Failure Of Materials Essay Example for Free

Failure Of Materials Essay Failure of materials is an analysis in engineering world, to approach and determining about how and why a materials has failed, like iron bar, why it can crocked or porous. Some general causes of failure are structural leading, wear corrosion and latent defects. Failure of materials must be known by an engineer, safety is the first word when engineer working building structure. They can not take random about materials that is used. They must know strength, flexibility, and endure of materials. For adding, with developing and updating software or research that had be done by company, we’ll more easy to know the characteristic of materials that we use. TYPICAL OF FAILURE OF MATERIALS Fatigue Failures Metal fatigue is caused by repeated cycling of the load below its static yield strength. It is a progressive localized damage due to fluctuating stresses and strains on the material. Metal fatigue cracks initiate and propagate in regions where the strain is most severe. The process of fatigue consists of three stages Initial crack initiation, Progressive crack growth across the part, and Final sudden fracture of the remaining cross section. Corrosion Failures Corrosion is chemically induced damage to a material that results in deterioration of the material and its properties. It is most coming from environment. Corrosion is normal, it is can not be removed, but can be minimized with several strategy like proper choice of material, design, coatings, and occasionally by changing the environment. Various types of metallic and nonmetallic coatings are regularly used to protect metal parts from corrosion. If corrosion can be minimized, materials be able to use and more advantage. Ductile and Brittle Metal Failures Ductile metals experience observable plastic deformation prior to fracture. Brittle metals experience little or no plastic deformation prior to fracture. At times metals behave in a transitional manner partially ductile/brittle. Ductile fracture is characterized by tearing of metal and significant plastic deformation. The ductile fracture may have a gray, fibrous appearance. Ductile fractures are associated with overload of the structure or large discontinuities. High Temperature Failures In physics theory, when a materials is being warm, they will expand than original size. We know about boilers, gas turbine engines, and ovens are some of the systems that have components that experience creep.   An understanding of high temperature materials behavior is beneficial Failures involving creep are usually easy to identify due to the deformation that occurs. Failures may appear ductile or brittle. While creep testing is done at constant temperature and constant load actual components may experience damage at various temperatures and loading conditions. in evaluating failures in these types of systems. High temperature progressive deformation of a material at constant stress is called creep. High temperature is a relative term that is dependent on the materials being evaluated. Liquid Metal   and Hydrogen embitterment Failures   Liquid metal embitterment is the decrease in ductility of a metal caused by contact with liquid metal. The decrease in ductility can result in catastrophic brittle failure of a normally ductile material. Very small amounts of liquid metal are sufficient to result in embitterment. The liquid metal can not only reduce the ductility but significantly reduce tensile strength. Liquid metal embitterment is an insidious type of failure as it can occur at loads below yield stress. Thus, catastrophic failure can occur without significant deformation or obvious deterioration of the component. Hydrogen embitterment failures are frequently unexpected and sometimes catastrophic. An externally applied load is not required as the tensile stresses may be due to residual stresses in the material. The threshold stresses to cause cracking are commonly below the yield stress of the material. Very small amounts of hydrogen can cause hydrogen embitterment in high strength steels. Common causes of hydrogen embitterment are pickling, electroplating and welding, however hydrogen embitterment is not limited to these processes. There are causes of materials failure, but not disease that not have medicine. Every materials that we use have a protection, protection come from our knowledge about characteristic of materials as chemical composition, using guide or calculation and appointment the materials for our structure. Addition, many factory,   metal – producing majority, also publish list of their product that have content about characteristic ( strength, elasticity, endure and treatment). Bibliography Omens, J. H., MacKenna, D. A., and McCulloch, A. D. Measurement of Strain and Analysis of Stress in Resting Rat Left Ventricular Myocardium.   J. Biomech Press,1993. TCR Engineering Services Technical Team. White Paper: Investigating Material and Component Failure.   TCR Engineering Services Pvt. Ltd. India, 2004. Haut Donahue, T. L., Gregersen, C., Hull, M. L., and Howell, S. M. Comparison of Viscoelastic, Structural, and Material Properties. ASME, 1994.

Non Financial Performance Measures: Summary and Analysis

Non Financial Performance Measures: Summary and Analysis Total quality management and non financial performance measures In order to answer the first, fundamental, question of using non financial performance measure: why should companies use non-financial reporting, it is necessary to look at the relationship between market value and book value. The market value of a company reflects the investors’ perception of the company’s present, and future, value, as manifested by stock prices. The book value, on the other hand, reflects the value of the company as reported in the official balance sheet: assets less liabilities, or net assets. Thus book value represents, in a way, the official company value and is reported to shareholders and the financial community. The market and book values for companies were very close by the end of the 1970s. The picture has, however, changed dramatically, and one estimate from the current level of stock market valuations says that book value now represents on average just around one quarter of the market value (Dutta and Reicheistein, 2005). Other data indicates an even more dramatic change in companies with valuable brands, a reputation for high quality or technical expertise, for example, in individual companies, e.g. Microsoft, the estimated book value portion is around 9%, for SAP around 5%, and for Coca-Cola around 7%. (Daum, 2002) The ratio of book value to market value is often so small that the relevance of the balance sheet to modern has often questionable. It is, of course, crucial to understand the gap between market and book values, as the market value comes from the intangible assets, such as the customer, human resource, partner, and brand assets. In order to understand the gap, there is an ob vious need for relevant and reliable information on these intangible assets, thus non-financial performance measures aim to providing such information to the stakeholders, and in particular, to the present and future investors. Lack of reliable and relevant information on intangible assets implies there is no basis for non-financial reporting, which in turn implies that market values will change over time in a less well-founded way. There is always a certain level of volatility on the stock markets, and the increasing relative importance of intangible, non financial performance measurements that has emerged over the last few decades, in combination with a persistent lack of reliable and relevant information on these assets, and no systematic non-financial reporting, is expected to create an increasing volatility. This is clearly seen, for example, on the trends in the NYSE over the past three decades (Kristensen and Westlund, 2003). It is, naturally, expected that a lack of non financial reporting will imply a significant portion of unnecessary volatility, which is clearly demonstrated by the stock price development for technology stocks (Kristensen and Westlund, 2003). For example, the IT ‘bubble’ to a significant extent was built up by a lack of proper information and analysis of intangible assets in these companies, due to a lack of non financial performance measurement and thus an overvaluing of intangible technology assets, such as AOL’s telecommunications distribution networks at the time of the AOL-Time Warner merger (The Economist, 2002). It is clear that this demonstrates a malfunctioning of the capital markets, causing significant negative consequences by destroying values in the short term, as well as long term. As such, the main purpose of non financial performance measurement is to provide the market investors and analysts with information to verify the present and expected future value of a company. Ultimately, the process of verifying the market value at a certain time will then be more fact based, thus reducing the unnecessary price volatility. In order to accurately achieve this, the key predictors of a company’s future financial performance: revenue, profits and market share, are crucial. Most recent research identifies these predictors as being primarily intangibles, non financial assets, thus explaining why market value today is basically determined by intangible assets. (Kristensen and Westlund, 2003) In particular, indicators related to the customer asset: the size and ‘quality’ of the customer base, the human capital, the brand assets, the value of corporate citizenship, and the firms product quality and expertise, will dominate. If such an indicator is a reas onably stable, strong and sustainable predictor of future financial performance, it should be called a ‘Value Driver’ (Kristensen and Westlund, 2003). Non-financial reporting aims at disclosing information on value drivers, which must be operationalised and transparent and, ideally, verifiable according to new accounting standards in order to become true non financial performance measures. Total quality management (TQM) practices have been implemented by firms interested in enhancing their survival prospects by including quality and continuous improvement in their strategic priorities. As such, they often have to be measured using both financial and non financial measures, as the expertise and cultural aspects of the TQM process are often difficult to measure by purely quantitative, financial means. One of the key measures of the success of TQM is the balanced scorecard (BSC) approach, which appraises both the four key dimensions of firm performance: customers, financial, learning and growth, and also the internal business processes. The main advantage of this is that TQM does not consider employee satisfaction in its search for continuous improvement, but the BSC does consider employee satisfaction. (Hoque, 2003) Therefore, by adopting a BSC a firm that has adopted TQM will overcome this oversight which will in turn increase employee satisfaction and subsequently firm performance. Indeed, in the modern business context, employee satisfaction is key to firm performance, and so the BSC is an important non financial performance measure. TQM’s relentless pursuit of quality demands that firms identify all non-value adding waste in the manufacturing process and implement procedures to eliminate, or at least reduce, such activities. This implies better production planning to limit over-production and excessive inventory and improved product and plant design to eliminate wasteful movement and handling. (Smith, 1997) Substandard items must be eliminated and a changed attitude reinforced which is customer-focused and adopts ‘the next person on the production line is my customer’ approach (Hoque, 2003). The cost of quality is a potentially important component of management accounting systems which may facilitate the implementation of total quality management, despite being difficult to measure in absolute financial terms. The costs of prevention, appraisal and failure are all aspects of the cost of quality, and it is often necessary to use non financial performance measures to assess these. Prevention costs include the costs of plant, product and process planning, preventive maintenance, training and the implementation of statistical process control systems, and appraisal costs include the costs of inspection and testing of both incoming and outgoing materials, and the cost of maintaining and administering appraisal systems and equipment, both of which can be measure financially However, whilst failure costs include, at the internal level, the financial costs of scrap, rework, redesign and safety stocks necessary to provide a buffer against such failure; at the external level they include losses associated with customers, goodwill and reputation, all of which require non financial performance measurements. Analysis of the costs of external failure is increasingly becoming the focus of attention in this area, reflecting the current trend towards increasing customer orientation of management accounting. (Smith, 1997) Quality considerations also extend beyond those focused on the difficult ‘cost of quality’ question, and non financial reporting is useful in providing measures of other aspects of quality, such as the quality of purchased components, equipment failure and maintenance efforts. As a result, it is necessary for TQM practitioners to consider the relationship between the types of targets or benchmarks used in the two main contrasting performance improvement strategies continuous improvement and radical change. (Johnston et al, 2001) hypothesised that the process of target setting and the reward structures adopted would be different between the two strategies, proposing that organisations involved in continuous improvement of a process will base their performance targets on past performance and internal benchmarking, arrived at through consultation and with a mixture of financial and non-financial measurements of targets. However, for processes involving radical change, targets will be based on external benchmarks imposed by senior management, with purely financial targets, and financial rewards for their achievement. However, research showed that financial measurement and reward strategies predominated in both improvement strategies, thus implying that the pot ential benefits of adopting process changes are being constrained by only considering the financial side. However, whilst academic research and other research activities among accounting organisations on intangible assets has so far mainly focused on creating awareness of the significant importance of intangibles on future financial performance, to a lesser extent, research has dealt with the serious information deficiencies related to intangible assets (Hothorn et al, 2005). In particular, the research focus seems to have been on studying the dramatic shift in production functions and asset composition of the economy, rather than the underlying problems associated with measuring intangible assets, especially in cases such as Enron, where derivatives were grossly overvalued (Wilson et al, 2003). This research involves a multitude of research activities, including the macroeconomic theory of growth, as well as empirical studies on individual companies. The growing importance of intangible assets has already been demonstrated, and one rationale behind this development is the fact that the annual United States investments in intangible assets are of approximately the same magnitude as investments in physical assets: approximately $1.2 trillion (Lev, 2001). These activities have clearly led to a rather general acceptance that traditional, financial, accounting-based, information systems fail to provide investors and policy makers with insights on the impact on the economy from intangibles. This is of increasing importance, given that the volatility of stock prices is becoming abnormally high, and this raises many serious consequences, including systematic inefficiency in managerial decisions. The recommendations so far from researchers seem to be voluntary disclosure of information on intangibles, and indeed, some companies now report externally on various aspects of intangible assets, but this happens in a very non-standardised way and seems to be of limited value for investors’ decisions. Consultants, in particular linked to the accounting industry, are empirically analysing causes and consequences of investments in intangible assets, but this research provides only marginal guidelines in identifying best practice for non financial reporting (Kristensen and Westlund, 2003) Different suggestions have been presented by researchers to identify the new research agenda to understand better and manage intangible assets, with Lev (2001), for example, suggesting a focus on research related to organizational structures. The obviously incorrect validation of intangible assets in the cases of Enron and WorldCom (The Economist, 2002), shows that another focus of research mus t be to identify best practice methodology to measure intangible assets, and to measure the main intangible value drivers for future financial performance. Indeed, the sustainability of non financial reporting is completely dependent on how it will be accepted by the stakeholders of the business community: investors, analysts, customers, boards, management, employees, the accounting profession, etc This, in turn, completely depends on the ability and willingness by the accountants to provide a formal verification of the process to generate information, as well as on the information itself. Finally, this in turn depends on the quality of the information: â€Å"Companies must start by first identifying their true value drivers both financial and non-financial within the context of their business model, and by ensuring they have defined the right metrics as well as the measurement methodologies and systems to capture the right information for internal management† (PriceWaterhouseCoopers, 2001). Recognising that the treatment of non financial performance is a key current issue in accountancy, accounting associations have already identified a number of criteria and principles to secure and describe the quality of non-financial information. This process, however, appears far from being finalised, and in particular lacks a focus on the statistical characteristics of the information, and there is also a need for further operationalisation and transparency of the quality principles (Lev, 2001) As a general principle, any verification process should verify that non-financial reporting includes the right choice of information, has the necessary degree of relevance, and that the information provided has a reasonable level of reliability. If these three requirements are not sufficiently fulfilled there is unlikely to be a sustainable future for non financial performance measurement, in TQM or any other business aspect. Further to this, information that does not say anything or very little about future financial performance should not be included in non-financial reporting. All the included information must manifest the so called Value Drivers (Kristensen and Westlund, 2003) and such value drivers should be either directly linked to future financial data, or they could be indirectly linked, through a direct value driver. Thus, relevance should be defined by the existence of verified links to future financial numbers; however this raises a number of pertinent questions to be answered by the accounting profession. Mainly, they would need to decide which financial criteria should primarily be considered to secure relevance; and which future time period is of interest to investors. For the moment, it is probably worthwhile to have a very broad scope here, as this would mean that any financial information of interest could be used and, in addition, the future time period is defined in a very generic way. Of course, it is much more difficult to verify links to financial numbers if the lead time is substantial, and so care should be taken that the data will have a recognised financial impact within a reasonably short period of time. Indeed, whatever financial criterion and time period is chosen, it is crucial to be able to verify a strong enough and stable likely future financial impact from the non financial data. In order to better, and more accountably, measure this, such impacts should be statistically significant according to a standard statistical measurement, written into the accounting standards. However, the question that remains is still whether impacts should also exceed a certain financial level, as well as a statistical level, in order to qualify as a significant non financial value driver. In this context, it is also difficult to decide whether these qualifying criteria should also involve the extent to which a value driver will explain any likely variation in the future financial criterion. There are many potential principles to be found in information theory and statistics that might be used here, such as direct explanatory power (Kristensen and Westlund, 2003), but unfortunately the requirement levels necessary to use these principles are not very easy to determine, and could be open to abuse. In summary, in almost all modern industries, the book value of a company does not reflect the actual market value of the company, due to the increasing importance of branding, technology, knowledge and reputation. Whilst the market and book values were still very close at the end of the 1970s, since then the picture has changed dramatically, with estimates stating that book value now represents just one quarter of the market value. As a result, it is reasonable to conclude that the measurement of intangible, non financial factors is now roughly three times as important to investors as the measurement of financially measured, tangible assets. As the market value comes from intangible assets, like the customer, human resource, partner and brand assets, in order to understand the gap there is an obvious need for relevant and reliable information on these intangible assets, which is best provided by non financial performance measures. In the context of TQM, a large portion of the process improvements seen due to TQM initiatives will not have a definite financial effect; rather they will improve a product’s attractiveness to customers, or improve the efficiency of a firm’s processes. As a result, their primary impact will be difficult to measure by financial measures, and so non financial performance measures will be most relevant. From this, it follows that the accountancy profession needs a new reporting system and also need to define a best practice of measurement for these non financial performance measures, in order to reflect the true value of initiatives such as TQM. This system has a number of requirements, including causality, standardisation, relevance or link to financial results and reliability. The prevailing opinion appears to be that it is time that new reporting systems are introduced and implemented, as the discrepancy between the importance of intangibles and the ability to account for these types of assets constitutes a growing challenge for companies, investors and for society in general. The relevant people, including academics, managers, accountants, practitioners and auditors, should thus come together and formulate a new charter for future reporting of non financial performance measures. References: Daum, J. H. (2002) Intangible Assets or the Art to Create Value Wiley. Dutta, S. and Reicheistein, S. (2005) Stock Price, Earnings, and Book Value in Managerial Performance Measures. Accounting Review; Vol. 80, Issue 4, p. 1069. Hoque, Z. (2003) Total Quality Management and the Balanced Scorecard Approach: A Critical Analysis of their Potential Relationships and Directions for Research. Critical Perspectives on Accounting; Vol. 14, Issue 5, p. 553. Hothorn, T. Leisch, F. Zeileis, A. and Hornik, K. (2005) The Design and Analysis of Benchmark Experiments. Journal of Computational Graphical Statistics; Vol. 14, Issue 3, p. 675. Johnston, R. Fitzgerald, L. Markou, E. and Brignall, S. (2001) Target setting for evolutionary and revolutionary process change. International Journal of Operations Production Management; Vol. 21, Issue 11, p. 1387. Kristensen, K. and Westlund, A. H. (2003) Valid and reliable measurements for sustainable non-financial reporting. Total Quality Management and Business Excellence; Vol. 14, Issue 2, p. 161 Lev, B. (2001) Intangibles: Management, Measurements and Reporting Brookings Institution Press. PriceWaterhouseCoopers (2002) Value reporting, Forecast 2002 Bringing Information out into the Open. Smith, M. (1997) Putting NFIs to work in a balanced scorecard environment. Management Accounting: Magazine for Chartered Management Accountants; Vol. 75, Issue 3, p. 32. The Economist (2002) A steal? Vol. 365, Issue 8296, p. 57. Wilson, A. Key, K. G. and Clark, R. L. (2003) Enron: An In-Depth Analysis Of The Hedging Schemes. Journal of Applied Business Research; Vol. 19, Issue 4, p. 15.

Abortion - Its Only Natural :: essays papers

Abortion - It's Only Natural The topic of abortion is one of the most controversial of our times. The fight between pro-life and pro-choice supporters has has caused countless confrontations and several deaths. Despite what many people may believe, abortion is neither right nor wrong. It is a matter of personal opinion. In this way, each side can say with certainty that the other is wrong. Therefore the question remains; should abortion be legal? Though some may disagree on this point, the fact is that legalized abortion is the only option that will protect the lives of American citizens. One only needs to look into American history to see the results of prohibiting abortions to women. The violence which occurs today because the of pro-choice/pro-life conflicts is minimal in comparison to the thousands of hopeless women who turned to the illegal abortions --either self-inflicted or preformed by the backroom "professionals"-- which resulted in infection, massive blood loss, and death. It is better now that they have a place to go where abortions can be performed cleanly and with minimal risk. Legalization of abortion is the only choice no matter what side one takes in the debate. Women will try to do what they think is necessary to live as they wish, no matter what the risk. In order to live as she chooses a woman may give up her freedom, her morals, her beliefs, her family, or even her life. Abortion has been around for thousands of years in every inhabited corner of the globe. It has always been accepted as a means to prevent the suffering of both woman and potential child. It has been practiced widely in every society for many reasons including famine, war, poverty, overpopulation, or simply because a woman felt she was not ready for a child (Whitney 40). No one ever questioned a woman's right to this procedure. After all, who but God had the right to judge what a woman did with her own body? This thought process lasted till the 1800's. During this era of change people began to turn their attention in a new direction, the fetus. They began to protest abortion as cruel, inhumane, and murderous. Filled with a new sense of purpose and the glory of a fresh, righteous cause to uphold this new morality swept the countryside Abortion - It's Only Natural :: essays papers Abortion - It's Only Natural The topic of abortion is one of the most controversial of our times. The fight between pro-life and pro-choice supporters has has caused countless confrontations and several deaths. Despite what many people may believe, abortion is neither right nor wrong. It is a matter of personal opinion. In this way, each side can say with certainty that the other is wrong. Therefore the question remains; should abortion be legal? Though some may disagree on this point, the fact is that legalized abortion is the only option that will protect the lives of American citizens. One only needs to look into American history to see the results of prohibiting abortions to women. The violence which occurs today because the of pro-choice/pro-life conflicts is minimal in comparison to the thousands of hopeless women who turned to the illegal abortions --either self-inflicted or preformed by the backroom "professionals"-- which resulted in infection, massive blood loss, and death. It is better now that they have a place to go where abortions can be performed cleanly and with minimal risk. Legalization of abortion is the only choice no matter what side one takes in the debate. Women will try to do what they think is necessary to live as they wish, no matter what the risk. In order to live as she chooses a woman may give up her freedom, her morals, her beliefs, her family, or even her life. Abortion has been around for thousands of years in every inhabited corner of the globe. It has always been accepted as a means to prevent the suffering of both woman and potential child. It has been practiced widely in every society for many reasons including famine, war, poverty, overpopulation, or simply because a woman felt she was not ready for a child (Whitney 40). No one ever questioned a woman's right to this procedure. After all, who but God had the right to judge what a woman did with her own body? This thought process lasted till the 1800's. During this era of change people began to turn their attention in a new direction, the fetus. They began to protest abortion as cruel, inhumane, and murderous. Filled with a new sense of purpose and the glory of a fresh, righteous cause to uphold this new morality swept the countryside

Bilingual Education Essay -- Language

Bilingual education, as an educational program, was initially promoted by educators in the seventies (Hunger of Memory 26) and since then has been a topic of many debates in America. Some argue that bilingual education only serves as a detriment to American culture. Others argue that bilingual education is beneficial to those who come to live in America and want to become a part of the culture, but lack proficiency in the English language. Two authors, who have each taken opposite sides of the debate on bilingual education in America, are: Richard Rodriguez and Ariel Dorfman. Richard Rodriguez believes that bilingual education creates a feeling of separateness between foreign language speakers and American society; therefore, delaying the formation of a public identity. In contrast, Ariel Dorfman argues that bilingualism in America will be a bridge to better understanding other cultures. I assume the position of being neither, against or entirely in favor of bilingual education. I am in favor of bilingual education because it can be an effective segue to learning the English language and I believe it is very important to remain connected with our family’s language and culture. However, I also recognize the negative feeling of separateness from the larger public that bilingual education can have on foreign language speaking families, which hinders my ability to fully embrace bilingual education. Ariel Dorfman is an Argentinian author who struggled throughout his life to find a balance between the Spanish and English languages. As a result of Dorfman’s â€Å"bilingual journey† (Heading South 25), he argues that bilingual education is beneficial to American society. Dorfman believes that bilingualism will serve as a channel to better un... ... 1998. Print Garcia, Maria E., Ofelia Skutnabb-Kangas, Tove Torres-Guzman. Imagining Multilingual Schools: Language in Education and Globalization. Clevdon, GBR: Multilingual Matters Limited, 2006. Web. 17 Apr. 2011. Hadi-Tabassum, Samina. Language, Space and Power : A Critical Look at Bilingual Education. Clevdon, GBR: Multilingual Matters Limited, 2006. Web. 17 Apr. 2011. Rodriguez, Richard. â€Å"Aria: A Memoir of a Bilingual Childhood.† Conversations: Reading for Writing. Ed.Gack Selzer. 5th ed. New York: Longman, 2003. 153-166. Print. ---. Hunger of Memory: The Education of Richard Rodriguez. New York: Bantam Dell, 1983. Print Salomone, Rosemary C. True American : Language, Identity, and the Education of Immigrant Children. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2010. Web. 17 Apr. 2011.

Rheumatoid Arthritis :: essays research papers

  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Rheumatoid arthritis is an autoimmune disease that sauses chronic inflammation of the joints. Rhematiod arthritis can also cause inflammation of the tissue around the joints, as well as other organs in the body. Autoimmune diseases are illnesses which occur when the body tissues are mjistakenly attacked by its own immune system. The immune system is a complex organization of cells and antibodies designed normally to â€Å"seek and destroy† invaders of the body, particularly infections. Patients with these diseases have antibodies in their blood which target their own body tissues, where they can be associated with inflammation. Because it can affect multiple other organs of the body, rheumatoid arthritis is referred to as a systemic illness and is sometimes called rheumatoid disease.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  While rheumatoid arthritis is a chronic illness, meaning it can last for years, patients may experience long periods without symptoms. Typically, however, rheumatoid arthritis is a progressive illness that has the potential to cause joint destruction and functional disability. A joint is where two bones meet to allow movement of body parts. Arthritis means join inflammation. The join inflammation of rheumatoid arthritis causes swelling, pain ,stiffness, and redness in the joints. The inflammation of rheumatoid disease can also occur in tissues around the joints, such as the tendons, ligaments, and muscles.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  In some patienst with rheumatoid arthritis, chronic inflammation leads to the destruction of the cartilage, bone and ligaments causing deformity of the joints. Damage to the joint can occur early in the disease and be progressive. Moreover, studies have shown that the progressive damage to the joints does not necessarily correlate with the degree of pain, stiffness, or swelling present in the joints.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Rheumatoid arthritis is a common rheumatic disease, affecting more than two million people in the United States. The disease is three times more common in women as in men. It afflicts people of all races equally. The disease can begin at any age, but most often starts after age forty and before sixty. In some families, multiple members can be affected, suggesting a genetic basis for the disorder.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  The cause of rheumatoid arthritis is unknown.

Battery Industry

Case Preparation For Discussion (Gillette) 1. Central problem/issue in case: The main problem is that, since its acquisition, Duracell has become a drain on the financial performance of Gillette. The board needs to decide what should be done to turn Duracell around and restore Gillette to a dependable financial performer. 2. How is the battery industry (you can use five forces analysis to answer this question)? Has it been changing? If yes, how? Overall, the industry is very attractive. New entrants realize the potential of snagging a piece of a highly profitable industry that produced $5. billion in revenue and $807 million operating margin. Threat of new entrants is low, as the capital requirements and technology development needed to stay relevant in the market proves to be a daunting barrier to entry. Also, in order to realize a significant profit, economies of scale must be realized to produce a massive amount of batteries while keeping costs low. This would be harder for smalle r entrants to achieve. Threat of substitute products is low, as no replacement good has been introduced that may provide the consumer with the same benefits as using a battery. This makes the industry attractive.However, if a company produced a good that could replace the need for a battery, this would detrimentally alter the battery industry, making threat of substitute products a major factor of the industry. The bargaining power of suppliers is low because there is little differentiation between the inputs of the batteries, which can be acquired from many different suppliers. This low supplier power makes the industry attractive. The bargaining power of the buyer is fairly high, as there is high buyer concentration with low switching costs, which makes the industry less attractive. The major, key factor is the rivalry among competitors.There are three main competitors that comprise 85. 76% of the battery market, in which they are constantly upgrading their technology, promoting t heir products with strong advertising and marketing campaigns, and cutting prices of their goods. Yes, the battery industry has changed over time to create more efficient, less costly batteries than it ever has before; however, it is becoming fairly stagnant. With the competitors simply making them slightly more efficient than the leading brand and coming up with the next best advertising campaign, there is little more for each of the battery manufacturers to do with their product.The battery industry could be considered a â€Å"cash cow† – great profitability, large market share, but little growth. In order to stay on top, Duracell has to spend significant amounts of money on R&D to continue to keep up to speed on the relevant technology. 3. What were the impacts of Duracell’s introduction of Ultra on the nature of competition in the battery industry? When Duracell introduced Ultra in May 1998, it began a long cycle of the battery industry’s main competi tors introducing new, higher-powered, longer lasting batteries.Originally, these batteries were sold at a premium. Three months after the introduction of Ultra, Duracell was involved in several court battles, which were soon followed by Gillette’s announcement that it was restructuring the company and cutting jobs. After all the commotion around the battery industry, Consumer Reports told consumers that all batteries were standard, worked the same, and to buy the cheapest one. When Energizer and Rayovac introduced their new, updated batteries, they were sold at a price cut or at the same price as the standard battery.For all three main competitors, none of their baseline batteries were replaced, but rather simply updated and sold alongside the other on the shelf. Each introduction was accompanied by a pricey advertising campaign that was designed to win new customers and hopefully gain market share. 4. Why was Gillette unable to achieve the same success in batteries that it h ad been able to achieve in shaving products? Gillette is very good at using their knowledge and expertise in each of their segments to create related, diversified products to fit the needs of their consumers.They use what they already know, the resources and capabilities that they already have, to grow horizontally within each segment by creating a wider range of products and services for the consumer. For their personal grooming segment, they have expanded from simply razors to shaving cream and deodorants. They have been unable to find a way to do the same within their portable power segment, in which Duracell is the only company. In order to gain financially, they need to discover a way to expand the capabilities of Duracell. 5. If you were James Kilt, what strategic actions would you take?I would look for ways to expand the portable power segment, which includes Duracell. Perhaps using Duracell in all of Gillette’s electronic products, such as the electric-powered toothbr ushes, electronic razors, or coffee makers. Also, a possibility is to perhaps create an exporting agreement to electronic goods producers to use Duracell batteries in their products as they are sold. Another possibility is to spend money developing a battery that could be used in auto production, then creating a joint venture with an auto manufacturer.Gillette already has good global presence, so expanding more globally could help. 6. What do you learn from this case? I learned that just because a company is profitable at a specific point in time, like Duracell, does not mean it will be profitable forever, even if it is teamed up with a strong, financially enduring company, like Gillette. In order to continue outstanding financial performance, you must evaluate where the industry is going in the future and look for ways to diversify and expand before it hits a downturn.

Hume’s Argument for Skepticism

Eryn Croft Professor Chudnoff PHI 101 Honors October 9, 2012 Hume’s argument for skepticism about induction states that we can use induction, like causation, to gain knowledge. We must rely on induction to draw conclusions in everyday life because it is the only resource we have to work with. However, we must realize the limitations of induction. Philosopher Karl Popper successfully undermines Hume’s problem of induction by proving that induction is not needed in science and that Hume’s argument is circular. Karl Popper argued that induction cannot be used in science.He says that induction can never be proven by experimentation. Science instead uses deduction by formulating theories and hypotheses. Science uses the method of conjecture and refutation. Hypotheses can never be proven or verified, but their success can be compared to other hypotheses. The usefulness of a hypothesis can be determined through deduction or predictions. Scientists test theories by makin g completely falsifiable claims. If there is nothing you can to do disprove the claim then the hypothesis is corroborated. A corroborated theory should not be considered true, merely accepted until better theories are discovered.Popper said that a theory can never be confirmed by observation. Where Hume argues that our theory originates from repetition, Popper argues that theory begins before repetition. Therefore, Popper argued that science does not even use induction. Karl Popper also argued that inductive reasoning leads to more inductive reasoning, leading to a circular argument. The problem of induction is that induction is creating the problem and â€Å"begging the question. † In order to avoid begging the question when using inductive reasoning, you might introduce a new inductive principle.By introducing a new inductive principle, you would have to make justification based on experience, leading to even more inductive reasoning. Hume argues that we need to justify ind uction, but Popper says it is not necessary because it leads to more induction and hence a circular argument. Popper also completely denies that induction is an a priori synthetic truth. An a priori truth is necessary and truth preserving, meaning it cannot be false. If induction is a priori, then it would not require justification based upon experience because it is already true.Since Popper rejects the traditional inductive model in science, he had to replace it with his own approach. Popper chose to accept William Whewell’s ‘hypothetico-deductive model. ’ He said that science does not use the inductive model, but instead uses the hypothetico-deductive model. The model begins by formulating a hypothesis that can be falsified by a test on observable data. We can then experiment or make observations to falsify the theory. Now the theory can be falsified or corroborated. If it is corroborated, then it will be accepted and used repeatedly until a better theory prov es better.In Hume’s view, observation comes before theory, whereas Popper’s view is that theory comes before observation. Popper believes that having an observation without first considering a theory is pointless. He argued that theories are only scientific if they are capable of being refuted by tests. As a result, Popper thought that falsifiability and testability were synonymous. One of Popper’s biggest arguments against Hume’s theory of induction is in his explanation of corroboration. A theory can only be corroborated if it does not contradict the basic, accepted statements.Even if a theory is falsified, we can still find many areas of corroboration. If a theory is highly falsified, then it is also highly corroborated. Needless to say, a falsified theory cannot also be considered corroborated. Merely, we can find corroboration through the steps taken to falsify a theory. Popper also acknowledges that corroboration is relative to time. He wanted to en sure that corroboration was not used to determine truth or falsehood. Although Popper successfully undermines Hume’s argument for skepticism of induction, there are also problems with Popper’s argument.Scientists always repeat experiments in order to ensure that the results are accurate and valid. An experiment cannot be proven correct unless other scientists replicate the experiment and achieve the same results. However, Popper argues that scientific knowledge is created by conjecture and criticism; but repeating experiments is not conjecture or criticism, it is induction. You would not repeat experiments for conjecture because it would be repetitive and unnecessary. Repeating experiments is in fact induction because it is allowing for the possibility that the conclusion is false.For example, if all of the Ibis we have ever observed are white, we can induce that all Ibis are white. This observation about Ibis is not conjecture because our past experiences offer suffic ient proof that all Ibis are white. Induction is based off of past experiences and repetitive observations. Therefore, scientists’ repeating an experiment is in fact induction, not conjecture or criticism. Scientific knowledge is an infinite cycle of inductive logic. Inductive logic continuously replaces one theory, with a better more inclusive theory that also relies on inductive logic. In addition, science does have theories that they think are proven.When scientists create a law, it is based on a theory proven through induction. For example, Isaac Newton was sitting under an apple tree when an apple suddenly fell next to him on the ground. Newton used his observation to conclude that gravity was the force that caused the apple to fall to the ground instead of merely floating in the air. Newton, by direct observation and repetition, proved the Universal Law of Gravitation. Popper argued that theories proven corroborated should not be considered true. But gravity can in fact only be proven true through induction, not conjecture.Newton did not attempt to continuously falsify gravity, but instead continuously prove gravity through causal relations. If the apple always falls to the ground and always has in the past, then we can use inductive reasoning to assume that gravity is the cause of the fall. Finally, scientists must use prediction as part of methodology in science. Popper says that theory comes before observation. Prediction is the majority of proposing a theory. We cannot use Popper’s ‘hyptothetico-deductive model’ without the methods of induction because probability is part of induction. Induction allows us to predict the outcome, and thus create a theory.Induction is included in Popper’s own models, which negates his claim that science does not use induction. Hume’s argument for skepticism about induction has many valuable points that allow us to conclude that induction can be a valuable tool in drawing conclus ions; we just have to be skeptical when using induction so we are not misled. Karl Popper successfully undermines Hume’s argument, but there can also be objections to Popper’s argument. As a result, it is best to combine Hume’s argument with Popper’s argument. First, we can accept Popper’s claim that deductive arguments are usually always rationally and logically true.For example, the word bachelor will always be accepted as someone who is unmarried. We can also realize that when using induction, there is always a gap between the premises and the conclusion. We must use probability and past observations to reach a conclusion and close the gap between premises. However, we cannot assume that Popper’s method of falsifying theories and corroborating theories to necessarily be correct. Hume believes that observation comes before theory, while Popper believes that theory comes before observation and is then proven false.Attempting to falsify stat ements is actually using inductive reasoning, so Popper is not absolutely rejecting induction. As a result, we cannot absolutely reject induction either. We must also accept that induction is definitely a priori, definitely truth preserving. It is a known fact. However, an a priori truth is based on probability and enquiring. For example, we cannot say bachelors are not married without enquiring about people we know to be bachelors. Thus, we still use induction and cannot rule it out in the scientific process. As a result, we can argue that science uses both inductive and deductive methods to reach conclusions.