Structural design for dynamic response reduction

A computer program for redesigning structural modes to reduce response has been initiated. The linear regulator approach in modal coordinates has been implemented. It is noted that the transformation of solution to physical structure is a major problem. It is concluded that the solution of stiffness equations and damping equations can be done separately as NXN set of (matrix Riccati) equations

Interactive Online Tool for Educating the Public About Landscape Conservation

Landscape-scale conservation planning performed in a systematic and transparent manner is becoming more common as it is increasingly evident that ecological processes are being affected at large spatial scales. The Appalachian Landscape Conservation Cooperative undertook a 15-state landscape conservation planning project, resulting in a landscape conservation design called NatureScape. To facilitate NatureScape\u27s implementation by groups and individuals participating in on-the-ground landscape conservation, we developed an online decision support tool. This tool has the potential to assist Extension services in delivering research-based information to varied stakeholders as they make land use decisions

Integrated Application of Active Controls (IAAC) technology to an advanced subsonic transpot project-demonstration act system definition

The 1985 ACT airplane is the Final Active Controls Technology (ACT) Airplane with the addition of three-axis fly by wire. Thus it retains all the efficiency features of the full ACT system plus the weight and cost savings accruing from deletion of the mechanical control system. The control system implements the full IAAC spectrum of active controls except flutter-mode control, judged essentially nonbeneficial, and incorporates new control surfaces called flaperons to make the most of wing-load alleviation. This redundant electronic system is conservatively designed to preserve the extreme reliability required of crucial short-period pitch augmentation, which provides more than half of the fuel savings

Blood group substances as differentiation markers in human dento-gingival epithelium

Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/65594/1/j.1600-0765.1987.tb02054.x.pd

Integrated Application of Active Controls (IAAC) technology to an advanced subsonic transport project: Current and advanced act control system definition study. Volume 2: Appendices

The current status of the Active Controls Technology (ACT) for the advanced subsonic transport project is investigated through analysis of the systems technical data. Control systems technologies under examination include computerized reliability analysis, pitch axis fly by wire actuator, flaperon actuation system design trade study, control law synthesis and analysis, flutter mode control and gust load alleviation analysis, and implementation of alternative ACT systems. Extensive analysis of the computer techniques involved in each system is included

Clinical Effects of Electromagnetic Stimulation as an Adjunct to Periodontal Therapy

Peer Reviewedhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/141604/1/jper0046.pd

The Prenective View of Propositional Content

Beliefs have what I will call ‘propositional content’. A belief is always a belief that so-and-so: a belief that grass is green, or a belief that snow is white, or whatever. Other things have propositional content too, such as sentences, judgments and assertions. The Standard View amongst philosophers is that what it is to have a propositional content is to stand in an appropriate relation to a proposition. Moreover, on this view, propositions are objects, i.e. the kind of thing you can refer to with singular terms. For example, on the Standard View, we should parse the sentence ‘Simon believes that Sharon is funny’ as: [Simon] believes [that Sharon is funny]; ‘Simon’ is a term referring to a thinking subject, ‘that Sharon is funny’ is a term referring to a proposition, and ‘x believes y’ is a dyadic predicate expressing the believing relation. In this paper, I argue against the Standard View. This is how I think we should parse ‘Simon believes that Sharon is funny’: [Simon] believes that [Sharon is funny]; here we have a singular term, ‘Simon’, a sentence ‘Sharon is funny’, and a ‘prenective’ joining them together, ‘x believes that p’. On this Prenective View, we do not get at the propositional content of someone’s belief by referring to a reified proposition with a singular term; we simply use the sentence ‘Sharon is funny’ to express that content for ourselves. I argue for the Prenective View in large part by showing that an initially attractive version of the Standard View is actually vulnerable to the same objection that Wittgenstein used against Russell’s multiple-relation theory of judgment

Distributed-Pair Programming can work well and is not just Distributed Pair-Programming

Background: Distributed Pair Programming can be performed via screensharing or via a distributed IDE. The latter offers the freedom of concurrent editing (which may be helpful or damaging) and has even more awareness deficits than screen sharing. Objective: Characterize how competent distributed pair programmers may handle this additional freedom and these additional awareness deficits and characterize the impacts on the pair programming process. Method: A revelatory case study, based on direct observation of a single, highly competent distributed pair of industrial software developers during a 3-day collaboration. We use recordings of these sessions and conceptualize the phenomena seen. Results: 1. Skilled pairs may bridge the awareness deficits without visible obstruction of the overall process. 2. Skilled pairs may use the additional editing freedom in a useful limited fashion, resulting in potentially better fluency of the process than local pair programming. Conclusion: When applied skillfully in an appropriate context, distributed-pair programming can (not will!) work at least as well as local pair programming