An investigation of end-anchorage and performance of SR-4 strain gages on a prestressed concrete beam

In recent years there has been brought to the attention of engineers and architects a new medium of construction---prestressed concrete. Reinforced concrete has long been recognized as a satisfactory material for use in the construction of buildings, bridges, highways, tanks and other structures. However, most concrete designers will concede that this material has many drawbacks. For instance, in a simple beam of rectangular cross-section, roughly only one half or the concrete is relied on to resist compressive forces. The tensile strength of the concrete is considered to be zero, and steel bars or rods must be inserted to carry the tensile stresses. This assumption necessarily increases the dead loads which must be considered in design. Prestressed concrete refers to members in which the concrete is subjected to stress before it receives any live loads. This stress ls usually in the form of a compressive force which acts on the whole cross-sectional area of the member. In this way the entire area of the member can be used to resist the applied loads. As in any new field of endeavor, many problems are encountered which must be investigated. In this field of prestressed concrete probably the largest stumbling block is the method of anchoring the high tensile strength wires which are used to induce the compressive stresses in the concrete. It is the purpose of this paper to investigate one method of end-anchorage and also to investigate the performance of SR-4 strain gages applied to both the prestressing wires and the concrete --Introduction, pages 1-2

Student Loans and their effect on Parental Views of Education Financing

Using the 2012 wave National Longitudinal Survey of Youth 1979, this study examines the effect that parents\u27 student debt have on their decision to use tax advantage education vehicles to save for their children\u27s college. We also examine parental decisions on obtaining student loans on behalf of their children. The results show that parents who report having student loans are 61% less likely than those that report no student loan debt to use tax-advantaged education saving vehicles. However, we find no difference in the effect of having student loans on the decision to obtain debt to fund their children\u27s college education

Stafford County Shoreline Management Plan

With approximately 85 percent of the Chesapeake Bay shoreline privately owned, a critical need exists to increase awareness of erosion potential and the choices available for shore stabilization that maintains ecosystem services at the land-water interface. The National Academy of Science published a report that spotlights the need to develop a shoreline management framework (NRC, 2007). It suggests that improving awareness of the choices available for erosion control, considering cumulative consequences of erosion mitigation approaches, and improving shoreline management planning are key elements to minimizing adverse environmental impacts associated with mitigating shore erosion. Actions taken by waterfront property owners to stabilize the shoreline can affect the health of the Bay as well as adjacent properties for decades. With these long-term implications, managers at the local level should have a more proactive role in how shorelines are managed. The County recognizes that development has led to increased runoff and non-point source pollution and identifies the need to guide efforts to maintain water quality, preserve wildlife habitats, and minimize the risk of natural hazards (Stafford County Planning Commission, 2010). The shores of Stafford range from exposed open-river to very sheltered creeks, and the nature of shoreline change varies accordingly (Figure 1-1). This shoreline management plan is useful for evaluating and planning shoreline management strategies appropriate for all the creeks and rivers of Stafford. It ties the physical and hydrodynamic elements of tidal shorelines to the various shoreline protection strategie

York County Shoreline Management Plan

With approximately 85 percent of the Chesapeake Bay shoreline privately owned, a critical need existsto increase awareness of erosion potential and the choices available for shore stabilization that maintainecosystem services at the land-water interface. The National Academy of Science published a report thatspotlights the need to develop a shoreline management framework (NRC, 2007). It suggests that improv-ing awareness of the choices available for erosion control, considering cumulative consequences of erosion mitigation approaches, and improving shoreline management planning are key elements to minimizing adverse environmental impacts associated with mitigating shore erosion

Fairfax County Shoreline Management Plan

Much of the Fairfax County’s tidal shoreline is suitable for a “Living Shoreline” approach to shoreline management. The Commonwealth of Virginia has adopted policy stating that Living Shorelines are the preferred alternative for erosion control along tidal waters in Virginia (http://leg1.state.va.us/cgi-bin/ legp504.exe?111+ful+CHAP0885+pdf). The policy defines a Living Shoreline as …”a shoreline management practice that provides erosion control and water quality benefits; protects, restores or enhances natural shoreline habitat; and maintains coastal processes through the strategic placement of plants, stone, sand fill, and other structural and organic materials.” The key to effective implementation of this policy at the local level is understanding what constitutes a Living Shoreline practice and where those practices are appropriate. This management plan and its use in zoning, planning, and permitting will provide the guidance necessary for landowners and local planners to understand the alternatives for erosion control and to make informed shoreline management decisions. The recommended shoreline strategies can provide effective shore protection but also have the added distinction of creating, preserving, and enhancing wetland, beach, and dune habitat. These habitats are essential to addressing the protection and restoration of water quality and natural resources within the Chesapeake Bay watershed. The final Fairfax County Shoreline Management Plan is an educational and management reference for the City and its landholders

City of Suffolk Shoreline Management Plan

City of Suffolk understands that water resources are an integral part of the quality of life for its residents. The City’s Comprehensive Plan states that management of development and land disturbing activities directly affect the quality of surface water, drinking water, fisheries and wetland habitat (City of Suffolk Department of Planning, 2006). The shores of Suffolk range from exposed open river to very sheltered creeks, and the nature of shoreline change varies accordingly. While the City’s Comprehensive Plan provides general guidance for shore erosion control, a shoreline management plan is useful for evaluating and planning shoreline management strategies appropriate for all the creeks and rivers of Suffolk. It ties the physical and hydrodynamic elements of tidal shorelines to the various shoreline protection strategies

An Analysis on the Efficiency of Philippine Microfinance Institutions: A Stochastic Frontier Approach

Microfinance institutions (MFIs) were created to provide loans and financial services for the poor as commercial banks have requirements that are not accessible to them. The Philippines government soon started using MFIs as a poverty alleviation tool to answer the market failure created by the commercial banking industry since it cannot accommodate the needs of low-income earners due to the high costs attached to it. However, recent studies have shown that MFIs are “mission drifting,” which means that they are deviating from their original social purpose and becoming more financially driven. As a result, this paper estimates the financial and social efficiency of Philippine MFIs using a two-step Stochastic Frontier Approach from 2005 to 2018

Prince George County Shoreline Management Plan

Much of Prince George County’s shoreline is suitable for a “Living Shoreline” approach to shoreline management. The Commonwealth of Virginia has adopted policy stating that Living Shorelines are the preferred alternative for erosion control along tidal waters in Virginia (http://leg1.state.va.us/cgi‐bin/legp504.exe?111+ful+CHAP0885+pdf). The policy defines a Living Shoreline as …”a shoreline management practice that provides erosion control and water quality benefits; protects, restores or enhances natural shoreline habitat; and maintains coastal processes through the strategic placement of plants, stone, sand fill, and other structural and organic materials.” The key to effective implementation of this policy at the local level is understanding what constitutes a Living Shoreline practice and where those practices are appropriate. This management plan and its use in zoning, planning, and permitting will provide the guidance necessary for landowners and local planners to understand the alternatives for erosion control and to make informed shoreline management decisions. The recommended shoreline strategies can provide effective shore protection but also have the added distinction of creating, preserving, and enhancing wetland, beach, and dune habitat. These habitats are essential to addressing the protection and restoration of water quality and natural resources within the Chesapeake Bay watershed. The final Prince George County Shoreline Management Plan is an educational and management reference for the County and its landholders

Gloucester County Shoreline Management Plan

With approximately 85 percent of the Chesapeake Bay shoreline privately owned, a critical need existsto increase awareness of erosion potential and the choices available for shore stabilization that maintainsecosystem services at the land-water interface. The National Academy of Science published a report thatspotlights the need to develop a shoreline management framework (NRC, 2007). It suggests that improvingawareness of the choices available for erosion control, considering cumulative consequences of erosionmitigation approaches, and improving shoreline management planning are key elements to minimizingadverse environmental impacts associated with mitigating shore erosion.Actions taken by waterfront property owners to stabilize the shoreline can affect the health of the Bayas well as adjacent properties for decades. With these long-term implications, managers at the local levelshould have a more proactive rolein how shorelines are managed.Preserving its natural environmentis a local priority particularly inregard to future developmentconsiderations (Gloucester County,2016). The shores of Gloucesterrange from exposed open-riverto very sheltered creeks, and thenature of shoreline change variesaccordingly (Figure 1-1). Thisshoreline management plan isuseful for evaluating and planningshoreline management strategiesappropriate for all the creeksand rivers of Gloucester. It tiesthe physical and hydrodynamicelements of tidal shorelines tothe various shoreline protectionstrategies