Search results

This paper aims to present a low-cost, edge-fed, windmill-shaped, notch-band eliminator, circular monopole antenna which is practically loaded with a complementary split ring resonator (CSRR) in the middle of the radiating conductor and also uses a partial ground to obtain wide-band performance.

To compensate for the reduced value of gain and reflection coefficient because of the full (complete) ground plane at the bottom of the substrate, the antenna is further loaded with a partial ground and a CSRR. The reduction in the length of ground near the feed line improves the impedance bandwidth, and introduced CSRR results in improved gain with an additional resonance spike. This results in a peak gain 3.895dBi at the designed frequency 2.45 GHz. The extending of three arms in the circular patch not only led to an increase of peak gain by 4.044dBi but also eliminated the notch band and improved the fractional bandwidth 1.65–2.92 GHz.

The work reports a –10dB bandwidth from 1.63 GHz to 2.91 GHz, which covers traditional coverage applications and new specific uses applications such as narrow LTE bands for future internet of things (NB-IoT) machine-to-machine communications 1.8/1.9/2.1/2.3/2.5/2.6 GHz, industry, automation and business-critical cases (2.1/2.3/2.6 GHz), industrial, society and medical applications such as Wi-MAX (3.5 GHz), Wi-Fi3 (2.45 GHz), GSM (1.9 GHz), public safety band, Bluetooth (2.40–2.485 GHz), Zigbee (2.40–2.48Ghz), industrial scientific medical (ISM) band (2.4–2.5 GHz), WCDMA (1.9, 2.1 GHz), 3 G (2.1 GHz), 4 G LTE (2.1–2.5 GHz) and other personal communication services applications. The estimated RLC electrical equivalent circuit is also presented at the end.

Because of full coverage of Bluetooth, Zigbee, WiFi3 and ISM band, the proposed fabricated antenna is suitable for low power, low data rate and wireless/wired short-range IoT-enabled medical applications.

The antenna is fabricated on a piece (66.4 mm × 66.4 mm × 1.6 mm) of low-cost low profile FR-4 epoxy substrate (0.54 λ_g × 0.54 λ_g) with a dielectric constant of 4.4, a loss tangent of 0.02 and a thickness of 1.6 mm. The antenna reflection coefficient, impedance and VSWR are tested on the Keysight technology (N9917A) vector network analyzer, and the radiation pattern is measured in an anechoic chamber.

Stiffness adjusting ability is essential for soft robotic arms to perform complex tasks. A soft state enables dexterous operation and safe interaction, while a rigid state enables large force output or heavy weight carrying. However, making a compact integration of soft actuators with powerful stiffness adjusting mechanisms is challenging. This study aims to develop a piston-like particle jamming mechanism for enhanced stiffness adjustment of a soft robotic arm.

The arm has two pairs of differential tendons for spatial bending, and a jamming core consists of four jamming units with particles sealed inside braided tubes for stiffness adjustment. The jamming core is pushed and pulled smoothly along the tendons by a piston, which is then driven by a motor and a ball screw mechanism.

The tip displacement of the arm under 150 N jamming force and no more than 0.3 kg load is minimal. The maximum stiffening ratio measured in the experiment under 150 N jamming force is up to 6–25 depends on the bending direction and added load of the arm, which is superior to most of the vacuum powered jamming method.

The proposed robotic arm makes an innovative compact integration of tendon-driven robotic arm and motor-driven piston-like particle jamming mechanism. The jamming force is much larger compared to conventional vacuum-powered systems and results in a superior stiffening ability.

The purpose of the paper is to examine the phrase “just and equitable”, and associated terminology, within New Zealand’s strata law, to inform other jurisdictions. In particular, this paper temporarily suspends the notion of a statutory hendiadys to consider what kind of justice is reflected in judicial consideration of the phrase.

This paper takes a mixed-methods approach, drawing on a combination of black-letter law, property law theory and insights from literary and philosophical analysis.

While justice is often considered as “treating like cases alike”, this is not apparent from this study. The analysis shows that different kinds of justice outcomes emerge, with some emphasis on justice as economic efficiency. In addition, the paper highlights the inherent uncertainty in what is “just and equitable” and how associated disjunctive phrases, such as “unjust or inequitable” are still treated as hendiadys, but are no more clear.

The research is limited to consideration of a single jurisdiction (New Zealand), though the useful degree of case law from this jurisdiction provides broad insight.

Among other things, the paper argues for further consideration of the usefulness of the “just and equitable” test in light of the kind of justice we want to achieve. The addition of mandatory considerations to existing statutory tests may allow more of a focus, beyond the exigencies of individual cases or narrow outcomes of economic efficiency.

While there is existing literature on the “just and equitable” phrase within strata law, the paper is the first, to the best of the authors’ knowledge, to provide an analysis focused on how suspending the statutory hendiadys normally inherent in “just and equitable” provides insight into the kind of justice that emerges from the application of this test within a single strata jurisdiction. As such, the paper provides lessons for other jurisdictions on how to improve relevant statute and case law outcomes.

This article sets out to show how principles and questions about method that underlie a way of interpreting the discipline of conservation and restoration can find results in research and studies, aiming at achieving even conscious reuse process. The occasion is the very recent research performed on the former Church of Saints Gerolamo and Francesco Saverio in Genoa, Italy, the Jesuit church annexed to the 17th-century College of the order. It is a small Baroque jewel in the heart of the ancient city, former University Library and actually abandoned, forgotten for years, inaccessible and awaiting a new use.

The two-year work carried out on the monumental building was conducted according to a study and research methodology developed and refined over the years within the activities of the School of Specialisation in Architectural Heritage and Landscape of the University of Genoa. It is a multidisciplinary and rigorous approach, which aims to train high-level professionals, up-to-date and aware of the multiple problems that interventions on existing buildings, especially of a monumental nature, involve.

The biennal study has been carried out within the activities of the Post-Graduate Programme in Architectural Heritage and Landscape of the University of Genoa. The work methodology faces the challenges of the contemporary complexity, raised by the progressive broadening of the concept of cultural “heritage” and by the problems of its conservation, its active safeguard and its reuse: safety in respect of seismic risk, fire and hydro geological instability, universal accessibility – cognitive, physical and alternative – resource efficiency, comfort and savings in energy consumption, sustainability, communication and involvement of local communities and stakeholders.

The goals of the work were the following: understanding of the architectural heritage, through the correlated study of its geometries, elements and construction materials, surfaces, structures, spaces and functions; understanding of the transformations that the building has undergone over time, relating the results of historical reconstructions from indirect sources and those of direct archaeological analysis; assessment of the state of conservation of the building recognising phenomena of deterioration, damage, faults and deficits that affect materials, construction elements, systems and structures; identification of the causes and extent of damage, faults and deficits, assessing the vulnerability and level of exposure of the asset to the aggression of environmental factors and related risks; evaluation of the compatibility between the characteristics of the available spaces, the primary needs of conservation, the instance of regeneration and possible new uses; the definition of criteria and guidelines for establishing the planning of conservation, restoration and redevelopment interventions.

A main challenge in studying China is that different views clash. A more serious challenge is that studies that are critical of or dissent from the Chinese government policies are labeled “anti-China” by the Chinese authorities, affecting the free academic exchange of ideas on China. This article discusses this issue and proposes a long-term solution.

This is a perspective study and uses the qualitative approach to develop the authors’ arguments.

The authors argue that the contention in China-related studies is derived primarily from the different perspectives that scholars use. This study identifies two main perspectives: the China-centric view and the rest of the world’s view. The combination of the clash of perspectives and the interference of the Chinese state hinders the development of our knowledge regarding China. Using Rawls’ theory of justice and the veil of ignorance, the authors propose to build common ground for the China study community based on academic freedom, equality and the rule of law. This study further shows that building the common ground is feasible.

The authors’ proposed common ground will help create a free environment for meaningful exchange between different perspectives and reduce the risks in China studies.

The authors’ angle to examine the contentiousness and riskiness of China studies is new. It is the first time that different perspectives on China studies are delineated and compared, the costs of the contentiousness and riskiness are assessed, and the long-term consequences of different paths are examined.

Previous literature on sustainable supply chain management has largely adopted an instrumental view of stakeholder management and has focused on understanding the effect of powerful stakeholders who have a more decisive influence on an organization's supply chain decisions. Social enterprises have emerged as organizations that often aim to create impact by integrating marginalized stakeholders into their operations and supply chains. This study examines the trade-offs that social enterprises experience due to their moral stance toward stakeholder engagement, evidenced in their commitment to serving marginalized stakeholders, as well as the responses adopted to these trade-offs.

The study follows a theory elaboration approach through a multiple case study design. The authors draw on insights from stakeholder theory and use the empirical insights to expand current constructs and relationships in a novel empirical context. Based on an in-depth analysis of primary and secondary qualitative data on ten social enterprises, the authors examine how these organizations integrate marginalized stakeholders into various roles in their operations.

When integrating marginalized customers, suppliers and employees, social enterprises face affordability, reliability and efficiency trade-offs. Each trade-off represents conflicts between the organization's needs and the needs of marginalized stakeholders. In response to these trade-offs, social enterprises choose to internalize the costs through slack creation or vertical integration or externalize the costs to stakeholders. The ability to externalize is contingent on the growth orientation of the organization and the presence of like-minded B2B (Business-to-Business) customers. These responses reflect whether organizations accept the trade-offs at the expense of one or more stakeholders or if they avoid the trade-offs and find mutually beneficial solutions.

Building on the empirical insights, the authors elaborate on stakeholder theory with a focus on the integration of marginalized stakeholders by emphasizing a moral justification for stakeholder engagement, identifying the nature of the underlying trade-offs which can arise when various stakeholder needs are in conflict and examining the contingencies affecting organizational responses to these trade-offs.

The article considers the utility of a pluralist perspective in the context of current debates around UK corporate governance reform. Oxford School pluralism advanced both a description of how industrial relations (IR) operated in practice plus a prescription for how it should operate. Whilst economic conditions are different today, a pluralist framing provides not only a useful way of understanding interests in firm governance (description) but also a solid grounding for a pragmatic reform agenda (prescription).

Drawing from key texts in the field, the article considers core concepts within pluralist discourse and discusses their relevance to contemporary policy debates.

The article provides a short outline of recent economic and political developments and considers how a pluralist framing helps explain firm-level interests, challenging the dominant narrative of shareholder primacy. It then asks what policy interventions might flow from this analysis of capital and labour investments, and how feasible they are in the current UK context. This allows a discussion of levels of analysis (evident in materialist theories such as “radical pluralism” and the “disconnected capitalism thesis”). Finally, it reflects briefly on the links between corporate governance and wider patterns of inequality, suggesting the pluralist position is consistent with a Durkheimian sociology focusing on the potential in state-led regulatory interventions to tackle anomie and strengthen social solidarity.

The article brings together literature from what are often treated as relatively discrete areas of enquiry (employment relations and corporate governance) and also considers the public policy implications of these connections.

Working conditions, pay rates and the rights of workers to collectively negotiate have become important points of discussions in recent years, with support for unions and union applications rising to levels long unseen in America. In many instances, though, companies have responded aggressively. This is not the first time such a dynamic has played out in American business. This study aims to take a fresh look at one of America’s most prominent historical disputes between labor and ownership – the Homestead Massacre of 1892 – to glean lessons from that conflict that remain relevant to today’s business environment.

This study adopts game theory and the principles of repeated interaction to assess how differing discount factors led to differences in time orientations between the workers and the Carnegie company. These differing time orientations affected both the strategy each side deployed in the negotiations and the payoffs received by the parties. Letters, contemporary news reports and histories of the events leading up to and immediately following the 1892 Homestead Massacre are qualitatively analyzed with a genealogical pragmatic approach.

Differences in temporal orientation between management and workers exacerbated the conflict, with the workers adopting a more cooperative stance and distal time orientation, while the Carnegie company negotiated with a proximal time orientation and played to “win” a game that, in fact, could not be fully won or lost given its infinitely repeating nature. The result was a short-term victory for the Carnegie company but with long-term negative consequences that highlight the suboptimal outcome the company achieved by playing a proximal strategy in an infinite game.

Although the incident at Homestead is a well-studied labor dispute, many of the themes that preceded the incident have resurfaced in the modern work context. This work, by adopting game theory as an analytical framework, provides new insights into management mistakes that led to the labor conflict and lessons for what present-day managers can do to avoid exacerbating labor strife.

The purpose of this conceptual article is to examine the role of villainification and heroification in social studies through critically analyzing the author’s place-based encounters with three civil war narratives.

The article describes the author’s critical reflections on three narratives involving confederate figures and examines theoretical and pedagogical implications.

The article introduces a spectrum of ethical judgments which plots villainification and heroification on opposing ends. The author advocates for more nuanced ethical judgments that contextualize decisions as understandable or defensible based on evidence. The term understandable reflects a concept of being able to explain (i.e. demonstrate understanding) why a curricular figure made certain choices without agreeing with or supporting those choices. The term defensible denotes the existence of evidence that provides a rationale for a choice such that the person making the ethical judgment would feel comfortable making (i.e. defending) the same choice.

The article introduces a theory of nuanced ethical judgments in social studies that maps onto existing literature on heroification, villainification and place-based education. Pedagogical implications for social studies education are also identified.

This study aims to explore the relationship between promoter share pledging and the company’s dividend payout policy in India. Furthermore, this study also analyses the moderating impact of family involvement in business on the association between share pledging and dividend payout.

A sample of 236 companies from the S&P Bombay Stock Exchange Sensitive (BSE) 500 Index (2014–2023) has been analysed through fixed-effects panel data regression. For additional testing, robustness checks include alternative measures of dividend payout and promoter share pledging, as well as alternative methodologies such as Bayesian regression. Lastly, to address potential endogeneity, instrumental variables with a two-stage least squares (IV-2SLS) methodology have been implemented.

Upholding the agency perspective, a significantly negative impact of promoter share pledging on corporate dividend payouts in India has been uncovered. Moreover, family involvement in business moderates this relationship, highlighting that the negative association between promoter share pledging and dividend payouts is more pronounced in family companies. The findings are consistent throughout the robustness testing.

The present study represents a pioneering endeavour to empirically analyse the link between promoter share pledging and dividend payouts in India. It enhances the theoretical underpinnings of the agency relationship, particularly by substantiating the existence of Type II agency conflicts between majority and minority shareholders. The findings of this research bear significant implications for investors, researchers and policymakers, particularly in light of the widespread prevalence of promoter-controlled entities in India.