外文文献翻译

中英文对照外文翻译(文档含英文原文和中文翻译)原文:Safety Assurance for Challenging Geotechnical Civil Engineering Constructions in Urban AreasAbstractSafety is the most important aspect during design, construction and service time of any structure, especially for challenging projects like high-rise buildings and tunnels in urban areas. A high level design considering the soil-structure interaction, based on a qualified soil investigation is required for a safe and optimised design. Dueto the complexity of geotechnical constructions the safety assurance guaranteed by the 4-eye-principle is essential. The 4-eye-principle consists of an independent peer review by publicly certified experts combined with the observational method. The paper presents the fundamental aspects of safety assurance by the 4-eye-principle. The application is explained on several examples, as deep excavations, complex foundation systems for high-rise buildings and tunnel constructions in urban areas. The experiences made in the planning, design and construction phases are explained and for new inner urban projects recommendations are given.Key words: Natural Asset; Financial Value; Neural Network1.IntroductionA safety design and construction of challenging projects in urban areas is based on the following main aspects:Qualified experts for planning, design and construction;Interaction between architects, structural engineers and geotechnical engineers;Adequate soil investigation;Design of deep foundation systems using the FiniteElement-Method (FEM) in combination with enhanced in-situ load tests for calibrating the soil parameters used in the numerical simulations;Quality assurance by an independent peer review process and the observational method (4-eye-principle).These facts will be explained by large construction projects which are located in difficult soil and groundwater conditions.2.The 4-Eye-PrincipleThe basis for safety assurance is the 4-eye-principle. This 4-eye-principle is a process of an independent peer review as shown in Figure 1. It consists of 3 parts. The investor, the experts for planning and design and the construction company belong to the first division. Planning and design are done accordingto the requirements of the investor and all relevant documents to obtain the building permission are prepared. The building authorities are the second part and are responsible for the buildingpermission which is given to the investor. The thirddivision consists of the publicly certified experts.They are appointed by the building authorities but work as independent experts. They are responsible for the technical supervision of the planning, design and the construction.In order to achieve the license as a publicly certified expert for geotechnical engineering by the building authorities intensive studies of geotechnical engineering in university and large experiences in geotechnical engineering with special knowledge about the soil-structure interaction have to be proven.The independent peer review by publicly certified experts for geotechnical engineering makes sure that all information including the results of the soil investigation consisting of labor field tests and the boundary conditions defined for the geotechnical design are complete and correct.In the case of a defect or collapse the publicly certified expert for geotechnical engineering can be involved as an independent expert to find out the reasons for the defect or damage and to develop a concept for stabilization and reconstruction [1].For all difficult projects an independent peer review is essential for the successful realization of the project.3.Observational MethodThe observational method is practical to projects with difficult boundary conditions for verification of the design during the construction time and, if necessary, during service time. For example in the European Standard Eurocode 7 (EC 7) the effect and the boundary conditions of the observational method are defined.The application of the observational method is recommended for the following types of construction projects [2]:very complicated/complex projects;projects with a distinctive soil-structure-interaction,e.g. mixed shallow and deep foundations, retaining walls for deep excavations, Combined Pile-Raft Foundations (CPRFs);projects with a high and variable water pressure;complex interaction situations consisting of ground,excavation and neighbouring buildings and structures;projects with pore-water pressures reducing the stability;projects on slopes.The observational method is always a combination of the common geotechnical investigations before and during the construction phase together with the theoretical modeling and a plan of contingency actions(Figure 2). Only monitoring to ensure the stability and the service ability of the structure is not sufficient and,according to the standardization, not permitted for this purpose. Overall the observational method is an institutionalized controlling instrument to verify the soil and rock mechanical modeling [3,4].The identification of all potential failure mechanismsis essential for defining the measure concept. The concept has to be designed in that way that all these mechanisms can be observed. The measurements need to beof an adequate accuracy to allow the identification ocritical tendencies. The required accuracy as well as the boundary values need to be identified within the design phase of the observational method . Contingency actions needs to be planned in the design phase of the observational method and depend on the ductility of the systems.The observational method must not be seen as a potential alternative for a comprehensive soil investigation campaign. A comprehensive soil investigation campaignis in any way of essential importance. Additionally the observational method is a tool of quality assurance and allows the verification of the parameters and calculations applied in the design phase. The observational method helps to achieve an economic and save construction [5].4.In-Situ Load TestOn project and site related soil investigations with coredrillings and laboratory tests the soil parameters are determined. Laboratory tests are important and essential for the initial definition of soil mechanical properties of the soil layer, but usually not sufficient for an entire and realistic capture of the complex conditions, caused by theinteraction of subsoil and construction [6].In order to reliably determine the ultimate bearing capacity of piles, load tests need to be carried out [7]. Forpile load tests often very high counter weights or strong anchor systems are necessary. By using the Osterberg method high loads can be reached without install inganchors or counter weights. Hydraulic jacks induce the load in the pile using the pile itself partly as abutment.The results of the field tests allow a calibration of the numerical simulations.The principle scheme of pile load tests is shown in Figure 3.5.Examples for Engineering Practice5.1. Classic Pile Foundation for a High-Rise Building in Frankfurt Clay and LimestoneIn the downtown of Frankfurt am Main, Germany, on aconstruction site of 17,400 m2 the high-rise buildingproject “PalaisQuartier” has been realized (Figure 4). The construction was finished in 2010.The complex consists of several structures with a total of 180,000 m2 floor space, there of 60,000 m2 underground (Figure 5). The project includes the historic building “Thurn-und Taxis-Palais” whose facade has been preserved (Unit A). The office building (Unit B),which is the highest building of the project with a height of 136 m has 34 floors each with a floor space of 1340 m2. The hotel building (Unit C) has a height of 99 m with 24 upper floors. The retail area (Unit D)runs along the total length of the eastern part of the site and consists of eight upper floors with a total height of 43 m.The underground parking garage with five floors spans across the complete project area. With an 8 m high first sublevel, partially with mezzanine floor, and four more sub-levels the foundation depth results to 22 m below ground level. There by excavation bottom is at 80m above sea level (msl). A total of 302 foundation piles(diameter up to 1.86 m, length up to 27 m) reach down to depths of 53.2 m to 70.1 m. above sea level depending on the structural requirements.The pile head of the 543 retaining wall piles (diameter1.5 m, length up to 38 m)were located between 94.1 m and 99.6 m above sea level, the pile base was between 59.8 m and 73.4 m above sea level depending on the structural requirements. As shown in the sectional view(Figure 6), the upper part of the piles is in the Frankfurt Clay and the base of the piles is set in the rocky Frankfurt Limestone.Regarding the large number of piles and the high pile loads a pile load test has been carried out for optimization of the classic pile foundation. Osterberg-Cells(O-Cells) have been installed in two levels in order to assess the influence of pile shaft grouting on the limit skin friction of the piles in the Frankfurt Limestone(Figure 6). The test pile with a total length of 12.9 m and a diameter of 1.68 m consist of three segments and has been installed in the Frankfurt Limestone layer 31.7 m below ground level. The upper pile segment above the upper cell level and the middle pile segment between the two cell levels can be tested independently. In the first phase of the test the upper part was loaded by using the middle and the lower part as abutment. A limit of 24 MN could be reached (Figure 7). The upper segment was lifted about 1.5 cm, the settlement of the middle and lower part was 1.0 cm. The mobilized shaft friction was about 830 kN/m2.Subsequently the upper pile segment was uncoupled by discharging the upper cell level. In the second test phase the middle pile segment was loaded by using the lower segment as abutment. The limit load of the middle segment with shaft grouting was 27.5 MN (Figure 7).The skin friction was 1040 kN/m2, this means 24% higher than without shaft grouting. Based on the results of the pile load test using O-Cells the majority of the 290 foundation piles were made by applying shaft grouting. Due to pile load test the total length of was reduced significantly.5.2. CPRF for a High-Rise Building in Clay MarlIn the scope of the project Mirax Plaza in Kiev, Ukraine,2 high-rise buildings, each of them 192 m (46 storeys)high, a shopping and entertainment mall and an underground parking are under construction (Figure 8). The area of the project is about 294,000 m2 and cuts a 30 m high natural slope.The geotechnical investigations have been executed 70m deep. The soil conditions at the construction site are as follows: fill to a depth of 2 m to 3mquaternary silty sand and sandy silt with a thickness of 5 m to 10 m tertiary silt and sand (Charkow and Poltaw formation) with a thickness of 0 m to 24 m tertiary clayey silt and clay marl of the Kiev and But schak formation with a thickness of about 20 m tertiary fine sand of the But schak formation up to the investigation depthThe ground water level is in a depth of about 2 m below the ground surface. The soil conditions and a cross section of the project are shown in Figure 9.For verification of the shaft and base resistance of the deep foundation elements and for calibration of the numerical simulations pile load tests have been carried out on the construction yard. The piles had a diameter of 0.82 m and a length of about 10 m to 44 m. Using the results of the load tests the back analysis for verification of the FEM simulations was done. The soil properties in accordance with the results of the back analysis were partly 3 times higher than indicated in the geotechnical report. Figure 10 shows the results of the load test No. 2 and the numerical back analysis. Measurement and calculation show a good accordance.The obtained results of the pile load tests and of the executed back analysis were applied in 3-dimensionalFEM-simulations of the foundation for Tower A, taking advantage of the symmetry of the footprint of the building. The overall load of the Tower A is about 2200 MN and the area of the foundation about 2000 m2 (Figure11).The foundation design considers a CPRF with 64 barrettes with 33 m length and a cross section of 2.8 m × 0.8m. The raft of 3 m thickness is located in Kiev Clay Marl at about 10 m depth below the ground surface. The barrettes are penetrating the layer of Kiev Clay Marl reaching the Butschak Sands.The calculated loads on the barrettes were in the range of 22.1 MN to 44.5 MN. The load on the outer barrettes was about 41.2 MN to 44.5 MN which significantly exceeds the loads on the inner barrettes with the maximum value of 30.7 MN. This behavior is typical for a CPRF.The outer deep foundation elements take more loads because of their higher stiffness due to the higher volume of the activated soil. The CPRF coefficient is 0.88 =CPRF . Maximum settlements of about 12 cm werecalculated due to the settlement-relevant load of 85% of the total design load. The pressure under the foundation raft is calculated in the most areas not exceeding 200 kN/m2, at the raft edge the pressure reaches 400 kN/m2.The calculated base pressure of the outer barrettes has anaverage of 5100 kN/m2 and for inner barrettes an average of 4130 kN/m2. The mobilized shaft resistance increases with the depth reaching 180 kN/m2 for outer barrettes and 150 kN/m2 for inner barrettes.During the construction of Mirax Plaza the observational method according to EC 7 is applied. Especially the distribution of the loads between the barrettes and the raft is monitored. For this reason 3 earth pressure devices were installed under the raft and 2 barrettes (most loaded outer barrette and average loaded inner barrette) were instrumented over the length.In the scope of the project Mirax Plaza the new allowable shaft resistance and base resistance were defined for typical soil layers in Kiev. This unique experience will be used for the skyscrapers of new generation in Ukraine.The CPRF of the high-rise building project MiraxPlaza represents the first authorized CPRF in the Ukraine. Using the advanced optimization approaches and taking advantage of the positive effect of CPRF the number of barrettes could be reduced from 120 barrettes with 40 mlength to 64 barrettes with 33 m length. The foundation optimization leads to considerable decrease of the utilized resources (cement, aggregates, water, energy etc.)and cost savings of about 3.3 Million US$.译文:安全保证岩土公民发起挑战工程建设在城市地区摘要安全是最重要的方面在设计、施工和服务时间的任何结构,特别是对具有挑战性的项目,如高层建筑和隧道在城市地区。

Disclosing vulnerability information to a vendor should not be a painful or difficult process for the security researcher or the vendor. Ideally, we should all coexist and work together.In May of 2011, I reported several vulnerabilities affecting the S7-1200, a PLC designed and manufactured by Siemens. There was, for a time following my disclosure, a common misconception perpetrated by Siemens' marketing team, which informed Siemens customers that the attacks and vulnerabilities only affected the Simatic S7-1200.This is clearly untrue. The TCP replay and memory protection authentication bypass vulnerabilities are not specific to one type of PLC, as Siemens initially claimed.The issue is present in several different hardware platforms, as revealed by my own investigations and confirmed in the latest ICS-CERT alert. It was not until further investigation of other PLC models by ICS-CERT and myself was completed that Siemens felt obligated to make public certain information regarding additional affected products. Siemens also attempted to minimize the severity of the initially disclosed vulnerabilities by claiming that the S7-1200 was not used in nuclear power installations, and those higher-end PLCs that are used in such sensitive installations were not affected. That claim also turned out to be false.Myself and many control systems experts, such as Dale Peterson, Bob Radvanovsky, Jake Brodsky, Kevin Finisterre and Kevin Lackey, were immediately skeptical of these claims, and rightly so. Each of these individuals already knew the entire line of S7s were using the same protocols and standards, so it wasn’t long before I started receiving inquiries regarding what exactly was exploitable on the controllers. They all knew that if it were a protocolspecific implementation issue, the attacks would not only affect Siemens PLCs, but many other vendors as well. I imagine we will start seeing a significant number of disclosures relating to insecure use of protocols in the near future.Ralph Langner, Stuxnet expert, posted a comment on Digital Bond regarding the password authentication flaw.“The password mechanism on Siemens S7 controllers is so simple that option 1 can probably be ruled out. And the next bombs that are waiting to be dropped may be much more serious than what we have seen so far. Once that Dillon figures out how to delete OB1, which he might before dinner, and crafts this into a Metasploit module, he will have created a cyber assault weapon. Both Siemens and ICS-CERT know that this is technically possible and what the impact would be. While the vendor has no obligation to act on this, DHS certainly has.” –Ralph Langner.I believe that, especially when related to critical industrial control systems, it is preferable for an independent security researcher to discover product vulnerabilities and create public awareness by responsibly disclosing information to CERTs, rather than for our enemies to find the bugs and use them against us.I am not entirely convinced that a metasploit module should be described as acyber-assault weapon, but it does sound cool! The ruby modules were intended to serve as a proof of concept to assist the vendor in validating the bugs, and subsequently developing a patch. These “cyber-assault weapons” are also helpful to ICS-CERT, helping them validate the severity of the issue so they can keep the public informed. In addition, the modules are now available to the pen testing community to assist companies in testing their own infrastructure.The S7-300 and S7-400 are impacted by the same attacks as the S7-1200 with the exception of one denial of service attack against an integrated web server running on the S7-1200 (see ICS-ALERT-11-186-01.)The S7-300 and S7-400 are recognized by many as Siemens’ “bread and butter” products. It is apparent that they share the same key characteristics, including the use of ISO-TSAP and the same PROFINET communication protocol.One of the attacks that we will cover during the Black Hat presentation is the packet replay attack: SIEMENS-SSA-625789. Siemens refers to this issue as a “security gap”. However, if an attacker can capture a CPU STOP/START command or send a CPU READ/WRITE command to any PLC in the automation network, he can alter the operational logic on the controller or disable any process attached to the device, including, but not limited to, enabling hidden features on the PLC.Here is a quote from Siemens’ first advisory notice regarding some of the vulnerabilities and the replay attack scenario. They were already aware of the weak password authentication mechanism, and yet still recommended the feature as a viable solution to prevent remote exploitation of the controller.The Siemens advisory recommends:“It is not however, possible to replay the recorded data obtained from one controller to other controllers within the same plant or other plants as long as they are configured with unique passwords. The answer to this scenario is that a password protected S7-1200 will, in the future (with the firmware update), no longer respond to recorded frames transmitted to the controller at a later time.”--SIEMENS-SSA-625789.The Siemens marketing department has since changed its tone after I provided the exploit code (free of charge). This code will also be available in the Metasploit framework after ICS-CERT has released its advisories.Siemens CERT and a team of their engineers quickly responded to the replay attack scenario by claiming they had a mitigation effort in place to prevent unauthorized access to the PLC. After speaking with ICS-CERT and Siemens CERT, I quickly discovered the ease with which an attacker could circumvent the access control feature they had recommended to prevent unauthorized access to the controller.It is important to remember that this feature was not intended to prevent remote exploits or replay attacks against the device, it was designed to prevent other engineers or unauthorized third parties from re-programming or tampering with the programmable logic onthe PLC. Based on my observation of the packet replay scenario, it seemed logical that if one were to intercept the packets containing a password they could replay the same packets against any controller with the that password and gain access to the controller. It also became evident that if the controller had no password at all, any controller would accept any commands sent to and from any source, without validating any portion of the packets.Just as we enabled the password protection feature by sending a series of packets to the PLC containing a password, which in turn flips a bit in the PLC's memory to enable a protection flag, we could turn that flag off by sending the same packets back to the PLC.It was also clear to me that because everything sent to the controller by the engineering workstation is in plain text, it would be trivial for an attacker to decode the encoded password hash used to flip the memory protection built into the PLC. ICS-CERT verified and reported that the S7-200, S7-300, S7-400, and S7-1200 are all affected by the same protocol specific security vulnerabilities.Conclusion:We need secure protocols in ICS. The product vendors have the ability to make this a reality.The time has come for experts around the ICS community to come together and make the necessary changes to insure a safer environment for all those affected. That means everyone in the world who lives near or works in a factory or a power plant!When vendors misrepresent vulnerability information, their customers cannot properly assess the risk to their operations. Given Siemens ' public statements, it is hard to imagine the company taking the lead in ICS security. If trust is an important buying criteria, other vendors in this industry, such as GE and Rockwell, have an opportunity to set an example and gain market share in the future.供应商对漏洞信息的披露，不应该成为一个让安全研究人员或供应商痛苦的过程。

市场调研方法外文文献及翻译1. Market Research Methods: Incorporating Social Media into Traditional Approaches文章介绍了如何在市场调研中运用社交媒体，以帮助企业更好地了解消费者。

研究人员将社交媒体与传统的定量调研和定性调研相结合，以获得更全面的信息。

通过采集社交媒体的数据分析消费者的行为和偏好，以及对产品或服务的反馈意见。

2. Using Eye Tracking in Market Research: A Guide to Best Practices该文献介绍了视觉追踪技术在市场调研中的应用。

作者指出，视觉追踪技术可以帮助研究人员理解消费者在浏览产品或服务时的注意力分配和行为模式。

文章介绍了适用于市场调研的视觉追踪应用程序的最佳实践和测试方法。

3. Conjoint Analysis in Marketing: New Developments with Implications for Research and Practice这篇文章介绍了一种被称为 "共轭分析" 的调研方法，该方法可以帮助研究人员了解消费者在购买某种产品或服务时的偏好和决策过程。

文献称，共轭分析已经成为市场营销领域最为普遍的工具之一。

文章还介绍了最新的研究和在实践中的应用，并探讨了一些特定情况下共轭分析的限制。

4. Qualitative Market Research: An International Journal这个杂志专注于定性市场调研方法。

它包括与确定消费者需求、分析竞争对手、建立品牌等相关的研究。

文章强调定性市场调研可以提供深入的见解和对产品或服务的更清晰的理解，帮助企业做出更明智的营销和业务决策。

每一期都包括来自该领域的专家的文章，并提供案例研究和最佳实践。

5. Use of Artificial Intelligence Techniques in Market Research: A Review该文献介绍了如何使用人工智能技术进行市场调研。

Yunnan Ethnic pattern in Packaging DesignAbstract: Art is a folk Mother of the arts，is the source of the new art, From which to draw a strong tradition of high—grade Nutrition。

The persons belonging to national folk arts Ethnic patterns，are folk arts Intraoperative a gem, its development Research，and with the means of modern art，art wind Grid，professional skills combine to form a unique Style and features a modern design There are important applications，this paper focuses on Minority Folk pattern in modern packaging design Meter applications are discussed.Keywords: Yunnan Ethnic. Pattern。

Packaging Design.IntroductionYunnan is a multi-ethnic province, Here multiply survive the Han, Yi, Bai More than twenty families， Zhuang, Miao， Dai, etc。

Nation. Long history of various ethnic groups in Yunnan Province， the source is far Long, creating a rich and colorful Folk art。