【判断题】
(30735 )当康明斯KTA-l9G2型柴油机节温器发生故障时,会导致高水温。
查看试卷,进入试卷练习
微信扫一扫,开始刷题
相关试题
【判断题】
(30736 )康明斯发电车中,若高水温停机保护传感器发生故障时仍需使用该机组时,可采取拆除超速保护板后短接箱中7、9号端子的措施强行起机。
【判断题】
(30737 )KTA-19G2柴油机当转速为1500转/分时,测速传感器每秒钟可检测到3550个电脉冲。
【判断题】
(30738 )喷油器针阀圆柱密封面磨损产生的主要影响是各缸喷油不均,转速不稳。
【判断题】
(30739 )在康明斯KTA-19G2柴油机中,若机油泵中的压力阀失控造成无法打开将造成机油压力偏低。
【判断题】
(30740 )康明斯发电车中,当机油压力低于70kPa时,将发生低油压停机报警保护。
【判断题】
(30741 )运用客车质量鉴定条件中,发电车配电控制屏紧急停机装置失效属C类故障。
【判断题】
(30742 )康明斯KTA-19G2柴油机停机是通过断油停机。
【判断题】
(30743 )手动拧进KTA-l9G2型柴油机电磁截流阀上的手动调整螺钉可强行断油停机。
【判断题】
(30744 )康明斯发电车1FC5356发电机中若T1、T2、T3中任何接线断路都将造成发电机空载电压偏低。
【判断题】
(30745 )康明斯发电车1FC5356发电机中静止压敏电阻击穿短路将造成发电机励磁电压偏低。
【判断题】
(30746 )1FC5发电机的放置整流模块损坏一个时只会造成发电机空载时端电压偏高。
【判断题】
(30747 )装配柴油机的主轴承螺栓、连杆螺栓,拧紧就行了。
【判断题】
(30748 )有轻微穴蚀的气缸套可旋转90°继续使用。
【判断题】
(30749 )发电车柴油机中所使用的DCA的作用可减少穴蚀的产生。
【判断题】
(30750 )在1FC5系列发电机中,短接F1和F2将造成发电机端电压降低至360V左右。
【判断题】
(30751 )康明斯发电车1FC5356发电机的限流电阻R出现部份匝间短路,将造成发电机端电压偏低。
【判断题】
(30752 )MP-T系列发电机采用电压调节器型号为APRl25—5型。
【判断题】
(30753 )APRl25—5型电压调节器有三个可调整的电位器,可达到调整MP-T系列发电机输出电压值及精度的目的。
【判断题】
(30754 )柴油机转速不稳定会造成无刷发电机电压振荡故障。
【判断题】
(30755 )励磁电路接线不良不会造成无刷发电机电压振荡故障
【判断题】
(30756 )各缸喷油量不均匀会导致柴油机振动大。
【判断题】
(30757 )各缸喷油压力不一致不会使柴油机振动大。
【判断题】
(30758 )轴承间隙过大会导致柴油机振动大。
【判断题】
(30759 )曲轴弯曲变形不会使柴油机振动大。
【判断题】
(30760 )柴油机与发电机不同心会造成柴油机振动大
【判断题】
(30761 )柴油机安装基础不牢固会造成柴油机振动大。
【判断题】
(30762 )PT泵执行器作用不良可造成柴油机有怠速,无高速。
【判断题】
(30763 )柴油机转速调得过高不会使柴油机起机即为高速。
【判断题】
(30764 )发电机带有充磁电路的,可将充磁开关置于充磁位,待发电机电压正常后,再将开关置于断位。
【判断题】
(30765 )发电机励磁绕组、定转子绕组绝缘不良、损坏可造成发电机不发电。
【判断题】
(30766 )油针体变形或磨损会造成喷油器雾化不良。
【判断题】
(30767 )喷油器外壳平面磨损不平会造成喷油器漏油严重。
【判断题】
(30768 )发电车乘务员应具备熟悉发电车内各设备性能、结构的基本素质。
【判断题】
(30769 )发电车乘务员须经培训考试合格、技术等级达到初级及以上方可上岗。
【判断题】
(30770 )发电车乘务员在工长领导下,负责发电车值乘和设备日常保养检修作业,保证发电车安全正常供电。
【判断题】
(30771 )发电车乘务员需每隔1小时须进机房巡视各部运转状态,并做好运行记录。
【判断题】
(30772 )车辆乘务员是监控旅客列车运行安全的重要岗位,承担着妥善处理列车运行途中发生的故障和为旅客提供良好服务设施的工作。
【判断题】
(30773 )非电气化铁路区段的人员临时进入电气化铁路作业(包括通过电气化铁路的乘务员、各种 检查人员等)时,必须接受电气化铁路安全教育。
【判断题】
(30775 )发电车乘务员须经培训考试合格、技术等级达到中级及以上方可上岗。
【判断题】
(30776 )库列检是运用客车维修与保养的主体,承担着客车入库检修、辅修、A1级检修和客车整修等工作。
推荐试题
【单选题】
在实际工作中,要注意掌握分寸,防止“过”或“不及”,其关键在于___
A. 抓住事物的主要矛盾
B. 确定事物的质
C. 认识事物的量
D. 把握事物的度
【单选题】
区分量变和质变的根本标志是看___
A. 事物的变化是否显著
B. 事物的变化是否迅速
C. 事物的某些属性是否发生了变化
D. 事物的变化是否超出度的范围
【单选题】
量变的复杂性是指___
A. 量变的程度发展不同
B. 量变形式的多样性和总的量变过程中有部分质变
C. 质变中有量的扩张
D. 量变有在度的范围内的变化和突破度的范围的变化
【单选题】
量变中的阶段性部分质变表现了___
A. 事物内部各部分之间变化的不平衡性
B. 事物整体与某些构成部分之间变化的不平衡性
C. 事物与事物之间变化的不平衡性
D. 事物的本质属性与非本质属性之间变化的不平衡性
【单选题】
量变中的局部性部分质变是___
A. 事物的本质属性与非本质属性之间变化不平衡性的表现
B. 事物的各个部分之间变化不平衡性的表现
C. 事物的内部矛盾和外部条件变化不平衡性的表现
D. 事物的量和质变化不平衡性的表现
【单选题】
揭示事物发展的趋势和道路的规律是___
A. 对立统一规律
B. 质量互变规律
C. 否定之否定规律
D. 联系和发展规律
【单选题】
“肯定和否定相互渗透,在一定意义上,肯定就是否定。”这是一种___
A. 相对主义诡辩论的观点
B. 唯物辩证法的观点
C. 主观唯心主义的观点
D. 形而上学的观点
【单选题】
事物的否定方面是指___
A. 事物的积极方面
B. 事物的消极方面
C. 事物中维持其存在的方面
D. 事物中促使其灭亡的方面
【单选题】
作为辩证的否定的“扬弃”是___
A. 既保留又继承
B. 彻底抛弃
C. 既克服又保留
D. 矛盾的调和
【单选题】
辩证的否定是事物发展的环节,因为辩证的否定___
A. 把旧事物完全抛弃
B. 使旧事物发生量变
C. 是新事物产生、旧事物灭亡
D. 是从外部强加给事物的
【单选题】
否定之否定规律___
A. 在事物完成一个发展周期时才能完整地表现出来
B. 在事物发展过程中任何一点上都可以表现出来
C. 在事物经过量变和质变两种状态后表现出来
D. 在事物发展过程中经过肯定和否定两个阶段表现出来
【单选题】
事物发展的周期性体现了___
A. 事物发展的直线性与曲折性的统一
B. 事物发展是一个不断地回到出发点的运动
C. 事物发展的周而复始的循环性
D. 事物发展的前进性和曲折性的统一
【单选题】
直线论的错误在于只看到___
A. 事物发展的周期性而否认了前进性
B. 事物发展的前进性而否认了曲折性
C. 事物发展的间接性而否认了连续性
D. 事物发展的曲折性而否认了周期性
【单选题】
循环论的错误在于___
A. 只看到事物发展的普遍性,没有看到事物发展过程的特殊性
B. 只看到事物的绝对运动,没有看到事物的相对静止
C. 只看到事物发展道路的曲折性,没有看到事物发展趋势的前进性
D. 只看到新旧事物之间的连续性,没有看到新旧事物之间的间断性
【单选题】
对立统一规律揭示了___
A. 事物发展的动力和源泉
B. 事物发展的状态和过程
C. 事物发展的方向和道路
D. 事物发展的两种趋向
【单选题】
唯物辩证法的实质和核心是___
A. 对立统一规律
B. 质量互变规律
C. 否定之否定规律
D. 联系和发展的规律
【单选题】
辩证法所说的矛盾是指___
A. 人们思维中的前后不一的自相矛盾
B. 事物之间或事物内部各要素之间的对立统一
C. 对立面之间的相互排斥
D. 事物之间或事物内部各要素之间的相互依赖
【单选题】
矛盾的基本属性是___
A. 普遍性和特殊性
B. 绝对性和相对性
C. 变动性和稳定性
D. 斗争性和同一性
【单选题】
依据是___
A. 矛盾的同一性和斗争性辩证关系的原理
B. 矛盾的普遍性和特殊性辩证关系的原理
C. 事物发展的量变和质变辩证关系的原理
D. 事物发展的内因和外因辩证关系的原理
【单选题】
矛盾问题的精髓是___
A. 矛盾的普遍性和特殊性关系的问题
B. 矛盾的同一性和斗争性关系的问题
C. 主要矛盾和次要矛盾关系的问题
D. 矛盾的主要方面和次要方面关系的问题
【单选题】
题的方法都是___
A. 重点论
B. 均衡论
C. 一点论
D. 两点论
【单选题】
“任何个别(无论怎样)都是一般”。这句话的正确含义是___
A. 特殊性就是普遍性
B. 特殊性存在于普遍性之中
C. 普遍性是特殊性的总和
D. 特殊性中包含普遍性
【单选题】
在唯物辩证法看来,水果同苹果、梨、香蕉、桔子等的关系是___
A. 共性和个性的关系
B. 整体和部分的关系
C. 本质和现象的关系
D. 内容和形式的关系
【单选题】
“是就是是,不是就是不是,除此之外都是鬼话。”这是一种___
A. 形而上学的观点
B. 相对主义的观点
C. 唯心主义的观点
D. 辩证法的观点
【单选题】
真象和假象的区别在于___
A. 真象是客观的,假象是主观的
B. 真象表现本质,假象不表现本质
C. 真象深藏于事物内部,假象外露于事物外部
D. 真象从正面直接地表现本质,假象从反面歪曲地表现本质
【单选题】
有的哲学家说,在大风扬起的尘土中,每一粒尘土的运动状况都是纯粹必然的。这是种___
A. 辩证唯物主义决定论的观点
B. 形而上学的机械决定论的观点
C. 唯心主义非决定论的观点
D. 庸俗唯物主义的观点
【单选题】
“或然率”是指___
A. 可能性在质上的一种科学说明和测定
B. 可能性在量上的一种科学说明和测定
C. 必然性的一种科学说明和判定
D. 偶然性的一种科学说明和测定
【单选题】
Economically speaking, are we better off than we were ten years ago? Twenty years ago?
In their thirst for evidence on this issue, commentators seized on the recent report by the Census Bureau, which found that average household income rose by 5.2% in 2015. Unfortunately, that conclusion puts too much weight on a useful, but flawed and incomplete, statistic. Among the more significant problems with the Census’s measure are that: 1) it excludes taxes, transfers, and compensation like employer-provided health insurance; and 2) it is based on surveys rather than data. Even if precisely measured, income data exclude important determinants of economic well-being, such as the hours of work needed to earn that income.
While thinking about the question, we came across a recently published article by Charles Jones and Peter Klenow, which proposes an interesting new measure of economic welfare. While by no means perfect, it is considerably more comprehensive than average income, taking into account not only growth in consumption per person but also changes in working time, life expectancy, and inequality. Moreover, it can be used to assess economic performance both across countries and over time.
The Jones-Klenow method can be illustrated by a cross-country example. Suppose we want to compare the economic welfare of citizens of the U.S. and France in 2005.
In 2005, as the authors observe, real consumption per person in France was only 60% as high as the U.S., making it appear that Americans were economically much better off than the French on average. However, that comparison omits other relevant factors: leisure time, life expectancy, and economic inequality. The French take longer vacations and retire earlier, so typically work fewer hours; they enjoy a higher life expectancy, presumably reflecting advantages with respect to health care, diet, lifestyle, and the like; and income and consumption are somewhat more equally distributed there than in the U.S. Because of these differences, comparing France’s consumption with the U.S.’s overstates the gap in economic welfare.
Similar calculations can be used to compare the U.S. and other countries. For example, this calculation puts economic welfare in the United Kingdom at 97% of U.S. levels, but estimates Mexican well-being at 22%.
The Jones-Klenow measure can also assess an economy’s performance over time. According to this measure, as of the early-to-mid-2000s, the U.S. had the highest economic welfare of any large country. Since 2007, economic welfare in the U.S. has continued to improve. However, the pace of improvement has slowed markedly.
Methodologically, the lesson from the Jones-Klenow research is that economic welfare is multi-dimensional. Their approach is flexible enough that in principle other important quality-of-life changes could be incorporated—for example, decreases in total emissions of pollutants and declines in crime rates.
What does the author think of the 2015 report by the Census Bureau?___
A. It is based on questionable statistics.
B. It reflects the economic changes.
C. It evidences the improved welfare.
D. It provides much food for thought.
【单选题】
Economically speaking, are we better off than we were ten years ago? Twenty years ago?
In their thirst for evidence on this issue, commentators seized on the recent report by the Census Bureau, which found that average household income rose by 5.2% in 2015. Unfortunately, that conclusion puts too much weight on a useful, but flawed and incomplete, statistic. Among the more significant problems with the Census’s measure are that: 1) it excludes taxes, transfers, and compensation like employer-provided health insurance; and 2) it is based on surveys rather than data. Even if precisely measured, income data exclude important determinants of economic well-being, such as the hours of work needed to earn that income.
While thinking about the question, we came across a recently published article by Charles Jones and Peter Klenow, which proposes an interesting new measure of economic welfare. While by no means perfect, it is considerably more comprehensive than average income, taking into account not only growth in consumption per person but also changes in working time, life expectancy, and inequality. Moreover, it can be used to assess economic performance both across countries and over time.
The Jones-Klenow method can be illustrated by a cross-country example. Suppose we want to compare the economic welfare of citizens of the U.S. and France in 2005.
In 2005, as the authors observe, real consumption per person in France was only 60% as high as the U.S., making it appear that Americans were economically much better off than the French on average. However, that comparison omits other relevant factors: leisure time, life expectancy, and economic inequality. The French take longer vacations and retire earlier, so typically work fewer hours; they enjoy a higher life expectancy, presumably reflecting advantages with respect to health care, diet, lifestyle, and the like; and income and consumption are somewhat more equally distributed there than in the U.S. Because of these differences, comparing France’s consumption with the U.S.’s overstates the gap in economic welfare.
Similar calculations can be used to compare the U.S. and other countries. For example, this calculation puts economic welfare in the United Kingdom at 97% of U.S. levels, but estimates Mexican well-being at 22%.
The Jones-Klenow measure can also assess an economy’s performance over time. According to this measure, as of the early-to-mid-2000s, the U.S. had the highest economic welfare of any large country. Since 2007, economic welfare in the U.S. has continued to improve. However, the pace of improvement has slowed markedly.
Methodologically, the lesson from the Jones-Klenow research is that economic welfare is multi-dimensional. Their approach is flexible enough that in principle other important quality-of-life changes could be incorporated—for example, decreases in total emissions of pollutants and declines in crime rates.
What does the author say about the Jones-Klenow method?___
A. It is widely used to compare the economic growth across countries.
B. It revolutionizes the way of measuring ordinary people’s livelihood.
C. It focuses on people’s consumption rather that their average income.
D. It is a more comprehensive measure of people’s economic well-being.
【单选题】
Economically speaking, are we better off than we were ten years ago? Twenty years ago?
In their thirst for evidence on this issue, commentators seized on the recent report by the Census Bureau, which found that average household income rose by 5.2% in 2015. Unfortunately, that conclusion puts too much weight on a useful, but flawed and incomplete, statistic. Among the more significant problems with the Census’s measure are that: 1) it excludes taxes, transfers, and compensation like employer-provided health insurance; and 2) it is based on surveys rather than data. Even if precisely measured, income data exclude important determinants of economic well-being, such as the hours of work needed to earn that income.
While thinking about the question, we came across a recently published article by Charles Jones and Peter Klenow, which proposes an interesting new measure of economic welfare. While by no means perfect, it is considerably more comprehensive than average income, taking into account not only growth in consumption per person but also changes in working time, life expectancy, and inequality. Moreover, it can be used to assess economic performance both across countries and over time.
The Jones-Klenow method can be illustrated by a cross-country example. Suppose we want to compare the economic welfare of citizens of the U.S. and France in 2005.
In 2005, as the authors observe, real consumption per person in France was only 60% as high as the U.S., making it appear that Americans were economically much better off than the French on average. However, that comparison omits other relevant factors: leisure time, life expectancy, and economic inequality. The French take longer vacations and retire earlier, so typically work fewer hours; they enjoy a higher life expectancy, presumably reflecting advantages with respect to health care, diet, lifestyle, and the like; and income and consumption are somewhat more equally distributed there than in the U.S. Because of these differences, comparing France’s consumption with the U.S.’s overstates the gap in economic welfare.
Similar calculations can be used to compare the U.S. and other countries. For example, this calculation puts economic welfare in the United Kingdom at 97% of U.S. levels, but estimates Mexican well-being at 22%.
The Jones-Klenow measure can also assess an economy’s performance over time. According to this measure, as of the early-to-mid-2000s, the U.S. had the highest economic welfare of any large country. Since 2007, economic welfare in the U.S. has continued to improve. However, the pace of improvement has slowed markedly.
Methodologically, the lesson from the Jones-Klenow research is that economic welfare is multi-dimensional. Their approach is flexible enough that in principle other important quality-of-life changes could be incorporated—for example, decreases in total emissions of pollutants and declines in crime rates.
What do Jones and Klenow think of the comparison between France and the U.S. in terms of real consumption per person?___
A. It reflected the existing big gap between the two economies.
B. It neglected many important indicators of people’s welfare.
C. It covered up the differences between individual citizens.
D. It failed to count in their difference in natural resources.
【单选题】
Economically speaking, are we better off than we were ten years ago? Twenty years ago?
In their thirst for evidence on this issue, commentators seized on the recent report by the Census Bureau, which found that average household income rose by 5.2% in 2015. Unfortunately, that conclusion puts too much weight on a useful, but flawed and incomplete, statistic. Among the more significant problems with the Census’s measure are that: 1) it excludes taxes, transfers, and compensation like employer-provided health insurance; and 2) it is based on surveys rather than data. Even if precisely measured, income data exclude important determinants of economic well-being, such as the hours of work needed to earn that income.
While thinking about the question, we came across a recently published article by Charles Jones and Peter Klenow, which proposes an interesting new measure of economic welfare. While by no means perfect, it is considerably more comprehensive than average income, taking into account not only growth in consumption per person but also changes in working time, life expectancy, and inequality. Moreover, it can be used to assess economic performance both across countries and over time.
The Jones-Klenow method can be illustrated by a cross-country example. Suppose we want to compare the economic welfare of citizens of the U.S. and France in 2005.
In 2005, as the authors observe, real consumption per person in France was only 60% as high as the U.S., making it appear that Americans were economically much better off than the French on average. However, that comparison omits other relevant factors: leisure time, life expectancy, and economic inequality. The French take longer vacations and retire earlier, so typically work fewer hours; they enjoy a higher life expectancy, presumably reflecting advantages with respect to health care, diet, lifestyle, and the like; and income and consumption are somewhat more equally distributed there than in the U.S. Because of these differences, comparing France’s consumption with the U.S.’s overstates the gap in economic welfare.
Similar calculations can be used to compare the U.S. and other countries. For example, this calculation puts economic welfare in the United Kingdom at 97% of U.S. levels, but estimates Mexican well-being at 22%.
The Jones-Klenow measure can also assess an economy’s performance over time. According to this measure, as of the early-to-mid-2000s, the U.S. had the highest economic welfare of any large country. Since 2007, economic welfare in the U.S. has continued to improve. However, the pace of improvement has slowed markedly.
Methodologically, the lesson from the Jones-Klenow research is that economic welfare is multi-dimensional. Their approach is flexible enough that in principle other important quality-of-life changes could be incorporated—for example, decreases in total emissions of pollutants and declines in crime rates.
What is an advantage of the Jones-Klenow method?___
A. It can accurately pinpoint a country’s current economic problems.
B. It can help to raise people’s awareness of their economic well-being.
C. It can diagnose the causes of a country’s slowing pace of economic improvement.
D. It can compare a country’s economic conditions between different periods of time.
【单选题】
Economically speaking, are we better off than we were ten years ago? Twenty years ago?
In their thirst for evidence on this issue, commentators seized on the recent report by the Census Bureau, which found that average household income rose by 5.2% in 2015. Unfortunately, that conclusion puts too much weight on a useful, but flawed and incomplete, statistic. Among the more significant problems with the Census’s measure are that: 1) it excludes taxes, transfers, and compensation like employer-provided health insurance; and 2) it is based on surveys rather than data. Even if precisely measured, income data exclude important determinants of economic well-being, such as the hours of work needed to earn that income.
While thinking about the question, we came across a recently published article by Charles Jones and Peter Klenow, which proposes an interesting new measure of economic welfare. While by no means perfect, it is considerably more comprehensive than average income, taking into account not only growth in consumption per person but also changes in working time, life expectancy, and inequality. Moreover, it can be used to assess economic performance both across countries and over time.
The Jones-Klenow method can be illustrated by a cross-country example. Suppose we want to compare the economic welfare of citizens of the U.S. and France in 2005.
In 2005, as the authors observe, real consumption per person in France was only 60% as high as the U.S., making it appear that Americans were economically much better off than the French on average. However, that comparison omits other relevant factors: leisure time, life expectancy, and economic inequality. The French take longer vacations and retire earlier, so typically work fewer hours; they enjoy a higher life expectancy, presumably reflecting advantages with respect to health care, diet, lifestyle, and the like; and income and consumption are somewhat more equally distributed there than in the U.S. Because of these differences, comparing France’s consumption with the U.S.’s overstates the gap in economic welfare.
Similar calculations can be used to compare the U.S. and other countries. For example, this calculation puts economic welfare in the United Kingdom at 97% of U.S. levels, but estimates Mexican well-being at 22%.
The Jones-Klenow measure can also assess an economy’s performance over time. According to this measure, as of the early-to-mid-2000s, the U.S. had the highest economic welfare of any large country. Since 2007, economic welfare in the U.S. has continued to improve. However, the pace of improvement has slowed markedly.
Methodologically, the lesson from the Jones-Klenow research is that economic welfare is multi-dimensional. Their approach is flexible enough that in principle other important quality-of-life changes could be incorporated—for example, decreases in total emissions of pollutants and declines in crime rates.
What can we infer from the passage about American people’s economic well-being?___
A. It is much better than that of their European counterparts.
B. It has been on the decline ever since the turn of the century.
C. It has not improved as much as reported by the Census Bureau.
D. It has not been accurately assessed and reported since mid-2000s.
【单选题】
大学生的成才目标是___。
A. 培养德智体美全面发展的人才
B. 培养德智体美全面发展的社会主义建设者
C. 培养德智体美全面发展的社会主义建设者和接班人
D. 培养专业化、创新化的人才
【单选题】
世界政治格局发展的必然趋势是___。
A. “多极化”
B. 单边主义
C. 两极格局形成
D. 一超独霸
【单选题】
在全面发展的教育中德、智、体、美是缺一不可,统一存在的,其中处于主导地位的是___。
【单选题】
时代精神的内涵十分丰富,其中___居于核心地位。
A. 艰苦奋斗
B. 自强不息
C. 团结统一
D. 改革创新
【单选题】
民族精神是一个民族赖以生存和发展的精神支撑。中华民族在五千年的发展中所形成的伟大民族精神的核心是___。
A. 爱国主义
B. 人道主义
C. 科学主义
D. 革命英雄主义
【单选题】
下列名言反映中华民族是一个艰苦奋斗的民族的有___。
A. 艰难困苦,玉汝于成
B. 先天下之忧而忧
C. 生于忧患,死于安乐
D. 民无信不立