text:
You are here: Home /
Topics /
Crops /
Vegetables & Pulses /
Stay Connected
Note: This topic page may contain material that has not yet been updated to reflect the new Farm Act, signed into law on February 7. ERS has published highlights and some implications of the Act's new programs and provisions. Sign up for the ERS Farm Bill e-newsletter to receive notices of topic page updates and other new Farm Bill-related materials on the ERS website.
Marketing Orders Research and Promotion Crop Insurance and Disaster Assistance Trade Promotion Programs
Vegetables and pulses are rarely part of mainstream farm policy debates because they grow on limited acreage and receive relatively small Federal budget outlays. Historically, Federal price and income support programs have not directly covered vegetables, with most outlays stemming from a variety of general, noncrop-specific programs.
However, dry peas, lentils, and small chickpeas became program crops in the 2002 Farm Act. In addition, the Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008 (2008 Farm Act) includes large chickpeas (garbanzo beans) in some commodity programs. For the 2009-12 crops, producers of garbanzo beans will be eligible to receive marketing assistance loans and loan deficiency payments, as well as benefits from counter-cyclical payments (CCPs) or the Average Crop Revenue Election (ACRE) program.
Loan rates for garbanzo beans (large chickpeas) are set at $11.28 per hundredweight (cwt) for crop years 2009-12, with target prices (used to calculate counter-cyclical payments; there are no direct payments (DPs) for pulse crops) set at $12.81 per cwt during the same period.
With the exceptions noted above, Federal price support programs have not included dry beans since the late 1960s. The 2008 Farm Act retains the longstanding provision on planting restrictions for dry beans (excluding mung beans and, beginning in crop year 2009, garbanzo beans/large chickpeas) on base acres. Planting dry beans (excluding mung beans and garbanzo beans/large chickpeas) on base acres is prohibited unless the producer or farm has a history of planting dry beans, but payments are reduced acre-for-acre on such plantings. Double cropping of dry beans is permitted without loss of payments if the region has a history of such double cropping.
The Food, Conservation and Energy Act of 2008 was a groundbreaking farm act for the U.S. fruit and vegetable industry. Over the life of the current Farm Act (fiscal years 2008-13), approximately $3 billion is dedicated to issues of importance to the industry. Fiscal years (FY) run from October 1 through September 30 of the designated year. These include programs covering nutrition, crop research, pest/disease programs, trade assistance, and conservation programs. In general, the legislation will help strengthen industry competitiveness in domestic and world markets.
Vegetable and dry bean markets are also influenced by a number of general programs, including the following:
Marketing orders and marketing agreements are designed to help stabilize market conditions for fruit and vegetable products. The programs assist farmers by allowing them to work collectively to solve marketing problems. Industries voluntarily enter into these programs and choose to have Federal oversight of certain aspects of their operations.
For example, the only Federal marketing order in force for tomatoes covers the majority of fresh-market tomatoes produced in Florida between October and June. This order authorizes the handling of Florida fresh-market tomatoes by grade, size, quality, maturity, pack, and container. Grade, size, quality, and maturity requirements established under the order also are applied to tomatoes imported between October 10 and June 15 (under so-called 8e requirements), but the container and pack requirements are not. The order also provides authority for production research, marketing research and development, and marketing promotion, including paid advertising. Visit USDA's Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS) website for more information about fruit, vegetable, and other specialty crop marketing orders.
Federally sanctioned research and promotion programs allow industry-funded joint promotion and research of a commodity by growers/shippers. Programs are currently in place for potatoes and mushrooms. Research and promotion programs are intended to expand, maintain, and develop markets for individual agricultural commodities in the United States and abroad. The Secretary of Agriculture appoints national boards to carry out these programs. Membership may include producers, handlers, importers, and processors (depending on which industry members pay assessments to fund the programs), as well as public citizens. The boards conduct promotion, market and production research, and new product development under the supervision of AMS. For more information, visit the AMS web pages for the potato, watermelon, and mushroom program areas.
USDA's Risk Management Agency administers crop insurance policies for many crops, including an increasing number of vegetables and pulses, many of which have been created since the late 1990s. Policies, which can vary by State, may cover a single commodity, regardless of its end use, or provide separate coverage for fresh and processing markets.
Federal crop insurance is purchased before the growing season and provides an indemnity payment if the farmer's actual yield falls below a predetermined guarantee. Private insurance companies sell and service the policies. Although crop insurance is not free to growers, the government subsidizes a significant portion of the insurance premium.
Vegetable growers who do not purchase crop insurance or do not have established Federal crop insurance programs for their crops are eligible for Federal financial assistance under the Noninsured Crop Disaster Assistance Program (NAP), administered by USDA's Farm Service Agency. The program provides payments to qualified growers who lose at least 50 percent of their crops or are unable to plant more than 35 percent of their acreage because of a natural disaster. Payments are made on the loss exceeding 50 percent of expected production, based on producers' yield and production records. The amount disbursed to vegetable growers under NAP varies, depending on natural disasters (if any) affecting crops in a given year. Because many commodities in the vegetable and melon industry are still not part of the Federal crop insurance program, growers of such commodities rely on NAP.
In addition, vegetable producers are frequently eligible for financial assistance during years of extensive crop loss. Producers of insured crops (covered by a crop insurance plan or NAP) may be eligible for the Supplemental Agricultural Disaster Assistance and for ad hoc disaster aid.
Producers eligible for disaster assistance programs are can also apply for the Disaster Debt Set-Aside Program, whereby they may be allowed to set aside a portion of their Federal debt to maintain their farming operations. (For more information, see Ongoing Disaster Assistance Programs for Agricultural Producers.) Growers are also eligible for emergency loans and the Emergency Conservation Program.
The Market Access Program (MAP), administered by USDA's Foreign Agricultural Service, provides matching grants to commodity marketing boards and cooperatives to help expand markets overseas for U.S. agricultural products. Regional trade promotion organizations may also be grant recipients. The industry will also likely benefit from allocations to State Departments of Agriculture and other industry or trade organizations.
The Foreign Market Development Program, also administered by USDA's Foreign Agricultural Service, works with nonprofit U.S. agricultural trade organizations to develop, maintain, and expand long-term export markets for U.S. agricultural products. Program activities focus on reducing market impediments, improving the processing capabilities of importers, modifying restrictive regulatory codes and standards in foreign markets, and identifying new markets or uses for U.S. products. Of the $34.5 million program total in FY 2008, about $321,000 went to the vegetable sector (the U.S. Dry Bean Council and the USA Dry Pea and Lentil Council).
The Specialty Crop Competitiveness Act of 2004 became law in December 2004, but was subject to appropriation of funds each year, which were minimal. The major focus of this legislation was to provide block grants through the various State departments of agriculture for planning and conducting research programs of importance to local producers and consumers of specialty crops. The 2008 Farm Act reauthorizes and extends this Specialty Crop Block Grant Program through FY 2012. (The 2004 law ran through FY 2009.) It also provides funding through the Commodity Credit Corporation (CCC) in the amounts of $10 million in FY 2008; $49 million in FY 2009; and $55 million per year during FYs 2010-12. Each State is to receive $100,000 or one-third of 1 percent of total funding for each fiscal year, whichever is higher.
The Technical Assistance for Specialty Crops (TASC) Program (introduced in the 2002 Farm Security and Rural Investment Act, or 2002 Farm Act) is designed to open, retain, and expand markets for U.S. specialty crops. It helps U.S. exporters address phytosanitary or other technical barriers that prohibit or threaten exports of U.S. specialty crops. Eligible crops include all cultivated plants and their U.S. products--except wheat, feed grains, oilseeds, cotton, rice, peanuts, sugar, and tobacco. The 2008 Farm Act funds the TASC program (through the CCC) in the amounts of $4 million in FY 2008, $7 million in FY 2009, $8 million in FY 2010, and $9 million for each of FYs 2011 and 2012.
For More Information...
Last updated: Tuesday, March 11, 2014
For more information contact: Hodan Farah Wells and Suzanne Thornsbury


text:
A photopolymerisable system is disclosed which can be polymerised by exposure to UV light, for example, to form a solid, light-transmitting sheet material having volume refractive index variations defining an optical diffuser or a hologram, for example. The system includes a silicone monomer, prepolymer, macromonomer or co-monomer capable of undergoing free radical initiated polymerization and further includes a photoinitiator.
1. A solid, light-transmitting diffuser having volume refractive index variations or surface relief features that are produced by the exposure of a free radical photopolymerizable system to non-coherent, substantially collimated polymerizing electromagnetic radiation, wherein the system includes a monomer, prepolymer, macromonomer or co-monomer comprising silicone groups wherein the silicone monomer, macromonomer, co-monomer or prepolymer comprises silicone acrylate, acrylate terminated poly(dimethylsiloxane), multifunctional silicone acrylate or silicone acrylamide.
2. The diffuser of
3. The diffuser of
4. The diffuser according to
5. The diffuser according to
6. The diffuser according to
7. The diffuser according to
8. The diffuser according to
9. The diffuser according to
10. The diffuser according to
11. The diffuser according to
12. The diffuser according to
13. The diffuser according to
14. The diffuser according to
15. The diffuser according to
16. The diffuser according to
17. The diffuser according to
a) Methyl benzoyl formate
b) 1-Hydroxycyclohexyl phenylketone
c) 2-Hydroxy-2-methyl-1-phenyl-1-propanone
d) Diphenyl(2,4,6-trimethylbenzoyl)phosphine oxide
e) 2,4-Diethylthioxanthone plus suitable amine synergist and mixtures of two or more of the above.
18. The diffuser according to
19. The diffuser according to
20. The diffuser according to
21. The diffuser of
22. The diffuser of
23. The diffuser of
24. The diffuser of
This application contains subject matter which is disclosed in co-pending application PCT/GB01/04973, filed in the United States concurrently herewith.
1. Field of the Invention
THIS INVENTION relates to optical recording materials and to methods of forming optical devices such as diffusers and holograms from such materials. The present specification discloses, inter alia, various systems or mixtures of components which can be provided in the form of an extended layer and which are of such a character that when such an extended layer of such system or mixture is exposed to light or other appropriate radiation, at least some components of the system undergo polymerisation in the areas so exposed, whereby an end product is obtainable, (after any necessary processing steps), which comprises a solid, transparent, or at least light-transmitting sheet or layer characterised by refractive index variations and/or characterised by variations in layer thickness, i.e. by surface relief features. Such systems are useful, for example as holographic recording materials, or in the production of microlens arrays, or of light-diffusing or de-pixelating screens.
2. Description of Related Art
Typically, known systems for the purpose referred to comprise a monomer or monomers capable of undergoing free-radical-initiated polymerisation, a photo-initiator capable of generating free radicals on exposure to radiation of the required wavelengths and a polymeric matrix or binder. Examples of such known systems or mixtures are disclosed in for example U.S. Pat. Nos. 5,470,662 4,963,471, 4,942,112, 3,658,526.
It is among the objects of the present invention to provide an improved photopolymerisable system or mixture.
According to one aspect of the invention there is provided a photopolymerisable system capable of polymerisation to form a solid, light-transmitting material having volume refractive index variations and/or surface relief features dependent on the exposure of the system to polymerising radiation, wherein the system includes a silicone acrylic compound or compounds.
According to another aspect of the invention there is provided a system capable of being modified by electromagnetic radiation to provide a transparent or substantially transparent material having volume refractive index variations, or surface contour features, determined by exposure of the system to such radiation, the system comprising:—
The system may additionally include a compatible polymer, e.g. polymers or copolymers with similar groups to the silicone prepolymer. Compatible polymers which may be used include PVA, polysiloxane polymers or acrylic type polymers such as PMMA.
It is another object of the invention to provide an improved light-modifying structure using a system or mixture in accordance with the above noted aspect as a starting material.
According to this aspect of the invention, there is provided a diffuser, hologram or other light-modifying structure formed by polymerisation of a system in accordance with the previously noted aspects of the invention.
It is also among the objects of the present invention to provide a light-diffusing material by exposure of a photopolymerisable system or mixture to polymerising radiation without requiring an optical mask or screen.
According to another aspect of the invention there is provided a method of making a light-diffusing material comprising providing a photopolymerizable system capable of polymerization to form a solid, light-transmitting material having volume refractive index variations and/or surface relief features dependent on the exposure of the system to polymerizing radiation, and which method comprises exposing a layer provided by said system to polymerizing radiation through an optical aperture screen to polymerize the material and subsequently polymerizing any of the material still unpolymerized.
According to yet another aspect of the invention there is provided a method of making a light-diffusing material comprising providing a photopolymerisable system capable of polymerisation to form a solid, light-transmitting material having volume refractive index variations and/or surface relief features dependent on the exposure of the system to polymerising radiation, and which method comprises exposing a layer provided by said system to polymerising radiation without any intervening mask and without other means of producing small scale variation of light intensity with position in the layer.
Preferably said system includes a silicone acrylate or similar compound or compounds.
The polymerising radiation is preferably parallel (collimated) or substantially parallel radiation.
According to still another aspect of the invention, there is provided a diffuser formed by the above method.
In preferred embodiments of the invention, the system comprises:
Examples of component (b) which may be used include:
Acrylate/Methacrylate Groups
Urethane methacrylates such as supplied under the Trade name "Genomer 4302", or any of the ethylenically unsaturated monomers capable of free radical initiated addition polymerisation identified as such in any of U.S. Pat. Nos. 5,470,662; 4,963,471; 4,942,112; or 3,658,526. In particular, it may be beneficial to use polyester or polyether acrylates, which may impart flexibility to the polymerised material.
Vinyl Groups
The system may additionally include a compatible polymer, e.g. polymers or copolymers with similar groups to the silicone prepolymer. Compatible polymers or binders which may be used include PVA, polysiloxane polymers or acrylic-type polymers such as PMMA. Thus the formulation may include:
In practice, there may be added to the formulations of the above system (i.e. silicone acrylate and monomer blends; silicone acrylate or silicone methacrylate alone; silicone/acrylate monomer blends), various other components such as flexibilisers, binders, other monomers, stabilisers, defoamers, antioxidants, photoinitiators and amine synergists.
Examples of materials in these classes which may be used are set out below:
The addition of such flexibilisers was found to be beneficial, allowing the production of good diffuser films with good to adequate flexibility.
Other monomers (vinyl, acrylate groups)
Actilane 800 is a silicone difunctional acrylate product from Akros Chemicals Ltd., Manchester; Daracure 1173 is 2-hydroxy-2-methyl-1-phenyl-1-propanone; NVP is N-vinyl pyrrolidinone; PVA is poly(vinyl acetate) MW 12,800; TMPTA is trimethylolpropane triacrylate; POEA is 2-phenoxyethyl acrylate; Rahn 99-662 is a silicon acrylate, a product from RAHN AG, Switzerland.
The Actilane 800 and Rahn 99-622 materials referred to are examples of materials referred to generally as silicone acrylates, and are also known as acrylate terminated poly (dimethylsiloxanes) (PDMS). Silicone acrylates useful in the context of the invention may also include aliphatic, phenyl, other aromatic or cyclic groups, or vinyl groups in addition to or as an alternative to methyl groups.
In variants of the invention, other silicone copolymers such as silicone methylacrylates or silicone acrylamide and silicone epoxy pre-polymers may be used instead of the silicone acrylate prepolymers referred to herein.
In the accompanying drawing:
In some embodiments of the invention described in the following, a light-diffusing screen, for use as a rear projection screen or a depixelating screen, is made by a technique similar to that disclosed in European Patent No. 0294122 or European Patent No. 0530269, and in which technique, a layer of photopolymerisable material is applied to an optical mask featuring a plurality of light-transmitting apertures or windows in an opaque background or a plurality of opaque spots or patches in a light-transmitting background, these apertures or patches being on a microscopic scale (typically about 2 microns, and up to about 10 microns maximum dimension). In what follows, some examples are given of the manufacture of optical diffusers using masks substantially of the kind disclosed in EP-0801767. In these examples, the mask took the form of a photographic negative or transparency in the conventional form of a glass plate bearing on one side a gelatine layer incorporating opaque silver grains. In the examples of this character given below, the photopolymerisable mixture or system was coated directly onto the gelatine side of the prepared mask. In other examples below optical diffusers are manufactured by a process which is similar but in which no mask is used, the photopolymerisable mixture or system being coated directly onto a plain, transparent sheet or film.
In the examples in which masks were used, they were prepared by being cleaned in acetone or chloroform or a 5% solution of "Decon Neutracon" in acetone or a 5% solution of "Decon Neutracon" in distilled water. After such cleaning, the mask was dried, then a 1% solution of Glassclad 18 (a proprietary release agent) in distilled water was applied for 10 to 20 seconds to the gelatins side of the mask, whereafter the mask was air-dried for 24 hours. In the examples in which no mask was used, a plain glass plate or tile was used instead of a developed photographic plate, the plain glass plate being prepared by cleaning in acetone.
In the "screen printing technique", in each case a template (i.e. a border or "frame" of plastics film defininig a central aperture to receive the polymerisable material) was placed on the glass tile or optical mask. Having stirred the polymerisable formulation, a sufficient quantity was placed in the well, defined by said aperture, taking care to avoid bubbles as far as possible. A piece of Mylar (R.T.M.) (polyester) with a release coating was placed over the top, taking care to place the side with the release coating facing the quantity of the formulation and a roller was passed over the top of the assembly to allow the formulation to spread out evenly filling the well within the template.
The tile or mask with the Mylar side down was placed in an ultra-violet light exposure apparatus under a source of ultra-violet light for a standard period, (e.g. two minutes). Thus, where an optical mask of the kind referred to was used, the photopolymerizable material was first exposed through the mask (a "contact printing" technique). The tile or plate was then turned over and similarly exposed for a further period to provide a "blanket" exposure. The film was then carefully separated from the glass or mask, Mylar and template, for optical testing and evaluation. As the polymerization of the systems in accordance with the invention is in general inhibited by contact with oxygen, it is necessary to exclude oxygen, either by providing a covering layer of impermeable material such as plastic film or by a blanket of inert gas, during exposure, Because the formulations exemplified are liquid until polymerized, it is normally appropriate to provide, between the glass plate and the superimposed film, a spacer or template in the form of a frame bounding the region occupied by the polymerizable system, such spacer of frame being, for example, of plastic film of the appropriate thickness.
In the examples in which a mask was used, the optical density of the mask was typically 1.6. Optical density is defined in accordance with the following equation:
Where transmittance is the proportion of the light striking the mask which is allowed to pass through it and OD is the optical density. An optical density of 1.6 allows about 3% of the light to pass through.
Table 1 below sets out, for each of a plurality of trials, the respective formulation in accordance with the invention, (the components of each formulation or system being set out under the heading "Formulation"), the portions of the respective components, (these being set out in the column headed "Parts" in the same sequence as set out in the column "Formulation"), the optical density of each mask being set out in the column headed "Mask" and the characteristics of the resulting diffuser being summarised in the column headed "Comments". In the first column of the Table 1 the characters in the brackets in the first column are codes identifying the particular system of formulation concerned. These codes are used to identify the respective formulations in the discussion below.
In the "Comments" section in Table 1, the indications "SURFACE RELIEF" and "VOLUME EFFECT" indicate respectively that the light-diffusive effect appeared to be entirely or almost entirely due to surface relief produced in accordance with the mask pattern, and that at least a significant part of the light-diffusing effect appeared to be due to refractive index variations within the bulk of the photopolymer layer. Whether the light-diffusing effect was due to surface relief or to refractive index variations in the volume of the photopolymer layer was assessed by application of an index matching fluid such as propan-2-ol to the free surface of the photopolymer. If such application of propan-2-ol removed the light-diffusive effect the diffusion was considered to be due to surface relief, whereas if it did not, the diffusion was considered to be due to refractive index variations in the volume of the material.
The photopolymerisation of some of the systems in accordance with the present invention is believed to be somewhat complex, in that it is believed that significant copolymerisation with the monomeric components (such as the NVP, POEA or TMPTA, etc. (also illustrated in FIG. 11)), takes place and quite possibly a degree of crosslinking between the monomers (TMPTA, etc.,) and the silicone acrylate and even between these and the PVA (where present).
It is hypothesised that, during exposure of a system in accordance with the invention to UV, through an optical mask, as described, the mechanism involved is as follows:
Initially, during the exposure, photopolymerisation of the silicone acrylate and monomer commences in the immediate area exposed to ultra-violet light, followed by migration, by diffusion, of monomer and silicone prepolymer from the unexposed regions into the exposed regions, accompanied by further polymerisation, including co-polymerisation, and even a degree of cross-linking, in the exposed regions, leaving a deficit of prepolymer and monomer in the unexposed areas.
The PVA incorporated in some of the formulations indicated is added in order to increase the viscosity of the system, to assist in handling and processing of the coated masks, and to improve the mechanical properties of the end product, by improving flexibility etc., the PVA being effectively dissolved in the monomer and polymer. It is believed however, that during the UV curing described, some (beneficial) chemistry involving the PVA may also take place, including bonding or cross-linking with the monomer and/or with the functional groups of the silicone acrylate. The alternatives to PVA noted herein by way of further compatible polymers likewise serve to increase viscosity of the uncured system and to improve flexibility in the end product.
As noted in Table 1, Formulation MCL 63 (Actilane 800 with NVP) forms a diffuser that exhibits surface relief. The addition of PVA, as in Formulation MCL 65, does not change this result. The use of a cross-linker such as TMPTA with the Actilane 800 as in Formulation MCL 70 forms a diffuser that exhibits volume graded refractive index effects, i.e. a diffuser in which within the photopolymer material, the refractive index varies from position to position. The addition of PVA as in Formulation MCL 73 does not change this result. This particular formulation (MCL 73) formed a very hard film. The mixture was very viscous before being UV-cured. The addition of POEA to the Actilane 800 Formulation MCL 71 led to a diffuser which exhibited graded refractive index volume effects POEA is an aromatic acrylate also known as ethylene glycol phenyl ether acrylate and has a reasonably high refractive index (RI) of 1.5180. Acrilane 800 has a RI 1.4590. Formulations MCL 70 and MCL 71 in the Table had favourable light-diffusing characteristics. A favourable formulation is MCL 77 in Table 1.
As regards the other formulations in Table 1, Rahn 99-622 forms with TMPTA (MCL 76), POEA (MCL 77) or NVP (MCL 78) a diffuser that exhibits bulk-refractive index variation effects. Variant systems may include PVA and a compatible organic solvent. A further option would be to use poly(vinyl formal) or poly(vinyl butyral) (PVB) to improve refractive index modulation. The combination of Rahn 99-622 with NVP and TMPTA (MCL 82) forms a diffuser that relies mainly on surface relief. However, with NVP and POEA (MCL 83) a diffuser is produced which exhibits volume refractive index variations. The combination of Rahn 99-622, TMPTA and PVA (MCL 85) formed a surface relief diffuser that did not stick to the gelatine. It would be interesting to examine the addition of NVP and POEA to formulation MCL 85.
Whilst in the examples noted above, the photopolymerisable system or formulation was coated directly onto the gelatine surface of a photographic negative or transparency, it should be understood that in many cases, for example, where a holographic recording material is to be supplied to end users, the recording material may comprise a product in the form of the photopolymerisable system or formulation in accordance with the invention sandwiched between a relatively inert and ideally transparent sheet, for example, sandwiched between two sheets of Mylar (polyester) film. Such a product may be made, for example, by modifying a formulation such as indicated by MCL 73 or MCL 85 in Table 1, by increasing the proportion of PVA and including a compatible solvent for the PVA (such as MEK), to provide a formulation of a viscosity low enough to allow it to be readily applied as a coating, and coating the fluid system onto one Mylar film in a coating apparatus, known per se, for applying a coating of uniform thickness, the second Mylar film subsequently being applied to the exposed surface of the photopolymerisable layer.
Table 2 below sets out refractive indices of the components of the formulations to which Table 1 relates.
Referring to
Table 3 below sets out Angle of View data for diffusers manufactured as described above using the formulations and masks indicated in Table 1.
The above angle-of-view measurements were made using an Eldim "Conoscope" type EZ160R, whereas the measurements indicated in
Note: Sample MCL 83 was too small to measure accurately.
The Actilane 800 material and the Rahn 99-622 material referred to above, (and the Rahn 00-225 material referred to below), are prepolymers or macromonomers comprising molecules of significant molecular weight comprising a plurality of acrylic and siloxane groups, the molecules typically comprising an inorganic silicone backbone with pendant methyl groups. These materials, in the presence of free radicals, are able to undergo still further polymerisation. More particularly, these materials may comprise solutions of said prepolymers or macromonomers in further compatible monomers. The NVP, TMPTA and POEA referred to are ethylenically unsaturated monomers capable of polymerisation in the presence of free radicals. The Daracure 1173 (2-hydroxy-2-methyl-1-phenyl-1-propanone) is a photoinitiator capable of generating free radicals when exposed to UV light, to bring about polymerisation of the silicone acrylate materials and the ethylenically unsaturated monomers.
It may also be appropriate to incorporate an oxygen inhibitor or anti-oxidant in the formulation to improve shelf life and/or to minimise interference by atmospheric oxygen in the polymerisation of the material whilst it is exposed to atmosphere during exposure to UV light.
Whilst in the examples described above, the photopolymerisable material was exposed through an optical mask to produce the desired light diffusing sheets; the applicants have found that in certain conditions, at least some of the formulations noted, such as MCL 76 and MCL 77, will form a light diffusing layer when exposed to UV light even in the absence of an optical aperture mask of the kind described, eg. if the method described above is carried out except that the photopolymerisable material is coated directly onto a plain transparent glass plate instead of onto a photographic mask plate of the kind referred to.
Thus Tables 4, 5 and 6 below provide angle of view results for a number of different photopolymerisable mixtures or systems of various formulations and for two cases, namely (a) for exposure to collimated ultraviolet light through an aperture mask or screen, in the manner described with reference to Tables 1 to 3 above and (b) for exposure directly to collimated ultraviolet light distributed substantially uniformly over the plate or sample concerned, without any intervening photo mask, i.e. with the photopolymerisable material coated directly onto a plain transparent plate of glass or other transparent support. In each of the cases illustrated in Tables 4, 5 and 6, the ultraviolet light was directed normal to, i.e. perpendicular to, the plane of the glass plate or other transparent support. In cases (b), as indicated, the exposure time comprised two substantially equal periods of exposure, one from the glass side of the photopolymerisable layer/glass plate combination and one from the opposite side of said combination. For the cases (a) the exposure was selected in accordance with the density of the optical mask to achieve the optimum angle of view and the technique was in general as described above in relation to Tables 1 to 3.
In Tables 4 and 5, the numbers in the first horizontal row are identification numbers for the formulations concerned, and the numbers in the six horizontal rows below are the parts (by weight) in the respective formulation, of the components (e.g. Actilane 800; Daracure 1173; NVP; POEA; TMPTA and PVA) indicated in the column at the left of the table.
The next three rows in each of Tables 4 and 5, below the heading "With Mask" set out, respectively, for those samples which were exposed through a mask as described in relation to
Table 6 takes the same form as Tables 4 and 5 and illustrates corresponding results for formulations identified as 100 and 109, incorporating Crodamer UVS 500 resin (see below), instead of Actilane 800 or Rahn 99-622. Formulation 100 corresponded with formulation 98 (Table 4) but with the Actilane 800 replaced by Crodamer UVS 500 and likewise corresponded with formulation 99 (Table 5) but with the Rahn 99-622 material replaced by Crodamer UVS 500. Formulation 109 corresponded with formulation 107 (Table 4) but with the Actilane 800 replaced by Crodamer UVS 500, and corresponded with formulation 108 (Table 5) but with the Rahn 99-622 material replaced by Crodamer UVS 500. For ease of reference, in Table 6, the corresponding results for formulations 98 and 107 from Table 4, and for formulations 99 and 108 from Table 5, are also set out (the figures in the second horizontal row in Table 6 for formulations 98, 99, 107 and 108 have been replaced by the letters "A" or "R" as the case may be, to highlight the fact that the respective columns relate to samples of formulations with Actilane 800 or Rahn 99-622 respectively.
Crodamer UVS 500 is a silicone acrylate resin available from Croda Resins Limited of Kent, England.
It will be noted that the samples using Crodamer UVS 500 gave relatively low angles of view, even when exposed through optical masks, and negligible angles of view when exposed without a mask. The formulation using Rahn 99-622 (see also Table 5) likewise gave negligible or low angles of view when exposed without an optical mask, with the exception of formulation 125 which gave a 15 degree angle of view when exposed without a mask (and a 16 degree angle of view when exposed through a mask).
As noted above, in the examples to which Tables 4 to 6 relate, the direction along which the collimated ultraviolet light was directed onto the photopolymerisable resin layer was normal to the major plane of that layer. However, it is possible, as illustrated in
The term polymerisation as used herein, is intended to encompass processes by which homopolymers are formed as well as processes by which co-polymers are formed.
In what follows, some examples are given of the manufacture of holograms using photopolymerisable materials of the same kind as disclosed above, or of similar kinds. In the manufacture of these holograms, the photopolymerisable materials may be exposed directly to photopolymerising coherent radiation using the photopolymerisable material to record a holographic image directly and produce a volume or phase hologram. (For reproduction of similar holograms, of course, a hologram may first be recorded, in coherent light, on a photographic film or plate which is subsequently developed and used as a mask through which a layer of such photopolymer is exposed to polymerising radiation in substantially the same way as described above for the manufacture of a diffuser using a mask, but the result is not a true volume hologram and, of course, the latter method would involve an additional, and generally unnecessary method step).
In tests to assess the suitability of the photopolymerisable materials or systems concerned as holographic materials, the apparatus shown in
In Tables 7 and 8 below, the components of each formulation or system are set out in the second to sixth row in the column which is furthest to the left, whilst the first row in each table carries a series of numerical identifiers or codes, each representing a particular formulation or system. The column directly below each such identifier or code sets out, in the second to sixth row, the proportions, in the respective formulation or system, of the respective component in the same row in the column which is furthest to the left.
Variant systems may include PVA and a compatible organic solvent. A further option would be to use poly(vinyl formal) or poly(vinyl butyral) (PVB) to improve refractive index modulation.
With the method described above, all holograms produced were of a similar quality. Exposure with S polarisation was slightly superior to P polarisation. Some holograms were heated, after exposure, in an oven at 90 C. for two hours. This also slightly enhanced the brightness of the hologram.
Also for purposes of comparison, similarly prepared samples of the materials set out in Table 7 and Table 8 were exposed to polymerising radiation through aperture masks, as described above and corresponding samples were exposed to polymerising radiation without using aperture masks. Tables 7 and 8 show in the penultimate row in the table (AOV mask) the angle of view of the diffuser resulting from such exposure of the respective material samples through such an aperture mask and in the last row (No mask) the angle of view of the diffuser resulting from such exposure of the respective material samples directly, without such a mask.
For purposes of comparison, the same procedure, using the same apparatus (
Formulations 211, 212 and 213 are respectively 100 pts of the respective above resin indicated in Table C plus three parts of photoinitiator (Daracure 1173). In relation to the references to "haze" in Table 9 it should be noted that with very weak diffusers it is possible to differentiate between such haze and the diffusing characteristics of a diffuser with light guiding structures by observing off-axis transmission. Haze increases with the extent to which the incident radiation is off-axis as compared with on axis because haze is thickness dependent. Materials incorporating light guiding structures become more transparent off-axis.
The silicone acrylate resins used were: Actilane 800, Rahn 00-225 and Rahn 99-622. Rahn 99-622 contains the same resin as Rahn 00-225 but has been diluted with polyether polyol tetra acrylate (PPTTA) in the ratio of 30:70. (PPTTA:Rahn 00-225). Rahn 00-225 is very viscous, more viscous than Actilane 800 and apparent of higher MW.
PVA may be added to Actilane 800 as in Table 8. The use of a cross-linker such as TMPTA with the Actilane 800 as in Table 8 or with Rahn 00-225 as in Table 7 encourages volume graded refractive index effects, i.e. the refractive index varies from position to position within the photopolymer material. The addition of PVA does not change this result.
As shown in Tables 7, 8 and 9 above, silicone acrylate resins have the ability to form diffusers when an aperture mask is used and to some extent without, provided the viscosity is sufficiently low to allow diffusion during the exposure process. The presence of the PPTTA monomer in MCL 213 illustrates this and the difference between 211 and 213 suggests the importance of molecular weight (MW). From these results it can be seen that the combination of silicone (or siloxane) resin and acrylic (or methacrylate) monomer in appropriate proportions could be used to create both diffusers and holograms.
It should be understood that in many cases, for example, where a holographic recording material is to be supplied to end users, the recording material may comprise a product in the form of the photopolymerisable system or formulation in accordance with the invention sandwiched between a relatively inert and ideally transparent sheet, for example, sandwiched between two sheets of Mylar (polyester) film. Such a product may be made, for example, by modifying the formulations indicated in Table 7 and Table 8 by increasing the proportion of PVA and including a compatible solvent for the PVA (such as MEK), to provide a formulation of a viscosity low enough to allow it to be readily applied as a coating, and coating the fluid system onto one Mylar film in a coating apparatus, known per se, for applying a coating of uniform thickness, the second Mylar film subsequently being applied to the exposed surface of the photopolymerisable layer after removal of excess solvent from the coating.
Apparatus suitable for the commercial production of optical diffusers from the materials of the invention is shown schematically in
For example, in
The arrangement of
The arrangement of
Further examples illustrating the production of optical diffusers using silicone-based materials in accordance with the invention are set out below. In these examples, test samples were prepared either using a commercially available laminator or using the "screen printing technique" described above.
In the following, Section A and Section B respectively set out results for tests conducted using the formulations indicated (where the nature of the materials Rahn 99-622, Actilane 800, Daracure 1173 etc. were as set out earlier in this specification).
In Sections A and B below, the first row in each table, referenced MCL in the left hand column, carries, as headings, identification numbers for each formulation, to which the column below relates. In section A, the next nine rows, and in section B, the next four rows, set out the proportions, in the respective formulation of the respective components identified in the column furthest to the left.
The last row in each table sets out the angle of view in each of two orhthogonal directions for the respective example exposed without an optical mask; the second from last row in each table sets out the exposure time for each sample, both for the example exposed without a mask and for the example exposed through a mask and for which the angles of view in each of two orthogonal directions are set out in the third from last row.
In section A below, the samples referred to were prepared on the laminator, except for those indicated as having been exposed through an optical mask, which were prepared by hand using the screen printing technique with a template of known thickness (100-150 microns).
The samples in Section A were UV-cured on an apparatus termed, for convenience, the 'Elephant' (which has an ultra-violet source which produces well collimated UV light.) at 650 w @4.5 min/m for formulations MCL 176, 208, 295 and 1000 W for formulation MCL 188.
Section A
In Section B below, the samples were prepared by hand using the screen printing technique referred to above with a template of known thickness (100-150 microns on a glass plate or photographic plate/mask then UV-cured on the 'Elephant'.
Section B
Rahn 99-622 is a combination of Rahn 00-225 (30%) and PPTTA (70%). The chemical PPTTA, tradename Genomer 1456 is polyetherpolyoltetraacrylate
Further useful formulations utilising simply a silicone acrylate and a photoinitiator are set out below in Table 10 together with angle of view (AoV) of the resulting diffuser after a 'standard' exposure to UV, for exposure through an optical aperture mask of the density indicated in in the column headed 'Mask OD' (or, where indicated, direct exposure to collimated UV light without a mask.
Further useful formulations using a silicone acrylate and an unsaturated monomer are set out below, in Table 11, with the results indicated.
Useful formulations incorporating acryloyl morpholine (ACMO) as the unsaturated monomer, are set out below, in Table 12 together with the results. (It will be understood that the table below and the two preceding tables are, apart from the components of the formulations listed, the ratios of the components in the formulations and the numerical values indicated, substantially the same, so that the headings and layout, etc. are the same in each table).
The formulations described above are more or less viscous liquids in the unpolymerised state and form, upon polymerisation, solid flexible films which can, if desired, be peeled off their respective substrates and/or cover sheets.
Alternatives to silicone acrylate prepolymers as described above include siloxane and acrylic monomers and prepolymers incorporated as separate components and the acrylate components replaced by methacrylates or acrylamides or other reactive species such as epoxies or polyesters and incorporating the appropriate polymerisation initiators.
As noted above, at least some of the formulations referred to will form a light diffusing layer when exposed to UV light even in the absence of an optical aperture mask. It now seems that this effect may be to some extent conditional by the thickness of the photopolymer layer, dependent, in turn, inter alia, upon the viscosity of the material. In general, thinner layers, e.g. formed from a material with a higher proportion of monomer, tend to be better holographic recording materials, whilst thicker layers tend to be better for forming diffusers.
The applicants have found that the thickness of the photopolymorisable layer exposed to form a diffuser in the manner described is of some importance, insofar as they have found that, below a certain thickness, a given formulation, at least where exposed without a mask, fails to form a diffuser. This critical thickness, it has been found, is different for different formulations. Furthermore the applicants have noted that increases in thickness alter the light diffusing properties of the diffuser produced little, or not at all. With these factors in mind, it is possible by a few simple tests to establish the optimum thickness for each system formulation.
The applicants have found that for diffusers of significant strength, it is necessary for the silicone content of the photopolymerisable formulation used to be within certain ranges
In this specification, the silicone content is calculated as the weight, in the total formulation of the
As discussed herein, to form optical diffusers by exposure of the photopolymerisable systems referred to by exposure to polymerising radiation, such as UV light, without the use of an optical mask, the light or other radiation used should be collimated, i.e. substantially parallel. The applicants have found, however, that useful diffusers can be produced using UV light which is less than perfectly collimated, e.g. such that, for example, a major percentage of the light directed onto any given infinitesimal area of the material being exposed passes within a small angle α of a nominal direction (which nominal direction may be, for example, normal to the plane of the exposed layer, where a is preferably less than 10�, more preferably less than 5�, although for some applications it may be necessary for a to be less than 1�. The following examples, set out in Table 13 below, illustrate the relevance of the degree of collimation.
In the following the 'Elephant' as noted above, is an apparatus for exposing photopolymerisable samples prepared as described herein and which directs a closely collimated beam of UV light (within 1� of perfect parallelism) onto the sample. The 'Natgraph' (UV source where the degree of collimation can be varied) is an apparatus for the same purpose which provides light collimated only to within 5� of perfect parallelism. Table 13 illustrates the significance of the degree of collimation afforded by these two apparatuses.
The applicants have found that optical diffusers manufactured in accordance with the invention have, in many cases, the curious property that if viewed at an angle significantly displaced from the original angle of incidence of the polymerising radiation on the precursor material the diffuser appears substantially clear transparent whilst if viewed in a direction aligned with the direction of incidence of the original polymerising radiation on the precursor material, the diffuser appears as a normal light diffuser. The references in the table above to "clear when twisted" referred to this phenomenon. appears as a normal light diffuser. The references in the table above to "clear when twisted" referred to this phenomenon.
The materials disclosed above may be used, inter alia, in the manufacture of holograms, microlens arrays, and of light-diffusing or depixelating screens by the techniques disclosed above.
Diffusers made using the materials of the invention, by the above-described methods in accordance with the invention, have the useful property of being polarisation maintaining, and, indeed have polarisation maintenance typically better than 97%. That is to say, if, for example, light passing through such a diffuser is 100% plane polarised with a particular direction of polarisation before reaching the diffuser, 97% or more of the light emerging from the diffuser will still be plane polarised in the same direction. This has significant implications for the use of such diffusers in conjunction with LCD displays, for example, which rely upon control of polarisation of light to produce visible text and graphics
Using the silicone-based photopolymerisable materials discussed above, it is readily possible to produce optical diffusers, by either the mask exposure method or the maskless exposure method discussed above, which have better than 99% polarisation maintenance. Up until the date of the present invention, optical diffusers produced by exposure of commercially available photopolymers through optical aperture masks have, at best, had around 97% polarisation maintenance. Furthermore, (and without sacrificing the excellent polarisation maintenance), optical diffusers may be produced using the silicone based materials of the invention (and again by either the mask exposure method or the maskless exposure method), having an angle of view as high as 56 degrees, whereas the greatest angle of view that has until now be achievable by exposure of commercially available photopoloymers through optical masks, (necessary to achieve a diffuser in the case of such commercially available photopolymers), has been around 35 degrees, where surface relief effects have been removed or avoided, or 40 degrees taking advantage of surface relief effects. (In the case of optical diffusers manufactured in accordance with the present invention, the angle of view of up to 56 degrees is achievable without relying upon surface relief effects, i.e. by relying wholly upon refractive index variations within the volume of the diffuser material).
These significant differences with diffusers manufactured in accordance with the present invention, as compared with the prior art, have significant implications for diffusers used in conjunction with LCD displays, for example.
The term polymerisation as used herein, is intended to encompass processes by which homopolymers are formed as well as processes by which co-polymers are formed.
In the present specification "comprises" means "includes or consists of" and "comprising" means "including or consisting of".
Patent Citations
Referenced by
Legal Events
Original Image

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Lake Havasu City police discover a boat chop shop
LAKE HAVASU CITY, Ariz. -- Authorities in Lake Havasu City say they've discovered an apparent boat chop shop operation and arrested a man in the case.
Police served a search warrant Thursday night at a Lake Havasu business and arrested 41-year-old Randolph Letcher Jr.
He's being held on suspicion of conducting a chop shop and possession of stolen property plus drug charges after police reported finding methamphetamine in their searches of Letcher's business and home.
Police say Letcher owns Jet Boats Plus in Lake Havasu City and rents a space in an RV park near Blythe, Calif.
A Riverside County Sheriff's detective located a stolen trailer and boat on Letcher's space.
Police say the trailer had been reported stolen out of Lake Havasu City in July 2013 and the boat was reported stolen last month.


text:
Written by Staff • Issue: August 3, 2011 • Campus: CU Denver •
University of Colorado Denver communication Assistant Professor Hamilton Bean's No More Secrets: Open Source Information and the Reshaping of U.S. Intelligence (Praegar Security International) has been published with a foreword by former Sen. Gary Hart of the School of Public Affairs.
According to the publication, "Since 9/11, U.S. intelligence organizations have grappled with the expanded use of open-source information derived from unclassified material, including international newspapers, television, radio and websites. They have struggled as well with sharing this information with international and domestic law enforcement partners. The apparent conflict between openness and secrecy provides an opportunity to reconsider what constitutes intelligence and how citizens and their government interact in the interests of national security."
Post your comment here.
(Log in required. Need to register? Click here.)


text:
Mars Rising: Season 1, Episode 2
Rocket Power (8 Oct. 2007)
TV Episode | Documentary
(awaiting 5 votes)
Reviews: write review
The design for the ship carrying the astronauts and supplies on a three-year mission to Mars is examined, including the propulsion system and fuel. William Shatner narrates.
Director:Brian Murphy
Stars:Paul Delaney, Yanick Bousquet, James Garvin | See full cast and crew »


text:
Search the collections
Similar items over time
Photograph - Demolition of Western Annexe, Exhibition Building, Melbourne, 1967 Reg. No: MM 124049
- Summary:
- Black & white photograph of the northern section of the western annexe of the Exhibition Building part of which has been demolished, taken in 1967. The northern section of the western annexe was demolished between March and May 1967.
This is one of 959 photographs (or images) of the Exhibition Building collated by the Exhibition Trustees as a 10 volume pictorial history of the Exhibition Building spanning the years 1880 to 1985. The pictorial history was instigated by the centenary of the Exhibition Building in 1980 and forms part of a larger Royal Exhibition Building collection of documents, photographs, objects and research files.
- Description:
- A black & white silver gelatin print on a page of a photograph album. There is a printed caption below the photograph.
- Description Of Content:
- The remaining portion of the northern section of the western annexe is in the middleground of the photograph with two trees and a parking area in the foreground and Rathdowne Street and part of the northern Carlton Gardens in the background.
|191 mm (Height), 249 mm (Width)
More information
|Tagged with:
|buildings, royal exhibition building, construction works, car parks, royal exhibition building trustees
|Themes this item is part of:
|Images & Image Making Collection, Public Life & Institutions Collection, Royal Exhibition Building Collection
|Primary Classification:
|Secondary Classification:
|Building & Infrastructure
|Tertiary Classification:
|buildings & grounds
|Master Plan Stage 2 - Development old western annexe site northern/ section March 9th-May 12th 1967./ Site March 1967 looking towards Rathdowne Street and St. George's/ Church.
|Photograph: Black & White
|Place & Date Depicted:
|Royal Exhibition Building (REB), Melbourne, Victoria, Australia, 1967
This item is part of the following themes:
Similar items
Previous Page
| More


text:
Chalkley, Lyman. Chronicles of the Scotch-Irish Settlement in Virginia.
Extracted from the originial court records of Augusta County, 1745-1800. vol. 1.
Baltimore: Genealogical Publishing Co., 1966.
Volume 1
(xxx) = page number
page 30: court records, order book I, August 19, 1747
(246) Daniel Gawen, a servant boy of SAML. DOAK, adjudged to be 12 years old.
page 66: order book IV, November 22, 1754
(331) SAML. DOAK and John Mitchell, guardians of the orphans of John Greer...settled accounts.
page 120: order book IX, April 15, 1765
(335) Wm. Elliott, provisions. John Finley, provisions. Mary Trimble, relict of John Trimble, for horse of John's impressed and provisions. Wm. Armstrong, provisions. Henry Criswell, horse impressed. Samuel Wilson, provisions and horse impressed. John Miller, provisions. DAVID DOAGE, provisions. Ralph Laverty, provisions. Thos. Beard, provisions. John Trimble, provisions. Nathan Gilliland, carriage of "flower." John McClary, provisions.
page 144: order book XI, March 15, 1768
(489) Hemp certificates: Peachy Ridgeway Gilmore, DAVID DOAK, John McKee, Jacob Anderson, Ro. Allison, Rob. Rodgers.
page 157: order book XIII, June 22, 1769
(222) Following recommended for appointment as Justices: Mathew Harrison, William Ingles, William Christian, George Mathews, John McClenachan, James Robertson, Stephen Trigg, William Horbert, Philip Love, Anthony Bledsoe, John Bowman, John Thomas, ROBERT DOAGE and John Montgomery. The following to be left off and reasons given to the Governor by the Clerk: John Chizwell, John Wilson, John Archer, Alexr. Boyd, David Robinson, Benj. Estill, John Maxwell, Charles Lewis, Andrew Bird, Richard Woods.
page 158: order book XIII, August 16, 1769
(324) Following recommended as Justices, viz: Mat. Harrison, Wm. Ingles, Wm. Christian, George Mathews, John McClenachan, James Robertson, Stephen Trigg, Wm. Herbert, Philip Love, Anthony Bledsoe, John Bowman, John Thomas, ROBERT DOAGE, John Montgomery, Alexr. Thompson, James Craig, Walter Crockett, Andrew Lockridge, Walter Cunningham, and James McGavock. The following to be left off, reasons to be given by the Clerk and former order discharged, viz: John Chiswell, John Buchanan, John Wilson, John Archer, John Maxwell, Charles Lewis, Alexr. Boyd.
page 245: order book XIX, April 19, 1786
(360) William Casteel, son of Jinny Jewell, to be bound to JOHN DOAK.
page 249: order book XX, April 18, 1787
(254) Militia officers recommended: Captains, William Shields, ROBERT DOAK; Lieutenants, Wm. Bell, John Gamble, James Mitchell; Ensigns, Wm. Bell, Jr., Alexr. Reed, James McCune, David Williams, Wm Brownlee, Wm. Henderson.
page 272: order book XXII, March 25, 1793
(258) James Bratton, William Shields, ROBERT DOAK, John McCutchen, and Augustine Argenbright as Captains in 2d Battalion...recommended.
page 274: order book XXII, July 16, 1793
(302) ROBERT DOAK and James Frazer qualified, see pages 258-9.
page 289: order book XXIV, August 21, 1798
(339-341) JOHN DOAKE qualified Major of 2d Battalion, 32d Regiment, 7th Brigade.
County Court Judgments. These notes are to the files of papers in the County Court marked "Judgments." These are the original papers in suits and causes that were instituted or adjudicated in this Court. They are filed in bundles, wrapped, and labeled withthe term at which final judgment was entered. The references are to the bundle first and then to the style of the suit where the paper noted may be found. The letters used in designating the bundle are private marking and not a part of the official label.
Following the County Court Judgments, there are some pages of notes to the original petitions and miscellaneous papers which are filed with the original wills, settlements, &c. It is not possible to fix the date of these papers in many instances more definitely than that they were presented to the Court within the period set out on the label of the package.
page 294: August, 1746
Patrick Hays vs. SAMUEL DOAK.--Defendant brother of JOHN DOAK. 17th April 1746.
page 404: March, 1795
Samuel Blackwood, William Blackwood, Joseph Blackwood, by Walter Davies, guardian, Ann Blackwood, Eleanor Blackwood, Rebecca Blackwood, Robert Scott and Mary, his wife, formerly Mary Blackwood, v. Mark Hadden (Hatton).---Spa. Chancery. 7th April, 1793.....1782, cash paid JAMES DOAK for teaching two of the children...
page 497: paper found between leaves of order book XI, page 90 (note: order book XI begins March 23, 1767 and ends March 18, 1768) To the Worshipful Court of Augusta County the Petition of the Inhabitants of Reedy Creek Humbly Sheweth:--- That whereas we, your petitioners, for some time past have been debarred settling and improving and cultivating our patent lands on the Western Waters, the reason whereof is best known to our legislators, but by virtue of the late treaty held to the northward, we hope we may, without offense, petition your worships to give orders that there may be alterations and amendments made on the old road leading from Capt. Ingle's Ferry to James Davis's, on the head of the Holston River, and appoint such surveyors as you in your wisdom shall think fit, and your petitioners, as in duty bound, will pray. (Signed) Joseph Black, James Holice, John Montgomery, Robt. Montgomery, James Montgomery, George Breckenridge, Alexander Breckenridge, Robert Breckenridge, Robert Campbell, ROBERT DOACK, WILLIAM DOACK, William Sayers, Arthur Campbell, William Davis, James Hays, Samuel Hopes, William Leftwich, Gasper Gender, George Gender, Jacob Kinder, William Phips, John Houncal, Barnet Small, John Smith, John Bets, Robert Buchanan, Robert Davis, Samuel McAdam, James Davis, Nicholas Buchanan, Alex. Buchanan.
Volume II
page 32: judgments, April 1806
Peter R. Beverley vs. JOHN DOAKE -- Deposition of Thomas Mitchell, 14th October, 1805, aged 73, says: SAMUEL DOAK lived on the land in dispute upwards of sixty years ago and John has lived on it ever since Sam's Death. Deposition of Hugh Fulton, 14th October, 1805, aged 77, says: He was acquainted with Samuel, father of John.
page 80: circuit court causes ended
Peter Kinder vs. SAMUEL DOAK -- O.S. 40; N.S. 14 -- Bill 16th June, 1802. In 1770, Andrew Little made a settlement on waters of Reed Creek, then in Fincastle, now Wythe, and a short time afterwards transferred it to John Riley, who sold to orator. In 1775 SAMUEL DOAK, from a military warrant under the King of Great Britain's proclamation, had a survey made including above settlement. The warrant to Samuel was dated 1773, and under the proclamation of 1763. SAMUEL DOAK went to live in North Carolina (now Tennessee) about 1789, and has never returned. Answer states that in 1768 ROBERT DOAK, for and on behalf of SAMUEL DOAK, sowed some turnips on the land but made no actual settlement. In 1770 Jacob Young made an improvement on the same tract but removed to Holstein and conveyed his claim to Samuel. In 1771 Samuel built a cabin and afterwards Andrew Little built a cabin but never lived in it. George Boyd, of Stuart County, Tenn., deposes 3d December, 1804.
page 123: circuit court causes ended
Charles Cumming vs. Walker -- O.S. 135; N.S. 47 -- Bill, March 1803. Thomas Armstrong was an early setttler on the lands granted Dr. Thomas Walker in Fincastle County, known as Wolf Hill tract adjoining James Pifer. Armstrong sold to Robert Breckinridge, who sold to orator. Alexander Breckinridge deposes 10th June 1803, in Bourbon County, Ky. Deed 25th August, 1800, by Francis Walker and Jane B., his wife, to Charles Cummin of Washington County. Recorded in District Court at Washington Court House, 3d October, 1800. Robert Breckinridge, aged 60, deposes in Montgomery County, Ky., 5th June, 1803: In 1771 or 72 he purchased a part of the Wolf Hill tract. John Davis and James Pifer depose, 1803, that they have been neighbors of Rev. Chas. Cummins near 30 years. Alexr. Breckinridge's deposition: In 1769 ROBERT DOKE said he was agent for Dr. Thomas Walker to lay off the Wolf Hill tract. In November same year he went and chose a tract and built a cabin on it and in 1770 moved there.
page 276: marriage licenses in Augusta County
30 October 1762 DAVID DOAGE.
page 278: marriage licenses in Augusta County
28 March 1774 ROBERT DOACK.
page 283: marriage bonds, Augusta County
27 September 1786, John Milliken and ISABELLA DOAK: surety, Robert Torbet.
page 301: marriage bonds, Augusta County
6 January 1787, James Berry and JENNIE DOAK, daughter of DAVID and JANNET DOAK (consent). Teste: ROBERT DOAK, JOHN DOAK.
page 327: marriage bonds, Augusta County
10 April 1797, John Lilley and ROBERT DOAK, Alex. St. Clair, sureties, John Lilley and ELIZABETH DOAK, daughter of ROBERT DOAK. "This day John Doak made oath that John Lilley, who is about to intermarry with his daughter, Elizabeth, is above the age of 21 years.
page 333: marriage bonds, Augusta County
11 March 1799, John Lerew and SAML. DOKE, Jno. McClelland, sureties. John Lerew and ELIZABETH DOKE, daughter of DAVID DOKE, sister to SAML. DOKE, and of age. John is son of Jacob Larew, who consents. Teste: Benj. Larew.
page 347: record of marriages in Augusta County
28 September 1786, John Millihen and ISABELLA DOAK. 10 January 1787, James Berry and JENNY DOAK.
page 356: record of marriages in Augusta County
11 April 1797, Jno. Lilley and ELIZABETH DOAK.
page 417: delinquents
1755, Geo. Breckinridge, twice charged; SAM. DOAK, Constable.
page 418: delinquents
1756, DAVID DOAK, Constable; Barnet Finley, listed soldier.
page 434: Augusta Parish Vestry Book
page 17 -- James Fulton and John Mitchell make returns, viz: 1748, 26th March, processioned for SAMUEL DOAK, present Samuel Braford; Processioned for John Mitchell, present SAMUEL DOAK; processioned for Samuel Braford, present SAMUEL DOAK; processioned for DAVID DOAK, present Samuel Wilson; processioned for George Breckinridge, present. ---- Breckenridge.
page 442: Augusta Parish Vestry Book
page 161 -- SAMUEL DOAK and John Tate, in Captain James Mitchell's Company. (1755)
page 444: Augusta Parish Vestry Book
1756: Processioned by John Tate and SAMUEL DOAK, in Cap. James Mitchell's Company, for SAML. DOAK, for DAVID DOAK.
page 456: Augusta Parish Vestry Book
page 441 -- for DAVID DOAKE, for SAMUEL DOAKE. (1767-68)
page 508-509: The Preston Papers, copies of musters of Augusta County....The date of the Musters has been fixed by Mr. Joseh A. Waddell, the author of the most delightful, exhaustive and valuable work, "The Annals of Augusta County," as the year 1742. Capt. John Christian's List: George Breakinsed, Alex. Brackinsedg, Rob. Brackinsedg, James Brackinsedg, JNO. DOACKE, SAM DOACKE.
Volume III
page 8: will book 1
(64) 14th September, 1747. David Steele's will--Farmer, son Robert, plantation; wife; son, Nathaniel; daughters, Martha Teas, Isabella McCluer, 5 shillings; daughters, Rebecka, Jannet. Executors, SAMUEL DOAK and Robert Ramsey; refused to execute. Teste: Wm. Steel, Geo. Brakenridge, Robert Alexander. Proved, 18th November, 1747, by Brakenridge and Alexander.
page 15: will book 1
(213) 1st December, 1749. Executor's bond as above; surety, SAMUEL DOAKE. (above = will of DAniel Denniston of Beverley Manor)
page 18: will book 1
(275) 15th September, 1750. John Greer's nuncupative will...
Executors, John Mitchell and SAMUEL DOAK. Teste: James Cowin, Jno. Mitchell, SAML. DOAK, Francis Beatey.
page 26: will book 1
(447) 24th August, 1752. John Mitchell and SAMUEL DOAGE'S bond as guardians (appointed) of Rebecca, Alexander, Martha, Mary Greer, orphans of John Greer, deceased, with sureties Francis Beatey.
page 30: will book 1
(516) 15th August, 1753. John Brownlee's bond as guardian (appointed) to Alexander McNutt, orphan of James McNutt, with sureties SAMUEL DOAKE and Arthur Hamilton.
page 108: will book 4
(203) 2d February, 1769. Robert Wilson's estate appraised (Mary Wilson, executrix), by John Tate, Robert Alexander, John Fulton, DAVID DOACK.
page 123: will book 4
(497) 5th November, 1771. SAML DOAK'S will, farmer--To wife, Jane; to daughter, Elinor, unmarried; to wife, to have disposal of all household furniture at her Pleasure to her 3 daughters, Elinor, Mary, Isbel; to son, John; to oldest son, David, plantation David now lives on as ROBERT DOAK laid it off; to son, Samuel, plantation at head waters of Rockfish in Amherst; to son, John, plantation testator lives on; to son, Robert, tract testator formerly lived on in Rockfish, joining Capt. Crawford; daughters, Jane and Elizabeth. Executors, wife Jane, son David, son-in-law Wm. Brown. Brother-in-law John Finley and John Tate to advise executors. Teste: John and James Mitchel, William Tate, John Tate, Jr. Proved, 19th May, 1772, by James Mitchel and the Tates. DAVID DOACK qualifies with John Tate, Nathaniel Steel.
page 124: will book 4
(520) 10th June, 1772. SAML. DOACK'S estate appraised by John Ward, James Mitchell, James Meteer.
page 161: will book VI
(227) 9th January, 1782. James Fulton's estate appraised by James Brownlee, ROBT. DOAK, Thomas Boyd.
page 194: will book VII
(358) 29th March, 1791. Wm. Moffett, Alex. Gibson, ROBT. DOAK elected overseers of poor.
page 201: will book VIII
(66) 2d August, 1793. James Meteer's will--To wife, Elizabeth; to 3 sons, William, James, Samuel. Executors, wife Elizabeth and son William. Teste: Samuel McCutchen, DAVID DOAK, James Mitchell, John Walce, SAMUEL DOAK. Proved, September Court, 1793, by the Doaks and James Mitchell, Jr. Executors qualify.
page 222: will book IX
(215) 26th June, 1799. DAVID DOAK'S will--To wife, Jennet; to sons, Samuel and David; to daughter, Jenny Berry; daughter, Rosannah Doak; to daughter, Betsy; to 5 daughters, viz: Aggy, Fanny, Darcos, Polly, Elly; to son, Hugh. Executors, wife Jennet, sons Samuel and David. Guardian. James Berry. Teste: Thos. Mitchell, James and Samuel Meteer. Proved, 28th June, 1802. Jennet refuses.
Others qualify.
page 225: will book IX
(360) 24th June, 1803. Samuel Meteer's will--To brother, James (tract devised to testator by father, and tract falling to testator by brother William); to sister, Betsey; brother, James; sister Sally's son, William. Executors, sister Betsey and brother James. Teste: Thomas Mitchell, SAMUEL and DAVID DOAK. Proved, 26th March, 1804. Executors qualify.
page 228: will book X
(53) 21st March, 1804. JOHN DOAK'S will--To son, John; sons, Samuel and Thomas Mitchell Doak; to daughter, Julia; daughter, Nancy; daughter, Rosannah; daughter, Betsey Wilson Doak; son, Washington; son, David. Executors, brothers Vory(?), Robert, Samuel, Sr., and David Doak. Teste: Samuel Brown, James Mitchell, Sr. and Jr. Proved, 23d June, 1806. Executors qualified.
page 229: will book X
(116) 6th August, 1806. Thomas Mitchell, Sr.'s will--To son, William; son, Thomas; daughter, Elizabeth Mitchell; daughter, Ibby Mitchell; daughter, Jenny Meteer; granddaughter, Betty McClure; grandson, Thomas McClure; granddaughter, Polly McClure. Executors, friend Thomas Mitchell and John Wilson. Teste: W. Wilson, ROBT. DOAK, John, James, and Thos. Mitchell. Proved, 23d March, 1807. Jno. Wilson refused; Thomas qualified.
page 231: will book X
(155) Martin Miller's will--To son, Henry's children, viz: Martin and others; to son-in-law, Luke Collins, executor. Teste: ROBT. DOAK, David Shultz, Godlieb Stone. Proved 23d November, 1807. Executor qualifies.
page 239: will book XI
(182) 25th October, 1812. James Mateer's will--To wife, Jane McTeer; to four children, William McTeer, Mitchel McTeer, Eliza McTeer, Isabella McTeer; brother, William. Executors, wife Jane, Thos. Mitchell, Jr.; Daniel Henderson. Teste: Thos. Jackson, ROBT. DOAKE, DORCAS M. DOAKE, NANCY DOAKE. Proved, December Court, 1812. Jane and Thomas qualify.
page 252: deed book l
(23) 10th February, 1745-6. George and Robert Brackenridge to DAVID DOACK, L42, Virginia money; 300 acres in Beverley Manor, being the tract George now lives on. Acknowledged by both, 10th February, 1745-6.
page 261: deed book 1
(280) 12th August 1747. Wm. Beverley, of Essex, to James Lynn, 538 acres in Beverley Manor on South River, Shanando; SAMUEL DOAK'S land; Patrick Campbell's land; Brownlee's land; George Brackenridge's land. Teste: Robt. Davis, Jno. Mitchell, W. Russell. Proved by all witnesses, 19th August, 1747.
page 261: deed book 1
(314) 13th August, 1747. Wm. Beverley to Samuel Brawford, farmer, L6 current money Virginia; 200 acres in Beverley Manor; corner John Buchanan; corner John Mitchell and SAMUEL DOAGE. Witnessed and proved as above.
page 262: deed book 1
(317) 13th August, 1747. Wm. Beverley to John Mitchell, L20; 609 acres in Beverley Manor; corner to Samuel Brafford; John Buchanan's land; Patrick Campbell's land; crossing South River; SAMUEL DOAK'S land. Witnessed and proved as above.
page 262: deed book 1
(330) 13th August, 1747. Wm. Beverley to Helen Mitchell, widow, L6.8.6; 200 acres in Beverley Manor; Brackenridge's line; corner to Teat's line; corner to DAVID DOAK; John Lockhart's corner; John Teat's land. Witnessed and proved as above.
page 266: deed book 1
(451) 19th November, 1747. L41. JOHN DOAGE, farmer, to Richard Burton, farmer, 400 acres on James River on west side Blue Ridge patented to John, 12th January, 1746. Teste: James Porteus, Benj. Johnston. Acknowledged, 19th November, 1747.
page 286: deed book 2
(757) 22d May, 1750. James Lynn to Andrew Lynn, 269 acres in Beverley Manor, SAML. DOAK'S line, Buffler Hill; corner Jno. Teat and Saml. Wilson. Teste: Andrew Cowan, Elijah McClenachan, John Ramsey.
page 298: deed book 3
(505) 19th August, 1751. James Lynn, architectus, to Samuel Braford, 269 acres in Beverley Manor; corner Andrew Lynn; corner Brownlee; corner George Breckinridge (Sarah, wife of James). Teste: Jno. Mitchell, SAML. DOACK, Andrew Lynn.
page 313: deed book 5
(272) Samuel Braford and Ann to Elizabeth Mateer (McAttore), alias Wright, widow. Sold by Beverley to Samuel Brawford in Beverley Manor. Cor. Samuel's tract purchased of John Buchanon; lines of John Mitchell and SAMUEL DOACK. Delivered to James Mateer, 1774. Teste: Wm. Finley, Wm. Wright.
page 337: deed book 7
(132) 1755. Same to DAVID DOAK, L3, 100 acres in Beverley Manor; corner said Doak's old survey. Delivered: ROBERT DOAK, March, 1768.
page 338: deed book 7
(165) 3d June, 1755. Saml. Wilson, plantationer, to Robt. Wilson, farmer, L55, 461 acres in Beverley Manor, part of 761 acres granted by Beverely to Geo. and Rob. Breckinridge. 26th November, 1742, and said 461 acres were sold by Geo. and Ro. to Saml., 8th February, 1745; corner DAVID DOAK.
page 357: deed book 8
(198) 20th November, 1759. Helenor (Helander) ( ) Mitchell to Robt. Mitchell, L5, 200 acres in Beverley Manor, Robt. Wilson's line; corner Jno. Teate (Tate), DAVID DOACK'S land; Jno. Lockart's corner. Teste: James Kowan.
page 368: deed book 9
(247) 19th May, 1761. John Mitchel to Thomas Mitchel, L10, 234 acres in Beverley Manor, part of 609 acres conveyed to John by Beverley, 13th August, 1747; cor. Samuel Braford. Teste: John Finley, Robert Wilson, DAVID DOACK. Delivered: Thos. Mitchell, 3d November, 1765.
page 435: deed book 12
(323) 15th October, 1765. Nathaniel Evins and Mary to John Alcorn, L30, 120 acres on a branch of Looney"s Creek. Delivered: ROBERT DOAGE, October Court, 1769.
page 453: deed book 13
(311) 18th May, 1767. Thomas Teat (Tate) and Ann to George Bright, L28, 170 acres in Beverley Manor on the head of a branch of Sourth River; David Hays line. Teste: James Tate, Wm. Campbell, ROBERT DOAK. Delivered: George Bright, November, 1770.
page 464: deed book 14
(192) 16th March, 1768. David Steel to Nathaniel Steel, L---, 3 1/2 acres in Beverley Manor. Teste: William McAdow, ROBERT DOAK, Thomas Steel. Delivered: Nathaniel Steel, April, 1773.
page 477: deed book 15
(186) 15th November, 1768. William Dean and Mary to Hugh Davis, of York County, Pennsylvania, L5, 550 acres in Beverley Manor, part of 800 acres formerly belonging to Patrick Cook; corner William Dean; corner David Campbell. Teste: Patt. Cunningham, DAVID DOACK. Delivered: Hugh Davis, March, 1770.
page 487: deed book 15
(474) 16th May, 1769. DAVID DOACK and Mary ( ) to John Alexander, of York County, Pennsylvania, L310, 400 acres. Teste: Randal Lockhart, John Finley, WILLIAM DOACK. Delivered: DAVID DOACK, November, 1771.
page 514: deed book XVII
(438) 18th November 1771. John Alexander to Nathaniel Steel, mortgage, L120, tract whereon John now lives, 400 acres conveyed to him by DAVID DOAGE and whereon he formerly lived. Teste: Francis Patton, DAVID DOAGE. Delivered: Nathaniel Steel, April, 1773.
page 525: deed book 19
(5) 17th November, 1772. John Alexander and Mary to David Humphress in Beverley Manor. First sold by Beverley to George Breckinridge and by him transferred to DAVID DOAK. Delivered: David Humphries, 24th November, 1774.
page 556: deed book 22
(384) 16th June, 1778. Privy examination of Mary, wife of Joseph Love, of Montgomery County (deed, 9th August, 1777, to Richard Payne), before Wm Davis and WM. DOACK.
page 557: deed book 22
(482) 16th March, 1779. Andrew Linn, Benjamin Lowrey and Sarah, of Mecklinburg County, North Carolina, to ROBERT DOACK, on South River, a hill called the bufler (Buffalo?) hill.
page 561: deed book 23
(144) Teste: Hugh Tarbet, ROBERT and DAVID DOAK.
page 565: deed book 23
(456) 16th April, 1782. John Waddle (Signed in German and apparently some other name--Null?) and Mary ( ) Waddle, to the Congregation adhering to Bethel Meeting House, part of the tract John now lives on, on waters of Christian's Creek. Delivered: ROBERT DOACK, one of the grantees.


text:
Click here to subscribe to Beyond Blue.
- Follow Therese on these partner sites:
- Psych Central
- The Huffington Post
- Intent
- ShareWIK
- PBS/This Emotional Life
- Today's Mama
Since it is the Friday before Father's Day, and I wanted to dedicate a post to all the devoted fathers out there, I thought I'd share passages of a very cool book that my mother-in-law bought for Eric awhile back, since he's an avid golfer (well, if he were independently wealthy, he would be): "Zen Golf: Mastering the Mental Game" by Dr. Joseph Parent. Not that all of you are golfers.
2. You are not your thoughts.
Previous Posts
Seven Ways to Get Over an Infatuation
posted 12:46:43pm Feb. 19, 2014 | read full post »
When Faith Turns Neurotic
posted 10:37:13am Jan. 14, 2014 | read full post »
How to Handle Negative People
posted 10:32:10am Jan. 14, 2014 | read full post »
8 Coping Strategies for the Holidays
posted 9:30:12am Nov. 21, 2013 | read full post »
Can I Say I'm a Son or Daughter of Christ and Suffer From Depression?
posted 10:56:04am Oct. 29, 2013 | read full post »