当前位置：搜档网 › The Relationship Between Seat Pressure and Comfort

The Relationship Between Seat Pressure and Comfort

400 Commonwealth Drive, Warrendale, PA 15096-0001 U.S.A. Tel: (724) 776-4841 Fax: (724) 776-5760 Web: https://www.sodocs.net/doc/c24679315.html,

SAE TECHNICAL PAPER SERIES

2003-01-2213

The Relationship Between Seat

Pressure and Comfort

Aernout Oudenhuijzen and Koen Tan

TNO Human Factors

Femke Morsch

Haagse Hogeschool, University for Professional Education

Digital Human Modeling for Design and Engineering Conference and Exposition

Montreal, Canada June 16-19, 2003

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without the prior written permission of SAE.

For permission and licensing requests contact:

SAE Permissions

400 Commonwealth Drive

Warrendale, PA 15096-0001-USA

Email: permissions@https://www.sodocs.net/doc/c24679315.html,

Fax: 724-772-4891

Tel: 724-772-4028

For multiple print copies contact:

SAE Customer Service

Tel: 877-606-7323 (inside USA and Canada)

Tel: 724-776-4970 (outside USA)

Fax: 724-776-1615

Email: CustomerService@https://www.sodocs.net/doc/c24679315.html,

ISSN 0148-7191

Positions and opinions advanced in this paper are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of SAE. The author is solely responsible for the content of the paper. A process is available by which discussions will be printed with the paper if it is published in SAE Transactions.

Persons wishing to submit papers to be considered for presentation or publication by SAE should send the manuscript or a 300 word abstract of a proposed manuscript to: Secretary, Engineering Meetings Board, SAE. Printed in USA

2003-01-2213 The Relationship Between Seat Pressure and Comfort

Aernout Oudenhuijzen and Koen Tan

TNO Human Factors

Femke Morsch

Haagse Hogeschool, University for Professional Education Copyright ? 2003 SAE International

ABSTRACT

With rising customer expectations, driver comfort will become more and more important for car manufacturers

in distinguishing themselves from others. This is a challenge, since it is difficult to predict comfort, especially in early design stages. Today, comfort can only be assessed and tested very late in the design a construction process (often using prototypes). Potentially, biomechanic software solutions provide a solution for early comfort testing. Hence, the application

of this solution will decrease cost and development time. However, before one is able to create such a software solution, one must have insight into the relationship between mechanical parameters and comfort. This relationship was investigated through a series of experiments in a driving simulator. Both mechanical parameters and comfort were measured. The results showed that seat pressure measurements can be used to quantify driver comfort.

INTRODUCTION

Comfort covers many aspects and is, therefore, difficult

to predict. The aim of TNO is to enable early automotive virtual comfort testing using digital human models. Today, anthropometric digital human models support comfort testing. However, most underlying comfort models are limited to postural comfort (Oudenhuijzen et al., 2000). The focus of TNO is to add seat pressure comfort to the existing postural comfort models. In order

to be able to model these aspects insight has to be gained into the relationship between seat pressure and comfort. This relationship was investigated through an experiment. This paper will describe the relationship between comfort and seat pressure focusing on:

1. The relationship itself, does it exist?

2. What part of the seat contributes more strongly

to seat comfort, the seatpan or the backrest?

3. The best pressure distribution needed for

comfort. Once the relationship between comfort and seat pressure has been established, it is possible to predict seat comfort. Secondly, the seat pressure data resulting from the experiment can be used for validation purposes of biomechanic human modeling systems.

The relationship between comfort and seat pressure:

In automotive research, seat pressure measurements are often used in relation with seat comfort. Most authors agree on the existence of a relationship between comfort and seat pressure (see Table 1) except for Lee, Ferraiuolo (1993) and Reed et al. (1991).

Table 1 An overview of seat comfort experiments involving seat pressure and the relationship found between comfort and seat pressure (+ = a relationship does exist, ? = the article does not mention a solid relationship between comfort and seat pressure).

A relationship between seat

pressure and comfort was

found

Lee and Ferraiuolo

(1993) ? Park et al. (1998) +

Kamaijo et al.(1982) +

Milivojevich et al. (2000) +

Uenishi et al. (2000) +

Reed et al. (1991) ?

Zhao et al. (1994) +

Michida et al. (2001) +

Demontis and Giacoletto

(2002) + Inagaki et al. (2000) +

Lee and Ferraiuolo (1993) found a correlation which proved to be to weak to be the basis for seat design activities. However, they concluded that the results looked promising for further studies. Reed et al. (1991) concluded that higher pressures recorded were a likely

cause for discomfort. However, a solid relationship between seat pressure and comfort was not found.

The seatpan versus the backrest

The backrest is often referred to as being of great importance to enhance comfort and to reduce discomfort. Most authors (see Table 2) only looked for the relationship between seat pressure and comfort for the complete seat. They did not look for a specific contribution of the backrest or the seatpan to seat comfort. Lee, Ferraiuolo (1993) and Uenishi et al. (2000) did not reveal any preference for the seatpan or the backrest. Kamaijo et al. (1982), Zhao et al. (1994) and Michida et al. (2001) revealed no stronger contribution to comfort for the seatpan or the backrest. Only Milivojevich et al. (2000), Park et al. (1998), Demontis, G iacoletto (2002) and Inagaki et al. (2000) revealed comfort differences between the seatpan and the backrest. The authors differed in opinion about the contribution of the backrest or the seatpan to comfort. Milivojevich et al. (2000) found a correlation between comfort scores of seats and the mean lumbar pressure. However, an even stronger correlation was found between the ischial pressure and comfort ratings. Demontis and G iacoletto (2002) created a model to estimate various aspects of driver comfort. A linear regressive model was developed for the factor static comfort. This model consisted of three aspects: postural comfort, stiffness and wrapping (the ratio between the peak and mean pressure in the anterior popliteal zone). The cushion has a higher weight in the regressive models, indicating a higher importance of the cushion compared to the backrest. Park et al. (1998) and Inagaki et al. (2000) showed a stronger influence of the backrest on seat comfort compared to the seatpan.

Table 2 An overview of seat comfort experiments showing a stronger contribution to seat comfort for the backrest compared with the seatpan (? = result is not clear, + = preference for the backrest, - = preference for the seatpan, +/- = no preference for the seatpan or backrest).

The backrest contributes stronger

to seat comfort compared with the

seatpan

Lee and Ferraiuolo (1993) ?

Park et al. (1998) +

Kamaijo et al. (1982) +/-

Milivojevich et al. (2000) -

Uenishi et al. (2000) ?

Reed et al. (1991) +

Zhao et al. (1994) +/-

Michida et al. (2001) +/-

Demontis and Giacoletto (2002) -

Inagaki et al. (2000) + Park et al. (1998) concluded that seats rated uncomfortable did not support the hip and the lumbar region properly. Inagaki et al. (2000) found that thigh support and backrest firmness contributed strongly to the comfort assessment.

What is the best pressure distribution?

Treaster, Marras (1987) and Tichauer (1978) defined several guidelines, which are to be considered to provide the best fit for a car seat. These guidelines are: ? Avoid tissue compression and pressure

concentrations;

? Avoid flattening of the lumbar spine by providing support for the lower back;

? Distribute the load equally on the back, the pelvis and upper legs.

Once these guidelines are being taken into consideration an even distribution will result in a good fit and a high comfort assessment. The question, however,

is how to avoid (if possible) pressure concentrations, how to distribute the load equally and how to avoid flattening of the lumbar spine, and how to distribute the load equally on areas of the human body? Milivojevich et al. (2000) support the guidelines mentioned above, they concluded that a uniform pressure generated a higher comfort score. Park et al. (1998) found that seats rated uncomfortable did not support the hip and the lumbar region properly. They also found that the seat pressure distribution for the uncomfortable seats was asymmetric, contrary to the comfortable seats. Kamaijo et al. (1982) concluded the following: “…the quality of the seat can be roughly determined through an analysis of the load distribution in height direction”; “…it is a good seat when the body pressure pattern shows a variance of pressure along the body’s shape around both ischiatic nodes”. Consequently, Kamaijo et al. (1982) opposed the guidelines of Tichauer (1987 and 1978).

How to compare several studies?

A similarity between the studies mentioned above is that both comfort and seat pressure were measured. However, they differed in: the experimental methods used for the experiments; the measuring equipment; the duration of exposure; the type and number of seats; the number of subjects used and parameters used for data processing. Most experiments were done statically (in a mock-up); some were done dynamically (driving in an instrumented vehicle). Several methods were used to process the seat pressure data. Some authors divided the matrices resulting from the seat pressure measurements, into various areas to interpret the data quantitatively. These areas were mostly determined visually when inspecting the matrices based on anatomic aspects of the human body and mechanical properties of the seats. The resulting areas focused

mainly on the area around the buttocks, the upper legs and several areas on the backrest. It must be mentioned that the areas differed in size, position and shape amongst different studies. The parameter most commonly used was mean pressure. In some cases a pressure ratio was used (Lee and Ferraiuolo (1993), Park et al. (1998)). This ratio was defined by the total pressure for a certain area of the seat, divided by the total pressure for the whole seat. Evidently, when analyzing the differences between several papers, a standard method to process seat pressure data in relation to seat comfort has not been determined yet. This makes detailed comparisons of results virtually impossible.

To summarize, seat pressure relates to seat comfort in general. It is, however, not clear what part (the backrest or the seatpan) of the seat contributes more strongly to seat comfort. Finally, most authors seem to agree on the need for an even pressure distribution. However, it is not clearly defined what an even pressure distribution is.

METHODS

The methods used will be described in this section. The subjects, the experimental procedure, the independent and dependent variables, the measurement techniques and the techniques for data analysis will be described in the sections below.

SUBJECTS

A homogeneous group of subjects (in stature and weight) was selected for the experiments in order to be able to compare pressure data with comfort ratings for certain areas of the human body. These areas would differ significantly when using an inhomogeneous group of subjects. The main focus of the experiment is biomechanics instead of anthropometry. Hence, anthropometric differences are no contributing parameters. Therefore, the subjects’ stature and weight was close to the Dutch average (stature 1810 mm, weight 81 kg). The subjects were selected based on their driving experience (more then 5 years driving experience and at least 20.000 km each year). Another selection criterion was absence of problems or injury to the lower back and lower and upper extremities. The subjects’ age ranged from 22 to 55. EXPERIMENTAL TASK AND PROCEDURE

A within subject design was used. The various conditions were rotated between subjects in order to prevent any kind of order-effects.

Prior to each condition the subjects were instructed about their task. They were asked to drive in a normal way. Extreme driving was prohibited. They were instructed to assess comfort. Each condition consisted of a task driving for one hour. The task contained 8% city streets, 39% country roads and 53% highway (Bubb, 1995). The moving base of the driving was active, providing realistic driving movements. After each condition the subjects completed a questionnaire using a computer. Completion of the questionnaire took approximately 10 minutes.

The TNO Human Factors driving simulator was used for the experiment (see Fig. 1). This simulator enables subjects to drive in a controlled environment. The driving simulator was validated as a tool to replicate on-road driving by Hoekstra, van der Horst (2000), Kaptein et al. (1996), Kaptein, Claessens (1998) and Kaptein, Korteling (1998). Two mock-ups were used for the experiment: one mock-up of a MPV and one of a sedan. Furthermore, the simulator consisted of a computer generated image system, a moving base (the moving base gives the subjects a physical feedback of driving motions (braking, cornering, accelerating and road conditions) and a 3 dimensional sound system.

Fig. 1 The TNO Human Factors driving simulator equipped with the sedan mock-up

INDEPENDENT VARIABLES

SEATS

Ideally a seat would be used where several parameters such as geometry, shape, mechanical properties (stress-strain, damping, friction) can be manipulated independently. However, such a seat was not available for the comfort experiments. Therefore, two seats were selected for the experiments. The seats were selected based on their mechanical characteristics: a medium soft seat (Volvo V40 seat) and a firmer seat (a standard BMW 318 seat) were used (Verver and de Lange, 2002). The medium soft seat will be referred to as seat 1, the firm one as seat 2.

TRUNK INCLINATION

Subjects were seated in two different seated postures:

with an upright trunk position and a more reclined one. A

mock-up based on an MPV design (Renault Espace) was used for the upright trunk posture, a sedan design (BMW 318) for the more reclined trunk posture. Consequently, the driving simulator was equipped with two different mock-ups: one for the sedan and one for the MPV. The seats in the mock-ups were positioned with the same Seating Reference Point (SgRP) and seat reference lines (SAE J1100, 1997). The angle between the reference lines for the seatpan and the backrest was 105° for both mock-ups. This angle was fixed in order to obtain comparable seat pressure data. For instance, the pressure on the seatpan and backrest would change when adjusting the angle between the seatpan and the backrest, which had to be prevented. Additionally, the aim of the experiment was not to find the optimal backrest angle, but which seat provides the optimal support given a certain backrest angle.

The angle between the horizontal plane and the seatpan reference line differed between the two mock-ups. The seat in the sedan mock-up was installed in a more reclined position (4°) compared with the design for the BMW 318. The seat, pedals and steering wheel were adjustable in order to assure the constant relationships between the subjects and the mock-up. The pedals were horizontally adjustable over a range of 100 mm. The steering wheel was adjustable in height (50 mm) and depth (80 mm).

DEPENDENT VARIABLES AND MEASUREMENT TECHNIQUES COMFORT

Comfort was measured through questionnaires. The questionnaire was based on the work of Krist (1993), Park et al. (1997, 1998) and Reed et al. (1991). Also, L ocalized P ostural D iscomfort (L PD) ratings were included (van der Grinten (1991) and van der Grinten, Smitt (1992)). Furthermore, the subjects rated the firmness, and the support for various areas of their back and buttocks.

SEAT PRESSURE

Seat pressure was measured continuously using pressure mats, with a frequency of 0.5 Hz. The FSA measuring system was used. The dimensions of the mats were 21” x 21”. The sensing area dimensions were 17”x 17”. The mats had a 16 x 16 array sensor arrangement. One pressure mat was attached to the seatpan, another to the backrest. Two edges of the mats were positioned touching the intersection between the seatpan and the backrest. The pressure mats were properly secured to the seat in order to prevent folding and sliding.

In order find quantitative differences between both seats, the seats were divided into different areas (see Fig. 2). The seatpan and the backrest were divided in 20 and 12 areas respectively based on anatomical aspects of the

human body, and certain parts of the seats.

Fig. 2 The mean seat pressure on the seatpan and the backrest for both seats and the areas analysed.

These areas distinguish separate parts of the seats i.e. the cushions for sideways support and the cushions for general support of the buttocks and the back or separations in the cushions. Also, the areas distinguish separate parts of the subject’s body (the area around the ischial tuberosities, the legs and the lower, middle and upper back). This method could be used because of the anthropometric similarity between the subjects: all subjects were average in stature and weight. An ANOVA was used to analyze the pressure data for each area. This was done for the seats, the two mock-ups and the left and right side of the seats as independent variables. In addition, the mean pressure and the corresponding standard deviation of the areas were compared using a posthoc Tukey-test. The results were considered being

significantly different with a p<= 0.05.

Fig. 3 The areas selected for the backrest and the seatpan (marked red)

In order to visualize differences between the two seats, certain areas of the backrest and the seatpan were selected. These were the areas with the highest-pressure values and the most contact between the human body and the seats. Evidently, the areas (cells) with a pressure equal to 0 mmHg were taken out. This resulted in two areas: one for the buttocks and one for

the back (without the sideways support). The mean pressure for each row (1 to 16 and 1 to 10 for the backrest and the seatpan respectively, see Fig. 3) was determined for each horizontal array of pressure cells. DATA ANALYSIS

COMFORT

The subjective measurements consisted of a questionnaire and Local Perceived Discomfort (LPD) measurements. The subjects were asked to rate the comfort for specific areas on the back and the buttocks

in a specific part of the questionnaire (see Fig. 4). The mean ratings and the corresponding standard deviations were calculated for each question. The results were analyzed using MANOVA. The MANOVA was carried out on the subjects’ ratings using the subjects, the mock-

up (MPV or sedan), and the seats as independent variables. Differences were considered being significantly with a p<= 0.05.

SEAT PRESSURE

The mean ratings for all subjects and the corresponding standard deviations were calculated for each area. A S tudent test (two-tailed) was carried out to check the differences between the resulting data. The results were considered being statistically and significantly different with a p<=0.05.

Fig. 4 The areas (sideways, lower, middle and upper back) on the back including the buttocks. RESULTS

Firstly, the comfort results will be given, followed by the seat pressure results. Finally, the relationship between seat pressure and comfort will be described.

COMFORT

Both seats were comfortable. However, the overall comfort of seat 1 differed significantly from the seat 2, i.e., an overall lower comfort rating for seat 2. There was no significant effect found for comfort and trunk inclination. Both seats were rated similar in both mock-ups.

The subjects were asked to rate the support provided by several areas of the backrest. The results for all areas of the back showed significant differences between the two seats. The ratings for all areas analyzed were lower (= worse) for seat 2 (see Table 3 and Fig. 4). The largest differences were found for the lower back. Again, no significant effect was found for trunk inclination. As a result, both seats provided the same amount of comfort in both mock-ups for all areas on the back (including the buttocks).

Table 3 The mean comfort ratings for several areas of the back (1= dissatisfied, 5= satisfied).

Seat 1 Seat 2

Mean Mean

MPV 3,72 3,00 Upper back

S edan 3,76 3,03

MPV 3,78 3,30 Middle back

edan 3,79 3,09 MPV 3,06 1,28

Lower back

S edan 3,21 1,69

The rating for the sideways support was significantly lower for seat 2 than for seat 1. The rating for the sideways support did not differ between both mock-ups. Table 4 The mean comfort ratings for the sideways support (1= dissatisfied, 5= satisfied).

Seat 1 Seat 2

Mean Mean

MPV 3,09 2,61 Sideways support

S edan 3,18 2,82

The subjects also rated their LPD. Significant differences were found only for the LPD for the lower back. The results showed a higher discomfort level for the lower back in seat 2 (see Table 5). There was no difference for the LPD between the seats in the two mock-ups.

Table 5 The mean LPD level for the lower back in both seats for both mock-ups (0= maximum discomfort, 5= no discomfort)

Seat 1 Seat 2

MPV 4.4 3.8

Lower back

Sedan 4.8 3.8

The subjects were asked to rate the seatpan’s comfort for its support of the buttocks, the upper legs, the sideways support, the seat’s width, depth and height. No significant differences were found between the two seatpans for these aspects. The two seatpans were rated identically in both mock-ups. The subjects were also asked to rate the firmness of the two seats. There was no preference for seat 1 (medium soft) or seat 2 (firm).

SEAT PRESSURE

The mean seat pressure distribution differs between the two seats as can be seen in Fig. 5 (see appendix). The differences between the two seats are detected easily. The seat pressure of seat 1 is evenly distributed over a larger area; the seat pressure of seat 2 is higher in partial areas. There was almost no pressure measured for the sideways support of seat 2.

Also, differences were found between the seats in the two mock-ups (MPV and sedan). The mean seat pressure on the seatpan was higher for the MPV. The mean seat pressure on the backrest was higher for the sedan.

Fig. 6 (see appendix) for the seatpan shows clear differences in mean seat pressure:

? The mean pressure for seat 2 in the MPV mock-up is higher;

? The pressure is more evenly distributed for the seat

1 in both mock-ups;

? The pressure distribution in the MPV mock-up for seat 2 close to the backrest is lower than for seat 1 seat;

? There is a small difference in the mean pressure in the sedan mock-up for both seats, the mean pressure is higher for seat 2;

? The pressure is evenly distributed for both seats in the sedan mock-up;

? The pressure close to the backrest in the sedan mock-up for the seatpan is lower for seat 2.

Fig. 7 (see appendix) shows clear differences in mean seat pressure for the backrest. The results show:

? A similar pressure distribution for the seats in the two mock-ups;

? A higher mean pressure for both seats in the sedan mock-up; ? An evenly distributed seat pressure for seat 1, seat 2 shows an uneven distribution;

? A higher mean seat pressure for seat 2;

? A clear peak in mean seat pressure for seat 2 and not for seat 1;

? A higher mean pressure for the lower back for seat 1 and lower mean pressure for seat 2;

? A lacking support for the lower back (0 cm to 15 cm from the intersection with the seatpan) for seat 2; ? An overcompensated support for the middle back

(15 to 30 cm from the seatpan) for seat 2.

RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN SEAT PRESSURE AND COMFORT

The mean seat pressure results showed significant differences between seat 1 and seat 2. The mean seat pressure for seat 1 was evenly distributed which was not the case for seat 2. A lower comfort was found for seat 2, especially for the backrest. The seatpan was rated to be comfortable for both seats. No significant differences were found between the seatpans of both seats, despite significant differences in mean seat pressure.

The mean seat pressure from the bottom (near the seatpan) to the top (near the shoulders) of the backrest and the comfort ratings for the lower, middle and upper back is shown in Fig. 8 for the sedan (see appendix). The lower and middle back was estimated to be 15 cm high each. The figure also shows that seat 2, providing less support for the lower back, and a rather high pressure concentration for the middle back, was experienced as being less comfortable compared to seat 1. Evidently, the lacking lumbar support and the uneven pressure distribution in seat 2 seat was less comfortable. Seat 1, instead, with more lumbar support and an even pressure distribution was more comfortable. Therefore, one may conclude that an even pressure distribution results in a higher comfort for the backrest.

Sideways support:

Table 6 shows the mean seat pressure and the comfort ratings for the sideways support. The pressure results are mirrored by the comfort ratings. The comfort rating shows that seat 1 is more comfortable compared to seat 2 concerning sideways support.

Table 6 An overview of the mean seat pressure (SP) for the sideways support) and the corresponding comfort ratings (CR) for the two seats in the two mock-ups (comfort rating: 1 = dissatisfied, 5 = satisfied).

SP CR

MPV Seat

1 3,8 3,09

Seat 2 0,6 2,61

Sedan Seat

1 9 3,18

Seat 2 3 2,82

DISCUSSION

The aim of this study was to find a relationship between comfort and seat pressure. A relationship was found between comfort and seat pressure for the backrest. The backrest with a more even pressure distribution gave a higher seat comfort. This relationship was not found for the seatpan. The comfort of both seatpans was similar despite significant differences in seat pressure. It could be that the subjects are more sensitive to discomfort caused by the backrest compared to the seatpan. As a result, differences in properties of the seats’ backrest could be noticed earlier. This finding can probably be explained by the difference of the anatomy of the human back and buttocks. The area around the buttocks contains, for most people, more deformable tissue, contrary to the back. Consequently, the buttocks have a higher potential to compensate for differences between the seats and the buttocks’ shape, contrary to the human back. In other words, comfort awareness for the buttocks is lower due to a higher potential to compensate for shape differences.

Literature both supports and contradicts the above-mentioned results. Most studies have found a relationship between seat pressure and comfort. Most studies also support the need for an even seat pressure distribution. However, not all studies mentioned support our findings for the backrest, some are unclear and two are even contrary to our results. Most authors only looked for the relationship between seat pressure distribution and experienced comfort for the complete seat. They did not look for a specific contribution of the backrest or the seatpan to seat comfort. Milivojevich et al. (2000), Park et al. (1998), Kamaijo et al. (1982), Demontis, Giacoletto (2002) and Inagaki et al. (2000) revealed clear differences between the seatpan and the backrest concerning the relationship with comfort.

Table 7 shows several of these seat comfort experiments. It also compares these experiments with our experiments on three parameters:

A. Is seat pressure distribution related to comfort?

B. Are the results similar with our results, namely, that

comfort is related to an even seat pressure distribution?

C. Does the backrest contribute more strongly to

comfort compared with the seatpan?

Most studies have found a relationship between seat pressure and comfort. Most studies also support the need for an even seat pressure distribution. However, not all studies mentioned support our findings for the backrest, some are unclear and two are even contrary to our results. Most authors only looked for the relationship between seat pressure distribution and experienced comfort for the complete seat. They did not look for a specific contribution of the backrest or the seatpan to seat comfort. Milivojevich et al. (2000), Park et al. (1998), Kamaijo et al. (1982), Demontis, Giacoletto (2002) and Inagaki et al. (2000) revealed clear differences between the seatpan and the backrest concerning the relationship with comfort.

Table 7 A comparison between several seat comfort experiments and the experiment described in this paper (A= a relationship was found between seat pressure and comfort, B= an even pressure distribution is needed, C= a relationship was found for the backrest only but not for the seatpan, + = similar result, ? = unknown, +/- = similar and different result, - = different result)

Is an even pressure distribution needed?

There is a common conclusion that an even pressure distribution is needed for seat comfort. However, it is not clear what an even distribution is. In fact, the pressure distribution was uneven for both seats in the experiment. Only, seat 2 showed a clear peak at the middle back and seat 1 showed a higher mean pressure for the lower back compared to the upper back. The pressure was more evenly distributed for seat 1 than for seat 2. The highest comfort ratings were found for a seat pressure distribution with a lumbar support, which is higher or equal to the support for the middle back and with a gradually diminishing pressure starting from the middle back to no pressure for the upper back.

The pressure distribution was not evenly distributed for the seatpan either. The results showed substantially higher pressure under the buttocks. Still, the seatpans were rated to be comfortable. Evidently, an even pressure distribution is not desirable for seat comfort.

Seat pressure

F inally, the following issue remains: is a low mean pressure preferred over a high pressure or not? The seat pressure data showed similar pressure distributions for the backrests of both seats in the two mock-ups. The only difference was a higher mean pressure for the sedan mock-up. This could be expected because the center of gravity moves aft when rotating the body backwards. More weight rests on the backrest as a result. However, both backrests were rated similarly in

comfort. Additionally, the seat pressure on the seatpans

of both seats differed significantly. The mean seat pressure was higher for seat 2; still the comfort ratings were similar. Additionally, the subjects had no preference for the firmness of seat 1 (the medium soft seat) or seat 2 (the firm seat). Evidently, the mean pressure itself, within the boundaries as tested, does not relate directly to seat comfort. However, there is always

a tradeoff to be made. It is possible that seats with firm upholstery will cause discomfort due to a poor fit between the human body and the seat causing pressure peaks on certain areas. These fit problems could be overcome with seat adjustments. On the other hand softer seats, can deflect more easily, are less sensitive

to these fit problems. Consequently, an optimal fit is harder to achieve with a firmer seat than with a softer seat, which allows for more deformation.

CONCLUSIONS

This paper focused on the relationship between seat pressure and comfort. It also focused on the fit between

the seated driver and the seat. Dynamic aspects, involving real car vibrations, were not taken into account. Dynamic aspects were taken into account regarding the driving task itself. The relationship was investigated using the TNO Human Factors driving simulator as an instrument. This simulator offers the possibility to drive in

a controlled environment.

The following can be concluded:

? In line with other experiments, a relationship was found between comfort and seat pressure for the

backrest. Consequently, seat pressure measurements can be used to predict seat comfort.

This offers the oportunity to reduce the amount of

test time needed for seat comfort tests. Additionally,

this relationship can be used to predict seat comfort

using applicable human modeling systems;

? The pressure values, being high or low, do not relate directly to comfort. However, the pressure

distrubution relates directly to comfort. The comfort

differences were only found for different pressure

distributions but not for similar pressure distributions

with different pressure values;

? There is no direct preference for a firm versus a medium soft seat. Both types of seats can be

comfortable. However, the human body’s fit is more

critical for a firm seat. Hence, firm seats could be

assessed being less comfortable due to a poor fit;

? The backrest has a stronger contribution to seat comfort than the seatpan;

? An uneven pressure distribution for the backrest will be less comfortable. However, an even pressure

distribution is not desirable. The pressure

distribution for the backrest at the lower and middle

back should be similar/constant and gradually

deminishing starting from the middle back to no pressure for the upper back for an optimal seat comfort.

REFERENCES

Bubb, H. (1995). Anwendung von RAMSIS - Cockpitgestaltung in Kraftfahrzeug. DGLT Bericht 95-02

Demontis, S, Giacoletto, M. (2002). Prediction of car seat comfort from human-seat interface pressure distribution (SAE Conference 2002, SAE no 2002-01-0781). Warrendale, PA: Society of Automotive Engineers.

Hoekstra, W. & van der Horst, A.R.A. (2000). New road designs tested in a driving simulator. Proceedings DSC 2000, Paris, 506-509.

Inagaki, H, Taguchi, T, Yasuda, E. (2000). Evaluation of riding comfort: from the viewpoint of interaction of human body and seat for static, dynamic and long time driving. (SAE Conference 2002, SAE no 2002-01-0781). Warrendale, PA: Society of Automotive Engineers.

K amaijo K, Tsujimura, H, Obara, H, K atsumata, M. (1982). Evaluation of Seat comfort (SAE Conference 1982, SAE no 820761). Warrendale, PA: Society of Automotive Engineers.

K aptein, N.A. & Claessens, F.M.M. (1998). Effects of cognitive road classification on driving behaviour: a driving simulator study. Soesterberg, TNO Human Factors, Report TM-98-C048.

K aptein, N.A. & K orteling, J.E. (1998). The effect of image resolution on driving simulator validity. Soesterberg, TNO Human Factors, Report TM-98-A048.

K aptein, N.A., Theeuwes, J. & van der Horst, A.R.A. (1996). Driving simulator validity: Some considerations. Transportation Research Record 1550, 30-36.

Lee, J, Ferraiuolo, P. (1993). Seat comfort (SAE Conference 1993, SAE no 930105). Warrendale, PA: Society of Automotive Engineers.

Michida, N, Okiyama, H, Nishikawa, K, Nouzawa, T. (2001). A study of drivers; fatigue mechanisms during long hour driving (SAE Conference 2001, SAE no 2001-01-0381). Warrendale, PA: Society of Automotive Engineers.

Milivojevich, A, Stanciu, R, Russ, A, Blair, G.R, Heumen, J.D. (2000). Investigating Psychometric and body pressure distribution responses to automotive seat comfort (SAE Conference 2000, SAE no 2000-01-0626). Warrendale, PA: Society of Automotive Engineers.

Oudenhuijzen, A.J.K, Verver, M.M, Happee, R, Delleman N.J. (2000). ACHIEVE: An overview of Driver comfort. Report TNO-TM-00-D011, TNO Human Factors, Soesterberg, The Netherlands.

Park, S.J., Lee, Y.S., Nahm, Y.E., Lee, J.W. & Kim, J.S. (1998). Seating physical characteristics and subjective co mfo rt: design co nsideratio ns (SAE Conference 1998, SAE no 980653). Warrendale, PA: Society of Automotive Engineers.

Reed, M.P., Saito, M., Kakishima, Y., Lee, N.S. & Schneider, L.W. (1991). An investigatio n o f driver discomfort and related seat design factors in extended-durati o n driving (SAE Conference 1991, SAE no 910117). Warrendale, PA: Society of Automotive Engineers.

SAE 1997, SAE J 1100, Motor Vehicle Dimensions (april 1997).

Tichauer, E.R. (1978). The bi mechanic basis f ergonomics. New York: Wiley.

Treaster D, Marras, W.S. (1987). Measurement o f seat pressure distributi o ns. Batelle Memorial Institue, Columbus, Ohio

Uenishi, K., Fujihashi, K. & Imai, H. (2000). A seat ride evaluati o n meth o d f o r transient vibrati o ns (SAE Conference 2000, SAE no 2000-01-0641). Warrendale, PA: Society of Automotive Engineers.

Van der Grinten, M.P (1991). Test-retest reliability o f a practical method for measuring body part discomfort. In Qeuinnic, Y. and Daniellou, F. (eds.), Designing for everyone (London Tayloar and Francis), 54-56.

Van der Grinten, M.P., Smitt P (1992). Development of a pratical metho d fo r measuring bo dy part disco mfo rt. In: Kumar, S. (ed.), Advances in industrial ergonomics and safety IV, Proceedings of the anual Ergnomics and Safety Conference, 1992. Taylor and Francis, 311-318.

Verver, M.M, de Lange, R (2002). ACHIEVE: Seat mo delling in MADYMO using multi-bo dy techniques. Report TNO-02.OR.BV.037.1/MVV, TNO Automotive, Delft, The Netherlands.

Zhao, L.Q, Xia, Q.S, Wu, X.T. (1994). Study o f sitting co mfo rt o f auto mo tive seats (SAE Conference 1994, SAE no 945243). Warrendale, PA: Society of Automotive Engineers. CONTACT

Aernout Oudenhuijzen, TNO Human F actors. P.O. Box 23, 3769 ZG Soesterberg, the Netherlands. E-mail: oudenhuijzen@tm.tno.nl

APPENDIX

Fig. 5 A typical example for the mean seat pressure for a subject on the seat and the backrest for seat 1 (left) and seat 2 (right). The vertical and horizontal axes at the left and bottom of the pictures represent the cells of the measuring device. The vertical axis on the right of the pictures shows the scale for the seat pressure (in mm Hg).

Fig. 6 The mean seat pressure for the area of the buttocks of the seatpan for both seats in both mock-ups

Fig. 7 The mean seat pressure for the area of the back (without the sideways supports) of the backrest for both seats in both mock-ups

Fig. 8 The mean seat pressure and the comfort ratings for the lower, middle and upper back for the sedan (QE (comfort rating): 1 = dissatisfied, 5 = satisfied, LPD (discomfort rating): 0 = maximum discomfort, 5 = no discomfort), NS = not significant (no significant differences were found).

四年级一件难忘的事400字作文【五篇】

四年级一件难忘的事400字作文【五篇】四年级一件难忘的事400字精选作文篇一在童年里有许许多多的事情就像在海滩上捡贝壳，有绚烂的笑，是开心的往事；有黯淡的，像是勾起一段伤心的往事，都使我非常难忘。早晨，风和日丽，我去帮妈妈和爸爸买早餐，等我去到早餐店，我发现早餐店旁有一大群人，我带着好奇心走去，让我大吃一惊，我发现那有一位老奶奶绊倒在地上。我心想：为什么一位老奶奶搬绊倒在地上，但每一个人都无动于衷，还围观老奶奶，真是不尊重老人！我气得暴跳如雷，我就问我旁边的大人：“你们为什么不扶老奶奶”那人就说：“因为最近在新闻里，有很多老人成心绊倒在地上让路人扶起她。”谁知老人就说：扶起他的人是推他的人。老人还说：赔我钱。我听完就有一点不敢拉老奶奶了。这时，一位青年人走过来，马上扶起老奶奶，旁边的人说，那个青年人真笨，青年人就说：“难道金钱比生活还重要吗？”青年人问奶奶要紧吗？奶奶说，不要紧，谢谢你，小伙子。青年人就说不用谢，说完就走了，我看到青年人的身影，我觉得很惭愧。这一件事使我非常难忘，假如社会的人都献出一点爱心，那么社会就是充满爱心的。

四年级一件难忘的事400字精选作文篇二每一个人都有自己最难忘的事，我最难忘的事就是三年级那次集体打连响儿。记得那一次我们拿着漂亮的连响儿，排着整齐的队伍，伴随着美好的音乐，踏着坚决的步伐，熟练地打了起来。看到这样整齐划一的队伍，我不由心生骄傲：看来我的努力还是没有白费呀！但放眼又一望，我们四周可以说是人山人海，有无数双眼睛正盯着我们，我心里不知从哪里来了一种莫名的紧张，我头上冒着冷汗，腿不由的发着抖。就在这一霎时，我做错了一个动作，登时，我感觉所有人的目光都投向了我一个人，我这颗本来就不平静的心，现在显得更加紧张了、更加不安了，我一下子都不知该干什么了，我真想有一个洞，让我钻到洞里去，我以前打的是那么灵敏，可现在却有气无力，仿佛有一个小精灵把我这活泼的精神给夺走了，经过漫长的煎熬，我好不容易才等到了结束的那一刻。我回家把这件事告诉我妈妈，妈妈说：想做好一件事就要加倍的努力，不要认为自己会做了就可以了，妈妈的这次教导，将使我一生受益。四年级一件难忘的事400字精选作文篇三我家有各种各样的陶瓷器皿，比如：碗，花瓶，勺子，水杯等。它们形态各异，五彩缤纷。它们站在一起，仿佛都在展示自己曼妙的

人教版四年级(上册)数学专项训练

人教版四年级（上册）数学基础知识专项训练

人教版四年级上册数学基础知识填空题专项训练１、由5个千万、4个万、8个十和9个一组成的数是（），读作（），取近似值到万位约是（）。 2、406000000读作（），这个数中的6在（）位上，表示（），改写成用万作单位是（）。 3、一周角=（）平角=（）直角。 4、367÷23把23看作（）来试商比较方便。 5、下午3：00时针和分针夹成的最小角是（）度。 6、在数位顺序表中，从右起第四位是（）位，这个数的计数单位是（），如果这个数位上的数字是8，8表示（）。 7、5个一百万、4个十万、2个千和4个一组成的数是（）。读作（），它有（）个计数单位。 8、在9、8中间添（）个0，这个数才是九千万零八。 9、一个数加上2的和比最小的五位数多1，这个数减2是（ 10、在数位顺序表中，从右起第四位是（）位，这个数的计数单位是（），如果这个数位上的数字是8，8表示（）。 11、5个一百万、4个十万、2个千和4个一组成的数是（）。读作（），它有（）个计数单位。 12、在9、8中间添（）个0，这个数才是九千万零八。 13、一个数加上2的和比最小的五位数多1，这个数减2是（） 14、120分米=（）米 540秒=（）分 72小时=（）天 132个月=（）年 15、计量角的单位是（）。（）是量角的工具。 16、角的大小要看两边（），（）越大，角越大。 17、线段有（）个端点。把线段的一端无限延长，就得到一条（），把线段的两端无限延长，就得到一条（），它（）端点。 18、过一个点可以画（）条直线，过两点可以画（）条直线。 19、按照从大到小的顺序排列下面各数 88000 80800 80008 80080 ________________________________________________ 20、把锐角、平角、钝角、直角、周角按下列顺序排列。（）＞（）＞（）＞（）＞（） 21、4293÷4口，要使商是二位数，口可以填（）

古代晋灵公不君、齐晋鞌之战原文及译文

晋灵公不君（宣公二年）原文：晋灵公不君。厚敛以雕墙。从台上弹人，而观其辟丸也。宰夫胹熊蹯不熟，杀之，寘诸畚，使妇人载以过朝。赵盾、士季见其手，问其故而患之。将谏，士季曰：“谏而不入，则莫之继也。会请先，不入，则子继之。”三进及溜，而后视之，曰：“吾知所过矣，将改之。”稽首而对曰：“人谁无过？过而能改，善莫大焉。诗曰：‘靡不有初，鲜克有终。’夫如是，则能补过者鲜矣。君能有终，则社稷之固也，岂惟群臣赖之。又曰：‘衮职有阙，惟仲山甫补之。’能补过也。君能补过，衮不废矣。” 犹不改。宣子骤谏，公患之，使鉏麑贼之。晨往，寝门辟矣，盛服将朝。尚早，坐而假寐。麑退，叹而言曰：“不忘恭敬，民之主也。贼民之主，不忠；弃君之命，不信。有一于此，不如死也！”触槐而死。秋九月，晋侯饮赵盾酒，伏甲将攻之。其右提弥明知之，趋登曰：“臣侍君宴，过三爵，非礼也。”遂扶以下。公嗾夫獒焉。明搏而杀之。盾曰：“弃人用犬，虽猛何为！”斗且出。提弥明死之。初，宣子田于首山，舍于翳桑。见灵辄饿，问其病。曰：“不食三日矣！”食之，舍其半。问之，曰：“宦三年矣，未知母之存否。今近焉，请以遗之。”使尽之，而为之箪食与肉，寘诸橐以与之。既而与为公介，倒戟以御公徒，而免之。问何故，对曰：“翳桑之饿人也。”问其名居，不告而退。——遂自亡也。乙丑，赵穿①攻灵公于桃园。宣子未出山而复。大史书曰：“赵盾弑其君。”以示于朝。宣子曰：“不然。”对曰：“子为正卿，亡不越竟，反不讨贼，非子而谁？”宣子曰：“呜呼!‘我之怀矣，自诒伊戚。’其我之谓矣。” 孔子曰：“董狐，古之良史也，书法不隐。赵宣子，古之良大夫也，为法受恶。惜也，越竞乃免。” 译文：晋灵公不行君王之道。他向人民收取沉重的税赋以雕饰宫墙。他从高台上用弹弓弹人，然后观赏他们躲避弹丸的样子。他的厨子做熊掌，没有炖熟，晋灵公就把他杀了，把他的尸体装在草筐中，让宫女用车载着经过朝廷。赵盾和士季看到露出来的手臂，询问原由后感到很忧虑。他们准备向晋灵公进谏，士季说：“如果您去进谏而君王不听，那就没有人能够再接着进谏了。还请让我先来吧，不行的话，您再接着来。”士季往前走了三回，行了三回礼，一直到屋檐下，晋灵公才抬头看他。晋灵公说：“我知道我的过错了，我会改过的。”士季叩头回答道：“谁能没有过错呢？有过错而能改掉，这就是最大的善事了。《诗经》说：‘没有人向善没有一个开始的，但却很少有坚持到底的。’如果是这样，那么能弥补过失的人是很少的。您如能坚持向善，那么江山就稳固了，不只是大臣们有所依靠啊。

关于难忘的一件事四年级作文3篇

关于难忘的一件事四年级作文3篇【导语】每个人都有难忘的事，我当然也不会例外。下面是小编为大家整理的关于难忘的一件事四年级作文，仅供参考，欢迎大家阅读。关于难忘的一件事四年级作文一六岁那年，发生了一件令我难忘的事情——在商场里我差点儿走丢了！那天，天气很冷，我们一家人去商场买东西。买完后，我们在一楼闲逛。走着走着，我松开了妈妈的手，跑去看一款造型独特的吸尘器，当回过头时，爸爸妈妈已经走得无影无踪了。商场里人很多，我非常害怕，心想：“妈妈也一定急坏了！怎么办？” 我在商场里转了一圈，越来越害怕、恐惧，忽然，我想起爸爸的车在路边停着，干脆就“守株待兔”吧！所以就跑去爸爸的车旁边等。过了一会儿，爸爸妈妈终于找到我了，妈妈冲过来，一把把我紧紧地搂进怀中，口里不停的说：“吓死妈妈了，妈妈腿都软了！”然后又语无伦次的夸我聪明，没瞎跑，唉！我心里就像打翻了五味瓶一样，说不出的'滋味儿！从那以后，我再也不敢轻易放开妈妈的手了。关于难忘的一件事四年级作文二

一个美丽的晚霞中，那七元五角的事使我永刻不能忘怀。我背着书包回了家，对妈妈和蔼地说：“妈咪，我回来了！哦，对了妈咪，老师吩咐我们要买一支黑笔，您可不可以给我两块半。”说完，妈咪点了点头，从黑纹色的包里拿出了两块半，我拿起了钱就往商店里奔驰去。从商店里拿起了一支晶亮的黑笔，到收银台付了钱，就发现了里头还藏了个五元，我的贪婪之心有苏醒了。付了钱后就在半路上犹豫到底要不要把这五元给妈咪呢？在犹豫时就看见了一个小妹妹，她看见前面的叔叔掉了十元钱，就还给了那个叔叔，我就在想，连一个比我还小的妹妹都那么听话，我不能落后，就跑回了家，把五元还给了妈咪。做人要道德，道德只是个简单的是与非的问题，实践起来却很难，把五元还给妈咪，一个人要是从小就受到这样的教育的话，就会获得道德实践的勇气和力量。关于难忘的一件事四年级作文三在我的脑海里发生过许多难忘的事情，但是有一件事令我记忆犹新，那是发生在去年的一件事。那是一天下午我在我在学校上学的时候，我借了刘利娜的语文作业抄，下课了，我抄完了。就和女同学玩橡皮筋。正在这时候周老师来了，我们吓得腿都软了。在回家得路上我心里忐忑不安，心想这样做对不对呢？

2020年四年级数学上册解决问题专项综合练习

2020年四年级数学上册解决问题专项综合练习 1. 某小学学生向汶川地震灾区踊跃捐款，请根据下图填空．（1）______年级的捐资金额最多，是______元．（2）六个年级捐资金额这组数据的中位数是______元．（3）二年级捐资金额是四年级捐资金额的______%．（4）四年级捐资金额比五年级少______%． 2. 特快列车每小时行170千米,普通列车每小时行107千米（1）特快列车40小时行多少千米？（2）普通列车40小时行多少千米？ 3. 2010年第六次全国人口普查显示，我国人口总数大约是1339720000 人，读横线的数。 4. 如图是广本汽车销售店2013年一月至五月的销售情况统计图．

请你根据上图，完成以下的填空：（1）______月的销售量最少．（2）二月份的销售量比一月份多______台．（3）五月份的汽车销售量是三月份的______%．（4）四月份的汽车销售量比二月份增加了______%． 5. 下图显示的是某班20人在“献爱心”活动中捐图书的情况，该班级人均捐了多少册书？ 6. 小强拆了甲、乙两架纸飞机，下面是这两架飞机前5次试飞情况的统计图．（1）估一估，前5次试飞，哪一驾纸飞机飞行的距离远一些？（2）第6次试飞，甲飞机的飞行距离是21米，乙飞机的飞行距离是10米．在图中画出表示这架纸飞机第6次试飞飞行距离的直条，并计算这架纸飞机6次飞行距离的平均数各是多少．

7. 早餐店炸油饼，油锅一次最多能炸2张饼，炸熟一张饼要4分钟（正反面各2分钟）．如果一个客人要9张饼，早餐店老板最快多少分钟可以把油饼给他？ 8. 某机床厂各车间男、女工人统计图．看上面的统计图回答下面的问题．（1）三个车间共有工人______人，其中女工共______，男工共______人．（2）三个车间平均每车间有______人．（3）第三车间男工人数比第二车间男工人数多______ %． 9. 学校进行团体操表演，每行站20人，正好站24排．如果要站成16排，那么每行需要站多少人？ 10. 50枚棋子围成圆圈，编上号码1、2、3、4、…50，每隔一枚棋子取出一枚，要求最后留下的枚棋子的号码是42号，那么该从几号棋子开始取呢？ 11. 估一估，哪个算式的商最接近圈中的数，画上“√”。先估算出每个圆中的四个算式的商是多少，再比较一下，看哪个算式的商最接近圈中的数。 12. 小红在计算一个数乘2.5时，忽略了2.5的小数点，得到的结果是75，正确的结果是多少？

四年级难忘的一件事作文400字

每个人的每一天都充满着快乐、伤心、害怕或者难过，并且会有一些难忘的事情。你难忘的一件事是什么呢？下面是小编和大家分享的“四年级难忘的一件事作文400字”，一起来看看吧，希望大家喜欢。四年级难忘的一件事作文400字（一）虽然我才上四年级，但是我的生活里也有很多难忘的事。我就给大家讲一件让我难忘的事吧。有一次爸爸让我做大米饭，给我留下了深刻的印象。那天中午，爸爸对我说：“今天中午你来帮妈妈做大米饭吧，正好也锻炼锻炼。”我听了以后高兴地说：“好啊，小菜一碟。”说完以后我就开始动手了。我先把大米放在盆里淘干净，再倒进锅里，放在炉子上就到客厅去看我喜欢看的电视去了。在我看得正高兴的时候，忽然就闻到厨房里传出来一股烧糊的味儿来。我一看表，已经过去了半个小时了，我马上跑进厨房，把锅端下来。打开锅盖，就看见了变黑的锅底。可我没有放弃，又做了一次。我又把米淘干净倒进锅里以后，我又去写作业去了。过了一会儿，我又闻到了那股烧糊的味道。我跑到厨房一看，锅底又黑了。这一看，我的眼泪都快掉下来了，这可怎么办啊？这时候，爸爸来了，对我说：“不用哭，做什事都要专心，再来一次。”我点了点头。第三次，我终于把大米饭做熟了，看见自己的成果，我感到很高兴。这件事让我明白了：做什么事都要专心致志，不能三心二意。四年级难忘的一件事作文400字（二）今天，是我和姐姐第一次去买菜。妈妈给了我们钱，说：＂要注意安全哦。＂我们说：＂知道了。＂一路上，我的心在扑通扑通地跳。来到菜市场，我都目瞪口呆了，各种各样的蔬菜放在我面前，有西兰花、芫茜、冬瓜……还有许多嘈杂声呢！我回忆起妈妈要我买的菜，哦！要买鱼。我走进市场左看看，右望望，嘿，找到了！我走过去，正准备对卖鱼的叔叔说话，一位阿姨便先说了一步。阿姨买完了鱼，我又准备说，谁知，又有一位阿姨要买。5分钟过去了，我还没买到，我着急了，对着叔叔大声说：＂叔叔，请给我一块鲜鱼肉！＂叔叔笑眯眯地说：＂你要多少呀？＂＂4元。＂我回答说。叔叔弄好了鱼，用袋子好了给我，我付了钱并说了一声＂谢谢＂就走了。我又想到要买菜，对了，还有芫茜！我找到了买我所需要的地方，就跟那位婆婆要了一点。当我走出市场时，天空下起了牛毛似的雨，我跟姐姐说：＂我们快走吧！＂接着，我们骑着自行车，飞快地奔回家。骑到半路，雨就更大了，我们到了一棵树下遮雨，但是好久都不见天空好转。为不拖延时间，我和姐姐顶着风冒着雨冲回家。

四年级上册数学专项练习

薄弱环节专项全练全测(一) 数与代数【薄弱点一】大数读、写的准确性一、读出或写出下列各数。(8分) 30050082 读作：______________________ 3960400090 读作：______________________ 一千零四十万四千零二十写作：________________ 七千零三亿零二十万零五写作：________________ 二、求近似数。(8分) 1．省略万位后面的尾数。 16493560≈9528641≈ 2．省略亿位后面的尾数。 2709546312≈9953364778≈ 三、选择。(6分) 1．下面三个数中，一个0也不读出来的是( )。 A．50000800 B．50080 C．5008000 2．下面各数中，用9，8，7，5，0这五个数字组成的最接近8万的数是( )。 A．89750 B．80579 C．85079 3．74□7600000≈75亿，□里最大能填( )。 A．8 B．9 C．7 【薄弱点二】乘、除法计算的准确性四、改错。(12分)

五、笔算下面各题，带※号的要验算。(24分) 240×38＝207×40＝※360×50＝ 380÷70＝ 694÷72＝※633÷21＝【薄弱点三】用乘、除法知识解决问题的正确性六、解决问题。(34分) 1．一块长方形草坪的面积是120平方米，改建后，长扩大到原来的4倍，宽扩大到原来的3倍，改建后草坪的面积是多少？(8分) 2．某花店在教师节到来之际，搞促销活动：每盆月季花16元，买3盆送1盆。照这样计算，买4盆花，每盆比原来便宜多少钱？(8分) 3．一根木头长15米，把它平均分成5段，每锯一段需8分钟，锯完一共要花多少分钟？(8分) 4．一辆长途客车6小时行了348千米。照这样的速度，它12小时可以行多少千米？(10分) 解法1：先求客车1小时行驶多少千米，再求12小时可以行驶多少千米。解法2：先求12小时中有几个6小时，再求几个348千米是多少。【薄弱点四】合理安排时间七、小红家来了客人，她要沏茶招待客人。(8分) 找茶叶：1分钟沏茶：3分钟接水：1分钟洗杯子：2分钟洗水壶：2分钟烧水：10分钟应该怎样安排时间才能使所用时间最短？至少要多长时间？

如何翻译古文

如何翻译古文学习古代汉语，需要经常把古文译成现代汉语。因为古文今译的过程是加深理解和全面运用古汉语知识解决实际问题的过程，也是综合考察古代汉语水平的过程。学习古代汉语，应该重视古文翻译的训练。古文翻译的要求一般归纳为信、达、雅三项。“信”是指译文要准确地反映原作的含义，避免曲解原文内容。“达”是指译文应该通顺、晓畅，符合现代汉语语法规范。“信”和“达”是紧密相关的。脱离了“信”而求“达”，不能称为翻译；只求“信”而不顾“达”，也不是好的译文。因此“信”和“达”是文言文翻译的基本要求。“雅”是指译文不仅准确、通顺，而且生动、优美，能再现原作的风格神韵。这是很高的要求，在目前学习阶段，我们只要能做到“信”和“达”就可以了。做好古文翻译，重要的问题是准确地理解古文，这是翻译的基础。但翻译方法也很重要。这里主要谈谈翻译方法方面的问题。一、直译和意译直译和意译是古文今译的两大类型，也是两种不同的今译方法。 1．关于直译。所谓直译，是指紧扣原文，按原文的字词和句子进行对等翻译的今译方法。它要求忠实于原文，一丝不苟，确切表达原意，保持原文的本来面貌。例如：原文：樊迟请学稼，子曰：“吾不如老农。”请学为圃。子曰：“吾不如老圃。”（《论语?子路》）译文：樊迟请求学种庄稼。孔子道：“我不如老农民。”又请求学种菜蔬。孔子道：“我不如老菜农。”（杨伯峻《论语译注》）原文：齐宣王问曰：“汤放桀，武王伐纣，有诸？”（《孟子?梁惠王下》）译文：齐宣王问道：“商汤流放夏桀，武王讨伐殷纣，真有这回事吗？（杨伯峻《孟子译注》）上面两段译文紧扣原文，字词落实，句法结构基本上与原文对等，属于直译。但对直译又不能作简单化理解。由于古今汉语在文字、词汇、语法等方面的差异，今译时对原文作一些适当的调整，是必要的，并不破坏直译。例如：原文：逐之，三周华不注。（《齐晋鞌之战》）译文：〔晋军〕追赶齐军，围着华不注山绕了三圈。

四年级作文一件难忘的事

大年三十，踩气球白雪皑皑的夜晚，从一间小屋里传出了阵阵欢快的笑声。那是大年三十，人们正忙着发压岁钱。只见家人们从裤兜里掏出一张比一张大的钱，塞到满怀欣喜的孩子们的手里。我们拿着钱就去买了许许多多的气球。我们一家人开始给气球打气。我们不知疲惫地打了一个又一个。不一会儿，整整地堆满了一间大房子。气球的颜色和形状各不相同，有大的、有小的、红的、绿的、白的……在灯光的照耀下，非常漂亮。我挑了一些漂亮点儿的气球，挂了起来，把客厅装扮得像春节联欢晚会现场一样光彩亮丽。时钟刚好走到12点时，我便急得像上锅的蚂蚁一样，立即跳向气球堆。“啪啪……”气球发出响亮的爆炸声。这清脆的爆炸声吸引了爸爸妈妈和弟弟的围观。他们被我那热乎劲儿感染了，也过来跟我一起踩气球。“噼噼啪啪……”一阵响，就像放鞭炮一样，既吓人又好玩。清脆的爆炸声给热闹的夜晚增添了一份别具一格的色彩。不一会儿，整整一屋的气球就只踩剩一个了。我上前去一踩，没想到它竟然跑了，气得我张牙舞爪直瞪眼，恨不得一脚把它踩扁。我那滑稽的举动惹得爸妈们突地大笑起来。我不服气，气鼓鼓的又跑上去，对着气球狠狠地一踩，心想这回肯定能踩扁它。可谁知，我一个不小心，脚下一滑，便跌坐在气球上。“啪……”完了，气球在我的屁股上炸开了花。这下子，可把我的爸妈们逗得更乐了。欢快的笑声在小屋的四周回荡，也回荡在我生命的旋律中…

捉螃蟹记得去年冬天的一个早晨，天气晴朗，阳光明媚，我和表妹一起到河边的沙滩上捉螃蟹。河里的水非常的少，到处都是石头。螃蟹，就藏在这些奇形怪状的石头下面。我们一边沿着岸边走，一边翻着旁边的石头。突然，表妹发现了一只螃蟹，激动万分地对我说：“哥哥，这块石头下面好像藏了一只螃蟹。”我们连忙轻轻地走过去，慢慢地蹲下去，小心翼翼地把石头搬开，快速伸过手去捉它，没想到螃蟹用两只大钳子把我的手狠狠地夹住了，痛得我脸都涨红了。我赶紧用力的把手往外一甩，才摆脱掉这该死的螃蟹。“呀！流血了！”表妹惊呼道。我低头一看，才发现是自己的手被螃蟹夹了一条大口子，直流血。我淡然地擦擦手说没事，可怎知表妹被我那流血直流的手吓得大哭起来。忍者疼痛，我迅速一抓，就把螃蟹扔进了瓶子里，表妹立即破涕为笑。我们终于捉了一只螃蟹，心里有说不出的高兴，我那鲜红的手指和表妹那还挂着晶莹泪珠的脸，在阳光下，闪闪发光……

(完整版)心理学研究方法

福建省高等教育自学考试应用心理学专业（独立本科段）《心理学研究方法》课程考试大纲第一部分课程性质与目标《心理学研究方法》是福建省高等教育自学考试应用心理学专业（独立本科段）的一门专业基础必修课程，目的在于帮助考生了解和掌握心理学研究的理论基础和主要方法，检验考生对心理学研究理论基础与主要方法，检验考生对心理学研究方法的基本知识和主要内容的掌握水平与应用能力。心理学研究的对象是心理现象。它的研究主题十分广泛：即涉及人的心理也涉及动物的心理；即涉及个体的心理也涉及群体的心理；即涉及有意识的心理也涉及潜意识的心理；即涉及与生理过程密切相关的心理也涉及与社会文化密切相关的心理。心理学研究是一种以经验的方式对心理现象进行科学探究的活动。由于心理学的研究方法是以经验的或实证的资料为依据的，因而使心理学与哲学相区别，也与人文学科相区别。设置本课程的具体目的要求是，学习和掌握心理学研究方法的基本理论和基本技能，将有助于学生们理解心理学的基本概念、基本原理和基本理论。理解心理学家在探索心理与行动时所做的一切，有助于考生将来为心理学的发展做出有益的贡献。第二部分考核内容与考核目标第一编心理学研究基础第一章心理学与科学一、学习目的与要求通过本章学习，要求考生了解心理学的性质，了解心理学科学研究的方法、特征及基本步骤，理解心理学研究的伦理问题和伦理规范。二、考核知识点与考核目标 1、识记：（1）心理学的含义；（2）心理学科学研究的特征：系统性、重复性、可证伪性和开放性；（3）知情同意。 2、领会：（1）一般人探索世界的常用方法；（2）心理学研究主要包含哪几个步骤；（3）科学研究的开放性主要表现在哪几方面； 3、应用：（1）根据科学研究的特征来分析某些心理学的研究；（2）心理学研究的伦理问题及以人为被试的研究的伦理规范来分析是否可以在心理学研究中使用欺骗的方法。

四年级数学上册专项练习

填空题 1、当除数是34时，试商时可以把除数看作( )，这样初商容易偏( )。 2、（）个26相加的和是468；（）比12个15多20。 334＝21），这时被除数是（）。 4、在括号里填上合适的数。 480秒=（）分540厘米=（）分米624时＝（）日 5、我们戴的红领巾上有一个（）角，两个（）角。 6、钟面上，分针转动360度，相应地时针转动（）度。从3：00走到3：15，分针转动了（）度。 6点时，时针和分针所组成的角是（）度，是（）角， 3点时，时针和分针所组成的角是（）度，是（）角。 7、把“78÷26=3，26+3=29”合并成一个综合算式是（）。 8、在5○1÷58中，如果商的最高位在十位上，○中最小填（），还可以填（）。如果3□2÷36的商是一位数，□里的数最大可以填（），最小可以填（）。在算式□17÷53中，要使商是两位数，□最小填（）；要使商是一位数，□最大填（）。 9、在公路上有三条小路通往小明家，它们的长度分别是125米、207米、112米，其中有一条小路与公路是垂直的，那么这条小路的长度是（）米。 10、李阳从1楼到3楼用了12秒，她从一楼到六楼需要（）秒。 11．二百零六亿八千万写作（），改写成用“万”作单位的数是（）万，用“亿”作单位这个数的近似数是（）亿。 12．2个千万、7个万、8个百和5个十组成的数是（），这个数读作（）。 13．由6、7、5、1、0组成的最大数是（），最小数是（）。14、计算除法时，错将除数36看成63，结果得到商12。请你帮他算一算，正确的商应该是（）。

15．一个边长24厘米的正方形面积是（）平方厘米。 16、把两道算式组成综合算式，再用递等式计算。 14×2=28 21×4=84 10×5=50 28-15=13 200-84=116 30＋50=80 （）（）（）选择、判断题 1、30度的角被投影仪投到屏幕上时角就变大了。（） 2、570÷40＝14……1。（） 3、在方向板上，北和西南之间夹角是135°。（） 4、在同一平面内，两条直线不是相交就是平行。（） 5、在同一平面内，两条直线不是平行就是垂直。（） 6、4个同样大的正方体可以拼成一个较大的正方体。（） 7、在10倍的放大镜下看15度的角就变成了150度。（） 8、六位数一定比七位数小。（） 9、平角就是一条直线，周角就是一条射线。（） 10、三位数除以两位数，商不可能是三位数。（） 11、三位数除以两位数，商最多是两位数。（） 12、过一点能画无数条直线。（）13．两条直线相交成直角时，这两条直线就互相垂直。（）14．观察物体时，在同一位置看到相同的形状可能有不同的摆法。（）15、两条不相交的直线叫做平行线。（） 1、在4□7÷46的商是两位数，□中的数最小是（）。 ①7 ② 6 ③5 2、想使物体从斜面上向下滚动时尽可能地快，下面的选项中，木板与地面的夹角是（）度最符合要求。 ①20 ②38 ③10 ④80

齐晋鞌之战原文和译文

鞌之战选自《左传》又名《鞍之战》原文：楚癸酉，师陈于鞌(1)。邴夏御侯，逢丑父为右②。晋解张御克，郑丘缓为右(3)。侯日：“余姑翦灭此而朝食(4)”。不介马而驰之⑤。克伤于矢，流血及屦2 未尽∧6)，曰：“余病矣(7)！”张侯曰：“自始合(8)，而矢贯余手及肘(9)，余折以御，左轮朱殷(10)，岂敢言病吾子忍之！”缓曰：“自始合，苟有险，余必下推车，子岂＿识之(11)然子病矣！”张侯曰：“师之耳目，在吾旗鼓，进退从之。此车一人殿之(12)，可以集事(13)，若之何其以病败君之大事也擐甲执兵(14)，固即死也(15)；病未及死，吾子勉之(16)！”左并辔(17) ，右援拐鼓(18)。马逸不能止(19)，师从之，师败绩。逐之，三周华不注(20) 韩厥梦子舆谓己曰：“旦辟左右！”故中御而从齐侯。邴夏曰：“射其御者，君子也。”公曰：“谓之君子而射之，非礼也。”射其左，越于车下；射其右，毙于车中。綦毋张丧车，从韩厥，曰：“请寓乘。”从左右，皆肘之，使立于后。韩厥俛，定其右。逢丑父与公易位。将及华泉，骖絓于木而止。丑父寝于轏中，蛇出于其下，以肱击之，伤而匿之，故不能推车而及。韩厥执絷马前，再拜稽首，奉觞加璧以进，曰：“寡君使群臣为鲁、卫请，曰：‘无令舆师陷入君地。’下臣不幸，属当戎行，无所逃隐。且惧奔辟而忝两君，臣辱戎士，敢告不敏，摄官承乏。” 丑父使公下，如华泉取饮。郑周父御佐车，宛茷为右，载齐侯以免。韩厥献丑父，郤献子将戮之。呼曰：“自今无有代其君任患者，有一于此，将为戮乎”郤子曰：“人不难以死免其君，我戮之不祥。赦之，以劝事君者。”乃免之。译文1：在癸酉这天，双方的军队在鞌这个地方摆开了阵势。齐国一方是邴夏为齐侯赶车，逢丑父当车右。晋军一方是解张为主帅郤克赶车，郑丘缓当车右。齐侯说:“我姑且消灭了这些人再吃早饭。”不给马披甲就冲向了晋军。郤克被箭射伤，血流到了鞋上，但是仍不停止擂鼓继续指挥战斗。他说:“我受重伤了。”解张说:“从一开始接战，一只箭就射穿了我的手和肘，左边的车轮都被我的血染成了黑红色，我哪敢说受伤您忍着点吧！”郑丘缓说:“从一开始接战，如果遇到道路不平的地方，我必定（冒着生命危险）下去推车，您难道了解这些吗不过，您真是受重伤了。”daier 解张说:“军队的耳朵和眼睛，都集中在我们的战旗和鼓声，前进后退都要听从它。这辆车上还有一个人镇守住它，战事就可以成功。为什么为了伤痛而败坏国君的大事呢身披盔甲，手执武器，本来就是去走向死亡，伤痛还没到死的地步，您还是尽力而为吧。”一边说，一边用左手把右手的缰绳攥在一起，用空出的右手抓过郤克手中的鼓棰就擂起鼓来。（由于一手控马，）马飞快奔跑而不能停止，晋军队伍跟着指挥车冲上去，把齐军打得打败。晋军随即追赶齐军，三次围绕着华不注山奔跑。韩厥梦见他去世的父亲对他说:“明天早晨作战时要避开战车左边和右边的位置。”因此韩厥就站在中间担任赶车的来追赶齐侯的战车。邴夏说:“射那个赶车的，他是个君子。”齐侯说: “称他为君子却又去射他，这不合于礼。”daier 于是射车左，车左中箭掉下了车。又射右边的，车右也中箭倒在了车里。（晋军的）将军綦毋张损坏了自己的战车，跟在韩厥的车后说: “请允许我搭乗你的战车。”他上车后，无论是站在车的左边，还是站在车的右边，韩厥都用肘推他，让他站在自己身后——战车的中间。韩厥又低下头安定了一下受伤倒在车中的那位自己的车右。于是逢丑父和齐侯（乘韩厥低头之机）互相调换了位置。将要到达华泉时，齐侯战车的骖马被树木绊住而不能继续逃跑而停了下来。（头天晚上）逢丑父睡在栈车里，有一条蛇从他身子底下爬出来，他用小臂去打蛇，小臂受伤，但他（为了能当车右）隐瞒了这件事。由于这样，他不能用臂推车前进，因而被韩厥追上了。韩厥拿着拴马绳走到齐侯的马前，两次下拜并行稽首礼，捧着一杯酒并加上一块玉璧给齐侯送上去，

难忘的一件事作文400字四年级_1

难忘的一件事作文400字四年级难忘的一件事作文400字四年级最令我难忘的一件事，就是偷吃四色小辣椒了，那四色辣椒的滋味，真是难以形容，令人难忘。在我家楼下有一个小菜园，那里是爷爷的乐园，他每天都会去那，乐呵呵地给他种的蔬菜浇水。在这个菜园里，有白菜、罗卜和辣椒。最引起我主意的就是辣椒了。爷爷种的不是一般的辣椒，是四色小辣椒。四色小辣椒是一种能变色的小辣椒，在每个季节变一种色，春天是绿色、夏天是黄色、秋天是紫色、冬天是红色，非常神奇。一天我在楼下散步，当时正是秋天的一个。我走到菜园时，看见里面的小辣椒，紫紫的，看起来很好吃。心想：着么紫的小辣椒难道还会辣吗？肯定能好吃，心中便有了一种想法，摘一个尝一尝，反正爷爷也不在。我以飞一般的速度跑了过去。用手一拽，边摘了下来。我像得了一件宝贝似的，小心翼翼地捧着四色小辣椒，向家跑去。到了家，见没人，才放了心。跑进厨房把四色小辣椒洗干净，然后把放四色小辣椒放进嘴里嚼，不嚼不要紧，一嚼可坏了。顿时，舌头、喉喽就像要喷火一样，辣的我说不出话来。我跑到水

龙头前大口大口的喝起水来。这才好点，没想到这四色小辣椒比别的辣椒辣上十倍。这件事一直刻在我的心头，甩也甩不掉呢。四年级:戴恋佳难忘的一件事作文400字四年级最令我难忘的一件事，就是偷吃四色小辣椒了，那四色辣椒的滋味，真是难以形容，令人难忘。在我家楼下有一个小菜园，那里是爷爷的乐园，他每天都会去那，乐呵呵地给他种的蔬菜浇水。在这个菜园里，有白菜、罗卜和辣椒。最引起我主意的就是辣椒了。爷爷种的不是一般的辣椒，是四色小辣椒。四色小辣椒是一种能变色的小辣椒，在每个季节变一种色，春天是绿色、夏天是黄色、秋天是紫色、冬天是红色，非常神奇。一天我在楼下散步，当时正是秋天的一个。我走到菜园时，看见里面的小辣椒，紫紫的，看起来很好吃。心想：着么紫的小辣椒难道还会辣吗？肯定能好吃，心中便有了一种想法，摘一个尝一尝，反正爷爷也不在。我以飞一般的速度跑了过去。用手一拽，边摘了下来。我像得了一件宝贝似的，小心翼翼地捧着四色小辣椒，

《鞌之战》阅读答案(附翻译)原文及翻译

《鞌之战》阅读答案（附翻译）原文及翻译鞌之战[1] 选自《左传成公二年（即公元前589年）》【原文】癸酉，师陈于鞌[2]。邴夏御齐侯[3]，逢丑父为右[4]。晋解张御郤克，郑丘缓为右[5]。齐侯曰：余姑翦灭此而朝食[6]。不介马而驰之[7]。郤克伤于矢，流血及屦，未绝鼓音[8]，曰：余病[9]矣！张侯[10]曰：自始合，而矢贯余手及肘[11]，余折以御，左轮朱殷[12]，岂敢言病。吾子[13]忍之！缓曰：自始合，苟有险[14]，余必下推车，子岂识之[15]？然子病矣！张侯曰：师之耳目，在吾旗鼓，进退从之[16]。此车一人殿之[17]，可以集事[18]，若之何其以病败君之大事也[19]？擐甲执兵，固即死也[20]。病未及死，吾子勉之[21]！左并辔[22]，右援枹而鼓[23]，马逸不能止[24]，师从之。齐师败绩[25]。逐之，三周华不注[26]。【注释】 [1]鞌之战：春秋时期的著名战役之一。战争的实质是齐、晋争霸。由于齐侯骄傲轻敌，而晋军同仇敌忾、士气旺盛，战役以齐败晋胜而告终。鞌：通鞍，齐国地名，在今山东济南西北。 [2]癸酉：成公二年的六月十七日。师，指齐晋两国军队。陈，

列阵，摆开阵势。 [3]邴夏：齐国大夫。御，动词，驾车。御齐侯，给齐侯驾车。齐侯，齐国国君，指齐顷公。 [4]逢丑父：齐国大夫。右：车右。 [5]解张、郑丘缓：都是晋臣，郑丘是复姓。郤（x ）克，晋国大夫，是这次战争中晋军的主帅。又称郤献子、郤子等。 [6]姑：副词，姑且。翦灭：消灭，灭掉。朝食：早饭。这里是吃早饭的意思。这句话是成语灭此朝食的出处。 [7]不介马：不给马披甲。介：甲。这里用作动词，披甲。驰之：驱马追击敌人。之：代词，指晋军。 [8] 未绝鼓音：鼓声不断。古代车战，主帅居中，亲掌旗鼓，指挥军队。兵以鼓进，击鼓是进军的号令。 [9] 病：负伤。 [10]张侯，即解张。张是字，侯是名，人名、字连用，先字后名。 [11]合：交战。贯：穿。肘：胳膊。 [12]朱：大红色。殷：深红色、黑红色。 [13]吾子：您，尊敬。比说子更亲切。 [14]苟：连词，表示假设。险：险阻，指难走的路。 [15]识：知道。之，代词，代苟有险，余必下推车这件事，可不译。 [16]师之耳目：军队的耳、目（指注意力）。在吾旗鼓：在我们

四年级难忘的一件事400字作文

大家都经历过让自己难忘的事，究竟是哪件事让你印象深刻至今难忘呢？下面是小编整理的“四年级难忘的一件事400字作文”，仅供参考，欢迎阅读，希望对大家有所帮助。四年级难忘的一件事400字作文（一）我已在世上度过了十个春秋，在我的记忆里，好多事已随着时间的流逝变得模糊啦，可是有件事像是烙在了我的脑海里，使我怎么也忘不掉。记得那是一年夏天，天热的出奇，我和爸爸妈妈去文化宫玩，当时我穿着一件小背心和一条小短裤，鞋子走起路来还会发出“吱吱”的响声，我和爸爸妈妈坐在凳子上乘凉，我看到一群鸽子飞来，好美呀！有白的有灰的，可鸽子为什么又叫和平鸽呢？我疑惑的问爸爸，爸爸说：“传说在古代的时候，鸽子可以传递消息，因为鸽子象征着和平象征着祖国美好的未来，所以鸽子又叫和平鸽。”哦！原来是这么回事，那我就要犒劳犒劳它们啦，我买了一包玉米去喂鸽子，有一只鸽子很丑，好象是安徒生笔下的丑小“鸽”，可是，它并没有为它自己的丑而感到自卑，当我喂它们食物时它也和别的鸽子来抢食物，它的嘴啄一粒，就慢慢的吞下去，那样子真有趣，等它吃饱了，它就用翅膀盖住身子和头在那睡上了大觉！我喜欢上了那只“灰小鸽”，喜欢它那种自信，喜欢它那种乐观向上，喜欢它那种永不放弃。每当我一看到鸽子，我就想起那只“灰小鸽”这也就成了我记忆最深的一件事，因为它使我明白了一个做人的道理，要自强-自信-自立！四年级难忘的一件事400字作文（二）在我的成长历程里，有许多让我难忘的事，但它们都如过眼云烟，但今年暑假的这件事最让我刻骨铭心。不知道从什么时候起，我的眼睛变的斜视，虽然不影响视力，但是却不美观。到医院去检查医生说：“需要做个小手术，不然长大后就不好做了。” 于是爸爸和奶奶带我到沈阳爱尔医院去做手术。在做手术之前经过一系列的检查后，准备做手术，爸爸和奶奶都很担心，妈妈也很挂念我，一个接一个的电话打过来，问我害怕吗？我还听见她在电话里哭了。其实，我很兴奋，一点也不害怕，因为我终于等到了那一刻，走进了手术室后，医生给我打上了麻醉针，我就什么也不知道了，美美的睡了一觉，当我醒来的时候，爸爸已经守护在我的床边，问长问短，我觉得很幸福。这时候妈妈又一个电话追来问我做的怎么样，爸爸说：＂做得很成功＂，妈妈心里的一块石头终于落地了。第二天，打开纱布，我照镜子发现只是眼睛又红又肿，但是一点也不疼，在爸爸和奶奶的精心照顾下我终于出院了。我觉得我很勇敢，我想大声对爸爸妈妈说：“我长大了，不要太为我担心了。” 四年级难忘的一件事400字作文（三）今年暑假，社区组织我们参加“老少共读一本书《跨越时代的呼唤----焦裕禄》”活动。

《鞌之战》阅读答案附翻译

《鞌之战》阅读答案（附翻译）《鞌之战》阅读答案（附翻译）鞌之战[1] 选自《左传·成公二年（即公元前589年）》【原文】癸酉，师陈于鞌[2]。邴夏御齐侯[3]，逢丑父为右[4]。晋解张御郤克，郑丘缓为右[5]。齐侯曰：“余姑翦灭此而朝食[6]。”不介马而驰之[7]。郤克伤于矢，流血及屦，未绝鼓音[8]，曰：“余病[9]矣！”张侯[10]曰：“自始合，而矢贯余手及肘[11]，余折以御，左轮朱殷[12]，岂敢言病。吾子[13]忍之！”缓曰：“自始合，苟有险[14]，余必下推车，子岂识之[15]？——然子病矣！”张侯曰：“师之耳目，在吾旗鼓，进退从之[16]。此车一人殿之[17]，可以集事[18]，若之何其以病败君之大事也[19]？擐甲执兵，固即死也[20]。病未及死，吾子勉之[21]！”左并辔[22]，右援枹而鼓[23]，马逸不能止[24]，师从之。齐师败绩[25]。逐之，三周华不注[26]。【注释】 [1]鞌之战：春秋时期的著名战役之一。战争的实质是齐、晋争霸。由于齐侯骄傲轻敌，而晋军同仇敌忾、士气旺盛，战役以齐败晋胜而告终。鞌：通“鞍”，齐

国地名，在今山东济南西北。 [2]癸酉：成公二年的六月十七日。师，指齐晋两国军队。陈，列阵，摆开阵势。 [3]邴夏：齐国大夫。御，动词，驾车。御齐侯，给齐侯驾车。齐侯，齐国国君，指齐顷公。 [4]逢丑父：齐国大夫。右：车右。 [5]解张、郑丘缓：都是晋臣，“郑丘”是复姓。郤（xì）克，晋国大夫，是这次战争中晋军的主帅。又称郤献子、郤子等。 [6]姑：副词，姑且。翦灭：消灭，灭掉。朝食：早饭。这里是“吃早饭”的意思。这句话是成语“灭此朝食”的出处。 [7]不介马：不给马披甲。介：甲。这里用作动词，披甲。驰之：驱马追击敌人。之：代词，指晋军。 [8]未绝鼓音：鼓声不断。古代车战，主帅居中，亲掌旗鼓，指挥军队。“兵以鼓进”，击鼓是进军的号令。 [9]病：负伤。 [10]张侯，即解张。“张”是字，“侯”是名，人名、字连用，先字后名。 [11]合：交战。贯：穿。肘：胳膊。 [12]朱：大红色。殷：深红色、黑红色。 [13]吾子：您，尊敬。比说“子”更亲切。

最难忘的一件事四年级作文3篇

最难忘的一件事四年级作文3篇这件事，使我终生难忘。给了我鼓励与力量；给了我信心与希望，它已深深地印在我心里，伴我成长。下面是小编为大家整理的最难忘的一件事四年级作文，仅供参考，欢迎大家阅读。最难忘的一件事四年级作文一今天我在家里找东西的时候，看到了一张照片，照片上一个小男孩拉着一个小购物车站在超市门口，开心地笑着。使我陷入了回忆。哪天妈妈让我一个人去超市购物，我高兴的一蹦三尺高，因为那可是我长到现在从来没有过的事情啊！我拉着妈妈给我的小推车，走进了超市的大门。我先把我的小车车存在超市的储物台，就在超市里找了一个公用车车，推进了超市。超市里的东西真多，看得我琳琅满目。我第一个要买的东西是四盒0.5的铅，我找来找去都没找到，最和终于在文具类的下面，找到了0.5的铅。但是我又左右为难了有两种前一种是彩铅后一种不是彩铅。彩铅稍微贵一点，普通的铅不是很贵。我先来想去，最后买了彩铅，因为就贵几毛钱吗，还是一漂亮为主吧。后来我又买了许多其他的东西，就去收银台付钱了。我先把我卖的所有东西放到收银台上，等收银的阿姨算完了

钱，统一结账。这次买的钱是40元，我给了阿姨100元，阿姨给我找了60元。等我把所有东西装进我带来的小车车，就回家了通过这次买东西，我收获了自立。最难忘的一件事四年级作文二在我的记忆里，我的童年有许多许多难忘的事，但其中有一件事更是让我最难忘。这件事现在想起来，我都觉得很好笑——那就是掉牙!我换第一颗牙时，是妈妈带我去医院，医生给我打了麻药，把还没有松动的牙硬生生的给拔了下来，听医生说不拔就会影响新牙的`生长。等换第二颗牙时，我才深深地体会到了换牙的滋味。先是牙齿有点松动，吃东西时觉得有点碍事，但又好像不影响什么。于是我有事没事的就用舌头摇摇它，也不疼，心里总想它早早掉了就好了，可它偏偏好像快掉了，但又牢牢的不掉。渐渐的它越来越来松动了，我都感觉到好像就只有那么一点点肉连着它了，可它还是不掉。有一天中午，妈妈做了我最爱吃的红烧排骨，我高兴地大吃了起来，正美美地吃着，突然，我咬到了块硬硬的东西，我以为我咬到了骨头，结果吐出来一看，是带着血的小白牙，其实这样掉牙一点儿都不疼，但是它掉得可真不是时候，那香喷喷的排骨是不能吃了，真是让我遗憾。这件事虽然已经过去了很久，但这次掉牙的经历却让我

The Relationship Between Seat Pressure and Comfort

四年级一件难忘的事400字作文【五篇】

人教版四年级(上册)数学专项训练

古代晋灵公不君、齐晋鞌之战原文及译文

关于难忘的一件事四年级作文3篇

2020年四年级数学上册解决问题专项综合练习

四年级难忘的一件事作文400字

四年级上册数学专项练习

如何翻译古文

四年级作文一件难忘的事

(完整版)心理学研究方法

四年级数学上册专项练习

齐晋鞌之战原文和译文

难忘的一件事作文400字四年级_1

最新四年级数学上册单元专项练习

《鞌之战》阅读答案(附翻译)原文及翻译

四年级难忘的一件事400字作文

《鞌之战》阅读答案附翻译

最难忘的一件事四年级作文3篇

相关文档

最新文档

The Relationship Between Seat Pressure and Comfort

四年级一件难忘的事400字作文【五篇】

人教版四年级(上册)数学专项训练

古代晋灵公不君、齐晋鞌之战原文及译文

关于难忘的一件事四年级作文3篇

2020年四年级数学上册解决问题专项综合练习

四年级难忘的一件事作文400字

四年级上册数学专项练习

如何翻译古文

四年级作文 一件难忘的事

(完整版)心理学研究方法

四年级数学上册专项练习

齐晋鞌之战原文和译文

难忘的一件事作文400字四年级_1

最新四年级数学上册单元专项练习

《鞌之战》阅读答案(附翻译)原文及翻译

四年级难忘的一件事400字作文

《鞌之战》阅读答案附翻译

最难忘的一件事四年级作文3篇

相关文档

最新文档

四年级作文一件难忘的事