Int J Interact Des Manuf(2008)2:225–232
DOI10.1007/s12008-008-0052-6
INDUSTRIAL PAPER
Usability factors to be considered in a simulation tool while designing production system
B.N.Shishir Bhat
Received:7July2008/Revised:16September2008/Accepted:16September2008/Published online:7October2008?Springer-Verlag2008
Abstract An approach to the use of simulation software in production system design uses it as an expert tool to assist system designers in a one off design.A user centered app-roach,in contrast,uses simulation software to support teams of users to make key decisions about system design.In addi-tion,it provides support for continued improvement and deve-lopment activities by the users.In order to achieve these aims, the software must be easily usable by users,involve clear gra-phics to act as a prototyping tool,and be suf?ciently robust to work within an industrial context.This paper describes three industrial experiences in the design and implementation of team based cellular manufacturing employing standard simu-lation software packages and accompanying standard partici-patory design techniques.Each failed to achieve the intended goal of user centered system design.Re?ecting on this expe-rience,principles for software and design techniques capable of realizing user centered simulation objective are offered. Keywords Simulation·User centered·Case study·Evaluation
1Introduction
As the rate of process innovation continues to increase, there is increasing demand for techniques to reduce the ‘time-to-operation’of new production systems.One form in B.N.Shishir Bhat
Department of Mechanical Engineering,
Dr M.G.R.University,Chennai,India
B.N.Shishir Bhat(B)
#219,6th Main,2nd Block,Kalyan Nagar,
Bangalore560043,Karnataka,India
e-mail:shishirbn@https://www.doczj.com/doc/2d7575909.html,;shishirbn@https://www.doczj.com/doc/2d7575909.html, which this occurs is the use of simulation software to assist in modeling the operation of new systems before building pro-totypes,pilots or actual working systems.The achievement of successes using such software,and its future potential,is dif?cult to question.What is more controversial,however, is the manner and purpose for which simulation software is developed and used.An approach to simulation software uses it as an expert tool to assist system designers in one off design. Such an approach has severe limitations for those concerned to develop and use new software systems as an aid to infor-ming end users and increase their input into design.From such a perspective,a more‘user centered’approach to simu-lation uses simulation software to support teams of users in making key decisions about system design and support conti-nued improvement and development activities by users.This paper is concerned to develop further the idea of user centered approaches to simulation.It will outline the background to the project,and provide case studies of the use of simulation for user centered system design in this paper.The experience will then be evaluated against a more developed model of user centered simulation requirements.In conclusion,soft-ware design principles and techniques will be presented to assist in the further development of simulation software.
2Project description
From the user centered perspective the main importance of simulation is its ability to allow user input into system design, particularly by rapidly prototyping new systems through the creation of realistic working models that encourage unders-tanding and intervention by users.In the process,the concept of a user centered approach to simulation was further clari-?ed and the importance recognized by the way in which the software is used in the design process.The following case
226 B.N.Shishir Bhat
studies illustrate the problems and issues that are raised in attempts to implement user centered simulation ideas.
The project is the?rst major joint research-industry pro-ject in a gear manufacturing company that addresses the need to integrate technical and organizational factors in production system design and which develops methodologies to assist in this integration process.The objectives of the project are to: (1)design and implement team based manufacturing cells in 3companies;(2)document and report on techniques to assist the introduction of cellular manufacturing;(3)transfer manu-facturing knowledge between companies.The project speci-?cally aims to introduce team-based cellular manufacturing as a key objective is to develop better techniques for integra-ting technical and organizational considerations into system design.Cellular manufacturing is an established approach in the design of batch production systems which simpli?es material?ows and rationalizes machine set-up times.It has also been introduced in the area of assembly.This facility layout approach is accompanied by the introduction of semi-autonomous work groups in order to more fully realize the bene?ts offered by cellular manufacturing.In Europe team based manufacturing cells have been described as“produc-tion islands”and have become a symbol of the European response to the Japanese challenge of lean production sys-tems[9].
One dimension of the project was a review of available simulation software and methods in order to determine their usefulness in facilitating the introduction of team based cel-lular manufacturing.One area of particular interest to the people was the extent to which the simulation packages could support users in participative system design so that,there was a focus on graphics capability and usability.The simulation modeling was therefore evaluated both in terms of its tech-nical capability of accurately modeling production systems, and in terms of its visualization ability to assist communica-tion about the nature of a proposed system and to aid in the discussion,evaluation and improvement of a design.
3Literature review
3.1Development of simulation as a design tool
The genesis of simulation lies in the spreading of Operational Research techniques in the post World War II period.This period also saw initial developments in formal design metho-dologies in areas of architecture and engineering.Design was seen as a process that could be represented as a set of proce-dures.Checklists of design tasks which appeared in the?fties were popular as early normative models of the design pro-cess.Simulation offered the additional advantage of concur-rent development of system components so that training of users could proceed in parallel with the development of the system itself[1].Subsequently simulation modeling has been used as an aid in the planning and development of manufactu-ring systems[2].Manufacturing processes consist of discrete events and initially high-level programming languages,such as Fortran,Pascal and Modula,were used to create simula-tions of these.More recently,speci?c discrete event simula-tion languages(e.g.GPSS,SIMSCRIPT and SIMAN)and manufacturing simulation programs like Witness,AUTO-MOD,etc.have been developed to facilitate modeling in this area.
While physical models remain an effective approach for many forms of simulation,the widening availability of computer-based modeling techniques has resulted in the construction and dissemination of increasingly sophisticated mathematical models[4].For example in areas such as aeron-autical engineering where formerly full scale pre-production prototypes were used to test concepts,mathematical models are increasingly being substituted,with consequent advan-tage in time and cost.During the1950s the difference in performance between hand built prototype military aircraft and the initial production models constructed using expen-sive manufacturing jigs meant that the prototypes were no longer reliable predictors of the performance of the produc-tion models[6].A response to two related and central pro-blems in simulation are:the selection of an appropriate form of simpli?cation for the model and its resulting adequacy in relation to reality.
3.2Simpli?cation for simulation:values and complexity
A key issue in any model building activity is the balance between simpli?cation of reality and retention of suf?cient relevant detail to make the output of the model a meaning-ful and reliable guide to real world behavior[9].Ultimately only a systemic test in the real world can achieve full corres-pondence between simulation and actual performance,and while systemic testing may be a valid strategy in certain circumstances,it is generally associated by cost.Simula-tion therefore operates with a reduced model of the situation under consideration.The strategy for simpli?cation will be guided by the speci?c purpose of the model.The assump-tions used in achieving dramatic simpli?cation,and in par-ticular in generating the relationships between components in mathematical models,are usually presented as the result of a rational value free process.While value assumptions may be concealed within the formulae of a model,the real world system itself is as likely to conceal complex and criti-cal relationships and variables.In research and development such hidden complexities are revealed by the tribulations of the translation from laboratory environment to production environment[7].Adequate understanding and appropriate simpli?cation is impossible in the classes of complexly interactive and tightly coupled systems like“high-risk
Usability factors to be considered in a simulation tool while designing production system227
technologies”.High technology systems cannot be adequa-tely modeled since our understanding of their behavior is too inadequate to either allow appropriate simpli?cation or to evaluate the performance of models against expectations. Buffers and safety devices are added by designers to cope with expected complexity,however,these measures them-selves involve adding more components and creating more possible https://www.doczj.com/doc/2d7575909.html,plex interactions generally are unintended or unanticipated sequences and are either not visible or immediately comprehensible.In a complex plant, many subsidiary controls are automated,intending to leave user operators with only the main parameters to worry about, but this is achieved at the cost of?exibility[2].In view of the above concerns,this paper proceeds from three rela-ted assumptions that:users must be involved in the trade-offs implicit in the simpli?cation involved in modeling,that they must understand the implicit values which underlie such choices and that the resulting simulation must be approached as a supportive tool,not as a decision-making tool.
The development of a user centered approach to simu-lation in this paper draws strongly upon the user centered design tradition in Europe[3,4].From within this tradition, user centered objectives are commonly used to refer to pro-duction technology,socio-technical production systems, and/or strategic production objectives.In addition,it involves a speci?c vision of the design process.involved in esta-blishing such systems and realizing these objectives.Thus, while skill based design is strongly rooted in a technology design strategy,it is against the general orientation of this design approach to restrict its scope to technical system design.All four features of skill based automation are ulti-mately interlinked in a vision of new production systems that emphasizes the necessity and desirability of developing systems that have as a key component the utilization and enhancement of direct production skills[10].In computer system design the emphasis is on computer‘support’of wor-ker initiative and group work,and the creation of‘transpa-rent’‘tools’for use by users skilled in the production area in which they are to be deployed.In European initiatives to promote‘user centered’technologies,the‘user’is placed at the‘centre’of such systems in a vision of production that both draws upon and develops traditional images of‘craft’work and‘organic’forms of production[5].The image of the user centered factory of the future is centered on‘computer aided crafts people’rather than monitoring and error recovery personnel maintaining an independent integrated manufactu-ring system.The information potential of new technologies is utilized to the maximum to assist skilled operators to make crucial judgments concerning system operation and develop-ment.The solution to the problems of manufacture are sought in creating technology to develop and support user creati-vity,interaction,communication and skills in computer and user integrated manufacturing or computer aided production systems not removing system dependence upon user skills through maximum automation,computer guided systems or computer integrated manufacture.
4Case studies
Because of space restrictions here,the following case studies are only brief overviews.Each case study was conducted at the manufacturing site of a collaborating industry partner. Company A is a manufacturer of irrigation equipment and the project involved the further development of plastics compo-nents manufacturing within https://www.doczj.com/doc/2d7575909.html,pany B manufactures automotive components and the sub-project aimed to make the assembly of automobile instrument panels into cellular mode(replacing a moving assembly line).Company C is a white goods manufacturer wherein the project the press shop is in cellular mode.
4.1Company A
In this company,the engineering design of a manufacturing cell was transformed from a set of engineering drawings into a three dimensional dynamic model with the use of the AUTOMOD package.The model took about one week to produce.The aim of the exercise was to produce a relatively accurate visual model of cell operations to assist communi-cation,selling and improvement of the cell design.As a tool for selling the concept and eliciting shop?oor input into the design,the project was a dramatic success.Once created,the model was shown to the whole cell team,and discussion was encouraged.The most direct result was a statement by the cell team that they now realized what the concept was about,and far greater commitment was given to the cell concept.In addi-tion,the cell team contributed a number of suggestions for the improvement of the layout design that had not been taken into consideration by the designers,and the changes were subse-quently implemented.This lesson was so effective,that when the simulation software was used next in another company introducing cells,the visual working model was displayed to the whole factory using a large overhead screen.
4.2Company B
After some abortive initial attempts,this sub-project was initiated with the establishment of a cross-functional team to design the assembly process for a new model instrument panel.The team included company engineers and represen-tatives from the shop?oor.At the outset simulation was promoted as a useful design tool,and commenced an eva-luation of computer simulation software packages.However, the company team members had had no experience with this technique and there was some initial uncertainty about how simulation could help with the design process.Attempts were
228 B.N.Shishir Bhat
made to clarify the bene?ts of simulation,but the design team was not very receptive.As a result it was decided to proceed with the evaluation of the software and with the building of a model of the existing instrument panel assembly line(using SIMVIEW)offsite and largely independently of the team’s activities.Repeated attempts to demonstrate the model to the team failed,mainly because of a lack of available time and interest among the other team members.The overall aim of this proposal was“to build computer models of the current assembly line,and associated stock handling processes,in order to(a)identify,and explore key problems on the current line which are of relevance to the new assembly process,and (b)provide a basis for evaluating alternative assembly propo-sals”.While there was some agreement with the objectives of the proposal,the issue of timing was raised as a problem.This issue arose from the pressures of a new product launch and the tight deadlines imposed by the production schedule.It was argued that the simulation results would not be ready in suf?-cient time to in?uence the key decisions that had to be made on the assembly process(e.g.on the selection of assembly facilities and associated equipment).When the team began to consider different assembly process options,including the possibility of introducing work-in-progress buffers between assembly stages,the problem of meeting production sche-dules in a tightly coupled just-in-time delivery system was encountered.Again it was suggested that the various alterna-tives could be simulated and evaluated in terms of delivery performance.This was done and the results were presented to the team.The simulation exercise considered the effects of disturbances(e.g.line stoppages and stock-outs),and the subsequent recovery rates,on different assembly processes with and without buffers.The discussion of this analysis did in?uence the team members.It helped create an appreciation of the limitations of paced-line assembly and a wider accep-tance of the bene?ts of more?exible materials?ow arran-gements.The work of the team was prematurely concluded by the manager.He announced his solution to the problem, and imposed it on the team as a non-negotiable proposal. This proposal was later discarded(as a result of the failure of another engineering project in the plant)and a decision was made to revert to using the existing assembly line for the new model instrument panel.While a number of reports on the simulation modeling were later produced by the project team,these were not utilized by the company engineers in their development of the assembly process.
4.3Company C
When this sub-project commenced,a project implementa-tion team was established to coordinate the activities within the company.A sub-committee of this team,the simula-tion issues group,was formed to supervise the computer simulation of the pilot press cell.This group was chaired by a company manufacturing engineer.None of the com-pany members of the group had had any experience with simulation,and there was considerable confusion as to what exactly simulation was.A common belief among the group members was that the simulation exercise would help with the scheduling of cell operations.Others saw the exercise as a means of visualizing and demonstrating the proposed press cells in operation before they were created.They expected that the simulation exercise would produce a computer model in an“interactive visual format”that could be understood by all,including the shop?oor operators in the press shop.The main task as seen was“to evaluate the performance of the cell under different operating conditions in order to?nd the opti-mum combination of machines and operators”.The working was done off-site to build a simulation model(using WIT-NESS),and only visited the company to obtain production data for model building.Initially there was a major com-munication problem between the company’s manufacturing engineers and for the author.This situation was exacerba-ted by a lack of support from the manufacturing engineering manager.As a result,little progress was made at?rst.This problem was eventually resolved,later on the work was done on-site(thereby gaining a better understanding of the produc-tion process in the press shop),and a model was built which was demonstrated to the issues group.Although this model had only rudimentary graphics,the demonstration was well-received by those present particularly when the effects of simulating different“what if’scenarios were shown.
The model was progressively re?ned using production data,and through this a good working relationship developed between the author and the manufacturing engineers at Com-pany C.After some time,a“?nal”written report was produ-ced and tabled at a meeting of the issues group.This report presented the results of simulations of the pilot cell opera-ting under different conditions.With the tabling of this report, the chairman of the group concluded the simulation exercise. There were mixed reactions to the exercise and its outcomes at the company.The manufacturing engineers were basically happy with the outcome(the?ndings essentially con?rmed their own analysis of the cell’s operation).However,other staffs involved with the project were far from satis?ed.No graphical representation of the simulation model was develo-ped,and the model was never demonstrated to the operators in the press shop.The?nal report on the exercise was criticized as being“too long and incomprehensible”,and a widespread view was that the“process consumed valuable time for little return.”
5Lessons learned from case studies
As a result of the dif?culties encountered during the project, it is necessary to clarify the aims,objectives and issues of
Usability factors to be considered in a simulation tool while designing production system229
user centered approaches to simulation.This has occurred for two main reasons.Firstly,it has been observed that without a sustained input from user centered proponents,the use of simulation becomes led by a series of“non-decisions”in a direction that is far from user centered ideals.Secondly,this clari?cation of the ideas seeks to foster communication and debate with the more traditional engineering approaches to simulation.The following are some key insights and obser-vations that emerge from the ongoing process of re?ection on the projects.
5.1A vision of user centered simulation
Techno centric approaches to technology assume that where possible you build out a dependence on user and,where this is not possible,the system constrains user action.Within this perspective,simulation can be viewed as a‘quantita-tive machine’,assisting expert engineers to optimize sys-tem design some time before implementation.It removes reliance on engineer’s calculations,speeds up the process of calculation,and provides a?nal software check on engi-neers’calculations.Modelling is analytical,abstract,tidy and precise.Uncertainty is built out of the‘real world’by the creation of an internally consistent and certain(within its own terms)model of reality.The uncertainty that then emerges between the match of that model with reality is regar-ded as a technical question of accurate data collection and adequate testing https://www.doczj.com/doc/2d7575909.html,er centered approaches to technology attempt to promote user decision making and develop user creativity by developing transparent tools to support and enhance user judgment and enable and foster user autonomy.Within this perspective,simulation can be vie-wed as an action image generator creating visually modeled relationships that capture the necessary and fuzzy features. Simulation is carried out to provoke thought by communi-cating provisional designs in an iterative process,not create ?nal solutions through expert knowledge and rapid https://www.doczj.com/doc/2d7575909.html,er centered approaches should not be seen as‘anti-technology’,or even as opposed to the use of simulation as a ‘calculating machine’.The key issue is not prioritizing one capability of simulation(visualization)over another(quanti-tative analysis),but combining these capabilities in a simula-tion process that promotes rather than undermines the input of tacit knowledge,operator experience,and inter-disciplinary cross-departmental discussion in production system design. Underlying this approach are clearly philosophical diffe-rences about the nature of models(analytical and precise versus holistic and fuzzy etc.)and the nature of expertise (formal engineering skills versus tacit operation skills etc.) but these do not have to be presented as mutually exclusive in a way that many more romantic user centered advocates might wish.5.2Evaluation of projects
In order to meet the ideals of user centered simulation,the simulation model has to be both transparent and expressive of the knowledge and needs of?nal users.This can occur through understanding and participation at three stages: model creation,model evaluation and model modi?cation. At each of these stages,both the software and the modeling process should facilitate user understanding and participa-tion.While users may not need to learn the techniques of model building where experts are available,they should be able to engage in dialogues with the experts so that mutual learning occurs.In the case of Company A,the use made of AUTOMOD software increased the understanding and input by operators at the model evaluation stage.However,the complexity of the software made it dif?cult,if not impos-sible,for users to understand how the model was created or make it possible for them to make and assess their own modi-?cations.The process was very much one of presentation and guidance by expert engineers,while encouraging and facili-tating evaluation of an expert generated design before?nal expert presentation of the?nal design.Clearly this severely compromises the user centered ideal.Firstly,the narrowing of the range of alternatives through prior expert input of a selected model severely circumscribes the options available to users.If they had been involved in the creation of the model,there might have been a range of different options to consider.Moreover,in constructing the model,a series of modi?cations,adaptations and approximations have to be made-all of which become embodied in a?nal looking glossy model.This need to be understood by those evalua-ting the model,and the best way to understand these is to be active in the model creation.Similarly,noninvolvement in the?nal model modi?cation also makes it impossible for operators to know about or make judgments concerning the inevitable trade-offs as the design is modi?ed and adapted to suggestions for change.
The use of simulation in the assembly design process at Company B could be considered a partial success,in that it did have some in?uence on the conceptualization of the problem among the design team members.However,it did fail overall to play a signi?cant role in the decision-making on the adoption of an assembly process for the new model. The software used,SIMVIEW,has object-oriented animation and so provides a more user-friendly interface.But while the model of the assembly line was represented as colorful ani-mated graphics,this feature of the software was not utilized as the model itself was never used as a communication tool. As with previous case,the design team was not involved in building the model and neither did the assembly line opera-tors make any inputs into this process.The model-building in this sub-project was purely an expert-driven process and so did not meet the user centered ideal.The simulation exercise
230 B.N.Shishir Bhat
at Company C also can be seen as a partial success.A model was successfully developed using Witness that did closely represent the production process in the Press Shop,and the manufacturing engineers did?nd the results to be a useful corroboration of their own analysis.Furthermore,some of the potential of simulation for visualizing and analyzing pro-duction processes was recognized in the company when the model was demonstrated.However,this potential was never realized,the model got very little exposure and the exer-cise was widely seen within the company to be a waste of time.Again,this was an expert-driven approach to simula-tion modeling,the problematic aspects of which were exa-cerbated by poor communication between the“expert”and his“client”at the outset of the process.a wider range of actors than in conventional approaches.Under these condi-tions,such problems—if not addressed—can prove fatal to the achievement of the ideals.
5.3Discussion of the failures
In the case of Company A,a complex3D wire frame simulation package prevented substantial in?uence from semi-skilled operators in model construction and?nal modi-?cation.In addition,the lack of systematic consideration given by the simulation engineer and the project team to inte-grating workforce input at each of the stages of simulation, prevented any attempt to reduce these technical constraints through organization and training.At both the other compa-nies,a lack of prior experience of,and to a lesser extent a lack of preparedness to adopt new problem-solving methods, created a need for an initial education https://www.doczj.com/doc/2d7575909.html,munica-tion is an important issue here.The nature and bene?ts of simulation need to be conveyed to the industry partners in terms that they can readily relate to.Effective communica-tion in this context requires translation between the disparate cultures of the academy and industry.
At Company B,time was a major constraint and the design process was effectively hi-jacked by the Engineering Mana-ger who could see no immediate bene?t to be gained from simulation.At company C,the engineer was too narrowly task-focused and so was unable to enter into meaningful dialogues with the industry partners on the nature and rele-vance of simulation in the sub-project context.Both cases reveal the limitations of the technocratic approach to simu-lation modeling.The industry partners were not enrolled into the model-building process,there was no effective dia-logue among peers in the respective teams,and so no mutual learning occurred.The result was a failure to realize the powerful potential of simulation as a design and develop-ment tool.Problems such as these have been encountered in other design and development projects,as a perusal of the literatures which address the areas of project management and simulation will attest.However,to achieve the ideals of user centered design requires a broader view of problem-solving and the involvement of a wider range of actors than in conventional approaches.Under these conditions,such problems—if not addressed—can prove fatal to the achieve-ment of the ideals.
6Conclusions
The experiences of the project,combined with the re?ections discussed above,can be translated into a set of proposals for software design principles and design techniques.These proposals seek to provide a focus for learning,debate and a wider application of the insights gained from the project. 6.1Software design principles
User centeredness implies an up-front acknowledgment of the values incorporated into a model or simulation and recog-nition of the central role of user“components”in such simu-lation.Software speci?cations for user centered simulation must therefore follow a number of central principles.The translation of these design principles into software speci?ca-tions remains a necessary and urgent task.
6.1.1User factors paradigm
The user factors paradigm has crossed over into user compu-ter interaction from its origins as“Man–machine interface”design.As a consequence it is still informed by a view of individual performance in relation to the visual and physi-cal inputs and outputs of a computer system drawn from cognitive psychology.In considering the attitudes of desi-gners to the role of users within a system,the model of user and machine performance offered by the various ver-sion of Bevan’s,list is worth examination.The list enume-rates properties of systems across two columns:a left hand column representing machine attributes and a right hand column representing user attributes.It is on the right hand column that development in arti?cial intelligence techniques and the general availability of computer resources have made inroads since the original formulation of the list.A residual or default view of the user role has emerged.For example, arti?cial intelligence programming techniques make a form of machine learning a practical choice and a techno centric reading would regard those properties which remain under the user heading as simply a residual problem for systems designers.A user centered reading would see the automation of peripheral user tasks as an opportunity to focus on the implicit knowledge of the user activities not replaceable by machine as a core resource of the system.
Usability factors to be considered in a simulation tool while designing production system231
6.1.2Collaborative work paradigm
Relatively sophisticated models of user computer interaction have led to notions of user de?ned and adaptive interfaces which correspond to the incremental development and targe-ting requirements,although these usually retain assumptions of one-one person to machine relationships[5].The emer-gence of end user computing environments in commercial applications has given prominence to incremental and proto-typing based development approaches.These correspond to the use of prototyping tools in the development of user cente-red systems.Prototyping development cycles correspond to the prototyping of production cells,but the basic paradigm is still predominantly one person to one machine.Fortuna-tely Parmee[6]work on a social model of user computer interaction and the emerging?eld of research into Computer Supported Collaborative Work(CSCW)provides an alter-native[7].The emerging paradigm of social groups utilizing machines and of collective computer supported work in group situations is supportive of the objectives of user centered sys-tems development at the level of the Workgroup.
6.1.3Safety critical systems paradigm
A user centered philosophy requires the support of transpa-rent tools to support and enhance user judgment and to foster user autonomy.Van Schaik[8]in examining the requirement of robustness and transparency in life critical systems argues that systems that must be trusted must also allow full unders-tanding of processes they incorporate.In less life critical, but“enterprise”critical developments comparable require-ments are needed to ensure the trust and support of users. The models developed should allow reduced tightness of coupling or complexity of interaction or both.Flight simu-lators were used“off-line”to construct a system of rules by induction from considered expert responses to a variety of situations.Expert system software capable of applying these judgments in real time was then developed.Prototyping and simulation provide a corresponding“off-line”development environment for production systems.
6.2Design techniques
As we stated in the introduction,a user centered approach to simulation would provide software as a tool to support teams of users in their design and continuous improvement activi-ties.The key concept here is that of a team of peers engaged in the“cooperative design”of systems—computer systems, manufacturing systems,or assembly systems.These teams should be made up of different functional groups of engineers (all of whom would consider themselves as product or pro-cess“designers”)and shop?oor operators(the“end-users”of the systems being developed).To work effectively,a space in the organization and the design process needs to be created for the users to be able to act(“give voice”),dialogues should be developed and mutual learning should be encouraged.In this user centered design process,software should not only enhance the various skills of the cooperating team members (and not degrade or seek to replace them)but also be seen as “tools for expert users”(i.e.designed to be under the control of the people using them).To establish cooperative design teams that are able to utilize tools such as simulation effec-tively,requires commitment,cultural change and focused project management https://www.doczj.com/doc/2d7575909.html,anizational commitment is required to ensure that appropriate teams are formed and that these are given the necessary support for their activi-ties.Cultural change is necessary to ensure the breakdown of barriers across workplace cultures(e.g.between different functional groups of engineers,between engineers and shop ?oor employees,and between both groups and managers) in order to establish communication between them.Training is one means by which the breakdown in cultural barriers can be instigated and steered,and the adoption of procedural rules which realize the principles of“democratic dialogue”Shneiderman[9]is another.Project management methods ensure that cooperative design teams are able to work effecti-vely to achieve their assigned tasks.Such methods begin with the speci?cation of clearly-de?ned tasks,roles,authority and responsibility.They include systematic problem-solving pro-cedures and tools,including project mapping.Performance measures,project milestones and external review procedures are also project management tools.in conclusion,what we are arguing for here is that for simulation software to match the use-context of user centered system design,two major conditions need to be met.Firstly,the use context must be prepared;i.e.the cultural and organizational dimensions of cooperative design have to be established.Secondly,the soft-ware should be developed to be used as a tool in this context;
i.e.as an aid to cooperative decision-making that supports and does not usurp the knowledge and skills of the team actors engaged.
References
1.Mod:Human factors integration:an introductory guide,Version
1.2dated16August2000.Ministry of Defense,UK(2000)
2.Noyes,J.M.:Designing for humans,pp.215.Psychology Press,
Hove,UK.ISBN0-415-22721-6(2001)
3.Robertson,S.,Robertson,R.:Mastering the Requirements Pro-
cess.Addison-Wesley,Harlow,UK(1999)
4.Robertson,S.:Requirements trawling:techniques for discovering
https://www.doczj.com/doc/2d7575909.html,put.Stud.55,405–421(2001) 5.Hall,R.:Prototyping for usability of new technology.Int.J.Hum.
Comput.Stud.55,485–501(2001)
6.Parmee,I.C.:Improving problem de?nition through interactive
evolutionary computation.Arti?cial Intelligence for Engineering Design,Analysis and Manufacturing,vol.16(3),pp.185–202.
Cambridge University Press,Cambridge(2002)
232 B.N.Shishir Bhat
7.Maguire,M.C.:User Centered Requirements Handbook.EC Tele-
matics Applications Programme,Project TE2010RESPECT (Requirements Engineering and Speci?cation in Telematics),WP4 Deliverable D4.2,Version3.3,May(1998)
8.Van Schaik,P.:Involving users in the speci?cation of functiona-
lity using scenarios and model-based https://www.doczj.com/doc/2d7575909.html,rm.
Technol.18,455–466(1999)
9.Shneiderman,B.:Designing the user Interface:Strategies for Effec-
tive Human Computer Interaction,3rd edn.Addison-Wesley, Reading,MA(1998)
10.Bevan,N.:Industry standard usability tests.In:Brewster,S.,
Cawsey,A.,Cockton,G.(eds.)Human Computer Interaction199, vol.II,pp.107–108.British Computer Society,London(1999)
一、be going to 的用法点拨 be going to 是一种固定结构，它后面要接动词原形，用来表示按计划或安排要发生的动作，有时也可以表示推测将要或肯定会发生的动作，有"准备；打算"的意思。含有be going to 结构的句子中往往有表示将来的时间状语。例如： We are going to have a class meeting this afternoon.今天下午我们打算开班会。(安排) Look at the black clouds. It's going to rain.看那些乌云，快要下雨了。(推测) 二、be going to 在肯定句中的形式 be going to 结构中的助动词be很少用原形，它一般有三种形式，即：am , is , are 。当主语是I 时用am ；当主语是第三人称单数时用is；当主语是其他人称时用are。例如： I am going to buy something tomorrow morning.明天早上我要去买些东西。 She is going to see Mr. Wang this afternoon.她打算今天下午去看望王先生。 三、含be going to 的句子变否定句和一般疑问句的变法 由于句子中有助动词be，因此be going to 的否定句和一般疑问句的构成很容易，即在be (am, is, are) 的后面加上not 就构成了否定句；把be (am, is, are) 放到句首，在句末加问号就构成了一般疑问句，其答语为：Yes, 主语+ am/is/are. / No, 主语+ isn't/aren't. / No, I'm not.不过I am... 在改为一般疑问句时常常改为"Are you ....?"。例如： They are going to see the car factory next week. (肯定句) They are not going to see the car factory next week. (否定句) -Are they going to see the car factory next week? -Yes, they are. (No, they aren't.) (一般疑问句及其回答) 四、使用be going to 应注意的两点 1. There be 句型的be going to 结构为：There is / are going to be... (注意句型中going to 后面的be不能改为have。) 常用来表示将有某事发生。例如： There is going to be a football match next Saturday in our school.下周六我们学校将有一场足球比赛。 2. come, go, leave, arrive等表示位置移动的动词常用现在进行时表示将要发生的动作，它们很少与be going to 结构连用。例如： Miss Sun is coming tonight.今晚孙小姐要来。
beyond the reach of somebody在某人伸手够不着的地方Keep chemicals beyond the reach of children. fall in love with somebody开始爱上某人 I think I’m falling in love with your brother. flash a smile笑容一闪 She flashed a sudden smile at him. lie in 在于 The difficulty lies in providing sufficient evidence. make an attempt to do something努力……, 试图…… The climbers will make another attempt to reach the summit today. end with以……结束 The festival ended with fireworks. like clockwork极有规律性和准确性地，顺利地 The operation went like clockwork. loose end(s)尚待解决或解释的枝节问题 There are some annoying loose ends in the plot. miscarriage of justice审判不公, 误判 This failure contributed to the miscarriage of justice. take on开始具有或呈现(某种品质、形貌等)，以……面貌出现These insects can take on the color of their surroundings. without doubt 无疑地，确实地 Without doubt，he is a genius . under arrest 被捕，在押 A drug dealer was under arrest last night. back out不履行，打退堂鼓，食言 I hope I can depend on you not to back out at the last moment. catch on懂得；掌握\流行 He doesn’t take hints easily, but he’ll catch on eventually. fill in替代某人的工作 Sally is off sick. Can you fill in for her for a few days?
一、故事引入 杜牧的《清明》一诗“清明时节雨纷纷，路上行人欲断魂。借问酒家何处有，牧童遥指杏花村。”大家都很熟悉，但如果把标点符号改动一下，就成了另一作品。有人巧妙短句将其改成了一首词：“清明时节雨，纷纷路上，行人欲断魂。借问酒家何处？有牧童遥指，杏花村。”还有人改成了一首优美隽永的散文：“清明时节，雨纷纷。路上，行人欲断魂。借问酒家：“何处有牧童？”遥指杏花村。 又如，常有人在一路边大小便，有人就在那立了块牌子：过路人等不得在此大小便。立牌人的本意是：“过路人等，不得在此大小便。”可没有点标点符号，于是被人认为是：“过路人，等不得，在此大小便。” 类似的故事不胜枚举，诸如一客栈“下雨天留客天留我不留”的对联，祝枝山写给一财主的对联“今年正好晦气全无财富进门”。可见，标点符号的作用举足轻重。语文课程标准对小学各阶段学生应该掌握的标点符号作了明确的规定和说明。因此，作为小学语文教师，不但要咬文嚼字，教会学生正确使用标点符号也不容忽视。下面，我就简单谈谈一些易错的标点符号的用法。 二、易错标点符号的用法例谈 （一）问号 1、非疑问句误用问号 如：他问你明天去不去公园。虽然“明天去不去公园”是一个疑问，但这个问句在整个句子中已经作了“问”的宾语，而整个句
子是陈述的语气，句尾应该用句号。又如：“我不晓得经理的心里到底在想什么。”句尾也应该用句号。 2、选择问句，中间的停顿误用问号 比如：宴会上我是穿旗袍，还是穿晚礼服？这是个选择问句，中间“旗袍”的后面应该用逗号，而不用问号。再有：他是为剥削人民的人去死的，还是为人民的利益而死的？这个句中的停顿也应该用逗号。 3、倒装句中误把问号前置 像这样一个句子：到底该怎么办啊，这件事？原来的语序是：这件事到底该怎么办啊？ 倒装之后，主语放到了句末，像这种情况，一般问号还是要放在句末，表示全句的语气。 4、介于疑问和感叹语气之间的句子该如何使用标点符号 有的句子既有感叹语气，又有疑问的语气，这样的情况下，哪种语气强烈，就用哪个标点，如果确定两种语气的所占比重差不多，也可以同时使用问号和叹号。 （二）分号 1、句中未用逗号直接用分号 从标点符号的层次关系来看，应该是逗号之间的句子联系比较紧密，分号之间的句子则要差一个层次，这样看来，在一个句中，如果没有逗号径直用分号是错误的。比如：漓江的水真静啊，漓江的水真清啊，漓江的水真绿啊。这里句中的两处停顿就不能使用分号。再
be going to的用法 一、be going to 的用法 be going to是一种固定结构，它后面要接动词原形，用来表示按计划或安排要发生的动作，有时也可以表示推测将要或肯定会发生的动作，有"准备；打算"的意思。含有be going to 结构的句子中往往有表示将来的时间状语。例如：We are going to have a class meeting this afternoon. 今天下午我们打算开班会。(安排) Look at the black clouds. It's going to rain. 看那些乌云，快要下雨了。(推测) 二、be going to 在肯定句中的形式 be going to 结构中的助动词be很少用原形，它一般有三种形式，即：am , is , are 。当主语是 I 时用am ；当主语是第三人称单数时用is；当主语是其他人称时用are。例如： I am going to buy something tomorrow morning. 明天早上我要去买些东西。 She is going to see Mr. Wang this afternoon. 她打算今天下午去看望王先生。 三、使用be going to 应注意的两点 1.There be 句型的be going to 结构为：There is / are going to be... (注意句型中going to 后面的be不能改为have。) 常用来表示将有某 事发生。例如： There is going to be a football match next Saturday in our school. 下周六我们学校将有一场足球比赛。 https://www.doczj.com/doc/2d7575909.html,e, go, leave, arrive等表示位置移动的动词常用现在进行时表示 将要发生的动作，它们很少与be going to 结构连用。例如： Miss Chan is coming tonight. 今晚陈小姐要来。
Unit 1 1.I am trying to find my way to success 2.W e need to work on our skills. 3.W e will inform you in due course. 4.I n retrospect, I missed too much 5.I want to make up for what has been lost. 6.I did not in the least understand this principle. 7.o n occasion I feel learning is tired 8.O n the other hand, he is good at basketball 9.I picked up discipline in the university. 10.These facts throw light on the matter. 11.She would have died if the young man hadn't come to his rescue 12.The book was old and soon fell apart 13.From my point of view learning is very useful. 14.Lock up all the doors before you go out 15.I want to go on vacation 1. 背离传统需要很大的勇气。（departure, enormous）It takes enormous amount of courage to make a departure from the tradition.
If引导条件状语从句的详细用法解答 引导条件状语从句最常用的连词是if，常见的if条件状语从句表示在某条件下，某事很可能发生，条件是可能存在的，主句中某种情况发生的概率也是很高的。如： If you ask him，he will help you．如果你请他帮忙，他会帮你的。 If you fail in the exam，you will let him down．如果你考试不及格，你会让他失望的。 If you have finished the homework，you can go home．如果你作业做完了就可以回家了。 另外，if从句还表示不可实现的条件或根本不可能存在的条件，也就是一种虚拟的条件或假设。从句多用一般过去时或过去完成时，表示对现在或过去的一种假设。如： If I were you，I would invite him to the party．如果我是你，我会邀请他参加聚会。 I would have arrived much earlier if I had not been caught in the traffic．要不是交通堵塞，我本会来得早一些。 另外你还要注意if 条件句的时态搭配 1．if从句用一般现在时，主句用一般将来时 If he runs he’ll get there in time. 如果他用跑的，他就会及时赶到那儿。 The cat will scratch you if you pull her tail. 如果你拉猫的尾巴，它就会抓你。2．if从句用一般现在时，主句用may/might/can If the fog gets thicker the plane may/might be diverted. 如果雾在大一些，飞机可能就会改在别的机场降落。 If it stops snowing we can go out. 如果雪停了，我们就可以出去。 3．if从句用一般现在时，主句用must/should If you want to lose weight you must/should eat less bread. 如果你想减肥，你必须少吃面包。 4．if从句用一般现在时，主句用一般现在时 If you heat ice it turns to water. (也可用will turn)如果把冰加热，它就会化成水。5．if从句用现在进行时，主句用一般将来时 If you are looking for Peter you’ll find him upstairs. 如果你是在找彼得，上楼就会找到他。 6．if从句用现在完成时，主句用一般将来时 If you have finished dinner I’ll ask the waiter for the bill. 如果你吃完了，我就叫服务生来算账 注意： 学习" if " 引导的条件状语从句的用法,现在总结一下: if 条件句不一般,几个要点记心间; 条件句,放在前,逗号要放句中间。 条件句表可能，主句多用将来时； 条件句表事实，主句常用现在时。
编校一课丨连接号用法大全 《标点符号用法》新标准中，连接号删除长横线“——”，只保留三种形式：一字线“—”、半字线“-”、波纹线“～”。三种连接号的使用范围各不相同。一字线 一字线占一个字位置，比汉字“一”略长标示时间、地域等相 关项目间的起止或相关项之间递进式发展时使用一字线。例：1.沈括（1031—1095），宋朝人。 2.秦皇岛—沈阳将建成铁路客运专线。 3.人类的发展可以分为古猿—猿人—古人—新人这四个阶段半字线半字线也叫短横线，比汉字“一”略短，占半个字位置。用于产品型号、化合物名称、 代码及其他相关项目间的连接。例：1.铜-铁合金（化合物 名称） 2.见下图3-4（表格、插图编号） 3. 中关园3号院3-2-11室（门牌号） 4.010-********（电话号码） 5.1949-10-01（用阿拉伯数字表示年月日） 6.伏尔加河-顿河运河（复合名词）波纹线波纹线俗称波浪线，占一个字位置标示数值范围的起止时用波纹线，包括用阿拉伯数字表示的数值和由汉字数字构成的数值。例：1.10～30cm 2. 第七～九课常见问题1.在数值间使用连接号时，前后两个数值都需要加上计量单位吗？在标示数值范围时，用波纹线连接号。此时，在不引起歧义的情况下，只在后一数值后计量单位，用波纹线连接的两个
数值，其单位是一致的。例：500～1000公斤 2.“1996～现在”这样的用法对吗？不对。波纹线连接数字，“现在”不是数字，应改为“”到或“至”。“1996”后宜加“年”。 关注“木铎书声”，做优秀出版人木铎书声是北京师范大学出版科学研究院官方微信平台，致力于传播最新行业动态，促进出版职业人的发展。
一、单选be going to 的用法 (作业) discuss the plan, shall we? ( )1. —Let’s —Not now. I to school to meet Tom. A. go B. went C. am going D. was going ( )2. What are you going this weekend? A. do B. to do C. doing D. to doing ( )3. I swimming tomorrow. A. went B. am going to go C.go D. am going to going ( )4. There a concert on Qixing Square next Monday evening. A.is B. is going to C. is going to be D. is have ( )5. a big party in our school in two weeks. A. It is B. It be C. There was D. There is going to be 二、用所给动词的适当形式填空 6.Jim and Li Lei _ (watch) the football match this evening. 7. they (go) fishing this Friday afternoon? 8.—What you (do) tomorrow morning? —I’ｍ(see) my grandparents. 三、完成句子 9.We are going to play ping-pong on Saturday. (改为一般疑问句并 作否定回答) —going to play ping-pong on Saturday? 10.They are going to meet in the park. (就划线部分提问) 11.They are going to clean the classroom tomorrow. (就划线部分提问) they going tomorrow? 12.When is he going to take a trip? (tomorrow) (根据提示进行回答)
初中英语――条件状语从句 一．if 引导的条件状语从句 引导条件状语从句最常用的连词是if，常见的if条件状语从句表示在某条件下，某事很可能发生，条件是可能存在的，主句中某种情况发生的概率也是很高的。如： If you ask him，he will help you．如果你请他帮忙，他会帮你的。 If you fail in the exam，you will let him down．如果你考试不及格，你会让他失望的。 If you have finished the homework，you can go home．如果你作业做完了就可以回家了。 另外，if从句还表示不可实现的条件或根本不可能存在的条件，也就是一种虚拟的条件或假设。从句多用一般过去时或过去完成时，表示对现在或过去的一种假设。如： If I were you，I would invite him to the party．如果我是你，我会邀请他参加聚会。 I would have arrived much earlier if I had not been caught in the traffic．要不是交通堵塞，我本会来得早一些。 另外你还要注意if 条件句的时态搭配 1．if从句用一般现在时，主句用一般将来时 If he runs, he’ll get there in time. 如果他用跑的，他就会及时赶到那儿。 The cat will scratch you if you pull her tail. 如果你拉猫的尾巴，它就会抓你。 2．if从句用一般现在时，主句用may/might/can If the fog gets thicker, the plane may/might be diverted. 如果雾在大一些，飞机可能就会改在别的机场降落。 If it stops snowing, we can go out. 如果雪停了，我们就可以出去。 3．if从句用一般现在时，主句用must/should If you want to lose weight, you must/should eat less bread. 如果你想减肥，你必须少吃面包。4．if从句用一般现在时，主句用一般现在时 If you heat ice, it turns to water. (也可用will turn)如果把冰加热，它就会化成水。 5．if从句用现在进行时，主句用一般将来时 If you are looking for Peter, you’ll find him upstairs. 如果你是在找彼得，上楼就会找到他。6．if从句用现在完成时，主句用一般将来时 If you have finished dinner, I’ll ask the waiter for the bill. 如果你吃完了，我就叫服务生来算账注意： 学习" if " 引导的条件状语从句的用法,现在总结一下: if 条件句不一般,几个要点记心间; 条件句,放在前,逗号要放句中间。 条件句表可能，主句多用将来时； 条件句表事实，主句常用现在时。 在if 引导的条件状语从句中，如果从句谈论的是一个有可能发生的事实及其产生的相关的结果，主句用一般将来时态，从句用一般现在时态。如： We can walk there if we can't find a bus. If it rains tomorrow, we will not go to the zoo. What will you do if you find a panda in danger? 如果if 条件句谈论的是重复发生和预示要发生的情景和事件，则主从句大多用一般现在时态。如： If bears are in danger, they attack people. 在if 引导的条件状语从句中，if 和条件句位置灵活，可直接放在主句后面，若if 条件句放句首，从句后面要加逗号，和主句隔开。还要注意前后时态一致原则
be going to 句型的用法 1. 意义：be going to是"一般将来时"的一种表现形式，表示将 来某个时间将要发生的动作或存在的状态，意思为"打算，将要"。 其中"be"会根据主语的人称变化成"is,am,are"等形式。"to"跟在它后面的动词必须是动词原形。通常和tomorrow, this evening(week/ year…), next week(Sunday…)等连用 2. 结构：主语+be(am/is/are)+going to+动词原形 （系动词（am/is/are）的用法：我（I）用am,你（you）用are, is 连着他（he）她(she)它(it),凡是复数都用are） 3.肯定句：主语+be(am/is/are)+going to +动词原形 A.He is going to buy a book after school. B. I am going to climb mountains. 4.否定句：在系动词（am/is/are）后+not A. He isn’t going to buy a book after school. 5.一般疑问句：Be+主语+going to +动词原形（把系动词提到主语前面） A.Is he going to buy a book after school? -----No, he isn’t. B.Are you going to climb mountains? ------Yes, I am.(变一般疑问句时，第一人称变为第二人称) 6.特殊疑问句：疑问词+be +主语+going to +动词原形 He is going to have a picnic next Sunday. 下个星期天他打算去野餐。 ---What is he going to do next Sunday? ----When is he going to have a picnic?
连接号用法之深入辨析 王曜卿 第二轮修志，各地都是衔接上届志书的下限编修续志，续志书名也是千篇一律：在书名下加上断限。书名下断限的书写格式，规范写法为―(19xx－2000)‖，但采用这种写法的却不成主流。不规范的书写格式中，常见的是―(19xx～2000)‖，此外还有―(19xx－2000年)‖、―(19xx～2000年)‖、―(19xx年－2000年)‖、―(19xx年～2000年)‖，加上―－‖、―～‖两种符号自身宽度变化所产生的变体，不规范的写法就更多了。 志书断限中的连接号，没有引起人们的高度重视，由此所反映出来的，则是标点符号规范化和表达概念准确性的大问题。准确地说，是正确、规范地使用连接号，准确地表述时空范围之概念，准确地表述数值量之关系(或幅度)的大问题。 一、连接号的多种形式 连接号有多种形式，各自的作用、用途也不同。中华人民共和国国家标准(简称―国标‖)《标点符号用法》(GB/T 15834－1995)对连接号的规定： 4.13 连接号 4.13.1 连接号的形式为?－‘。连接号还有另外三种形式，即长横?——‘、半字线?-‘和浪纹?～‘。 4.13.2 两个相关的名词构成一个意义单位，中间用连接号。例如： a) 我国秦岭－淮河以北地区属于温带季风气候区，夏季高温多雨，冬季寒冷干燥。 b) 复方氯化钠注射液，也称任-洛二氏溶液(Ringer-Locke solution)，用于医疗和哺乳动物生理学实验。 4.13.3 相关的时间、地点或数目之间用连接号，表示起止。例如： a) 鲁迅(1881－1936)中国现代伟大的文学家、思想家和革命家。 b) ?北京——广州‘直达快车 c) 梨园乡种植的巨峰葡萄今年已经进入了丰产期，亩产1000公斤～1500公斤。 4.13.4 相关的字母、阿拉伯数字等之间，用连接号，表示产品型号。例如： 在太平洋地区，除了已建成投入使用的HAW－4和TPC－3海底光缆之外，又有TPC －4海底光缆投入运营。 4.13.5 几个相关的项目表示递进式发展，中间用连接号。例如：
In unison Consist of Keep sb. in suspense Hand down At any rate Narrow down Come over Jut over Know better than Over and over Text B Rely on Apart from Run errands And the like Keep…at bay Keep…in the dark Be aware of Be up to
1、科学家们找到火星上有水的证据了吗？（proof） 2、计划委员会已经将建核电厂的可能地点缩小到了两个沿海城 镇。（location, narrow down） 3、山姆不仅失去了工作，而且还失去了双腿，他只好告社会救济 度过余生。（welfare） 4、由十二个人组成的陪审团(jury)一致表决认为玛丽有罪（guilty） (consist of, in unison) 5、听到有人质疑他的才能，肖恩觉得受了奇耻大辱。（talent, humiliate） 1) Have scientists found proof of water on Mars? 2) The planning committee has narrowed down the possible locations for the nuclear power plant to two coastal towns. 3) Sam not only lost his job but also both legs; he had to live on welfare for the rest of his life. 4) A jury consisting of 12 members voted in unison that Mary was guilty. 5) Sean felt humiliated to hear his talent being questioned. 6、
be going to 结构用法精讲 一、be going to 的用法点拨：be going to 是一种固定结构，它后面要接动词原形。含有be going to 结构的句子中往往有表示将来的时间状语，如：tomorrow, next week等。 1、用来表示按计划或安排要发生的动作，有“准备；打算”的意思。这种主观意图，一般已做过事先安排，故其实现的可能性较大，其主语常是人。 We are going to have a class meeting this afternoon.今天下午我们打算开班会。（安排） 2、表示根据现有情况、某种迹象，判断将要或即将发生的动作。此时不含有主观意图，只是表示说话人对客观事态发展的判断或推测，此时主语可以是人，也可以是物。例如： Look at the black clouds. It's going to rain.看那些乌云，快要下雨了。（推测） I”m not feeling well, I”m going to be ill. 我感觉不是很好，可能要生病了。（表示说话人的感觉而已） 二、be going to 在肯定句中的形式在肯定句中，be going to模样是：主语+be(am / is / are) + going to +动词原形+其它。 be going to 结构中的助动词be很少用原形，be随主语人称和数的变化而变化，它一般有三种形式，am , is , are 。而going to 固定不变。即：当主语是I 时用am ；当主语是第三人称单数时用is；当主语是其他人称时用are。 I am going to buy something tomorrow morning.明天早上我要去买些东西。 She is going to see Mr. Wang this afternoon.她打算今天下午去看望王先生。 三、含be going to 的句子变否定句和一般疑问句的变法 由于句子中有助动词be，因此be going to 的否定句和一般疑问句的构成很容易，即在be (am, is, are) 的后面加上not 就构成了否定句；把be (am, is, are) 放到句首，在句末加问号就构成了一般疑问句，其答语为：Y es, 主语+ am/is/are. / No, 主语+ isn't/aren't. / No, I'm not.不过I am... 在改为一般疑问句时常常改为“Are you ....?”。例如： They are going to see the car factory next week. (肯定句) They are not going to see the car factory next week. (否定句) —Are they going to see the car factory next week? —Y es, they are. (No, they aren't.) (一般疑问句及其回答) 四、使用be going to 应注意的几点 1．There be 句型的be going to 结构为：There is / are going to be... (注意句型中going to 后面的be不能改为have。) 常用来表示将有某事发生。例如： There is going to be a football match next Saturday in our school. 下周六我们学校将有一场足球比赛。 2．come, go, leave, arrive等表示位置移动的动词常用现在进行时表示将要发生的动作，它们很少与be going to 结构连用。例如： Miss Sun is coming tonight.今晚孙小姐要来。 They are going to the park next Friday. 下星期五他们打算去公园。 3. “be going to +动词原形”结构与表示将来的时间状语是否连用，在意思上有所差别。如果其后有明确的时间状语，则表示该动作或状态发生的可能性较大；反之，则表示一种推测，表示未来可能发生的事情。例如： There is going to be a film in our school this evening. 今晚我们学校将有一场电影。（一定会发生）
翻译 1.自从有了移动电话后，他再也没有给朋友写信了。（no longer） he has no longer written to his friends ever since he got a mobile phone. 2.尽管很忙，他每天至少花两小时上网（surf the internet），了解这个领域的 最新动态。（even though） even though he is very busy, he spends at least two hours every day surfing the internet, aiming to know about the latest development in this area / field. 3.李教授在毕业典礼上作了一个简短的讲话，他的话深深铭刻在我的记忆中。 （impress upon） 4.讲到期末考试，学生们一点儿都不紧张，他们满脸都是自信。（confidence） talking of the final exams the students were not nervous at all. on their faces was confidence. 5.在30分钟内写出一篇约100个词的短文，对于他们班大多数学生来说不过是小菜 一碟。（snap） to write a short passage of about 100 words within 30 minutes would be a snap to most students in their class. 6.我发觉自己对英语口语有着浓厚的兴趣。（find…doing） i have found myself having great interest in spoken english. 7.驱车行驶在高速公路上，我意识到近几年来，中国的公路系统发生 了巨大的变化。（realize;enormous） driving on the highway, i realized that enormous changes had taken place in china’s automobile way system in recent years. 8.我简直不敢相信他这么快就学会了操作计算机。（can hardly believe;work） 9.三年的时光已经过去，这一刻终于来临了：不到两周我就要回国了。（in less than） 10.许多我认识的人都迫不及待地想要出国，而我却宁愿和家人一起呆在国内。 （can’t wait） many people i know can’t wait to go abroad, but i would rather stay with my family in my country. 11.他的生活经历在他的学术生涯（academic career）中一直扮演着一个重要角 色（play a role in）。 his life experiences have always been playing an important role in his academic career. 12.那家餐厅最近已经延长了营业时间。（extend） the restaurant has extended its opening hours recently. 13.我刚刚读完一本从一种新的视角研究莎士比亚（shakespeare）的有趣的书籍。 （approach） i have just read an interesting book which has a new approach to shakespeare.
be going to用法口诀: be going to跟“动原”,计划、准备或打算; 表可能,有必然,通过现象来判断。 be的形式要注意,它要随着人称变, 否定句,很简单,not加在be后边; 疑问句,需牢记,be应提到主语前。 be going to句型的两种不同用法 I’m going to the school、我正要去学校。 I’m going to go to the school、我打算去学校。 第一句就是动词go的进行时表将来,(to)之后须加名词。(come,go等趋向动词的现在进行时表将来。) 第二句则为be going to的一般将来时句型,to之后须加动词原形。一般将来时 一、概念:表示将要发生的动作或存在的状态及打算、计划或准备做某事。句中一般有以下时间状语:tomorrow, next day(week, month, year…),soon, the day after tomorrow(后天)等。 二、基本结构:①be going to + do;②will+ do、 be going to的特殊疑问句形式 先瞧我的构成方式:疑问词＋be going to的一般疑问句。我有一个口诀献给大家,一定对您们有所帮助: 疑问词在句首, 系动词be跟着走,
主语、going紧相随, 其它成分不要丢。 如何把我的陈述句形式转换成特殊疑问句形式呢？我再告诉同学们一个好方法,那就就是:一定、二变、三去掉。 一定:即确定划线部分的疑问词; 二变:即把be going to变为一般疑问句形式; 三去掉:去掉划 线部分。例如: We are going to have a meeting next Monday、 A:确定疑问词为when(什么时候) B:把原句改为一般疑问句are you going to have a meeting next Monday? C:去掉划线部分,即When are you going to have a meeting?您们打算什么时候开会？ 【注意】如果对to后面的动词短语进行提问则要用What、、、do、、、?对例句中的have a meeting进行提问应为: What are you going to do next Monday?下星期一您们打算做什么？ 【特别警示】当划线部分为主语或主语的定语时,特殊疑问句的语序为陈述句语序。请瞧: Miss Li is going to teach you 三、否定句:在be动词(am, is, are, was, were)或情态动词will后加not 成won’t。 例如:I’m going to have a picnic this afternoon、→I’m not going to have a picnic this afternoon、 四、一般疑问句: be或will提到句首,some改为any, and改为or,第一二人称互换。 例如:We are going to go on an outing this weekend、→Are you going to go on an outing this weekend? 五、对划线部分提问。一般情况,一般将来时的对划线部分有三种情况。 1、、问人。Who 例如:I’m going to New York soon、→Who’s going to New York soon、
连接号用法 国家标准《标点符号用法》(GB／T15834—1995)把连接号分为一字线(—)、半字线(-)、浪纹线(～)和长横线(——)4种形式。 连接号的基本用法是把意义密切相关的词语、字母、数字连接成一个整体。连接号的基本形式是短横，占一个字的位置，印刷行业叫一字线，它还有另外两种形式，就是半字线（-）和波浪线（～）。连接号和破折号不同，不要相混。破折号是一长横，占两个字的位置。 一字线连接号连接词语，构成复合结构。例如：在我国大力发展第三产业的问题，以经得到经济——社会发展战略的决策人员和研究人员的重视。 一字线连接号还可以连接名词，表示起始和走向。例如：马尼拉－广州－北京行线八月一日首次通行 半字线连接号连接号码、代号，包括产品型号、序次号、门牌号、电话号、帐号等。前后多是隶属关系，可以读“杠”。例如：CH-53E是在CH-53D的基础上重新设计的更大型的重型起重直升机，公司编号S-80,绰号“超种马” 半字号连接号连接外国人的复姓或双名，例如：让-皮埃尔·佩兰 波纹线连接号连接数字表示数值的范围，例如：芽虫可用40％乐果乳剂800～1000倍液防治 一字线连接号也可以连接相关数字，例如：鲁迅（1881－1936） 半字号连接号连接阿拉伯数字表示年、月、日。这是国际标准化组织推荐的形式。例如：1993-05-04（1993年5月4日） 一、使用场合 1．一字线 一字线主要用于2个或2个以上名词或时间之间的连接，表示走向、起止和递进关系。(1)连接相关的方位名词，构成一个整体，表示走向关系。 [例1] 四川省达州市位于秦巴山系沿东北—西南方向向四川盆地过渡的地理阶梯之中。[例2] 我国的秦岭一淮北地区属于温带季风气候。 (2)连接相关的地点，表示空间或地理位置上的起止关系。 [例3] 2007年8月10日，深圳—重庆—拉萨航线首航成功。 再如：北京—天津高速公路；上海—杭州的D651次动车组列车。 (3)连接相关的时间，表示某一时间段的起止关系。 [例4] 20世纪80—90年代，中国东南沿海地区出现了“民工潮”现象。 再如：2000—2006年；2007年1—5月；2008年3月5—17日；上午8：00—12：00。(4)用于序数之间，表示起止关系。