外文翻译(带图)

合集下载

外文翻译中英文对照

Strengths优势All these private sector banks hold strong position on CRM part, they have professional, dedicated and well-trained employees.所以这些私人银行在客户管理部分都持支持态度，他们拥有专业的、细致的、训练有素的员工。

Private sector banks offer a wide range of banking and financial products and financial services to corporate and retail customers through a variety of delivery channels such as ATMs, Internet-banking, mobile-banking, etc. 私有银行通过许多传递通道（如自动取款机、网上银行、手机银行等）提供大范围的银行和金融产品、金融服务进行合作并向客户零售。

The area could be Investment management banking, life and non-life insurance, venture capital and asset management, retail loans such as home loans, personal loans, educational loans, car loans, consumer durable loans, credit cards, etc. 涉及的领域包括投资管理银行、生命和非生命保险、风险投资与资产管理、零售贷款（如家庭贷款、个人贷款、教育贷款、汽车贷款、耐用消费品贷款、信用卡等）。

Private sector banks focus on customization of products that are designed to meet the specific needs of customers. 私人银行主要致力于为一些特殊需求的客户进行设计和产品定制。

毕业论文外文翻译格式【范本模板】

因为学校对毕业论文中的外文翻译并无规定，为统一起见,特做以下要求：1、每篇字数为1500字左右，共两篇；2、每篇由两部分组成:译文+原文.3 附件中是一篇范本，具体字号、字体已标注。

外文翻译（包含原文)(宋体四号加粗）外文翻译一（宋体四号加粗）作者：(宋体小四号加粗）Kim Mee Hyun Director, Policy Research & Development Team，Korean Film Council（小四号）出处：(宋体小四号加粗)Korean Cinema from Origins to Renaissance(P358～P340) 韩国电影的发展及前景（标题：宋体四号加粗）1996～现在数量上的增长(正文:宋体小四）在过去的十年间，韩国电影经历了难以置信的增长。

上个世纪60年代，韩国电影迅速崛起，然而很快便陷入停滞状态,直到90年代以后，韩国电影又重新进入繁盛时期。

在这个时期，韩国电影在数量上并没有大幅的增长，但多部电影的观影人数达到了上千万人次。

1996年，韩国本土电影的市场占有量只有23.1%。

但是到了1998年，市场占有量增长到35。

8%，到2001年更是达到了50%。

虽然从1996年开始，韩国电影一直处在不断上升的过程中，但是直到1999年姜帝圭导演的《生死谍变》的成功才诞生了韩国电影的又一个高峰。

虽然《生死谍变》创造了韩国电影史上的最高电影票房纪录，但是1999年以后最高票房纪录几乎每年都会被刷新。

当人们都在津津乐道所谓的“韩国大片”时，2000年朴赞郁导演的《共同警备区JSA》和2001年郭暻泽导演的《朋友》均成功刷新了韩国电影最高票房纪录.2003年康佑硕导演的《实尾岛》和2004年姜帝圭导演的又一部力作《太极旗飘扬》开创了观影人数上千万人次的时代。

姜帝圭和康佑硕导演在韩国电影票房史上扮演了十分重要的角色。

从1993年的《特警冤家》到2003年的《实尾岛》，康佑硕导演了多部成功的电影。

外文文献翻译(图片版)

本科毕业论文外文参考文献译文及原文学院经济与贸易学院专业经济学（贸易方向）年级班别2007级 1 班学号3207004154学生姓名欧阳倩指导教师童雪晖2010 年 6 月 3 日目录1 外文文献译文（一）中国银行业的改革和盈利能力（第1、2、4部分） (1)2 外文文献原文（一）CHINA’S BANKING REFORM AND PROFITABILITY（Part 1、2、4） (9)1概述世界银行（1997年）曾声称，中国的金融业是其经济的软肋。

当一国的经济增长的可持续性岌岌可危的时候，金融业的改革一直被认为是提高资金使用效率和消费型经济增长重新走向平衡的必要（Lardy，1998年，Prasad，2007年）。

事实上，不久前，中国的国有银行被视为“技术上破产”，它们的生存需要依靠充裕的国家流动资金。

但是，在银行改革开展以来，最近，强劲的盈利能力已恢复到国有商业银行的水平。

但自从中国的国有银行在不久之前已经走上了改革的道路，它可能过早宣布银行业的改革尚未取得完全的胜利。

此外，其坚实的财务表现虽然强劲，但不可持续增长。

随着经济增长在2008年全球经济衰退得带动下已经开始软化，银行预计将在一个比以前更加困难的经济形势下探索。

本文的目的不是要评价银行业改革对银行业绩的影响，这在一个完整的信贷周期后更好解决。

相反，我们的目标是通过审查改革的进展和银行改革战略，并分析其近期改革后的强劲的财务表现，但是这不能完全从迄今所进行的改革努力分离。

本文有三个部分。

在第二节中，我们回顾了中国的大型国有银行改革的战略，以及其执行情况，这是中国银行业改革的主要目标。

第三节中分析了2007年的财务表现集中在那些在市场上拥有浮动股份的四大国有商业银行：中国工商银行（工商银行），中国建设银行（建行），对中国银行（中银）和交通银行（交通银行）。

引人注目的是中国农业银行，它仍然处于重组上市过程中得适当时候的后期。

第四节总结一个对银行绩效评估。

外文翻译完整版

毕业设计外文资料翻译原文题目：The Design and Retorfit of Buildings for Resistance to Blast-Induced Progressive Collapse 译文题目：建筑物的设计和改造抵抗由爆炸冲击引起的建筑物的连续倒塌院系名称：土木建筑学院专业班级：土木工程0303班学生姓名：吴建明学号：20034040332指导教师：白杨教师职称：讲师附件： 1.外文资料翻译译文；2.外文原文。

指导教师评语及成绩：签名： 2010年 4月 12日附件1：外文资料翻译译文译文标题（3号黑体，居中）×××××××××（小4号宋体，1.5倍行距）×××××××××××××××××××××××××××××××××××××××××××××××××××××××××××××××××××…………。

（要求不少于3000汉字）建筑物的设计和改造抵抗由爆炸冲击引起的建筑物的连续倒塌1.简介在近现代史中，极端的爆炸事件推动了现有的设计方法和规范重新评估冲击荷载对建筑结构和它们的居住着的影响。

外文翻译---100个改变平面设计的观念(英文为图片)

中文1850字100个改变平面设计的观念（部分）观念53 影子游戏平面设计师永久痴迷的问题之一，即是如何从平面世界中脱离出来。

他们想要让图像和文字摆脱二维水平的限制。

匈牙利裔艺术家LászlóMoholy-Nagy 终生都致力于解决这个棘手的问题。

通过摄影，以及用透镜、反射镜、滤光片来控制光影的方法，他赋予了静态的平面元素一种纵深和动态的感觉。

1929年的一本名为《14部包豪斯著作》的手册封面上，LászlóMoholy-Nagy通过从各种角度拍摄排字盘上的金属字并拼贴在一起的方法，创造了一种奇特的视觉混合物。

这些单词不仅突出于画面而且也不符合透视原理。

他意识到，将字形与它们被扭曲的影子放在一起，可以将纸面转换为一扇通往超凡脱俗的境界的窗口。

László Moholy-Nagy应该会喜欢美国艺术家Ed Ruscha的作品，他的单色的“文字作品”常和一种奇特的光影游戏联系在一起，受洛杉矶的印刷环境启发，他的作品介于电影标题序列和路边广告之间。

他创作于1990年的作品“Mighty Topic”则是以块状的大写字母为前景，而投射在背后墙上的是斜体的大小写的字母的模糊影子。

而且，投影被设计为一个陡峭的角度，一种视觉的荒谬。

然而，奇怪的是，图像并没有给人一种错误的印象，相反，它忠实地再现了一种视觉矛盾，并给南加利福尼亚州的风景、广告牌、汽车旅馆标志和大型加油站的遮檐注入了更多的个性。

2004年，巴黎Châtelet剧院宣传Richard Wagner的Tannhäuser的海报中，Rudi Meyer 用字体和阴影创造了一个幽灵似的视觉幻象。

透视上看，一个大写字母T投射出一个长长的令人生畏的十字架形状的阴影。

一个人们可能不会下意识地注意到的细节——T的角度和十字架阴影并不匹配——成就了作品给观者的怪异印象。

影子游戏经常用于舞台设计，所以并不令人意外，Rudi Meyer在为Châtelet剧院的7年任期中创造了许多这种的平面幻像。

本科毕业设计外文文献翻译

（Sheaｒ waｌl ｓt ｒuctural desigｎ ofh ｉgh-ｌev ｅl fr ａmeworkＷｕ Jiche ｎgＡbstract ： In t ｈis pape ｒ the basic c ｏｎcepts of ｍａn ｐow ｅr ｆｒom th ｅｆra ｍｅ sh ｅａr w ａｌl str ｕc ｔｕｒｅ, analy ｓis of the ｓtruct ｕr ａｌ des ｉgn ｏf th ｅ c ｏnt ｅnt ｏｆ t ｈe fr ａme she ａr wall, in ｃｌudi ｎg the ｓeism ｉc wa ｌl she ａr spa本科毕业设计外文文献翻译学校代码： 10128学号：题目：Shear wall structural design of high-level framework 学生姓名：学院：土木工程学院系别：建筑工程系专业：土木工程专业（建筑工程方向）班级：土木08-（5）班指导教师： (副教授)ｎratiｏdesign, ａnd a concrｅtｅｓtruｃtuｒe in thｅmｏst co ｍmonｌy useｄframe shear walｌstｒｕcturｅtｈｅdesign of p ｏiｎｔs to note.Keyworｄs: cｏncrｅｔｅ; fｒaｍｅshｅａｒwall sｔｒucｔｕre；hiｇh－risｅbuildｉｎｇsThe wall is aｍoｄern high－rｉｓe buiｌdiｎgs is an iｍpo ｒｔant buiｌdinｇconｔｅnt, the ｓize of thｅfraｍe sheａr wall must comｐly with buildｉng reguｌａtｉons. The pｒｉnｃipｌe is ｔhat the largeｒsｉzｅbｕt the thｉｃknessｍuｓt ｂｅsmaller gｅoｍetric featｕrｅｓshoｕlｄｂe ｐｒeｓented ｔo the pｌatｅ,ｔｈe forｃe is close to cylｉndrｉcal.Ｔhe waｌl sｈｅar wa ｌl strｕｃｔure ｉs a flaｔcomｐonent. Itｓeｘposure to tｈe force aｌoｎg ｔhe ｐlane leｖｅl of theｒole ofｓｈear and momｅｎt, must also take ｉｎtｏａccounｔthe veｒｔical preｓsure.Opeｒate unｄer thｅcomｂiｎed actｉｏn oｆbenｄing momeｎts and axial force aｎｄsheａr forcｅbｙthe caｎtilｅｖｅr deep beａm uｎder ｔｈe acｔion of the force leveｌｔo lｏo ｋinto ｔｈe bottom mouｎted on ｔhe basｉs of. Sheaｒｗaｌl ｉｓdiｖidｅｄinｔo a whole walｌand ｔheａssoｃiated ｓｈeａr wall in thｅactual project,a wholｅwａlｌfor ｅxａmpl ｅ, suｃh as ｇenｅraｌhｏusiｎｇｃonstｒuction in tｈe gablｅｏr fish bｏne strｕcture ｆｉlｍwａｌls ａnd small opｅningｓwall.Cｏupled Sｈeａr ｗalls are ｃonnｅcted bｙｔhｅcｏupｌing ｂeam shｅａr wall.Buｔｂecause tｈeｇｅnerａlｃｏupling beaｍstｉｆfness is less thaｎｔhe wall stiｆfnｅsｓof the lｉmbs，ｓｏ. Wａlｌliｍb aｌonｅis obviｏus.The ｃｅntral beam of tｈeｉnflｅｃtion pｏｉnｔtｏpay aｔtenｔiｏｎto tｈeｗaｌl pressｕre thａn the limiｔs of the lｉmb axis. Will forｍa shortｗiｄe beａms，widｅcolｕmn wａll liｍｂｓhear wａll ｏpｅnings toｏlarge ｃomｐonｅnt aｔbothｅn ｄs ｗith jｕst the domain of vａｒiabｌe crosｓ－ｓecｔｉon ro ｄin ｔhe intｅrｎａｌforcｅｓｕnder tｈｅaｃtioｎof maｎy Ｗalｌlｉmb iｎflｅcｔion point Ｔhｅｒeｆoｒe, ｔhe cａｌcula ｔions ａｎd consｔruction sｈouldAccordinｇtｏappｒoxiｍａｔe tｈe framｅstｒucｔure to ｃonsideｒ.Tｈe desｉｇｎof ｓhｅａr walls ｓhoulｄbe based on the cｈａractｅrisｔics ｏf ａvａｒｉｅty oｆwall itseｌｆ,ａnd dｉfferｅnｔmeｃhanical ch ａrａcteｒisｔｉcｓand requireｍents,wall oｆthｅinternａｌforceｄistrｉbutｉon and failurｅmoｄｅs ｏf sｐecific and cｏmprehensive ｃonｓideration of the design rｅinｆorcemｅnt aｎd stｒuctural measｕres. Ｆrame sｈear wall ｓｔrｕctuｒe deｓiｇn is to cｏｎsider the ｓtructｕre of the oｖerall ａnａｌysis for ｂoｔh dｉrecｔｉｏｎsｏｆthｅhｏrｉzontal and vｅrtiｃalｅfｆects. Oｂtain thｅinternal force ｉs reｑuirｅd in ａccｏrdancｅｗｉｔｈtｈe bias or paｒtｉal ｐull normal sｅcｔｉon forｃｅｃaｌculatiｏn.The waｌl strｕcture oｆtheｆｒame sｈear ｗall ｓｔructural dｅsign of ｔhe coｎtent frame hｉgh-rise buildings, in ｔhe actual ｐrｏjeｃｔiｎｔhｅuse of thｅｍoｓt seisｍic ｗａlls have suffiｃient quantitｉeｓto meｅt ｔheｌｉmitsｏf the lａyer displacement, the loｃation iｓｒelａtiｖely flexiblｅ. Seiｓmic wａll for cｏntinuous layout，ｆulｌ-length ｔhroｕgh．Should bｅdesigned to avoid the waｌl mutaｔioｎs ｉn limb ｌｅｎgth and alignment is noｔuｐａnd down the ｈolｅ. The samｅtｉme．Tｈe inｓide of ｔhe hole marginｓcｏlｕｍｎshｏｕld not ｂｅｌｅssｔhan３00mm ｉｎordｅｒtｏguaraｎteｅtheｌengtｈof the colｕｍn ａs the edgｅof tｈe coｍponent and constｒａiｎt eｄgｅcｏｍponeｎts．Thｅbi-direc ｔiｏnal laｔerａl forｃe ｒesiｓting strucｔurａl fｏrm of verticａl aｎｄhorｉzontaｌwalｌcoｎnected.Eａｃh ｏｔhｅr as ｔhe ａffiｎiｔｙof the shｅar wall. Ｆor ｏnｅ, two seismic frａme sｈe ａr ｗalｌｓ,ｅｖen beam highｒatio ｓhould noｔgreateｒthan 5 aｎd a height of nｏt less thaｎ400mm.Midline colｕmnａnd beａmｓ,wall ｍｉdline shouｌdｎoｔbe greaｔer tha ｎthe ｃoｌｕmｎwidｔｈof1/4，ｉn ordｅr ｔｏreｄuce thｅtoｒsional eｆfect of the sｅiｓmｉｃacｔion ｏnｔｈｅｃolｕmn．Oｔhｅrwｉsｅcan be taken tｏstrengthｅn theｓtirruprａｔｉo iｎｔhe cｏlｕmn tｏmake ｕp.If thｅshear wａｌl sheａｒsｐａn ｔhａnｔhe ｂig twｏ. Ｅveｎthe beａｍcro ｓs-heｉｇht ratiｏgreateｒthan 2.5, ｔhen tｈe design presｓｕｒe ｏf thｅｃｕt shoulｄnoｔmａkｅａｂig 0.2. Howevｅｒ, ｉf the sheａｒwallｓheａr sｐａｎｒatiｏof ｌess than two couｐlinｇｂeａms sｐan of ｌeｓs than ２．5, then the shear coｍｐres ｓiｏn rａｔiｏis noｔgreaｔer thａn 0.15. Thｅｏther haｎｄ，ｔhe bｏttom oｆthe fraｍe ｓhｅar walｌstructure ｔo enhａnce tｈｅdｅsign sｈould ｎoｔbe leｓs thaｎ２０0mmａnd noｔlesｓthaｎstorey 1/１6，othｅｒｐaｒtｓｓhｏulｄnot be lｅss than 160mm ａnd ｎｏt ｌｅss thaｎｓtoｒey １/20. Arounｄthe wall of the frame ｓhｅar ｗall strucｔure sｈｏulｄbe set ｔo the beａm or dark bｅamａnd the sｉｄe columｎｔｏform a borｄｅr. Ｈoｒizｏntａl ｄｉｓtrｉbuｔioｎoｆsｈear waｌls cａn from the sheａr effect，tｈｉs design wｈen ｂuilｄｉng higｈｅr longeｒor fｒaｍｅｓtructｕre reinfoｒcｅment shｏuld be aｐprｏpｒiatelｙincｒeａｓed, ｅspｅcｉａlｌy in the sｅnｓitivｅｐarts of the beam pｏsition ｏr teｍperaｔuｒe, stiffnｅsｓchａnge is besｔappｒopriatｅly increased, ｔｈeｎcｏnsidｅration sｈoulｄbe ｇｉveｎｔo the wａlｌvertｉcaｌreiｎforｃemeｎt,becaｕse ｉt is mａinly fｒom the bｅnding efｆecｔ, aｎｄtake in ｓome ｍｕlti-ｓtorｅｙshｅａｒｗａll structuｒereinforcｅｄreｉnｆorceｍent rate -likｅlｅsｓconｓtｒained edgｅｏｆｔhｅcomｐonent or components reinforｃemeｎt of thｅedge ｃomｐｏnent.Referｅnces: [1 sad Hａyaｓhi,He Yaming. Ｏn the shorｔshｅar ｗall ｈigh-riｓe bｕilｄinｇｄesign ［J]．Kｅｙｕaｎ, 2008, (O2).高层框架剪力墙结构设计吴继成摘要: 本文从框架剪力墙结构设计的基本概念人手, 分析了框架剪力墙的构造设计内容, 包括抗震墙、剪跨比等的设计, 并出混凝土结构中最常用的框架剪力墙结构设计的注意要点。

外文翻译英文

2. WHAT CONSTITUTES FAIR DEALINGWEINBERGER v. UOP, INC.457 A.2d 701 (Del.Supr.19a3).MOORE, JUSTICE.This post-trial appeal was reheard en banc from a decision of the Court of Chancery. It was brought by the class action plaintiff below, a former shareholder of UOP, Inc., who challenged the elimination of UOP's minority shareholders by a cash-out merger between UOP and its majority owner, The Signal Companies, Inc. Originally, the defendants in this action were Signal, UOP, certain officers and directors of those companies, and UOP's investment banker, Lehman Brothers Kuhn Loeb, Inc. The present Chancellor held that the terms of the merger were fair to the plaintiff and the other minority shareholders of UOP. Accordingly, he entered judgment in favor of the defendants.Numerous points were raised by the parties, but we address only the following questions presented by the trial court's opinion:1) The plaintiffs duty to plead sufficient facts demonstrating the unfairness of the challenged merger;2) The burden of proof upon the parties where the merger has been approved by the purportedly informed vote of a majority of the minority shareholders;3) The fairness of the merger in terms of adequacy of the defendants' disclosures to the minority shareholders;4) The fairness of the merger in terms of adequacy of the price paid for the minority shares and the remedy appropriate to that issue; and5) The continued force and effect of Singer v. Magnavox Co., Del.Supr., 380 A.2d 969, 980 (1977), and its progeny.In ruling for the defendants, the Chancellor re-stated his earlier conclusion that the plaintiff in a suit challenging a cash-out merger must allege specific acts of fraud, misrepresentation or other items of misconduct to demonstrate the unfairness of the merger terms to the minority. We approve this rule and affirm it.The Chancellor also held that even though the ultimate burden of proof is on the majority shareholder to show by a preponderance of the evidence that the transaction is fair, it is first the burden of the plaintiff attacking the merger to demonstrate some basis for invoking the fairness obligation. We agree with that principle. However, where corporate action has been approved by an informed vote of a majority of the minority shareholders, we conclude that the burden entirely shifts ^ to the plaintiff to show that the transaction was unfair to the minority^- But in all this, the burden clearly remains on those relying on the vote to show that they completely disclosed all material facts relevant to the transaction.Here, the record does not support a conclusion that the minority stockholder vote was an informed one. Material information, necessary to acquaint those shareholders with the bargaining positions of Signal and UOP, was withheld under circumstances amounting to a breach of fiduciary duty. We therefore conclude that this merger does not meet the test of fairness, at least as we address that concept, and no burden thus shifted to the plaintiff by reason of the minority shareholder vote. Accordingly, we reverse and remand for further proceedings consistent herewith.In considering the nature of the remedy available under our law to minority shareholders in a cash-out merger, we believe that it is, and hereafter should be, an appraisal under 8 Del.C. § 262 as hereinafter construed. We therefore overrule Lynch v. Vickers Energy Corp., Del. Supr., 429 A.2d 497 (1981) {Lynch II) to the extent that it purports to limit a stockholder's monetary relief to a specific damage formula. But to give full effect to section 262 within the framework of the General Corporation Law we adopt a more liberal, less rigid and stylized, approach to the valuation process than has heretofore been permitted by our courts. While the present state of these proceedings does not admit the plaintiff to the appraisal remedy per se, the practical effect of the remedy we do grant him will be co-extensive with the liberalized valuation and appraisal methods we herein approve for cases coming after this decision.Our treatment of these matters has necessarily led us to a reconsideration of the business purpose rule announced in the trilogy of Singer A v. Magnavox Co., supra; Tanzer v. International General Industries, JT > Inc., DeL.Supr., 379 A.2d 1121 (1977); and Roland International Corp. v. Najjar, Del.Supr., 407 A.2d 1032 (1979). For the reasons hereafter set forth we consider that the business purpose requirement of these cases v J is no longer the law of Delaware.The facts found by the trial court, pertinent to the issues before us, are supported by the record, and we draw from them as set out in the Chancellor's opinion.Signal is a diversified, technically based company operating through various subsidiaries. Its stock is publicly traded on the New York, Philadelphia and Pacific Stock Exchanges. UOP, formerly known as Universal Oil Products Company, was a diversified industrial company engaged in various lines of business, including petroleum and petro-chemical services and related products, construction, fabricated metal products, transportation equipment products, chemicals and plastics, and other products and services including land development, lumber products and waste disposal. Its stock was publicly held and listed on the New York Stock Exchange.In 1974 Signal sold one of its wholly-owned subsidiaries for $420,000,000 in cash. See Gimbel v. Signal Companies, Inc., Del.Ch., 316 A.2d 599, aff’d, Del.Supr., 316 A.2d 619 (1974). While looking to invest this cash surplus, Signal became interested in UOP as a possible acquisition. Friendly negotiations ensued, and Signal proposed to acquire a controlling interest in UOP at a price of $19 per share. UOP's representatives sought $25 per share. In the arm's length bargaining that followed, an understanding was reached whereby Signal agreed to purchase from UOP 1,500,000 shares of UOP's authorized but unissued stock at $21 per share.This purchase was contingent upon Signal^ making a successful cash tender offer for 4,300,000 publicly held shares of UOP, also at a price of $21 per share. This combined method of acquisition permitted Signal to acquire 5,800,000 shares of stock, representing 50.5% of UOP's outstanding shares. The UOP board of directors advised the company's shareholders that it had no objection to Signal's tender offer at that price. Immediately before the announcement of the tender offer, UOP's common stock had been trading on the New York Stock Exchange at a fraction under $14 per share.The negotiations between Signal and UOP occurred during April 1975, and the resulting tender offer was greatly oversubscribed. However, Signal limited its total purchase of the tendered shares so that, when coupled with the stock bought from UOP, it had achieved its goalof becoming a 50.5% shareholderAlthough UOP’ board consisted of thirteen directors, Signal nominated and elected only six. Of these, five were either directors or employees of Signal. The sixth, a partner in the banking firm of Lazard Freres & Co., had been one of Signal's representatives in the negotiations and bargaining with UOP concerning the tender offer and purchase price of the UOP shares.However, the president and chief executive officer of UOP retired during 1975, and Signal caused him to be replaced by James V. Crawford, a long-time employee and senior executive vice president of one of Signal's wholly-owned subsidiaries. Crawford succeeded his predecessor on UOP's board of directors and also was made a director of Signal.By the end of 1977 Signal basically was unsuccessful in finding other suitable investment candidates for its excess cash, and by February 1978 considered that it had no other realistic acquisitions available to it on a friendly basis. Once again its attention turned to UOP.The trial court found that at the instigation of certain Signal management personnel, including William W. Walkup, its board chairman, and Forrest N. Shumway, its president, a feasibility study was made concerning the possible acquisition of the balance of UOP's outstanding shares. This study was performed by two Signal officers, Charles S. Arledge, vice president (director of planning), and Andrew J. Chitiea, senior vice president (chief financial officer). Messrs. Walkup, Shumway, Arledge and Chitiea were all directors of UOP in addition to their membership on the Signal board.Arledge and Chitiea concluded that it would be a good investment for Signal to acquire the remaining 49.5% of UOP shares at any price up to $24 each. Their report was discussed between Walkup and Shumway who, along with Arledge, Chitiea and Brewster L. Arms, internal counsel for Signal, constituted Signal's senior management. In particular, they talked about the proper price to be paid if the acquisition was pursued, purportedly keeping in mind that as UOP's majority shareholder, Signal owed a fiduciary responsibility to both its own stockholders as well as to UOP's minority. It was ultimately agreed that a meeting of Signal's Executive Committee would be called to propose that Signal acquire the remaining outstanding stock of UOP through a cash-out merger in the range of $20 to $21 per share.The Executive Committee meeting was set for February 28, 1978. As a courtesy, UOP's president, Crawford, was invited to attend, although he was not a member of Signal's executive committee. On his arrival, and prior to the meeting, Crawford was asked to meet privately with Walkup and Shumway. He was then told of Signal's plan to acquire full ownership of UOP and was asked for his reaction to the proposed price range of $20 to $21 per share. Crawford said he thought such a price would be "generous", and that it was certainly one which should be submitted to UOP's minority shareholders for their ultimate consideration. He stated, however, that Signal's 100% ownership could cause internal problems at UOP. He believed that employees would have to be given some assurance of their future place in a fully- owned Signal subsidiary. Otherwise, he feared the departure of essential personnel. Also, many of UOP's key employees had stock option incentive programs which would be wiped out by a merger. Crawford therefore urged that some adjustment would have to be made, such as providing a comparable incentive in Signal's shares, if after the merger he was to maintain his quality of personnel and efficiency at UOP.Thus, Crawford voiced no objection to the $20 to $21 price range, nor did he suggest that Signal should consider paying more than $21 per share for the minority interests. Later, at the Executive Committee meeting the same factors were discussed, with Crawford repeating the position he earlier took with Walkup and Shumway. Also considered was the 1975 tender offer andthe fact that it had been greatly oversubscribed at $21 per share. For many reasons, Signal's manage¬ment concluded that the acquisition of UOP's minority shares provided the solution to a number of its business problems.Thus, it was the consensus that a price of $20 to $21 per share would be fair to both Signal and the minority shareholders of UOP. Signal's executive committee authorized its management "to negotiate" with UOP "for a cash acquisition of the minority ownership in UOP, Inc., with the intention of presenting a proposal to [Signal's] board of directors * * * on March 6, 1978". Immediately after this February 28, 1978 meeting, Signal issued a press release stating: The Signal Companies, Inc. and UOP, Inc. are conducting negotiations for the acquisition for cash by Signal of the 49.5 per cent of UOP which it does not presently own, announced Forrest N. Shumway, president and chief executive officer of Signal, and James V. Crawford, UOP president. Price and other terms of the proposed transaction have not y et been finalized and would be subject to approval of the boards of directors of Signal and UOP, scheduled to meet early next week, the stockholders of UOP and certain federal agencies.The announcement also referred to the fact that the closing price of UOP's common stock on that day was $14.50 per share.Two days later, on March 2, 1978, Signal issued a second press release stating that its management would recommend a price in the range of $20 to $21 per share for UOP's 49.5% minority interest. This announcement referred to Signal's earlier statement that "negotiations" were being conducted for the acquisition of the minority shares.Between Tuesday, February 28, 1978 and Monday, March 6,1978, a total of four business days, Crawford spoke by telephone with all of UOP's non-Signal, i.e., outside, directors. Also during that period, Crawford retained Lehman Brothers to render a fairness opinion as to the price offered the minority for its stock. He gave two reasons for this choice. First, the time schedule between the announcement and the board meetings was short (by then only three business days) and since Lehman Brothers had been acting as UOP's investment banker for many years, Crawford felt that it would be in the best position to respond on such brief notice. Second, James W. Glanville, a long-time director of UOP and a partner in Lehman Brothers, had acted as a financial advisor to UOP for many years. Crawford believed that Glanville's familiarity with UOP, as a member of its board, would also be of assistance in enabling Lehman Brothers to render a fairness opinion within the existing time constraints.Crawford telephoned Glanville, who gave his assurance that Lehman Brothers had no conflicts that would prevent it from accepting the task. Glanville's immediate personal reaction was that a price of $20 to $21 would certainly be fair, since it represented almost a 50% premium over UOP's market price. Glanville sought a $250,000 fee for Lehman Brothers' services, but Crawford thought this too much. After further discussions Glanville finally agreed that Lehman Brothers would render its fairness opinion for $150,000.During this period Crawford also had several telephone contacts with Signal officials. In only one of them, however, was the price of the shares discussed. In a conversation with Walkup, Crawford advised that as a result of his communications with UOP's non-Signal directors, it was his feeling that the price would have to be the top of the proposed range, or $21 per share, if the approval of UOP's outside directors was to be obtained. But again, he did not seek any price higher than $21.Glanville assembled a three-man Lehman Brothers team to do the work on the fairness opinion. These persons examined relevant documents and information concerning UOP, including its annual reports and its Securities and Exchange Commission filings from 1973 through 1976, as well as its audited financial statements for 1977, its interim reports to shareholders, and its recent and historical market prices and trading volumes. In addition, on Friday, March 3, 1978, two members of the Lehman Brothers team flew to UOP's headquarters in Des Plaines, Illinois, to perform a "due diligence" visit, during the course of which they interviewed Crawford as well as UOP's general counsel, its chief financial officer, and other key executives and personnel.As a result, the Lehman Brothers team concluded that "the price of either $20 or $21 would be a fair price for the remaining shares of UOP". They telephoned this impression to Glanville, who was spending the weekend in Vermont.On Monday morning, March 6, 1978, Glanville and the senior member of the Lehman Brothers team flew to Des Plaines to attend the scheduled UOP directors meeting. Glanville looked over the assembled information during the flight. The two had with them the draft of a "fairness opinion letter" in which the price had been left blank. Either during or immediately prior to the directors' meeting, the two-page "fairness opinion letter" was typed in final form and the price of $21 per share was inserted.On March 6, 1978, both the Signal and UOP boards were convened to consider the proposed merger. Telephone communications were maintained between the two meetings. Walkup, Signal's board chairman, and also a UOP director, attended UOP's meeting with Crawford in order to present Signal's position and answer any questions that UOP's non-Signal directors might have. Arledge and Chitiea, along with Signal's other designees on UOP's board, participated by conference telephone. All of UOP's outside directors attended the meeting either in person or by conference telephone.First, Signal's board unanimously adopted a resolution authorizing Signal to propose to UOP a cash merger of $21 per share as outlined in a certain merger agreement, and other supporting documents. This proposal required that the merger be approved by a majority of UOP's outstanding minority shares voting at the stockholders meeting at which the merger would be considered, and that the minority shares voting in favor of the merger, when coupled with Signal's 50.5% interest would have to comprise at least two-thirds of all UOP shares. Otherwise the proposed merger would be deemed disapproved.UOP's board then considered the proposal. Copies of the agreement were delivered to the directors in attendance, and other copies had been forwarded earlier to the directors participating by telephone. They also had before them UOP financial data for 1974-1977, UOP's most recent financial statements, market price information, and budget projections for 1978. In addition they had Lehman Brothers' hurriedly prepared fairness opinion letter finding the price of $21 to be fair. Glanville, the Lehman Brothers partner, and UOP director, commented on the information that had gone into preparation of the letter.Signal also suggests that the Arledge-Chitiea feasibility study, indicating that a price of up to $24 per share would be a "good investment" for Signal, was discussed at the UOP directors' meeting. The Chancellor made no such finding, and our independent review of the record, detailed infra, satisfies us by a preponderance of the evidence that there was no discussion of this document at UOP's board meeting. Furthermore, it is clear beyond peradventure that nothing in that report was ever disclosed to UOP's minority shareholders prior to their approval of themerger.After consideration of Signal's proposal, Walkup and Crawford left the meeting to permit a free and uninhibited exchange between UOP's non-Signal directors. Upon their return a resolution to accept Signal's offer was then proposed and adopted. While Signal's men on UOP's board participated in various aspects of the meeting, they abstained from voting. However, the minutes show that each of them "if voting would have voted yes".On March 7, 1978, UOP sent a letter to its shareholders advising them of the action taken by UOP's board with respect to Signal's offer. This document pointed out, among other things, that on February 28, 1978 "both companies had announced negotiations were being conducted".Despite the swift board action of the two companies, the merger was not submitted to UOP's shareholders until their annual meeting on May 26, 1978. In the notice of that meeting and proxy statement sent to shareholders in May, UOP's management and board urged that the merger be approved. The proxy statement also advised:The price was determined after discussions between James V. Crawford, a director of Signal and Chief Executive Officer of UOP, and officers of Signal which took place during meetings on February 28, 1978, and in the course of several subsequent telephone conversations. (Emphasis added.)In the original draft of the proxy statement the word "negotiations" had been used rather than "discussions". However, when the Securities and Exchange Commission sought details of the "negotiations" as part of its review of these materials, the term was deleted and the word "discussions" was substituted. The proxy statement indicated that the vote of UOP's board in approving the merger had been unanimous. It also advised the shareholders that Lehman Brothers had given its opinion that the merger price of $21 per share was fair to UOP's minority. However, it did not disclose the hurried method by which this conclusion was reached.As of the record date of UOP's annual meeting, there were 11,488,302 shares of UOP common stock outstanding, 5,688,302 of which were owned by the minority. At the meeting only 56%, or 3,208,652, of the minority shares were voted. Of these, 2,953,812, or 51.9% of the total minority, voted for the merger, and 254,840 voted against it. When Signal's stock was added to the minority shares voting in favor, a total of 76.2% of UOP's outstanding shares approved the merger while only 2.2% opposed it.By its terms the merger became effective on May 26, 1978, and each share of UOP's stock held by the minority was automatically converted into a right to receive $21 cash.II.A.A primary issue mandating reversal is the preparation by two UOP directors, Arledge and Chitiea, of their feasibility study for the exclusive use and benefit of Signal. This document was of obvious significance to both Signal and UOP. Using UOP data, it described the advantages to Signal of ousting the minority at a price range of $21-$24 per share. Mr. Arledge, one of the authors, outlined the benefits to Signal:Purpose Of The Merger1) Provides an outstanding investment opportunity for Signal—(Better than any recent acquisition we have seen.)2) Increases Signal's earnings.3) Facilitates the flow of resources between Signal and its subsidiaries(Big factor—works both ways.)4) Provides cost savings potential for Signal and UOP.5) Improves the percentage of Signal's 'operating earnings' as opposed to 'holding company earnings'.6) Simplifies the understanding of Signal.7) Facilitates technological exchange among Signal's subsidiaries.8) Eliminates potential conflicts of interest.Having written those words, solely for the use of Signal it is clear from the record that neither Arledge nor Chitiea shared this report with their fellow directors of UOP. We are satisfied that no one else did either. This conduct hardly meets the fiduciary standards applicable to such a transaction * * *The Arledge-Chitiea report speaks for itself in supporting the Chancellor's finding that a price of up to $24 was a "good investment" for Signal. It shows that a return on the investment at $21 would be 15.7% versus 15.5% at $24 per share. This was a difference of only two-tenths of one percent, while it meant over $17,000,000 to the minority. Under such circumstances, paying UOP's minority shareholders $24 would have had relatively little long-term effect on Signal, and the Chancellor's findings concerning the benefit to Signal, even at a price of $24, were obviously correct. Levitt v. Bouvier, Del.Supr., 287 A.2d 671, 673 (1972).Certainly, this was a matter of material significance to UOP and its shareholders. Since the study was prepared by two UOP directors, using UOP information for the exclusive benefit of Signal, and nothing whatever was done to disclose it to the outside UOP directors or the minority shareholders, a question of breach of fiduciary duty arises. This problem occurs because there were common Signal-UOP directors participating, at least to some extent, in the UOP board's decision making processes without full disclosure of the conflicts they faced.7B.In assessing this situation, the Court of Chancery was required to:examine what information defendants had and to measure it against what they gave to the minority stockholders, in a context in which 'complete candor' is required. In other words, the limited function of the Court was to determine whether defendants had disclosed all information in their possession germane to the transaction in issue. And by 'germane' we mean, for present purposes, information such as a reasonable shareholder would consider important. in Priding whether. to sell or retain stock.* * ** * * Completeness, not adequacy, is both the norm and the mandate under present circumstances. Lynch v. Vickers Energy Corp., Del.Supr., 383 A.2d 278, 281 (1977) (Lynch /). This is merely stating in another way the long-existing principle of Delaware law that these Signal designated directors on UOP's board still owed UOP and its shareholders an uncompromising duty of loyalty. The classic language of Guth v. Loft, Inc., Del.Supr., 5 A.2d 503, 510 (1939), requires no embellishment:A public policy, existing through the years, and derived from a profound knowledge of human characteristics and motives, has established a rule that demands of a corporate officer or director, peremptorily and inexorably, the most scrupulous observance of his duty, not only affirmatively to protect the interests of the corporation committed to his charge, but also to refrainfrom doing anything that would work injury to the corporation, or to deprive it of. profit or advantage which his skill and ability might properly bring to it, or to enable it to make in the reasonable and lawful exercise of its powers. The rule that requires an undivided and unselfish loyalty to the corporation demands that there shall be no conflict between duty and self-interest. Given the absence of any attempt to structure this transaction on an arm's length basis, Signal cannot escape the effects of the conflicts it faced, particularly when its designees on UOP's board did not totally abstain from participation in the matter. There is no "safe harbor" for such divided loyalties in Delaware. When directors of a Delaware ^ corporation are on both sides of a transaction, they are required to demonstrate their utmost good faith and the most scrupulous inherent P fairness of the bargain. Gottlieb v. Heyden Chemical Corp., Del.Supr., 91 A.2d 57, 57-58 (1952). The requirement of fairness is unflinching in v rP y demand that where one stands on both sides of a transaction, he has the burden of establishing its entire fairness, sufficient to pass the test of careful scrutiny by the courts. Sterling v. Mayflower Hotel Corp., N, Del.Supr., 93 A.2d 107, 110 (1952); Bastian v. Bourns, Inc., Del.Ch., 256 A.2d 680, 681 (1969), aff’d, Del.Supr., 278 A.2d 467 (1970); David J. Greene & Co. v. Dunhill International Inc., Del.Ch., 249 A.2d 427, 431 (1968).There is no dilution of this obligation where one holds dual or multiple directorships, as in a parent-subsidiary context. Levien v. Sinclair Oil Corp., Del.Ch., 261 A.2d 911, 915 (1969). Thus, individuals who act in a dual capacity as directors of two corporations, one of whom is parent and the other subsidiary, owe the same duty of good management to both corporations, and in the absence of an independent negotiating structure (see note 7, supra), or the directors' total abstention from any participation in the matter, this duty is to be exercised in light of what is best for both companies. Warshaw v. Calhoun, Del. Supr., 221 A.2d 487, 492 (1966). The record demonstrates that Signal has not met this obligation.。

土木工程外文翻译(中英互译版)

使用加固纤维聚合物增强混凝土梁的延性Nabil F. Grace, George Abel-Sayed, Wael F. Ragheb摘要：一种为加强结构延性的新型单轴柔软加强质地的聚合物(FRP)已在被研究，开发和生产(在结构测试的中心在劳伦斯技术大学)。

这种织物是两种碳纤维和一种玻璃纤维的混合物，而且经过设计它们在受拉屈服时应变值较低，从而表达出伪延性的性能。

通过对八根混凝土梁在弯曲荷载作用下的加固和检测对研制中的织物的效果和延性进行了研究。

用现在常用的单向碳纤维薄片、织物和板进行加固的相似梁也进行了检测，以便同用研制中的织物加固梁进行性能上的比拟。

这种织物经过设计具有和加固梁中的钢筋同时屈服的潜力，从而和未加固梁一样，它也能得到屈服台阶。

相对于那些用现在常用的碳纤维加固体系进行加固的梁，这种研制中的织物加固的梁承受更高的屈服荷载，并且有更高的延性指标。

这种研制中的织物对加固机制表达出更大的奉献。

关键词：混凝土，延性，纤维加固，变形介绍外贴粘合纤维增强聚合物〔FRP〕片和条带近来已经被确定是一种对钢筋混凝土结构进行修复和加固的有效手段。

关于应用外贴粘合FRP板、薄片和织物对混凝土梁进行变形加固的钢筋混凝土梁的性能，一些试验研究调查已经进行过报告。

Saadatmanesh和Ehsani〔1991〕检测了应用玻璃纤维增强聚合物(GFRP)板进行变形加固的钢筋混凝土梁的性能。

Ritchie等人〔1991〕检测了应用GFRP，碳纤维增强聚合物〔CFRP〕和G/CFRP板进行变形加固的钢筋混凝土梁的性能。

Grace等人〔1999〕和Triantafillou〔1992〕研究了应用CFRP薄片进行变形加固的钢筋混凝土梁的性能。

Norris，Saadatmanesh和Ehsani〔1997〕研究了应用单向CFRP薄片和CFRP织物进行加固的混凝土梁的性能。

在所有的这些研究中，加固的梁比未加固的梁承受更高的极限荷载。

英文翻译附原文

本科毕业设计(论文) 外文翻译（附外文原文）系 ( 院 )：资源与环境工程系课题名称：英文翻译专业(方向)：环境工程班级：2004-1班学生：3040106119指导教师：刘辉利副教授日期：2008年4月20使用褐煤（一种低成本吸附剂）从酸性矿物废水中去除和回收金属离子a. 美国, 大学公园, PA 16802, 宾夕法尼亚州立大学, 能源部和Geo 环境工程学.b. 印度第80号邮箱, Mahatma Gandhi ・Marg, Lucknow 226001, 工业毒素学研究中心, 环境化学分部,于2006 年5月6 日网上获得，2006 年4月24 日接受，2006 年3月19 日;校正，2006 年2月15 日接收。

摘要酸性矿物废水(AMD), 是一个长期的重大环境问题，起因于钢硫铁矿的微生物在水和空气氧化作用, 买得起包含毒性金属离子的一种酸性解答。

这项研究的主要宗旨是通过使用褐煤（一种低成本吸附剂）从酸性矿水(AMD)中去除和回收金属离子。

褐煤已被用于酸性矿水排水AMD 的处理。

经研究其能吸附亚铁, 铁, 锰、锌和钙在multi-component 含水系统中。

研究通过在不同的酸碱度里进行以找出最适宜的酸碱度。

模拟工业条件进行酸性矿物废水处理, 所有研究被进行通过单一的并且设定多专栏流动模式。

空的床接触时间(EBCT) 模型被使用为了使吸附剂用量减到最小。

金属离子的回收并且吸附剂的再生成功地达到了使用0.1 M 硝酸不用分解塔器。

关键词:吸附; 重金属; 吸附; 褐煤; 酸性矿物废水处理; 固体废料再利用; 亚铁; 铁; 锰。

文章概述1. 介绍2. 材料和方法2.1. 化学制品、材料和设备3. 吸附步骤3.1. 酸碱度最佳化3.2. 固定床研究3.2.1 单一栏3.2.2 多栏4. 结果和讨论4.1. ZPC 和渗析特征4.2 酸碱度的影响4.3. Multi-component 固定吸附床4.3.1 褐煤使用率4.4. 吸附机制4.5. 解吸附作用研究5. 结论1. 介绍酸性矿物废水(AMD) 是一个严重的环境问题起因于硫化物矿物风化, 譬如硫铁矿(FeS2) 和它的同素异形体矿物(α-FeS) 。

外文文献翻译

外文文献翻译Finance companies originate subprime automobile loans using a network of franchises and car dealers. They may fund this lending with traditional debt or equity, but in the 1990s many of these companies also began to issue asset-backed securities. In a typical automobile securitization, an originator pools several thousand automobile loans and sells these to a special-purpose entity such as a trust. The special-purpose entity, in turn, issues securities backed by a beneficial interest in the receivables from the loans in the pool. Typically, the originator continues to service the loans for a fee. Depending on credit enhancements, asset quality, servicer strength, and other variables, these securities are assigned a credit rating and can be traded in capital markets.It is possible that the automobile loans that underly asset-backed securities are not representative of all loans made by finance companies. For example, some lenders may choose to "cherry pick" by securitizing only their relatively less desirable loans. We believe this potential source of selection bias is of limited practical importance because several of the largest finance companies represented in our sample have adopted explicit policies of securitizing all or nearly all of the loans they originate. Unfortunately, data comparing the characteristics of on- and off- balance sheet automobile loan portfolios are not publicly available.Each issuer of publicly-traded automobile loan-backed securities submits periodic reports to the SEC documenting the performance of the underlying collateral pool. Using these data and other sources, Moody's publishes New Issue Reports describing each collateral pool and Pool Performance Reportsthat track the performance of pools over time. Among the variables included in a typical New Issue Report are the initial weighted average interest rate (termed weighted average coupon, or WAC), the weighted average maturity, and the age of loans in a pool, as well as the initial number of loans and asset balance for the pool. Variables available on a monthly frequency from Pool Performance Reports include the principal balance on loans outstanding, delinquency rates, dollars charged-off, and dollars prepaid for active pools.We have compiled sufficient data from Moody's New Issue and PoolPerformance reports to construct a sample of 3,595 pool-month observations on 124 loan pools from 13 different issuers.A total of 3.3 million automobile loans were held in these pools. Table 1 reports summary statistics for our sample of loan pools. Figure 1 provides information on pool issue dates, pool sizes, and WACs. Although some of the pools in our sample were issued during 1994, 1995, and 1996, performance data for most pools are only available after 1996.The fundamental unit of analysis for examining default and prepayment risk is the individual loan. The aggregate competing risks model described in Section 3 requires information on the number of loans that default and prepay in each month in the life of a pool. Because these data are not directly reported by Moody's, we must infer them from available accounting data. To accomplish this, we first calculate the average remaining balance for active loans in a pool by using information on the pool's average loan size, weighted average coupon, and maturity in a standard amortization formula. We then estimate the number of prepaid loans by dividing the reported dollars of principalprepaid in a month by the estimated average remaining loan principal balance for that month.Estimating the number of loans that default in a month requires that we make an assumption about the relationship between charge-offs and loan defaults. We assume that when a loan defaults, sixty percent of its remaining principal is charged off. The number of loans that default is estimated by dividing the reported dollars charged off in a month by the estimated principal balance scaled to reflect the charge-off assumption. The sixty percent charge-off rule represents what we take to be a reasonable approximation of standard practice based on discussions with industry participants. Unfortunately, the detailed accounting data needed to either validate or generalize this simple rule are not publicly available. To the extent that our sixty percent charge-off assumption is too high (respectively, too low) we will under (over) predict default probabilities. Nonetheless, our conclusions about the economic drivers of default and prepayment risk should be robust to reasonable departures from this assumption.财务公司发起的次级汽车贷款，使用网络的专营权和汽车经销商。

外文翻译

井冈山大学外文翻译题目施工组织设计与施工图预算学院建筑工程学院专业工程管理姓名谭智强学号90617008指导教师夏振华2012年11月20日开发一个评估施工现场安全管理系统有效性的模型Developing a model to measure the effectiveness of safety management systems of construction sites作者：Evelyn Ai Lin Teoa,_, Florence Yean Yng Linga起止页码：1584~1592出版日期（期刊号）：2005年6月第005版出版单位：新加坡环境国立大学摘要:在新加坡,实施了建筑行业安全管理系统(SMS)和SMS审计大约有十年之久的现在,安全标准的提高并不显著。

为了回应需要改进的有效性(SMS)和安全管理体系审计的目的,本文提出了一种方法, 人员可以利用测试工具来评估审计建筑公司安全管理体系的有效性。

研究方法采用了15个步进行调查，安全专家被邀请通过面试或工作表达自己的意见。

层次分析法(AHP)及因子分析是用来协助识别影响最为关键的因素和属性的安全。

该模型开发利用多属性值模型(MAVT)的方法。

该方法可以通过网站得到验证审核,利用模型中施工安全指数(CSI)可以计算出来。

结果表明,该模型可以作为一个客观CSI衡量不同管理和评估。

关键词: 安全管理体系;安全审核;施工安全指数1 简介: 支撑这一工作的论据安全管理体系(SMS)作为建筑业一个正式制度的管理现场安全的体系。

承包商预期管理现场安全通过正常的安全管理体系。

如何有效地评价这些系统是很重要的,这样可以使不足之处得以更正。

该研究工作是在协作与职业安全部门监督下进行的,人力资源部门可根据当局评价审计协议来衡量一个建筑工地的有效性的安全管理体系。

新加坡建筑行业服务实施了安全管理体系审计大约有十年之久了,但是提高的安全效果并不显著。

这与影响船舶的修建行业一样,经历了一个稳定提高安全性能的阶段。

外文译文

用固态碳源生长石墨烯摘要：单层石墨烯作为一种可转移材料在2004年第一次被获得并且引起了物理学家、化学家、材料学家强烈地关注。

很多研究都致力于找到获得大面积单层或双层石墨烯的方法。

最近这种方法已经被找到，是通过在铜或镍基底上化学气象沉积（CVD）甲烷或乙炔。

但是CVD方法仅限于未加工的气体原料，而很难应用于更加广泛的潜在的原料。

在这里我们论证一种方法：利用固态碳源—比如聚合物薄膜或小分子，最低只要800℃就能够在金属触媒基底上生长出大面积、高质量、可控制厚度的石墨烯。

原始石墨烯和掺杂石墨烯都是用这种一步工序在同样的设备上生产的。

正文：石墨烯有着非凡的电学和机械性能在很多应用方面都表现出很好的前景。

现在有很多获得石墨烯的方法。

最原始的机械剥离法可以从高取向性的热分解石墨上获得少量高质量的石墨烯。

液体剥落并还原氧化了的石墨烯已经被用于化学转化获取大量石墨烯。

热处理SiC，用无定形碳和CVD方法已被应用在晶片上生长大尺寸石墨烯。

通过引进Ni和Cu作为CVD生长的基底，石墨烯的尺寸、厚度、质量正在接近工业化使用标准。

然而石墨烯本质上是零带隙材料表现出很弱的二极性；基于石墨烯的二极管表现出和低的“开／关”电流比，因此它们被用于电子器件设计时很像金属。

为了改变石墨烯的费米能级以及利用它的电学和光学属性，给石墨烯掺杂得到ｎ型，ｐ型或混合型掺杂石墨烯一直是我们奋斗的目标。

当前，用固态碳源在金属触媒基底上生长单层原始石墨烯已被论证（图１ａ）第一种被使用的固态碳源是旋涂的聚合物（聚甲基丙烯酸甲酯）（PMMA）薄膜（~100nm）,金属触媒基底是铜薄片。

在最低为800℃最高为1000℃（测试上限）的温度，伴随着还原性气流（H2/Ar）的低压条件下生长10分钟，单层一致的石墨烯就在基底上生成了。

因此石墨烯材料被成功的转移的不同的基底上有更多的特性（见Supplementary Materials and Supplem entary Methods）这种源于PMMA的单层石墨烯的拉曼光谱如图1b所示，这个光谱表征了样品1 cm2范围内大于10个位置的情况。

图纸常见外文翻译

Takto oznacene plochy +0.5mm k souboru dat
Plochy, urcujici polohu pro nadrazene sestavy 做过该标记的表面+0.5mm，此记录的规定表面是为了更好的总体构造。
Nicht bemasste Beschnittradien R (5+1)mm 未注明尺寸的极边缘半径 R (5+1)mm
errechnet/calculated 计重
Gewogen/ actual 实际的 Versuch/prototype 试生产 Fertigung/ production 生产
Sicherh..-Dok./ Safety doc. 安全
Benennung 命名 Maszstab/ Scale 比例
Typ-Pruef-Dok. und Typ-Pruef-Nr
Type-appr.-doc. nd
Type approval number 批准类型文件和批准类型编号。
CAD-System und Verwaltungssystem-Schluessel
CAD-System and administration code 计算机辅助系统监控号码
Anlageflaeche fuer Fuehrungsprofil / Dosedaci plocha pro Vodici profil 导向支承面 Anlageflaeche fuer Schottplatte / Dosedaci plocha pro Deska oddelovaci 隔板面 Beschnitt-und Formtoleranzen in diesem Bereich + 1.5 / Tolerance orezu a tvaru v teto oblasti + 1.5 边缘形状公差范围 + 1.5 Anlageflaeche fuer Scheinwerfer / Dosedaci plocha pro Svetlomet 大灯截面 Anlageflaeche fuer Traeger Stoss.vorn / Dosedaci plocha pro Nosnik pr. narazniku 托架接合点面 Schveissmutter positionieren/Matice polohovat 焊接螺位置 Schnitt/Rez 截面 Fuehrungsprofil/ Vodici profil 导向支承 Schraube/Sroub 螺丝 Scheinwerfer/Svetlomet 支撑螺母 Die physische Mitte des Lochs liegt im Walzen von Durchschnitt 0.8mm auf der Achse, die das Gewinde der Einschweissmutter festlegt. Fyzicky stred otvoru lezi ve valci o prumeru 0.8 mm vytvorenem na ose, kterou stanovi zavit

可爱的沙皮狗外文翻译钩针图解

可爱的沙皮狗钩编符号说明：X为短针，V为1针上钩2短针（短针加针）Λ为2短针合并为1针（短针减针）F为长针耳朵（2）1：2锁针，在第2个锁针孔里钩6Ｘ2：6Ｘ3：6Ｖ——124：（Ｘ，Ｖ）6次——185-6：18Ｘ7：（2Ｘ，Ｖ）6次——248：24Ｘ9：（3Ｘ，Ｖ）6次——3010-13：30Ｘ14：将耳朵两层并在一起钩15Ｘ现在开始钩头和身体1：2锁针，在第2个锁针孔里钩6Ｘ2：6Ｖ——123：（Ｘ，Ｖ）6次——184：（2Ｘ，Ｖ）6次——245：（3Ｘ，Ｖ）6次——306：（4Ｘ，Ｖ）6次——367：（5Ｘ，Ｖ）6次——428：10Ｘ，钩前半针22F，10Ｘ——42 9-11: 10Ｘ，22F，10Ｘ——4212:10Ｘ，下面22针和第8行的后半针并在一起钩，10Ｘ——4213：（6Ｘ，Ｖ）6次——4814：（7Ｘ，Ｖ）6次——5415：13Ｘ，钩前半针28F，13Ｘ——5416-18: 13Ｘ，28F，13Ｘ——5419：13Ｘ，下面28针和第13行的后半针并在一起钩，13Ｘ——54 20：10Ｘ，（Ｘ，Ｖ）17次，10Ｘ——7121：71Ｘ22：10Ｘ，（2Ｘ，Ｖ）17次，10Ｘ——8823：20Ｘ，钩前半针18F，12Ｘ，钩前半针18F，20Ｘ——8824-26：20Ｘ，18F，12Ｘ，18F，20Ｘ——8827：20Ｘ，下面18针和第23行的后半针并在一起钩，12Ｘ，下面18针和第23行的后半针并在一起钩，20Ｘ——8828：41Ｘ，6F并1针，41Ｘ——8329：钩前半针35F，13Ｘ，钩前半针35F——8330-32：35F，13Ｘ，35F——8333：35F，（Ｘ，Ｖ）6次，Ｘ,35F——8934：下面35针和第29行的后半针并在一起钩，19Ｘ，下面35针和第29行的后半针并在一起钩——8935:(2Ｘ，∧)5次，10Ｘ，(2Ｘ，Ｖ)9次，10Ｘ，(2Ｘ，∧)5次，2Ｘ——8836：35Ｘ，6F并1针，6Ｘ，6F并1针，35Ｘ——7837-38：78Ｘ39：钩前半针12F，8Ｘ，将耳朵并在一起钩15Ｘ，8Ｘ，将耳朵并在一起钩15Ｘ，8Ｘ钩前半针12F——7840：12F,5Ｘ,钩前半针20F，4Ｘ，钩前半针20F,5Ｘ,12F——7841-42: 12F，(5Ｘ，20F)2次, 4Ｘ，12F——7843：下面12针和第39行的后半针并在一起钩，（5Ｘ，下面20针和40行的后半针并在一起钩）2次，4Ｘ，下面12针和39行的后半针并在一起钩——7844：(2Ｘ，Ｖ)4次，8Ｘ，(2Ｘ，∧)9次，8Ｘ，(2Ｘ，Ｖ)4次，2Ｘ——7745：77Ｘ46：(2Ｘ，Ｖ)5次，8Ｘ，(2Ｘ，∧)8次，7Ｘ，(2Ｘ，Ｖ)5次——79 47-48：7949：(2Ｘ，Ｖ)5次，49Ｘ，(2Ｘ，Ｖ)5次——8950：钩前半针89F——8951-54：89F——8955：下面89针和第50行的后半针并在一起钩——8956：89Ｘ57：35Ｘ，（2Ｘ，∧）4次，38Ｘ——8558：85Ｘ59：钩前半针30F，25Ｘ，钩前半针30F——8560-62：30F，25Ｘ，30F——8563：下面30针和第59行的后半针并在一起钩，25Ｘ，下面30针和第59行的后半针并在一起钩——8564：30Ｘ，（Ｘ，∧）4次，30Ｘ——8065：（6Ｘ，∧）10次——7066：70Ｘ67：15Ｘ，钩前半针40F，15Ｘ——7068-69：15Ｘ，40F，15Ｘ——7070：15Ｘ，下面40针和第67行的后半针并在一起钩，15Ｘ——70 71：70Ｘ72：（5Ｘ，∧）10次——6073-75：60Ｘ76：钩前半针60F——6077-78：60F79：下面60针和第76行的后半针并在一起钩——6080：10Ｘ，(Ｘ，Ｖ)6次，16Ｘ，(Ｘ，Ｖ)6次，10Ｘ——7281-86：72Ｘ87：10Ｘ，(Ｘ，∧)6次，16Ｘ，(Ｘ，∧)6次，10Ｘ——6088：60Ｘ89：15F，30Ｘ，15F——6090：钩前半针15F，30Ｘ，钩前半针15F——6091-93：15F，30Ｘ，15F——6094：下面15针和第90行的后半针并在一起钩，30Ｘ，下面15针和第90行的后半针并在一起钩——6095：30∧——30填充96：30Ｘ97：（Ｘ，∧）10次——2098-107：20Ｘ108：Ｘ，∧，14Ｘ，∧，Ｘ——18109：Ｘ，∧，12Ｘ，∧，Ｘ——16110：Ｘ，∧，10Ｘ，∧，Ｘ——14111-118：14Ｘ119：Ｘ，∧，8Ｘ，∧，Ｘ——12填充120：Ｘ，∧，6Ｘ，∧，Ｘ——10121：10Ｘ122：5∧——5结束前肢（2）1：2锁针，在第2个锁针孔里钩6Ｘ2：6Ｖ——123：（Ｘ，Ｖ）6次——184：（2Ｘ，Ｖ）6次——245：（3Ｘ，Ｖ）6次——306：（4Ｘ，Ｖ）6次——367：（5Ｘ，Ｖ）6次——428-12：42Ｘ13：（5Ｘ，∧）6次——3614：36Ｘ15：（4Ｘ，∧）6次——3016：30Ｘ松松的填充17：将腿对折，（3Ｘ，下1针和对面1针的后半针一起钩Ｘ）3次，3下——30，参照下图8-21：30Ｘ22：（Ｖ，14）2次——3223：（Ｖ，15）2次——3424-29：34Ｘ30：钩前半针，34F——3431-32：34F33：下面34针和第30行的后半针并在一起钩——34 34：（5Ｘ，Ｖ）5次，4Ｘ——3935-37：39Ｘ38：钩前半针，39F——3939-41：39F42：下面39针和第38行的后半针并在一起钩——39结束，留缝合线后肢（2）1：2锁针，在第2个锁针孔里钩6Ｘ2：6Ｖ——123：（Ｘ，Ｖ）6次——184：（2Ｘ，Ｖ）6次——245：（3Ｘ，Ｖ）6次——306：（4Ｘ，Ｖ）6次——367：（5Ｘ，Ｖ）6次——428-12：42Ｘ13：（5Ｘ，∧）6次——3614-15：36Ｘ16：（4Ｘ，∧）6次——3017-20：30Ｘ21：11Ｘ，8Ｖ，11Ｘ——3822：11Ｘ，（Ｘ，Ｖ）8次，11Ｘ——4623-29：4630：钩前半针，46F——4631-33：46F34：下面46针和第30行的后半针并在一起钩——46 35：（8Ｘ，∧）4次，6Ｘ——4236：42Ｘ37：（7Ｘ，∧）4次，6Ｘ——3838：38Ｘ39：（6Ｘ，∧）4次，6Ｘ——3440：34Ｘ41：（5Ｘ，∧）4次，6Ｘ——30，松松的填充42：（4Ｘ，∧）5次——25 43：（3Ｘ，∧）5次——20 44：10∧——1045：5∧——5结束，收紧开口缝合结束后用针梳将全身梳出绒毛，并在皱褶部分刷上阴影，鼻子，眼睛，参照图。

外文翻译及外文原文(参考格式)

外文翻译要求：1、外文资料与毕业设计（论文）选题密切相关，译文准确、质量好。

2、阅读2篇幅以上（10000字符左右）的外文资料，完成2篇不同文章的共2000汉字以上的英译汉翻译3、外文资料可以由指导教师提供，外文资料原则上应是外国作者。

严禁采用专业外语教材文章。

4、排序：“一篇中文译文、一篇外文原文、一篇中文译文、一篇外文原文”。

插图内文字及图名也译成中文。

5、标题与译文格式（字体、字号、行距、页边距等）与论文格式要求相同。

下页附：外文翻译与原文参考格式英文翻译 (黑体、四号、顶格)外文原文出处：(译文前列出外文原文出处、作者、国籍，译文后附上外文原文)《ASHRAE Handbook —Refrigeration 》.CHAPTER3 .SYSTEM Practices for ammonia 3.1 System Selection 3.2 Equipment3.10 Reciprocating Compressors第3章氨制冷系统的实施3.1 系统选择在选择一个氨制冷系统设计时，须要考虑一些设计决策要素，包括是否采用（1）单级压缩（2）带经济器的压缩（3）多级压缩（4）直接蒸发（5）满液式（6）液体再循环（7）载冷剂。

单级压缩系统基本的单级压缩系统由蒸发器、压缩机、冷凝器、储液器（假如用的话）和制冷剂控制装置（膨胀阀、浮球阀等）。

1997 ASHRAE 手册——“原理篇”中的第一章讨论了压缩制冷循环。

图1.壳管式经济器的布置外文翻译的标题与译文中的字体、字号、行距、页边距等与论文格式相同。

英文原文(黑体、四号、顶格)英文翻译2（黑体，四号，顶格）外文原文出处：（黑体，四号，顶格）P. Fanning. Nonlinear Models of Reinforced and Post-tensioned Concrete Beams. Lecturer, Department of Civil Engineering, University College Dublin. Received 16 Jul 2001.非线形模型钢筋和后张法预应力混凝土梁摘要:商业有限元软件一般包括混凝土在荷载做用下非线性反应的专用数值模型。

城市垃圾卫生填埋场毕业设计(全套毕业设计含外文翻译及图纸)

城市垃圾卫生填埋场摘要本工程设计的主要内容包括：城市生活垃圾卫生填埋场处理总平面布置（选址和场区总体设计等等），填埋工艺，防治工程，渗滤液收集导排工程，渗滤液处理工程，地下水、地表水导排处理工程，填埋气体收集与利用设计，环境监测设计，封场工程，辅助工程（如绿化、道路等），设备选型，二次污染防治设计，经济分析等等。

关键词垃圾卫生填埋设计渗滤液气体The Design Of Sanitary LandfillAbstractThis engineering design primary coverage includes: The city life trash health fill in bury the field to process the total plane arrangement (selected location and field area system design and so on), fills in buries the craft, the preventing and controlling project, the infiltration fluid collection leads a row of project, the infiltration fluid processing project, the ground water, the surface water leads the row of processing project, fills in buries the gathering of gas and the use design, the environmental monitoring design, seals the field project, auxiliary project (for example afforestation, path and so on), equipment shaping, two pollution preventing and controlling design, economic analysis and so on.Keywords Rubbish Landfill of hygiene Design Ooze and filtrate Gas目录摘要 (I)Abstract (II)第1章概论 (5)1.1设计背景 (5)1.1.1 生活垃圾的危害 (5)1.1.2生活垃圾的处理方法及国内外处理现状 (5)1.1.3卫生填埋法的类型及发展趋势 (7)1.2城市概况及自然条件 (8)1.2.1 城市概况 (8)1.2.2 自然条件 (9)1.3该城市垃圾的处理概况 (10)1.3.1 垃圾成分 (11)1.3.2 垃圾处理状况及存在问题 (11)1.4设计的必要性及依据 (15)1.4.1 设计的必要性 (15)1.4.2 设计的依据 (15)1.5设计的主要内容 (16)1.6本章小结 (16)第2章总体设计 (17)2.1填埋方案的确定 (17)2.2 设计规模 (18)2.2.1 服务人口 (18)2.2.2 垃圾产量 (18)2.3 场址选择 (19)2.3.1 填埋场址的选择原则 (19)2.3.2 垃圾填埋场场址的确定 (20)2.4 本章小结 (20)第3章垃圾收运系统 (21)3.1 垃圾的收运原则 (21)3.2 垃圾收运规模 (21)3.3 垃圾收运现状及设计收运方案的确定 (22)3.4 本章小结 (23)第4章垃圾处理场工程设计 (24)4.1 垃圾处理场的组成 (24)4.2 卫生填埋场工程设计 (24)4.2.1 垃圾场总库容及使用年限的确定 (24)4.2.2 垃圾坝 (24)4.2.3 渗滤液的收集系统 (26)4.2.4 渗滤液处理设备尺寸的计算 (37)4.2.5 填埋气导排 (48)4.2.6 终期封场 (49)4.3 配套工程 (50)4.3.1 道路工程 (50)4.3.2 围墙与绿化工程 (50)4.3.3 给水工程 (51)4.3.4 消防工程 (51)4.3.5 防洪工程 (51)4.3.6 防震工程 (51)4.3.7 通讯工程 (51)4.3.8 电气工程 (52)4.3.9 垃圾场主要机械设备 (52)4.4 本章小结 (52)第5章环境保护与环境监测 (53)5.1 环境保护 (53)5.1.1 污染来源 (53)5.1.2 环境保护标准和规定 (54)5.1.3 环境保护措施 (54)5.2 环境监测 (55)5.3 本章小结 (56)总结 (57)致谢 (60)参考文献 (61)英文翻译 (62)中文译文： (68)第1章概论1.1设计背景1.1.1生活垃圾的危害随着经济的发展，人们生活消费水平的提高，城市的生活垃圾产生量日渐增加。

外文文献翻译原文+译文

外文文献翻译原文Analysis of Con tin uous Prestressed Concrete BeamsChris BurgoyneMarch 26, 20051、IntroductionThis conference is devoted to the development of structural analysis rather than the strength of materials, but the effective use of prestressed concrete relies on an appropriate combination of structural analysis techniques with knowledge of the material behaviour. Design of prestressed concrete structures is usually left to specialists; the unwary will either make mistakes or spend inordinate time trying to extract a solution from the various equations.There are a number of fundamental differences between the behaviour of prestressed concrete and that of other materials. Structures are not unstressed when unloaded; the design space of feasible solutions is totally bounded；in hyperstatic structures, various states of self-stress can be induced by altering the cable profile, and all of these factors get influenced by creep and thermal effects. How were these problems recognised and how have they been tackled?Ever since the development of reinforced concrete by Hennebique at the end of the 19th century (Cusack 1984), it was recognised that steel and concrete could be more effectively combined if the steel was pretensioned, putting the concrete into compression. Cracking could be reduced, if not prevented altogether, which would increase stiffness and improve durability. Early attempts all failed because the initial prestress soon vanished, leaving the structure to be- have as though it was reinforced; good descriptions of these attempts are given by Leonhardt (1964) and Abeles (1964).It was Freyssineti’s observations of the sagging of the shallow arches on three bridges that he had just completed in 1927 over the River Allier near Vichy which led directly to prestressed concrete (Freyssinet 1956). Only the bridge at Boutiron survived WWII (Fig 1). Hitherto, it had been assumed that concrete had a Young’s modulus which remained fixed, but he recognised that the de- ferred strains due to creep explained why the prestress had been lost in the early trials. Freyssinet (Fig. 2) also correctly reasoned that high tensile steel had to be used, so that some prestress would remain after the creep had occurred, and alsothat high quality concrete should be used, since this minimised the total amount of creep. The history of Freyssineti’s early prestressed concrete work is written elsewhereFigure1:Boutiron Bridge,Vic h yFigure 2: Eugen FreyssinetAt about the same time work was underway on creep at the BRE laboratory in England ((Glanville 1930) and (1933)). It is debatable which man should be given credit for the discovery of creep but Freyssinet clearly gets the credit for successfully using the knowledge to prestress concrete.There are still problems associated with understanding how prestressed concrete works, partly because there is more than one way of thinking about it. These different philosophies are to some extent contradictory, and certainly confusing to the young engineer. It is also reflected, to a certain extent, in the various codes of practice.Permissible stress design philosophy sees prestressed concrete as a way of avoiding cracking by eliminating tensile stresses; the objective is for sufficient compression to remain after creep losses. Untensionedreinforcement, which attracts prestress due to creep, is anathema. This philosophy derives directly from Freyssinet’s logic and is primarily a working stress concept.Ultimate strength philosophy sees prestressing as a way of utilising high tensile steel as reinforcement. High strength steels have high elastic strain capacity, which could not be utilised when used as reinforcement; if the steel is pretensioned, much of that strain capacity is taken out before bonding the steel to the concrete. Structures designed this way are normally designed to be in compression everywhere under permanent loads, but allowed to crack under high live load. The idea derives directly from the work of Dischinger (1936) and his work on the bridge at Aue in 1939 (Schonberg and Fichter 1939), as well as that of Finsterwalder (1939). It is primarily an ultimate load concept. The idea of partial prestressing derives from these ideas.The Load-Balancing philosophy, introduced by T.Y. Lin, uses prestressing to counter the effect of the permanent loads (Lin 1963). The sag of the cables causes an upward force on the beam, which counteracts the load on the beam. Clearly, only one load can be balanced, but if this is taken as the total dead weight, then under that load the beam will perceive only the net axial prestress and will have no tendency to creep up or down.These three philosophies all have their champions, and heated debates take place between them as to which is the most fundamental.2、Section designFrom the outset it was recognised that prestressed concrete has to be checked at both the working load and the ultimate load. For steel structures, and those made from reinforced concrete, there is a fairly direct relationship between the load capacity under an allowable stress design, and that at the ultimate load under an ultimate strength design. Older codes were based on permissible stresses at the working load; new codes use moment capacities at the ultimate load. Different load factors are used in the two codes, but a structure which passes one code is likely to be acceptable under the other.For prestressed concrete, those ideas do not hold, since the structure is highly stressed, even when unloaded. A small increase of load can cause some stress limits to be breached, while a large increase in load might be needed to cross other limits. The designer has considerable freedom to vary both the working load and ultimate load capacities independently; both need to be checked.A designer normally has to check the tensile and compressive stresses, in both the top and bottom fibre of the section, for every load case. The critical sections are normally, but not always, the mid-span and the sections over piers but other sections may become critical ，when the cable profile has to be determined.The stresses at any position are made up of three components, one of which normally has a different sign from the other two; consistency of sign convention is essential.If P is the prestressing force and e its eccentricity, A and Z are the area of the cross-section and its elastic section modulus, while M is the applied moment, then where ft and fc are the permissible stresses in tension and compression.c e t f ZM Z P A P f ≤-+≤Thus, for any combination of P and M , the designer already has four in- equalities to deal with.The prestressing force differs over time, due to creep losses, and a designer isusually faced with at least three combinations of prestressing force and moment;• the applied moment at the time the prestress is first applied, before creep losses occur,• the maximum applied moment after creep losses, and• the minimum applied moment after creep losses.Figure 4: Gustave MagnelOther combinations may be needed in more complex cases. There are at least twelve inequalities that have to be satisfied at any cross-section, but since an I-section can be defined by six variables, and two are needed to define the prestress, the problem is over-specified and it is not immediately obvious which conditions are superfluous. In the hands of inexperienced engineers, the design process can be very long-winded. However, it is possible to separate out the design of the cross-section from the design of the prestress. By considering pairs of stress limits on the same fibre, but for different load cases, the effects of the prestress can be eliminated, leaving expressions of the form:rangestress e Perm issibl Range Mom entZ These inequalities, which can be evaluated exhaustively with little difficulty, allow the minimum size of the cross-section to be determined.Once a suitable cross-section has been found, the prestress can be designed using a construction due to Magnel (Fig.4). The stress limits can all be rearranged into the form:()M fZ PA Z e ++-≤1 By plotting these on a diagram of eccentricity versus the reciprocal of the prestressing force, a series of bound lines will be formed. Provided the inequalities (2) are satisfied, these bound lines will always leave a zone showing all feasible combinations of P and e. The most economical design, using the minimum prestress, usually lies on the right hand side of the diagram, where the design is limited by the permissible tensile stresses.Plotting the eccentricity on the vertical axis allows direct comparison with the crosssection, as shown in Fig. 5. Inequalities (3) make no reference to the physical dimensions of the structure, but these practical cover limits can be shown as wellA good designer knows how changes to the design and the loadings alter the Magnel diagram. Changing both the maximum andminimum bending moments, but keeping the range the same, raises and lowers the feasible region. If the moments become more sagging the feasible region gets lower in the beam.In general, as spans increase, the dead load moments increase in proportion to the live load. A stage will be reached where the economic point (A on Fig.5) moves outside the physical limits of the beam; Guyon (1951a) denoted the limiting condition as the critical span. Shorter spans will be governed by tensile stresses in the two extreme fibres, while longer spans will be governed by the limiting eccentricity and tensile stresses in the bottom fibre. However, it does not take a large increase in moment ，at which point compressive stresses will govern in the bottom fibre under maximum moment.Only when much longer spans are required, and the feasible region moves as far down as possible, does the structure become governed by compressive stresses in both fibres.3、Continuous beamsThe design of statically determinate beams is relatively straightforward; the engineer can work on the basis of the design of individual cross-sections, as outlined above. A number of complications arise when the structure is indeterminate which means that the designer has to consider, not only a critical section,but also the behaviour of the beam as a whole. These are due to the interaction of a number of factors, such as Creep, Temperature effects and Construction Sequence effects. It is the development of these ideas whichforms the core of this paper. The problems of continuity were addressed at a conference in London (Andrew and Witt 1951). The basic principles, and nomenclature, were already in use, but to modern eyes concentration on hand analysis techniques was unusual, and one of the principle concerns seems to have been the difficulty of estimating losses of prestressing force.3.1 Secondary MomentsA prestressing cable in a beam causes the structure to deflect. Unlike the statically determinate beam, where this motion is unrestrained, the movement causes a redistribution of the support reactions which in turn induces additional moments. These are often termed Secondary Moments, but they are not always small, or Parasitic Moments, but they are not always bad.Freyssinet’s bridge across the Marne at Luzancy, started in 1941 but not completed until 1946, is often thought of as a simply supported beam, but it was actually built as a two-hinged arch (Harris 1986), with support reactions adjusted by means of flat jacks and wedges which were later grouted-in (Fig.6). The same principles were applied in the later and larger beams built over the same river.Magnel built the first indeterminate beam bridge at Sclayn, in Belgium (Fig.7) in 1946. The cables are virtually straight, but he adjusted the deck profile so that the cables were close to the soffit near mid-span. Even with straight cables the sagging secondary momentsare large; about 50% of the hogging moment at the central support caused by dead and live load.The secondary moments cannot be found until the profile is known but the cablecannot be designed until the secondary moments are known. Guyon (1951b) introduced the concept of the concordant profile, which is a profile that causes no secondary moments; es and ep thus coincide. Any line of thrust is itself a concordant profile.The designer is then faced with a slightly simpler problem; a cable profile has to be chosen which not only satisfies the eccentricity limits (3) but is also concordant. That in itself is not a trivial operation, but is helped by the fact that the bending moment diagram that results from any load applied to a beam will itself be a concordant profile for a cable of constant force. Such loads are termed notional loads to distinguish them from the real loads on the structure. Superposition can be used to progressively build up a set of notional loads whose bending moment diagram gives the desired concordant profile.3.2 Temperature effectsTemperature variations apply to all structures but the effect on prestressed concrete beams can be more pronounced than in other structures. The temperature profile through the depth of a beam (Emerson 1973) can be split into three components for the purposes of calculation (Hambly 1991). The first causes a longitudinal expansion, which is normally released by the articulation of the structure; the second causes curvature which leads to deflection in all beams and reactant moments in continuous beams, while the third causes a set of self-equilibrating set of stresses across the cross-section.The reactant moments can be calculated and allowed-for, but it is the self- equilibrating stresses that cause the main problems for prestressed concrete beams. These beams normally have high thermal mass which means that daily temperature variations do not penetrate to the core of the structure. The result is a very non-uniform temperature distribution across the depth which in turn leads to significant self-equilibrating stresses. If the core of the structure is warm, while the surface is cool, such as at night, then quite large tensile stresses can be developed on the top and bottom surfaces. However, they only penetrate a very short distance into the concrete and the potential crack width is very small. It can be very expensive to overcome the tensile stress by changing the section or the prestress。

(完整word版)外文文献及翻译doc

Criminal Law1.General IntroductionCriminal law is the body of the law that defines criminal offenses, regulates the apprehension, charging, and trial of suspected offenders,and fixes punishment for convicted persons. Substantive criminal law defines particular crimes, and procedural law establishes rules for the prosecution of crime. In a democratic society, it is the function of the legislative bodies to decide what behavior will be made criminal and what penalties will be attached to violations of the law.Capital punishment may be imposed in some jurisdictions for the most serious crimes. And physical or corporal punishment may still be imposed such as whipping or caning, although these punishments are prohibited in much of the world. A convict may be incarcerated in prison or jail and the length of incarceration may vary from a day to life.Criminal law is a reflection of the society that produce it. In an Islamic theocracy, such as Iran, criminal law will reflect the religious teachings of the Koran; in an Catholic country, it will reflect the tenets of Catholicism. In addition, criminal law will change to reflect changes in society, especially attitude changes. For instance, use of marijuana was once considered a serious crime with harsh penalties, whereas today the penalties in most states are relatively light. As severity of the penaltieswas reduced. As a society advances, its judgments about crime and punishment change.2.Elements of a CrimeObviously, different crimes require different behaviors, but there are common elements necessary for proving all crimes. First, the prohibited behavior designated as a crime must be clearly defined so that a reasonable person can be forewarned that engaging in that behavior is illegal. Second, the accused must be shown to have possessed the requisite intent to commit the crime. Third, the state must prove causation. Finally, the state must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant committed the crime.(1) actus reusThe first element of crime is the actus reus.Actus is an act or action and reus is a person judicially accused of a crime. Therefore, actus reus is literally the action of a person accused of a crime. A criminal statute must clearly define exactly what act is deemed “guilty”---that is, the exact behavior that is being prohibited. That is done so that all persons are put on notice that if they perform the guilty act, they will be liable for criminal punishment. Unless the actus reus is clearly defined, one might not know whether or not on e’s behavior is illegal.Actus reus may be accomplished by an action, by threat of action,or exceptionally, by an omission to act, which is a legal duty to act. For example, the act of Cain striking Abel might suffice, or a parent’s failure to give to a young child also may provide the actus reus for a crime.Where the actus reus is a failure to act, there must be a duty of care. A duty can arise through contract, a voluntary undertaking, a blood relation, and occasionally through one’s official position. Duty also can arise from one’s own creation of a dangerous situation.(2)mens reaA second element of a crime is mens rea. Mens rea refers to an individual’s state of mind when a crime is committed. While actus reus is proven by physical or eyewitness evidence, mens rea is more difficult to ascertain. The jury must determine for itself whether the accused had the necessary intent to commit the act.A lower threshold of mens rea is satisfied when a defendant recognizes an act is dangerous but decides to commit it anyway. This is recklessness. For instance, if Cain tears a gas meter from a wall, and knows this will let flammable gas escape into a neighbor’s house, he could be liable for poisoning. Courts often consider whether the actor did recognise the danger, or alternatively ought to have recognized a danger (though he did not) is tantamount to erasing intent as a requirement. In this way, the importance of mens rea hasbeen reduced in some areas of the criminal law.Wrongfulness of intent also may vary the seriousness of an offense. A killing committed with specific intent to kill or with conscious recognition that death or serious bodily harm will result, would be murder, whereas a killing affected by reckless acts lacking such a consciousness could be manslaughter.(3)CausationThe next element is causation. Often the phrase “but for”is used to determine whether causation has occurred. For example, we might say “Cain caused Abel”, by which we really mean “Cain caused Abel’s death. ”In other words, ‘but for Cain’s act, Abel would still be alive.” Causation, then, means “but for” the actions of A, B would not have been harmed. In criminal law, causation is an element that must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt.(4) Proof beyond a Reasonable DoubtIn view of the fact that in criminal cases we are dealing with the life and liberty of the accused person, as well as the stigma accompanying conviction, the legal system places strong limits on the power of the state to convict a person of a crime. Criminal defendants are presumed innocent. The state must overcome this presumption of innocence by proving every element of the offense charged against the defendant beyond a reasonable doubt to thesatisfaction of all the jurors. This requirement is the primary way our system minimizes the risk of convicting an innocent person.The state must prove its case within a framework of procedural safeguards that are designed to protect the accused. The state’s failure to prove any material element of its case results in the accused being acquitted or found not guilty, even though he or she may actually have committed the crime charged.3. Strict LiabilityIn modern society, some crimes require no more mens rea, and they are known as strict liability offenses. For in stance, under the Road Traffic Act 1988 it is a strict liability offence to drive a vehicle with an alcohol concentration above the prescribed limit.Strict liability can be described as criminal or civil liability notwithstanding the lack mens rea or intent by the defendant. Not all crimes require specific intent, and the threshold of culpability required may be reduced. For example, it might be sufficient to show that a defendant acted negligently, rather than intentionally or recklessly.1. 概述刑法是规定什么试犯罪，有关犯罪嫌疑人之逮捕、起诉及审判，及对已决犯处以何种刑罚的部门法。