This research quantifies the seismic vulnerability of older reinforced concrete frame structures located in Mid-America. After designing a representative three-story gravity load designed reinforced concrete frame structure, a nonlinear analytical representation was used evaluate inter-story drift demands from simulated earthquake time histories that were representative for the region. Limit state story drift capacities were identified for FEMA 273 guidelines, nonlinear pushover analyses, and incremental dynamic analyses. Integrating these two quantities allowed for the creation of fragility curves which relates the probability of exceeding a particular limit state given an imposed spectral acceleration at the fundamental building period. These curves were then used to evaluate the seismic vulnerability of the representatively designed structure. The structure as originally designed was found to be inadequate to resist large lateral loading that would be typical for the Memphis area. So structural retrofit performed by increasing the column-to-beam strength ratio was evaluated by increasing the strength of the column members in the analytical model. The first retrofit raised the column-to-beam strength ratio to 1.2, which is currently required by the ACI code provisions. The second retrofit raised the column-to-beam strength ratio to 1.8, as suggested in previous studies. The story capacity, demand, and fragility curves were once again created for these retrofitted structures. Comparison of these fragility curves is discussed in relation to the retrofit strategy of column strengthening for older reinforced concrete frame structures in Mid-America.

This research quantifies the seismic vulnerability of older reinforced concrete frame structures located in Mid-America. After designing a representative three-story gravity load designed reinforced concrete frame structure, a nonlinear analytical representation was used evaluate inter-story drift demands from simulated earthquake time histories that were representative for the region. Limit state story drift capacities were identified for FEMA 273 guidelines, nonlinear pushover analyses, and incremental dynamic analyses. Integrating these two quantities allowed for the creation of fragility curves which relates the probability of exceeding a particular limit state given an imposed spectral acceleration at the fundamental building period. These curves were then used to evaluate the seismic vulnerability of the representatively designed structure. The structure as originally designed was found to be inadequate to resist large lateral loading that would be typical for the Memphis area. So structural retrofit performed by increasing the column-to-beam strength ratio was evaluated by increasing the strength of the column members in the analytical model. The first retrofit raised the column-to-beam strength ratio to 1.2, which is currently required by the ACI code provisions. The second retrofit raised the column-to-beam strength ratio to 1.8, as suggested in previous studies. The story capacity, demand, and fragility curves were once again created for these retrofitted structures. Comparison of these fragility curves is discussed in relation to the retrofit strategy of column strengthening for older reinforced concrete frame structures in Mid-America.

Master of Agribusiness / Department of Agricultural Economics / Allen M. Featherstone / Farm Credit Mid-America is experiencing strong growth due to the success of the farming sector in our four state territory of Tennessee, Kentucky, Indiana, and Ohio. The company is well positioned to meet the financial demands of its customers and they have an aggressive growth plan to increase total assets from $18 billion to $25 billion in five years. They also plan to add 600 new employees in that time period. Determining the appropriate level of capital to sustain growth and meet the demands of its customers will be a primary objective of the organization over the next five years. Permanent capital is viewed as a percentage of total assets at Farm Credit Mid-America with the ideal amount between 14% and 16%. A detailed analysis of the current capital level, regulatory requirements, and the projected future financial position of the company was completed to: · Define and understand capital as it applies to Farm Credit Mid-America; · Research the current capital levels for Farm Credit Mid-America; · Compare capital levels of Farm Credit Mid-America to capital levels of other Farm Credit Associations and other banks; · Understand Basel III Accords and how it applies to Farm Credit Mid-America’s capital requirements; · Complete sensitivity analysis with multiple scenarios applied to the current Farm Credit Mid-America loan portfolio to determine the effect certain events may have on capital levels; · Determine if Farm Credit Mid-America is appropriately capitalized based on the other objectives. When looking at the results, it is determined that current capital levels are in line with other Farm Credit associations and competitors. Also, Farm Credit Mid-America has met the Basel III guidelines for minimum capital requirements. The sensitivity analysis included a wide range of scenarios from normal growth rates to extreme loan portfolio distress and the effects those scenarios would have on permanent capital. The permanent capital ratio exceeded the minimum standard of 12% on all sensitivity analysis scenarios. Therefore, based on the objectives of this thesis Farm Credit Mid-America appears to be adequately capitalized.

The problem of this study was the need for a systematic development of curriculum for Coordinated Vocational Academic Education (C.V.A.E.) Office Duplication Practice. Sources of data included recent research and information provided by the Texas Education Agency. The study is divided into five parts, including an introduction; background information; an overview of the Mid-America Vocational Curriculum Consortium and the Occupational Curriculum Development Laboratory; and a summary of findings, conclusions, and recommendations. Findings are that there are opposing forces in curriculum development. The study concludes that progress is being made in curriculum development, and recommends that the individual learner be the focal point of all curriculum development efforts.