.1 Shifting boards shall have a thickness of not less than 50 mm and shall be fitted grain-tight and where necessary supported by uprights.
.2 The maximum unsupported span for shirting boards of various thicknesses shall be as follows:
If thicknesses greater than these are provided the maxi mum unsupported span will vary directly with the increase in thickness.
.3 The ends of all shifting boards shall be securely housed with 75 mm minimum bearing length.
12.2 Other materials
Divisions formed by using materials other than wood shall have a strength equivalent to the shifting boards required in A12.1.
.1 Steel uprights used to support divisions loaded on both sides shall have a section modulus given by
W = a x W1,
W = section modulus in cubic centimetres;
a = horizontal span between uprights in metres.
The section modulus per metre span W1 shall be not less than that given by the formula:
W1 = 14.8 x (h1 - 1.2) cm3/m,
h1 - is the vertical unsupported span in metres and shall be taken as the maximum value of the distance between any two adjacent stays or between a stay and either end of the upright. Where this distance is less than 2.4 m the respective modulus shall be calculated as if the actual value were 2.4 m.
.2 The moduli of wood uprights shall be determined by multiplying by 12.5 the corresponding moduli for steel uprights. If other materials are used their moduli shall be at least that required for steel increased in proportion to the ratio of the permissible stresses for steel to that of the material used. In such cases attention shall be paid also to the relative rigidity of each up right to ensure that the deflection is not excessive.
.3 The horizontal distance between uprights shall be such that the unsupported spans of the shifting boards do not exceed the maximum span specified in A12.1.3.
.1 Wood shores, when used, shall be in a single piece and shall be securely fixed at each end and heeled against the permanent structure of the ship except that they shall not bear directly against the side plating of the ship.
.2 Subject to the provisions of A12.4.3 and A12.4.4, the minimum size of wood shores shall be as follows:
Length of shore
Not exceeding 3 m
150 x 100
Over 3 m but not exceeding 5 m
150 x 150
Over 5 m but not exceeding 6 m
150 x 150
Over 6 m but not exceeding 7 m
200 x 150
Over 7 m but not exceeding 8 m
200 x 150
Exceeding 8 m
200 x 150
Shores of 7 m or more in length shall be securely bridged at approximately mid-length.
.3 When the horizontal distance between the uprights differs significantly from 4 m the moments of inertia of the shores may be changed in direct proportion.
.4 Where the angle of the shore to the horizontal exceeds 10° the next larger shore to that required by A12.4.2 shall be fitted provided that in no case shall the angle between any shore and the horizontal exceed 45°.
Where stays are used to support divisions loaded on both sides, they shall be fitted horizontally or as near thereto as practicable, well secured at each end formed of steel wire rope. The sizes of the wire rope shall be determined assuming that the divisions and upright which the stay supports are uniformly loaded at 4.9 kN/m2 . The working load so assumed in the stay shall not exceed one third of its breaking load.
13. DIVISIONS LOADED ON ONE SIDE ONLY
13.1 Loagitudinal divisions
The load (P) in newtons per metre length of the divisions shall be taken as follows:
.1 Table A13-1
CHAPTER 1. THE PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS ...4
chapter 2. Measuring happiness ...5
chapter 3. The Happy Planet Index ..8
chapter 4. results: an amber planet ..11
THE LIST OF THE USED LITERATURE .17
Everyone wants to be happy. There are few goals in life shared by so many people. Economic activity the production of goods and services is certainly not an end in itself but only has value in so far as it contributes to human happiness.
But, surprisingly enough, economists have long left the study of happiness to other disciplines, especially psychology. True, when the science of economics was founded by the classics, it was taken for granted that happiness can be measured and used to determine whether a particular economic policy raises or lowers the happiness of the people affected.
So the normally dry science of economics has found a new means of expressing a nations wellbeing. Instead of studying the gross domestic product, a team of researchers has decided that happiness is the best indicator of a countrys relative success.
They have devised a test to calculate a populations satisfaction with their everyday lives or lack of it. The sum of those individual accounts has produced a new measurement: the gross national happiness.
It opens up the possibility that one day international comparisons of nations will not be based on the goods and services they produce. They will be judged on the cheerful disposition of their inhabitants.
CHAPTER 1. THE PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS
In the 1970s, in the tiny Himalayan kingdom of Bhutan, the countrys economy was coming under major scrutiny. By most measures gross domestic product, national income, employment and so on, it was growing sluggishly. So the King of Bhutan did something unusual. He decreed that from then on Bhutans progress would be measured not against these traditional economic yardsticks but against its Gross National Happiness.
It might have seemed an unconventional response to outside criticism, but the king had struck upon an idea that would grow into an important, increasingly respectable study that of happiness economics. It is a subject most of us can relate to. As nations and individuals, almost all of us are richer and healthier than ever before. However, this wealth has gone hand in hand with a malaise of discontent. Those in rich nations have been getting less and less happy over the past 50 years.
Traditional economics does not have a satisfactory explanation for this. Since the time of Adam Smith, wealth has been assumed to be the key measure of a countrys progress. It is for this reason - and the fact that money is easy to measure that economists have tended to concentrate on measures such as gross domestic product, unemployment and a handful of other social measures such as life expectancy and inequality. But not, until recently, happiness, which, given how much importance philosophers have placed on contentedness since the earliest days of humanity, is somewhat surprising.
The idea that a countrys progress should be measured against its happiness did not, in fact, begin in Bhutan twenty or so years ago. In 1776 Thomas Jefferson laid down that Americans should be entitled not just to life and liberty but to the pursuit of happiness. Jeremy Bentham, the 19th-century inventor of the philosophy of utilitarianism, said that humans should strive for the greatest happiness of the greatest number.
Pursuing happiness seems to have yielded definite results in Bhutan. Since taking up the gross national happiness index, the country has grown at a remarkable rate by even conventional economic terms. In 2007 it was the second-fastest growing economy in the world, all the while managing to increase its gross national happiness.