Article

The gifted child.

Pediatrics in Review (Impact Factor: 0.82). 08/2000; 21(7):240-2. DOI: 10.1542/pir.21-7-240
Source: PubMed
0 Bookmarks
 · 
93 Views
  • 12/2006: pages 263-275;
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The drilling of deep holes remains an unsatisfactory machining operation due its limited productivity. This manufacturing process requires the chips to be evacuated through the use of retreat cycles and high-pressure lubrication, which is problematic both for productivity and the respect of the environ- ment. An alternative response to the chip evacuation problem is the use of a vibratory drilling head which enables the chip to be split thanks to the drill’s axial vibration. The high-speed drilling operation requires specific cutting conditions to be determined in order to maintain self-excited axial vibration throughout the drilling process. The prediction of adequate cutting conditions is determined on the basis of the frequency characteristics of the spindle/self-vibratory drilling head and the dynamics of the cutting process. It can be expressed in terms of a specific stability diagram indicating the zone of stable self-excited axial vibration. The aim of this study is to develop a high-speed spindle/drilling head/tool system finite element model to evaluate the system’s dynamic characteristics and the adequate cutting conditions allowing stable self-excited axial vibration. The model is elaborated on the basis of rotor dynamics prediction, and takes into account the interfaces between system components, using the receptance coupling method. Using the model, adequate cutting conditions are determined by integrating the model-based tool tip transfer function into the chatter vibration stability approach proposed by Budak and Altintas. The simulated results are validated by performing vibration and drilling tests. The proposed model can be used to accurately evaluate the dynamic performance of the spindle/self-vibratory drilling head and can also be used to design an optimised spindle/drilling head for a given drilling process.
    International Journal of Machine Tools and Manufacture 01/2012; 52(1):59-68. · 2.26 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This article sets out the findings of an exploratory study which looked at the impact of the Hampshire Agreed Syllabus, ‘Living Difference’, on teaching and learning in religious education. The research was carried out in Hampshire, Southampton, and Portsmouth, UK, between April and June 2008. Twenty teachers were interviewed, all of whom were using Living Difference and all of whom had reported that they were finding the syllabus effective in relation to their previous practice. The aim was to find out what it was about Living Difference that these teachers felt was producing more effective teaching and more successful learning in RE and why. The study also examined what might need developing or changing in the syllabus and its implementation. The author compares with other pedagogies of RE aspects of Living Difference including contextualising and evaluating religious material, using concepts, assessing and measuring progression in religious education, differentiation, having one attainment target, developing higher order thinking skills, and enabling student voices to be heard. It also looks at issues in training teachers in using the Agreed Syllabus. The author suggests that Living Difference supports teachers and students primarily at the pedagogical level of objectives, or setting intending learning outcomes, using a framework of understanding pedagogy in RE at three levels: the level of aims, the overall aims of the subject; the level of objectives, of setting intended learning outcomes; and the level of methodology, the activities which enable and support students to achieve those learning outcomes. The article ends with some questions for religious education nationally. Does Living Difference offer a pedagogical model at the level of objectives which could underpin the National Framework for RE and RE in the primary and secondary curricula? Is one attainment target better than two in practice? Does initial teacher training and continuing professional development need to give greater emphasis to learning theory? Should all agreed syllabi provide a pegagogical framework at the level of objectives, like Living Difference does? Should local authorities support training of the kind which is going on in Hampshire?
    British Journal of Religious Education 03/2010; 32(2):147-161. · 0.47 Impact Factor