129 research outputs found

    Interfacial Bond between Reinforcing Fibers and Calcium Sulfoaluminate Cements: Fiber Pullout Characteristics

    Get PDF
    The results of an experimental investigation on the influence of the interfacial bond of reinforcing fibers embedded in a calcium sulfoaluminate matrix on the fiber-pullout peak load and energy consumption are presented. Bonding at the fiber-matrix interface plays an important role in controlling the mechanical performance of cementitious composites—in particular, composites formed from sulfate-based systems (calcium sulfoaluminate [CSA] cements), as opposed to the silicate systems found in portland cement. Various types of fibers were selected, including polyvinyl alcohol (PVA), polypropylene, and copper-coated steel. The fibers were embedded in three different matrixes: two sulfate-based cements including one commercially available CSA cement and a CSA fabricated from coal-combustion by-products. The third matrix was a silicatebased ordinary portland cement (OPC). In this study, the results of the single-fiber pullout test were coupled with scanning electron microscopy (SEM) to examine the interfacial bond between the fiber and CSA matrix for evidence of debonding and possible hydration reaction products

    2018 NDMC ANNUAL

    Get PDF
    Contents01 From the director 02 Drought preparation toolkit tested in Nebraska available to all 03 Partnerships produce vulnerability assessments for tribes 04 Drought Monitor maps & stats localized for NWS offices 05 Producer workshops focus on latest drought management tools 06 2018 by the numbers 08 Where we were in 2018 10 New web-based form makes submitting drought observations easier 11 Five states began drought plan updates in 2018 12 Project brought drought management, monitoring skills to 4 countries 13 2018 Publication highlights 16 Collaboration 17 Team and partnership

    Homemakers' Practices and Satisfactions with Clothing.

    Get PDF
    12 p

    The patchwork governance of ecologically available water: A case study in the Upper Missouri Headwaters, Montana, United States

    Get PDF
    Institutional authority and responsibility for allocating water to ecosystems (“ecologically available water” [EAW]) is spread across local, state, and federal agencies, which operate under a range of statutes, mandates, and planning processes. We use a case study of the Upper Missouri Headwaters Basin in southwestern Montana, United States, to illustrate this fragmented institutional landscape. Our goals are to (a) describe the patchwork of agencies and institutional actors whose intersecting authorities and actions influence the EAW in the study basin; (b) describe the range of governance mechanisms these agencies use, including laws, policies, administrative programs, and planning processes; and (c) assess the extent to which the collective governance regime creates gaps in responsibility. We find the water governance regime includes a range of nested mechanisms that in various ways facilitate or hinder the governance of EAW. We conclude the current multilevel governance regime leaves certain aspects of EAW unaddressed and does not adequately account for the interconnections between water in different parts of the ecosystem, creating integrative gaps. We suggest that more intentional and robust coordination could provide a means to address these gaps

    BUILDING A SUSTAINABLE NETWORK OF DROUGHT COMMUNITIES

    Get PDF
    The first step in managing large-scale (national) collaborations and networks is to consider and address how a group and a potential partnership may match up (Luther, 2005). To explore this concept and many other collaborative concepts, the National Integrated Drought Information System (NIDIS) hosted a workshop, “Building a Sustainable Network of Drought Communities,” which was facilitated by the National Drought Mitigation Center (NDMC) in Chicago, IL, June 8-9, 2011. The workshop explored current examples of good communication and lessons learned within the realm of drought planning in order to address a future NIDIS Engaging Preparedness Communities (EPC) working group that is solution-focused and collaborative. With the diversity and experience of the participants at this meeting, a wealth of good practices or lessons learned in drought planning, preparedness, and general stakeholder engagement set the pathway for building a sustainable community of drought practitioners. In his opening remarks, NIDIS Director Roger Pulwarty noted that adaptive institutions can show robustness in the following ways: Levels of alertness—monitoring the external world for early warning signs that key assumptions are likely to verify/fail and a commitment to rigorous monitoring of performance; Agility—the ability to react to early warning signs of problems or opportunities; flow of knowledge across components, and to adjust strategies and tactics rapidly to meet changes in the environment; and Alignment—the ability to align the whole organization (and partners) to its mission-policies and practices that give rise to failures/successes. Through an interactive workshop format that used Appreciative Inquiry (framing breakout sessions on success), the group was able to effectively discuss topics such as: • Integrating Planning Efforts • Planning Under Uncertainty • Evaluating, Assessing, and Updating Drought Plans • Leveraging Resources for Risk Management • Implementing Plans and Planning Information • Synthesizing Success Stories and Lessons Learned • Creating a Sustainable Network of Drought Professionals The most common themes resulting from the workshop included: • Importance of networking and collaboration—this is a necessity. Figuring out how to make it seamless is the main goal that the NIDIS EPC Community should foster. Good communication is the key among the drought practitioners and their stakeholders. • Celebrate success—in this future drought network, successes related to drought efforts should be highlighted within the community and to the public. This will help drive future positive interactions and collaborations. It also gives the community a sense of pride. • “Stakeholder Buy-In”—why should stakeholders stay engaged in an ongoing drought community? Especially when there is no drought? Again, good communication and collaborations with other multi-hazard, sustainability, and natural resources planning efforts will help keep drought a priority. • Economic, environmental, and social aspects of planning for drought—these should always be considered. This was a recurrent theme in the workshop. • Planners should not “reinvent the wheel”—planners involved in climate adaptation work can and should reference the best drought planning resources and case studies to help them incorporate drought in their overall planning efforts. • “Have a plan for the plan”—how and who will make it happen? What kind of leadership is needed within the NIDIS EPC community to track its progress and success? • Sharing of resources—as budgets become slimmer, a central location of available resources and the sharing of resources in the area of drought preparedness and mitigation is necessary. Communication regarding these potential resources should also be integrated into this NIDIS EPC community. Since the occurrence of the workshop, several EPC-related activities have taken place, including a webinar in December 2011. This workshop report and additional EPC updates will be placed on the U.S. Drought portal (www.drought.gov). Currently, the American Planning Association (APA), NIDIS and the NDMC are collaborating to produce a Planning Advisory Service (PAS) Report to connect drought mitigation resources with the planning practices of local, regional, tribal and state governments. This builds on the work of the APA’s Hazard Planning Center, which produced a similar PAS Report (sponsored by FEMA) on how to integrate multi-hazard planning into planning practices. In May 2012: The APA’s drought planning project webpage went live and can be found at: http://www.planning.org/research/drought/index.ht

    Defining Ecological Drought for the Twenty-First Century

    Get PDF
    THE RISING RISK OF DROUGHT. Droughts of the twenty-first century are characterized by hotter temperatures, longer duration, and greater spatial extent, and are increasingly exacerbated by human demands for water. This situation increases the vulnerability of ecosystems to drought, including a rise in drought-driven tree mortality globally (Allen et al. 2015) and anticipated ecosystem transformations from one state to another—for example, forest to a shrubland (Jiang et al. 2013). When a drought drives changes within ecosystems, there can be a ripple effect through human communities that depend on those ecosystems for critical goods and services (Millar and Stephenson 2015). For example, the “Millennium Drought” (2002–10) in Australia caused unanticipated losses to key services provided by hydrological ecosystems in the Murray–Darling basin—including air quality regulation, waste treatment, erosion prevention, and recreation. The costs of these losses exceeded AUD $800 million, as resources were spent to replace these services and adapt to new drought-impacted ecosystems (Banerjee et al. 2013). Despite the high costs to both nature and people, current drought research, management, and policy perspectives often fail to evaluate how drought affects ecosystems and the “natural capital” they provide to human communities. Integrating these human and natural dimensions of drought is an essential step toward addressing the rising risk of drought in the twenty-first century
    • …
    corecore