Field Methods. This section describes in more detail the methods used to evaluate discoveries identified during construction monitoring that require subsurface excavations. These methods are essentially the same as those used for site-specific evaluations. Evaluation methods are essentially sampling methods focused on recovering a large enough sample to estimate the density and diversity of the cultural deposit and to expose enough of the site stratigraphy to assess site integrity. A general approach is described below, from surface inspection and collection to various kinds of subsurface investigation. The first step is to xxxx all exposed artifacts, artifact concentrations and features with color-coded pin flags to provide an overall view of the site’s potential contents. If the discovery is a buried site, the area involved will tend to be limited. If the discovery’s surface material is part of a site that was missed during the original survey, these finds will be sampled with CSCs ranging from 5 x 5 m units to 15 x 15 m units according to surface artifact density. Enough grids will be used to collect from ca. 30 to 50% of all surface artifacts. The CSCs will be supplemented by the collection of all formal tools inside and outside of the CSCs. If practical, all artifacts will be collected on sites with a sparse surface scatter. Four types of subsurface excavation units will be used. (1) 30 x 30 or 50 x 50 cm Shovel Test Pits (STPs), excavated in 20-cm levels to depths of no more than 80 cm, usually space at 10-m intervals and/or subjectively placed. These would be used to help define site boundaries, focusing on the edges of the site.
Field Methods. AAF’s Project Archaeologist will be present to monitor all ground disturbing activity at each site and archaeologically sensitive area listed in Stipulation IV.D. AAF will inform a designated construction crew supervisor that the Project Archaeologist and/or IAM will be present and has the authority to stop or redirect work in the event of an unanticipated discovery.
Field Methods. Several simulations were performed for different ships in waves using the RANS solver OpenFOAM. Drift forces were computed for different heading angles and compared with available experimental data. Ships under investigation were the Xxxxxx xxxx III, the Duisburg Test Case (DTC) containership, described by el Moctar et al. (2012) and a Cruise-Vessel. During these first studies, influencing parameters such as discretization, numerical setups and modes of motion were investigated. Achievements have been obtained with respect to the following aspects: Grid and convergence study, preliminary validation study for the calculation of second order wave forces and comparison between fixed and spring constrained surge motions on added resistance (Ley et al. 2014). The final objective is to develop off-line databases for second order wave forces, approximations of manoeuvring forces in shallow water, rudder forces behind the propeller in waves, a simplified unsteady model for a screw propeller and peculiarities of hull-propeller interaction coefficients in waves, obtained by a RANS solver. The RANS code Neptuno developed by TUB (Xxxx Xxxxxxxx & Xxxxx, 2002) has been enhanced with a new body force propeller model, allowing a better approximation of the rudder inflow and propeller torque. The code will be used to calculate forces on the hull due to waves, current and wind to derive a coefficient set including these environmental effects. The new body force model is based on a large set of RANS calculations for the isolated propeller rotating in homogenous inflow. The present calculations were made for a stock propeller with six blades, seen in Figure 25 on the left. The advance coefficient J and the angle of incidence α were varied in a range from 0.1 to 0.9 and 0° to 30°, respectively. For each time step of the calculated case – which corresponds to a specific rotation angle of a considered propeller blade – the resulting pressure and shear stresses in each cell of a triangular grid on both the suction and pressure side of the blade are saved. The propeller disk is then discretized with a polar grid (right-hand side of Figure 25) and for each cell of this grid the three components of the mean force per unit area caused by all propeller blades over a complete revolution are calculated and stored in a database for each considered pair J and α. In addition, the corresponding induced velocities of the propeller in an upstream reference plane are saved as well. When settin...
Field Methods. DOT&PF will design the archaeological fieldwork strategy to answer the research questions discussed in Section 4.1. DOT&PF and its contractors will complete archaeological excavations prior to construction activities. During data recovery efforts, it may be necessary to fence or secure each site during the field phase for safety measures. In addition, DOT&PF will arrange and fund security during off-work hours as a protection against artifact collecting or vandalism in easily accessible areas or recreational areas with a high volume of use. During the initial phase of field work, archaeologists will use information gleaned from the comprehensive literature review regarding the known cultural resources from which data will be recovered. They will clear vegetation (where necessary) to allow for subsequent documentation of the surface features through mapping, photographs, field notes, and drawings, including depression measurements and observations. Archaeologists will plot all features on a site base map using Global Positioning Systems (GPS) units with sub-meter accuracy. Following the initial documentary stage, archaeologists will establish site datum and grid systems for excavation and subsurface testing at the locations within the Direct APE for additional investigation. Archaeologists will excavate all house pits and suspected house pit depressions, and may excavate cache pit and suspected cache pit depressions within the Direct APE of the selected build alternative. They will conduct subsurface testing at all cache pit and suspected cache pit locations, as well as in the areas surrounding house pit features. Archaeologists will follow standard archaeological methods for excavation and will conduct hand excavation with shovels and trowels for test units and block excavation units at each site to be investigated. They will screen sediment with 1/8-inch mesh hardware cloth in shaker screens and retain sediment as appropriate for site reclamation. Archaeologists will conduct subsurface testing to identify and document additional buried cultural materials that may not have a surface indication in a grid pattern at regularly spaced intervals (e.g., 10-meter intervals) appropriate to the site type and testing effort. Archaeologists will conduct subsurface testing with shovels and trowels in the manner described above. Shovel test units will be 50 centimeters square and will be excavated to bedrock, glacial till, or to the extent possible with hand tools. Arc...
Field Methods. In-depth semi-structured interviews were selected for the current research because we sought to understand individual experiences with and perceptions of TANF policies (Xxxxxxx et al., 2011; Xxxxxx, 2002). Due to restrictions associated with COVID-19, recruitment and interviews were conducted over the phone or virtually over Zoom, based on the technology available to the participant. Research indicates that phone interviews yield quality data on par with data gathered from face-to-face interviews (Xxxxxx, 2008; Xxxxxxx & Xxxxxxxx, 2004). When interviewed, the participant was located in a private location of her choice. The PI who conducted the interviews was located in her private office. The personal and sensitive nature of this study required thorough ethical considerations to ensure that the research is not coercive or places participants in danger of further abuse. By the nature of recruiting women directly through service organizations, women were already connected to a system of supports. With the participants’ permission, the PI was prepared to connect the participants with resources in coordination with the CBO to manage distress that may occur during or because of the interview. No participants requested to be connected to resources as a result of stress and, unprompted, most indicated that they appreciated the opportunity to speak about their experiences. Further, due to precautions associated with the COVID-19 pandemic, all interviews were conducted remotely over Zoom when the participant could be in a safe, private location (Xxxxxxxx & Xxxxxxxx, 2014, 2016). The Emory University Institutional Review Board approved the research. Informed consent was obtained and documented by the PI, a doctoral candidate, who read the informed consent document to the participants, provided time to answer any questions that the participant may have and asked a series of questions to ensure that informed consent could be given. This process included asking participants to describe the purpose of the study and what they would be asked to do if they joined, and asking participants to practice how they would respond if they didn’t want to answer a question or stop the interview. The PI then documented consent in an online, HIPAA compliant platform. Each interview was audio recorded with the verbal permission of the participant. Each participant received a $50 gift card as remuneration for their time and contributions to the study. The interview began with a calendar ...
