Giving up densities of rabbits Research Paper Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words

Giving up densities of rabbits - Research Paper Example The purpose of the study was to determine how far the cottontail would go from its natural habitat for the food set up in the trays. The prediction was that the cottontail rabbits would not venture too far from their home for the food set up in the trays at a further distance. There were two trays set up at a closer distance. In the one tray the food was easier for the rabbits to get to than in the other tray that was set out at a close distance to the proximity of the rabbits natural habitat. The prediction was that the rabbits would not want to venture to far away from the habitat to find the food that was set out for them. The rabbits would not work as hard at the closer two trays that were set up with the rabbit nibble, because the rabbits would be too frightened that a predator would come and hunt the rabbit. The rabbits would devour the food from the tray that was easier to grab at, and easier to get to the food, because the rabbits would not want to stand there too long to get the food. The rabbits would want to hurry, and eat so they would not be discovered by any predators. The importance of a rabbit giving up density is because the rabbits do not want to be discovered while going through extra lengths just to get the food. The rabbits give up density for safety, and will always go for the easier food that is closer to their habitat, than go for food that is far away from their habitat. â€Å"When we say ‘habitat’ we are referring to a location that suits best the basic needs of the living organism,† Cottontail Rabbit Habitat, (1). Materials and Methods The materials used for this experiment were four feeding troughs. The troughs were filled with dry sand, and then filled with rabbit chow. The rabbit chow was mixed with the sand. There was the same amount of food put into two troughs, and the same amount of food put into the other two troughs. The troughs were filled with unequal portions of sand. When the sand was poured into the t roughs with the food the food was then blended well with the sand. The two troughs with the most food in them were placed further in the field. The two troughs with the least amount of food were left near the habitat of the rabbits. When the rabbits came out in the night the rabbits ate from the two troughs that were closest to the habitat. â€Å"Cottontail rabbits generally forage for food at night and stay concealed in brush during the daytime,† Moore, (1). The researchers put the troughs out at night, and expected the rabbits to eat from them during the night. The experiment was conducted in the same spot over the course of the three nights. The experiment warranted the use of the troughs in the same spots over the course of the three nights as not to have inconsistencies with the results of the experiment. The rabbits ate more food from the trough that was closest to their habitat, and not filled with as much sand. The researchers found that the rabbits ate more from the trough that did not have as much sand in it, because the rabbits found it easier to get to the food with less sand in the trough. The rabbits did not want to linger too long at the troughs to get the food. The rabbits were afraid of any predator coming around and harming the rabbits as the rabbits were trying to eat. Results The results of the experiment were that the rabbits ate less out of the two troughs that were far away. The rabbits ate more out of the trough that was close to their habitat,

Children and the hous Essay Example for Free

Children and the hous Essay Carver has been called a dirty realist. In what way do you think this can be applied to Neighbors and Theyre not your husband?  I dont think Carvers work can really be stereotyped; it is certainly different from other fiction by other American writers, so I dont think it can ever really be given a heading like dirty realism.  Even though the word dirty conjures pictures of filth, squalor and generally anything sexually different that people tend to shun, but in fact it almost has a double meaning- it doesnt have to mean sordid- its almost a term for describing anything sexually explicit which might otherwise be thought unethical or immoral. Neighbors is a story which basically is an insight into someone elses life- something that you would never normally know about that could be translated as interfering or an incredible lack of respect for other people and their belongings.  Theyre not your husband is a portrayal of male behavior and how controlling it can sometimes be.  Neighbors is a revealing insight into the life of a couple going through a particularly difficult stage in their relationship. The idea of such a trivial thing like feeding their friends cat is a particular trait of Carvers- to use something incredibly mundane to blossom something amazing from something pretty boring and routine. The way Bill and Arlene break all the unwritten laws of society and therefore bring a new flame to their relationship is odd in itself, but when you think about it, it is an obvious way- to try on the lives of people who are happy and confident in their relationship, and copy it into yours. The non conformist way they behave is yet another style of Carver; to show us the way people behave when they know other people cant see into their world or the way they are acting. I dont think that this particular story is particularly dirty, even if it is slightly sexual- it is not particularly crude or off putting. It is quite subtle- for example, the way that they always use the excuse of playing with Kitty when they spend hours in the Stones flat, is reminiscent of felines, which can be portrayed as erotic or sexual, and it is such a pathetic excuse that its obvious its not true- but neither of them ever questions it, they seem to have a hidden bond which lets them understand each other perfectly, and I think this is why they dont need to discuss anything when they go into the flat together. Although the Millers make the fatal mistake of leaving the key inside the house at the end of the story, it is too late, the image of perfect, routine middle- class life is broken. We realise that when we saw these people as a normal couple, mundane with no ups and downs in their lives, that we had only just scratched the surface. These people can behave just as badly as anyone else an although we do not see it, they are just as unlikely to conform to some perfect boring lifestyle than any of us. Theyre not your husband is a frank description of how male behavior can lead to extremes when men are put under great pressure. This can often happen in relationships when the female is more successful than the male, yet is unlikely to happen in circumstances where the man is the breadwinner and a wife or partner is left at home to look after children and the house.  This statement is proved when Earls failure to get himself a job leads to his controlling behavior over his wife in a want of something to live for, a purpose in life. Earl enjoys having some influence over her life and the way he can make decisions for her- after all, he doesnt really have any to make for himself. It gives him something to think about- ways to get her to lose more weight quickly, to make her an object of desire that he can be proud to be seen with. Earl seems to have no opinions or morals of his own- he relies on the opinions and gossip of other people to tell him whether his wife is attractive or not. He doesnt seem to be able to tell that she has lost too mush weight- it is like he has lost slight control of his mind, similar to the way anorexics do, they believe they are still fat even when they are skeletal. Earl would like her to continue losing weight until he hears someone say that she looks good- then he would be satisfied. The language used in this story is much more crude and chauvinist than that used in Neighbors. When the two business men discuss Doreen, saying Some men like their quim fat, this is deliberately coarse and blunt to represent just how lightly it was said, and how shallow Earl must be to take it seriously instead of standing up for his wife and forgetting about it. Instead he walks out of the cafe, pretending not to know her to save himself embarrassment. The language they use is quite dirty, but this is not Carvers own views- it is him trying to show how insincere and shallow people can be, and the seedy way they can behave. How 0men can judge a woman simply by her looks and completely ignore character. This is extremely realistic in the sense of how people are embarrassed to admit they are with somebody because they think theyre special, desperate for other people not to think worse of them because they like someone not considered to be up to the standards of others. It shows the appalling level that things can get to in a real- life situation without any of the family noticing much. IT takes outsiders to make a difference, good or bad. In both stories Carver uses dirty realism to give the audience an insight into the lives of real people- things that could actually happen and dont revolve around some huge unrealistic drama like a lot of fiction does. However it is a lot more obvious in Theyre not your husband than it is in Neighbors, simply because the language is that much more raw and unrefined. It is subtler in Neighbors, yet it is still there, and if anything, I find the subtlety more effective than the obvious, harsh language in Theyre not your husband. In both stories the language is simple and unpolished, leaving the mind of the reader open to discover the seedy and immoral world he has based his characters in. It opens your eyes to see the world around us in the same way, which is slightly daunting and depressing, but probably a good thing in the long run as it lets us look at other people and realise how pointless their lives are.  I think Carver has been classed as a dirty realist simply for the reasons that he uses sex as to act as a part in the life of human beings which can be changed by something which doesnt have to be very dramatic, making it realistic.

Ethnicity and Genocide in Rwanda

Ethnicity and Genocide in Rwanda Tracing the origins of a genocide is a treacherous undertaking. If simply recording the facts can be difficult, due to the chaotic and brutal disregard of human existence and culture, then tracing the social, cultural and political origins/causes is highly problematic. If the interpreter chooses to trace these origins to the distant past, by considering peculiar cultural developments and tensions then he/she can be accused of absolving those who were actively involved in the genocide of the responsibility that should be attributed to them. If on the other hand, the interpreter chooses merely to concentrate on the motivations of those involved then this can be at the expense of a broader understanding of the circumstances that enabled such motivations to flourish. This dilemma certainly confronts efforts to explain the most notorious genocide in human history, in Germany during the second world war. Hannah Arendt for example, asked us, disturbingly, to think of Eichman as just a burea ucrat trying to do the best for his career and family as a creation of the dark side of modernity. In attempting to explain a more recent, equally brutal, genocide in Rwanda in 1994 we are once again confronted by the interpretive dilemma described above. In the case of Rwanda the issue for those attempting to explain why almost 1 million people were murdered in the space of just a few months, has been the extent to which ethnicity was the decisive factor. Was it ethnic tension and rivalry that erupted, horrifically, into the mass killing of a minority ethnic group by another majority ethnic group? If so then how did such viscous ethnic tension emerge? Was it an artificial creation of colonial rule, that was very likely to eventually end in violent conflict? Or were ethnic tensions between the Hutu and Tutsi the deliberate construction of power groups bent on the annihilation of their enemies, their competitors for power. And to what extent were these tensions class based rather than ethnic? In the following essay I shall show how there is more at stake in assessing the contributi on of ethnicity to the genocide in Rwanda than the degree to which ethnicity was a factor. Moreover, it is very clear that ethnicity played a part but the key issue is when, who, how and for what purpose was ‘ethnic’ division created? Our answers to these questions will lead us to the very meaning of the ethnicities themselves. Ethnicity and Genocide Before we can begin to address the particular case of Rwanda however we should clarify what will be meant by both ethnicity and genocide. The term ethnicity is usually employed to refer to the identity of a group of people who share a particular geography, language, history, religion, habits and customs that can be distinguished from other such groups. Whether this identity is ‘imaginary or real’, as Obi Zgwanda notes, is irrelevant. What matters is that there is a perception of ethnic differences and that this perception guides the actions and interactions of those who hold to them. It is important also to note here that ethnicity is a social identity that is not necessarily confined by, or the product of, precise geographical boundaries. Indeed Africa is a good example of a region that consists of many ethnicities that pre-date the establishment of geographical boundaries. Moreover, just because a certain social identity is not geographically demarcated against another social identity, it’s other, does not mean that the social identity in question is any less describable as ethnic (Igwara, 1995: 7) The term genocide requires a much more formal definition. This is because there often seems to be some confusion between killing that is motivated by ethnic hatred and the deliberate, planned attempt to eliminate a certain ethnic group which is what we shall understand to be genocide. The distinction is important because it is much easier to understand the socio-historical causes of violence between ethnic groups than it is to trace the socio-historical legacy that led to genocide. In other words, there may exist ethnic tensions or competing ethnicities but it is a big step to then understand them as the key contributing factor in genocide. And once we recognise that genocide is planned and deliberate then we also have to take into account the motivations of the planners of the genocide. In other words, we need to consider the extent to which ethnicity was manipulated by actors bent on the paranoid accumulation of power and wealth. Hutu and Tutsi as ethnicities? Hutu and Tutsi are the two main ethnic groupings in Rwanda. But are they really distinct ethnic groupings. After all, they share the same language and customs and are not divided by religion either. Indeed, they also share the same geography. The Hutu, who are the majority group, have been historically distinguished, most significantly, merely by their occupation as farmers of the land whereas Tutsi are mainly cattle farmers. To be sure this is an important difference, in that ownership of cattle has traditionally been thought of as the chief measure of status. There are some who believe that Tutsi and Hutu can be distinguished also by appearance but then there are others still who believe that this is mythical, a social imagination of former Tutsi rule which explains why they are thought to be taller. In any case, the pre-twentieth century history of Tutsi and Hutu suggest that the two groups were different not as ethnicities as such but as two layers of a caste system. This would perhaps explain why prior to the twentieth century the Hutu and Tutsi coexisted relatively peacefully; certainly if the cultural and economic hierarchy between Tutsi and Hutu was internalised as a natural order within the social identities of the two groupings. Indeed, to describe the Hutu and Tutsi as ethnicities may indeed be a Eurocentric way of classifying the differences between the two groups that wants to divide up the world into distinct ethnicities, much in the way that nations are divided up. To put the point differently, it is rather like understanding the middle and working classes in Britain as separate ethnicities. To conclude this section, if the genocide carried out by Hutu against Tutsi is to be understood in terms of ethnicity then the ethnicity we are referring to must surely be a recent creation and therefore, perhaps less decisive as a factor? Colonialism and the construction of ethnicity It is now widely recognised that colonial rule of Africa, and other parts of the world, created tensions that otherwise might not have existed. There are two key reasons for this effect. Firstly, the dividing up of Africa by European powers in the 19th and early 20th century created artificial boundaries which subsequently became states, and which would later become the subject of dispute and violent conflict. Secondly, and more significantly in the case of Rwanda colonialism imposed what is called the settler/native dialectic. The settler/native dialectic did not just impose a hierarchy it established an altered consciousness in which social identities were relative to the superiority of the colonist (Mamdani, 2001). Moreover, consent to colonial rule was imposed not just through force but through a kind of cultural assimilation in which the native was encouraged to aspire to the cultural and economic superiority of the settler. This surely had the effect of heightening tensions bet ween groups that were privileged or marginalised within this dialectic thus feeding a key ingredient of ethnicity, namely otherness (Mamdani, 2001) German control of Rwanda up until the first world war certainly followed the logic of colonialism described above. Throughout German occupation the dominance of the Tutsi was further institutionalised through administrative and economic structures. And the enforcement of a tax regime meant that the Tutsi were both partly responsible for and beneficiaries of the collection and allocation of revenue. However, it was Belgian colonialism that had the most significant impact on relations between Hutu and Tutsi, and the social construction of ethnic identity in Rwanda. There are several key factors here. Firstly, after taking control of the colony after world war one, the Belgian authorities introduced formal ethnic identification. Every Rwandan was forced to carry identity cards stating their ethnic identity, i.e Hutu or Tutsi. Placed alongside the continued support for the Tutsi elite and the explicit belief that the Tutsi were superior to the Hutu, physically and culturally, this surely had the effect of polarising the ‘ethnic’ contrast between the two groups (Igwara, 1995: 46) Worse still, the Belgian authorities attempted to make Rwanda into a profitable colony and thus enforced a much harsher regime than under the Germans. Since much of the administration of this regime was carried out by the Tutsi an actual dynamic of tension was set in place that was to unfold throughout the twentieth century. The Belgian colonisers certainly helped to ensure, albeit unintentionally, that this dynamic became conflictual and violent. In the 1950’s signs of unrest amongst the Hutu population in reaction to their oppressed condition led the Belgian authorities to introduce a greater measure of equality between the Hutu and Tutsi. Moreover the growing confidence and deepened collective consciousness of the Hutu eventually resulted in a bloody overthrow by the Hutu of the Tutsi regime in 1959. From 1962 onwards the Hutu reversed the Tutsi dominance, often just as brutally as the regime that it replaced. By the 1990’s the Hutu and Tutsi were divided, at least, by divergent collective memories of the past, or in other words by conflicting ethnic identities. By way of conclusion to our summary of the effects of colonialism, we can say that the colonial control of Rwanda clearly established tensions that might not otherwise have existed, which had the effect of strengthening the ethnic self-consciousness of the Hutu and Tutsi (Mamdani, 2001). Though we have not yet established the degree to which ethnicity contributed to the genocide in Rwanda, it is clear that the tensions that were present in the early 1990’s were ethnic ones, even if they were only recently created. By this time the perceived cultural differences between the Hutu and Tutsi were not mere economic. The Genocide It is one thing to establish that the genocide occurred against a background of decades of ethnic strife, but quite another to claim this strife was the decisive factor in the genocide. To claim that ethnicity was the decisive factor in the genocide is perhaps to suppose that the genocide was spontaneous, that it was the rising to the surface of ethnic injustice and hatred whose will was carried out by the militia who slaughtered so many Tutsi, in such a short space of time. But perhaps this is what the perpetrators of the genocide would like us to believe. Perhaps it would be more accurate to claim, following the definition of Genocide outlined above, that the genocide was deliberate and planned and that the ethnic hatred, and thus the particular ethnicity that played a part was also deliberately cultivated for the purpose of carrying out genocide. There are several key factors here. Firstly whilst its scale was unprecedented in Rwanda, the genocide arguably began sometime before 1994. During the late 1980’s and early 1990’s a series of progroms were carried out. These were smaller scale brutal killing expeditions by Hutu militia, coordinated by the Hutu government, most probably in preparation for genocide on a much greater scale (Freeman, 1998). The Hutu government appeared to have arrived at the conclusion that the surest way to permanently secure its power base was the elimination of the Tutsi. The rhetoric of the regime during this period certainly seems to confirm this. But the Hutu suppression of the Tutsi during this period, under the leadership of Habyarimana, was not simply motivated by the desire to ethnically cleanse. Even though viscous ethnocentric rhetoric was employed the Hutu government were perhaps more fearful of the consequences of the pressure that was being brought on them by external powers for democratic reform and thus the i nclusion of the Tutsi. The progroms then, and the eventual genocide may be seen as an attempt to eliminate any threat to its power base before it was required to relent to pressure for democratic reform. Indeed, the introduction of democratic reform during the early 1990’s only further strengthened the Hutu governments cause. More press freedom and the establishment of new political parties only led to more pro-Hutu and more anti-Tutsi rhetoric. This rhetoric was also more specifically targeted against the Arusha accords which were supposed to establish a power-sharing arrangement with the Tutsi. To be sure, the chances for the success of the accords was diminished also by the invasions between 1990-93 of the Rwandan Patriotic Front (RPF) a Tutsi led militia force based in Uganda. However the fear amongst the Hutu elite that if the accords were realised they would lose their cultural and political positions was more decisively a factor in their racialisation of Rwanda politic s during the period before the genocide. The extent to which the Rwandan genocide was planned and thus the result of a power struggle rather, merely, than ethnicity, is evidenced by the events that led up to the genocide in the months before. On April 6th 1994 a plane carrying the president was shot down by a missile, killing everyone on board. But in the same day of the attack, Hutu militia were out on patrol checking the identities of all passers by if they were Tutsi they were brutally murdered with machete’s (Freeman, 1998: 49). The killing that ensued then was immediate and on a mass scale during a period of just 3 months. Estimates of the number of Tutsi killed ranged between 700,000 and 1 million. The apparent suddenness of the genocide as well as the inaction of the international community should not however, disguise the significant and not well concealed evidence that the genocide was planned even predictable. Indeed the attack on the presidents aeroplane is still shrouded in mystery. It is unclear who ca rried out the attack and some suspect that it may have been Hutu extremists concerned that the Hutu government would relinquish some of its power base to the Tutsi. And it should also be noted that the genocide was not just targeted at Tutsi but Hutu moderates. The relative absence of ethnicity as a factor in the summary above leaves out an important question however. How is it, if the genocide was a planned attempt by the Hutu elite to eliminate any potential threat to its power-base, that so many people participated in the genocide. However, only 10% of the Hutu population participated in the killings. The image that is often portrayed of the people killing their neighbours often obscures this statistic. It is true that Tutsi and Hutu lived in the same communities and spoke the same language and even married each other but one cannot make the further step that the genocide was the spontaneous eruption of ethnic hatred. Clearly, the events and origins of the genocide in Rwanda are highly contested. Indeed, it is important to include here the interpretation of the events offered by western governments and the western media. There is much evidence to suggest that both the U.S and France had the operational military capability to intervene ra pidly and decisively to halt the genocide. Furthermore the shooting down of the presidents plane has never properly been investigated, either by the U.N, American or Belgian authorities. Moreover Rwanda represents a massive failure on a number of fronts. The most blatant failure was clearly that of the United Nations for pathetically sending in peacekeeping troops that were merely able to stand by and watch the slaughter. Then there is the failure, and apparent inconsistency of the ‘American empire’ to decisively intervene despite its interventions elsewhere. And there is also the failure to prevent the genocide, to do anything about the preparations for genocide. Indeed, Rwanda was actually viewed as a model of development of an example of the success of international development aid. This is despite the substantial use of international aid for the funding Hutu militia and the luxurious lifestyles of the Hutu elite. From the perspective of these failed actors, or non-actors, it is certainly much more convenient either to understand what happened in Rwanda as ‘civil war’ or to understand it as a sudden eruption of ethnic tensions that defy easy explanation. Curiously, by laying the blame for the genocide at the door of colonialism the cultural studies, post-colonial explanation for the genocide in Rwanda actually ends up allying itself with the former colonial powers who apparently ‘powerless’ to intervene. Conclusion Whilst ethnicity is clearly a factor in the genocide in Rwanda, we need to be careful the way in which and the degree to which attribute this factor. Firstly, historically the Tutsi and Hutu have been divided along class rather than ethnic lines. Their differences do not take the form of ethnic differences in the European sense of the term. Secondly, whilst the colonial intensification of tensions between the Hutu and Tutsi created a consciousness of ethnicity that might not otherwise have existed we should be careful when attempting to trace the specific and brutal act of genocide to the legacy of colonialism. Thirdly, the years, months, days and hours that proceded the genocide suggest that it was planned and thus not a sudden eruption of ethnic tension and hostilities as is sometimes implied. Bibliography John A. Berry and Carol Pott Berry (eds.), Genocide in Rwanda:  A Collective Memory. Washington, DC: Howard University  Press, 1999. Charles Freeman, Crisis in Central Africa Hove: Wagland, 1998 Mahmood Mamdani, When Victims Become  Killers: Colonialism, Nativism, and the Genocide in Rwanda. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2001. Obi Igwara, Ethnic Hatred: genocide in Rwanda London: ASEAN, 1995

The Unnecessary Death of Jessica Hathawaye :: Exploratory Essays Research Papers

The Unnecessary Death of Jessica Hathawaye When will the day come when parents realize children are not possessions to be manipulated!? Children are people, too, and need guidance - don't we all? - but is it necessary to force our beliefs and practices upon them, demanding they emulate only the lifestyle we lead? It sickens me to see the tragic waste of human life, specifically the lives of children. Going one step further, it sickens me to see parents who lack the common sense that God gave a dog! One can't drive an automobile without passing a test, but any idiot can have a child. It wasn't bad weather that killed Jessica Hathaway. It was the effects of her mother's non-conformist lifestyle and preaching. Imagine a small seven year old girl, living in a quiet town on the coast of northern California. One would envision the child playing with dolls, serving tea from her Barbie play-time tea set to her mom or dad, maybe even showing off her schoolwork from the day's lessons in grammar school. A very believable childhood scenario. Not for Jessica Hathaway. Jessica wasn't allowed to play with dolls or teddy bears. Jessica Hathaway wasn't allowed to go to grammar school with the other children. Jessica wasn't even allowed to read children's books. Introducing New Age mother and self-acclaimed spiritual healer, Lisa Hathaway, Jessica's mother. Lisa has her own ideas about how to raise her children, as do we all, but Lisa's ideas ride the fence between extreme New Age philosophy and 60s idealism. Lisa encouraged Jessica to follow her bliss, though it seems obvious the real encouragement was to follow her mother's bliss. A seven year old child finds bliss in a chocolate candy bar, or in playing house with friends, but certainly not in reading technical material from an equestrian magazine or flying a plane across the country. Jessica Hathaway never watched television; there wasn't one in her house and she wasn't allowed to watch anyone else's. Truthfully, we all could use a little less television. Jessica didn't go to school, Lisa felt the children should forge their own way in life. Real life the best tutor, experience the best preparation. That could apply to an eighteen year old, but a seven year old? Lisa failed to file a home-schooling plan with local authorities, another display of her anti-conformist attitude. School is an unfit place for my children, Lisa has said.

Concrete

The crack widths predicted by the different codes have been calculated for a range of varying parameters: Varying tension reinforcement stress (Figure 9) Varying cover (Figure 10) Varying bar spacing with constant reinforcement area and stress. (Figure 1 1) Varying bar spacing with constant reinforcement area and maximum stress to AS 3600. Figure 12) BBS 5400 results have been plotted using a Ms / MGM ratio of 0. 1 and 1. All results have used long term values where available. Larger versions of these graphs may be found on the Powering presentation associated with this paper. The following observations can be made from the graph results: The BBS 5400 results using the two different load ratios gave substantially different results, with the higher ratio giving increased crack widths. The BBS 8110 results were either approximately centrally placed between the two BBS 5400 results, or close to the lower values.The Recoded 2 results were usually reasonably close to the mean of the other results. The CUBE-Flip-1990 results were consistently the lowest for high steel stresses and high concrete cover values. Results with varying spacing were close to Recoded 2 results. The IAC 318 results were consistently the highest, being close to and slightly higher than the upper bound BBS 5400 values. All crack widths increased approximately linearly with increasing steel stress Crack widths increased with increasing cover, with Recoded 2 reaching a constant value at 70 mm cover, and the CUBE-PIP code at 35 mm cover.The other codes continued to increase more than linearly up to 100 mm cover. All codes predicted increasing crack width with increasing bar spacing and constant reinforcement area steel stress. Figure 9: Varying tension reinforcement stress Figure 10: Varying cover Figure 11: Varying bar spacing with constant reinforcement area and stress Figure 12: Varying bar spacing with constant reinforcement area and maximum stress to AS 3600.When the steel stress was adjusted to the maximum allowable under AS 3600 (I. E. Reduced for increasing bar spacing and increasing bar diameter) the predicted crack widths were reasonably uniform in the spacing range 50 to 200 mm, then tended to reduce with greater spacing. DEFLECTION The main differences in approach to the calculation of deflections are summarized low: Australian and American codes are based on the Brannon equation, using a uniform average effective stiffness value.Australian codes allow for loss of tension stiffening through a reduction of the cracking moment related to the free concrete shrinkage. Allowance for shrinkage curvature in the Australian codes is simplified and will underestimate curvature in symmetrically reinforced sections. British codes allow only a low tension value for cracked sections, which is further reduced for long term deflections European codes adopt an intermediate approach for cracked sections, tit an allowance for loss of tension stiffening.British and European code prov isions for shrinkage curvature are essentially the same Effective stiffness, calculated according to AS 3600, Recoded 2, BBS 5400, and BBS 8110, and with no tension stiffening, is plotted against bending moment for the same concrete section used in the crack width analysis. Figure 13 shows results with no shrinkage, and Figure 14 with a shrinkage of 300 Microscopic. RESEARCH ABOUT THE METHODS USED IN DIFFERENCE CONCRETE STANDARDS AS 3600 limits the maximum reinforcement stress under serviceability loads to a axiom value dependent on either the bar diameter or the bar spacing, whichever gives the greater stress.AS 5100 has the same limits, with an additional requirement to check for lower limits under permanent loads for elements in exposure classifications 82, C or U. Recoded 2 limits stresses in essentially the same way, except that the limits are presented as maximum bar spacing or diameter for a specified stress, rather than vice versa. The Recoded 2 limits are related to 3 diffe rent values of nominal crack width, 0. 2 mm, 0. 3 mm or 0. 4 mm, under pseudo-static loading. The applicable crack Edith depends on the exposure classification and type of member.Code Provisions for Crack Width Limits As well as stress limits, Recoded 2 has detailed provisions for the calculation of design crack widths, which are summarized below: The basic formula for crack width: crack spacing x (mean steel strain – mean concrete strain) makes no allowance for variation in crack width between the level of the reinforcement and the surface of the concrete, however the crack spacing is mainly related to the cover depth, and the crack width is directly proportional to crack spacing, so the depth of cover has a significant effect on crack widths.The expression for Seems – ECMA limits the effect of tension stiffening to 40% of the steel strain. For long term effects the tension stiffening coefficient is reduced by 1/3, from 0. 6 to 0. 4. The British concrete design codes specify a design crack width at the surface of the concrete as follows: The basic approach is similar to Recoded 2, except that the crack width is projected from the reinforcement level to the concrete surface. The main differences between BBS 5400 and BBS 8110 are: BBS 5400 includes a factor to reduce the effect of tension stiffening, depending on the ratio of live load moment to dead load moment (Ms / MGM).The effect of this is to reduce tension stiffening effects to zero for a load ratio of 1 or greater. The tension stiffening coefficients are differently formulated. The IAC requirements are based on stress limits derived from the Surgery-Lutz equation: The IAC 318 equation makes no allowance for tension stiffening, and predicts crack width at the upper bound of those studied in this paper. Results are usually similar to those from the BBS 5400 equation using a Ms / MGM ratio of 1 .AS 3600, AS 5100, and IAC 318 AS 3600 and AS 5100 provisions for â€Å"simplified† calculati on of deflections are identical other than a typographical error in AS 5100), and are both based on the â€Å"Brannon† equation, which is also used in IAC 318. The equation in IAC 318 is differently formulated, but will give identical results for the same cracking moment and section stiffness values. The AS 3600 version of the equation is shown below: left is calculated for the maximum moment section, and applied along the full length of the member being analyses.The calculation of the cracking moment in the Australian codes (but not IAC 318) includes an allowance for the shrinkage induced tensile stress in the unchecked section, which contributes to loss of tension stiffening: AS 3600 and AS 5100 provide a factor KC , applied to the calculated deflection, to account for the additional deflection due creep and shrinkage: KC = [2- 1. 2(ASS / East)] Note that for a symmetrically reinforced section KC reduces to the minimum value of 0. , being the effect of creep deflection alon e. 6. 4. 2 OBSESS,BBS 8110 Deflections in BBS 5400 and BBS 8110 are calculated from integration of section curvatures. The cracking moment and curvature of cracked sections allows for a short term concrete tensile stress of 1 Amp, reducing to 0. 5 Amp in the long term. Shrinkage curvatures in BBS 8110 are determined from the free shrinkage strain, and the first moment of area of the reinforcement about the cracked or unchecked section, as appropriate.BBS 5400 uses a similar approach, but tabulates factors based on the compression and tension reinforcement ratios. 6. 4. 3 Recoded 2 and CUBE-PIP 1990 (MAC 90) The European codes also provide for calculation of deflections by integration of section curvatures, but provide a different expression for the stiffness of cracked sections: Shrinkage curvatures are assessed using a similar method to that given in BBS 8110:

The Versailles Treaty Put an End to World War I

The Versailles Treaty Put an End to World War I The Versailles Treaty, signed on June 28, 1919 in the Hall of Mirrors in the Palace of Versailles in Paris, was the peace settlement between Germany and the Allied Powers that officially ended World War I. However, the conditions in the treaty were so punitive upon Germany that many believe the Versailles Treaty laid the groundwork for the eventual rise of Nazis in Germany and the eruption of World War II. Debated at the Paris Peace Conference On January 18, 1919- just over two months after the fighting in World War Is Western Front ended- the Paris Peace Conference opened, beginning the five months of debates and discussions that surrounded the drawing up of the Versailles Treaty.   Although many diplomats from the Allied Powers participated, the big three (Prime Minister David Lloyd George of the United Kingdom, Prime Minister Georges Clemenceau of France, and  President Woodrow Wilson  of the United States)  were the most influential. Germany was not invited. On May 7, 1919, the Versailles Treaty was handed over to Germany, who was told they had only three weeks in which to accept the Treaty. Considering that in many ways the Versailles Treaty was meant to punish Germany, Germany, of course, found much fault with the Versailles Treaty. Germany did send back a list of complaints about the Treaty; however, the Allied Powers ignored most of them. The Versailles Treaty: A Very Long Document The Versailles Treaty itself is a very long and extensive document, made up of 440 Articles (plus Annexes), which have been divided into 15 parts. The first part of the Versailles Treaty established the League of Nations. Other parts included the terms of military limitations, prisoners of war, finances, access to ports and waterways, and reparations. Versailles Treaty Terms Spark Controversy The most controversial aspect of the Versailles Treaty was that Germany was to take full responsibility for the damage caused during World War I (known as the war guilt clause, Article 231). This clause specifically stated: The Allied and Associated Governments affirm and Germany accepts the responsibility of Germany and her allies for causing all the loss and damage to which the Allied and Associated Governments and their nationals have been subjected as a consequence of the war imposed upon them by the aggression of Germany and her allies. Other controversial sections included the major land concessions forced upon Germany (including the loss of all her colonies), the limitation of the German army to 100,000 men, and the extremely large sum in reparations Germany was to pay to the Allied Powers. Also enraging was Article 227 in Part VII, which stated the Allies intention of charging German Emperor Wilhelm II with supreme offence against international morality and the sanctity of treaties. Wilhelm II was to be tried in front of a tribunal made up of five judges. The terms of the Versailles Treaty were so seemingly hostile to Germany that German Chancellor Philipp Scheidemann resigned rather than sign it. However, Germany realized they had to sign it for they had no military power left to resist. Versailles Treaty Signed On June 28, 1919, exactly five years after the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand, Germanys representatives Hermann Mà ¼ller and Johannes Bell signed the Versailles Treaty in the Hall of Mirrors in the Palace of Versailles near Paris, France.

How to Get Writing a Novel off your Bucket List

How to Get Writing a Novel off your Bucket List How to Get â€Å"Writing a Novel† off Your Bucket List Natalie Barelli harbored a dream that's all too familiar for our readers - writing a novel. An IT professional writing a psychological thriller might have seemed like a  pipe dream, but persistence led to a book which by all accounts is a real page-turner. If "writing a novel" is still on your bucket list, you'll find some good inspiration and advice below!Edit:  Just 6 months  after publishing "Until I Met Her", Natalie Barelli got signed by Amazon Publishing's imprint Thomas Mercer. You can read about how that happened here.It was a conversation about bucket lists that got me started. Over a glass of wine - or ten, let’s be honest - my friend and I were lamenting the fact that it’s so easy to put something into the bucket list, but almost impossible to get it out again.So we decided to pick one each, and get on with it. And mine was to write a novel. More specifically, a psychological suspense novel, because I love them. I read them all the time, I am addict ed to them, and find them to be great stories. Ironically, I didn’t use to enjoy writing very much, but I have always loved stories, and the idea of them. And of course probably like anyone who has ever wanted to write a novel, I thought I could write one because I love reading them.Having decided that I would write a novel, I figured there must be structures out there that I could follow, something akin to the three-act paradigm that is used in film narratives. I was hoping for a â€Å"join the dots† style model, something along the lines of â€Å"kill someone in chapter 1† and â€Å"throw in a suspect in chapter 3† then link ‘em up in chapter 2. I got one item out of my bucket list, my house has never been so clean, and I published Until I Met Her on Amazon on 16 June, ten days ago at the time of writing this. To date the novel has received seven five-star reviews, all of which point to a good plot and good writing.I sure didn’t get those on my own.Until I Met Her here is now available on  Amazon, so make sure to get your copy!How close are you to finishing your first novel? Does  Natalie's story sound like a day out of your life?  Please  share your thoughts and experiences, or any question for Natalie, in the comments below!