Supersonic dynamic stability characteristics of a space shuttle orbiter

Supersonic forced-oscillation tests of a 0.0165-scale model of a modified 089B Rockwell International shuttle orbiter were conducted in a wind tunnel for several configurations over a Mach range from 1.6 to 4.63. The tests covered angles of attack up to 30 deg. The period and damping of the basic unaugmented vehicle were calculated along the entry trajectory using the measured damping results. Some parameter analysis was made with the measured dynamic derivatives. Photographs of the test configurations and test equipment are shown

Supersonic dynamic stability derivatives of a modified 089B shuttle orbiter

An experimental test program was conducted to measure the dynamic stability derivatives of a modified 089B shuttle orbiter. Supersonic forced oscillation tests were conducted in the Langley Unitary Plan Wind Tunnel over a range of Mach numbers from 1.6 to 4.63 for angles of attack up to 30 deg. The data were measured at the model resonant frequency with pitch and yaw amplitudes of 1 deg and a roll amplitude of 2.5 deg

Subsonic and transonic dynamic stability characteristics of the space shuttle launch vehicle

An investigation has been conducted to determine the subsonic and transonic dynamic stability characteristics of a 0.015 scale model of the space shuttle launch vehicle. These tests were conducted in the Langley 8-foot transonic pressure tunnel over a Mach number range from 0.3 to 1.2. Forced oscillation equipment was used to determine the damping characteristics of several configurations about all three axes. The test results show that the model exhibited positive damping in pitch except at the highest Mach number (1.2) where there was a region of negative damping at 2 deg angle of attack. The yawing oscillation tests show that the model exhibited nonlinearities and negative damping at Mach numbers of 0.3 and 0.6. The model exhibited positive roll damping throughout the test angle of attack and Mach range

Supersonic dynamic-stability derivatives of the space shuttle launch vehicle

An investigation was made to determine the dynamic stability characteristics of a 0.015-scale model of the space shuttle launch vehicle at supersonic speeds. These tests were made at angles of attack from -10 deg to 10 deg at Mach numbers of 2.00, 2.86, 3.96, and 4.63. The complete launch vehicle, consisting of the orbiter, external tank, and solid rocket boosters, has positive damping in pitch, roll, and yaw over the angle-of-attack and Mach number range. The orbiter external tank configuration has a region of negative angles pitch damping for small negative of attack at a Mach number of 2.00. At all other test conditions, the orbiter external tank configuration has positive damping about all three axes

Effect of the shear-to-compressive force ratio in puncture tests quantifying watermelon mechanical properties

a b s t r a c t Because texture is a primary driver of watermelon acceptability, the development of methods to test for small differences in texture between new cultivars would be of great utility to fruit breeding efforts. The objective was to investigate the effect of the shear-to-compressive force ratio in puncture tests on watermelon, then design new probes that would improve the test's sensitivity. A new hollow probe design of increased shear force (compactness = 11.6 mm 2 /mm 2 ) was more sensitive at quantifying watermelon tissue mechanical properties when compared to the industry standard Magness-Taylor probe (compactness = 1 mm 2 /mm 2 ). Compressive force applied is constant between the two. The hollow probe was more sensitive to differences between tissue types, though was not able to discriminate between cultivars, using the maximum force value. Based upon the improved performance of the hollow probe with tissue types, a high-shear 'snowflake' probe was designed and compared to the hollow and MagnessTaylor probes. The Magness-Taylor probe misclassified tissue types in 42% of samples tested, while the hollow and snowflake probes performed better, misclassifying 32% and 34% of samples, respectively. This was an improved accuracy over the Magness-Taylor, but the hollow and snowflake probes were not significantly different (a = 0.05) from each other. These results suggest that of the two, the hollow probe, due to its simplicity, offers an improvement over the industry standard Magness-Taylor in maximum force parameter applications

The discursive construction of childhood and youth in AIDS interventions in Lesotho's education sector: Beyond global-local dichotomies

This is the post-print version of this article. The definitive, peer-reviewed and edited version of this article is published in Environment and Planning D,Society and Space 28(5) 791 – 810, 2010, available from the link below. Copyright @ 2010 Pion.In southern Africa interventions to halt the spread of AIDS and address its social impacts are commonly targeted at young people, in many cases through the education sector. In Lesotho, education-sector responses to AIDS are the product of negotiation between a range of ‘local’ and ‘global’ actors. Although many interventions are put forward as government policy and implemented by teachers in schools, funding is often provided by bilateral and multilateral donors, and the international ‘AIDS industry’—in the form of UN agencies and international NGOs—sets agendas and makes prescriptions. This paper analyses interviews conducted with policy makers and practitioners in Lesotho and a variety of documents, critically examining the discourses of childhood and youth that are mobilised in producing changes in education policy and practice to address AIDS. Focusing on bursary schemes, life-skills education, and rights-based approaches, the paper concludes that, although dominant ‘global’ discourses are readily identified, they are not simply imported wholesale from the West, but rather are transformed through the organisations and personnel involved in designing and implementing interventions. Nonetheless, the connections through which these discourses are made, and children are subjectified, are central to the power dynamics of neoliberal globalisation. Although the representations of childhood and youth produced through the interventions are hybrid products of local and global discourses, the power relations underlying them are such that they, often unintentionally, serve a neoliberal agenda by depicting young people as individuals in need of saving, of developing personal autonomy, or of exercising individual rights.RGS-IB

Ethical and methodological issues in engaging young people living in poverty with participatory research methods

This paper discusses the methodological and ethical issues arising from a project that focused on conducting a qualitative study using participatory techniques with children and young people living in disadvantage. The main aim of the study was to explore the impact of poverty on children and young people's access to public and private services. The paper is based on the author's perspective of the first stage of the fieldwork from the project. It discusses the ethical implications of involving children and young people in the research process, in particular issues relating to access and recruitment, the role of young people's advisory groups, use of visual data and collection of data in young people's homes. The paper also identifies some strategies for addressing the difficulties encountered in relation to each of these aspects and it considers the benefits of adopting participatory methods when conducting research with children and young people

Regulatory Improvement Legislation: Risk Assessment, Cost-Benefit Analysis, and Judicial Review

As the number, cost, and complexity of federal regulations have grown over the past twenty years, there has been growing interest in the use of analytic tools such as risk assessment and cost-benefit analysis to improve the regulatory process. The application of these tools to public health, safety, and environmental problems has become commonplace in the peer-reviewed scientific and medical literatures. Recent studies prepared by Resources for the Future, the American Enterprise Institute, the Brookings Institution, and the Harvard Center for Risk Analysis have demonstrated how formal analyses can and often do help government agencies achieve more protection against hazards at less cost than would otherwise occur. Although analytic tools hold great promise, their use by federal agencies is neither consistent nor rigorous. The 103rd, 104th, 105th and 106th Congresses demonstrated sustained interest in the passage of comprehensive legislation governing the employment of these tools in the federal regulatory process. While legislative proposals on this issue have attracted significant bipartisan interest, and recent amendments to particular enabling statutes have incorporated some of these analytical requirements, no comprehensive legislation has been enacted into law since passage of the Administrative Procedure Act in 1946. The inability to pass such legislation has been attributed to a variety of factors, but a common substantive concern has been uncertainty and controversy about how such legislation should address judicial review issues. For example, the judicial review portion of The Regulatory Improvement Act (S. 981), the 105th Congress\u27s major legislative initiative, was criticized simultaneously as meaningless (for allegedly offering too few opportunities for petitioners to challenge poorly reasoned agency rules) and dangerous (as supposedly enabling petitioners to paralyze even well-reasoned agency rules). Thus, a significant obstacle to regulatory improvement legislation appears to be the conflicting opinions among legal scholars and practitioners about how judicial review issues should be addressed in such legislation. The Clinton Administration and the authors of S. 981 believe they have crafted a workable compromise, one that accommodates the need to bring more rigor and transparency to an agency\u27s decisional processes without imposing excessive judicial review. Nevertheless, it is clear that their agreement on this subject, if included in future legislative deliberations, will be scrutinized and contested. Recognizing the importance of the judicial review issue to this and, indeed, any effort to improve the regulatory process, the Center for Risk Analysis at the Harvard School of Public Health convened an invitational Workshop of accomplished legal practitioners and scholars to discuss how judicial review should be handled in legislation of this kind. The full-day Workshop was conducted in Washington, D.C. on December 17, 1998. Its purpose was to discuss principles, experiences, and insights that might inform future public debate about how judicial review should be addressed in legislative proposals that entail use of risk assessment and/or cost-benefit analysis in agency decision-making (whether the proposals are comprehensive or agency-specific). In order to provide the Workshop a practical focus, participants analyzed the provisions of S. 981 (as modified at the request of the Clinton Administration). An exchange of letters between S. 981\u27s chief sponsors and the Clinton Administration defining the terms of the agreement was examined as well. This Report highlights the themes of the Workshop discussion and offers some specific commentary on how proposed legislation (including but not limited to S. 981) could be improved in future legislative deliberations

Regulatory Improvement Legislation: Risk Assessment, Cost-Benefit Analysis, and Judicial Review

As the number, cost, and complexity of federal regulations have grown over the past twenty years, there has been growing interest in the use of analytic tools such as risk assessment and cost-benefit analysis to improve the regulatory process. The application of these tools to public health, safety, and environmental problems has become commonplace in the peer-reviewed scientific and medical literatures. Recent studies prepared by Resources for the Future, the American Enterprise Institute, the Brookings Institution, and the Harvard Center for Risk Analysis have demonstrated how formal analyses can and often do help government agencies achieve more protection against hazards at less cost than would otherwise occur. Although analytic tools hold great promise, their use by federal agencies is neither consistent nor rigorous. The 103rd, 104th, 105th and 106th Congresses demonstrated sustained interest in the passage of comprehensive legislation governing the employment of these tools in the federal regulatory process. While legislative proposals on this issue have attracted significant bipartisan interest, and recent amendments to particular enabling statutes have incorporated some of these analytical requirements, no comprehensive legislation has been enacted into law since passage of the Administrative Procedure Act in 1946. The inability to pass such legislation has been attributed to a variety of factors, but a common substantive concern has been uncertainty and controversy about how such legislation should address judicial review issues. For example, the judicial review portion of The Regulatory Improvement Act (S. 981), the 105th Congress\u27s major legislative initiative, was criticized simultaneously as meaningless (for allegedly offering too few opportunities for petitioners to challenge poorly reasoned agency rules) and dangerous (as supposedly enabling petitioners to paralyze even well-reasoned agency rules). Thus, a significant obstacle to regulatory improvement legislation appears to be the conflicting opinions among legal scholars and practitioners about how judicial review issues should be addressed in such legislation. The Clinton Administration and the authors of S. 981 believe they have crafted a workable compromise, one that accommodates the need to bring more rigor and transparency to an agency\u27s decisional processes without imposing excessive judicial review. Nevertheless, it is clear that their agreement on this subject, if included in future legislative deliberations, will be scrutinized and contested. Recognizing the importance of the judicial review issue to this and, indeed, any effort to improve the regulatory process, the Center for Risk Analysis at the Harvard School of Public Health convened an invitational Workshop of accomplished legal practitioners and scholars to discuss how judicial review should be handled in legislation of this kind. The full-day Workshop was conducted in Washington, D.C. on December 17, 1998. Its purpose was to discuss principles, experiences, and insights that might inform future public debate about how judicial review should be addressed in legislative proposals that entail use of risk assessment and/or cost-benefit analysis in agency decision-making (whether the proposals are comprehensive or agency-specific). In order to provide the Workshop a practical focus, participants analyzed the provisions of S. 981 (as modified at the request of the Clinton Administration). An exchange of letters between S. 981\u27s chief sponsors and the Clinton Administration defining the terms of the agreement was examined as well. This Report highlights the themes of the Workshop discussion and offers some specific commentary on how proposed legislation (including but not limited to S. 981) could be improved in future legislative deliberations