Disclosed are systems, methods and computer program products for managing deposit accounts. A computer-based account management system allocates depositor funds among a plurality of FDIC-insured deposit accounts held in a plurality of deposit institutions, such as savings banks. The deposit accounts are preferably non-interest-bearing transaction accounts typically used for payroll and other operating expenses. The account management system establishes a deposit limit for each deposit institution to ensure that an individual's deposits at any deposit institution remains below the FDIC insurance limit. The system also stabilizes the deposit base by facilitating movement of funds to and from participating deposit institutions. The system automatically reconciles all balances and account activity on a daily basis and performs an automated daily allocation process to allocate deposits among the participating deposit institutions. The allocation process is performed in an unbiased manner using an equal, random, pro rata or first-come, first-served allocation.
This application is a continuation-in-part of U.S. application Ser. No. 13/221,032 filed Aug. 30, 2011.
The present invention relates to the field of finance and, in particular, to systems, methods and computer program products for administering funds deposited preferably in non-interest-bearing transaction accounts which funds exceed the standard maximum deposit insurance amount (the "SMDIA") offered by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (the "FDIC") at any single depository bank.
Financial management companies that provide asset management and investment services to individual and institutional investors with respect to fixed income (or debt) investments typically invest in bonds, loans, government and municipal securities and other debt investments, mutual funds, and other investment vehicles that invest in such debt investments. However, financial management companies rarely provide specialized management of depositor funds to be held in banks or credit unions or other institutions that offer FDIC insurance on deposits (referred to herein as "deposit institutions"). In addition to offering non-interest-bearing transaction accounts, typically used for a companies' payroll and operating expenses, FDIC-insured deposit institutions also offer a variety of other money saving, interest-bearing options, such as money market accounts, savings accounts, CDs and other demand and time deposit accounts having fixed or variable interest rates and different maturity dates. Although such interest-bearing deposit accounts may have lower interest rates than those offered by other debt instruments or debt funds, the funds held in these deposit institutions are insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation ("FDIC") provided the aggregate amount deposited in such deposit institution by a single depositor is under the standard maximum deposit insurance amount (the "SMDIA") which is currently $250,000.
There are existing extended FDIC programs that allocate amounts in excess of the SMDIA from a single depositor into multiple deposit institutions. However, such programs typically enroll a limited number of deposit institutions because these programs require installation of special software or hardware, execution of special documentation and/or agreement to special terms. In addition, these other extended FDIC programs do not have the technical capabilities to integrate the FDIC's account management systems with the disparate account management systems used by the various deposit institutions. This difficulty with integration also limits the number of deposit institutions that participate in such programs. Because of these unique requirements and/or limitations, such programs are unable to attract large numbers of deposit institutions and are therefore are only able to offer limited amounts of extended FDIC insurance coverage for depositors. The amount of FDIC insurance coverage offered by these programs is generally limited to the number of deposit institutions in such a program multiplied by the SMDIA. This arrangement may not be sufficient for wealthy individuals or institutions whose funds significantly exceed the FDIC insurance limit and therefore exceed the extended FDIC insurance offered by such other extended FDIC programs.
One FDIC program that has been popular among banks for insuring deposits is the Temporary Liquidity Guarantee Program (the "TLGP"). The TLGP, adopted on Nov. 21, 2008 at the pinnacle of the financial crisis, included an especially popular component known as the Transaction Account Guarantee ("TAG") program. The TAG program provides full insurance coverage of all funds in non-interest bearing transaction accounts, regardless of dollar amount, up to and in excess of the SMDIA. The TAG program is very attractive to banks because it enables them to allocate an unlimited amount of money to FDIC-insured accounts which provide absolute safety and security.
The FDIC created the TAG program to strengthen confidence and promote liquidity in the banking system by guaranteeing newly issued senior unsecured debt of banks, thrifts, and certain holding companies, and by providing full coverage of non-interest bearing transaction accounts, regardless of dollar amount. The TAG program also encourages large bank customers, fearful of bank failures, from withdrawing significant sums of cash and small business owners to maintain deposits at community banks. Such community banks particularly rely on TAG transaction accounts, which insure $46 billion of their deposits, cumulatively, to enable financing of small business lending and other activities.
By design, money deposited in accounts covered by TAG earns no interest, but every penny is protected by FDIC Insurance. Deposits in such non-interest-bearing accounts are referred to a core deposits. Examples of non-interest-bearing core deposits are deposits in savings accounts or traditional, non-interest-bearing, checking accounts. Core deposits may also include demand deposits, negotiated order of withdrawal ("NOW") accounts and automatic transfer service ("ATS") accounts, money market deposit accounts ("MMDAs"), and other savings deposits and time deposits.
While TAG has been successful, gathering over $1 trillion in deposits representing 20 percent of total U.S. Bank Deposits, it is expected to expire on Dec. 31, 2012. If the TAG program expires, it is expected that deposits, absent FDIC insurance, will migrate to larger deposit institutions that are perceived to be too big to fail. If the TAG program does not expire, it favors large banks—data shows that the nation's top 19 banks, those with assets of more than $100 billion, control more than half of the TAG account balances. Moreover, the continuation of the TAG program sends a message that the banking industry is still struggling as it did during the financial crisis. In addition, the TAG program has lost money, because current premiums have not covered the losses the FDIC has incurred when a bank fails and the agency has to pay out deposits in excess of the SMDIA limit. The FDIC says it will have to raise premiums to cover program losses if TAG is still in place in 2020 when the required reserve ratio jumps to 1.35 percent; the American Banking Association ("ABA") estimates it would require an extra $15 billion in premiums to cover TAG-insured deposits to get to that ratio.
Accordingly, there is a need to provide a new financial management system for automated administration of funds from multiple depositors each of which has funds that exceed the FDIC insurance limit and in deposit accounts at multiple banks so that no single depositor holds funds in excess of the SMDIA at any single depository institution. There is also a need to provide systems and methods for administering funds deposited in non-interest-bearing transaction accounts, which funds exceed the SMDIA limit, among multiple deposit institutions in a manner that allocates the excess funds equally and/or in an unbiased manner among the deposit institutions.
The present invention provides systems, methods and computer program products for administering funds deposited preferably in non-interest-bearing transaction accounts which funds exceed the standard maximum deposit insurance amount (the "SMDIA") offered by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (the "FDIC") at any single depository bank. In addition, to address the issues raised by expiration of the TAG program, a novel account management system and associated methods and computer program products has been invented which provides all of the benefits of the TAG program while simultaneously eliminating the negative aspects of the program.
In one example embodiment, the computer-implemented method for managing depositor funds held in a plurality of Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) insured non-interest-bearing deposit accounts held in a plurality of deposit institutions, the method comprises: creating and maintaining a general ledger file containing information about an aggregate account balance in each non-interest-bearing deposit account at a deposit institution and a transaction history of each deposit account and creating a system to retrieve such information from a database; creating and maintaining in a database a plurality of individual depositor records containing at least information about a daily account balance for each depositor in each of the plurality of deposit accounts at the deposit institutions and a transaction history of each depositor account and creating a system to retrieve such information from a database; retrieving from the plurality of deposit institutions information about a daily account balance in each deposit account and a daily transaction history of each deposit account; and automatically reconciling each of the deposit accounts, the reconciling comprising: comparing, for each deposit account, the transactions and the total account balance from the general ledger file with the transactions and daily account balance obtained from a deposit institution; if the compared account transactions or balances are different, identifying in the daily transaction history obtained from the deposit institution at least one transaction made by the deposit institution that was not posted to the general ledger file to account for the discrepancy; creating individual depositor records of one or more depositors whose funds are held in the deposit accounts at deposit institutions and updating such records when the transaction is made by the deposit institution; and posting the transaction made by the deposit institution to the individual depositor records of each identified depositor. In another example embodiment, the computer-implemented method for managing depositor funds held a Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) insured non-interest-bearing account held at a deposit institution, the method comprising: receiving a depositor's funds into an non-interest-bearing account held at the deposit institution; determining the difference between the amount of depositor's funds and a standard maximum deposit insurance amount (SMDIA) limit; and if the amount of depositor's funds exceeds the SMDIA, providing to an account management system the amount of excess funds; wherein the account management system comprises a computer adapted to support the account management system wherein the computer is adapted to send and receive information between at least the deposit institution; and wherein the account management system allocates the excess funds in an unbiased manner to a plurality of other deposit institutions.
The accompanying drawings, which are incorporated into and constitute a part of this specification, illustrate one or more example embodiments of the invention and, together with the detailed description serve to explain their principles and implementations.
FIG. 1A illustrates a high-level diagram of the account management system according to one example embodiment.
FIG. 1B illustrates a detailed diagram of the account management system according to one example embodiment.
FIG. 2 illustrates a schematic diagram of the account reconciliation process according to one example embodiment.
FIG. 3 illustrates a schematic diagram of the daily allocation process according to one example embodiment.
FIG. 4 illustrates a schematic diagram of the interest allocation process according to one example embodiment.
FIG. 5 illustrates a schematic diagram of the interest allocation process according to one example embodiment.
FIG. 6 illustrates a flow diagram of the process for allocation of depositor funds among a plurality of deposit institutions according to another example embodiment.
FIG. 7 illustrates a flow diagram of the process for daily account reconciliation according to one example embodiment.
FIG. 8 illustrates a flow diagram of the process for allocation of interest payments according to one example embodiment.
FIG. 9 illustrates a flow diagram the process for allocation of depositor funds during mergers or closures of deposit institutions according to one example embodiment.
FIG. 10 illustrates a schematic diagram of a computer system according to one example embodiment.
FIG. 11A illustrates a schematic diagram of a system for allocating depositor funds in non-interest bearing deposit accounts among a plurality of deposit institutions according to one example embodiment.
FIG. 11B illustrates a schematic diagram of the system for allocating depositor funds in non-interest bearing deposit accounts among a plurality of deposit institutions according to another example embodiment.
FIG. 11C illustrates a schematic diagram of the system for allocating depositor funds in non-interest bearing deposit accounts among a plurality of deposit institutions according to another example embodiment.
FIG. 11D illustrates a schematic diagram of the system for allocating depositor funds in non-interest bearing deposit accounts among a plurality of deposit institutions according to another example embodiment.
FIG. 11E illustrates a schematic diagram of the system for allocating depositor funds in non-interest bearing deposit accounts among a plurality of deposit institutions according to another example embodiment.
Example embodiments of the present invention are described herein in the context of systems, methods and computer program products for management deposit accounts holding depositor funds that exceed the FDIC insurance limit. Those of ordinary skill in the art will realize that the following description is illustrative only and is not intended to be in any way limiting. Other embodiments will readily suggest themselves to those skilled in the art having the benefit of this disclosure. Reference will now be made in detail to implementations of the example embodiments of the invention as illustrated in the accompanying drawings. The same reference indicators will be used to the extent possible throughout the drawings and the following description to refer to the same or like items.
FIGS. 1A and 1B show schematic diagrams of the account management system in accordance with one example embodiment. The system 100 may be implemented as a software application deployed on a general-purpose computer or a network server. The system 100 manages depositors' deposits 155 across a broad spectrum of participating deposit institutions 1, 2, 3, such as savings banks 160 and 170. The number of deposit institutions in which depositor funds may be deposited is not limited and may depend on the number of depositors and amount of funds managed by the system 100. The account management system 100 allocates depositor funds 166, 176 in the FDIC-insured deposit institutions 160 and 170 in order to maximize coverage for each depositor utilizing FDIC's pass-through insurance up to the current SMDIA limit of $250,000 at each institution; however, that limit may change in the future. All depositor deposits may be held in interest-bearing demand deposit accounts, such as money market and savings accounts 165 and 175, which preferably do not have fixed maturity dates. Deposits may also be held in core deposit accounts including non-interest-bearing accounts. The depositor funds 155 may be moved to and from the deposit institutions 160 and 170 through a custodian account for each depositor 153 held at a custodian institution. In another embodiment the depositor funds may be moved to and from deposit institutions through accounts held a correspondent bank or directly through the account management system.
In one example embodiment, the system 100 is configured to allocate a depositor's funds that exceed the FDIC insurance limit among several deposit institutions 1, 2, 3, so that the total amount of a single depositor's funds held in any deposit institution does not exceed the SMDIA. For example, as shown in FIG. 1B, funds of depositor D1, which may or may not exceed the FDIC insurance limit, may be divided into two portions 166 and 176 and allocated between accounts 165 and 175 held in different deposit institutions 160 and 170, respectively. Similar allocation processes may be performed with the funds of depositors D2 and D3. As a result, funds of depositors D1,D2 and D3 are allocated into accounts 165 and 175 held in different deposit institutions 160 and 170, respectively, so that no single depositor holds funds in excess of the SMDIA at any single deposit institution. The allocation of depositor funds may be performed by the custodian institution 150 through the custodian account 153 for each depositor based on allocation instructions 115 from the system.
In addition, to assure that no single depositor holds funds in excess of the SMDIA at any single deposit institution, due to, for example, interest payments by the deposit institutions or a credit to the deposit account made by the deposit institution for any reason, which may potentially bring the balance of a depositor's funds above the SMDIA for a deposit institution, the system 100 sets a deposit limit for each depositor at each deposit institution below the SMDIA (such per depositor deposit limit referred to as the PDDL) and monitors when the balance of any single depositor's funds at a single deposit institution exceeds the PDDL. In particular, the system may obtain from each of the deposit institutions 160 and 170 (or from the custodian institution 150) daily transaction records 145 for each deposit account. If the records 145 indicate that the amount of a depositor's funds held in any one of the deposit institutions exceeds the PDDL, the system 100 may instruct the custodian institution 150 to transfer, from each deposit account, a portion of a single depositor's funds 155 or 157 that exceeds the PDDL to at least one other deposit account in at least one different deposit institution, so that each deposit account holds a portion of a depositor's funds that does not exceed the PDDL and the amount of a single depositor's funds held at any deposit institution remains under the SMDIA.
Yet in another example embodiment, to keep track of the movement of depositor funds and the balance of funds in the deposit accounts, the system 100 may create a general ledger file 100 comprising a plurality of individual depositor records 120-140 and store such file in a database (not shown). The general ledger file 110 may include a plurality of account records 112 and 114 that contain information about account balances and transaction history for each deposit account and each depositor account managed by the system 100. For example, as shown in FIG. 1B, record 112 may include transaction history and account balance for deposit account 165 held at the deposit institution 160; and record 114 may include transaction history and account balance for deposit account 175 held at the deposit institution 170. Similarly, individual depositor records 120, 130, 140 contain information about the transaction history and daily account balance for each deposit account where a depositor's funds are held. In addition, individual depositor records 120, 130, 140 may include a depositor's identification and contact information as well as a depositor's preferences information (such as their bank exclusion list) and other types of information.
In one example embodiment, the account management system 100 automatically performs a "Daily Reconciliation Process" of all deposit institutions and all deposit accounts. FIG. 2 depicts a schematic diagram of this process. At step 205, the system 100 downloads bank activity information from each participating deposit institution. The system receives the account balance 210 and transaction records 215 specific to each deposit account where depositor funds are held. The account balance 210 is the current dollar amount held in the account as reported by the bank. The transaction record 215 provides a detail of any transaction that occurred. In one example embodiment, the system 100 automatically creates two output files for each deposit institution, one for the account balance and one for transaction records. The output data is saved in a designated output folder and stored for the day's reconciliation process. If an extraction error occurs during data download from any of the participating deposit institutions, an Exception Report may be generated, which flags the file for manual review. The Systems Administrator may trouble shoot and resolve the error. Once the extraction errors are resolved the deposit institution's data is ready be reconciled.
It should be noted that the organization of captured data of each deposit institution is facilitated by the system's ability to assign a unique identifier to multiple levels of data. In one example embodiment, the data levels may include, but are not limited to: (i) an individual deposit institution within the pool of participating deposit institutions, which may be identified by a unique FDIC certificate number; (ii) a deposit account within each deposit institution, which may be identified by the last four digits of the account number; and the transaction history for each deposit account. Additional data levels may be used in other embodiments.
Next, at step 220, the system performs a comparison of the downloaded bank balance and transactions with the general ledger balance (sum of all cleared transactions) and transactions to ensure that they match. If these balances and transactions match, then the deposit institution data is reconciled for the day and the reconciliation data is stored to provide an audit trail at step 260. If the deposit account balances and the general ledger balance do not match, the system 100 will identify and document all differences, and determine at step 225, if there are any pending transactions that have not been posted to the general ledger. For example, the system may generate a Review Pending Items Report which is used to identify any new transactions that are to be posted in order to balance the deposit account balances at the deposit institutions with the general ledger. The Report may also contain a description of the new transactions, which allows the new transactions to be easily identified and reviewed.
In one example embodiment, the pending transactions may be either interest paid by the deposit institution or fees imposed by the deposit institution. If it is determined that the pending transaction is not either interest or fees, the Exception Report may be generated and submitted for manual review at step 230. If the transaction activity is interest or fees, the system verifies the transactions and prepares them for posting to the appropriate general ledger accounts. If the transaction activity is a fee 235, the fee may be posted to a system account 240 in the general ledger 255. If the transaction activity is an interest payment 245, the interest is systemically allocated at step 250 to all depositors who have deposits with the deposit institution. In one example embodiment, the amount of allocation may be based on the daily balance of a depositor's funds. The allocated interest is then posted to depositors' accounts in the general ledger 255 and individual depositor records.
Lastly, at step 260, the system may generate a Bank Reconciliation Report which displays any pending transactions and all previously posted transactions. The new transactions can only be posted if the sum of all new transactions and previously posted transactions equals the ledger balance. Daily reconciliation process is complete when the status indicates that there are no pending items and the Bank Reconciliation Report shows that the deposit institution balance and the general ledger balance match. All reports that are specific to the deposit institution's reconciliation process for each day may be stored in the system database. When all the Deposit Institution Reconciliation Reports are generated and stored, the Daily Reconciliation Process is terminated.
In one example embodiment, the Daily Reconciliation Process described above may be followed by a "Daily Allocation Process." During this process, the account management system 100 provides instructions for the movement of funds between the custodian institution 150 and the participating deposit institutions 160 and 170 and also breaks down the aggregate deposit institution balance to the individual depositor level at the participating deposit institutions 160 and 170. FIG. 3 depicts a schematic diagram of the daily allocation process in accordance with one example embodiment. The process may begin at the start of each business day when the custodian institution 310 sends transaction records 145 to the system 320. The transaction records 145 may be transmitted via secured file transfer protocols. Preferably, within one hour of receipt of the transaction records 145, the system 320 generates at step 330 an ACH (Automated Clearing House) file 340, which instructs the custodian institution 310 how to allocate using ACH the net cash flows for each of the participating deposit institutions. The ACH file provides the deposit institution level detail. The ACH file is also the vehicle used to ensure that no single depositor holds funds in excess of the SMDIA at any single deposit institution and provides the data for rebalancing the depositors' custodian accounts. Preferably, within two hours of receiving the transaction records 145 from the custodian institution 320, the system 100 creates a Journal file 350 that provides a breakdown of depositor balances by bank and account activity data. The files are transmitted to the custodian institution 310, which in turn originates ACH transfers of funds between deposit accounts in different deposit institutions. It should be noted that the indicated time limits for generation of the ACH and Journal files are merely exemplary and can be changed depending on various business and technical criteria.
During Phase I of the process, the database of system 320 is prepped to receive and store the transaction records for the day and ensures that information on each deposit institution in the program has been updated. The updated information provides one of the main security features to the system. It ensures that system 320 is immediately alerted to any deposit institution mergers and failures of deposit institutions participating where depositor funds are allocated. The system also receives daily email alerts of public deposit institution data from published news sources and the FDIC detailing any mergers or failures, as will be described in greater detail herein below. These parameters ensure that in the rare event that the FDIC assumes the deposits of a failed deposit institution, an immediate claim can be initiated on behalf of each depositor with deposits in that failed deposit institution. The system 320 may also automatically generate a file for the FDIC in the required format with all the necessary depositor detail. This file is sent by the custodian institution 310 to the FDIC. This also ensures that depositor funds are transferred to other participating deposit institutions in the program. Additionally, the system ensures the immediate reallocation of cash balances in the event of a merger between participating deposit institutions. A reallocation to another deposit institution will only be triggered, if the account balances now held at the merged deposit institution, exceeds the preset aggregate deposit limit for such merged institution or if a single depositor may hold funds in excess of the PDDL at the merged deposit institution.
During Phase II of the process, the system 320 computes the net depositor cash transaction amount for the day (which may be positive or negative) and allocates such amounts to the participating deposit institutions. Once this phase is executed, the ACH file which is generated containing the allocation instructions for each deposit institution is sent to the custodian institution 310. The custodian institution then prepares all ACH originations for each participating deposit institution to be executed the same business day. If there is no cash movement for the day, a blank ACH file may still be transmitted to the custodian institution. This ensures that there is a file generated each business day for audit purposes.
During Phase III of the process, the system 320 breaks the cash allocation down to the depositor level at each deposit institution and generates a Journal file. The Journal file is transmitted to the custodian institution 310 and is used by the custodian to post transactions to the individual depositor's accounts with respect to each deposit institution. The account details may be stored in a database and provides the input for the depositor's monthly statement. The Journal file is sent to the custodian institution 310 daily preferably simultaneously with the sending of the ACH file.
Phases II and III may be time stamped to ensure processing prior to the designated cut off times, this ensures same day processing which contributes to both the liquidity of the depositors account as well as maximizes the time in which the depositor's balances earn interest. It should be noted that the indicated time limits for generation of the ACH and Journal files are merely exemplary and can be changed depending on various business and technical criteria.
In one example embodiment, the account management system 100 proactively monitors the safety and soundness of participating deposit institutions by reviewing up to date public information as published by the Federal Reserve and news services, so that, in the event of merger of participating deposit institutions or failure of one or more deposit institutions, appropriate actions may be taken by the account management system 100.
For example, if the deposits are acquired by another deposit institution, the system 100 will determine if the acquiring deposit institution is one of the participating deposit institutions. If the acquiring deposit institution is not in the program, the system 100 will assign a unique identifier for the acquiring deposit institution that will allow the deposit accounts to be transferred from the acquired program deposit institution. The allocation instructions 115 are given to the custodian institution. This process allows accounts to be transferred to the acquiring deposit institution instead of closed.
If the acquiring deposit institution is one of the participating deposit institutions, the system 100 will automatically perform the above-described reallocation process, and will instruct the custodian institution to reallocate balances to ensure that no single depositor holds funds in excess of the SMDIA at the acquiring deposit institution.
If the FDIC has taken over the failed bank, the system 100 automatically generates a file for the FDIC in the correct format with all the depositor details necessary to file a claim. The custodian institution only has to forward the file to the FDIC. Once the claim has been settled the custodian institution will move the cash to other participating deposit institutions based on allocation instructions sent by the account management system 100.
In the event of a merger between participating deposit institutions, the system 100 will automatically perform the above-described reallocation process, and will instruct the custodian institution to reallocate balances to ensure that no single depositor holds funds in excess of the SMDIA at the acquiring deposit institution, as will be described in greater detail herein below with referenced to FIG. 9.
In one example embodiment, the account management system 100 allows depositors to specify various preferences with respect to allocation of funds in the deposit institutions. For example, during registration with the system 100, all depositors are given the option to provide a list of deposit institutions in which they do not want their funds deposited ("Exclusion List"). The Exclusion List remains in effect as long as the depositor has funds on deposit with the system 100 and becomes part of the system that ensures that the system does not allocate such depositor's funds into deposit institutions on the Exclusion List. The system ensures a fully automated exclusion process that does not require manual intervention each time an allocation is performed on behalf of the depositor.
In one example embodiment, the account management system 100 does not require negotiated interest rates with the participating deposit institutions and will accept the deposit institution's offered rate. Interest rates are determined at the discretion of the deposit institution based on prevailing economic and business conditions and are subject to change at any time without notice. As indicated above, depositor funds may be deposited in interest-bearing demand deposit accounts, such as money market and savings accounts, which offer a variable rate without a fixed maturity. This provides maximum flexibility in the allocation of interest across all depositors.
This feature of accepting the deposit institution's offered rate is unique to the account management system of the present invention. The reason is that other extended FDIC deposit systems require participating banks to agree to a pre-set formula (e.g., Fed rate+3 bps). What this means from a participating bank's perspective is that the bank's treasurer must create a special process to deal with this funding source. This takes time and adds complexity to the bank's Asset liability Management Process. On the other hand, the account management system 100 allows the treasurer of a participating deposit institution to manage the deposit accounts in the same fashion as every other bank account and therefore affords the treasurer a greater amount of flexibility and no additional work. This in turn makes deposit institutions more willing to participate in the services provided by the account management system 100 and therefore expand the pool of participating deposit institutions.
By requiring deposit institutions to agree to a preset formula, other extended FDIC deposit systems are able to calculate interest on a daily basis. But because of the complexities of participating in an extended FDIC financial deposit system that require a predetermined rate (as described above), banks typically offer a lower rate to those financial systems. In contrast, in one embodiment, the account management system 100 deposits depositor funds in variable rate accounts and therefore simply takes the rate when the interest is applied to the deposit account and then allocates the interest to depositors' accounts when paid by the deposit institution. This allocation of interest requires substantial amounts of computations, but allows the account management system 100 to receive the higher rates that deposit institutions generally offer for accounts that do not require a deposit institution to have special software or hardware or to offer a predetermined rate. The process of the interest allocation to depositors when interest is paid by a deposit institution will be described herein below with reference to FIG. 5.
In one example embodiment, the account management system 100 runs a fully automated process to allocate and credit interest to the depositors. All depositors with deposits at a given deposit institution receive an allocation of interest based on their daily account balance. Interest paid by the deposit institution is captured from the daily transaction download and is allocated through the daily reconciliation process. Since interest rates are not negotiated and may fluctuate, depositors receive the actual rate paid by each deposit institution on their respective deposit at such deposit institution. Unlike other financial systems that credit interest based on a fixed maturity date, the account management system 100 credits interest to depositors as and when it is received from each depository institution and is not restricted to any particular day of the month. Since the system allows interest to be credited to the depositor's account on any day of the month, the interest is reconciled as it is received and does not require any manual interest calculations. All interest credited to a depositor is automatically reinvested for the account of the depositor.
FIG. 4 shows a diagram of a process of automatic interest allocation implemented by the account management system in accordance with one example embodiment. As shown, if a depository institution pays interest on the 15th of the month, the account management system 100 makes an interest allocation and credits depositors effective that day. If interest is paid by the deposit institution on the 30th of the month, the system 100 will perform the interest allocation effective that day. In contrast, other extended FDIC deposit systems generally credit interest based on a fixed maturity date.
In one example embodiment, the account management system 100 allocates interest on funds that depositors had on deposit for a partial month on the date a deposit institution pays interest. In particular, the system 100 automatically tracks a depositor's balances on a daily basis so that even if funds are withdrawn during the statement cycle, the depositor is allocated and is credited his share of the interest when it is paid by the deposit institution at the end of the next statement cycle. The interest allocation is based on the daily balance that a depositor has in a deposit account for the interest period. The interest may be paid at the end of the interest period and not at the time of withdrawal of the funds as is generally practiced by other extended FDIC deposit systems.
FIG. 5 shows a diagram of a process of interest allocation implemented in the account management system 100 in accordance with one example embodiment. As shown, depositor D1 maintains funds in a deposit institution throughout the month of June. If the deposit institution pays interest on June 30th, the system allocates interest to a depositor on such date based on the daily balance that a depositor has in the deposit account at such deposit institution for the entire interest period. If the depositor withdraws funds from the system the withdrawal is allocated to the deposit account at a deposit institution in the amount of "principal" on, for example, July 1st, the depositor receives the principal but not the interest that has accrued since the last payment date would be paid at the time of withdrawal. On, for example, July 31st, when the deposit institution next pays interest, the system will calculate the depositor's share of interest and allocate such share of the interest to the depositor based on the daily balance that the depositor has in the deposit account during such interest period. By crediting interest on the dates that deposit institutions pay interest, the system does not require the use of one depositors funds to pay another withdrawing depositor's accrued interest that has not yet been paid by a deposit institution and eliminates the liquidity risk in the event an outside institution, like a bank, provide funds for interest accrued but not yet paid by a deposit institution.
FIG. 6 depicts one example embodiment of a process for allocation of depositor funds among a plurality of deposit institutions. At step 610, the account management system 100 sets a deposit limit for each deposit institution based on the current aggregate deposits at such institution to ensure that the amount of depositor funds deposited through the system held in each deposit institution remains below a certain percentage of such institution's total deposits. Also at step 610, the system establishes a deposit limit for each depositor at each deposit institution in an amount less than the SMDIA to ensure that amounts that a depositor has on deposit in any deposit institution at any time is always under the SMDIA. This limit is referred to as the deposit limit per depositor deposit limit or PDDL. At step 620, the system then determines, based on the amount of depositor funds and the established aggregate deposit limit and the PDDL, a minimum number of different deposit institutions necessary for holding the depositor funds, so that no single depositor holds funds in excess of the PDDL at any single deposit institution. At step 630, the system then determines, based on the various allocation factors, the amount of depositor funds to be deposited in each different deposit institution, so that each deposit institution holds no more than the aggregate deposit limit for such deposit institution and so that no single depositor holds funds in excess of the PDDL at any single deposit institution. At step 640, the system receives from the deposit institutions where depositor funds are deposited (or from the custodian institution) transaction records for each of the deposit accounts. At step 650, the system determines, based on the transaction records, if the amount of an individual depositors funds held in any of the deposit institutions exceeds the PDDL. If the amount of a depositor's funds held in any of the deposit institutions exceeds the PDDL, the system, at step 660, instructs the custodian institution to reallocate from any deposit institution a portion of such depositor's funds that exceeds the PDDL to at least one other deposit account in at least one different deposit institution, so as to ensure that no single depositor holds funds in excess of the SMDIA at any single deposit institution.
FIG. 7 depicts one example embodiment of a process for daily account reconciliation. At step 710, the system retrieves from the database a general ledger file containing information about aggregate account balances in each deposit account and a transaction history of each deposit account. At step 720, the system retrieves from the database a plurality of individual depositor records containing information about a daily account balance for each depositor in each of the plurality of deposit accounts. At step 730, the system downloads from the plurality of deposit institutions information about a daily account balance in each deposit account and a daily transaction history of each deposit account. At step 740, the system than reconciles each of the deposit accounts by comparing, at step 750, for each deposit account, the total account, balance and transactions from the general ledger file obtained from the database with the daily account balance and transactions obtained from a deposit institution. If the compared account balances are different or the transactions are different, the system, at step 760, identifies in the daily transaction history obtained from the deposit institution at least one transaction (e,g., interest payment transaction) made by the deposit institution that was not posted to the general ledger file to account for the discrepancy. At step 770, the system identifies individual depositor records of one or more depositors whose funds are held in the deposit account where the interest payment transaction was made. At step 780, the system calculates what portions of the interest payment to be allocated to each of the identified depositors based on the daily balance of funds held in the deposit account for each identified depositor. At step 790, the system posts the calculated portions of the interest payment to the individual depositor records of each identified depositor.
FIG. 8 depicts one example embodiment of the process for allocation of interest payments. At step 810, the system receives from a deposit institution information about account balances and a transaction history for a deposit account that holds funds of a plurality of depositors. At step 820, the system retrieves from a database a plurality of individual depositor records that indicate which depositors hold funds in said first deposit institution, including a balance of funds held by each depositor each day in said first deposit institution. At step 830, the system calculates what portions of the interest payment are allocated to each of the depositors indicated in the depositor records based on the daily balance of funds held in the first deposit institution for each depositor. At step 840, the system determines if the balance of funds held by any depositor in said first deposit institution exceeds a preset deposit limit for such depositor at said first deposit account, where the preset deposit limit for each depositor is set below the SMDIA to ensure that the amount of a depositor's funds held in the first deposit institution remains under the SMDIA, such limit is referred to as the per depositor deposit limit or PDDL. If a depositor's funds held at such deposit institution exceeds the PDDL after a transaction, the system, at step 850, identifies a second deposit institution in which the balance of funds of at least one indicated depositor does not exceed the PDDL. Finally, at step 860, the system instructs the first deposit institution to transfer from the deposit account a portion of the interest payment allocated to said at least one indicated depositor to the deposit account at the second deposit institution, so that each of the first and second deposit institutions holds a portion of depositor funds that does not exceed the PDDL.
FIG. 9 depicts one example embodiment of a process for allocating depositor funds during mergers or closures of the participating deposit institutions. At step 910, the system collects and analyzes information about deposit institutions to identify mergers or closures of these institutions. In the event of a merger (or a closure that results in a merger) step 920, between two or more deposit institutions, the system determines, at step 930, if the total amount of a single depositor's funds held in the merged deposit institutions could exceed the PDDL, in which case the system authorizes transfer, at step 940, of the potential excess portion of the depositor's funds held in said merged deposit institution to at least one other deposit account held in at least one other deposit institution so no single depositor holds funds in excess of the PDDL at any single deposit institution. In the event of a closure of a deposit institution, at step 950, the system selects, at step 960, one or more other participating deposit institutions for acquiring depositor funds received from the FDIC with respect to funds previously held in the closed deposit institution, so that the total amount of a single depositor's funds held in each of the acquiring deposit institutions do not exceed the PDDL. Lastly, at step 970, the system allocates the depositor funds between the one or more selected deposit institutions.
FIG. 10 depicts one example embodiment of a computer system 5, such as a personal computer or application server, suitable for supporting account management system of the present invention. As shown, computer 5 may include one or more processors 15, memory 20, one or more hard disk drive(s) 30, optical drive(s) 35, serial port(s) 40, graphics card 45, audio card 50 and network card(s) 55 connected by system bus 10. System bus 10 may be any of several types of bus structures including a memory bus or memory controller, a peripheral bus and a local bus using any of a variety of known bus architectures. Processor 15 may include one or more Intel® Core 2 Quad 2.33 GHz processors or other type of microprocessor.
System memory 20 may include a read-only memory (ROM) 21 and random access memory (RAM) 23. Memory 20 may be implemented as in DRAM (dynamic RAM), EPROM, EEPROM, Flash or other type of memory architecture. ROM 21 stores a basic input/output system 22 (BIOS), containing the basic routines that help to transfer information between the components of computer system 5, such as during start-up. RAM 23 stores operating system 24 (OS), such as Windows® XP Professional or other type of operating system, that is responsible for management and coordination of processes and allocation and sharing of hardware resources in computer system 5. System memory 20 also stores applications and programs 25, such as services 306. System memory 20 also stores various runtime data 26 used by programs 25.
Computer system 5 may further include hard disk drive(s) 3D, such as SATA magnetic hard disk drive (HDD), and optical disk drive(s) 35 for reading from or writing to a removable optical disk, such as a CD-ROM, DVD-ROM or other optical media. Drives 30 and 35 and their associated computer-readable media provide non-volatile storage of computer readable instructions, data structures, applications and program modules/subroutines that implement processes and methods disclosed herein. Although the exemplary computer system 5 employs magnetic and optical disks, it should be appreciated by those skilled in the art that other types of computer readable media that can store data accessible by a computer system 5, such as magnetic cassettes, flash memory cards, digital video disks, RAMs, ROMs, EPROMs and other types of memory may also be used in alternative embodiments of the computer system.
Computer system 5 further includes a plurality of serial ports 40, such as Universal Serial Bus (USB), for connecting data input device(s) 75, such as keyboard, mouse, touch pad and other. Serial ports 40 may be also be used to connect data output device(s) 80, such as printer, scanner and other, as well as other peripheral device(s) 85, such as external data storage devices and the like. System 5 may also include graphics card 45, such as nVidia® GeForce® GT 240M or other video card, for interfacing with a monitor 60 or other video reproduction device. System 5 may also include an audio card 50 for reproducing sound via internal or external speakers 65. In addition, system 5 may include network card(s) 55, such as Ethernet, WiFi, GSM, Bluetooth or other wired, wireless, or cellular network interface for connecting computer system 5 to network 70, such as the Internet.
FIGS. 11A-11E show schematic diagrams of the account management system 1100 in accordance with another embodiment of the invention. In this embodiment, the system 1100 administers funds preferably held in non-interest-bearing transaction accounts. Non-interest-bearing transaction accounts include, for example, accounts maintained at an FDIC-insured depository institution, for which no interest is paid or accrued and where the insured depository institution does not reserve the right to require advance notice of intended withdrawals.
The system 1100 may be implemented as a software application deployed on a general-purpose computer or a network server. The system 1100 manages depositors' 1101, 1102, 1103, 1104 deposits 1155, 1156 across participating deposit institutions 1160, 1170, 1180, 1190. The number of deposit institutions in which depositor funds may be deposited is not limited and may depend on the number of deposit institutions enrolled in the system 1100. The account management system 1100 allocates depositor funds held in deposit accounts 1166, 1167, 1176, 1177, 1186, 1187, 1196, 1197 in the FDIC-insured deposit institutions 1160, 1170, 1180, 1190 in order to maximize insurance coverage for each depositor 1101, 1102, 1103, 1104 utilizing FDIC's pass-through insurance up to the current maximum SMDIA limit amount of $250,000 at each institution 1160, 1170, 1180, 1190. It is important to note that the dollar amount of the SMDIA limit may change from time-to-time and the invention is not restricted by the current limit of $250,000. The account management system 1100 may also be a listing service or other web-based service where depositors and banks either manually (through a user-interface) or automatically (through another computer, database and server system) post their respective desired deposit amounts into the system. The system 1100 is configured to use elements, methods and allocation processes described above particularly with respect to the embodiments disclosed in FIGS. 1-3, 6-7 and 9-10.
All deposits 1166, 1176, 1186, 1196 are preferably held in non-interest-bearing demand deposit accounts 1166, 1167, 1176, 1177, 1186, 1187, 1196, 1197, such as checking and savings accounts. The depositor funds 1155, 1156 may be moved to and from the deposit institutions 1160, 1170, 1180, 1190 through the system 1100 for each depositor 1101, 1102, 1103, 1104.
For the benefit of using the account management system 1100, deposit institutions pay a minimal fee for processing the transactions and for the listing and other privileges associated with the system. When a deposit institution enrolls or participates in the account management system 1100, it identifies an amount of total deposits, preferably core deposits, that it would like to hold in accounts, preferably non-interest-bearing accounts. These total desired deposits may be referred to cumulatively as "demand." The system 1100 then attempts to meet these deposit requests by using excess amounts (resulting from a depositor's funds in excess of the SMDIA) received by participants in the system. These deposits of excess amounts may be referred to cumulatively as "supply." The system 1100 attempts to match the supply and demand by allocating excess funds to meet the demand of individual deposit institutions. When depositors or deposit institutions want to withdraw their deposits they simply input their withdrawal request into the system and the money is pulled from the respective banks.
In one example embodiment, the system 1100 is configured to allocate a depositor's funds that exceed the FDIC insurance limit among several deposit institutions 1160, 1170, 1180, 1190 so that the total amount of a single depositor's funds held in any deposit institution does not exceed the SMDIA limit. For example, as shown in FIG. 11A, deposit funds 1155 of depositor 1101, in the amount of $1 million, which exceeds the FDIC insurance SMDIA limit of $250,000, may be allocated by the system 1100 to other deposit accounts 1177, 1187, 1997.
In this example, $250,000 of the deposit 1155 is deposited into account 1166. The deposit institution 1160 then either manually or automatically transmits information about the excess funds 1168 of $750,000 to the system 1100. If the information is input manually, the depositor 1101 or deposit institution 1160 directly inputs the amount of the total desired deposit into the system 1100 using a computer or web-based user-interface. This desired deposit amount may be the total $1 million 1155 or just the excess amount 1168 of $750,000. The system 1100 can be configured to use either or both amounts. If the system 1100 is configured as a listing service, the desired deposit amount (i.e., the excess amount 1168) may be posted on a site located on a server so that other participants (those enrolled to use the system 1100), can view the desired deposit amount.
If the information about the depositor's 1101 deposit 1155 is transmitted to the system 1100 automatically, a local computer accessible to either the depositor 1101 or deposit institution 1160 is used. This local computer may automatically calculate the amount of funds in excess of the SMDIA and then transmit such information to the account management system 1100. Alternatively, the local computer may transmit the amount of the total deposit 1155 to the system 1100 which would then calculate the amount of funds in excess of the SMDIA 1168 that need to be allocated to other deposit institutions.
Referring again to in FIG. 11A, the system 1100 is configured to allocate the excess funds 1168 by dividing the funds 1168 into three portions 1178, 1188, 1198 among three accounts 1177, 1187, 1197 preferably non-interest-bearing transaction accounts. The system 1100 uses the same allocation processes as described above with respect to the embodiments shown in FIGS. 1-3, 6-7 and 9-10. In this example, the system 1100 divides the excess funds 1168 into three equal portions 1178, 1188, 1198 of $250,000. While the allocation process may divide the funds equally, as shown in this example, the system 1100 is also configured to allocate the funds randomly, pro rata or on a first-come, first-served basis among the deposit accounts 1177, 1187, 1197. In addition, the system 1100 can be configured to use any combination of these allocation methods: equally, randomly, pro rata and first-come, first-served. Importantly, the allocation process should preferably occur in an unbiased manner so that it does not favor any deposition institution or any type of deposit institution. Using a random allocation method, the system 1100 randomly allocates a percentage of the excess funds of $750,000 to be deposited in each of the accounts 1177, 1187, 1197. Using a first-come, first-served allocation method, the system 1100 keeps a list of demand requests made by deposit institutions, the most recent request being filled first, followed by later requests, arranged by the date and time of the demand request.
Another example embodiment of the invention is shown in FIG. 11B. In this example, depositor 1101 deposits $500,000 1165 into account 1166, preferably a non-interest-bearing transaction account, held at deposit institution 1160. After information concerning the excess funds 1178 is input in or transmitted to the system 1100, the system 1100 then allocates $250,000 in excess funds 1178 to deposit institution 1170 which deposits the funds 1178 into account 1177, preferably also a non-interest-bearing transaction account. In this example, another depositor 1102 also deposits $500,000 1175 into deposit account 1176 held at deposition institution 1170. After information about this depositor's excess funds 1179 of $250,000 is transmitted to the system 1100, the system 1100 then allocates the excess funds 1179 to deposit institution 1190 which deposits the funds into deposit account 1197. In this example, because the incoming 1178 and outgoing 1179 amounts are the same, deposit institution 1102 has a "reciprocality" status.
Referring to the example embodiment shown in FIG. 11C, depositor 1101 deposits $500,000 1165 into deposit account 1166 held at deposit institution 1160. After information about the excess funds 1188 of $250,000 is input in or transmitted to the system 1100, the system then allocates $250,000 in excess funds 1188 to deposit institution 1103 which deposits the excess funds 1188 into deposit account 1187. Another depositor 1103 deposits $300,000 1185 into account 1186 at deposit institution 1180. Information about the excess funds 1189 of $50,000 is then input in or transmitted to system 1100 which then allocates the $50,000 in excess funds 1189 to deposit institution 1190. Deposit institution 1190 then deposits the excess funds 1189 into account 1197. In this example, because the incoming 1188 and outgoing 1189 amounts are not the same, deposit institution 1103 has a "partial reciprocality" status.
It is important to note that, in this example, deposit account 1197 is a single account designated by the deposit institution 1190 to hold all funds received by the system 1100. Accordingly, while the total deposits in account 1197 may exceed the SMDIA limit, no single depositor will have funds in this account 1197 in excess of the SMDIA limit and thus, each depositor's 1101, 1102 funds 1165, 1175, respectively, will be fully insured. In another embodiment, as shown and described above with respect to FIGS. 11A-11D, each depositor 1101, 1102, 1103 may have a designated account at each deposit institution 1160, 1170, 1180, 1190 where the maximum limit for each of these designated accounts 1166, 1177, 1187, 1197 is the SMDIA.
FIG. 11E provides a cumulative example of FIGS. 11A-11D and shows the movement and allocation of depositors' 1101, 1102, 1103 deposit funds 1155, 1175, 1185 between deposition institutions 1160, 1170, 1180, 1190 and accounts 1166, 1176, 1177, 1186, 1187, 1197.
In another embodiment of the system shown and described with respect to FIGS. 11A-11E, to ensure that no single depositor holds funds in excess of the SMDIA at any single deposit institution 1160, 1170, 1180, 1190, the system 1100 may also set a deposit limit for each depositor 1101, 1102, 1103, 1104 at each deposit institution below the SMDIA (such per depositor deposit limit referred to as the "PDDL"). The system 1100 may be configured to monitor when the balance of any single depositor's funds at a single deposit institution exceeds the PDDL. In particular, the system 1100 may obtain from each of the deposit institutions 1160, 1170, 1180, 1190 daily transaction records for each deposit account. If the records indicate that the amount of a depositor's funds held in any one of the deposit institutions exceeds the PDDL, the system 1100 may transfer, from each deposit account 1166, 1167, 1176, 1177, 1186, 1187, 1196, 1197, a portion of a single depositor's funds that exceeds the PDDL to at least one other deposit account in at least one different deposit institution, so that each deposit account holds a portion of a depositor's funds that does not exceed the PDDL and the amount of a single depositor's funds held at any deposit institution remains under the SMDIA.
In another embodiment, a custodian institution (as shown and described in the above embodiments, in particular FIG. 1A) or a correspondent bank may be incorporated into the embodiment shown in FIGS. 11A-11E to administer the deposit funds 1155. In this example embodiment, depositors 1101, 1102, 1103, 1104 would deposit funds into the custodian institution or correspondent bank, as shown in FIG. 1A. The custodian institution or correspondent bank would then administer the depositor's funds between the system 1100, the depositors 1101, 1102, 1103, 1104 and the deposit institutions 1160, 1170, 1180, 1190 as described in the preceding embodiments.
As discussed above, the accounts 1166, 1167, 1176, 1177, 1186, 1187, 1196, 1197 are preferably non-interest-bearing transaction accounts, but they may also be interest-bearing accounts such as negotiated order of withdrawal (NOW) accounts or money market accounts. In addition, the deposits are preferably core deposits. The system 1100 and associated deposits are preferably treated as core deposits due to the stability provided by non-interest-bearing deposits and the fairness offered to banks with the unbiased allocation system. More specifically, both depositors and deposit institutions can input their respective desired deposit amount into the system. Cash is be allocated to all participating deposit institutions in a completely unbiased manner. Supply and demand requests are coordinated in order of dollar amount and time of entry. No interest is paid on the deposits placed at any deposit institution. Only an administrative fee and/or processing fee is paid by a bank 1160, 1170, 1180, 1190 receiving the deposit 1155, 1156.
The embodiments depicted in FIGS. 11A-11E overcome the issues presented by expiration of the TAG program. The account management system 1100 encourages movement of TAG money to small, community banks because the money is allocated without any bias toward large banks by allocating cash—equally, randomly, pro rata, on a first come-first served basis or any combination of these—to banks subscribed to the system. Consequently, the community banks are able to support new loan business and to receive cheaper deposits, higher margins and more liquidity which improves the economy. The account management system 1100 also provides a private sector solution that removes reduces involvement of the FDIC thus eliminating some of the "Big Government" concerns. Furthermore, the system 1100 spreads funds to accounts at numerous banks thereby reducing the impact of the cost of any one bank failing on the deposit insurance fund ("DIF"). Moreover, the system 1100 allows banks to have offsetting placement of deposit balances (if clients are introduced via the bank) and receipt of deposit balances. The system 1100 also offers a private sector solution that helps build local economies and strengthen community banks.
In various embodiments, the processes and methods described herein may be implemented in hardware, software, firmware, or any combination thereof. If implemented in software, the functions may be stored as one or more instructions or code on a non-transitory computer-readable medium. Computer-readable medium includes both computer storage and communication medium that facilitates transfer of a computer program from one place to another. A storage medium may be any available media that can be accessed by a computer. By way of example, and not limitation, such computer-readable medium can comprise RAM, ROM, EEPROM, CD-ROM or other optical disk storage, magnetic disk storage or other magnetic storage devices, or any other medium that can be used to carry or store desired program code in the form of instructions or data structures and that can be accessed by a computer. Also, any connection may be termed a computer-readable medium. For example, if software is transmitted from a website, server, or other remote source using a coaxial cable, fiber optic cable, twisted pair, digital subscriber line (DSL), or wireless technologies such as infrared, radio, and microwave are included in the definition of medium.
In the interest of clarity, not all of the routine features of the embodiments are shown and described herein. It will be appreciated that in the development of any such actual implementation, numerous implementation-specific decisions must be made in order to achieve the developer's specific goals, and that these specific goals will vary from one implementation to another and from one developer to another. It will be appreciated that such a development effort might be complex and time-consuming, but would nevertheless be a routine undertaking of engineering for those of ordinary skill in the art having the benefit of this disclosure.
Furthermore, it is to be understood that the phraseology or terminology used herein is for the purpose of description and not of limitation, such that the terminology or phraseology of the present specification is to be interpreted by the skilled in the art in light of the teachings and guidance presented herein, in combination with the knowledge of the skilled in the relevant art(s). Moreover, it is not intended for any term in the specification or claims to be ascribed an uncommon or special meaning unless explicitly set forth as such.
The various embodiments disclosed herein encompass present and future known equivalents to the known components referred to herein by way of illustration. Moreover, while embodiments and applications have been shown and described, it would be apparent to those skilled in the art having the benefit of this disclosure that many more modifications than mentioned above are possible without departing from the inventive concepts disclosed herein.
posting the transaction made by the deposit institution to the individual depositor records of each identified depositor.
identifying an individual depositor record of a depositor who made funds withdrawal; and posting the deposit to the individual depositor record.
3. The method of claim 1, wherein reconciling further comprises: identifying in a daily transaction history a fee transaction debited by the deposit institution from the deposit account; and posting said fee transaction to a separate account in the general ledger file.
instructing the account management system to reallocate from each deposit institution a portion of a depositor's funds that exceeds the PDDL to at least one other deposit account at least one different deposit institution, whereby each deposit institution holds a portion of a depositor's funds that does not exceed the PDDL and no more than the aggregate deposit limit for such deposit institution, so to ensure that the amount of depositor funds held in each deposit institution remains under the SMDIA.
instructing the first deposit institution to transfer from the first deposit account an amount at least equal to a portion of the transaction made by the deposit institution to the deposit account held in the second deposit institution, whereby each of the first and second deposit institutions holds a portion of such depositor's funds that does not exceed the PDDL.
13. The method of claim 5, wherein the deposit account is a checking account or a savings account having no interest rate.
a processor coupled to the memory, the processor configured to: retrieve from the plurality of deposit institutions information about a daily account balance in each deposit account and a daily transaction history of each deposit account; and reconcile each of the deposit accounts, the reconciling comprising: comparing, for each deposit account, the transactions and the total account balance from the general ledger file with the daily transactions and account balance obtained from a deposit institution; if the compared account transactions or balances are different, identify in the daily transaction history obtained from the deposit institution at least one transaction made by the deposit institution that was not posted to the general ledger file to account for the discrepancy; identify individual depositor records of one or more depositors whose funds are held in the deposit account where the transaction by the deposit institution was made; and post the transaction made by the deposit institution to the individual depositor records of each identified depositor.
instruct the account management system to reallocate from one or more deposit accounts depositors' funds that exceed the aggregate deposit limit to at least one other deposit account at least one different deposit institution, so that each deposit institution holds aggregate depositor funds that does not exceed the aggregate deposit limit for each deposit institution.
wherein the account management system allocates the excess funds in an unbiased manner to a plurality of non-interest-bearing deposit accounts located at the plurality of deposit institutions.
17. The method of claim 16 wherein the step of determining the difference between the amount of the depositor's funds and the SMDIA limit comprises inputting the amount of the depositor's funds into a database located on a computer at the one of the plurality of deposit institutions wherein the deposit institution computer calculates the difference between the amount of depositor's funds and the SMDIA limit and wherein the deposit institution computer transmits the amount of excess funds to a database of the account management system.
18. The method of claim 16 wherein the account management system allocates the excess funds in equal amounts to the plurality of deposit institutions.
19. The method of claim 16 wherein the account management system allocates the excess funds in random amounts to the plurality of deposit institutions.
20. The method of claim 16 wherein the account management system allocates the excess funds in pro rata amounts to the plurality of deposit institutions.
21. The method of claim 16 wherein the account management system allocates the excess funds the plurality of deposit institutions on a first come, first served basis.
22. The method of claim 16 further comprising the step of determining a per depositor deposit limit (PDDL) for each of the plurality of non-interest-bearing deposit accounts at each of the plurality of deposit institutions wherein the PDDL is an amount less than the SMDIA.


text:
Nice Rack (Wine Rack!) and Other Stupid Inventions
By Allie Leach
Hey lay-dees: here's something to put on your Christmas Wish List. Who needs a CamelBak when you can wear a wine rack? Now attention-seeking gals can wear a sports bra that can hold up to 25 ounces of liquid-whatever-you-want in it. And, they say, it enhances your cup up to two sizes. Wow. What will they think of next?
P.S.—Is it just me, or does it look like she's getting blood drawn from her boobs? Hot.
"You won't find this at Victoria's Secret," boasted Paul Krasulja of BaronBob.com, whose Web site also sells toilet-shaped coffee mugs, a remote control fart machine and edible G-strings.
"It's not like one boob fills up and the other goes flat," Krasulja said. "I made my girlfriend put it on, and she looked good."
Ranging in size from the petite 32A to the amply endowed 38C, the Wine Rack would be a fit for either the Keira Knightley or Kim Kardashian set.
Krasulja touted the sports bra as a recession-friendly way to drink, offering women a sneaky method for combating high-priced drinks at sporting events. He said security guards aren't about to get hands-on, even with a well-endowed woman.
"You grab a woman there, fuggeddaboutit," he said. "But even if you put your hand on it, it would feel like a boob."
The Wine Bra sells for $29.95.
"I don't consider it fine lingerie," Krasulja said. "But it is a good-looking piece."
To view more stupid inventions, (if you have the patience to click through a whopping 61 pics in total) click here.

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


text:
Q: How can I fix the broken keyboard shortcut in VS2012 to copy from schema-compare definition text? If I run an SQL Schema Compare in Visual Studio 2012 (part of the SQL Server Data Tools add-on), I can highlight text inside an object definition, and can right-click to select "Copy (Ctrl+C)", and it works.  But actually pressing Ctrl+C doesn't work — absolutely nothing happens.
How can I fix this?
What I've tried:  messing around in the Keyboard Shortcuts dialog, which doesn't seem to list that specific version of the copy command.
Other info:  the default Edit.Copy command doesn't seem to be enabled; the Edit menu's Copy command is greyed out when selecting in the Object Definition panel, curiously.

A: This a bug in the July 2014 release, with no workaround right now. It's been fixed internally and will be included in the next SQL Server tooling update - for more information see this Connect bug.

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaStackExchange


text:
Mnich (deutsch: München) ist eine Gemeinde in Tschechien. Sie liegt 17 Kilometer nördlich von Jindřichův Hradec und gehört zum Okres Pelhřimov.

Geographie
Mnich befindet sich im Süden der Böhmisch-Mährischen Höhe am Direnský potok. Nordöstlich des Ortsteils Chválkov verläuft die Schmalspurbahnstrecke Jindřichův Hradec–Obrataň.

Nachbarorte sind Vlkosovice, Chválkov und Rutov im Norden, Dvořiště und Mirotín im Nordosten, Betlém und Bohdalín im Osten, Novy Mnich und Hladov im Südosten, Rosička im Süden, Světce im Südwesten, Drunče und Annovice im Westen sowie Bořetín im Nordwesten.

Geschichte
Erstmals urkundlich erwähnt wurde Mnich im Jahre 1352 als Besitz des Pelhřimov von Mnich. Sieben Jahre später übernahm Purkart von Mnich das Patronat über die Kirche, die seit 1371 als Pfarrkirche fungierte. An der Stelle des heutigen Dorfes befand sich ursprünglich eine von Schanzen und Wassergräben umgebene wehrhafte Burg. Das Geschlecht von Mnich erlosch nach 1415.

1552 erwarben die Herren von Talmberg Mnich. 1583 brannte das Dorf nieder, auch die Kirche wurde zerstört. Im Jahre 1588 war der Wiederaufbau des Ortes abgeschlossen.

1650 wurde die verarmte Pfarre aufgelöst und an Deštná angeschlossen. 1750 wurde auf Antrag des Besitzers von Mnich, Franz de Paula Freiherr von Gudenus, das Kirchspiel Mnich wieder eingerichtet und 1759 die Kirche zur Pfarrkirche erhoben. 1779 erfolgte ein Umbau der Kirche, bei der anstelle des hölzernen Glockenturmes ein fester Kirchturm errichtet wurde. 1780 bestand der Ort aus 45 Häusern. Ab 1787 li gen von Mnich Kirchenbücher vor.

Nach der Aufhebung der Patrimonialherrschaften entstand 1848 aus den Herrschaften Rothlhota, Kamenitz und Neuötting die k.k. Bezirkshauptmannschaft Kamenitz, zu der Mnich fortan gehörte.
1906 wurde die Schmalspurbahn von Obrataň nach Jindřichův Hradec eingeweiht. Seit 1971 wird die Pfarrei von Deštná aus verwaltet.

Gemeindegliederung
Die Gemeinde Mnich besteht aus den Ortsteilen Chválkov (Chwalkow), Dvořiště, Mirotín (Mirotin), Mnich und Rutov (Rutow). Grundsiedlungseinheiten sind Betlém (Betlem), Chválkov, Dvořiště, Mirotín, Mnich, Nový Mnich (Neu Mnich) und Rutov.

Das Gemeindegebiet gliedert sich in die Katastralbezirke Chválkov u Kamenice nad Lipou, Mirotín und Mnich.

Sehenswürdigkeiten
 Kirche Johannes des Täufers, seit 1359 nachweisbar
 Pfarrhaus, vor 1371 errichtet
 Statue des Hl. Johannes von Nepomuk auf dem Markt
 Denkmal der Slawischen Brüder, nördlich des Ortes

Einzelnachweise

Ersterwähnung 1352

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaWikipedia


text:
Websitehttp://www.abdn.ac.uk/geosciences/
Impacts (12)
132056 Citations
95 Chapter (peer-reviewed)
69 Abstract
61 Commissioned Report
49 Book/Film/Article review
36 Literature review
31 Poster
18 Special issue
16 Other contribution
4 Anthology
3 Scholarly Edition
2 Website, Blog, Social Media
1 Featured article
1 Digital or Visual Products
1 - 50 out of 4,816 results
蒙古东南部的宏观纪念碑和考古景观
Wright, J. S. C., 1 Dec 2018, In: The Archaeology of Northern Ethnicity. 6
"Unseen by Eye, Unheard by Ear": The Archaeology of the Early Türks at Baga Gazrynn Chuluu, Mongolia
Wright, J. & Amartuvshin, C., 2009, Current Archaeological Research in Mongolia: Papers from the First International Conference on "Archaeological Research in Mongolia" held in Ulaanbaatar, August 19th–23rd, 2007. Bemmann, J., Parzinger, H., Pohl, E. & Tseveendorzh, D. (eds.). Bonn: Vor- und Frühgeschichtliche Archäologie Rheinische Friedrich-Wilhelms-Universität Bonn, p. 349-363 15 p. (Bonn Contributions to Asian Archaeology).
"Think horizontally, act vertically": the centenary (1916–2016) of pollen analysis and the legacy of Lennart von Post
Gaillard, M. J., Berglund, B. E., Birks, H. J. B., Edwards, K. J. & Bittmann, F., Mar 2018, In: Vegetation History and Archaeobotany. 27, 2, p. 267-269 3 p.
"And we would like to thank": The role of funding in Archaeology
Niklasson, E., 1 Oct 2013, Making Cultural History : New perspectives on Western heritage. Källén, A. (ed.). Lund: Nordic Academic Press, p. 151-161 11 p.
Knowledge Production
'World Heritage Site buffer zones: statements of fact or aspiration?'
Foster, S. M. & Linge, L., 2002, In: Conservation and Management of Archaeological Sites. 5, 3, p. 141 150 p.
'This is not the jungle, this is my barbecho': semantics of ethnoecological landscape categories in the Bolivian Amazon
Wartmann, F. M. & Purves, R. S., 2018, In: Landscape Research. 43, 1, p. 77-94 18 p.
hydrological feature
'It's revolutionised how we do things': then and now - a case study of Internet behaviours in a remote rural community
Williams, F., Farrington, J. & Philip, L. J., Aug 2015, Proceedings of the XXVI European Society for Rural Sociology Congress . European Society for Rural Sociology, p. 203-204 2 p.
rural area
'Islanding' the Mesolithic-Neolithic transition: approaches to landscapes of contact and transformation in Northwest Europe
Noble, G., 1 Apr 2010, Landscapes in Transtition. Finlayson, B. & Warren, G. (eds.). Oxford, United Kingdom: Council for British Research in the Levant/Oxbow, p. 125-132 8 p. (Levant Supplementary Series).
'Digital by Default' and the 'hard to reach': Exploring solutions to digital exclusion in remote rural areas
Williams, F., Philip, L., Farrington, J. & Fairhurst, G., Nov 2016, In: Local Economy. 31, 7, p. 757-777 16 p.
'Barris ibéricos' no Sudoeste Peninsular: Resultados preliminares de um estudo arqueométrico
Dias, M. I., Prudêncio, M. I., Rocha, F., Jorge, A., Ramos, A. C., Albergaria, J. & Melro, S., 2006, In: O Arqueólogo Português. (4 série) 23, p. 265-281 16 p.
'As thick as two short planks': Neolithic barrows in eastern and southern Britain
Noble, G., 2007, Beyond the grave: new perspectives on barrows . Last, J. (ed.). Oxford: Oxbow Books, p. 14-21 8 p.
Zircon Hf isotopic constraints on the sources of the Indus Molasse, Ladakh Himalaya, India
Wu, F-Y., Clift, P. D. & Yang, J-H., 26 Apr 2007, In: Tectonics. 26, 2, 15 p., TC2014.
Ziegler,K., Turner,P. & Daines,S.R. (eds). Petroleum Geology of the Southern North Sea: Future Potential. Geological Society Special Publication No. 123
North, C. P., 1998, In: Journal of Petroleum Geology. 21, p. 366-368
Research output: Contribution to journal › Book/Film/Article review › peer-review
YSB Commission Report and Recommendations
Wright, S. D. & Nelson, J. D., Sep 2008, 64 p. The Yellow School Bus Commission.
You'll Never Ride Alone: The Role of Social Media in Supporting the Bus Passenger Experience
Gault, P., Corsar, D., Edwards, P., Nelson, J. D. & Cottrill, C., Oct 2014, In: Ethnographic Praxis in Industry Conference Proceedings. 2014, 1, p. 199-212 14 p.
Yellow School Bus Commission: Report and Recommendations
Nelson, J. D., Sep 2008, London, United Kingdom: The Yellow School Bus Commission. 64 p.
Research output: Book/Report › Commissioned Report
Yarte VI, Yamal Peninsula, Northwest Siberia, in its Landscape Context
Milek, K. B., Anderson, D. G., Harrault, L. C. P. & Kremkova, J., 27 Feb 2017.
Research output: Contribution to conference › Paper
X-ray diffraction results from Mars Science Laboratory: Mineralogy of Rocknest at Gale Crater
Bish, D. L., Blake, D. F., Vaniman, D. T., Chipera, S. J., Morris, R. V., Ming, D. W., Treiman, A. H., Sarrazin, P., Morrison, S. M., Downs, R. T., Achilles, C. N., Yen, A. S., Bristow, T. F., Crisp, J. A., Morookian, J. M., Farmer, J. D., Rampe, E. B., Stolper, E. M., Spanovich, N. & MSL Science Team, 27 Sep 2013, In: Science. 341, 6153, 5 p., 1238932.
WWII Battlefield Survey of Peleliu Island, Peleliu State, Republic of Palau: final report. July 2012
Knecht, R., Price, N. & Lindsay, G. J., Jul 2012, National Park Service. American Battlefield Protection Program. 276 p.
Written evidence submitted to the House of Commons Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee Rural broadband and digital only services inquiry
Wallace, C. D. & Philip, L. J., Jul 2019, 5 p. House of Commons.
Writing it down: suggestions for a new approach to policy delivery: suggestions for a new approach to policy delivery
Reid, L. A., Sutton, P. & Hunter, C. J., Nov 2008.
Writing it down: suggestions for a new approach towards understanding pro-environmental behaviour
Reid, L., Hunter, C. & Sutton, P., Dec 2009, In: The International Journal of Sustainable Development and World Ecology. 16, 6, p. 369-373 5 p.
environmental behavior
Woven cultures: New insights into Pictish and Viking culture contact using the implements of textile production
Stirling, L. & Milek, K., 2015, In: Medieval Archaeology. 59, 1, p. 47-72 26 p.
Culture Contact
Would Acetate (or its Derivatives) be the Most Reliable Guide to Life on Terraqueous Globes?
Russell, M. J., Martin-Torres, J., Yung, Y. L. & Kanik, I., 1 Apr 2010.
effluents
chemical derivatives
Russell, M., Martin-Torres, J., Yung, Y. & Kanik, I., 1 May 2010.
serpentinization
early Earth
"World of Uncertainty" Game for Decision-Makers
Tabyldy Kyzy, J., Jan 2011, In: International Journal of Virtual and Personal Learning Environments. 2, 2, p. 40-45 5 p.
Workshop report: system development
Veeneman, W. W. & Nelson, J. D., 2010, In: Research in Transportation Economics. 29, 1, p. 219-223 5 p.
Working with Industry: Benefits for Research and Education
Green, D. R., 31 Dec 2017, In: GIS Professional. 79, p. 26-28 3 p.
Words Apart: Archaeology, Indigenous Communities and the Power of Definition
Hillerdal, C., 2018, The Resilience of Heritage: Cultivating a Future of the Past. Essays in Honour of Professor Paul J.J. Sinclair. Anneli, E., Christian, I. & Lindholm, K-J. (eds.). Uppsala Universitet, p. 363-392 30 p.
Woodland in the Neolithic of Northern Europe: The Forest as Ancestor
Noble, G., Apr 2017, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 222 p.
Three Age System
Wood dynamics in headwater streams of the Colorado Rocky Mountains
Wohl, E. & Goode, J., 20 Sep 2008, In: Water Resources Research. 44, 9, W09429.
Within the City Limits: tolerance and the negotiation of difference
Neill, W., Nov 2008, In: Town Planning Review. 79, 6, p. i-vii 7 p.
Research output: Contribution to journal › Special issue › peer-review
Within and beyond pits: deposition in lowland Neolithic Scotland
Noble, G. & Brophy, K., 2011, Beyond the Mundane: Regional Perspectives on Neolithic Pit Deposition. Lamdin-Whymark, H. & Thomas, J. (eds.). Oxford: Oxbow Books, p. 63-76 14 p. (Neolithic Studies Society Seminar Series).
Winter motion mediates dynamic response of the Greenland Ice Sheet to warmer summers
Sole, A., Nienow, P., Bartholomew, I., Mair, D., Cowton, T., Tedstone, A. & King, M. A., 16 Aug 2013, In: Geophysical Research Letters. 40, 15, p. 3940-3944 5 p.
dynamic response
Winter gale day frequency in Shetland and Faeroes, AD 1866-1905: links to sea ice history and the North Atlantic Oscillation
Dawson, A. G., McIlveny, J. & Warren, J., 2011, In: Scottish Geographical Journal. 126, 3, p. 141-152 12 p.
Gemmell, A. M. D. & Auton, C. A., 2000, The Quaternary of the Banffshire Coast & Buchan: Field Guide. Merritt, J. W., Connell, E. R. & Bridgland, D. R. (eds.). Cambridge, United Kingdom: Quaternary Research Association (Great Britain), p. 81-92 12 p.
Wind Retrieval Measurements for the Mars Surface Exploration
Soria-Salinas, Á., Wittmann, P., Zorzano, M-P. & Martin-Torres, F. J., Mar 2016.
Mars surface
habitability
brines
heat transfer coefficients
Wind retrieval from temperature measurements from the Rover Environmental Monitoring Station/Mars Science Laboratory
Soria-Salinas, Á., Zorzano, M-P., Mantas-Nakhai, R. & Martín-Torres, J., Aug 2020, In: Icarus (New York, N.Y. 1962). 346, 113785.
Mars Science Laboratory
monitoring station
Wind Forecasts for Rocket and Balloon Launches at the Esrange Space Center Using the WRF Model
Fonseca, R., Martin-Torres, J. & Andersson, K., Jun 2018, In: Weather and forecasting. 33, 3, p. 813-833 21 p.
Windfall sites for housing: An underestimated resource
Walton, W., 2000, In: Urban Studies. 37, p. 391-409 19 p.
Will catchment characteristics moderate the projected effects of climate change on flow regimes in the Scottish Highlands?
Capell, R., Tetzlaff, D. & Soulsby, C., 28 Feb 2013, In: Hydrological Processes. 27, 5, p. 687-699 13 p.
Wild Signs: An Introduction
Oliver, J. M., 2010, Wild Signs: Graffiti in Archaeology and History. Oliver, J. & Neal, T. (eds.). Oxford: Archaeopress, p. 1-4 4 p. (BAR, International Series ; vol. 2074).
Wild signs: graffiti in archaeology and history
Oliver, J. (ed.) & Neal, T. (ed.), 9 Mar 2010, Oxford: Archaeopress. 108 p.
Wild, domestic and feral? Investigating the status of suids in the Romanian Gumelniţa (5th mil. cal BC) with biogeochemistry and geometric morphometrics
Balasse, M., Evin, A., Tornero, C., Radu, V., Fiorillo, D., Popovici, D., Andreescu, R., Dobney, K., Cucchi, T. & Bălăşescu, A., 1 Jun 2016, In: Journal of Anthropological Archaeology. 42, p. 27-36 10 p.
Geometric Morphometrics
Widespread drying of European peatlands in recent centuries
Swindles, G. T., Morris, P. J., Mullan, D. J., Payne, R. J., Roland, T. P., Amesbury, M. J., Lamentowicz, M., Turner, T. E., Gallego-Sala, A., Sim, T., Barr, I. D., Blaauw, M., Blundell, A., Chambers, F. M., Charman, D. J., Feurdean, A., Galloway, J. M., Gałka, M., Green, S. M., Kajukało, K. & 18 others, Karofeld, E., Korhola, A., Lamentowicz, Ł., Langdon, P., Marcisz, K., Mauquoy, D., Mazei, Y. A., McKeown, M. M., Mitchell, E. A. D., Novenko, E., Plunkett, G., Roe, H. M., Schoning, K., Sillasoo, Ü., Tsyganov, A. N., van der Linden, M., Väliranta, M. & Warner, B., Nov 2019, In: Nature Geoscience. 12, 11, p. 922–928 7 p.
peatland
anthropogenic effect
Wide Scale network of E-systems for Multimodal Journey Planning and Delivery of Trip Intelligent Personalised data (WISETRIP): Life Cycle Model
Nelson, J. D. & WISETRIP Consortium, Dec 2008, Brussels, Belgium: Commission of the European Communities. (The connected traveller in the city, region and world of tomorrow)
Wide Scale network of E-systems for Multimodal Journey Planning and Delivery of Trip Intelligent Personalised data (WISETRIP): WISETRIP Architecture and Data Model
Nelson, J. D. & WISETRIP Consortium, Dec 2008, Brussels, Belgium: Commission of the European Communities. 76 p. (The connected traveller in the city, region and world of tomorrow)
Wide Scale network of E-systems for Multimodal Journey Planning and Delivery of Trip Intelligent Personalised data (WISETRIP): Integration of the Results from Relevant EU Projects
Nelson, J. D. & WISETRIP Consortium, 31 Jul 2008, Brussels, Belgium: Commission of the European Communities. 89 p. (The connected traveller in the city, region and world of tomorrow)
Wide Scale network of E-systems for Multimodal Journey Planning and Delivery of Trip Intelligent Personalised data (WISETRIP): Evaluation Plan
Zografos, K. G., Androutsopoulos, K., Nelson, J., Aditjandra, P. & WISETRIP Consortium, Sep 2009, Brussels, Belgium: Commission of the European Communities. 83 p. (The connected traveller in the city, region and world of tomorrow)
Wide Scale network of E-systems for Multimodal Journey Planning and Delivery of Trip Intelligent Personalised data (WISETRIP): Report on the Analysis of Requirements
The University of Aberdeen data protection policy


Welcome to the world's largest institutions dedicated to the African-American experience! The Wright Museum provides learning opportunities, exhibitions, programs and events based on collections and research that explore the diverse history and culture of African-Americans and their African origins.
Tue.-Sat. 9 a.m. - 5 p.m.
Boardroom 50 - - - - - ft.
Classrooms - 100 - - - - ft.
Ellis J. Bonner Plaza 200 - - 200 - - ft.
Lewis Latimer Café 200 - - 200 - - ft.
Multipurpose Rooms 200 - - - 300 - ft.
Orientation Theatre - 200 - - - - ft.
Rotunda 300 - - 500 - - ft.
Theatre/Auditorium - - - - 317 - ft.
"Another cultural treasure is the Charles H. Wright Museum of African American History, where a wide variety of function spaces include the spectacular Ford Freedom Rotunda, where up to 500 people can gather under a glass dome nearly as wide as the U.S. Capitol dome."


Beautiful printed tote bag from All Things Sundar. All Things Sundar tote bags is a perfect balance between style and utility. Made from finest material and with Exclusive Indian Art print. The product contains, single zipper compartment with backside zipper pocket and a double shoulder strap. A Network of artist from across the country creates, unique art exclusively for All Things Sundar. This artwork is used to create handbags and home accessories of superior quality. Each collection is centered around a piece of art. So what you get is a limited edition, superbly crafted statement bag for every occasion. The prints on the bags and other products are derived from India-inspired hand paintings that are created exclusively for us. COLOR - MULTI COLOR, WITH INDIAN ART PRINT.


text:
Planar imaging in a mach 8 flow using sodium laser-induced fluorescence
A. P. Yalin, W. R. Lempert, M. R. Etz, P. J. Erbland, A. J. Smits, R. B. Miles
We report the use of sodium Laser-Induced Fluorescence (LIF) as a means to obtain planar images of mixing in hypersonic flow fields. Helium is used as a substitute for hydrogen for these studies, and is seeded with trace quantities of sodium. Initial experiments have been conducted with low mass flow rates of helium injected into the boundary layer and observed with planar laser-induced fluorescence. Images in the streamwise and plan view directions are taken at the 10 Hz repetition rate of the excitation laser. We present here the design of the sodium seeding apparatus, as well as a discussion of diagnostic issues such as quenching, saturation, and chemical reaction.
Advanced Measurement and Ground Testing Conference, 1996 - New Orleans, United States
Advanced Measurement and Ground Testing Conference, 1996
Engineering(all)
Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Planar imaging in a mach 8 flow using sodium laser-induced fluorescence'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.
Fluorescence Engineering & Materials Science
Sodium Engineering & Materials Science
Mach number Engineering & Materials Science
Imaging techniques Engineering & Materials Science
Helium Engineering & Materials Science
Laser excitation Engineering & Materials Science
Hypersonic flow Engineering & Materials Science
Yalin, A. P., Lempert, W. R., Etz, M. R., Erbland, P. J., Smits, A. J., & Miles, R. B. (1996). Planar imaging in a mach 8 flow using sodium laser-induced fluorescence. Paper presented at Advanced Measurement and Ground Testing Conference, 1996, New Orleans, United States.
Yalin, A. P. ; Lempert, W. R. ; Etz, M. R. ; Erbland, P. J. ; Smits, A. J. ; Miles, R. B. / Planar imaging in a mach 8 flow using sodium laser-induced fluorescence. Paper presented at Advanced Measurement and Ground Testing Conference, 1996, New Orleans, United States.
@conference{929d947ad27646ec9079b7239a98b84a,
title = "Planar imaging in a mach 8 flow using sodium laser-induced fluorescence",
abstract = "We report the use of sodium Laser-Induced Fluorescence (LIF) as a means to obtain planar images of mixing in hypersonic flow fields. Helium is used as a substitute for hydrogen for these studies, and is seeded with trace quantities of sodium. Initial experiments have been conducted with low mass flow rates of helium injected into the boundary layer and observed with planar laser-induced fluorescence. Images in the streamwise and plan view directions are taken at the 10 Hz repetition rate of the excitation laser. We present here the design of the sodium seeding apparatus, as well as a discussion of diagnostic issues such as quenching, saturation, and chemical reaction.",
author = "Yalin, {A. P.} and Lempert, {W. R.} and Etz, {M. R.} and Erbland, {P. J.} and Smits, {A. J.} and Miles, {R. B.}",
note = "Advanced Measurement and Ground Testing Conference, 1996 ; Conference date: 17-06-1996 Through 20-06-1996",
Yalin, AP, Lempert, WR, Etz, MR, Erbland, PJ, Smits, AJ & Miles, RB 1996, 'Planar imaging in a mach 8 flow using sodium laser-induced fluorescence', Paper presented at Advanced Measurement and Ground Testing Conference, 1996, New Orleans, United States, 6/17/96 - 6/20/96.
Planar imaging in a mach 8 flow using sodium laser-induced fluorescence. / Yalin, A. P.; Lempert, W. R.; Etz, M. R.; Erbland, P. J.; Smits, A. J.; Miles, R. B.
1996. Paper presented at Advanced Measurement and Ground Testing Conference, 1996, New Orleans, United States.
T1 - Planar imaging in a mach 8 flow using sodium laser-induced fluorescence
AU - Yalin, A. P.
AU - Lempert, W. R.
AU - Etz, M. R.
AU - Erbland, P. J.
AU - Miles, R. B.
N2 - We report the use of sodium Laser-Induced Fluorescence (LIF) as a means to obtain planar images of mixing in hypersonic flow fields. Helium is used as a substitute for hydrogen for these studies, and is seeded with trace quantities of sodium. Initial experiments have been conducted with low mass flow rates of helium injected into the boundary layer and observed with planar laser-induced fluorescence. Images in the streamwise and plan view directions are taken at the 10 Hz repetition rate of the excitation laser. We present here the design of the sodium seeding apparatus, as well as a discussion of diagnostic issues such as quenching, saturation, and chemical reaction.
AB - We report the use of sodium Laser-Induced Fluorescence (LIF) as a means to obtain planar images of mixing in hypersonic flow fields. Helium is used as a substitute for hydrogen for these studies, and is seeded with trace quantities of sodium. Initial experiments have been conducted with low mass flow rates of helium injected into the boundary layer and observed with planar laser-induced fluorescence. Images in the streamwise and plan view directions are taken at the 10 Hz repetition rate of the excitation laser. We present here the design of the sodium seeding apparatus, as well as a discussion of diagnostic issues such as quenching, saturation, and chemical reaction.
T2 - Advanced Measurement and Ground Testing Conference, 1996
Yalin AP, Lempert WR, Etz MR, Erbland PJ, Smits AJ, Miles RB. Planar imaging in a mach 8 flow using sodium laser-induced fluorescence. 1996. Paper presented at Advanced Measurement and Ground Testing Conference, 1996, New Orleans, United States.