(QHUJ\ 3URFHGLD
Energy Procedia 00 (2010) 000–000 https://www.doczj.com/doc/b017634584.html,/locate/XXX Available online at https://www.doczj.com/doc/b017634584.html,
GHGT-10
Impact of post combustion capture of CO 2 on existing and new
Australian coal-fired power plants
N. Dave1*, T. Do, D. Palfreyman and P.H.M. Feron
CSIRO Energy Technology, 11 Julius Av., North Ryde 2113, Australia
Elsevier use only: Received date here; revised date here; accepted date here
Abstract
Currently, Australia emits approximately 600 MT equivalent of CO 2 annually, of which approximately 30% is directly linked to
the electricity generation using both brown and black coals. To restrain the CO 2 emissions, coal based power generators are
looking to retrofit the existing power plants with commercially available technology for the post combustion capture (PCC) of
CO 2 as well as invest in the new power plants with high efficiency steam cycles.
Since Australian coals are low in sulphur and the coal-fired power plants are well away from densely populated regions, the flue
gas desulphurisation (FGD) and de-NO X regulations are currently not there for the coal based electricity generation in Australia.
This is not an advantageous situation for straightforward retrofitting of the existing power plants with 30 wt% aqueous MEA
based commercially available PCC technology that has very limited tolerance for SO X and NO X (less than 10 ppmv). In addition,
Australia is a dry continent with very limited cooling water availability for the power plants. Hence, the Australian power
generators are considering both the power and the post combustion CO 2 capture plants to be air cooled.
This paper, therefore, assesses the impact of introducing post combustion capture of CO 2 on the existing and new Australian
coal-fired power plants, both brown and black coal-fired, in terms of the cost of electricity generation, the cost of CO 2avoidance, the cooling water demand and the overall plant efficiency. The existing power plants are considered to be
conventional subcritical and supercritical single reheat steam cycle based whereas the new power plant designs have allowed for
ultracritical steam conditions (35 MPa, 922 K) with double reheat. The CO 2 capture plants are considered to be either in service
full time or in service on demand with 90% capture efficiency and the product CO 2 ready for sequestration at 10 MPa and 313K.
The process and cost models for integrated power and capture plants have been obtained using ASPEN Rate-Sep, Steam-Pro,
Steam-Master and PEACE software packages for process modelling and cost estimation.
The results clearly show that an air cooled integrated power and capture plant has lower overall plant efficiency and slightly
higher cost of electricity generation in comparison with a water cooled equivalent plant. An ultracritical single reheat power plant
when integrated with capture plant that is in service full time has potential for lowest cost of electricity generation with minimum
cost for CO 2 avoidance. These results further show that replacing an existing turbine with a new LP turbine optimised for
continuous steam extraction for CO 2 plant duty minimises the adverse impact of PCC integration but the power generator looses
the flexibility for electricity generation.
* Corresponding author. Tel.:+61-2-94905306; fax: +61-2-94908530.
E-mail address : narendra.dave@csiro.au
Energy Procedia 4(2011)2005–https://www.doczj.com/doc/b017634584.html,/locate/procedia
doi:10.1016/j.egypro.2011.02.082
2Author name / Energy Procedia 00 (2010) 000–000
The results also provide important insights into the major contributions to the increased cost of power generation. For both the
existing and the new power plants, the amortised capital charge component dominates the cost of PCC integrated electricity
generation. In spite of the large reduction in efficiency for Australian power plants when PCC is applied, it appears that reducing
the capital costs of PCC will be at least equally important. This is an important outcome for the prioritization of research
activities aimed at reducing the costs of capture. For example, the novel solvent development work for improved PCC technology
should focus on increasing absorption rates at the same CO 2 carrying capacity of the solvent to reduce the capital cost
component.
? 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved
Keywords: CO2 Capture, PCC Integration and Economics, Carbon Capture, Greenhouse Gas Mitigation 1.Introduction
It is well known that coal-fired power stations are the largest point sources of carbon dioxide emissions that are
contributing to the global warming. In Australia alone, the power generators produce around 170 Mtonne of CO 2
emissions per annum or over 40% of Australia’s anthropogenic CO 2 emissions using the black and brown coals that
accounts for 170 TWh per annum of electricity [1]. Whilst this level of electricity production currently brings
significant economic benefits to Australia, there is a growing realisation both at the state and federal government
levels that in order to maintain current economic prosperity in future with minimal adverse climatic impact of large
scale CO 2 emissions, the post combustion capture of CO 2 and its geological storage will seriously need to be
implemented at the earliest. Although several different processes are currently under development for the separation
of CO 2 from flue gases, absorption processes using aqueous solutions of chemical absorbents is the leading
technology. The typical flow sheet of CO 2 separation and recovery process using chemical absorbents is shown in
Figure 1 [9].
Whilst commercially available
aqueous MEA (monoethanolamine)
solvent based post-combustion CO 2capture (PCC) technology promises
large scale carbon dioxide emissions
reductions when implemented in the
power plant sector, this technology is
known to reduce the power plant
efficiency and thereby increase the
cost of producing electricity. In
addition, the standard aqueous MEA
solvent has poor SO X /NO X tolerance
and hence necessitates flue gas
desulphurisation (F
GD) which
imposes additional capital and
operating expenditure burden on the
Australian power generators who
currently do not have statutory
requirement for FGD.
Figure 1: Process flow diagram for CO 2 recovery from flue gas with chemical absorbents
In addition to limited availability of water (Australia being a dry continent) and lack of emission controls other
than particulate removal in Australian power plants, the deployment issues with chemical solvent based PCC
c ?2011Publishe
d by Elsevier Ltd.2006
N.Dave et al./Energy Procedia 4(2011)2005–2019
N.Dave et al./Energy Procedia4(2011)2005–20192007
Author name / Energy Procedia 00 (2010) 000–000 3
processes such as high costs, increased cooling water demand, limited knowledge of environmental impact, lack of
scale-up experience and limited understanding of operational dynamics resulting from process integration with
power plants are well documented [7]. These issues have raised the need for an update of the expected techno-
economic impact of integrating the MEA based PCC process with coal-fired power plants in Australia as the first preliminary assessment was done over a decade ago [4]. The detailed assessment results could also be used to
provide justification for focus of research directions of particular relevance to Australia. This paper describes the methodology and results of a techno-economic evaluation of liquid absorption based post-combustion capture processes for both existing and new pulverised coal-fired power stations in Australia. The overall process design incorporates flexibility with switching a CO2 capture plant ON or OF F depending upon the demand and market
price for electricity, and addresses the impact of the presently limited emission controls on the process cost. The
techno-economic evaluation includes both air and water cooled power and CO2 capture plants, resulting in cost of generation for the situations without and with PCC.
2.Methodology
For black coal-fired power plant, a generic plant with gross electrical power output of 600 MW and operating at
85% capacity factor was assumed for this study. The power plant uses Surat Basin (Queensland) black coal, the composition of which is given in Table 1. The ambient conditions for this plant were in accordance with the “Technical Guidelines - Generator Efficiency Standards” (GES) released by the Australian Government [2]. Table 2 summarises these conditions.
Table 1: Surat Basin black coal properties
Proximate Analysis (weight % as received)
Moisture12.4
Ash 25.4
Volatile Matter 33.3
Fixed Carbon 28.7
Total 99.8
Heating Value (as received)
HHV (MJ/kg) 20.14
Ultimate Analysis (weight % dry ash free)
Carbon 76.5
Hydrogen 6.45
Nitrogen 0.95
Sulphur 0.53
Oxygen 15.57
Total 100.0 Performance
Unburnt carbon in furnace ash (%) 5
Unburnt carbon in fly-ash (%) 1.7
Table 2: Ambient conditions (GES) for black coal-fired power plants
Temperature (K) 298.15
Altitude (m) 111
Pressure (Bar) 1.0
Relative Humidity (%) 60
Wet Bulb Temperature (K) 292.65
Cooling Water Temperature (K) 292.65
2008N.Dave et al./Energy Procedia4(2011)2005–2019
4Author name / Energy Procedia 00 (2010) 000–000
Whilst existing black coal-fired power plants in Australia are almost entirely subcritical type, supercritical single
reheat conditions have been applied recently, and other higher efficiency steam cycles are expected to be applied in
future to all black coal-fired plants larger than about 350 MW in capacity. Hence, in this study the steam cycles and
the steam conditions for black coal-fired power plants were varied as below:
1.Subcritical – 16 MPa/811 K & 3.9 MPa/811 K
2.Supercritical Single Reheat – 25 MPa/839K & 4.4 MPa/839K
3.Ultra-supercritical Single Reheat – 27.5 MPa/878K and 5.7 MPa/886K
4.Supercritical Double Reheat – 25 MPa/839K, 6.6 MPa/839K & 1.9 MPa/839 K
5.Ultra-supercritical Double Reheat – 34.6 MPa/922K, 9.5 MPa/922K & 2.6 MPa/922K
F or brown coal-fired power plant, a generic sub-critical, but natural draft wet cooled power plant with gross
electrical power output of 539 MW and operating at 85% capacity factor was assumed. This plant was assumed to
use a typical Australian brown coal with 62% w/w moisture as received and practise typical pre-drying steps
followed in Australian power plants to have moisture content at the furnace inlet at 20% w/w. Table 3 gives the flue
gas composition, flow rate and temperature for this power plant whereas Table 4 lists the ambient conditions
applicable to this plant.
Table 3: Flue gas data for the brown coal-fired power plant
Flue gas flow rate (tonnes/hr) 3000.7
Flue gas temperature (o K) 441.5 Composition (volume %):
N258.8
O2 3.2
CO211.8
H2O 25.5
Ar 0.7
SO X (ppmv) 273
NO X (ppmv) 200
Table 4 - Ambient conditions for the brown coal-fired power plant
Temperature (K) 291.15
Altitude (m) 0
Pressure (Bar) 1.0
Relative Humidity (%) 73
Wet Bulb Temperature (K) 288.15
Cooling Water Approach Temperature to Wet Bulb Temperature (K) 12.6
With the above operating conditions, STEAM PRO, STEAM MASTER and PEACE software from Thermoflex
Inc were used as the state-of-the-art tools to simulate both the brown and black coal-fired power plants. STEAM
PRO allows for the steam plant design point heat balances, complete with outputs for plant hardware description,
preliminary engineering details and cost estimates in conjunction with PEACE. Hence, it realistically simulates and
costs a base case coal-fired power plant without CO2 capture. STEAM MASTER facilitates off-design calculations
for an existing power plant and hence estimates the impact of steam extraction on the power plant performance
when steam is extracted from the steam cycle in order to regenerate the spent chemical solvent in the stripper of CO2
capture plant. March 2008 versions of these softwares were used for this study and hence the coal-fired power plant
capital investment costs with and without CO2 capture were obtained for the period ending first quarter of 2008. It
should be noted that these costs are calculated by the PEACE software in US currency. For the period ending first
N.Dave et al./Energy Procedia4(2011)2005–20192009
Author name / Energy Procedia 00 (2010) 000–000 5 quarter of 2008, the Australian currency (Aus $) was close to parity with the US currency (US $). As a result, the cost data are reported for this study in Australian currency.
The CO2 capture plant was simulated using the ASPEN-Plus process engineering software available from AspenTech Inc, USA. This software provides steady state chemical equilibrium based as well as reaction kinetics based process designs for the CO2 absorber and the solvent regenerator. In addition, material and energy flows are determined at inlets and outlets of all equipment on the CO2 capture plant to facilitate their sizing. For the base case, 30% w/w MEA (monoethanolamine) based CO2 capture process was envisaged. Table 5 details the operating conditions determined for the CO2 capture plant. The CO2 capture plant was considered to have 2 parallel trains of absorbers and 2 parallel trains of solvent regenerators. The steam for solvent regeneration was considered to be available from the power plant steam cycle at 305 kPa and 406K. The capture plant capital investment cost was calculated from in-house data and verified against the public domain cost data available from the past studies for similar size plant [5, 10, 12].
For the power plant and CO2 capture plant operating cost calculations, the following assumptions were made: ?Power plant capacity factor - 85%
?Existing power plant is fully amortised.
?Fuel cost (as received) – Aus $0.5/GJ for brown coal and AUS $1/GJ for black coal
?Cost of electricity for CO2 capture and compression – At amortised capital price
?Construction period for CO2 capture plant and a new power plant – 3 years
?30 wt% aqueous MEA for CO2 capture and capture efficiency at 90%
?Annual interest rate - 10%
?Amortisation period for CO2 capture plant – 30 years
Whilst coal based projects can have technical life time of up to 40 years when midlife refits are considered, for the present study the life time was kept at 30 years in accordance with the Australian Tax Office ruling TR2006/5, “Effective life of depreciating assets”. The annual costs of raw, process and cooling water usage, chemicals consumed, solid and liquid waste disposal, plant manning, maintenance and administration applicable to both the power and the CO2 capture plants were calculated as per the CSIRO’s in-house data. Other soft operating costs such as the annual insurance liability against natural and man made disasters, local, state and federal level taxes, etc. were excluded from the techno-economic assessment.
Table 5: Operating conditions for CO2 capture plant
Chemical Solvent – Aqueous MEA 30% w/w
Solvent Temperature @ Inlet to the Absorber 313.15 K
Flue Gas Temperature @ Inlet to the Absorber 318.15 K
CO2 Loading of Solvent @ Inlet to the Absorber 0.21
CO2 Removal and Recovery Rate 90%
Number of Theoretical Stages in Absorber 4
Number of Theoretical Stages in Regenerator 9
Reboiler Temperature 399.15 K
Reboiler Heat Duty per kg of CO2 Recovered 4 MJ
Product CO2 Pressure and Temperature 10 MPa and 313.15 K
3.Process Simulations
Figure 2 shows the process flow-sheet for a mechanical draft wet cooled subcritical pf-fired power plant (600 MW gross) as developed by the STEAM PRO software for the Australian situation. It shows that the steam system
2010N.Dave et al./Energy Procedia4(2011)2005–2019
6Author name / Energy Procedia 00 (2010) 000–000
consists of a single high pressure turbine (HPT), a single twin path intermediate pressure turbine (IPT) and 2 twin path low pressure turbines (LPT). Steam bleed points are provided on the turbines for steam extraction for feed water heating. The feed water heating system consists of a single Low Pressure (LP) train, a single de-aerator and two symmetrical High Pressure (HP) trains. The LP train starts with a single external drain cooler, followed by 2 low pressure flash back heaters (F). F ollowing this are 2 flash back heaters with internal drain coolers (D). Following the low pressure feed water train, there is a single contact type heater (C) operating as the deaerator. Each High Pressure train consists of 2 flash back heaters with internal drain coolers (D). The steam and feed water heating system described so far was also used for the natural draft wet cooled subcritical brown coal-fired power plant simulation.
Figure 2: Flow sheet for mechanical draft wet cooled coal-fired subcritical power plant The subcritical plant simulations showed that if Surat basin black coal is used as fuel with 20% by volume excess air, then the flue gas leaving the stack will have approximately 320 ppmV SO X and 44 mg/Nm3 of particulate material. With brown coal as fuel and excess air level for combustion such that the flue gas has 6% oxygen by volume, the flue gas leaving the stack was determined to have approximately 273 ppmv SO X and in excess of 70 mg/Nm3 of particulate material. The current generation of CO2 capture technology that uses 30% w/w MEA solvent is intolerant to SO X and particulate content greater than 10 ppmV and 10 mg/Nm3 respectively [11]. As a result, the implementation of CO2 capture process in Australia definitely requires the flue gas desulphurisation (F GD) unit upstream. Improved F GD-technologies are available to achieve such low levels [6]. STEAM PRO calculates additional electrical power consumption, limestone/lime usage and capital investment associated with incorporation of the FGD unit for Australian power plants. Similar to the subcritical plant case, STEAM PRO process flow sheets and capital investment costs were calculated for other plant cases as well.
The generic process flow sheet (Figure 1) for a typical 30% w/w MEA based CO2 capture process was simulated using the ASPEN-Plus Rate-Sep software. After in-direct heat exchange with the CO2 lean exhaust gas leaving the absorber, the flue gas (Feed Gas) is pumped into the absorber by a blower. A direct contact type feed gas cooler upstream of the absorber controls the gas temperature at the absorber inlet. This feed gas cooler was envisaged to use 2% w/w aqueous soda solution to control SO X levels in the feed gas to the absorber below 10 ppmV. After passing through the absorber the flue gas undergoes a water wash section to remove any solvent droplets carried over and then leaves the absorber. The “CO2 rich” absorbent solution is pumped to the top of a stripper, via a heat exchanger. The regeneration of the solvent is carried out in the stripper. Heat is supplied to the reboiler to maintain
N.Dave et al./Energy Procedia4(2011)2005–20192011
Author name / Energy Procedia 00 (2010) 000–000 7
the regeneration conditions. The CO2 product gas leaves the stripper via an overhead condenser. The CO2-product is a relatively pure product, with water vapour being the main other component. It is first dehydrated to less than 50 ppmV moisture and compressed to 10 MPa and 313 K in the sequestration ready form using four stage water cooled compressor with 2.7 compression ratio. The “CO2 lean” absorbent solution, containing far less CO2 is then pumped back to the absorber via the lean-rich heat exchanger and a cooler to bring it down to the absorber temperature level.
It is envisaged that the CO2 capture plant could be considered to operate in two different modes viz., continuously or In Service full time, and ON/OFF or In Service on Demand only. In the first case, the power plant is constantly required to meet the CO2 emissions reduction target whereas in the later case, a power generator has flexibility to turn OFF the CO2 capture plant when the electricity demand and its sell price in the spot electricity market is sufficiently high and switch ON the capture plant when such conditions are not met. In case of CO2 capture large heat loads associated with the overhead condenser and the reboiler on CO2 stripper, the lean amine trim cooler and the intercoolers associated with CO2 compression provide common nodes for integrating a pf-fired power plant with a CO2 capture plant. For existing power plants in Australia, retrofitting CO2 capture plant involves extracting steam at 305 kPa either from one of the appropriate ports on LP turbine or installing a throttle valve at IP/LP turbine crossover, if the power generators require operational flexibility with CO2 capture plant. Unfortunately, the first option causes de-rating of LP turbine and possibly stability problems with turbine when the capture plant is switched on. If the capture plant is to be in service full time, the preferred option for the power generator could be the replacement of existing LP turbine with a new appropriate capacity (smaller) LP turbine. For the cost estimation purposes in this study, the existing turbine when replaced, it was considered to fetch 10% value of the new turbine as scrap. For a new power plant where integration of a CO2 capture plant can be considered at the design stage of the power plant, incorporation of a back pressure turbine at IP/LP crossover is an alternative and accordingly steam extraction from IP/LP crossover via back pressure turbine that kept extracted steam pressure at 305kPa was considered in the process simulation. F or this study, steam extracted from the steam cycle for both existing and new power plants to meet the reboiler duty of CO2 stripper is first cooled down to 406K by injecting boiler feed water in it before diverting to the reboiler and the condensate leaving the reboiler is returned the boiler feed water circuit. In order to optimise the integration of power plant with a CO2 capture plant, the CO2 stripper condenser and the CO2 compression intercoolers are cooled by the boiler feed water.
Since Australia has limitations in the available utility cooling water particularly at inland locations, the power generators are seeking to incorporate dry cooling (ambient air as coolant) both in the power plant and the CO2 capture plant. Conventional dry cooling for the overhead condenser on the CO2 stripper and the intercoolers on a multistage CO2 compressor involves large heat exchangers sizes, pressure loss on the process fluid side and fan power; all of which could have adverse techno-economic impact. Thus for the CO2 capture plant, the dry cooling was restricted in this study to cooling the utility water in a heat exchanger which is air cooled using a fan. The power consumption by this fan was calculated by Steam Pro and the cost of air cooled heat exchanger was obtained from Jord International Ltd (Australia), an equipment vendor, for various power plant and capture plant integration scenarios. Based on these considerations eight combinations of the power plant and the CO2 capture plant have been investigated in this study as below.
Case 1
New black coal-fired subcritical, supercritical single reheat (Super-1RH), ultra-supercritical single reheat (Ultrasuper-1RH), supercritical double reheat (Super-2RH) and ultra-supercritical double reheat (Ultrasuper-2RH) power plants without CO2 capture and with CO2 capture plants full time in service. Both the power plant and the capture plant are mechanical draft wet cooled.
Case 2
New black coal-fired subcritical, supercritical single reheat (Super-1RH), ultra-supercritical single reheat (Ultrasuper-1RH), supercritical double reheat (Super-2RH) and ultra-supercritical double reheat (Ultrasuper-2RH)
2012N.Dave et al./Energy Procedia4(2011)2005–2019
8Author name / Energy Procedia 00 (2010) 000–000
power plants with CO2 capture plants ON/OF F on demand. Both the power plant and the capture plant are mechanical draft wet cooled.
Case 3
New black coal-fired subcritical, supercritical single reheat (Super-1RH), ultra-supercritical single reheat (Ultrasuper-1RH), supercritical double reheat (Super-2RH) and ultra-supercritical double reheat (Ultrasuper-2RH) power plants without CO2 capture and with CO2 capture plants full time ON. Both the power plant and the capture plant are air cooled.
Case 4
New black coal-fired subcritical, supercritical single reheat (Super-1RH), ultra-supercritical single reheat (Ultrasuper-1RH), supercritical double reheat (Super-2RH) and ultra-supercritical double reheat (Ultrasuper-2RH) power plants with CO2 capture plants ON/OF F on demand. Both the power plant and the capture plant are air cooled.
Case 5
Existing black coal-fired subcritical and supercritical single reheat (Super-1RH) power plants without CO2 capture and with CO2 capture plant ON/OFF on demand. Both the power plant and the capture plant are mechanical draft wet cooled with the steam cycle not modified for capture.
Case 6
Existing black coal-fired subcritical and supercritical single reheat (Super-1RH) power plants with CO2 capture plants full time ON. Both the power plant and the capture plant are mechanical draft wet cooled with new LP turbine in the steam cycle for capture.
Case 7
Existing black coal-fired subcritical and supercritical single reheat (Super-1RH) power plants with CO2 capture plants ON/OF F on demand. Both the power plant and the capture plant are mechanical draft wet cooled with a throttle valve at the IP/LP crossover in the steam cycle for capture.
Case 8
Existing natural draft wet cooled brown coal-fired subcritical power plant without CO2 capture and with CO2 capture plant ON/OFF on demand. The power plant steam turbines have a throttle valve at the IP/LP crossover for capture and the capture plant is dry air cooled.
In each of the above cases, limestone/lime slurry based FGD unit with 98.5% efficiency was embedded in the power plant for facilitating aqueous 30% w/w MEA based CO2 capture and the capture plant was fully integrated with the power plant through the heat load nodes at the CO2 stripper reboiler, the stripper overhead condenser, the lean amine trim cooler and the CO2 compressor intercoolers. F or all cases of the water cooled black coal-fired power plants, the steam condenser design pressure on the process side was kept at 6.1 kPa where as in the air cooled cases, it was kept at 12.2 kPa. For the natural draft wet cooled brown coal-fired power plant the steam condenser design pressure was 5 kPa. The values for other operating parameters associated with the power plant functioning that are used for power plant simulations such as the primary and secondary air cold and hot end leakage rates, cold cooling water approach temperature to ambient wet bulb temperature, cold cooling water temperature rise in the steam condenser, hot cooling water approach temperature of the condensate, air to water ratio in the cooling tower, temperature rise for air over steam condenser etc are documented in the CSIRO Energy Technology reports [13, 14].
Author name / Energy Procedia 00 (2010) 000–000 9
Using the material and energy balance and the capital and operating cost estimates derived through the process simulations for each integrated case of the power and capture plants, impact of 30% w/w aqueous MEA based PCC process on the power plant net efficiency, the cost of electricity generation and the cost of CO2 avoidance ($ per ton of CO2 avoided) was calculated. The cost of CO2 avoidance was evaluated with reference to the same power plant type without CO2 capture.
4.Results and Discussion
Tables 6 to 8 show the calculated performance of new black coal-fired power plants in Australian context with and without 90% CO2 capture plants integrated (Cases 1 to 4). These results show that the air cooled power plants have about 1 to 1.5% (absolute points) lower net efficiency than the wet cooled power plants and consequently about Aus $1.5 per MWh net (net power output) higher cost of electricity generation. When CO2 capture is implemented in these plants, their net efficiency drops approximately 10% (absolute points) and the cost of electricity generation more than doubles across the board. Where the power generator has flexibility to switch the capture plant on and off on demand (flexible operation), the overall plant efficiency is lower than the case where the capture plant is ON full time. This is also reflected in the higher cost of electricity generation and CO2 avoidance for these plants. The results clearly show that irrespective of flexibility with CO2 capture, an ultra-supercritical single reheat (ultrasuper-1RH) power plant has potential for the lowest cost of electricity generation (Aus $104 to 108 per MWh net) and CO2 avoidance (roughly AUS $88 per tonne of CO2) when capture is implemented.
Table 6: Impact of PCC integration on net plant efficiency (%HHV) for new black coal-fired plants
Power Plant
Type
Water Cooled Plant Air Cooled Plant No
Capture
Capture on
Full Time
Capture on
Demand
No
Capture
Capture on
Full Time
Capture on
Demand
Subcritical 36.7% 26.7% 26.0% 35.2% 25.7% 25.2% Super-1RH 39.2% 29.1% 27.9% 37.7% 28.0% 27.2% Ultrasuper-1RH 40.3% 30.1% 28.9% 38.8% 29.1% 28.1%
Super-2RH 39.7% 29.3% 28.1% 38.2% 28.0% 27.3% Ultrasuper-2RH 41.2% 30.3% 28.7% 39.8% 29.3% 28.3%
Table 7: Impact of PCC integration on the cost of electricity generation (Aus $/MWh net) for new black coal-fired plants
Power Plant
Type
Water Cooled Plant Air Cooled Plant No
Capture
Capture on
Full Time
Capture on
Demand
No
Capture
Capture on
Full Time
Capture on
Demand
Subcritical 46.3 104.3 109.9 48.0 108.5 114.6
Super-1RH 45.7 99.0 106.0 47.3 103.2 110.2
Ultrasuper-1RH 45.6 97.4 104.1 47.1 101.1 108.1
Super-2RH 44.3 97.6 105.9 45.7 102.0 109.8
Ultrasuper-2RH 47.9 102.4 105.0 49.3 106.5 115.2
N.Dave et al./Energy Procedia4(2011)2005–20192013
10Author name / Energy Procedia 00 (2010) 000–000
Table 8: Impact of PCC integration on the CO 2 avoidance cost (Aus $/tonne of CO 2) for new black coal-fired plants Power Plant
Type Water Cooled Plant Air Cooled Plant No
Capture Capture on Full Time Capture on Demand No Capture Capture on Full Time Capture on Demand
Subcritical
N/A 79.4 87.2 N/A 79.4 87.4 Super-1RH
N/A 77.7 88.6 N/A 78.4 89.3 Ultrasuper-1RH
N/A 77.4 88.1 N/A 77.8 88.2 Super-2RH
N/A 79.0 91.7 N/A 80.2 92.2 Ultrasuper-2RH N/A 82.9 96.4 N/A 84.0 97.2
F igure 3 shows the break down of cost of electricity generation for new mechanical draft water cooled ultra-supercritical single reheat (ultrasuper-1RH) power plant without CO 2 capture and with flexible capture. It is clearly evident that the capital costs associated with the power plant and the capture plant dominate the cost of electricity generation. This is also the case where the capture plant is operating continuously. F or an equivalent air cooled power plant with and without capture similar results were obtained. For other types of air and water cooled new power plants, both without and with post combustion capture, the contribution of amortised capital charges to the cost of electricity generation remained in the range 66% to 70%.
Figure 3: Breakdown of the cost of electricity generation for a new ultra-supercritical single reheat (ultrasuper-1RH)
black coal-fired power plant without and with CO 2 Capture
Tables 9 to 11 below show the likely performance of existing mechanical draft wet cooled subcritical and supercritical single reheat (Super-1RH) black coal-fired power plants in Australian context with and without 90% CO 2 capture plants integrated (Cases 5 to 7) according to Steam Pro, Steam Master, Peace and Aspen Plus simulations. These results clearly show that under the 90% CO 2 capture scenario, an existing power plant has lowest impact on its net efficiency, cost of electricity generation and cost of CO 2 avoidance when retrofitted with a new LP turbine and a capture plant that is full time running. Replacing existing turbine with a new LP turbine optimised for
70%10%
20%No CO 2Capture
Amortised Capital
Charges (%)
O & M Cost (%)
Fuel Cost (%)67%21%12%Flexible CO 2Capture Amortised Capital Charges (%)O & M Cost (%)Fuel Cost (%)2014
N.Dave et al./Energy Procedia 4(2011)2005–2019
Author name / Energy Procedia 00 (2010) 000–000 11 continuous steam extraction for the capture plant duty minimises the adverse impact of PCC integration but the power generator looses electricity generation flexibility. F or the subcritical power plant, the marginal cost of electricity in this case rises from Aus $14.6/MWh net for no capture to Aus $56.6/MWh net with capture and the cost of CO2 avoidance becomes Aus $60/tonne of CO2. F or the supercritical single reheat power plant, its cost of electricity rises from Aus $13.8/ MWh net for no capture to Aus $52.6/MWh net with capture and the cost of CO2 avoidance becomes Aus $56.7/tonne of CO2. It should be noted that for the existing power plants the residual capital value of the power plant is assumed zero and hence the marginal cost of electricity generation is around Aus $14 to 15 per net MWh power output. However in reality, the power generators always attach a certain capital value to their asset and depending upon their financing arrangements may have certain capital debt to be paid off during the life time of operation. However, the assumption of the existing plant fully amortised gives a lowest bound to the cost of electricity generation when such plants are retrofitted for capture.
Table 9 – Impact of PCC integration on net plant efficiency (%HHV) for existing mechanical draft water cooled black coal-fired plants
Plant Type
Net Plant Efficiency (% HHV)
No
Capture
No Modifications New LP Turbine Throttle Valve
Capture ON Demand Capture ON Full Time Capture on Demand
Subcritical 36.5 26.1 26.9 26.1
Super-1RH 39.2 28.0 29.2 28.0
Table 10 – Impact of PCC integration on the cost of electricity generation (Aus $/MWh net) for existing mechanical draft water cooled black coal-fired plants
Plant
Type
Cost of Electricity Generation (Aus $/MWh net)
No Capture
No Modifications New LP Turbine Throttle Valve Capture ON Demand Capture ON Full Time Capture on Demand
Subcritical 14.6 58.0 56.6 58.3
Super-1RH 13.8 54.5 52.6 54.7
Table 11: Impact of PCC integration on the CO2 avoidance cost (Aus$/tonne of CO2) for existing mechanical draft water cooled black coal-fired plants
Plant
Type
CO2 Avoidance Cost (Aus $/tonne of CO2)
No
Capture
No Modifications New LP Turbine Throttle Valve
Capture on Demand Capture on Full Time Capture on Demand Subcritical N/A 59.7 57.5 60.0
Super-1RH N/A 59.6 56.7 59.9
Figure 4 below shows that the capture plant capital costs will dominate the cost of electricity generation for the existing black coal-fired subcritical power plants with PCC integration. In particular this relates to the amortised
N.Dave et al./Energy Procedia4(2011)2005–20192015
12Author name / Energy Procedia 00 (2010) 000–000
capital charges associated with installing the FGD system, the steam extraction valve at the IP/LP crossover in the steam cycle and the capture plant. Therefore, the technology development efforts should not only be directed at developing novel solvents for reducing the energy efficiency impact of CO 2 capture but also towards reducing the capital cost of the F GD system and the capture plant. This can be achieved for instance by using more reactive solvents.
Figure 4: Breakdown of the cost of electricity generation for existing subcritical power plants
Table 12 given below shows the impact of integrating 30% w/w aqueous MEA based PCC technology with an existing natural draft wet cooled brown coal-fired subcritical power plant where 90% CO 2 capture is desired with the power plant having flexibility to switch ON and OF F the capture plant on demand (Case 8). In this case, a throttle valve is used at the IP/LP crossover in the steam cycle for steam delivery to the capture plant when it is ON and air cooled heat exchanger system is used to pick up the utility water cooling load. The power plant is assumed to be retrofitted with limestone/lime based FGD system to meet the SO X limits of the PCC technology. Table 12 also compares performance of this power plant with that of a mechanical draft wet cooled black coal-fired subcritical power plant that has an IP/LP crossover integrated water cooled 90% capture plant operating ON/OFF on demand. The results clearly show higher costs of electricity generation and CO 2 avoidance for a brown coal-fired subcritical power plant in comparison with a black coal-fired subcritical power plant when PCC integration is implemented. Table 12 – Comparison of PCC integrated existing brown and black coal-fired power plants Plant Performance
Brown Coal Plant Black Coal Plant Net Efficiency (%HHV) Without Capture
28.9 36.5 Net Efficiency (%HHV) With 90% Capture 17.1 26.1
Cost of Electricity Generation Without Capture (Aus $/MWh net ) 11.1 14.6
Cost of Electricity Generation With Capture (Aus $/MWh net ) 83.0
58.3 Cost of CO 2 Avoidance (Aus $/tonne of CO 2) 74.9 60.0
032.67
67.33Black Coal-Fired Existing Power Plant
without PCC
Amortised Capital
Charges (%)
O & M Cost (%)
Fuel Cost (%)46.829.523.7Black Coal-Fired Existing Power Plant with PCC
Amortised Capital Charges (%)O & M Cost (%)Fuel Cost (%)
2016
N.Dave et al./Energy Procedia 4(2011)2005–2019
Author name / Energy Procedia 00 (2010) 000–000 13
Figure 5 below shows that for the existing brown coal-fired subcritical power plants with PCC integration, it is the amortised capital charges associated with installing the F GD system, the steam extraction valve at the IP/LP crossover in the steam cycle and the capture plant dominate the cost of electricity generation just as is the case with the existing black coal-fired power plants. Therefore, for these plants too the technology development efforts should be directed at not only developing the novel solvents for reducing the energy efficiency impact of CO 2 capture but towards reducing the fixed capital cost of the FGD system and the capture plant as well.
Figure 5: Breakdown of the cost of electricity generation for subcritical power plants with PCC
5.Conclusion
Techno-economic assessment of integrating post combustion capture with existing and in future to be installed coal-fired power plants for Australia clearly show that there are large efficiency and cost penalties associated with introducing CO 2 capture for its emission reduction. The process simulations for both water cooled and air cooled power plants indicate that the later type of power plants will have marginally lower net plant efficiency and higher cost of electricity generation with and without CO 2 capture compared to their water cooled equivalents. Hence, the cost of CO 2 avoidance for these plants will also be relatively higher. This is valid irrespective of whether the capture plant is operated continuously or flexibly allowing for switching on/off. Should the post combustion capture of CO 2become mandatory in future, then the ultra-supercritical single reheat design of power plants will become a preferred option for new plants in Australia, since they have potential to generate electricity at lowest cost with the lowest cost of CO 2 avoidance. The cost of electricity generation for such plants will be dominated by the capital amortisation charges that are likely to be roughly 70% of the cost of electricity generation under the assumptions made in this study. Retrofitting the existing black coal-fired power plants in Australia with commercially available 30% w/w aqueous MEA based CO 2 capture technology for 90% CO 2 emission reduction will add Aus $40 to 45 per MWh (of net power production) to the nominal cost of electricity generation and result into the cost of CO 2avoidance approximately Aus $60 per tonne of CO 2. The increase in the cost of electricity generation, as a consequence of PCC integration with existing black and brown coal-fired power plants, is dominated (as much as 52%) by the cost of capital (amortisation) associated with retrofitting a capture plant. Such a high level of contribution by the amortised capital charges to the cost of electricity generation clearly indicates that in order to reduce the economic impact of post combustion capture on the power generation sector, the technology development efforts should be directed at reducing the fixed capital cost of the capture plant and reducing its adverse impact on the net power plant efficiency. F or the existing power plants, replacing the existing LP turbine with a new LP turbine that is optimised for continuous steam extraction to meet the CO 2 plant duty minimises the adverse impact of integration of post combustion capture, but the power generator will lose the flexibility for electricity generation. 46.829.523.7
Black CoaL-Fi red Existing Power Plant Amorti sed Capi tal
Charges (%)
O & M Cost (%)
Fuel Cost (%)51.635.612.8
Brown Coal-Fi red Exi sti ng Plant
Amorti sed Capi tal Charges (%)O & M Cost (%)Fuel Cost (%)
N.Dave et al./Energy Procedia 4(2011)2005–2019
2017
2018N.Dave et al./Energy Procedia4(2011)2005–2019
14Author name / Energy Procedia 00 (2010) 000–000
6.Acknowledgement
This project is part of the CSIRO Coal Technology Portfolio and received funding from the Australian Government as part of the Asia-Pacific Partnership on Clean Development and Climate. The views expressed herein are not necessarily the views of the Commonwealth, and the Commonwealth does not accept responsibility for any information or advice contained herein.
Dr Narendra Dave and the co-authors are thankful to the management of Jord International Pty Ltd, NSW, Australia, for sizing and costing air cooled condensers, heat exchangers and CO2 compression intercoolers for this work.
7.References
[1]https://www.doczj.com/doc/b017634584.html,.au/publications_html/energy/energy_10/EG10_Apr.pdf
[2]AGO, 2006: Technical guidelines – Generator efficiency standards, Department of Environment and Heritage,
Australian Government, ISBN: 1 9212 97 247.
[3]Aresta M., 2003: Carbon dioxide recovery and utilisation, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Netherlands, ISBN: 1-
4020-1409-0.
[4]Dave N C, Duffy G J, Edwards, J H and Lowe A., 2000: Evaluation of the options for recovery and
disposal/utilisation of CO2 from Australian black coal-fired power plants, ACARP Project F inal Report No.
C7051.
[5]EPRI Interim Technical Report No: 1000316, December 2000, Evaluation of innovative fossil fuel power plants
with CO2 removal.
[6]Féraud, A., Marocco, L. and Howard, T., 2006: CASTOR Study on Technological Requirements for Flue Gas
Clean-Up Prior to CO2-Capture, presented at GHGT-8 Conference, Trondheim, Norway.
[7] Feron, P.H. M. 2008: Post-Combustion Capture (PCC) R&D and Pilot Plant Operation in Australia, IEA GHG
- 11th Post Combustion CO2 Capture Network Meeting, Vienna, Austria, 20-21 May.
[8]GPSA, 1998: Gas Suppliers Association Engineering Data Book, 11th Edition, Section 21, pp.6.
[9]IPCC Special Report, 2005: Carbon dioxide capture and storage, Mertz, B., Davidson, O., de Conninck, H.,
Loos, M. and Meyer, L. (eds) (Cambridge University Press, UK), pp. 431.
[10]Parsons, E. L., Shelton, W. W. and Lyons, J. L., 2002: Advanced fossil power systems comparison study,
Final Report for US/DOE-NETL.
[11]Riemer P., 1993: The capture of CO2 from fossil fuel fired power stations, IEA GHG R&D Programme
Report No. IEAGHG/SR2, December.
[12]US DOE/NETL Technical Report No: 401/110907, November 2007: Carbon dioxide capture from existing
coal-fired power plants.
[13]Dave N C, Do T and Palfreyman D., 2008: Assessing post combustion capture for coal-fired power stations
in APP countries –New power plants, CSIRO Report ET/IR – 1083.
N.Dave et al./Energy Procedia4(2011)2005–20192019
Author name / Energy Procedia 00 (2010) 000–000 15 [14]Dave N C, Do T and Palfreyman D., 2009: Assessing post combustion capture for coal-fired power stations
in APP countries –Existing power plants, CSIRO Report ET/IR – 1144.
石钟山记 《水经》上说：“鄱阳湖口有座石钟山。”郦道元认为，这山下面临深潭，微风掀起波浪时，水和石互相撞击，发出的声音象大钟一样。这种说法，人们常常怀疑它。现在把钟和磬放在水里，即使大风浪也不能使它发出声音，何况石头呢。到了唐代，李渤才寻访了它的遗迹，在潭边上找到两座山石，敲着听听它的声音，南边的山石声音重浊而模糊，北边的山石声音清脆而响亮。鼓槌的敲击停止以后，声音还在传播，余音慢慢消失。他自己认为找到了石钟山命名的原因了。然而这种说法，我更加怀疑。能敲得发出铿锵作响的山石。到处都有，可是唯独这座山用钟来命名，这是为什么呢？ 元丰七年农历六月丁丑那天，我从齐安乘船到临汝去，正好大儿子苏迈将要到饶州德兴县做县尉，送他到湖口，因此能够看到这座叫做“石钟”的山。庙里的和尚叫小童拿一柄斧头，在杂乱的石壁中间选择一两处敲打它，发出硿硿的响声，我仍旧笑笑，并不相信。到了晚上，月色明亮，我单独和迈儿坐小船，到绝壁下面。大石壁在旁边斜立着，高达千尺，活象凶猛的野兽、奇怪的鬼物，阴森森的想要扑过来抓人似的；山上栖息的鹘鸟，听到人声也受惊飞起，在高空中磔磔地叫着；还有象老头子在山谷中咳着笑着的声音，有的人说：“这就是鹳鹤。”我正心中惊恐想要回去。忽然，巨大的声音从水上发出，噌吰的声音象击鼓敲钟一样不停。船夫非常害怕。我仔细地观察，原来山下都是石头的洞穴和裂缝，不知它的深浅，微微的水波进入里面，冲荡撞击，便形成这种声音。船划回到两山中间，快要进入港口，有块大石头挡在水流中心，上面可以坐百来人，中间是空的，有很多窟窿，风吹浪打吞进吐出，发出窾坎镗鞳的声音，跟先前噌吰的声音互相应和，好像音乐演奏起来一样。我因而笑着对迈儿说：“你明白吗？发出噌吰响声的，那是周景王的无射钟，发出窾坎镗鞳响声的，那是魏庄子的歌钟。古人没有欺骗我们啊！” 事情没有亲眼看到、亲耳听到，却主观地推断它的有无，能行吗？郦道元见到和听到的，大概和我的见闻相同，可是说得不够详尽；一般做官读书的人又总不愿夜晚乘小船停靠在绝壁下面，所以没有谁能了解真相；而渔夫船工，虽然知道却又不能用口说出用笔写出来。这就是这座山（命名的真实原由）在世上没能流传下来的缘故啊。而浅陋的人竟用斧头敲击来寻求用钟命名的原由，还自己认为得到了它的真相。我因此把上面的情况记载下来，叹息郦道元记叙的简略，而笑李渤见识的浅陋。 【内容主旨】 本文记录了作者考察石钟山得名的原因的过程，文中的叙事，议论皆由探寻石钟山命名的来由而发，卒章显志，先得出“事不目见耳闻，而臆断其有无，可乎”的观点，再用“叹郦元之简，而笑李渤之陋”的一叹，一笑点写自己的写作意图。 全文分三个部分，第一段，对石钟山命名缘由的两种解释表示怀疑。第二段解疑，通过实地考察去探究石钟山命名的真实缘由。属记叙部分。第三段得出结论，即事情如果没有亲眼看见，亲耳听到就不能凭主观臆测去推断它的有无。属议论部分。 【写作手法】 《石钟山记》的结构不同于一般的记游性散文那样，先记游，然后议论，而是先议论，由议论带出记叙，最后又以议论作结。作者以“疑──察──结论”三个步骤展开全文。全文首尾呼应，逻辑严密，浑然一体。本文第一句就提郦道元的说法，提出别人对此说的怀疑，这种怀疑也不是没有根据，而是用钟磬作的实验为依据。这就为文章的第二段中作者所见的两处声
外文翻译 专业机械设计制造及其自动化学生姓名刘链柱 班级机制111 学号1110101102 指导教师葛友华
外文资料名称： Design and performance evaluation of vacuum cleaners using cyclone technology 外文资料出处：Korean J. Chem. Eng., 23(6), (用外文写) 925-930 (2006) 附件： 1.外文资料翻译译文 2.外文原文
应用旋风技术真空吸尘器的设计和性能介绍 吉尔泰金，洪城铱昌，宰瑾李， 刘链柱译 摘要：旋风型分离器技术用于真空吸尘器 - 轴向进流旋风和切向进气道流旋风有效地收集粉尘和降低压力降已被实验研究。优化设计等因素作为集尘效率，压降，并切成尺寸被粒度对应于分级收集的50％的效率进行了研究。颗粒切成大小降低入口面积，体直径，减小涡取景器直径的旋风。切向入口的双流量气旋具有良好的性能考虑的350毫米汞柱的低压降和为1.5μm的质量中位直径在1米3的流量的截止尺寸。一使用切向入口的双流量旋风吸尘器示出了势是一种有效的方法，用于收集在家庭中产生的粉尘。 摘要及关键词：吸尘器; 粉尘; 旋风分离器 引言 我们这个时代的很大一部分都花在了房子，工作场所，或其他建筑，因此，室内空间应该是既舒适情绪和卫生。但室内空气中含有超过室外空气因气密性的二次污染物，毒物，食品气味。这是通过使用产生在建筑中的新材料和设备。真空吸尘器为代表的家电去除有害物质从地板到地毯所用的商用真空吸尘器房子由纸过滤，预过滤器和排气过滤器通过洁净的空气排放到大气中。虽然真空吸尘器是方便在使用中，吸入压力下降说唱空转成比例地清洗的时间，以及纸过滤器也应定期更换，由于压力下降，气味和细菌通过纸过滤器内的残留粉尘。 图1示出了大气气溶胶的粒度分布通常是双峰形，在粗颗粒（>2.0微米）模式为主要的外部来源，如风吹尘，海盐喷雾，火山，从工厂直接排放和车辆废气排放，以及那些在细颗粒模式包括燃烧或光化学反应。表1显示模式，典型的大气航空的直径和质量浓度溶胶被许多研究者测量。精细模式在0.18?0.36 在5.7到25微米尺寸范围微米尺寸范围。质量浓度为2?205微克，可直接在大气气溶胶和 3.85至36.3μg/m3柴油气溶胶。
表单实验五 一、实验题目： 表单创建 二、实验目的与要求： （１）掌握类、对象的设计及调用方法等。 （２）掌握用表单向导设计单表、多表表单的操作。 （３）掌握用表单设计器设计表单的方法。 （４）掌握重要表单控件的使用和使用控件生成器生成控件。 三、实验内容： 实验5-1设计一个用户登录表单，在表单上创建一个组合框和一个文本框，从组合框选择用 户名，在文本框中输入口令，三次不正确退出。 方法步骤： 图7.1 （1）新建表单Form1，从表单控件工具栏中拖入两个标签Label1、Label2，两个命令按钮Command1、Command2，以及一个组合框控件Combo1和一个文本框控件Text1。并按图7.1调整好其位置和大小。 （2）设置Label1的Caption属性值为“用户名”，Label2的Caption属性值为“密码”，Command1、Command2的Caption属性值分别为“登录”和“退出”。Form1的Caption属性值为“登录”。 （3）设置Combo1的RowSourceType属性为“1-值”，RowSource属性为“孙瑞，刘燕”，Text1的PasswordChar属性为“*”。 （4）在Form1的Init Event过程中加入如下代码： public num num=0 在Command1的Click Event过程中加入如下的程序代码： if (alltrim(https://www.doczj.com/doc/b017634584.html,bo1.value)=="孙瑞" and alltrim(thisform.text1.value)=="123456") or (alltrim(https://www.doczj.com/doc/b017634584.html,bo1.value)=="刘燕" and alltrim(thisform.text1.value)=="abcdef") thisform.release do 主菜单.mpr else
《石钟山记》的原文及译文 [原文] 《水经》云：彭蠡之口有石钟山焉。郦元以为下临深潭，徽风鼓浪，水石相搏，声如洪钟。是说也，人常疑之。今以钟磬置水中，虽大风浪不能鸣也，而况石乎！至唐李渤始访其遗踪，得双石于潭上，扣而聆之，南声函胡，北音清越，桴止响腾，余韵徐歇。自以为得之矣，然是说也，余尤疑之。石之铿然有声者，所在皆是也，而此独以钟名，何哉？ 元丰七年六月丁丑，余自齐安舟行适临汝，而长子迈将赴饶之德兴尉，送之至湖口，因得观所谓石钟者。寺僧使小童持斧，于乱间择其一二扣之，□□焉，余固笑而不信也。至莫夜月明，独与迈乘小舟，至绝壁下。大石侧立千尺，如猛兽奇鬼，森然欲搏人；而山上栖鹘，闻人声亦惊起，磔磔云霄间；又有若老人咳且笑于山谷中者，或曰此鹳鹤也。余方心动欲还，而大声发于水上，噌□如钟鼓不绝。舟人大恐。徐而察之，则山下皆石穴罅，不知其浅深，微波入焉，涵淡澎湃而为此也。舟回至两山间，将入港口，有大石当中流，可坐百人，空中而多窍，与风水相吞吐，有□坎镗□之声，与向之噌□者相应，如乐作焉。因笑谓迈曰：汝识之乎？噌□者，周景王之无射也，□坎镗□者，魏庄子之歌钟也。古之人不余欺也 事不目见耳闻，而臆断其有无，可乎？郦元之所见闻，殆与
余同，而言之不详；士大夫终不肯以小舟夜泊壁之下，故莫能知；而渔工水师虽知而不能言。此世所以不传也。而陋者乃以斧斤考击而求之，自以为得其实。余是以记之，盖叹郦元之简，而笑李渤之陋也。 [译文] 《水经》上说：鄱阳湖口有座石钟山。郦道元认为，这山下面临深潭，微风掀起波浪时，水和石互相撞击，发出的声音象大钟一样。这种说法，人们常常怀疑它。现在把钟和磬放在水里，即使大风浪也不能使它发出声音，何况石头呢。到了唐代，李渤才寻访了它的遗迹，在潭边上找到两座山石，敲着听听它的声音，南边的山石声音重浊而模糊，北边的山石声音清脆而响亮。鼓槌的敲击停止以后，声音还在传播，余音慢慢消失。他自己认为找到了石钟山命名的原因了。然而这种说法，我更加怀疑。能敲得发出铿锵作响的山石。到处都有，可是唯独这座山用钟来命名，这是为什么呢？ 元丰七年农历六月丁丑那天，我从齐安乘船到临汝去，正好大儿子苏迈将要到饶州德兴县做县尉，送他到湖口，因此能够看到这座叫做石钟的山。庙里的和尚叫小童拿一柄斧头，在杂乱的石壁中间选择一两处敲打它，发出□□的响声，我仍旧笑笑，并不相信。到了晚上，月色明亮，我单独和迈儿坐小船，到绝壁下面。大石壁在旁边斜立着，高达千尺，活象凶猛的野兽、奇怪的鬼物，阴森森的想要扑过来抓人似的；
南京理工大学 毕业设计(论文)外文资料翻译 教学点：南京信息职业技术学院 专业：电子信息工程 姓名：陈洁 学号： 014910253034 外文出处：《 Pci System Architecture 》 (用外文写) 附件： 1.外文资料翻译译文；2.外文原文。 指导教师评语： 该生外文翻译没有基本的语法错误，用词准确，没 有重要误译，忠实原文；译文通顺，条理清楚，数量与 质量上达到了本科水平。 签名： 年月日 注：请将该封面与附件装订成册。
附件1：外文资料翻译译文 64位PCI扩展 1.64位数据传送和64位寻址：独立的能力 PCI规范给出了允许64位总线主设备与64位目标实现64位数据传送的机理。在传送的开始，如果回应目标是一个64位或32位设备，64位总线设备会自动识别。如果它是64位设备，达到8个字节（一个4字）可以在每个数据段中传送。假定是一串0等待状态数据段。在33MHz总线速率上可以每秒264兆字节获取（8字节／传送＊33百万传送字／秒），在66MHz总线上可以528M字节／秒获取。如果回应目标是32位设备，总线主设备会自动识别并且在下部4位数据通道上（AD[31::00]）引导，所以数据指向或来自目标。 规范也定义了64位存储器寻址功能。此功能只用于寻址驻留在4GB地址边界以上的存储器目标。32位和64位总线主设备都可以实现64位寻址。此外，对64位寻址反映的存储器目标（驻留在4GB地址边界上）可以看作32位或64位目标来实现。 注意64位寻址和64位数据传送功能是两种特性，各自独立并且严格区分开来是非常重要的。一个设备可以支持一种、另一种、都支持或都不支持。 2.64位扩展信号 为了支持64位数据传送功能，PCI总线另有39个引脚。 ●REQ64#被64位总线主设备有效表明它想执行64位数据传送操作。REQ64#与FRAME#信号具有相同的时序和间隔。REQ64#信号必须由系统主板上的上拉电阻来支持。当32位总线主设备进行传送时，REQ64#不能又漂移。 ●ACK64#被目标有效以回应被主设备有效的REQ64#（如果目标支持64位数据传送），ACK64#与DEVSEL#具有相同的时序和间隔（但是直到REQ64#被主设备有效，ACK64#才可被有效）。像REQ64#一样，ACK64#信号线也必须由系统主板上的上拉电阻来支持。当32位设备是传送目标时，ACK64#不能漂移。 ●AD[64::32]包含上部4位地址／数据通道。 ●C/BE#[7::4]包含高4位命令/字节使能信号。 ●PAR64是为上部4个AD通道和上部4位C/BE信号线提供偶校验的奇偶校验位。 以下是几小结详细讨论64位数据传送和寻址功能。 3.在32位插入式连接器上的64位卡
石钟山记-原文-翻译
石钟山记 苏轼 《水经》云：“彭蠡之口有石钟山焉。”郦元以为下临深潭，微风鼓浪，水石相搏，声如洪钟。是说也，人常疑之。今以钟磬置水中，虽大风浪不能鸣也，而况石乎！至唐李渤始访其遗踪，得双石于潭上，扣而聆之，南声函胡，北音清越，桴止响腾，余韵徐歇。自以为得之矣。然是说也，余尤疑之。石之铿然有声者，所在皆是也，而此独以钟名，何哉？ 元丰七年六月丁丑，余自齐安舟行适临汝，而长子迈将赴饶之德兴尉，送之至湖口，因得观所谓石钟者。寺僧使小童持斧，于乱石间择其一二扣之，硿硿焉。余固笑而不信也。至莫夜月明，独与迈乘小舟，至绝壁下。大石侧立千尺，如猛兽奇鬼，森然欲搏人；而山上栖鹘，闻人声亦惊起，磔磔云霄间；又有若老人咳且笑于山谷中者，或曰此鹳鹤也。余方心动欲还，而大声发于水上，噌吰如钟鼓不绝。舟人大恐。徐而察之，则山下皆石穴罅，不知其浅深，微波入焉，涵淡澎湃而为此也。舟回至两山间，将入港口，有大石当中流，可坐百人，空中而多窍，与风水相吞吐，有窾坎镗鞳之声，与向之噌吰者相应，如乐作焉。因笑谓迈曰：“汝识之乎？噌吰者，周景王之无射也；窾坎镗鞳者，魏庄子之歌钟也。古之人不余欺也！” 事不目见耳闻，而臆断其有无，可乎？郦元之所见闻，殆与余同，而言之不详；士大夫终不肯以小舟夜泊绝壁之下，故莫能知；而渔工水师虽知而不能言。此世所以不传也。而陋者乃以斧斤考击而求之，自以为得其实。余是以记之，盖叹郦元之简，而笑李渤之陋也。 注释 1、选自《苏东坡全集》。 2、彭蠡：鄱阳湖的又一名称。 3、郦元：就是郦道元，北魏人，地理学家，著《水经注》。 4、鼓：振动。 5、搏：击，拍。 6、洪钟：大钟。 7、是说：这个说法。
预测高速公路建设项目最终的预算和时间 摘要 目的——本文的目的是开发模型来预测公路建设项目施工阶段最后的预算和持续的时间。 设计——测算收集告诉公路建设项目，在发展预测模型之前找出影响项目最终的预算和时间，研究内容是基于人工神经网络(ANN)的原理。与预测结果提出的方法进行比较,其精度从当前方法基于挣值。 结果——根据影响因素最后提出了预算和时间，基于人工神经网络的应用原理方法获得的预测结果比当前基于挣值法得到的结果更准确和稳定。 研究局限性/意义——因素影响最终的预算和时间可能不同,如果应用于其他国家,由于该项目数据收集的都是泰国的预测模型,因此,必须重新考虑更好的结果。 实际意义——这项研究为用于高速公路建设项目经理来预测项目最终的预算和时间提供了一个有用的工具，可为结果提供早期预算和进度延误的警告。 创意/价值——用ANN模型来预测最后的预算和时间的高速公路建设项目,开发利用项目数据反映出持续的和季节性周期数据, 在施工阶段可以提供更好的预测结果。 关键词：神经网、建筑业、预测、道路、泰国 文章类型：案例研究 前言 一个建设工程项普遍的目的是为了在时间和在预算内满足既定的质量要求和其他规格。为了实现这个目标,大量的工作在施工过程的管理必须提供且不能没有计划地做成本控制系统。一个控制系统定期收集实际成本和进度数据,然后对比与计划的时间表来衡量工作进展是否提前或落后时间表和强调潜在的问题(泰克兹,1993)。成本和时间是两个关键参数，在建设项目管理和相关参数的研究中扮演着重要的角色，不断提供适当的方法和
工具，使施工经理有效处理一个项目，以实现其在前期建设和在施工阶段的目标。在施工阶段,一个常见的问题要求各方参与一个项目，尤其是一个所有者,最终项目的预算到底是多少?或什么时候该项目能被完成？ 在跟踪和控制一个建设项目时，预测项目的性能是非常必要的。目前已经提出了几种方法,如基于挣值技术、模糊逻辑、社会判断理论和神经网络。将挣值法视为一个确定的方法，其一般假设，无论是性能效率可达至报告日期保持不变，或整个项目其余部分将计划超出申报日期（克里斯坦森，1992；弗莱明和坎普曼，2000 ；阿萨班尼，1999；维卡尔等人，2000）。然而，挣值法的基本概念在研究确定潜在的进度延误、成本和进度的差异成本超支的地区。吉布利（1985）利用平均每个成本帐户执行工作的实际成本，也称作单位收入的成本，其标准差来预测项目完工成本。各成本帐户每月的进度是一个平均平稳过程标准偏差，显示预测模型的可靠性，然而，接受的单位成本收益在每个报告期在变化。埃尔丁和休斯（1992）和阿萨班尼（1999）利用分解组成成本的结构来提高预测精度。迪克曼和Al-Tabtabai（1992）基于社会判断理论提出了一个方法，该方法在预测未来的基础上的一组线索，源于人的判断而不是从纯粹的数学算法。有经验的项目经理要求基于社会判断理论方法的使用得到满意的结果。Moselhi等人（2006）应用“模糊逻辑”来预测潜在的成本超支和对建设工程项目的进度延迟。该方法的结果在评估特定时间状态的项目和评价该项目的利润效率有作用。这有助于工程人员所完成的项目时间限制和监控项目预算。Kaastra和博伊德（1996）开发的“人工神经网络”,此网络作为一种有效的预测工具，可以利用过去“模式识别”工作和显示各种影响因素的关系，然后预测未来的发展趋势。罗威等人（2006）开发的成本回归模型能在项目的早期阶段估计建筑成本。总共有41个潜在的独立变量被确定，但只有四个变量：总建筑面积，持续时间，机械设备，和打桩，是线性成本的关键驱动因素，因为它们出现在所有的模型中。模型提出了进一步的洞察了施工成本和预测变量的各种关系。从模型得到的估计结果可以提供早期阶段的造价咨询（威廉姆斯（2003））——最终竞标利用回归模型预测的建设项目成本。 人工神经网络已被广泛用在不同的施工功能中，如估价、计划和产能预测。神经网络建设是Moselhi等人（1991）指出，由Hegazy（1998）开发了一个模型，该模型考虑了项目的外在特征，估计加拿大的公路建设成本： ·项目类型 ·项目范围
石钟山记 苏轼 1《水经》云：“彭蠡I 丫之口有石钟山焉（助词，不译）。①郦元以为下临（动词，面对）深潭，微风鼓（名作动，振动）浪，水石相搏（击、拍），声如洪钟。是（这种）说也，人常疑之。今以钟磬qing 置水中，虽大风浪不能鸣（动词使动，使…鸣叫）也，而（递进，更）况石乎！②至唐李渤始（才）访（探寻）其遗踪，得双石于潭上，扣（敲击）而（承接）聆I ing之，南（名作状，在南边的）声函胡（通“含糊”），北（名作状）音清越（高扬），桴f U止响腾（传播），余韵（声音）徐（慢慢地）歇。自以为得（找到）之（代指“命名原因”）矣。然是说也，余尤（更加）疑之。石之铿然有声者（定语后置，“铿然有声”是石的定语），所在皆是（这样）也，而（转折，却）此独以钟名（名作动，命名），何哉译文：《水经》上说：“彭蠡湖的入口处有（一座）石钟山。”①郦道元认为下面对着深潭，微风鼓动着波浪，湖水与山石互相碰撞，发出的声音好像大钟一般。这个说法，人们常常怀疑它。现在拿钟磬放在水中，即使是大风大浪也不能使它发出声响，何况是石头呢！②到了唐朝，李渤才去探寻它的遗迹，在深潭边找到两块山石，敲敲它们，听听它们的声音。南边那块石头的声音重浊而模糊，北边那块石头的声音清脆而响亮，鼓槌停止敲击，声音还在传扬，余音慢慢地消失。他自己认为找到了石钟山命名的原因了。但是这个说法，我更加怀疑。有铿锵悦耳的声音的石头，到处都是这样，可是唯独这座山用“钟” 来命名，为什么呢 一、叙述对石钟山命名的两种说法，然后提出质疑,为下文亲自探究提供依据。 2元丰七年六月丁丑，余自齐安舟（名作状，乘船）行适（到、往）临汝，而（并列）长子迈将赴（赴任）饶之德兴尉，送之至湖口，因得观所谓石钟者。寺僧使小童持斧，于乱石间择其一二扣（敲击）之， 硿硿k e g焉（形副词尾，相当于“然”），余固笑而不信也。至莫（通“暮”）夜月明，（省略主语“吾”）独与迈乘小舟，至绝壁下。①大石侧（名作状，在旁边）立千尺，如猛兽奇鬼，森然欲搏人；而山上栖q I鹘 h u，闻人声亦惊起，磔磔zh e云霄间；.又有若老人咳且笑于山谷中者，或.曰此颧.…gum鹤.he也。余方心动（心惊）欲还，而大声发于水上，噌cheig吰h dig （形容“声音洪亮”）如钟鼓不绝。舟人（船夫）大恐。 ②徐而（修饰，地）察之，则（原来是）山下皆石穴罅（xi d裂缝），不知其浅深（古：偏义复词“深”， 今：浅和深），微波入焉（兼词，那里），涵淡（水波动荡）澎湃（波浪相击）而（表原因）为（形成）此（指“噌吰之声”）也。舟回至两山间，将入港口，有大石当（挡）^流（水流的中心），可坐百人， 空中（中间是空的）而多窍（窟窿），与风水相吞叶，有窾ku?坎k峦（击物声）镗tmg鞳t d （钟鼓声）之声，与向（原先、刚才）之噌吰者相应，如乐作（动词，演奏）焉（助词）。因笑谓迈曰：“汝识（zh i 通“志”）之乎噌吰者，周景王之无射y i也（判断句），竅坎镗鞳者，魏庄子之歌钟也。古之人不余欺也 （宾语前置句）！” 译文：元丰七年六月丁丑日，我从齐安乘船到临汝去，我的长子苏迈将到饶州德兴去做县尉，我送他到湖口，因而能够观察到这座称为“石钟”的山。寺庙里的和尚叫一个小孩拿着斧头，在乱石中间选一两处敲打它，发出硿硿的响声，我本来就觉得可笑，并不相信。到了晚上，月光明亮，我独自与苏迈坐
2100单词，11500英文字符，4300汉字 出处：Do?an E. New Historicism and Renaissance Culture*J+. Ankara üniversitesiDilveTarih-Co?rafyaFakültesiDergisi, 2005, 45(1): 77-95. 原文 NEW HISTORICISM AND RENAISSANCE CULTURE EvrimDogan Although this new form of historicism centers history as the subject of research, it differs from the "old" in its understanding of history. While traditional historicism regards history as "universal," new historicism considers it to be "cultural." According to Jeffrey N. Cox and Larry J.Reynolds, "new" historicism can be differentiated from "old" historicism "by its lack of faith in 'objectivity' and 'permanence' and its stress not upon the direct recreation of the past, but rather the process by which the past is constructed or invented" (1993: 4). This new outlook on history also brings about a new outlook on literature and literary criticism. Traditional literary historicism holds that the proper aim of literary criticism is to attempt to reconstruct the past objectively, whereas new historicism suggests that history is only knowable in the same sense literature is—through subjective interpretation: our understanding of the past is always conducted by our present consciousness’s. Louis Montrose, in his "Professing the Renaissance," lays out that as critics we are historically bound and we may only reconstruct the histories through the filter of our consciousness: Our analyses and our understandings necessarily proceed from our own historically, socially and institutionally shaped vantage points; that the histories we reconstruct are the textual constructs of critics who are, ourselves, historical subjects (1989: 23). For Montrose, contemporary historicism must recognize that "not only the poet but also the critic exists in history" and that the texts are "inscriptions of history" and furthermore that "our comprehension, representation, interpretation of the texts of the past always proceeds by a mixture of estrangement and appropriation.". Montrose suggests that this kind of critical practice constitutes a continuous dialogue between a "poetics" and a "politics" of culture. In Montrose's opinion, the complete recovery of meanings in a diverse historical outlook is considered necessary since older historical criticism is "illusory," in that it attempts to "recover meanings that are in any final or absolute sense authentic, correct, and complete," because scholarship constantly "constructs and delimits" the objects of study and the scholar is "historically positioned vis-a-vis that object:" The practice of a new historical criticism invites rhetorical strategies by which to foreground the constitutive acts of textuality that traditional modes of literary history efface or misrecognize. It also necessitates efforts to historicize the present as well as the past, and to historicize the dialectic between them—those reciprocal historical pressures by which the past has shaped the present and the present reshapes the past. The new historicist outlook on literary criticism is primarily against literary formalism that excludes all considerations external to the "text," and evaluates it in isolation.The preliminary concern of new historicism is to refigure the relationship between texts and the cultural system in which they were produced. In terms of new historicism, a literary text can only be evaluated in its social, historical, and political contexts. Therefore, new historicism renounces the formalist conception of literature as an autonomous aesthetic order that transcends the needs and interests of
企业大数据表单的向导式UI设计 Ray Liu 2013-02-20 前言 (2) 第一章向导式UI (3) 本节总结 (5) 第二章改进型的向导式UI (6) 本节总结 (7) 第三章向导式UI的缺点 (7) 结束语 (7)
前言 企业内部的信息管理系统，由于业务的复杂性，导致我们的一张订单中往往需要填写大量的数据信息。先来看一下excel2007中的模版中的DHL EMailShip订单 上面仅仅是一个tab中的内容，需要完整填的话，还有invoice, packingList等等，作为一个新手，填写这么多的数据可真是让人头大的事情啊。
第一章向导式UI 对于新手来说，做上述复杂单据无疑是个漫长的学习和适应的过程，由此，我想到了是否可以参考现今电商网站的购物页面，采用创建向导的形式来创建订单，目的有3点： 1.新手可以快速上手 2.流程固化，不易出错 3.数据的分块填写，减少注意力分散 举例：填写一张销售订单（excel2007中的Sales Order模版） 传统的非向导式的UI如下，用户直接在一个form中填写完所有信息。
向导式的UI如下： 第一步 第二步 第三步 第四步 点击提交，我们就创建了一张完整的销售订单了，效果如图1 一样
本节总结 对于新手，向导式UI无疑是好的。再次重申其目的 1.新手可以快速上手 2.流程固化，不易出错 3.数据的分块填写，减少注意力分散 OK，对于这个例子，你也许会疑问，我直接填数据也很直观啊，我不觉得这么麻烦的跳转UI填 来填去的就是方便了。 对，非常对，假设你入门了，精通了，变老手了，你愿意每次都这样一项一项的点击去填数据么？我不愿意，非常不愿意。 So，我们需要改进型（更友好）的向导式UI。
石钟山记 教学目的 1.认识作者反对臆断、重视考察的观点。 2.了解记叙、说明、议论相结合的写法。 教学设想 过去的教学经验证明，将本文当作游记来讲是讲不好的，将苏轼此举上升到“实践精神”，也显得不甚恰当。本文是一篇考察记，开头说作者对郦说和李说的怀疑，正是交代考察的缘起；中间记“游程”也是先访寺僧，后游绝壁，这是为考察目的而安排的；待到考察目的已经达到，便不再提游览之事，而着重抒发议论。按照考察记的要求来安排教学的各个环节，才会显得顺理成章。 本文的教学重点是“余方心动欲还……古之人不余欺也”这一 部分。突出这个重点，可以带动文章的全局。 对“预习提示”中“未能进一步从‘形’的方面作全面考察” 一句要作点解释――苏轼是在六月江水上涨之时去的。不可能看出山形。要防止学生因此引起思想混乱。 本课拟用三课时教读，安排如下： 第1课时：完成练习第一题，诵读第1段。 第2课时：诵读第2段，完成练习第二题。 第3课时：诵读第3段，总结全课。向课外延伸：学生自读俞樾文章（《春在堂随笔》第七卷第17条）。 ［说明］练习第三、五两题已在总结课上处理，第四题删去，有关翻译的练习拟放在高中二年级进行。 预习安排 1.对照注释看课文一遍。 2.比较下列各组句子的语气有什么不同，然后朗读全文，要读出语气。 3.划分本文结构。准备口答练习第一题。 第一课时 教学过程
一、导入新课。 提问：这篇课文跟我们刚学过的《游褒禅山记》有相同之点吗？请说出主要的。（都有记游的内容，都有相当多的议论成分，“记” 和“议”又都是紧密地结合在一起的。） 指出：能看出这些相同点，说明同学们能够举一反三，这是阅读能力提高的一个标志。这两篇文章还有一些不同点，而且是很大的不同。这一点现在先不讨论，但同学们在诵读过程中要认真加以领会。现在请看“预习提示”的第2段。 提问：“未能进一步从‘形’的方面作全面考察”这句话是对苏轼的批评吗？（是。）这个批评是不是严了一点？ 教师作解释（内容见“教学设想”）后，进一步指出：人们对事物的认识有一个过程，一开始不完善是难免的。苏轼的论断被人们承认八百年之久，这是很了不起的。 二、教师示范背诵全文和学生齐读全文。 要求学生在听教师背诵的过程中给难字注音，并认真品味每句话的语气。 教师背诵完毕，出示小黑板，再次正音： 蠡（ｌǐ）??（ｆú）铿（ｋēｎｇ）磔磔（ｚｈéｚｈé） 噌?疲ǎ悖瑷ィ睿纾瑷?ｎｇ）罅（ｘｉà）?U坎（ｋｕǎ ｎｋǎｎ） 莫（ｍù）镗?O（ｔāｎｇｔà）识（ｚｈì）无射（ｗúｙì）指出哪些是通假异读的字（莫、识），哪个字是古音异读（射）。 正音后学生齐读全文。 三、划分结构和探究主旨。 ［说明］本文说的是石钟山命名的来由，文中的叙事因此而发，议论也因此而发，用的是卒章显志的写法，全文的结构都是为“显志”服务的。作者的“志”即文章的主旨在最后一段说得十分明白，首先抓住作者的“志”，全文结构就可以一目了然。据此，这一项内容拟采用“倒析法”，也就是从最后一段着手分析，先探究文章主旨。这种分析是纲要式的，目的是使学生获得一个统率全文的初步概念，然后在诵读过程中逐步加深体会。
文献出处：Thronson P. Toward Comprehensive Reform of America’s Emergency Law Regime [J]. University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform, 2013, 46(2). 原文 TOWARD COMPREHENSIVE REFORM OF AMERICA’S EMERGENCY LAW REGIME Patrick A. Thronson Unbenownst to most Americans, the United States is presently under thirty presidentially declared states of emergency. They confer vast powers on the Executive Branch, including the ability to financially incapacitate any person or organization in the United States, seize control of the nation’s communications infrastructure, mobilize military forces, expand the permissible size of the military without congressional authorization, and extend tours of duty without consent from service personnel. Declared states of emergency may also activate Presidential Emergency Action Documents and other continuity-of-government procedures, which confer powers on the President—such as the unilateral suspension of habeas corpus—that appear fundamentally opposed to the American constitutional order.
石钟山记 苏轼 １《水经》云：“彭蠡lǐ之口有石钟山焉（助词，不译）。”①郦元以为下临（动词，面对）深潭，微风鼓（名作动，振动）浪，水石相搏(击、拍)，声如洪钟。是（这种）说也，人常疑之。今以钟磬qìng 置水中，虽大风浪不能鸣（动词使动，使…鸣叫）也，而（递进，更）况石乎！②至唐李渤始（才）访（探寻）其遗踪，得双石于潭上，扣（敲击）而（承接）聆líng之，南（名作状，在南边的）声函胡（通“含糊”），北（名作状）音清越（高扬），桴fú止响腾（传播），余韵（声音）徐（慢慢地）歇。自以为得（找到）之（代指“命名原因”）矣。然是说也，余尤（更加）疑之。石之铿然有声者（定语后置，“铿然有声”是石的定语），所在皆是（这样）也，而（转折，却）此独以钟名（名作动，命名），何哉？ 译文：《水经》上说：“彭蠡湖的入口处有（一座）石钟山。”①郦道元认为下面对着深潭，微风鼓动着波浪，湖水与山石互相碰撞，发出的声音好像大钟一般。这个说法，人们常常怀疑它。现在拿钟磬放在水中，即使是大风大浪也不能使它发出声响，何况是石头呢！②到了唐朝，李渤才去探寻它的遗迹，在深潭边找到两块山石，敲敲它们，听听它们的声音。南边那块石头的声音重浊而模糊，北边那块石头的声音清脆而响亮，鼓槌停止敲击，声音还在传扬，余音慢慢地消失。他自己认为找到了石钟山命名的原因了。但是这个说法，我更加怀疑。有铿锵悦耳的声音的石头，到处都是这样，可是唯独这座山用“钟”来命名，为什么呢？ 一、叙述对石钟山命名的两种说法,然后提出质疑,为下文亲自探究提供依据。 ２元丰七年六月丁丑，余自齐安舟（名作状，乘船）行适（到、往）临汝，而（并列）长子迈将赴（赴任）饶之德兴尉，送之至湖口，因得观所谓石钟者。寺僧使小童持斧，于乱石间择其一二扣(敲击)之，硿硿kōng焉（形副词尾，相当于“然”），余固笑而不信也。至莫（通“暮”）夜月明，（省略主语“吾”）独与迈乘小舟，至绝壁下。①大石侧（名作状，在旁边）立千尺，如猛兽奇鬼，森然欲搏人；而山上栖q ī鹘hú，闻人声亦惊起，磔磔zhé云霄间；又有若老人咳且笑于山谷中者，或曰此颧guàn鹤hè也。余方心动（心惊）欲还，而大声发于水上，噌chēng吰hóng（形容“声音洪亮”）如钟鼓不绝。舟人（船夫）大恐。②徐而（修饰，地）察之，则（原来是）山下皆石穴罅（xià裂缝），不知其浅深（古：偏义复词“深”，今：浅和深），微波入焉（兼词，那里），涵淡（水波动荡）澎湃（波浪相击）而（表原因）为（形成）此（指“噌吰之声”）也。舟回至两山间，将入港口，有大石当（挡）中流（水流的中心），可坐百人，空中（中间是空的）而多窍（窟窿），与风水相吞吐，有窾kuǎn坎kǎn（击物声）镗tāng鞳tà（钟鼓声）之声，与向（原先、刚才）之噌吰者相应，如乐作（动词，演奏）焉（助词）。因笑谓迈曰：“汝识(zhì通“志”)之乎？噌吰者，周景王之无射yì也（判断句），窾坎镗鞳者，魏庄子之歌钟也。古之人不余欺也（宾语前置句）！”
石钟山记【原文】作者简介：苏轼（1037～1101），字子瞻，号东坡居士，北宋眉山人。是著名的文学家，唐宋散文八大家之一。他学识渊博，多才多艺，在书法、绘画、诗词、散文各方面都有很高造诣。他的书法与蔡襄、黄庭坚、米芾合称“宋四家”；善画竹木怪石，其画论，书论也有卓见。是北宋继欧阳修之后的文坛领袖，散文与欧阳修齐名；诗歌与黄庭坚齐名；他的词气势磅礴，风格豪放，一改词的婉约，与南宋辛弃疾并称“苏辛”，共为豪放派词人。《水经》云：“彭蠡之口有石钟山焉。”郦元以为下临深潭，微风鼓浪，水石相搏，声如洪钟。是说也，人常疑之。今以钟磬置水中，虽大风浪不能鸣也，而况石乎！至唐李渤始访其遗踪，得双石于潭上，扣而聆之，南声函胡，北音清越，枹止响腾，余韵徐歇。自以为得之矣。然是说也，余尤疑之。石之铿然有声音，所在皆是也，而此独以钟名，何哉？元丰七年六月丁丑，余自齐安舟行适临汝，而长子迈将赴铙之德兴尉，送之至湖口，因得观所谓石钟者。寺僧使小童持斧，于乱石间择其一二扣之，硿硿焉。余固笑而不信也。至暮夜月明，独与迈乘小舟，至绝壁下。大石侧立千尺，如猛兽奇鬼，森然欲搏人，而山上栖鹘，闻人声亦惊起，磔磔云霄间；又有若老人欬且笑于山谷中者，或曰：“此鹳鹤也。”余方心动欲还，而大声发于水上，噌吰如钟鼓不绝。舟人大恐。徐而察之，则山下皆石穴罅，不知其浅深，微波入焉，涵淡澎湃而为此也。舟回至两山间，将入港口，有大石当中流，可坐百人，空中而多窍，与风水相吞吐，有窾坎镗鞳之声，与向噌吰者相应，如乐作焉。因笑谓迈曰：“汝识之乎？噌吰者，周景王之无射也；窾坎镗鞳者，魏庄子之歌钟也。古之人不余欺也！”事不目见耳闻，而臆断其有无，可乎？郦元之所见闻，殆与余同，而言之不详；士大夫终不肯以小舟夜泊绝壁之下，故莫能知；而渔工水师虽如知而不能言。此世所以不传也。而陋者乃以斧斤考击而求之，自以为得其实。余是以记之，盖叹郦元之简，而笑李渤之陋也。【译文】《水经》上说：“鄱阳湖口有座石钟山。”郦道元认为，这山下面临深潭，微风掀起波浪时，水和石互相撞击，发出的声音象大钟一样。这种说法，人们常常怀疑它。现在把钟和磬放在水里，即使大风浪也不能使它发出声音，何况石头呢。到了唐代，李渤才寻访了它的遗迹，在潭边上找到两座山石，敲着听听它的声音，南边的山石声音重浊而模糊，北边的山石声音清脆而响亮。鼓槌的敲击停止以后，声音还在传播，余音慢慢消失。他自己认为找到了石钟山命名的原因了。然而这种说法，我更加怀疑。能敲得发出铿锵作响的山石。到处都有，可是唯独这座山用钟来命名，这是为什么呢？元丰七年农历六月丁丑那天，我从齐安乘船到临汝去，正好大儿子苏迈将要到饶州德兴县做县尉，送他到湖口，因此能够看到这座叫做“石钟”的山。庙里的和尚叫小童拿一柄斧头，在杂乱的石壁中间选择一两处敲打它，发出硿硿的响声，我仍旧笑笑，并不相信。到了晚上，月色明亮，我单独和迈儿坐小船，到绝壁下面。大石壁在旁边斜立着，高达千尺，活象凶猛的野兽、奇怪的鬼物，阴森森的想要扑过来抓人似的；山上栖息的鹘鸟，听到人声也受惊飞起，在高空中磔磔地叫着；还有象老头子在山谷中咳着笑着的声音，有的人说：“这就是鹳鹤。”我正心中惊恐想要回去。忽然，巨大的声音从水上发出，噌吰的声音象击鼓敲钟一样不停。船夫非常害怕。我仔细地观察，原来山下都是石头的洞穴和裂缝，不知它的深浅，微微的水波进入里面，冲荡撞击，便形成这种声音。船划回到两山中间，快要进入港口，有块大石头挡在水流中心，上面可以坐百来人，中间是空的，有很多窟窿，风吹浪打吞进吐出，发出窾坎镗鞳的声音，跟先前噌吰的声音互相应和，好象音乐演奏起来一样。我因而笑着对迈儿说：“你明白吗？发出噌吰响声的，那是周景王的无射钟，发出窾坎镗鞳响声的，那是魏庄子的歌钟。古人没有欺骗我们啊！”事情没有亲眼看到、亲耳听到，却主观地推断它的有无，能行吗？郦道元见到和听到的，大概和我的见闻相同，可是说得不够详尽；一般做官读书的人又总不愿夜晚乘小船停靠在绝壁下面，所以没有谁能了解真相；而渔夫船工，虽然知道却又不能用口说出用笔写出来。这就是