Hi, this is Edward McCain. Welcome to our presentation about Endangered but Not Too Late, The State of Born Digital News Preservation. I'm part of a research team that completed this report. We released it in April. So I work at the University of Missouri, kind of in a dual position between the Donald W. Reynolds Journal of the Institute and University of Missouri Libraries. My purpose, one of my main goals is to preserve born digital news content, not just the digitized but stuff that was originally created in digital formats and that has not been until lately. I don't think a lot of attention has been given to it. So that's me. I also have another member of our research team with us today, Neil Mara. Neil, you want to tell us a little bit about how you got mixed up in this research? Sure thing, Edward. And hi, everybody. My name is Neil Mara. I'm a journalist of 40 years in the industry. I've been a consultant and researcher on this project as well as a fellow at the Reynolds Journalism Institute. But my background includes a lot of experience with digital and print, publishing workflows, technologies, asset management, archiving and preservation. Much of that, most of that was with McClatchy. I led a group that integrated digital workflows for McClatchy's 31 newsrooms. And in the process, I took on the task of preserving the content that hadn't been accumulated at all of those newsrooms. So that's really where I got a lot of experience. And then I got to meet Edward and got involved in this project. And we're really glad that you did, Neil. So all right, we're going to get on with it. First of all, identifying what's the problem? What's going on? What is the state of our digital news preservation? The problem is this. When we shifted from digital, from analog to digital, the news industry was focused on many other things and didn't really address these issues that happen in terms of digital preservation. So we say it forgot to ensure that. I think it was partly they forgot, but there's also a lot of other issues that we'll identify and talk about in the report. So you can probably write off the bat if you know anything about technology. You know that disk drives are physical objects. They don't last forever. Databases can be corrupted. There's a number of different ways that things can happen there. Backups don't always happen the way we had hoped that they would. Sometimes they don't happen. Sometimes they happen differently. Link rot is a huge problem and trying to access information over time on the web and metadata. Just having basic metadata, that over time can get lost, can break down and make it really, you know, pretty much impossible to find a needle in a haystack. Neil, anything you want to add there? Yeah, well, these things are issues that I think many people in this organization are familiar with. We're talking here about the news media, but this really is because of its importance and we'll talk about that in a minute, but this really is a wider problem. A problem that's really society-wide that we've just begun to grapple with. But our focus here is on news as part of the public record. Right, right there. Vicki McCarger in one of her reports in back in the early 2000s said this, and I really like it, digital preservation is like life support.  You have to keep it monitored. You have to keep migrating it to formats that you can access. It's a very long-term and intensive activity, much more so than I would say the analog process, analog preservation process. So as Neil was talking about earlier, we think that it's really important that news content gets preserved, digital news content, which is the primary form these days. It's part of our democracy. We call it the first draft of history often. It's an accountability, fundamental accountability mechanism for government, for large institutions, for corporations, and so on. It's an antidote to fake news, which erodes trust in not only in the news industry, but in other institutions as well. It's society as a whole. And it's a primary source of information for journalists, certainly, but also in the scholarly record for scholars as they try to pull up and discern what's been happening in our society over time. There are commercial uses as well. It's valuable for a variety of different purposes in terms of revenue streams. And it's part of the public record. So this is our community history often. The best source of that for a particular community can be in the news record, in the news content of that area. Neil? I just want to emphasize that last point, Edward. The record of the past and what's happened as reported in local news organization channels is really unique in every community. And that's why we think it's so important that this news be preserved and that we figure out new ways to preserve content now that it's all moving in the digital direction. So briefly, and people are probably pretty familiar in the analog world, archive was often basically grabbing a copy, keeping it cool, dry, dark, keeping bugs away from it. The timeline that we were looking at was in decades or perhaps in some cases, centuries. The idea of benign neglect, although not optimal, often was, I would say, tolerated or accepted as part of the deal for archiving content. And this goes for news content as well. So for instance, preserving a newspaper or reel of film or some audio tape, there was time, it wasn't necessarily urgent that every year or every decade even that get refreshed. And the long term access is a big thing. You can open a newspaper from 100 years ago, and you can access that content. I don't think that's, we're not going to be able to say the same for digital content. Even in a couple of decades sometime or a decade or or a couple of decades, we can lose access pretty darn quick to digital content. I think that's a really good point there, Edward. And in the case of just the image on this slide, what we're seeing here is a picture of a film can at GBH in Boston when we visited. And as everybody says, you could open up that can, you can pull up a frame on that on that film and you can see what was in that film. You do the equivalent today with a disk drive. It's completely indecipherable. And it's entirely dependent on the software that reads that data. Right. So in terms of digital, I'm going to switch over and let Neil take the lead on on these slides. How digital is different? So this is just some examples of things that we know and that we've learned through our research. Digital is different in so many different ways. And it's very fundamental nature. But also in the way that it's accessed. Subscriptions are no longer ownership. It's really just a license to access. You don't actually own something and hold something physically. The new cycle has changed entirely from the past. It's 24 seven operation news is constantly being updated. There are no distinct additions. There's no sort of demarcation lines as there used to be in the print world and broadcast world where broadcast was done. There's so many channels and in the digital environment and they're just proliferating and they're going to continue to proliferate. We expect making this so much more complex. The very kind of you might say atomic unit or atomic element of news is changing. It's becoming much more granular than the article or the page or the newspaper or the broadcast that was the case in the past. And that's what makes the linkages between elements so critical. We now have many new digital news startups. This is a great trend these days in the news industry. New ways of delivering news, new kinds of organizations, some of them nonprofit. But what we're seeing is the process of creating news in many of these organizations really has no, is not taking into account the preservation in some ways is making the problem worse. And then we have issues with the memory institutions which were the backstop and in many ways the kinds of organizations that helped the industry in the past preserve its content. But that is really no longer as reliable because of the issues of resources both in the memory institution field as well as in newsrooms. Yeah, I was going to say we were kind of surprised by the fact that the digital startups were not preserving as well as the older more established organizations. But we'll get into that a little bit later. That could largely be a part of culture. Yeah. Like you say, it was not what we expected. Right. Well, go back to the study to give a little more background on that. So this was again the Reynolds Journalism Institute, University of Missouri Journalism School and libraries, the university libraries here. We received a generous grant from the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation that allowed us to do this research. And just a little bit of background, we had a significant loss of news content back in 2002, which kind of got this whole thing started and got people at the journalism school very upset because there were about 15 years of Mid-Missouri news content, cultural history that was digital and digital formats that was lost back then. But it got people to thinking and said, we really probably need to address this. We need to raise the profile of this issue because this is going to happen again. So in the study itself, we wanted to look at the news industry. We got into a lot of newsrooms. We talked to a total, well, probably more than 115, but around that number, 40 some organizations. At the beginning, this was pre-COVID, we were visiting newsrooms, talking to people, seeing how the organizations were functioning, various newsrooms around the country. And then COVID hit, so we had to switch gears and did a lot of the rest of the research by video conference and that sort of thing. We also, I should also mention that we talked with some memory institutions that are involved in preserving born digital news or news content, including born digital. And then we talked with some of the firms, the technology firms, that produce the technology that allows the content management systems and other parts of news technology to function, which was really helpful. And they're very interested in what's going on as well. So in total, we spent about 18 months from 2019 to 2021 researching this and pulling together this report. And I would just emphasize the piece that Edward mentioned that quite a bit of this information we gathered was gathered on site at news organizations, newsrooms, along with memory institutions. And that was really extremely valuable. And we thank, we really thank the people who were involved. They're busy people, they had a lot going on, but they're also interested in the long-term survival of the products that they're producing, the news content. So what we found, we found that there was an interest, as we said, in the news organizations, all of them wanted to do something to preserve news content. They often didn't know what it would do, what to do or how to do it. And as a result, there's some big chunks of news content that are still today are not being preserved. And this is across, as we talked about, there's so many digital channels and that's expanding, but websites, mobile apps, certainly images, video, audio, interactive elements, special projects, and then social media, which social media is a really huge problem. Yeah. In fact, social media, I think is a good example of what we found. News organizations rely on social media to get the news out. Many readers and consumers rely on social media to receive news and to direct them to news. But of all the news organizations we spoke with and interviewed and met with, only one was doing anything significant to preserve their social media content. So, and then in terms of our findings, we had a lot of information to convey a lot of findings from our research. But we broke it down essentially into these four different areas, content, tech, practices and mission. And Neil, would you elaborate a little more on what we found in these areas? Sure thing, Edward. So in the content area, one of the key things that we found, this was again kind of a surprise, was that public media organizations that we met with and interviewed were doing a better job in general than private news organizations. Although, of course, private news organizations far outnumber the public organizations. We, and here we're talking about in public media, we're talking about, say, NPR stations, PBS stations, those kinds of enterprises. In technology, we found a couple of very, very troubling trends. One of them is that because of the financial difficulties news organizations are facing these days, just to stay afloat, especially in the old, the former newspaper industry, we're seeing cutbacks across the board. You know, not just reporters and editors, but in the support areas, such as technology staff and systems. We saw a number of cases where systems used for preservation are simply no longer there because an organization couldn't afford to keep them going or the staff to run them. In addition, we saw this largely and the absence of the former news librarians that we used to see in news organizations across America. And that was a very troubling trend. And we'll talk more about that soon. And as far as practices go, what we saw was almost no matter what kind of organization you're talking about, there was an overreliance on the web CMS as a platform for preservation, kind of an assumption that the web CMS was sufficient to preserve news content. When in fact, as many of you know, web CMS is not designed for preservation, it's designed for delivery on the web is designed for speed is designed, it's designed for performance. And it does that by reducing the quality of content, especially visual content, the size of images, the quality of images, videos, sound, etc. So this is a big issue. As far as mission, we found that there were very few news organizations that actually had any kind of policies or written practices concerning preservation. And this is one of the clear distinctions that we found, because many of the public media organizations did in fact have clear policies. And so that that links back to that first one, the public media doing a better job. And we think a significant reason for that are these preservation policies. And I just want to also reiterate what Neil was talking about with the CMS systems, the content management systems, over and over again, we would hear that is the archive. We were like, well, that's not really designed to do that. So challenges, Neil, you can go ahead. So we wanted to dive a little deeper into some of the preservation challenges that emerged through this research. And so many of them actually stem from this first point, that the digital, the transition to digital for the news industry has meant this multiplicity of products, multiplicity of channels, kind of an explosion, you might say, of outlets and streams of various kinds from the web to mobile to social to all sorts of news feeds. I mean, for heaven's sake, you can even see news on the screen on your gas pump. So this is one of the major factors that makes technology so much more central to the issue and to the process. And the changes in the news, the structure of news itself, far more important. And so what we found is that this whole question of the links between news elements is much more critical than it ever was in the past. When you had a single product and everything was assembled, and you could see an entire package of an article or a page or an edition or a broadcast, then it was a finite thing. But that's not the case anymore. Now it's the things that connect the photo to the story on the web or in the mobile app or in the news stream, connect the video to the story. Those things become absolutely essential. And we found, in most cases, those connecting links are not being preserved. So the news cycle, of course, we talked about this, the lack of distinct traditions makes it very difficult to standardize on preservation processes. And then the loss of newsroom librarians. What we found, this was really kind of a striking finding that in many cases, especially in the newspaper industry and other types of news organizations, there used to be news librarians everywhere. These were the experts. These were the preservation people. These were the ones who cared about this and were there in the rooms when decisions were happened. And in many cases, they're not there anymore. And I'll give you one example, McClatchy, the company that I worked with for many years, where there used to be a handful up to several dozen librarians in some of the larger newsrooms in Miami or Sacramento or Kansas City, the entire organization now across all 31 newsrooms, there's only one news librarian at the Miami Herald. And these are all the results of the struggles in the industry. And so we're just seeing impacts left and right from the struggle of the news industry and the change in business models. So again, diving deeper into this, we see this proliferation of news content types. And each of these has unique challenges in the structure in technology, publishing systems and broadcast systems. And those have to be taken into account for preservation purposes. And one of the things that we saw as a way to deal with this is an expansion in the number of systems that you see as part of the publishing and broadcasting process. And so again, a proliferation of systems, often systems that are channel specific to one particular channel, a video channel, audio channel, podcasts, for example, not just the web and mobile apps. And this fragmentation has made the problem much more difficult because you have different things going on in different systems, all drawing from, say, an original content source. This point about the deemphasis of print is really critical. And it's something that we want to draw attention to because many of the practices of the past that we still see in place rely on print additions for newspaper content as the archive method of record. And what's happened in the digital era is that there's been this gap that's just continued to grow between the amount of content that is published digitally and the amount of content that makes it into print. That can be, in many cases, the best news organizations that still have healthy print products, maybe 70, 80 percent. But in others, it can be as little as 40 or 50 percent of what's published digitally. So that has a big impact on processes that rely on print. What it means is, for example, the interest and the focus on the e-edition version of print products really means if that's something that's being used as a preservation mechanism, it's going to miss a lot of content that was never published in that print product. So these things are very important. We should probably clarify that this e-edition is a, it's kind of like a PDF or it's a variation of a PDF. And that PDF is derived from the print edition, not from what's online, not what's on the web. So if you're, in many cases, like a Library of Congress and other memory institutions, what's being preserved is the PDF of the print or some version of a PDF of a print edition, which is not a complete record of what was really, you know, the news organization was publishing. It's just a portion of it. Sorry. No, no good point, Edward. One other thing we want to talk about here is this last bullet on system migrations. Because of the complexities that we're touching on here in workflows and systems and metadata, what we saw in talking with newsrooms is that many of them report having significant issues with the loss of content during migrations from one system to another. And in this time of upheaval with, you know, growing numbers of channels and systems, this kind of migration problem is proliferates. It's happening everywhere and translating content from one system, you know, comprised of every structures and databases to another often results in the loss of content, the loss of parts of the content, the loss of metadata. It's a major kind of red flag for news organizations to be careful in those transition periods. Yeah. I would just want to one example of that, you know, content losses. We saw a situation where systems were being migrated and they actually at a certain point, like 2008 or something like that said, any publication date prior to that, we're just going to ignore. Well, if you don't know when the when this was published, it really hampers the, you know, it really diminishes the information quality. You know, it's really makes it difficult to figure out when was this published? When was it created? Right. So recommendations. And we had three general areas. We had the the first one was immediate actions. We tried to to get things together, pull things, some ideas together for how news organizations could do this without spending a lot of money or a lot of time that can just jump right into it. So Neil, you can elaborate on how at least some of what we suggest for immediate actions. Right. So here we're talking about preservation policy is really the number one item, because it correlates so closely with news organizations that are doing well. And so we see it as a very important thing because of the uncertainty and the and the, you know, the lack of the same news librarian role in many newsrooms. It's more important than ever to have a policy that states what you're going to preserve and how that's how that's going to be done. And one way to get there is to tap somebody to be responsible, you know, with the loss of librarians in news organizations has got to be somebody paying attention. And we found a number of cases where there is no longer anyone paying attention. So that's a key recommendation that we thought was important. And then establishing a plan for unpublishing. This is a new area that's a result of the digital, you know, proliferation across society, where many people are concerned about privacy and hiring reputation management companies to pressure newsrooms to remove content that might be embarrassing. Well, many news organizations really aren't aware that these kinds of these kinds of things are happening because they might hit a low level person and somebody will know sure or go ahead and delete it. And so a lot of newsrooms really don't have established processes for this. And so it's very important because it affects that that actual public record that this be done intentionally and with clear policies and procedures. Yeah, that the unpublishing thing is really gaining more and more attention in the news industry. I'll say that it's really important to look at. So our our second set of recommendations were set of mid medium term, so we say actions that will they'll take longer to accomplish. They may need to be invested and they may take some money or pull in some tech staff or something. But they're really essential to making progress towards digital preservation. And Neil, you want to get the details on that? Yes, thanks, Edward. So where where the the previous slide and recommendations were kind of, you know, minimum immediate steps. Here we're talking about things that are much more fundamental and permanent. You've got to have control of your metadata. So we're recommending the news organizations really dive deep into just review it because in many cases it's it can be changed and modified and processes can can be configured to preserve more metadata if somebody is just working the process and paying attention. Clarifying ownership is very important because as we look to the future in this continued proliferation of channels, it's very important to understand and, you know, which content you can actually you actually own so that you can know what to reuse, what you're able to reuse. And this is more difficult than it may seem. News organizations content comes from all sorts of places. It comes from your own staff members, reporters, photographers, videographers. It comes from freelancers. It comes from wire services, from syndication services, from the general public, from institutions and businesses, all kinds of sources. And you've got to know what the ownership and the rights are on all that content. So we suggest also that news organizations run a self assessment without somebody paying attention. It may not be clear that these things are going on. So we're recommending that leadership in newsrooms just run a little test, go back a year, pick the biggest news story of the previous year, and see if you can get a hold of the original content elements for all of the news coverage that you published on that big story. The original photos, original videos, original materials, the full length of text for all channels. Can you actually put your hands on that? That's what this is about. Put your hands on it and, as you were saying, make sure that you have the rights to use it. That you have the rights to it, exactly. And then this last point is really kind of the most important sort of forward-looking step. We really found that in order to do this properly, news organizations have to have some sort of system dedicated to preservation. The reliance again on WebCMS is really, it just isn't going to work because WebCMS has a separate purpose. Its speed of delivery the waste content is structured for the web is not the way it's needed for preservation. So an asset management of some sort is really going to be essential if you're looking to preserve content permanently going forward in the digital era. Essential, exactly. So talking about asset management, some best practices. Neil, you want to jump in on this again? Right. So we thought we'd share some of the best practices we saw in asset management because again, this is such a critical area. So I'll just jump right in. We see it's very important that you pay attention to workflows and build workflows in a way that reduces or if possible eliminates duplication of content. This is a big issue with WebCMS because people are taking the same photo and throwing it into the WebCMS today and then when the story runs again tomorrow and the story runs next week and a month from now, that same, let's say crime story or murder or election or whatever, you've got numerous duplicates of content. Which one's the original? In many cases, nobody knows. So you've got to set up a workflow that avoids that and it's really possible to do. You want as a best practice to preserve the full text in all channel manifestations. You want to see that those differences because it might content may need to be modified for a certain channel. Mobile, for example, social media, you want to preserve all that. For visual information, it's really important to have systems that allow you to preserve the highest quality of your still images, video, graphics and active media. There's so many more kinds of active media these days, maps and interactives and so on. Those are very difficult to preserve and those are going to continue to grow, but keeping these kinds of content permanently at their highest resolution and their lowest compression levels is really becoming critically important. So the linkages we've already talked about, if you preserve the linkages between content and the packaging information on what went on the web and in mobile and so on, and you have that original content, you can recreate something close to the way that original content is published in each channel. And that's really the goal, we think, for proper digital preservation. And then lastly, we think it's important that the preservation be integrated with the publishing workflows, rather than as a process after the fact. Because the higher the bar to making preservation happen, the less likely it's going to happen with busy staffs and very low-resourced newsrooms and preservation groups. Yeah, we think that this should be integrated in sort of an automatic thing so that people don't even have to really think about it. They don't have to be doing it themselves individually. Or manually, right. Or manually, yeah. Additionally, some of these may seem obvious, but you've got to have really the best possible metadata. So we wanted to provide some detail on that. So not only do you want the origin of your content, you want to know where it came from, the authorship, the institution, you want to have the full rights information and licensing terms. But you've also, we think, need multiple kinds of descriptive metadata that allows you to identify content by what's in the content and not necessarily in ways that are specific to a particular channel. For example, not necessarily the web navigation, which is often associated with news content, because that changes. It changes so often. But you want that descriptive metadata that's going to be permanent. And there are standards out there that can be applied. And the use of multiple taxonomies is actually a good idea because those may be needed and applicable for different purposes in the future. And then, of course, change tracking. And here we're talking about post-publication, not the version management as things are being created, but what happens to content after it's committed to a repository or an asset management system. It's critical that this be tracked so that everybody knows what happened whenever content is changed, including these unpublishing processes. It may be okay to change something, but you want to be able to know who did it, when it was done, why it was done, and what exactly was changed. Yeah, and I'm dealing on unpublishing. It would be best to be able to go back and see everything that happened and not have certain things deleted from the system entirely. You want to be able to go back and see, oh, this is what we did. This is who we removed, this name or this was the charge that brought this up. So in terms of workflow. So one last set of details on best practices. What we saw in asset management and the best news organizations in terms of what they do for preservation are these kinds of things. What we saw tends to point toward a modified or improved architecture that is set up to ensure that content gets preserved. Again, as we talked about and Edward mentioned, as automatically as possible, regardless of where content originates, what device content originates in or what system content originates in, because that's going to continue to expand and to grow. But you want a process that at a certain point takes all that content and preserves it as a master copy in your repository or your asset management system. And if you do that properly and if you preserve not only the content at its highest resolution and its best quality, but also the links that allow you to package that the way it appeared in each channel, in other words, focus on the core content, then you don't necessarily need to preserve every web page. Because web pages, frankly, are changing all the time, the structure, the appearance, the organization, I mean websites change constantly, mobile apps change constantly. So what you want is that original content along with we think the planning information, because that's really a good source of descriptive metadata. And if you do this, if you kind of move toward this kind of improved architecture of systems, we think that allows that would allow news organizations to use their channel specific systems, say the web CMS, to optimize for the thing that it's most needed for, which is speed of delivery and not worry about any preservation elements, because it would always be only a copy of the content that's in that repository. So you have that that new duality where content is preserved at its highest and best quality with all linkages, and then channel specific systems can focus on channel specific needs. And then the in terms of recommendations, the third leg of those are these industry wide bigger, bigger ideas, long term thinking that may involve policy changes and partnerships between the institutions. So certainly collaboration across the industry, Neil, there's no reason why why that couldn't happen. Yeah, we see we see the opportunity for news organizations to be, you know, much more open in terms of sharing and collaborating on preservation processes, you know, possibly even pooling resources to preserve certain kinds or segments of news organizations can work together to to share common preservation resources. Well, and we're seeing newsrooms collaborate, you know, all kinds of new stuff going on in terms of collaboration of the newsrooms. So this this would seem to maybe tap into that trend. It does fit into that trend, you're seeing newsrooms, news collaborations all over the country. In terms of preservation technology, what we found is many of the providers of technology are actually a lot very interested in this area, but they haven't heard as much about preservation functionality and systems and capabilities as they thought they would from their customers. And so we think it's important to advocate for that, so that that kind of that that technology is improved, and does a better job of doing the things that preservation needs for preserving and maintaining for the long term the digital news content that we're creating. And then lastly, we do see an opportunity here for partnerships between the news industry and a number of institutions. In particular, we think there's a natural partnership with libraries. You know, libraries are are an institution that exists in almost every community, you know, right there side by side with news organizations with local radio stations, newspapers, perhaps the digital startups that are that are coming that are arising in communities around the country. And there's a natural alliance of interest there that we think is important, because, you know, libraries care about this. So these have been the institutions that have preserved, you know, much of the public record, you know, for for centuries. But they're they're they're struggling to in terms of resources are working together. I think there's a there's a real future for those kinds of partnerships with news organizations. Just as an example, I think it was fantastic what happened at the Denver Public Library. And that was, you know, because of relationship between the Denver Public Library and the Rocky Mountain News, Rocky Mountain News and Denver closed, I think in 2009. And the because of that relationship between the different public library and the scripts, the owner of the newspaper, there was a full transfer of the ownership of that content. And that has been preserved for the record, you know, in the different public library archives online for posterity. And that's a great success story. Great example, Edward. So we've touched on, you know, a good bit of of what's in the report, but there's a lot more that you can learn about digital news preservation from the report. If you go to rjionline.org slash reserve news, you can get the full report. There's contact information for for me, and I can continue in touch with Neil. I'm not sure Neil, I think you're on the rji website as a fellow.  Go to the rjionline.org site, and you can find the report and our names. And we thank you for your attention. Appreciate you joining us. Thanks, everybody. Appreciate your interest.


What's going on everyone Sam here with late in sports cards ripping one box of 22 between the three and two baseball first off the line hobby for Stephen W. So good luck here Stephen. Everybody over on YouTube all of the people on Twitch are sending their good lucks. That is Tone, Darius, and Wahoos. What's up mad show? Oh that's nasty. We used to Darius because we use restream like that's the thing that we use and it just got like super hectic at one point so I think we stopped doing it. That was like before I got here though I just I have just heard stories of it. Buck Leonard 2.99 we've got Jordan Lawler nice one there three of six first off the line exclusive. Yeah that too Darius and Nolan Aronato to 1.50 future first ballots. Sounds good AJ. Nice one here we got poll count swatches. It's gonna be Edgar Martinez three of six first off the line exclusive. Grats on that there Stephen and this one's nasty. Two of six Peter Lanzo timeless moments for the Mets. That is 53rd home run of 2019. Congrats on that. That's so awesome. Love that man. Nice polar bear. That'll do it for the break. Thank you again Stephen. Appreciate it buddy. We'll get that right out to you man.


Okay, we'll take a look at this furnace for checking the carbon content. You see, this is just an ordinary induction coil. Put the stuff in there, heat it up to about 2600 degrees with oxygen and it will burn, and then you can proceed. Now on the resistance high-temperature furnace, which is another one that's used, you have carbide or moly disilicide elements, then the accelerators use, you have a catalyst in it, and then you can detect the separated gases by one of the two detection systems that we had previously mentioned that provide a specific and consistent signal and process it electronically. It's a lot of electronic stuff, but you can come up with an answer. On the infrared detection, you can apply it on the basis that various gases can absorb energy within a specific wavelength of the infrared spectrum. Now this is similar to a scanning electron microscope analysis. When you analyze something and you actually have a wavelength for a given element so that you can determine how much of each one you have in it. Then on the thermal conductive detection system, it's based on the principle that each gas has a distinct capability of carrying heat from the body. So you can take the carbon dioxide and determine the thermal conductive change generated by it, and come up with the amount of carbon that was extracted. In any sense, you can determine then the total amount of carbon that was in the sample and get an accurate reading on it. Now let's go to thread inspection, and this one is something that people talk about a lot, but it's kind of like politics. They talk about it a lot, but it's not a lot done. So I found out when I went to checking into it. The common methods of inspection that are given once again in this Millham book H28 are the systems 21, 22, and 23. They're also covered in ANSI B1.3M. Now in general, the system 21 requires the least amount of inspection. System 22 is an intermediate amount, and 23 is the most stringent. So each one of these is practically a separate document, so I'll just try to summarize them a little bit. But one of the things we found out is that most people just use system 21. On system 21, all you're doing is checking the OD or ID and using a go-no-go gauge. Anyway, some of the things that you are looking for on threads, now this was up earlier in the course, but nevertheless just to go through it again to familiarize ourselves with it. Here is the pitch of the threads, the distance between threads. Here is that angle which is usually this alpha 1, alpha 2 that the sum of those normally is 60 degrees on threads. Here is your vanish cone where you run out your threads, and here is the major diameter which is the outside crest of the threads, the minor diameter which is from the diameter at the root, and then the pitch diameter which is a very important thing, and that's of course where if you mated the threads up perfectly, you would have the same thickness through the cross section of the thread as you do here as you do in the mating thread. Here is another one that I wanted to show you for this reason. This is a close-up that shows the difference between having an un-radiest thread and having a radius thread. The other thing is this circle here represents the pins that are used for measuring the pitch diameter. There's a method called the three-pin method that they can put the pins, two on one side, one on the other side, put flat plates across, measure it, then you go to a table and you can find out from this table, based on the size thread you're using, the diameter of these pins you can come up with an accurate reading of the pitch diameter of the thread. Now for external threads, System 21 just includes go-no-go diameter and the major diameter. That's all that they do and you can either measure this, you usually measure it with what they call a ring gauge, which is nothing more than a calibrated thread in a ring to replace what you would normally use as a nut, and you try to thread the fastener into it. If it goes, it's fine. You use the other one, the no-go and if it doesn't go in that one, that means you are within the acceptable limits. It doesn't tell you exactly what your dimensions are, but it just tells you that the thing will work. So that's called the functional diameter if you will. System 22 includes the System 21 measurements plus pitch diameter. You can either measure it with a pitch micrometer, which is a micrometer that has a grooved head on one end of it that fits over a thread. Then you have a pin type on the other one that fits in a thread and you can span this across the O.D. of the threaded area and get a reading, which will give you the actual diameter, pitch diameter that you want, and you can look on the table then and see whether it's within the tolerances that you want. The thread groove diameter, which is the measurement between threads at the pitch diameter point. The functional diameter, which you get from up here with a go-no-go gauge, lead and flank angles, and that's just go-no-go, minor diameter, and then you can measure the root profile. But I found that that is not done that much unless somebody insists that it's done. System 23 includes all the others, plus now you get into the roundness of the pitch cylinder itself. The taper of it, in other words, if you take the whole thing as a cylinder, do you have a taper on it? Is it round or is it lopsided? The cumulative thread form variation going through the thing and checking to see whether it varies any from one end to the other. The lead and helix angle variation, the flank angle variation on the threads run out and even surface texture. Now surface texture on the threads usually is not a problem but you could measure it and see. It would only be if the thing had been coated with some sort of a coating that was not electronically deposited. In other words, if you had galvanized threads, then you could have a problem because you'd have extra plating material in the threads. And after you've gone through all of these things, this is just for threads. Nothing's been done on the rest of the fastener. So you could have a huge crack in and it wouldn't make any difference because if you passed everything else, the guy say, well, I inspected the threads and they're good. So you still have to look to see if there's anything else wrong. Now for internal threads, you have the go-no-go and the minor diameter. And that's about all that's usually checked. The go-no-go gauge, one end fits, the other one doesn't. And then with the minor diameter, you use a regular plug to slip in to check to see if it is okay. Then you move to the system 22. It includes the 21 and then you go for minimum material pitch diameter or thread groove diameter and the angles on the threads. But since this is internal thread, this is hard to do so usually people don't do it. Now here's a go-no-go gauge. One side will thread in if it's in normal tolerance, the other side won't. And this is used to check internal threaded or tapped holes. And that's the only, usually that's about the only acceptance that people use, I found. Here is the go-no-go pin for just checking the minimum diameter in a threaded hole to see if it is within tolerances. And so this one is fine and this one's not supposed to go.  Then for the system 23, it includes the others plus the roundness of the pitch cylinder. And they taper the pitch cylinder. But still nothing on the internal thread radius. Regardless of what you call out, it's not measured unless you would go in and tell somebody you have to have it. And then as I mentioned earlier, using this dental plaster type stuff, you can actually cast it and then take it and put it on an optical comparator to see whether you have the radius that you want. So now we move on to the cold hard facts of life that even though you've inspected the heck out of the threads with these three systems, if you run it through all of them, you still haven't looked for manufacturing defects. For defects in the threads, FFS86 federal spec gives examples of acceptable and unacceptable defects. And we'll look at those in subsequent figures. And you will note that the acceptance of the thread defects becomes more critical as the fastener strength increases and the ductility decreases. So there has to be some engineering judgment exercised on it. Now, here's one of the things threads should have no laps or seams at the root or the flanks of the, here's the root, here's the flank of the thread. And so in general, what you're saying on this is any defects below the pitch diameter because you're loading this part of the thread a lot more than you are this part. So anything below the pitch diameter in the way of a defect, a noticeable defect, you're not going to accept. When you get things above the pitch diameter outboard of it here, now you can accept more defects there because it is more lightly loaded. But even so, there are limits on how much you can accept on it. So once again, you look at it and if you find too many cracks in a fastener, you really should reject it. Now here's something that is a lesser problem. It just looks bad, having little nicks or something like that. As long as it's not a crack, it's just a nick from handling. And it doesn't affect the functioning of the threads. You could probably accept a nick on the outside surface of the threads. Now here is another method of thread inspection, a laser inspection method. Now, most manufacturing facilities would not have this at all because it is a setup with a full computer printout availability, and I think it costs about $100,000. So you wouldn't find them in your normal inspection shop. But it is a very accurate method of checking threads. It uses laser triangulation sensors and a motion sensor to digitize the thread form. And it's a non-contact method. You're using a laser beam. And the measurements are made by comparing the data obtained by laser scanning the thread to a perfect mating part that has been mathematically created in software. And the thread axis is the method you use for spinning it around, so you can check it at different points. Now these machines though, are used for inspecting inspection equipment. Because they're accurate enough. For instance, you can use them to inspect the thread plug gauges, go-no-go gauges, dies and taps. And they can handle parts up to six inches in diameter and four to 64 threads per inch. Now it's a time consuming thing, so the places that you would use it, as say you don't have very many bolts holding an engine on a plane. So on a 747, if you wanted to inspect the super high strength, the alloy steel bolts that are holding it on, you would run them through an inspection procedure like this, check every one of them. Because there, it's a super critical application. On the figure 78 is a picture of this. When you set the fastener down on the head, you can turn it, you scan the thread in. Because this is on a rotary spindle here. And once you scan it, then the table will index to another location. Then you get a thread profile that you can compare to a perfect thread. So if you're really doing something critical, this will work. In fact, I believe Marshall, I think got one of these machines because they wanted to use it for checking some of the super critical flight hardware for shuttle and installations that they were putting together there. So I went and looked at them. There's a company here in Westlake, I believe handles them. And they do work well, except that you would not inspect something that was just an ordinary production part because it's too time consuming, too expensive. Now, there have been various discussions through the years on how variation in pitch diameter on a fastener can do them in. And I guess this argument's been going on for 30 or 40 years or something like that. So the Industrial Fasteners Institute here in Cleveland initiated a research effort in 1993 to manufacture, measure and test a bunch of fasteners that were deliberately made out of tolerance on pitch diameter just to see how bad it was. And they put out an article on that in mechanical engineering in the December 1996 edition. And the conclusion was that variations in pitch diameter don't have a very big effect on the joint strength, the TIG life and clamping performance. In other words, it can be out of tolerance quite a bit and still pass the standard tensile and proof load requirements, which kind of surprised a lot of people. I thought it would have more effect than that because varying the pitch diameter, of course, you are loading your threads unevenly, but evidently what happens is that though you are loading them unevenly, you're spreading the load around to where you get more yielding and it'll still carry the load. So some of the people who did the testing were surprised that it was that good. Now, moving to the other parts of the fastener, the head and shank inspection. There's one of the places where you can really get into trouble with a fastener is having any kind of a defect in the fillet radius under the head because since that is one of your highest loaded areas, any kind of a crack there usually will propagate to cause failure. So a list of defects in their definitions are given in ASTM F788, that is for the fasteners and nut inspection is covered in ASTM F812. There are very similar methods of inspection, so I'll cover primarily the ones here just for fasteners and leave the other part out. Now quench cracks. Quench cracks are caused by excessively high thermal and transformation stresses during heat treatment. And so getting one of those means that you've got problems with the material so you could have a problem with it. So in general, quench cracks of any detectable size by visual inspection make the fastener unacceptable. And here's another one. This is a pet peeve of mine, socket head depth. Even though if you go to any of the ANSI specs and or mill specs, any of these on socket head fasteners, they give dimensions for the depth of socket. But I have yet to find anybody that's ever checked one. We had a problem here a couple of years ago with some NAS fasteners that the heads popped off of them in a wind tunnel installation. And when we looked at them, the socket depth was too deep.  If you get below the bottom of the head with the socket depth, you're in trouble. And that's what was happening. And although everybody talks about them, they're like UFOs, no evidence there. Here are some examples of the things in head and shank inspection. And cracks in general, these are quench cracks, which you can see can happen in the heads, in the shank, around the top of the head. But here's the one that really gets you. If you have any cracks here in this radius, fillet radius under the head, you're in real trouble. So that is from that FFS86 or ASTM 788, I don't remember now which, forging cracks. Now, remember I mentioned on fasteners that the higher strength ones usually have forged heads because you don't want to have the discontinuity and grain flow at the, particularly to fillet radius. So you can get forging cracks during the cutoff or forging operation or even cold forging, you can get some on the material. The material is a little bit too hard when you're cold forging it. And these are located on the top of the head and you're on the raised periphery around the indented head bolts and screws. And you can accept some of them if they are very, very slight so that they're more or less a streak rather than a crack, just a indentation mark as long as they have a very shallow depth. But once again, depends on the criticality of the installation as to how much you accept in the cracks. Here's one that shows a forging crack on the top of the head. And if you look at those limits on depth, you'll see that if you take 0.04 times the diameter or something like that for a bolt that is say a quarter inch in diameter, that's a pretty shallow crack. It's nothing more than a streak that you can see. So that type of crack would, so-called crack would be acceptable. Now here is a sheer burst and that's an open break in the metal from forming and you can accept these only if it's in the flats and extends in the crown, chamfer circle at the top of the head or in the under head bearing circle. And none of them located at the intersection of the wrenching flats that reduces the width to cross corners below its specified minimum. In other words, you can accept some of these once again if they are so shallow that they don't look like a crack itself. But just beware of them because this is one here and you see this is really, this one amounts to just a little depth on the corner of the flat. So that would probably be acceptable as long as it did not look like a crack itself. Bowls, that's a kind of a doubling over material which occurs during the forging operation and usually occurs near the intersection of diameter changes particularly with non-circular heads and the only problem that you look at with that is you can allow them in some cases at the corners but you don't want any near the fillet radius of the fastener in this area here. Now here you're getting it because you're trying to form a round cross section into a square so it's kind of hard to form that without getting some deformation and burrs around it. So once again you look to see where it's at and evaluate it before you accept this on a fastener. Now seams are usually in the raw material before forming and they're pretty straight and see seams are acceptable because usually they're not a crack per se and they're shallow and have a pretty good radius. Now see here if you look at this it's .03 times the diameter so if you go with a half inch fastener you see you still have something there that you would have trouble even seeing it's so shallow so that would be okay. Surface voids you can get this in a material due to the way it's formed but you got to watch if it indicates there's probably something wrong with the chemistry of the material if you're getting a lot of voids in the surface and once again the void depth look at the amount here that you're allowed .02 times the shank diameter that's still or ten thousands alright ten thousands void is a pretty shallow one and then the this one I would look at if you had void areas that are that high a percentage of the under head bearing area I would look at the material to see whether I had the right material chemistry or not and whether I'd want to reject it on that basis now tool marks, nicks and gouges they're permitted on the under head surface but you notice the restriction on that as long as your micro inch surface roughness does not go under the .125 well you see a .125 is really not too rough it's a rough machining surface and so the other place that you would look at if the head is banged up a little bit and it's on the corners out of the way you could probably accept it as long as the plating surface is not gouged now plating inspection this is another one of those that we talk about and people don't do others and look at it and say yep that's a gold color so it means it's got chromate in it and I don't see that it's gouged up too much so I guess it's alright most of the platings we've discussed earlier but we didn't discuss anything on the inspection of them so we'll kind of limit our coverage here to zinc and cadmium platings except for just visually looking at the things and the substitution of zinc for cadmium and using a dye to mask the color is a common way to cheat it's done off a lot and because the chromate dye that you use usually you look at it and the fastener is a gold type color and you can't tell by looking at it whether it's zinc or cadmium so the only way to find out is actually to run a test now you can do two different things on it you can destroy the plating on a fastener and take a chunk of the plating and go put it in a scanning electron microscope and see whether it's mostly cadmium or mostly zinc but then there are other things that you can do here too in inspecting now zinc is usually covered by STM B633 and cadmium is covered by a federal spec QQP416 you can do process control inspection and the plating outfits are supposed to do that and most of them do so that they control the amount of additives they put in if their bath gets tired they can add chemicals to it and so on and take new readings to determine how it is plating and you can do a lot of sampling inspection visual inspection and plating thickness tests there is in fact I believe a guy from here at Lewis just recently developed a method of inspecting the thickness of plating Dan Roth works over in M&S or what used to be M&S I believe developed one but there are methods of looking at and I think ultrasonically measuring plating thickness on materials you can do an adhesion test you can do a corrosion test and you can do a hydrogen embrittlement test although the hydrogen embrittlement test you can get that with both zinc and cadmium so that in itself would not be conclusive the lot sampling technique you can take a lot of plated fasteners of the same metal composition and so on and take a bunch of samples out visually inspect them look to see if the plating is smooth and to see whether it adheres properly whether it has blisters in it pips and that sort of thing and then you could alright you can measure them non-destructively by these various testers electronic test, eddy current, magnetic beta radiation backscatter and all these things that's covered in one of the sections of the mill handbook H28 you can take plated specimens for the required adhesion, corrosion and hydrogen embrittlement tests from a production lot at scheduled times you can determine the adhesion and this is a real scientific method by scraping the surface with a knife and then looking at it to see whether it is adhering properly with a magnifying glass that's a method of inspection that you can do yourself now corrosion resistance is determined of course by doing your salt spray test which runs 96 hours and after the exposure the presence of corrosion products visible to the unaided eye at normal reading distance is caused by rejection because you should not get any rusting on it or deposition of corrosion products for the 96 hours now hydrogen embrittlement testing this one is there are different schools of thought on where you should start on hydrogen embrittlement testing some of the faster manufacturers with a lower strength fasteners say gee you don't have to do it on lower strength fasteners because you can't get hydrogen embrittlement well a guy by the name of Lou Raymond who is kind of the guru in the US on hydrogen embrittlement ran some tests and decided that you get hydrogen embrittlement all the way down to about a grade 5 fasteners the only thing is it takes it longer to show up so in this ASTM spec it only they go anything above 144 which means your grade 8 would be the first one that you would test and put it at crank it up to 85% of tensile element for a minimum of 72 72 hours and you shouldn't have heads popping off if you have heads popping off then you have hydrogen embrittlement now the sample size and rejection criteria normally you pick a bunch of random samples out of a bin and test them and the ASTM F788 has a table which we'll show later that gives you the number of samples that you should take for a given production lot another one is given in this ANSI ASQC Z1.4 which superseded mill standard 105 and then we have ANSI spec B1818.1 that gives some sampling techniques the basis of all of these is to randomly pick a small sample and any failure of the samples rejects the whole lot here is one from ASTM F788 which shows you the sample size that you should take for a given lot size and you check it for all of these different tests that you want to run and once again the amount of testing that you do depends on the criticality of the design so if you find that they're okay you can proceed and accept the quantity of fasteners that you have if you find problems then you can go ahead and insist on more testing to verify that it's not as serious as it appears on the surface now for macroscopic examination of products with seam indications here is a sample table from ASTM F788 and you can take a look at them according to this sampling technique and if they are not judged acceptable then you can either conduct more tests or reject the entire lot there's been a lot of talk on the lot traceability and commingling and certifications and so on concerning the fastener quality act which is also known as public law 101 amended it's 101-592 as amended by 104-113 and of course one of the things that is covered in that law is lot traceability of fasteners the customer can ask for the steel manufacturer's name the lot number chemical analysis of the wire from which the fasteners were made and of course from domestic suppliers this information is readily available because most companies when they make fasteners they get a bill of lading with the coil material that gives all this information on it but on imported fasteners then it's a bit of a problem to get it because you have to get the certification from the person who made it in the foreign country now on commingling this is something that's kind of a new word but what it is in the past the fastener distributors would get fasteners from all different suppliers put them together in a barrel and when someone ordered some they get a bunch out of the barrel so it would be theoretically possible for you to get 100 fasteners made by 25 or 30 different manufacturers under this this part of the law the commingling would be cut way down to where you can only have the fasteners from two different manufacturers in the same lot because each manufacturer must register his trademark with ASME then he would stamp his trademark on all the fasteners covered by the law now the minimum sizes covered are a quarter inch in the inch system and 5 millimeter diameters in the metric of course that is together true too because if the fastener is through hardened in other words if it's a heat treated then smaller sizes are covered but nearly all the small sizes are excluded from the law because they're not heat treated that much now if the fasteners haven't been exempted they're now restricted by this commingling rule and of course you can't have more than two lots in the same container at least this way you have a better idea of who the manufacturer was on your lot of fasteners that you're getting for your usage customer can demand certifications such as the material lot numbers, chemical analysis reports and tensile test data and this documentation is notarized and legally binding on the suppliers part now in the past we could get certifications with fasteners but they normally were a sheet that the clerk who filled the order initialed and said these are certified to be good and that was it and so nobody was legally responsible so if it is done this way with the certification then the supplier is legally responsible for the fastener so one of the gimmicks that some of the distributors are using is they're saying okay you want certified fasteners it'll cost you three times as much for certified fasteners that's uncertified fasteners now do you really want certified fasteners so that's one of the loop holes if the distributor is not required to provide certifications he's not responsible for fasteners anymore the other thing that is in that law which is a real big loop hole is agreement between customer and manufacturer now if the customer is a clerk who knows nothing about fasteners they can make all sorts of agreement with the manufacturer without even knowing it so that so in other words it's don't ask don't tell type thing with these fastener certifications if you don't ask for them and insist that you get them and pay the surcharge for getting them you're not going to get them so that's where the fastener quality act stands and although a lot of fastener manufacturers are scared and a lot of companies are scared on it I don't honestly think myself that it's going to amount to that much in the long run it is being handled by NIST and of course the government will enforce the laws how much they enforce them nobody knows yet I went to the school that they taught on how it would be implemented it's something like a hundred page document even the lawyers can agree on how it should be interpreted so they'll probably ask for another delay in May of 98 now as far as inspection and test standards there are all kinds of specifications for test and inspection methods and what we have done is listed as many of those as we can in the appendices we also have general references in the appendices where some of this material came from and additional references in case you'd want to check further since so many fastener tests are done per mill standard 1312 we'll give a summary of its contents here just to kind of go over it it establishes standard methods for testing fasteners in both the metric and the inch pound system and the standard test methods yield data and design allowables that are safe to use in fact mill handbook 5 uses mill standard 1312 for running their tests on both materials and fasteners that they publish in the book and also fastener allowables in the joint section of mill handbook 5 the each test has a standard method spelled out and each and there are book forms for each one of them so you have a dash number for it that gives you a standalone document if you will so if you turn over to the next page here are the different categories the salt spray test that we've covered the interaction test humidity, lap shear test stress durability, hardness testing tensile strength stress corrosion, stress rupture fatigue the thickness of metallic coatings and double shear testing and on the then we go to torque tension clamping forces for installed or installation form fasteners stress relaxation elevated temperature tensile tests sealing, single shear shear joint fatigue receptacle push out panel fasteners for electrical tensile strength of panel fasteners and receptacle torque out fasteners then you have driving recessed torque for quality conformance test structural panel lap shear sheet pull up now this is something that is important and some of the cherry rivet type manufacturers the pole stem type rivet manufacturers have had trouble meeting the this sheet pull up because if you have several sheets together maybe they're not exactly lay flat and you try to pull them up and clench the rivet sometimes you have trouble passing this test with these pole stem rivets so a lot of the manufacturers have had to go back and revise things to get a little more pull in the system so that they can lock the rivets so that's what that one is used for that one there would be for the fasteners then you have locking torque test and this last one here has been I'm not sure whether the final copy of that one is even in the book yet but I know at the last committee meeting we had it was discussed that that one was being published barrel nut tension test which we didn't have Dave and we did the CM1 v-bands now for the the metric side you have these that are covered and they for some reason or other they change it to a DoD standard 1312 for the metric in order to differentiate from the mill standard and these are the ones that they have for testing of metric fasteners now we go into the the do's and don'ts or designs and I kind of come up with a set of guidelines here just common sense type guidelines that for you to use and it's not a complete list because you can always come up with an addition for a list but these at least could be used as a designer's checklist and one of the things that's a pet peeve of mine is I feel that enough information should be given on a drawing to fully define the fasteners you want and I know in the past I've been disappointed in some of the drawings in which they say all fasteners to be per FFS 86 or 85 now if you go look at that spec you can get anything from alloy steel, stainless steel down to even nylon fasteners so you're giving the guy a lot of leeway if you don't define it any further than that so this is why that I said fully define the fasteners you want in other words when you call them out for a specification give the paragraph of that specification that covers the fasteners that you want to use or if you are not satisfied with how it's defined in this spec give the strength level required for example on drawings on materials I know I have seen on drawings where it is critical enough that you even specify the grain direction on the drawing because you know on materials you have a longitudinal transverse and short transverse directions on them the short transverse usually the weak one so you specify on the drawing and the area of major stress that you want that to be the longitudinal direction in order to get better properties so specify what you want on the face of the drawing now here I mentioned earlier in the course using up softer than the bolt that will keep you out of trouble and that it distributes the loads on the thread because usually if you torque a fastener to failure with a nut it will fail in the first two threads in the thread run out area due to stress concentration so the nut will not fail usually it's the bolt that fails and don't use feather edges on sheets in a joint material for countersunk holes use floating nut plates for critical designs particularly for countersunk fasteners so that the countersink can center the fastener and the nut plate will not be trying to bend it determine the environmental conditions before selecting materials or coatings for fasteners because you want to make sure that you're covered and design sure fasteners to be critical in bearing that means that the fastener is stronger in shear than the material so therefore you can elongate the hole in the material to allow your fasteners to pick up the load without failing the fastener don't use jam nuts for locking check alignment of fasteners before final assembly and of course as a corollary of that avoid head bending because the fastener bending I think the SAE handbook says don't go more than plus or minus 2 degrees on misalignment on a fastener head to avoid trouble with bending and follow the edge distance and spacing guidelines on fasteners now you can temper this but one of the things that you don't do is put a fastener close to the edge that if the tolerance goes against you when the hole is drilled you'll have it pushing out on the edge and I've seen some that were almost that bad now don't use fasteners that look alike but are made of different materials don't use 300 stainless and A286 stainless the same size, same head and everything so that you can't tell the difference between them and don't use fine and coarse threads in the same assembly unless there's a big difference in the fastener diameter so it's not possible to get them in the wrong holes and here's something that you can get in trouble with although we did it on fittings on CM1 don't mix metric and inch fasteners in a design that'll get you in real trouble verify that you have the fasteners you specified and demand traceability if it is a critical design make sure that you get the proper traceability of the fasteners use inserts and soft materials to avoid fastener pull out if you can't use through holes if the dominant fastener load is sheer don't use a high torque on the fastener because you have to combine the fastener and sheer loads to the total strength of the material so you don't want to use up all of it on tension if your primary load is sheer avoid tapped holes as much as possible because you can't inspect them you're not sure how good they are so if you can avoid them don't use them use hardened washers under both the head and the nut on a bolded installation if possible don't torque a fastener above its yield point stay below the yield point and don't get close to it unless you run sufficient tests to determine pretty much where it is then in a fatigue joint if you have to go up because of fatigue then you can go up to a near yield torque the use of lubricants lowers the coefficient of friction so the torque values have to be adjusted accordingly one of the cases we had at the Cape of this using silver plated nuts stainless steel nuts of course the silver tarnishes so if you have them in a barrel for a long time they look bad so some manufacturer decided he would stop that so he coated these silver plated nuts with wax from tarnishing they didn't tarnish but nobody told the guy using the torque wrench they were yielding these things all over the place and couldn't figure out why they were yielding because the wax actually reduced the coefficient of friction about half of what it would normally be and torque tables are only guidelines the design engineer should determine the torque values for his design because that's why you don't use a torque table and we get you in trouble sometimes fasteners loaded in fatigue should be torqued to near yield values I mentioned that earlier and before we go into the frequently asked questions for design we'll take a short break and come back then and finish up the question and answer session


What's going on everyone? Sam here with late in sports cards have been 10 silver packs for Peter C. We've got one, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight, nine, and ten. So good luck here. Peter, see what we got, buddy. These are silvers. Tiz. Tiz of silvers. That is a Yannis and Orange. Anthony Richardson, 2199. Justin Herbert. Jamar Chase, one of one! Jamar Chase! Here we go.  The silver pack. Right out of the silver pack. Peter, congrats man. That's going to work just fine, my man. Congrats, buddy. Peter's first order with us too.  We'll get that magged. T-Law and Ken Griffey Jr. to 599. That is Jimmy Butler and Josh Allen to 199. Voltaire Votas, his thing is bot. Yeah, it's a bot. That's a bot right now. That's a bot right there. This abbreviation is legit bot. Danika Patrick to 599. X-Patch Bombs and Orange also to 199. And Roman Reigns to 50. Nice one there. Kyrie. Anthony Richardson to 499. Chris, do you see that too? Is Jalen Brunson and Orange Zay Flowers to 199. Is it Votas? Yeah, yeah. Yeah, now it's just 499 Votas. That's Kyle Bush and Orange Benedict Bather into 199. The Pacers. I'll do it for your break there. Peter, well congrats on the 101, man. That'll, uh, thanks for your support. Get him right out to you, buddy.


Internal Revenue Service IRS Tax News! There's no new news today, so we'll just go into a random joke. Isn't it funny how the Bidens are somehow our culturally diverse politicians these days? That's culturally insensitive. I mean, it don't make no sense! That doesn't make a whole lot of sense, dude! Oh no, he who is blind can now see! Because the Bidens?  And wider than whipped cream! Waiter than what? As anybody can clearly see just by looking at some of their vacation or possibly business trip photos. So, as you can clearly see, it was an excrement. It was ch- I was playing a joke. It was chocolate. Granted, they may redden greatly after sticking a straw in the said mountain.  But that- that don't change nothing. No, that doesn't change anything. Being red is even worse than being white from a diversity perspective these days.  Must be the war cry of a tribe. It's like, wait, hold, wait a second here. Hold on a second! That dude, he's- he's clearly orange. He is clearly going through something. What are you, colorblind or what? That doesn't make a whole lot of sense, dude. Oh no, he who is blind can now see! Honestly, I thought being colorblind was supposed to be a good thing. Whatever. I thought that was a good thing. Uh, it's not.


Hi stampers! Welcome to Watch It Weekly Wednesday. I'm Jill and I'm so excited I just got back from our convention that I learned this wonderful technique I can't wait to show you. I call it the window sheet background technique using our Stampin' Blends. You're going to need for this technique, you're going to need that spritzers and I put alcohol in it, rubbing alcohol in it. You're going to need our Stampin' Blends and a heat tool and a window sheet. Now I've just for purposes of showing this technique have cut it card size but I would normally make it a bigger card size because I would fold it over. So let me show you how this works. You're going to want to get your alcohol marker ready to go because you're going to spritz it. So any kind of way that you want to go ahead and do this I'm just gonna do it a bunch of times back and forth and it doesn't have to be exact. It can go inside of each other, blend just fine. And if you notice I'm using some really cool markers that you probably haven't seen. These are our new in-color blends. Now because I want to do a couple more colors I think I'm gonna go backwards and do the green again and then the blue and then a little more of the pink. It doesn't have to be perfect. Every single time you do this it's gonna look different. So now we're going to take our spritzer and it has alcohol in it. You might want to white an A on the bottom and we're just gonna spritz it all up like this and then we're gonna take our heat tool and blow it so it goes into each other and it blends. So it makes this wonderful cool background and no two are exactly alike. You can kind of shape how your how it looks by drawing it. Okay so let me put this I'm gonna blot it just a little bit where that one spot is that I'm not using. I'm gonna put it on here. Look how cool that background is. So I would actually turn it upside down and then so the alcohol is facing towards the cardstock. Isn't that a cool background? Now I want to show you how I'm gonna make like a sunset with this same technique. Take another piece of our window sheet and I'm gonna make the Sun first. Kind of like a half moon. I'm gonna make the bluish green water. I'm gonna add some little green in there to kind of give it a little measure of green color and then I'm gonna add a purple sky. I've just used all the dark colors of all these blends. I'm not using the lighter colors because I want it to be more of a darker hue and they don't have to touch each other or they can touch each other. There's no right and wrong with this because every single time you do it it's different. Okay now we got that. Now we're gonna turn this on and kind of blend it and if you want more alcohol you just put more on there and you can even put a little more of the blending brush on there.  Let's do it again. We're just at a very dark dry area so everything dries really fast. Even after it dries let's see if I want to add more color to it or more alcohol like let's say I want the Sun to be a little bit darker I can add more right here in this spot and then go ahead and spritz it again. So there's not really you can it's kind of mistake-free how it's how you do it. Let me show you now if I turn this over I'm gonna blot it again. Alright and then put it on this so it's got kind of that look. Let me show you a card that's done with both of these. Here's a rainbow one right here and I actually spritz it with and you won't be able to see it but I spritz it and it has Wink Estella on it so this is the side I spritzed right here and then I turned this down and it kind of gave it that little extra. Putting black on it really makes it pop too. Okay here's the other one that's got the sunset in there and I just put that on the card right there made the Sun and the setting part and the water. So this is how you do the window sheet background technique with your stamping plans. It's such a fun technique to do so many different backgrounds with. So if you're interested in any of these products click the links below and have fun doing the window sheet background technique. And if you're new here we post a video every Wednesday so make sure you subscribe and we'll see you next time on Watch It Weekly Wednesday.


Alright, thank you so much. And thanks everyone for being here. I'm Gabrielle Hayden I'm a librarian for research data management and reproducibility at the University of Oregon. But before I did that I got a PhD in 20th century poetry, and I spent three years as a visiting professor at Reed College. And it's some of the things that I learned in that former profession that kind of gave me the idea for this talk. So in, in my dissertation work where I got to do a lot of research at this ridiculously beautiful and inappropriately wealthy library the binary library. One of the things I was looking at was the ways that Spanish language and literature. The way that people had biases about Spanish language and literature sometimes press the translation and publishing about literature in the 20th century. And so that essentially what struck me was that some of the biased ways that people talk about human languages I saw some real parallels with the bias language that people use to talk about programming languages. So here I want to stop and say that I'm going to talk about language of bias and things that people will say that if they were said in earnest but absolutely violate the code of conduct here. And so if you're not in the mood to think about sad and stressful things or interactions that you've had in the past you should totally feel free to just hop off and come back the end of the talk will be less about these depressing topics. So you could even just hop off for the next seven minutes but but but that was basically just noticing that parallel right and and seeing so programming languages like human languages are social. Right. And I think the little scholarship that's done on this I think there's a lot of consensus right there embedded in the interesting hierarchy so just as the way that we talk about human languages is influenced by things like the history of imperial colonies and differences in power between cultures and nations in the same way. And I see that there are differences in the way that people understand programming languages or who has access to certain programming languages over others, or parts of the the computer science and software engineering ecosystems and you know the pay bills that can be associated with it so another way of saying that in more positive terms is that in the way that we talk about all sorts of human languages formal competing languages and other we have opportunities to emphasize solidarity or division. So here's just a selection of kind of classic gender and put downs that, you know, my, my thought for this inspiration for this context was really kind of running across these kinds of things. Often people don't say this type of stuff outright it's more like you notice. Oh, at this company I'm working at it seems like there are more women working in the front end or there's an assumption that that would be the case. Those kinds of things but it was very interesting because once I started to look into it. Of course I saw that actually this kind of way of putting down things that are newer potentially more accessible that that change who's using the technology are often getting in the same way by in this kind of gendered, gendered language, and that really harkens back to a way of putting down other people's languages that goes back quite a long way right so just I could have taken things from my dissertation but I actually thought it would be useful to think about how this goes back a lot farther. This is a fantastic feminist and post colonial analysis of the Gospel of St. Paul and his role in history, and talking about the way that he is pushing back against this language within Rome of imperial conquest being associated with masculinity and conquered lands and languages being associated with femininity right and you have this like image of potentially a sexual violence here on the cover right of the Roman soldier and the feminine, the female figure who sort of stands in for lands conquered by Rome. And you see that more recently in the 20th century with. So I was studying as a pound among other writers and you know you can see here he's talking about. He's sort of making a direct parallel between well Spanish literature is good one Spain has power. Now that it doesn't it's feminine and then he just throws in some gratuitous racism. Okay. On the one hand that's a kind of depressing thing to notice on the other hand I think it's useful when we run across this kind of toxic language to know that it has this sort of long and on our original uninteresting genealogy. But of course, I think that if you were to have this conversation on Reddit, you come across a lot of people who would say well but aren't some programming languages better than others. I'm actually not much of a programmer, although I do help teach some people in Python in my work and I am excited to be learning more, but I'm not someone who's going to have this opinion. Very friendly well who does care about the answer to this question that the folks we've, we've just been alluding to. But then also people who design and write programming languages right I mean, unlike human languages which developed completely organically. Programming languages are written by people and they're written to be successful. And so the people who design them want other people to adopt them. And they are also thinking about this so this is a great article from 2015 by CMU Professor Jean Yang and Ari Rapkin that talk about the question this kind of again this this kind of faux technical language, and there that essay actually comes out of this great study called the sociology of programming language adoption that Rapkin did with Leo Myrovich where they surveyed developers and asked them, you know, why are you choosing one language over another. And I think their sense was as people who wrote programming languages, or who are involved in the development of programming languages, you know that people would care about things like development speed and and correctness. I think all of these very specific technical things I mean you can think about if you're an advanced mathematician there's all sorts of fun work I think that can be done. But in fact what they found was no developers ultimately are choosing languages based on you know who they know and what what those people are using right open source libraries. There's a powerful existing code personal familiarity team familiarity so that those interpersonal dynamics are, are the things that really, that really matter. But there are still people who are thinking about the differences between languages and how that might affect people. There's sort of interesting parallels between the way that we talk about human languages, and the way that we talk about programming languages so German romanticism that's the 1700s and early 1800s, there was a lot of talk about language representing the spirit of the people are the spoke of a people and this was in the context of really empowering the German language over say Latin, and, and you know really thinking about the mother tongue, and how and thinking about that as a font of literary inspiration and so on. The recent version of this in the 20th century is what people tend to call the separate work hypothesis which is that this idea that the structure of language of human languages can influence how we think. And I think there's a general sense that that is not true in a in a really strong way, but that there can be a subtle. The subtle structures of language can suddenly affect what we're paying attention to within the language or what we're sort of the ways that we're invited to speak. And what's interesting is that there are people now who are doing research around those questions. And programming languages as well. So the knowledge lab at the Chicago just got a Sloan Foundation grant to do a bunch of machine learning analysis of the way that people are using computer programming languages. And thinking about that. There's also a fantastic talk that's still available on the way back machine by the inventor of Ruby, where he talks about having written Ruby, really very much with the separate work hypothesis in mind and in particular, the way that it's articulated in this fantastic novel by Samuel R Delaney if you don't know him he is really great sci fi novelist who thinks about a lot of smart interesting stuff. So the other thing that that comes up out of this is that I don't have time to really get into but I would love it if you guys had questions about it or wanted to chime in about it. In your own experience is that you know programming languages to a certain degree are based in English right so Python was developed by someone from the Netherlands Ruby by someone from Japan, and yet the sort of small words in there that to the extent that they're human language words are based in English. Yuki hero Matsumoto and I don't know that I'm saying his name right who developed Ruby in the same talk which I highly recommend that you go back and look at all the slots for because it's hilarious. You know starts out by saying you know when someone came to talk about Ruby in Japan we got them an English translator, because he had looked at Japanese for two weeks and, but here I have to stand before you with my bad English. I need to suffer just because I was born in Japan. Life is unfair, but he's really I mean it's, he's being he's being cute but of course it does reflect real structural imbalances in how how easily people can access language and then maybe how they feel about it to so geek sublime is a beautiful set of essays about all of these issues. It's a zero five minute warning. Okay. Great. And one of the things he talks about is the origin of of computer languages being inspired in part by semiotics, which is kind of a forebearer of certain strand of linguistics. In turn, having been really inspired by this brilliant Sanskrit grammar and from the fourth century BCE, who made a grammar of Sanskrit that can really be understood, according to the most recent arguments by scholars as a kind of a formal language or even a competing language so it's fascinating I don't know Sanskrit and I'm not a logician but if you want to go down that rabbit hole, I got really excited and read skimmed a lot of a b logic stuff that I didn't fully understand totally fascinating stuff but you know this is also something where when I mentioned this to a colleague who worked in tech they said oh you know I had heard of that because someone you know that I talked to who was being kind of rowey who was from India was like oh yeah well you know it all came from Penini right and there's that sense of wanting to express a kind of national pride or a cultural contribution when the programming languages are so dominated by the English language and by English language companies and then I'll just mention one other study that kind of gets into this is a chapter in critical code studies this new book out from MIT press about flowmatic which was written by Grace Hopper and was a precursor to cobalt, which is sort of focused on business folks, which in turn you can imagine as a kind of very early precursor to excel in certain ways in terms of its focus on the business audience and just talking about how that was a matter of bringing more English in and then I just want to end with noting that Excel is one of the only sort of platforms for programming languages that actually allows you to program in your language so there's the Excel the German version and so on. So I want to end by asking some questions that I hope can lead to some conversation either now or in the slack so you know how has language chauvinism affected your relationship to particular programming languages or your access to opportunity. Your first language is not English do you feel that the fact that programming languages are based in English affects your work or do you see it affecting others. And are there strategies you found helpful for interrupting language chauvinism so no obligation but if you're interested, I am totally fascinated to hear your thoughts so. Yeah, so I'm just going to stop there somehow I wanted there to be a more uplifting note at the end of this but this is me on Twitter come find me if you want. And yeah I want to continue to think and talk more about about interrupting these these kinds of associations are just noticing the ways that they are truly unoriginal. Thank you so much that was absolutely fantastic. And I just want to give a little comment on in terms of the time we've got left we've got five or six minutes so certainly time to ask a few questions or to have that discussion. In fact, we could go a little bit experimental and if anybody would like to come up on come up onto the screen and engage in any of those questions then I would be happy to do that. We've got a question that's coming. I'll read it out. And it's from Minister Klein, thank you Melissa. And they say I'm curious whether you've looked at similar effects within programming languages, ie, dialects that develop in particular workplace or set of packages. So tidy verse versus base are. You know, I haven't but I'd really like to I mean this was really. This talk is like posing the question and I think that the. I wanted to be able to come in here with more answers and questions but I think that to do that really requires a certain amount of more ethnographic research or really kind of getting into. So, but I want I think that's a really good question right I mean it's sort of what follows from that observation that people are choosing languages based on the, the language packages, and so on. Yeah, so I'm excited to keep, keep looking into that how much is the culture of the language due to the actual founders, or community that evolves I think that's a great question from Peter Murray rest. Something that comes to mind.  So, so I think in that sense like the people who are like so much of the work that is gone. So, and I think that's mostly at CSV comp, for example is that people do this work of maintaining and setting up the culture of being inclusive and inviting and respectful. And I think when you have people who are involved who are doing the opposite of that. I think you really see that so yeah and draw my day Elton is saying in her opinion founder effects are very strong. Yeah, absolutely any opinions on programming languages not written in English. Yeah, so I'm not I'm still so new to programming that it's not like I have opinions myself about different programming languages I mean it seems like there's a big challenge that people talk about network effects right that because many people have to learn the English based programming languages in order to enter in to the conversation. Then that's also then what everyone knows and so there's a kind of bigger audience and there's a kind of knock on a fact that you get from just in the sense that the founder maybe of a language can help set the culture, the fact that the early languages were in English then makes it harder to not write in languages that are not in English. And so a couple more comments, several people said this reminded them of the work of the lean Herman and that was someone who I ran across right at the end of giving this talk and I'm excited to read more about their work. And then Jonathan Cain says, it makes me think about conversations this morning about community building and what does this mean for all the work that folks are joined to build inclusive communities I think that's a great point and in fact, I had really I had meant to say at the very beginning to give a shout out to Angela Lee and her talk on data communities and those who build them. I think that these kinds of posturing right are the exact opposite of creating the kind of excitement and kindness that we work so hard to foster here at CSB comp so it felt it almost felt a little sad to give this paper here in the sense that it's sort of documenting the opposite of what we want to build but I, I hope that there's some value in, in noticing how the operations of our of the enemies of our inclusive communities. I think Gabrielle that I think is a lovely place to finish.


We do have a program here. It's called the National Family Caregiver Support Program and it is a federally funded program which actually has two components to it. The first component is actually for caregivers that's needing a little bit of a break. So it is a respite-based voucher program. A caregiver of any age taking care of anyone 60 and older can use this program. Essentially, if that caregiver needs to go to a doctor's appointments, to the grocery store, anything just to take a break, then they can choose whomever they want to come in there and watch their loved one while they take a break. It actually provides up to 25 hours per voucher. And essentially how this would work is that the caregiver chooses their own person. They pay that person out of their own pocket and then once all 25 hours of the voucher has been used, they send it back to us and we reimburse them up to $200 a voucher. So that way technically those caregivers aren't out any funding sources out of their own pocket to pay for someone to watch their loved one. The second component is the grandparents raising grandchildren and it does provide some monetary assistance to those grandparents and to be eligible, the grandparent has to be over the age of 55 and the biological parent cannot be living in the same household. It's an extremely useful program and a lot of people are aware of that and we encourage anyone who would be interested to contact us here at the ad. I would be your first contact so anyone can contact me and I'll lead you on through the process of applying for it. For anyone interested, then contact our telephone number at<PHONE_NUMBER>. My personal extension is 325 and we also have our website bigsandy.org. It has a wealth of information as well as all of our contact information and I encourage anyone interested or think they may be eligible or have someone in a situation where they could benefit from these services to contact me at any time. Thank you.