defects▪Barker v. Lull Engineering Company, Inc. (573 P.2d 443)▪NOTES AND QUESTIONS▪PROBLEMS▪Hernandez v. Tokai Corporation (2 S.W.3d 251)▪NOTES▪PROBLEM▪Brown v. Superior Court (751 P.2d 470)▪NOTES AND QUESTIONS▪PROBLEMS▪ 3. Warning Defects▪Livingston v. Marie Callender’s, Inc. (85 Cal. Rptr. 2)▪NOTES AND QUESTIONS▪PROBLEMS▪Jackson v. Coast Paint And Lacquer Company (499 F.2d 809)▪NOTES▪PROBLEMSo E. THE DEFINITION OF “ONE WHO SELLS”▪Allenberg v. Bentley Hedges Travel Serv., Inc. (22 P.3d 223)▪NOTES▪PROBLEMSo F. SALE OF PRODUCTS OR PROVISION OF SERVICES?▪Royer v. Catholic Medical Center (741 A.2d 74)▪NOTES▪PROBLEMSo G. THE TYPE OF HARM: THE ECONOMIC LOSS PROBLEM▪Moorman Manufacturing Company v. National Tank Company (435 N.E.2d 443)▪NOTE▪PROBLEMo H. THE ISSUE OF PLAINTIFF’S CONDUCT▪Daly v. General Motors Corporation (575 P.2d 1162)▪General Motors Corporation v. Sanchez (997 S.W.2d 584)▪NOTES▪PROBLEMSo I. PREEMPTION IN PRODUCTS LIABILITY▪NOTE▪PROBLEMChapter 17 DEFAMATIONo A. DEFAMATION DEFINED▪Lega Siciliana Social Club v. St. Germaine (77 Conn. App. 846)▪NOTES▪PROBLEMS▪Neiman-marcus v. Lait (13 F.R.D. 311)▪NOTE▪PROBLEMS▪Lent v. Huntoon (470 A.2d 1162)▪NOTE▪PROBLEMSo B. THE CONSTITUTIONALIZATION OF DEFAMATION▪New York Times Co. v. Sullivan (376 U.S. 254)▪NOTES AND QUESTIONS▪PROBLEMSo C. “PUBLIC FIGURES” AND “PRIVATE PLAINTIFFS”▪Gertz v. Robert Welch, Inc. (418 U.S. 323)▪NOTES▪PROBLEMSo D. APPLICATION OF THE “ACTUAL MALICE” STANDARD▪St. Amant v. Thompson (390 U.S. 727)▪NOTES▪PROBLEM▪Krinsky v. Doe 6 (72 Cal. Rptr. 3)▪NOTESo E. FACT VERSUS OPINION▪Milkovich v. Lorain Journal Co. (497 U.S. 1)▪NOTE▪PROBLEMSChapter 18 PRIVACYo A. OVERVIEW OF THE “RIGHT TO BE LEFT ALONE”▪Deckle McLean Privacy and Its Invasion 1–4 (1995)▪Stien v. Marriot Ownership Resorts, Inc. (944 P.2d 374)▪NOTES▪PROBLEMSo B. THE PRIVACY TORTS▪ 1. Intrusion▪People For The Ethical Treatment Of Animals v. Berosini (895P.2d 1269)▪NOTES▪PROBLEMS▪ 2. Appropriation of Name or Likeness▪Ainsworth v. Century Supply Co. (693 N.E.2d 510)▪People For The Ethical Treatment Of Animals v. Berosini (895P.2d 1269)▪NOTE▪PROBLEMS▪ 3. Publication of Private Facts▪Green v. Chicago Tribune Co. (675 N.E.2d 249)▪NOTES▪PROBLEMS▪ 4. False Light▪Cain v. Hearst Corp. (878 S.W.2d 577)▪NOTES▪PROBLEMSo C. REVISITING THE RIGHT TO PRIVACY∙Chapter 19 CIVIL RIGHTSo A. SECTION 1983▪ 1. § 1983 as a “Constitutional Tort”▪Monroe v. Pape (365 U.S. 167)▪NOTES▪ 2. § 1983 and “Ordinary” Tortso B. BIVENS ACTIONS▪Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents Of Federal Bureau Of Narcotics (403 U.S. 388)▪NOTESo C. IMMUNITY▪Monell v. Department Of Social Services (436 U.S. 658)▪NOTES▪Anderson v. Creighton (483 U.S. 635)▪NOTES▪PROBLEMS∙Chapter 20 MISUSE OF LEGAL PROCESSo A. INTRODUCTIONo B. MALICIOUS PROSECUTION▪ 1. Malicious Prosecution of a Criminal Action▪Banks v. Nordstrom (787 P.2d 953)▪NOTES▪ 2. Malicious Prosecution of a Civil Actiono C. ABUSE OF PROCESS▪Vittands v. Sudduth (730 N.E.2d 325)▪NOTES▪PROBLEM∙Chapter 21 MISREPRESENTATIONo A. OVERVIEW▪West v. Gladney (533 S.E.2d 334)▪NOTESo B. THE MISREPRESENTATION▪Delta School Of Commerce, Inc. v. Wood (766 S.W.2d 424)▪NOTES▪PROBLEM▪Rohm And Haas Co. v. Continental Casualty Co. (781 A.2d 1172)▪NOTES▪PROBLEMo C. DEFENDANT’S STATE OF MIND▪ 1. Intentional Misrepresentations▪Britt v. Britt (359 S.E.2d 467)▪NOTES▪PROBLEMS▪ 2. Negligent Misrepresentations▪Sain v. Cedar Rapids Community School District (626 N.W.2d 115)▪NOTES▪ 3. Scienter and Intent▪Myers & Chapman, Inc. v. Thomas G. Evans, Inc. (374 S.E.2d 385)▪NOTEo D. RELIANCE▪Francis v. Stinson (760 A.2d 209)▪NOTES▪PROBLEMSo E. DAMAGES▪Burke v. Harman (574 N.W.2d 156)▪Britt v. Britt (359 S.E.2d 467)▪NOTESo F. THIRD PARTY STATEMENTS▪Fisher v. Comer Plantation, Inc. (772 So. 2)▪NOTES▪PROBLEMChapter 22 COMPETITIVE TORTSo A. OVERVIEW: COMPETITION AS A TORT▪Neonatology Associates, Ltd. v. Phoenix Perinatal Associates, Inc. (216 Ariz. 185)▪NOTESo B. INTERFERENCE WITH BUSINESS EXPECTATIONS▪ 1. Interference with Contract▪Museum Boutique Intercontinental, Ltd. v. Picasso (886 F.Supp.1155)▪NOTES▪PROBLEMS▪ 2. Interference with Prospective Relationships▪Wal-mart Stores, Inc. v. Sturges (52 S.W.2d 711)▪NOTESo C. LYING AS UNLAWFUL MEANS: THE LAW OF FALSE ADVERTISING ▪ 1. Lying: The Law of False Advertising▪Upjohn Company v. Riahom Corporation (641 F. Supp. 1209)▪NOTES▪PROBLEM▪Johnson & Johnson * Merck Consumer Pharmaceuticals Co. v.Smithkline Beecham Corp. (960 F.2d 294)▪NOTES▪PROBLEMSo D. APPROPRIATION OF BUSINESS VALUES▪ 1. General Misappropriation▪American Television And Communications Corp. v. Manning (651 P.2d 440)▪NOTES▪PROBLEMS▪ 2. Trade Secrets▪Northern Electric Company, Inc. v. Torma (819 N.E.2d 417)▪NOTES▪PROBLEMS▪ 3. The Right of Publicity▪Wendt v. Host International, Inc. (123 F.3d 806)▪NOTES▪PROBLEMS▪ 4. The Clash Between the Appropriation Tort and Free Speech▪Winter v. Dc Comics (30 Cal 4)▪NOTES▪PROBLEMSo E. REPRISE: THE WIDE RANGE OF COMPETITIVE TORTSo Table of Caseso Index。