5.1 The design of a photovoltaic module or system intended to provide safe conversion of the sun's radiant energy into useful electricity must take into consideration the possibility of hazard should the user come into contact with the electrical potential of the module. These test methods describe procedures for verifying that the design and construction of the module or system are capable of providing protection from shock through normal installation and use. At no location on the module should this electrical potential be accessible, with the obvious exception of the intended output leads.5.2 These test methods describe procedures for determining the ability of the module to provide protection from electrical hazards.5.3 These procedures may be specified as part of a series of qualification tests involving environmental exposure, mechanical stress, electrical overload, or accelerated life testing.5.4 These procedures are normally intended for use on dry modules; however, the test modules may be either wet or dry, as indicated by the appropriate protocol.5.5 These procedures may be used to verify module assembly on a production line.5.6 Insulation resistance and leakage current are strong functions of module dimensions, ambient relative humidity and absorbed water vapor, and the ground path continuity procedure is strongly affected by the location of contacts and test leads to the module frame and grounding points.5.6.1 For these reasons, it is the responsibility of the user of these test methods to specify the maximum acceptable leakage current for the dielectric voltage withstand test, and the maximum acceptable resistance for the ground path continuity procedure.5.6.2 Fifty μA has been commonly used as the maximum acceptable leakage current (see ANSI/UL 1703, Section 26.1), and 0.1 Ω has been commonly used as the maximum acceptable resistance.5.7 Some module designs may not use any external metallic components and thus lack a ground point designated by the module manufacturer. In these cases, the ground path continuity test is not applicable.1.1 These test methods cover procedures for (1) testing for current leakage between the electrical circuit of a photovoltaic module and its external components while a user-specified voltage is applied and (2) for testing for possible module insulation breakdown (dielectric voltage withstand test).1.2 A procedure is described for measuring the insulation resistance between the electrical circuit of a photovoltaic module and its external components (insulation resistance test).1.3 A procedure is provided for verifying that electrical continuity exists between the exposed external conductive surfaces of the module, such as the frame, structural members, or edge closures, and its grounding point (ground path continuity test).1.4 This test method does not establish pass or fail levels. The determination of acceptable or unacceptable results is beyond the scope of this test method.1.5 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard. No other units of measurement are included in this standard.1.6 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.1.7 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

定价： 515元 / 折扣价： 438 元 加购物车

3.1 The use of geomembranes as barrier materials to restrict liquid migration from one location to another in soil and rock, and the large number of seam methods and types used in joining these geomembrane sheets, has created a need for standard tests by which the various seams can be compared and the quality of the seam systems can be nondestructively evaluated. This practice is intended to meet such a need.3.2 The geomembrane sheet material shall be formulated from the appropriate polymers and compounding ingredients to form a plastic or elastomer sheet material that meets all specified requirements for the end use of the product. The sheet material (reinforced or nonreinforced) shall be capable of being bonded to itself by one of the methods described in 1.2, in accordance with the sheet manufacturer's recommendations and instructions.1.1 This practice is intended for use as a summary of nondestructive quality control test methods for determining the integrity of seams used in the joining of flexible sheet materials in a geotechnical application. This practice outlines the test procedures available for determining the quality of bonded seams. Any one or combination of the test methods outlined in this practice can be incorporated into a project specification for quality control. These test methods are applicable to manufactured flexible polymeric membrane linings that are scrim reinforced or nonreinforced. This practice is not applicable to destructive testing. For destructive test methods, look at other ASTM standards and practices.1.2 The types of seams covered by this practice include the following: thermally bonded seams, hot air, hot wedge (or knife), extrusion, solvent-bonded seams, bodied solvent-bonded seams, adhesive-bonded or cemented seams, taped seams, and waterproofed sewn seams.1.3 The values stated in either SI units or inch-pound units are to be regarded separately as standard. The values stated in each system may not be exact equivalents; therefore, each system shall be used independently of the other. Combining values from the two systems may result in nonconformance with the standard.1.4 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.1.5 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

定价： 515元 / 折扣价： 438 元 加购物车

5.1 This method allows for the evaluation of seal quality by passing an ultrasound signal through the sealed area of a package or item. Poorly sealed areas will not transmit as much ultrasonic energy as properly sealed areas.5.2 This method relies on quantitative analysis of ultrasound signal strength, providing a non-subjective approach to assessing package seal quality and detecting defects.5.3 This technique has been used for inspecting a variety of materials including flexible pouch seals, rigid tray seals and other packaging components such as affixed valves. The precision and bias for any specific package and seal configuration needs to be individually determined and validated.5.4 The C-Scan approach is useful for laboratory applications or off-line seal inspection. The L-Scan approach can be used for on-line, real time inspection of seal quality. The sensitivity of either approach to detect a given defect size and level of severity needs to be individually determined.5.5 Sound waves propagate at different speeds through different materials generally moving faster through more dense materials. The acoustic impedance (expressed as g/cm2·μs) is the product of density (g/cm3) and velocity (cm/μs). Of particular importance is the extreme difference between the impedance of air and that of any solid material. Any gap or poorly bonded area can be readily detected.Material Velocity(cm/μsec) Density(g/cm3) AcousticImpedance(g/cm2-μsec)Air (20°C, 1 bar) 0.0344 0.00119 0.000041Water (20°C) 0.148 1.0 0.148Polyethylene 0.267 1.1 0.294Aluminum 0.632 2.7 1.7101.1 This standard method describes the technology and testing procedures that can be used to detect seal defects in the size range of 1 mm and characterize seal quality in a variety of packaging styles using airborne ultrasound technology.1.2 This test method does not purport to be the only method for measurement of seal quality.1.3 Heat seals and other package components can be tested in flexible, semi-rigid and rigid packages. Only the precision and bias for flexible package seals were evaluated in a recent ILS included in the method. The precision and bias for any specific package needs to be individually determined.1.4 On-line, real time inspection of seals can be considered particularly in the L-Scan mode.1.5 This method provides a non-destructive, quantitative, non-subjective approach to flexible package seal inspection.1.6 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard. No other units of measurement are included in this standard.1.7 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.1.8 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

定价： 590元 / 折扣价： 502 元 加购物车

5.1 The vacuum, bubble test method, as described in Test Method D3078, and various other leak detection methods described elsewhere (Test Method D4991, Guide E432, Test Method E493, Test Method E498, Test Method E499, and Test Method E1603) have been successfully used widely in various industries and applications to determine that a given package is or is not a “leaker.” The sensitivity of any selected leak test method has to be considered to determine its applicability to a specific situation.5.2 The procedures presented in this test method allow the user to carry out package and seal integrity testing with sufficient sensitivity to quantify seals in the previously defined moderate to fine seal ranges.5.3 By employing seal-isolating leak testing fixtures, packages constructed of various materials can be tested in the full range of seal performance requirements. Design of these fixtures is beyond the scope of this method.5.4 These seal/package integrity test procedures can be utilized as:5.4.1 A design tool,5.4.2 For tooling qualification,5.4.3 Process setup,5.4.4 Process validation tool,5.4.5 Quality assurance monitoring, or5.4.6 Research and development.1.1 This test method includes several procedures that can be used for the measurement of overall package and seal barrier performance of a variety of package types and package forms, as well as seal/closure types. The basic elements of this method include:1.1.1 Helium (employed as tracer gas),1.1.2 Helium leak detector (mass spectrometer), and1.1.3 Package/product-specific test fixtures.1.1.4 Most applications of helium leak detection are destructive, in that helium needs to be injected into the package after the package has been sealed. The injection site then needs to be sealed/patched externally, which often destroys its saleability. Alternatively, if helium can be incorporated into the headspace before sealing, the method can be non-destructive because all that needs to be accomplished is to simply detect for helium escaping the sealed package.1.2 Two procedures are described; however the supporting data in Section 14 only reflects Procedure B (Vacuum Mode). The alternative, Sniffer Mode, has proven to be a valuable procedure for many applications, but may have more variability due to exactly the manner that the operator conducts the test such as whether the package is squeezed, effect of multiple small leaks compared to fewer large leaks, background helium concentration, package permeability and speed at which the scan is conducted. Further testing to quantify this procedure’s variability is anticipated, but not included in this version.1.2.1 Procedure A: Sniffer Mode—the package is scanned externally for helium escaping into the atmosphere or fixture.1.2.2 Procedure B: Vacuum Mode—the helium containing package is placed in a closed fixture. After drawing a vacuum, helium escaping into the closed fixture (capture volume) is detected. Typically, the fixtures are custom made for the specific package under test.1.3 The sensitivity of the method can range from the detection of:1.3.1 Large leaks—10-2 Pa·m 3/s to 10-5 Pa·m3/s (10–1 cc/sec/atm to 10-4 cc/sec/atm).1.3.2 Moderate leaks—10-5 Pa·m 3/s to 10-7 Pa·m3/s (10-4 cc/sec/atm to 10-6 cc/sec/atm).1.3.3 Fine leaks—10-7 Pa·m 3/s to 10-9 Pa·m3/s (10-6 cc/sec/atm to 10-8 cc/sec/atm).1.3.4 Ultra-Fine leak—10-9 Pa·m 3/s to 10-11 Pa·m3/s (10-8 cc/sec/atm to 10-10 cc/sec/atm).NOTE 1: Conversion from cc/sec/atm to Pa·m3/s is achieved by multiplying by 0.1.1.4 The terms large, moderate, fine and ultra-fine are relative terms only and do not imply the acceptability of any leak rate. The individual application dictates the level of integrity needed. For many packaging applications, only “large leaks” are considered unacceptable and the ability to detect smaller leaks is immaterial. All leak rates referred to in this method are based on conversion of actual conditions (based on partial pressure of helium) to one atmosphere pressure differential and standard temperature conditions.1.5 The method may have applicability to any package type:1.5.1 Flexible, semi-rigid, or rigid.1.5.2 Permeable or impermeable.1.5.3 Packages comprised of both permeable and impermeable components, for example, formed aluminum blisters and other high barrier aluminum packaging, cartridges, and syringes.1.6 The sensitivities reported in the supporting data for this method pertain to the detectability of helium emanating from the sample and are not a function of the packaging form.1.7 The method is not applicable to breathable or porous packaging.1.8 The results obtained can be qualitative, semi-quantitative or quantitative depending on the procedure used.1.9 Test fixture design is not within the scope of this method except to note that different designs will be needed for different applications (which have different package types and package integrity requirements). Furthermore, the fixture selection and design will be based on where the testing is to be conducted within the manufacturing process (in other words, quality control versus research).1.10 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.1.11 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

定价： 590元 / 折扣价： 502 元 加购物车

4.1 The integrity test methods described are used to determine the integrity of membrane systems, and are applicable to systems containing membrane module configurations of both hollow fiber and flat sheet; such as, spiral-wound configuration. In all cases the practices apply to membranes in the RO, NF, and UF membrane classes. However, the TOC and Dye Test practices do not apply to membranes in the MF range or the upper end of the UF pore size range (0.01 μm and larger pore sizes) due to insignificant or inconsistent removal of TOC material by these membranes.4.2 These methods may be used to identify relative changes in the integrity of a system, or used in conjunction with the equations described in 9.4, to provide a means of estimating the integrity in terms of log reduction value. For critical applications, estimated log reductions using these equations should be confirmed by experiment for the particular membrane and system configuration used.4.3 The ability of the methods to detect any given defect is affected by the size of the system or portion of the system tested. Selecting smaller portions of the system to test will increase the sensitivity of the test to defects. When determining the size that can be tested as a discrete unit, use the guidelines supplied by the system manufacturer or the general guidelines provided in this practice.4.4 The applicability of the tests is largely independent of system size when measured in terms of the impact of defects on the treated water quality (that is, the system LRV). This is because the bypass flow from any given defect is diluted in proportion to the systems total flowrate. For example, a 10-module system with a single defect will produce the same water quality as a 100-module system with ten of the same size defects.1.1 This practice covers the determination of the integrity of water filtration membrane elements and systems using air based tests (pressure decay and vacuum hold), soluble dye, continuous monitoring particulate light scatter techniques, and TOC monitoring tests for the purpose of rejecting particles and microbes. The tests are applicable to systems with membranes that have a nominal pore size less than about 1 µm. The TOC, and Dye, tests are generally applicable to NF and RO class membranes only.1.2 This practice does not purport to cover all available methods of integrity testing.1.3 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard. No other units of measurement are included in this standard.1.4 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.1.5 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

定价： 646元 / 折扣价： 550 元 加购物车

The increased use of geomembranes as barrier materials to restrict liquid migration from one location to another in soil and rock, and the large number of seam methods and types used in joining these geomembrane sheets, has created a need for standard tests by which the various seams can be compared and the quality of the seam systems can be evaluated. This practice is intended to meet such a need.1.1 This practice is intended as a summary of destructive and nondestructive quality control test methods for determining the integrity of factory fabricated seams used in the joining of flexible sheet materials. This practice outlines the test procedures available for determining the quality of bonded seams. Tests chosen to be performed shall be selected from the nondestructive and destructive tests for their specificity to the liner system and the design application. These test methods are applicable to the seaming methods commonly used on manufactured flexible sheet geomembranes that are scrim-reinforced or nonreinforced. 1.2 The types of factory seams covered by this practice include the following: 1.2.1 Thermally Bonded Seams: 1.2.1.1 Dielectric -A dielectric seam is produced by clamping two lapped sheets of polymeric membrane between two conductive bars and applying an electric current to the bars, thus producing a field that generates friction heat at the interface between the two sheets to melt the surfaces. The pressure of the clamping bars creates a homogeneous bond which is allowed to cool by cutting off the electric current, while still under pressure. 1.2.1.2 Hot Air -A hot air seam is produced by applying high temperature air or gas between two polymeric sheet surfaces, thus melting the surfaces, at which time pressure is applied to form a homogeneous bond between the two membrane surfaces. 1.2.1.3 Hot Wedge (or Knife) -A hot wedge seam is produced by melting the two intimate surfaces by running a hot metal wedge between the surfaces, followed immediately by pressure to form a homogeneous bond. 1.2.1.4 Extrusion -A bond seam is produced by extruding molten parent material between or at the edge of two overlapped polymer sheet materials to effect a homogeneous melt between the two sheets to be joined. Hot air is sometimes applied between the two sheets to bring their temperature close to the melt point. The extrudate heat then melts the two preheated surfaces to effect the homogeneous bond. 1.2.2 Solvent Bonded Seams -A solvent is used to soften the surfaces to be bonded, followed by pressure to form a homogeneous bond. 1.2.3 Bodied Solvent Bonded Seams -The parent lining polymer material is dissolved in a solvent that is then applied in the same manner as a straight solvent, thus effecting a homogeneous bond. 1.2.4 Cured or Vulcanized Seams -These are thermally bonded seams that are produced prior to vulcanization of a cured ribbon sheet. A homogeneous bond is obtained by curing the seam along with the parent material blanket. 1.2.5 Adhesive Bonded or Cemented Seams, Taped Seams, and Waterproofed Sewn Seams -These seams are rarely made at the factory during the fabrication process and are generally limited to field installation seams. Adhesive bonded and taped seams provide a means, although non-homogeneous, of joining cured sheets. Waterproofed sewn seams are used with geotextiles, which may be laminated to a geomembrane film. 1.3 The types of factory seams covered by this practice include the following seam constructions: 1.3.1 Lap Seams -One sheet overlaps the other by a recommended minimum amount, with the bonded area between or at the edge of the two sheets. 1.3.2 Cap-Stripped Seams -A separate strip of the parent sheet material is bonded to both sheets covering the lap seam. 1.3.3 Butt Seams, Envelope Seams, and Standing Seams -These seams are not commonly used in factory seam fabrication. 1.4 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as the standard. 1.5 This standard may involve hazardous materials, operations, and equipment. This standard does not purport to address all of the safety problems associated with its use. It is the responsibility of whoever uses this standard to consult and establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.

定价： 0元 / 折扣价： 0 元

4.1 In many applications, the vapor retarders used on a thermal insulation will be exposed to the temperatures listed in 7.2. Cracking or delamination of the retarder under these conditions would, in most cases, cause it to lose its effectiveness as a vapor retarder material.1.1 This test method covers the visual determination of the thermal integrity of flexible water vapor retarders for those materials classified under Specification C1136, including plastic, foil, or paper and composites of two or more of these materials to temperatures listed in the specification or purchase contract. The vapor retarders are intended for use at temperatures of −20 to 150°F (−29 to 66°C). This test method does not cover mastics or barrier coatings applied in liquid form or materials intended for use as weather barriers.1.2 The values stated in inch-pound units are to be regarded as standard. The values given in parentheses are mathematical conversions to SI units that are provided for information only and are not considered standard.1.3 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.1.4 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

定价： 515元 / 折扣价： 438 元 加购物车

4.1 The use of geomembranes as barrier materials to restrict liquid migration from one location to another in soil and rock has created a need for a standard test method to evaluate the quality of geomembrane seams produced by thermo-fusion methods. In the case of geomembranes, it has become evident that geomembrane seams can exhibit separation in the field under certain conditions. Although this is an index-type test method used for quality assurance and quality control purposes, it is also intended to provide the quality assurance engineer with sufficient seam peel and shear data to evaluate seam quality. Recording and reporting data, such as separation that occurs during the peel test and elongation during the shear test, will allow the quality assurance engineer to take measures necessary to ensure the repair of inferior seams during facility construction, and therefore, minimize the potential for seam separation in service.1.1 This test method describes destructive quality control and quality assurance tests used to determine the integrity of geomembrane seams produced by thermo-fusion methods. This test method presents the procedures used for determining the quality of nonbituminous bonded seams subjected to both peel and shear tests. These test procedures are intended for nonreinforced geomembranes only.1.2 The types of thermal field seaming techniques used to construct geomembrane seams include the following:1.2.1 Hot Air—This technique introduces high-temperature air or gas between two geomembrane surfaces to facilitate melting. Pressure is applied to the top or bottom geomembrane, forcing together the two surfaces to form a continuous bond.1.2.2 Hot Wedge (or Knife)—This technique melts the two geomembrane surfaces to be seamed by running a hot metal wedge between them. Pressure is applied to the top or bottom geomembrane, or both, to form a continuous bond. Some seams of this kind are made with dual bond tracks separated by a nonbonded gap. These seams are sometimes referred to as dual hot wedge seams or double-track seams.1.2.3 Extrusion—This technique encompasses extruding molten resin between two geomembranes or at the edge of two overlapped geomembranes to effect a continuous bond.1.3 The types of materials covered by this test method include the following:1.3.1 Very low-density polyethylene (VLDPE).1.3.2 Linear low-density polyethylene (LLDPE).1.3.3 Very flexible polyethylene (VFPE).1.3.4 Linear medium-density polyethylene (LMDPE).1.3.5 High-density polyethylene (HDPE).1.3.6 Polyvinyl chloride (PVC).1.3.7 Flexible polypropylene (fPP).NOTE 1: The polyethylene identifiers presented in 1.3.1 – 1.3.5 describe the types of materials typically tested using this test method. These are industry-accepted trade descriptions and are not technical material classifications based upon material density.1.4 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.1.5 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

定价： 590元 / 折扣价： 502 元 加购物车

4.1 Low strain impact integrity testing provides acceleration or velocity and force (optional) data on slender structural elements (that is, structural columns, driven concrete piles, cast in place concrete piles, concrete filled steel pipe piles, timber piles, etc.). The method works best on solid concrete sections, and has limited application to unfilled steel pipe piles, H piles, or steel sheet piles. These data assist evaluation of the pile cross-sectional area and length, the pile integrity and continuity, as well as consistency of the pile material, although evaluation is approximate. This test method will not provide information regarding the pile bearing capacity. It is generally helpful to consider the soil profile, construction method and site records when evaluating data obtained by this method. Other useful information to consider and compare with results of this test includes low strain integrity test results of similar piles at the same site, concrete cylinder or core strength test results, automated monitoring data on equipment placing the concrete when augered piles are used, or information obtained from crosshole sonic logging (Test Method D6760) or thermal integrity profiling (Test Methods D7949) if available.4.1.1 Methods of Testing: 4.1.1.1 Pulse Echo Method (PEM)—The pile head motion is measured as a function of time. The time domain record is then evaluated for pile integrity.4.1.1.2 Transient Response Method (TRM)—The pile head motion and force (measured with an instrumented hammer) are measured as a function of time. The data are evaluated usually in the frequency domain.1.1 This test method covers the procedure for determining the integrity of individual vertical or inclined piles by measuring and analyzing the velocity (required) and force (optional) response of the pile induced by an (hand held hammer or other similar type) impact device usually applied axially and perpendicularly to the pile head surface. This test method is applicable to long structural elements that function in a manner similar to any deep foundation units (such as driven piles, augeured piles, or drilled shafts), regardless of their method of installation provided that they are receptive to low strain impact testing.1.2 This standard provides minimum requirements for low strain impact testing of piles. Plans, specifications, and/or provisions prepared by a qualified engineer, and approved by the agency requiring the test(s), may provide additional requirements and procedures as needed to satisfy the objectives of a particular test program.1.3 The text of this standard references notes and footnotes which provide explanatory material. These notes and footnotes (excluding those in tables and figures) shall not be considered as requirements of the standard.1.4 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard. No other units of measurement are included in this standard.1.5 All observed and calculated values shall conform to the guidelines for significant digits and rounding established in Practice D6026.1.6 The method used to specify how data are collected, calculated, or recorded in this standard is not directly related to the accuracy to which the data can be applied in design or other uses, or both. How one applies the results obtained using this standard is beyond its scope.1.7 This standard may involve hazardous materials, operations, and equipment. This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.NOTE 1: he quality of the result produced by this test method is dependent on the competence of the personnel performing it, and the suitability of the equipment and facilities used. Agencies that meet the criteria of Practice D3740 are generally considered capable of competent and objective testing/sampling/ inspection/etc. Users of this test method are cautioned that compliance with Practice D3740 does not in itself assure reliable results. Reliable results depend on many factors; Practice D3740 provides a means of evaluating some of those factors.

定价： 590元 / 折扣价： 502 元 加购物车

4.1 The use of reinforced geomembranes as barrier materials has created a need for a standard test method to evaluate the quality of seams produced by thermo-fusion methods. This test method is used for quality control purposes and is intended to provide quality control and quality assurance personnel with data to evaluate seam quality.4.2 This standard arose from the need for a destructive test method for evaluating seams of reinforced geomembranes. Standards written for destructive testing of nonreinforced geomembranes do not include all break codes (Fig. 1) applicable to reinforced geomembranes.FIG. 1 Break Codes for Dual Hot Wedge and Hot Air Seams of Reinforced Geomembranes Tested for Seam Strength in Shear and Peel Modes4.3 When reinforcement occurs in directions other than machine and cross-machine, scrim are cut at specimen edges, generally lowering results. To partially compensate for this, testing can be performed according to Test Method D7749 or the 2 in. wide strip specimen specified in this method can be utilized. Testing of 1 in. and 2 in. specimens is Method A and Method B, respectively.4.4 The shear test outlined in this method correlates to strength of parent material measured according to Test Method D7003/D7003M only if reinforcement is parallel to TD. For other materials, seam strength and parent material strength can be compared through Test Methods D7749 and D7004/D7004M. Values obtained with the strip methods shall not be compared to values obtained with grab methods.1.1 This test method describes destructive quality control tests used to determine the integrity of thermo-fusion seams made with reinforced geomembranes. Test procedures are described for seam tests for peel and shear properties using strip specimens.1.2 The types of thermal field and factory seaming techniques used to construct geomembrane seams include the following:1.2.1 Hot Air—This technique introduces high-temperature air between two geomembrane surfaces to facilitate melting. Pressure is applied to the top or bottom geomembrane, forcing together the two surfaces to form a continuous bond.1.2.2 Hot Wedge—This technique melts the two geomembrane surfaces to be seamed by running a hot metal wedge between them. Pressure is applied to the top and bottom geomembrane to form a continuous bond. Some seams of this kind are made with dual tracks separated by a non-bonded gap. These seams are sometimes referred to as dual hot wedge seams or double-track seams.1.2.3 Extrusion—This technique encompasses extruding molten resin between two geomembranes or at the edge of two overlapped geomembranes to effect a continuous bond.1.2.4 Radio Frequency (RF) or Dielectric—High-frequency dielectric equipment is used to generate heat and pressure to form an overlap seam in factory fabrication.1.2.5 Impulse—Clamping bars heated by wires or a ribbon melt the sheets clamped between them. A cooling period while still clamped allows the polymer to solidify before being released.1.3 The types of materials covered by this test method include, but are not limited to, reinforced geomembranes made from the following polymers:1.3.1 Very low-density polyethylene (VLDPE).1.3.2 Linear low-density polyethylene (LLDPE).1.3.3 Flexible polypropylene (fPP).1.3.4 Polyvinyl chloride (PVC).1.3.5 Chlorosulfonated polyethylene (CSPE).1.3.6 Ethylene interpolymer alloy (EIA).1.4 Units—The values stated in either SI units or inch-pound units are to be regarded separately as standard. The values stated in each system may not be exact equivalents; therefore, each system shall be used independently of the other. Combining values from the two systems may result in nonconformance with the standard.1.5 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.1.6 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

定价： 590元 / 折扣价： 502 元 加购物车

4.1 The use of reinforced geomembranes as barrier materials has created a need for a standard test method to evaluate the quality of seams produced by thermo-fusion methods. This test method is used for quality control purposes and is intended to provide quality control and quality assurance personnel with data to evaluate seam quality.4.2 Values obtained with this method can be correlated to Test Method D7004/D7004M. The purpose of correlating these methods was for the strength of parent material measured in Test Method D7004/D7004M to be comparable to seam strength measured by the test outlined here. The value obtained with this method cannot be compared to values for strip method, Test Method D7003/D7003M, for parent material or Test Method D7747/D7747M, strip method for reinforced seams.1.1 This test method describes destructive quality control tests used to determine the integrity of thermo-fusion seams made with reinforced geomembranes. A test procedure is described that uses seam tests using grab specimens for seam shear strength.1.2 The types of thermal field and factory seaming techniques used to construct geomembrane seams include the following:1.2.1 Hot Air—This technique introduces high-temperature air between two geomembrane surfaces to facilitate melting. Pressure is applied to the top or bottom geomembrane, forcing together the two surfaces to form a continuous bond.1.2.2 Hot Wedge—This technique melts the two geomembrane surfaces to be seamed by running a hot metal wedge between them. Pressure is applied to the top and bottom geomembrane to form a continuous bond. Some seams of this kind are made with dual tracks separated by a non-bonded gap. These seams are sometimes referred to as dual hot wedge seams or double-track seams.1.2.3 Extrusion—This technique encompasses extruding molten resin between two geomembranes or at the edge of two overlapped geomembranes to effect a continuous bond.1.2.4 Radio Frequency (RF) or Dielectric—High-frequency dielectric equipment is used to generate heat and pressure to form an overlap seam in factory fabrication.1.2.5 Impulse—Clamping bars heated by wires or a ribbon melt the sheets clamped between them. A cooling period while still clamped allows the polymer to solidify before being released.1.3 The types of materials covered by this test method include, but are not limited to, reinforced geomembranes made from the following polymers:1.3.1 Very low-density polyethylene (VLDPE).1.3.2 Linear low-density polyethylene (LLDPE).1.3.3 Flexible polypropylene (fPP).1.3.4 Polyvinyl chloride (PVC).1.3.5 Chlorosulfonated polyethylene (CSPE).1.3.6 Ethylene interpolymer alloy (EIA).1.4 Units—The values stated in either SI units or inch-pound units are to be regarded separately as standard. The values stated in each system may not be exact equivalents; therefore, each system shall be used independently of the other. Combining values from the two systems may result in nonconformance with the standard.1.5 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.1.6 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

定价： 590元 / 折扣价： 502 元 加购物车

4.1 The test is suitable for check testing properly selected samples from regular production or for determining the suitability of adhesives and bonding techniques for the production of joints for exterior service.4.2 Vary the number of specimens taken from each member and the number of members selected for test depending on the total number of members involved and the purpose of the tests. It is advisable, however, to include at least three specimens in the test, with the specimens selected to represent the probable range of quality of the adhesive joints.4.3 Adhesive joints at knots and knotty areas in general are not dependable under severe exposures. Disregard development of delamination at knots and do not include in the measurements or calculations.1.1 These test methods cover an accelerated means of measuring the resistance to delamination of structural laminated wood members intended for exterior service.1.2 These test methods are not intended as substitutes or replacements for the more severe test of resistance to delamination in Specification D2559.1.3 Two test methods are included. Choice of test method depends on purpose of the test and available time to complete.1.3.1 Test Method A—This test requires 3 days to complete and is a method for determining the suitability of adhesives and manufacturing techniques and equipment for production of joints adequate for exterior service.1.3.2 Test Method B—This test requires approximately 121/2 h. (If excessive delamination occurs, the cycle is repeated). It is a quality-control type test for examining adhesive joint quality.1.4 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as the standard. The values given in parentheses are for information only.1.5 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.1.6 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

定价： 515元 / 折扣价： 438 元 加购物车

This Technical Report provides a description of the motivations behind the Ravenscar Profile, to show how Ada programs using the profile can be analysed, and gives examples of usage.

定价： 1593元 / 折扣价： 1355 元

5.1 Seal attributes can be linked directly to a number of variables in process parameters, equipment, or material, as well as environmental (room temperature and relative humidity). Visual seal characteristics and defects can provide evidence of package integrity and production sealing problems.5.2 Visual seal defects often will be the first indication of heat sealing process variation. They also will indicate a lack of, or potential compromise to, package integrity after physical package performance testing.1.1 This test method covers the determination of channels in the package seal down to a width of 75 μm [0.003 in.] with a 60–100 % probability (see Section 8).1.1.1 The ability to visually detect channel defects in package seals is highly dependent on the size of channel, the degree of contrast from sealed and unsealed areas, the amount and type of adhesive between the two package layers, reflecting light angle, types of material used, the use of magnification, and the inspector's level of training and experience.1.2 This test method is applicable to packages with at least one transparent side so that the seal area may be clearly viewed.1.3 The values stated in either SI units or inch-pound units are to be regarded separately as standard. The values stated in each system may not be exact equivalents; therefore, each system shall be used independently of the other. Combining values from the two systems may result in non-conformance with the standard.1.4 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.

定价： 515元 / 折扣价： 438 元 加购物车

2.1 These test methods are useful for routine control, design of end-use products, and acceptance testing for conformance to specifications. Good workmanship, seams, and joints that remain strong over a wide range of atmospheric conditions and have the ability to withstand repeated cycles are necessary for satisfactory end use to the consumer.1.1 These test methods cover the evaluation of the integrity of the primary disposable bag used for vacuum cleaners.1.2 The intent of these test methods is to verify that the design of the primary disposable bag will perform satisfactorily for the consumer in a wide range of normal use conditions. The filtering capability of the disposable bag is not evaluated with the use of these test methods.1.3 The following tests are included:    Section  Installation and Removal 3  Workmanship 4  Durability 5  Seams and Joints 61.4 The values stated in inch-pound units are to be regarded as the standard. The values given in parentheses are for information only.1.5 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.1.6 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

定价： 590元 / 折扣价： 502 元 加购物车