.

‘ WTMTTW{ES
‘HESEARCH

TECHNICAL MEMORANDUMS

NATIONAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE! FOR AERONAUTICS

---------

No. 985
-. —-----

TABLES FOR COMFUTING VARIOUS CASES OF BEAM COLUMNS

By J. Cassens

Luftfahrtforschung
vol. la, Nos. 2 and 39 March 29, 1941
Verlag von R. Oldenbourg, Mtinc’henand Berlin

--———..

,...- ,.., ~. ...,.,, .,

Washington
August 1941
 1
\
Illllllllllllllumlillllllllllllll
31176014407283
!,,
~,i NATIONAL ’ADVISORY COMMITTEE:.FOR AERONAUTICS
---..-..--+
\
.... .,, .,. .. .
TECHl$I.CiL’-’tiEMOiANQtiNO;
NO; 985” ,-
....,,.. ,.,
-- L-----
.. ‘,
4
. . ..’
TABLES FOR 00MEWl!ING VARIOUS. CASES OF BEAM COLUMNS*
. ..’.,.; ,.’.

BY-J:. Cassens ~~
... .
,,: ,., .,
For a better understanding of these tables, the meth-
ods by which the cases are computed are discussed first.
The importance of the buckling-modulus is pointed out.

I. EXPLANATION OF THE METHODS

Aircraft design methods differ from other structural

engineering methods in. the selection of slender beams.
Since the former came into being at a time when structural
engineering had already reached certain standards, it is
not surprising that the stress analysis in aircraft design
was largely influenced by the other. But it is surprising
that Miiller-Breslau, for instance, annexed the column
tests in his work l!GraDhical Statics of Building Construc-
tion’ on the subject o~ aircraft design. The slender
spars of braced wings, the slender members of steel-tube
bodies and of the ribs no longer permit the calculation
of meiobers in rough approximation first for bending and
then for buckling, but the analysis had to correspond to
actual loading conditions, that is, combined bending and
column stress. The importance attached to this subject
in past years is readily seen from a glance at the old
Z.F.M. (Zeitschrift ftir Flugtechnik und Motorluftschiffahrt).
For example, in 1918 and 1919 these problems were treated
by Giimbel, Prall, Trefftz, Mi.iller-Breslau, Reissner,
Ratzersdorfer, Arnstein,. Koenig, etc. But the authors
really dealt merely with the problem shown in the present
report below no. 4 with corresponding applications.

It is true that in its principal beams modern air-

craft design again tends toward short columns, but even
so, column-effect problems remain to be solved,
--———-_—--—-_.____+________________________ ___________________
*tlTafel einiger Knickbiegef~lle. lJ Luftfahrtforschuhg,
vol. 18, nos. 2 and 3, March 29, 1941, pp. 86-94.

. .. . . ..—-. —
2 “NACA T,echnic& l’Mernorahdum ITo. 985

Column effect an,d.its counterpart; bend3ng tension ,

deals with the case of concurrent longitudinal and trans -
verse forces acting on a member. Hiit~e and various other
manuals, contain tables wnich give the transverse forces,
moments, deflections, and various other data for bending
forces on the straight member with,constant bending stiff-
ness. These forces are supplemented by the effect of the
moment FY, where P denotes the longitudinal force and
Y the deflection at’ any one point. The relation between
curvature radius p and bending forces reads:

1 day Mx
+ - = . -— = - --
P. d~a, EJ

where Mx is the moment of all bending forces dependent

upon beam ordinate x, EJ the bending stiffness, and y
the deflection of the neutral axis. (See fig. 1.) Divid-
ing moment Mx into a portion (~x) due solely to the
transverse forces and a portion affected only by P, a,f-
fords Mx = lfx 4 Py, which, posted in the foregoing rela-
tion, gives ‘

. .
k2yll+y=-%L (1)
P

with k2 = ‘+ . (The investigations ,apply to constant

ben,dii~g stiffness EJ and constant longitudinal force
F,) The simplest way of solving the differential equa-
tioil is as follows: ,The homogeneous differential eq-~.a-
tion is expressed as y = C eax; the values C are coef-
ficients to be defined later and must satisfy the boundary
conditions of the problem, while a establishes the con-
nection between the formula: and the original equation” (l).
The c.o,mple.tedifferential equation is solved either by
power formulas, the coefficients of which are determined
by comparison, or else. by others, for inst,ance, trigono-
metrical ones, depending upon the character of the right
side of equation (l). The majority of problems shown in
the tables were solved. by this method. The right side of
equation (1) shows that the law of superposition hol.d.s
for all loads applied transverse to the neutral axis.
Each loading condition is to be computed for app,lied lon-
gitudinal force 1?.

... . . ,-
 NACA Technical ..
Memo? andum”Na. ’985 3

-, . .
Th6-’1’aw-”oY-superpo’i%it5.0’n’’”can
be-made clever use of
in the calculation of a ~6am”withcons$ant ‘bending stiff-
ness and longitudinal force, the beam””being transversely ,
loaded by several, arbitrarily many, concentrated loads.
This merely requires expressions for deflections and mo-
ments of a beam transversely loaded by one concentrated
load, as found under no. 13.. ..
Under a concentrated load 40 the moment and the
deflection to the left of”the concentrated load is

‘in‘ELsin
Idx = Q. k ---–~-a C(I

Q() “ d
Y = -—
p k ::––: sin Cp - - x
( t )
and to the right

sin’ ~ sin ~
Mu = Q. k --:=-a

Therefore, if a beam. is under transverse load Q3, Q4,

and Q5 in addition to the longitudinal force P (fig..
2), the moment at point .xo
%#’qo = -k- is:
( )

and the deflection

k sin Cpo
---~—--
Yo = P (Q3 sin ~3 + Q4 sin Iq4 + Q5 sin T5)
sln a,
.,
.,,
.. ...,.“ -“ ~~ (QSd3+ Q. d4 +’Q5 d.)

As a result of transverse loads QI and Cja with P

(fig 2), the moment at point U. = t ~ X. (*0 = ~- is
\ )

m—mmmnnmlmn 1I II .nnmmmm-- m..m., ,,, , ....

4 NACA Technical ‘Win’b’iandurn
No. 98”5

,.. . ,.
and the deflection .

Mxo , U. = Mxo + Muo

and the deflection s at this point X. = Z - U. is:

8 =.yo + V.

This problem is naturally much more difficult if longitu-

dinal forces are applied at the same pbints as the trans-
verse forces. In this case the use of an expanded.
Clapeyron equation such as. cited “Dy lifi21er-3re’s18.uin. his
11Graphical Statics> ‘t vol. 2, 2, p. 643, is r.e,commended.
Examples for such problems may be found in the Z.F. M’.,
1920, p. 283. :

A second method for column stress calculation is

given because the final results appear ,i.nsubst?.ntially””
different form. Instead of trigonometric and’ hyperbolic
functions, a quotient appears which gives the effect of,
F in the denominator. Bleich, for example,’ computes’ the”
central moment of a beam loaded, as in case no. 3, accord-
ing to formula

g~ gt2 PX/P +——..-—--

0s032
Mmax= ~
(1+
1.032 -—
------
FE/p - 1 ) = ‘~- ‘-~~~p - ~

But no advantage accrues from this nethod except for syrn-

metr:ic load cases.
r .,. ,.. .—,.. .— .. . . ——... —-.. ——— -—--- . . . .. -..—- —
J

NACA Technical Memorandum”. No. 985 5

-, A third- method is bas-ed upon. “t-heapplicatio”ri-’”of

., ‘k-he
“passive energy 11 or the pri,nc-iple of virtual speed (I%ppl,
llDrang and ZWang* 11 vol. I, pa 61) . At first sight the
idea seems attractive, since the energy of the longitu-
dinal forces X the deflection can be discounted in first
approximate ion. But the, application. of ,the.method in-
volves a great number of difficulties.

According to this principle the deflection of a beam

follows from the relation

J
MiMk
&ik = —.
d=

1
ES

The method is best explained by the example illus-

trated in. figure 3.

The work performed in the beam is computed after the

actual load Q and P is applied on the “Deam deflected
under load 1. It affords
Z

o 0

The first integral is the same as that obtained from com-

puting the beam deflection under transverse load Q; let
us call it 8.. The second integral is a function of the
looked-for deflection ~.

Herewith the relation can be transformed into

.

(
,:P”;X
6 1- ~ -~-i– d.. = so (2)

\ o
)
The expression
6 NACA Technical Memorandum No.’”985

2 “ “

J.
.,.
‘~fxdx, .
l?J
‘o
can be found by trial; ‘y is ex~ressed. i“n a’ formula

which satisfies among others the boundary conditions for

deflection at x = O and X=l as well as for the
tangent at x = t.

,For constant P and XJ it affords

o
The result is a very, close approximation; hence

rE

Vew
small values 60 are accompa. nieil by an appreci-
able deflection ~ if the denominator expression is li-ke-
mi.se very small. If the denominator becomes eq,ual to zero,
it affords an expression for the stability condition of
this problem, which is generally known.

It gives

Tension bending can also be very readily computed by this

metnod. with P indicating a tension, equation (2) reads:
 NACA Techni ca:l Memo randum No ~: 985 7

,,. .,“.
.

: [’ijiE(~:a]”=jo,”:
-’”- ~~ .
,,
p)

whether a column effect case .accor,dirig,to,’this ‘methodz.is.

easy or difficult to compute,
,. depefids upon the success with
the formula for ;“ The Fouri&r
, a“nalys’i’kcan “be used by
analyzing the expression for the deflection without the
effect of P according to I?ourier.

If the central moment of a beam loaded, as in case no.

3,is computed by this method, it affords first for the de-
fleet ion

5 g14 px/p
6m = -— -— — ---—
384 E J PE7P- 1
and for the moment

g La F’E/P + 0.0281
M max = ‘~- ‘-—--——-—1-—
FE/F -

which is in good agreement with Bleichl s result.

11. MODULUS OF BUCKLING UXIIEI?COLUMN EI?I?ECT!

Occasionally it happens that comparatively

short col-
umns must be analyzed for column effect where o = F
- is
F
higher than the break between !!etmayer~s straight line and
Euler?s hyperbola in the ok = f(A) diagram. In such
cases it has been found practical to replace E modulus
by the buckling modulus. (See the writer~s article
s Column Testings 11Luftfahrtforschung, vol. 1?, no. 10,
1940, pp. 306-313.) To retain the E-modulus in such a
case would afford much too great a safety relative to the
column load according to Euler!s hyperbola, while from
pure buckling tests it is known that the member can take
up only one load according to the Tetmayer straight line.
 ., .
I

8 NACA Technical Memorandum ‘No. 985”.

Under comparatively low longitudinal stresses g

~ the
E-modulus can be used even if certain parts of the section
due to combined bending and longitudinal stress assume
values within Tetmayer?s range. In such cases the effect
is the opposite to that of pure crippling of short col-
umns, that is, the bending factor becomes effective. The
bending factor takes into consideration the experience
with bending tests where it was found that the measured
~~Br was greater than computed according to the expres-
sion ~B ~, where is the material strength from
‘B
tensile tests.

Translation by J. Vanier,
lTational Advisory Committee
for Aeronautics.
 be+ Iec+ion u (P time VC31UC’) M.
Problem Cons+an+s
Tanya.+ -;$- (P. k ,, .1 )
graph Moments M.= —1?...l~~=~ A and B
iden+if iustion $$ (Pjv 1. ,s )
2. Derivo~iOn
{ SpeckIl Moments Member buckles under

Cc.mpr.zs>irm bendinq Tension bend img Compression bendksq COmpwx- TasLw

Rns;on bend;nq
S;*
~p.v=B ,,nv _ MOT
.“ p.y=~.~in~+filo~
M== MO.; +P. y P= Tcri~io. B=- Jfo B.—a:>
sm a
Pky’=Bc&sq— MO; P.ky’=Bfhf~+MO; Mm= B.sinp=-!&. sin P Mz=”MO:—p. y
.
Pks. y’’=— B.sinp Pk:y’’=+B. Ginp

Y“=*(*-’) Y“=+*t-*)
i
Y“=-$%-fi%) “,=-%%%’) a=lw

p.y=B. sinp —Q. x Bfz=Q. x+P. y

P.ky’=B. cos~—Q. k M== B.sinq=~.sinv
Pk:y’’=— Bsinp
@.gly

m
A=+gks
g lx —xy-g P
M==@. z-z’)+P. y
p.v=A.cosv+B”sin~-T( B=+gkzdg;
P_ —. . . . . . . -P M== Acos~+B-sinp —gk2
1 -1 1
Pky’=—
Pk2y’’=
Asinq+Bcosq
—Acosq—
——
gk

Bsinp+gks
2( 1—2x) Mm= = g kz
1 — 1 at cenfcr
Cos;
() lx = 18@

A=+gkz+M1
P.y=A. cosqj-Bsinp B = gk’+M, gkz+M,
M==@wz2)+M1+
(M3-MJ-; +P. y
g /.z —z:)— Ml—(M,—Ml) f—gk: --~;
sm a
—~-( Mz=A. cos~+B. sin~—gkz or
Pky’=— Asin~+Bcosp B = ‘S —si:acos a
Mm,= bei tang ~- = -~ = tang PO at po /nt xo=k. qo
——gk 1—24=( M , —M,) ;
Z( +gk’t g;-
Mm. =&—g
Pk*y’’= —Acosy —B. sin~+gkz ‘Z=gk’(+-’)+%i”
a 181Y

A=+gkz —M,,

%r-- P.y=A. cosq+B. sin~ B=-+gkztg~+$;

—~Z( l.z—a?)+itfz 1—; – gkz

()
k
P.k. y’=-Asin~+B .cosq-~k(i-2z)-M,. ~
Pkzy’’= —Acosp —B, sinq+gkg w
. ,. 1
..
A

I I Mm,x = ——
Cosq. gk2=gh ‘ (C05T0
— +-*
LK
= 257030”
 ——
Problem Tflec+vw (P +imc value)
dug M. Con”s+an+s
graph -rangent (P. k I ,, }
z Moments Ma=-E.J~ A and B
id.zn+ifical-!on 2. Derku+ion ‘v (Pk’ !, I. J
m { SpaCia{ Moments Iember buck(cs under
-s !
d=+@ F—ME ~
l==$(l. x-x’) -afE+P. y A+ cen+er

%* 4z=Acos~+ B.sinp —gks 11

MM=g Pb. ~.——

()
P~y’*— Asinp+Bcosp-g T&(l-2x)
‘E=gk’f-f+)=gk’l-:’:n”;:;
Find.: MB “’ P?hsy’’=—Acosq-B. sip~+&k:
l-coca 1 1$
(
48 *—5
m u ~ga
}(
=gla. -—_
a-ma 2) C%, =w g

M.=:(2. Z —&) —af*--(a.f*-afJ ;+P. y 4=+g’ks —M, i!!

iUm=A. cos~+B. sinp-g~3 B=+g’&tg;
from P.kyl’ and P.ky; F
the eauations fnr Ml and M, read _M*—dflcosa ~ I

‘q”%’w’w:it”z’”
— T.
(1-’2 $) + (M, —Ml). +
U“k”
~P’y’’=. -AcosB-shp+gk:k:
~’P-&)+M’(&-’)=g’(:”@i-:)-y’”~”’ sin a o
.
I

t!=> - v,: II’*=L- v’,

[n fttld t,: J,,; E. J,==lri
[nfield fs:J,;’@. J,=B~
[n central field:

‘-’V%
‘% 1 rvD=o
P-l? a=% ND=
O*n0miqa40r
d.t..m,nu. t

jll~ht curved member

‘P.j
P,y, =~ .sinh~+.4cosp.+B ,sinp M== P.u+P. y A= O;B=O
P ,——
- -<:>=F=- ‘L P 1
,, p.f. ~
fz21
Cuwa+qre cqua+!w
Pk.y’=~,.; .casx~— Asin~+B.cos’~ ‘“f
M== —.sinn~+A..cos ~+B~sinq
+–3 1—;
for F=41:u-f. slnz+
-, ppyll=_ p’. j P;+
PLI- Eule?lod==E.J $; —.sinn~—Acosq-B. sinp M max=— d cenfcr

1 1 ——
;’ 1—;
a.— E E a=lW
k

S I/qht curved member M.= P.ll+P. y

M== A.cosp+ B.sinp—2PkS. E
or
P.y=”Acos,~+B .ainq— P.~(lz-aP)-2Ptks

Cut-va4ure
filr P-o:
equation
Pky’=—
Pksy’’=.—c
A.sin~+B. cosp~P.
os@sl Tlsini~+2Pk
k$(l —2x)
PE’. E
M==2P~.
(
kz cosp+tg~sinp—1
)
-
u-?. (t. it-@) @bl- 4f
~
0
a = 1800
 Pmab Icm Deflcc+ion “’ 6P time value) 4+!. Cams+an+*
d“v
graph Tangent (P. k ,< ,, ) A and B
Nr. ~ Moments ?&= -EJ~
ide nti fic&on 2. ckrivu+k ~ (phi - “ ) P
{ Specie I Moment M*m ber buckles under
I e
as 9
I [A=+k’(g+2P. q *
p“y=A”cosv-1-B.sinv —4?-
~ (~=—~~
M.l=:(l. z–&)+P. E(2z–&)+P. y
–P. $(z; z-#) -P(g+2P. q
10 Pky’=— A.sinp+B. cosp M== A.cosq-f-B .sinp-~s(g+2P. @
~(+ Mrm. =F(g+2P. g). ~– 1 in ccn *CF
gk 2—22) —PE. k(l —2z)
—T(
Curvature equation Cos;
Pk?y’’=-A. cosq-B. sinp+k’(g+2P, ~) () E
‘or ‘=O; g.=o 4/
u=#(l..z—#)fnlt~=F
I a=lw B

--~
?,.-l

--------~
- -
P.y=A. cosp+B. : (la!-&)
sinp ——
A=+k’(g+2PF)-ME
B=k’(g+2Pt)tg+
?

11”

I
“m
P

Curvature
J ix

for P.90:
“equati;n
. c-O
.
—P. E(t. x—&)+Mz
P.ky’= —A. sinq+B.
()
gk (1—22) —PRH1-24-ME+
—T.
1—;
cos~
—H(g+2Pf)
MS=:(l.
iKe=A.

““!-T%)=
Z—&)+PS(ZZY&)—MX
cosq+B*sin
(gt’+2Pk.
p-P(g+2PF)
q.
1-;
()

L.. tg;-+
(. )
+p.. y
‘tga
M.
P
~
●

@
$%
u- E.(l. x—ti); t-: PP. y’’=— A.cwp-B.8hq+ks~ +2P. ~)

~
Find : .W.

I S;cjh+ curved merdret 1 A=+ P(g+2P.E)-ikfE

“s.’ ,,: B=[ka(g+2PF)—Ms]

m
+ Ms=#(lx-#) +PF(Iz-&)-Ms+P.y
Lx
P*y=A. cos P+ B.sinp--- : (t. z—a!q a+ center : xtg~
M*=~. cosq+B. sin~-lP(g+2PF)
r“ —---
M ‘J -1 -r —P. g(t. ?–&)+M.—w(g+2P.
Pky’=-A. sinq+B. cosq
F) Mx=F(g+2PE)

Curva+urc
~1~
fdr P-
x
equai
O; g-O
ion

PPy’’=—A.
‘k
—F( l—2z)—

cosp-B.sinp+P
Pk&(l —2z)

(g+2Pl)
“=F(g+2p’)”(%)or
=
‘(=F’)
U= WAX--*);+
Find : MS
M.
(
-——
s; a ~a ) (gl’+2PtP)
(+.tg;–+
) a=38tF’

M== Q+L+M,
()1 —+ +M++P” Y;
‘P.y=A1.cosp+B1 .sinp-Q~.
()
x-M1 l-~ -M,?
M.= Q;u+W;+M (1 --+)+P.V
pkY8=-A,. sinq+B1. cosp-Q~. k+ Mi~-Mt~
M== A1. cos~+B,. sin~; iUw-=Ar. c&~{ B2. sin Q
Pk*y’’=-A1. cosq-B,. sinp with Q the morncm+ is :
13
P.v =A,,cosy+B,.siny-Q ~.u-M1~-M8
()
l-~
.,
Pku’=-A,.siny+B,. cwy-Q~. k-M, ~+Ms~

pk%’’=-A,. cosy— B%.siny

I f%= 18@
 Constants

32=’+,0.
12eflec+i0k V

.,-i-+’=f:;”a~~, {~ci’’lMi;s
~~ Tangent Nfoments W. — E. J — A and B

Ma ber buckIcs under

() P.Y =A1. cosq+B1. sinp-Q$. a+M, l—~

Pky’= —A1. sin~+B1. cosy —Q~”k—Ml~

B,= Q.k E~,—~
W= Q;X-JA 1—; +P” Y; JfU=Q;-U-~I; +P’V
Pk:y’’= —A; .cosq —B1.%inq ()
MZ=A1. cosq+B1. sin~ M“=A*. cosp+Bs.8iny

M&fj=Qz(& -+) “ ,

-.+..+.
P-
~
~
8-%

L@? z
b
1
d
+

u
M=.==Q; x-M1 ()
l—f

Mu= Q:. u-MIf

—Mi~+P. y

—jif*.l”_;
()
+p.1)
Ax= —Ml; A,=—
Bl=Q. k~

+lj%--
M,
sm a
Ms

y- nnd v- some as under 13. M== A1. cosq?+B1. sinq Ms.=Aa.@Jv+&.sinV sin ~
15 V=+: Y=+; but Ml and M, of opws;te siqns. B;= Q.k~
M’o-&)+”’(*-l)=Q’’z(%-+) ‘1)
c=+; q=+ -2++
M1(#a-l)+M,(l-&) =QZ(#-~) (i)
sin ~. sin v ‘sii t
ii4~=Q.k —M#&—M*-
sin a sm a
a=3tMP
I Find: M, nd M, ]

A,= —M,; A,=—M,

B1=Q. k~
H, Mz

+_?&__ M,
sin a
B,= Q.k%&
Find : Ifl .?d M.; y- und v- same as undc-r13.
16 p only for field N{ –2+%
but Ml ~n”d Ml of opposife s;g ~s.
y’1: Y’(m-o); V’s”=u’(w)
In field Z1:J1
In L, 2*:JS
In Cen+ral fieid

ND= :=namin=+or
ND = d.+..rnima rwr
— —.
Da?}rc+ion P (P timti value) M.
Problcrn
M. qraph Moments M,- –E. J $:
~dant~ficd+ien { Sp&l Moments

17
Moments for P=O g
g

il
kna10gou5 with cohmm #cc+,
“r
sin ~. sin (aa+ as + W)
‘1 ‘Q’” k sin (%+~+~+at)
+Q,,k $inq. sin (q+-+Q; ,k sinm”sina~
Sina 8in a
~,= Q1, ksinq”sin(~+a4)
th a
+Q,. ksin(~+~). sin(q+a J+ Q~.ksim(al+ a4)”sina4
sin a 6in a
18 sin al, sina4
M,=Q,. k
sin’s
+Q,.kSin ‘aij$ ‘in ~’+Q,.k ‘in ‘“’+$ ”%)‘in@f

M,= XRs-f-P. y M“,=Lul.+P. v

[n 81$
 ‘#
ii
Def[ec+’ion (P “time valu~).

NI
.$u&ents
& ($.,k. ,, ,. ) I M.

‘oments ‘= -– E “J =
@u

I Sp=i.1 Momen&

P~.y=A.aos~+B, sinq-Q.n+P. x~y<.

P.k. y’.y-AWp+Bc osq”-Q”k+P. k,y/ M@ =i14,.+Q. (i+P.d
P. P:#=-Acosq-Bsinq
2 df@=~-I-Q”k”tgt+ P”ayi’
Intermetiiata values in ronqe @—@
te be treated as under Nr. i.
—

Left sidc~ rarqe * Riqnt side: ranqa D&

P. y=ix. sinq-,$. x P.v=B,. siny—~”u

2 M.= B1-sinp M4=B,. sin~
Pky’-- Blcosg–$”. k P.kv’= B,cos~–~”k The momerit a-t S is:
-cm q. sin c cm ~.. sin q
P~y’’~.-Blainp” pk*. V”= B, Sin ~ M,=M M,=
sin. a sin a

a= 18(P
NACA Technical Memorandum No. 985

I?i<,ure
1,- Bean on two supports under longitudinal load
P and traiisverseforces g.

Figure 2.- Beam on two supports uznderload P and

concentrated,loads Q1 - Q5,

Q
i
p— -—~ Problem
r
#’__~..,_______ “ Actual load case (i)
~~y.l..y [
~ ..
!.- r
E Comparative load case (k.)
Jlii
p-x-+ ~
w-’-------l
—----+

Figure 3.- Built-in beam under load P and Q.

 I
.

~‘illllll!lll!llnmll[
31176
fllllllllllllllll
Ol&10
“’”’’:”””’””’=”’
7283
“’””-”’”:’”
‘“ ,
7“;;”
,,
—. ...—. — I

,.