5.1 Every ASTM test method listed in 2.1 contains a section describing its particular significance and use. Other test methods listed in 2.1 of this practice may contain sections pertaining to their particular significance and use.5.2 The physical testing procedures in this practice can be used in conjunction with lot sampling procedures as a basis for acceptance testing of commercial shipments of inflatable restraint fabrics. They may be used to establish the criteria by which inflatable restraint fabrics will be tested by the supplier to determine whether a lot of material is acceptable for shipment to the purchaser.5.3 This practice addresses all the physical properties that describe inflatable restraint fabrics and their commonly used test methods. Unless otherwise specified by agreement of purchaser and supplier, these standard test methods shall constitute the test conditions, procedures, and equipment used to determine the physical properties of fabrics used in inflatable restraints. It is intended to be used as a guideline in establishing a written material specification. The specification or agreement of purchaser and supplier may deviate from the practices described herein when (based on experience) considerations of fabric properties, material handling equipment, or inflatable restraint system design dictate otherwise.1.1 This practice is a listing of the test methods commonly employed in determining the physical properties of fabrics and yarns used in the manufacture of inflatable restraints.1.2 Fabrics used in the manufacture of inflatable restraints may be coated or uncoated, and may be comprised of spun yarns, continuous filament yarns, or a combination thereof.1.3 Fabrics used in the manufacturer of inflatable restraints may be either flat or one piece woven. For the one-piece woven, follow the sampling section of D5446 and the individual test method.1.4 In Section 9, this practice lists is alphabetical order the procedures associated with conducting physical testing of the following fabric or yarn properties of concern to the design and manufacture of inflatable restraints.Yarn Section  Denier (Yarn Number) 9.3.1   Fiber Content 9.3.2   Finish (Extractable Material) 9.3.3   Strength and Elongation 9.3.4   Twist 9.3.5 Fabric    Air Permeability 9.3.6   Abrasion Resistance 9.3.7   Blocking 9.3.8   Bow and Skew 9.3.9   Breaking Force & Elongation 9.3.10  Burst Strength 9.3.11  Coating Adhesion 9.3.12  Coating Weight 9.3.13  Count of Woven Fabric 9.3.14  Dynamic Air Permeability 9.3.28  Edgecomb Resistance 9.3.29  Flammability 9.3.15  Fogging (Volatility) 9.3.16  Length 9.3.17  Mass per Unit Area 9.3.18  Non-Fibrous Material 9.3.19  Odor 9.3.20  Packability 9.3.30  pH 9.3.21  Stiffness 9.3.22  Tear Strength 9.3.23  Thickness 9.3.24  Warp Size Content & Residual Sizing 9.3.25  Width 9.3.26  Sewing Thread 9.3.27 1.5 This practice may be used in conjunction with Practice D5427 which prescribes standard practices for the accelerated aging of inflatable restraint fabrics when comparative results of physical properties before and after accelerated aging are required.1.6 Procedures and apparatus other than those stated in this practice may be used by agreement of purchaser and supplier with the specific deviations from the standard practice acknowledged in the report.1.7 The values stated in either SI units or inch-pound units are to be regarded separately as standard. The values stated in each system are not exact equivalents; therefore, each system must be used independent of the other.1.8 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.See Note 3.

定价： 590元 / 折扣价： 502 元 加购物车

5.1 IAQ-based complaints and problems include discomfort/medical symptoms and unacceptable indoor environmental conditions such as odors that exist in residential buildings. The frequency of the occurrence of IAQ complaints and problems may be unknown.5.2 Characterization of IAQ concerns and identification of their underlying causes require systematic observations and measurements of the indoor air and environment, its occupants and potential contaminant sources. This practice provides background and procedures for the investigation of IAQ concerns.5.3 Where the dwelling is not owner-occupied, formal permission to access certain areas of the property and to collect information essential to the IAQ investigation is often required.5.4 The stepwise and phased approach described in this practice allows for an investigation that is commensurate with the nature of the problem and the level of resources available for the investigation.1.1 This standard practice describes procedures for evaluating indoor air quality (IAQ) concerns in residential buildings.1.2 The practice primarily addresses IAQ concerns encountered in single-family detached and attached (for example, townhouse or duplex design) residential buildings. Limited guidance is also provided for low- and high-rise multifamily dwellings, such as condominiums and apartments.1.3 The IAQ evaluation procedures are comprised of interviews with the homeowner or resident(s) (including telephone interviews and face-to-face meetings) and on-site investigations (including walk-through, assessment, and measurements). For application practicality, these procedures are divided into three separate phases, which may occur over one or more site visits.1.4 The procedures described in this standard practice are aimed at identifying potential causes contributing to an IAQ issue or concern. Such findings can be the basis for recommending corrective measures. This standard practice does not describe problem resolution or corrective measures, and the standard is not intended to evaluate the impact of corrective measures.1.5 This practice describes a pathway for characterizing indoor air, though using this practice does not guarantee that an investigator will be able to identify or resolve an IAQ complaint for one or more of the following reasons: (1) the diversity of sources and contaminants in indoor air; (2) other factors that may affect occupant perception and acceptance of indoor air quality, such as air temperature, humidity, noise, lighting, and psychological stress; (3) the range of susceptibility in the population.1.6 Implementation of procedures given in this standard requires the investigator (or investigative team) to have adequate background in several areas: general principles of IAQ; interviewing techniques; building design and construction practices; basic understanding of heating and cooling systems and appliances; use of IAQ measurement equipment; interpretation of IAQ data; and technical report writing.1.7 Although many elements described in this standard practice may be useful in training of IAQ investigators, it should not be used as the sole basis for specifying or conducting such training.1.8 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. For additional safety precautionary information, see Section 6.1.9 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： 843元 / 折扣价： 717 元 加购物车

5.1 This practice provides supplemental instructions that allow the use of Test Method D7249/D7249M to determine the open-hole (notched) strength of the sandwich panel facesheets for structural design allowables, material specifications, and research and development. Due to the curvature of the flexural test specimen when loaded, the open-hole sandwich facesheet strength from this test may not be equivalent to the open-hole sandwich facesheet strength of sandwich structures subjected to pure edgewise (in-plane) tension or compression.5.2 Factors that influence the notched facesheet strength and shall therefore be reported include the following: facesheet material, core material, adhesive material, methods of material fabrication, facesheet stacking sequence and overall thickness, core geometry (cell size), core density, adhesive thickness, specimen geometry (including hole diameter, diameter-to-thickness ratio, and width-to-diameter ratio), specimen preparation (especially of the hole), specimen conditioning, environment of testing, specimen alignment, loading procedure, speed of testing, facesheet void content, adhesive void content, and facesheet volume percent reinforcement. Further, notched facesheet strength may be different between precured/bonded and co-cured facesheets of the same material.1.1 This practice provides instructions for modifying the long beam flexure test method to determine open-hole facesheet properties of flat sandwich constructions subjected to flexure in such a manner that the applied moments produce curvature of the sandwich facesheet planes and result in compressive and tensile forces in the facesheets. Permissible core material forms include those with continuous bonding surfaces (such as balsa wood and foams) as well as those with discontinuous bonding surfaces (such as honeycomb). This practice supplements Test Method D7249/D7249M with provisions for testing specimens that contain a centrally located through-hole.1.2 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, to enforce conformance with the standard, each system shall be used independently of the other, and values from the two systems shall not be combined.1.2.1 Within the text, the inch-pound units are shown in brackets.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： 590元 / 折扣价： 502 元 加购物车

5.1 The payback method is part of a family of economic evaluation methods that provide measures of economic performance of an investment. Included in this family of evaluation methods are life-cycle costing, benefit-to-cost and savings-to-investment ratios, net benefits, and internal rates of return.5.2 The payback method accounts for all monetary values associated with an investment up to the time at which cumulative net benefits, discounted to present value, just pay off initial investment costs.5.3 Use the method to find if a project recovers its investment cost and other accrued costs within its service life or within a specified maximum acceptable payback period (MAPP) less than its service life. It is important to note that the decision to use the payback method should be made with care. (See Section 11 on Limitations.)1.1 This practice provides a recommended procedure for calculating and applying the payback method in evaluating building designs and building systems.1.2 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

This test method covers a uniform procedure for radioscopic examination of weldments. Requirements expressed in this test method are intended to control the quality of the radioscopic images and are not intended for controlling acceptability or quality of welds. It applies only to the use of equipment for radioscopic examination in which the image is finally presented on a television monitor for operator evaluation. The examination may be recorded for later review. It does not apply to fully automated systems where evaluation is automatically performed by computer. Unless otherwise specified by the applicable job order or contract, radioscopic examination shall be performed in accordance with a written procedure which includes: material and thickness range to be examined; equipment to be used, including specifications of source parameters and imaging equipment parameters; examination geometry, including source-to-object distance, object-to-detector-distance and orientation; image quality indicator designation and placement; test-object scan plan, indicating the range of motions and manipulation speeds through which the test object shall be manipulated in order to ensure satisfactory results; image-processing parameters; image-display parameters; and image storage.1.1 This practice covers a uniform procedure for radioscopic examination of weldments. Requirements expressed in this practice are intended to control the quality of the radioscopic images and are not intended for controlling acceptability or quality of welds.1.2 This practice applies only to the use of equipment for radioscopic examination in which the image is finally presented on a display screen (monitor) for operator evaluation. The examination may be recorded for later review. It does not apply to fully automated systems where evaluation is automatically performed by computer.1.3 The radioscopic extent, the quality level, and the acceptance criteria to be applied shall be specified in the contract, purchase order, product specification, or drawings.1.4 This practice can be used for the detection of discontinuities. This practice also facilitates the examination of a weld from several directions, such as perpendicular to the weld surface and along both weld bevel angles. The radioscopic techniques described in this practice provide adequate assurance for defect detectability; however, it is recognized that, for special applications, specific techniques using more stringent requirements may be needed to provide additional detection capability. The use of specific radioscopic techniques shall be agreed upon between purchaser and supplier.1.5 Units—The values stated in inch-pound units are to be regarded as the standard. The SI units given in parentheses are for information only.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. Specific precautionary statements are given in Section 7.1.7 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： 590元 / 折扣价： 502 元 加购物车

4.1 This practice outlines lead hazard reduction methods that have been shown to be effective in preventing lead poisoning in children.4.2 This practice tabulates advantages, disadvantages, and relative costs of the reduction methods to assist professionals such as certified lead-based paint risk assessors, supervisors, or project designers in selecting appropriate cost-effective options for controlling lead hazards identified during a lead risk assessment. Different control methods may be equally effective in controlling a given lead hazard and, consequently, the selection of a specific control method may depend on the needs and economic constraints of the client or building owner.4.3 This practice is intended to complement other lead hazard activities that are performed in accordance with regulations promulgated by authorities having jurisdiction. For example, in some jurisdictions, a lead hazard risk assessment, by regulation, consists of a visual assessment, a hazard assessment including environmental monitoring for lead, and selection of lead hazard reduction methods.4.4 This practice is intended to assist homeowners, owners and occupants of rental property, lenders, insurers, and others who have interest in selecting options for controlling lead hazards associated with leaded paint, dust, or soil.4.5 This practice complements Guide E2115. Information and data gathered in accordance with Guide E2115 and this practice are used in preparing a risk assessment report. Subsequent lead hazards are mitigated through implementation of controls selected in accordance with this present practice.4.6 This practice addresses the most commonly used lead hazard reduction methods. It is left to users of this practice to identify the advantages, disadvantages, and relative costs associated with emerging control technologies for comparison with these characteristics of established lead hazard control methods.4.7 This practice does not address specific historic preservation requirements. The interim control and abatement methods in this practice will work in any structure; however, historic preservation regulations promulgated by authorities having jurisdiction may impose specific interim control or abatement methods.1.1 This practice describes the selection of lead hazard reduction methods for controlling lead hazard risks identified during risk assessments of residential dwellings and child occupied facilities.1.2 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard. The values given in parentheses are mathematical conversions to inch-pound units that are provided for information only and are not considered standard.1.3 This practice contains notes, which are explanatory and are not part of the mandatory requirements of this standard.1.4 Methods described in this practice may not meet or be allowed by requirements or regulations established by local authorities having jurisdiction. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to comply with all such requirements and regulations.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 This practice provides one way for a laboratory to develop data-based Type A estimates of uncertainty as referred to in Section A22 in Form and Style for ASTM Standards.4.2 Laboratories accredited under ISO/IEC 17025 are required to present uncertainty estimates for their test results. This practice provides procedures that use test results to develop uncertainty estimates for an individual laboratory.4.3 Generally, these test results will be from a single sample of stable and homogeneous material known as a control or check sample.4.4 The true value of the characteristic(s) of the control sample being measured will ordinarily be unknown. However, this methodology may also be used if the control sample is a reference material, in which case the test method bias may also be estimated and incorporated into the uncertainty estimate. Many test methods do not have true reference materials available to provide traceable chains of uncertainty estimation.4.5 This practice also allows for ongoing monitoring of the laboratory uncertainty. As estimates of the level of uncertainty change, possibly as contributions to uncertainty are identified and minimized, revision to the laboratory uncertainty will be possible.AbstractThis practice describes techniques for a laboratory to estimate the uncertainty of a test result using data from test results on a control sample. This practice provides one method for a laboratory to estimate Measurement Uncertainty in accordance with Section A22.3 in Form and Style for ASTM Standards. This practice describes the use of control charts to evaluate the data obtained and presents a special type of control chart to monitor the estimate of uncertainty.This practice provides one way for a laboratory to develop data-based Type A estimates of uncertainty as referred to in Section A22 in Form and Style for ASTM Standards.1.1 This practice describes techniques for a laboratory to estimate the uncertainty of a test result using data from test results on a control sample. This practice provides one method for a laboratory to estimate Measurement Uncertainty in accordance with Section A22.3 in Form and Style for ASTM Standards.1.2 Uncertainty as defined by this practice applies to the capabilities of a single laboratory. Any estimate of uncertainty determined through the use of this practice applies only to the individual laboratory for which the data are presented.1.3 The laboratory uses a well defined and established test method in determining a series of test results. The uncertainty estimated using this practice only applies when the same test method is followed. The uncertainty only applies for the material types represented by the control samples, and multiple control samples may be needed, especially if the method has different precision for different sample types or response levels.1.4 The uncertainty estimate determined by this practice represents the intermediate precision of test results. This estimate seeks to quantify the total variation expected within a single laboratory using a single established test method while incorporating as many known sources of variation as possible.1.5 This practice does not establish error estimates (error budget) attributed to individual factors that could influence uncertainty.1.6 This practice describes the use of control charts to evaluate the data obtained and presents a special type of control chart to monitor the estimate of uncertainty.1.7 The system of units for this standard is not specified. Dimensional quantities in the standard are presented only as illustrations of calculation methods. The examples are not binding on products or test methods treated.1.8 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.1.9 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

2.1 Internal temperature measurements are made on both in-flight vehicles and on-ground test specimens; and, because of the importance of the temperature measurements to the design of various missile and spacecraft heat shields, it is essential that care be taken to minimize the sources of error in obtaining these measurements.2.2 Over the past several years, the problems of using thermocouples to obtain accurate temperature measurements in low-conductivity specimens have been studied by various people to isolate the sources of error and to establish improved temperature measurement techniques. The major sources of error are listed in this document and recommended solutions to the problems are given.1.1 This practice covers methods for instrumenting low-conductivity specimens for testing in an environment subject to rapid thermal changes such as produced by rocket motors, atmospheric re-entry, electric-arc plasma heaters, and so forth. Specifically, practices for bare-wire thermocouple instrumentation applicable to sheath-type thermocouples are discussed.1.2 The values stated in inch-pound units are to be regarded as the standard. The metric equivalents of inch-pound units may be approximate.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

5.1 Atmospheric corrosion of metallic materials is a function of many weather and atmospheric variables. The effect of specific corrodants, such as sulfur dioxide, can accelerate the atmospheric corrosion of metals significantly. It is important to have information available for the level of atmospheric SO2 when many metals are exposed to the atmosphere in order to determine their susceptibility to corrosion damage during their life time in the atmosphere.5.2 Volumetric analysis of atmospheric SO2 concentration carried out on a continuous basis is considered by some investigators as the most reliable method of estimating the effects caused by this gas. However, these methods require sophisticated monitoring devices together with power supplies and other equipment that make them unsuitable for many exposure sites. These methods are beyond the scope of this practice.5.3 The sulfation plate method provides a simple technique to independently monitor the level of SO2 in the atmosphere to yield a weighted average result. The lead peroxide cylinder is similar technique that produces comparable results, and the results are more sensitive to low levels of SO2.5.4 Sulfation plate or lead peroxide cylinder results may be used to characterize atmospheric corrosion test sites regarding the effective average level of SO2 in the atmosphere at these locations.5.5 Either sulfation plate or lead peroxide cylinder testing is useful in determining microclimate, seasonal, and long term variations in the effective average level of SO2.5.6 The results of these sulfur dioxide deposition rate tests may be used in correlations of atmospheric corrosion rates with atmospheric data to determine the sensitivity of the corrosion rate to SO2 level.5.7 The sulfur dioxide monitoring methods may also be used with other methods, such as Practice G84 for measuring time of wetness and Test Method G140 for atmospheric chloride deposition, to characterize the atmosphere at sites where buildings or other construction is planned in order to determine the extent of protective measures required for metallic materials.1.1 This practice covers two methods of monitoring atmospheric sulfur dioxide, SO2 deposition rates with specific application for estimating or evaluating atmospheric corrosivity as it applies to metals commonly used in buildings, structures, vehicles and devices used in outdoor locations.1.2 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard. No other units of measurement are included in this 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： 590元 / 折扣价： 502 元 加购物车

5.1 Assumptions of Solution of Cooper et al (1):5.1.1 The head change in the control well is instantaneous at time t  = 0.5.1.2 Well is of finite diameter and fully penetrates the aquifer.5.1.3 Flow in the nonleaky aquifer is radial.NOTE 2: The exact conservation equation of Richards (5)with the volumetric water content can be simplified to take the form used in the solution of (1)with the storage coefficient, which implies several assumptions including that of constant total stresses (6).5.2 Implications of Assumptions: 5.2.1 The mathematical equations applied ignore inertial effects and assume the water level returns the static level in an approximate exponential manner. The geometric configuration of the well and aquifer are shown in Fig. 1.FIG. 1 Cross Section Through a Well in Which a Slug of Water is Suddenly Injected5.2.2 Assumptions are applicable to artesian or confined conditions and fully penetrating wells. However, this practice is commonly applied to partially penetrating wells and in unconfined aquifers where it may provide estimates of hydraulic conductivity for the aquifer interval adjacent to the open interval of the well if the horizontal hydraulic conductivity is significantly greater than the vertical hydraulic conductivity.NOTE 3: Slug and pumping tests implicitly assume a porous medium. Fractured rock and carbonate settings may not provide meaningful data and information.5.2.3 As pointed out by Cooper et al (1) the determination of storage coefficient by this practice has questionable reliability because of the similar shape of the curves, whereas, the determination of transmissivity is not as sensitive to choosing the correct curve. However, the curve selected should not imply a storage coefficient unrealistically large or small.NOTE 4: The quality of the result produced by this standard 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 standard 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.NOTE 5: Some published literature (7, 6) have discussed the appropriateness of the slug test. These have not been universally accepted and the industry continues to use this practice.1.1 This practice covers the determination of transmissivity from the measurement of force-free (overdamped) response of a well-aquifer system to a sudden change of water level in a well. Force-free response of water level in a well to a sudden change in water level is characterized by recovery to initial water level in an approximate exponential manner with negligible inertial effects.1.2 The analytical procedure in this practice is used in conjunction with the field procedure in Test Method D4044/D4044M for collection of test data.1.3 Limitations—Slug tests are considered to provide an estimate of transmissivity. Although the assumptions of this practice prescribe a fully penetrating well (a well open through the full thickness of the aquifer), the slug test is commonly conducted using a partially penetrating well. Such a practice may be acceptable for application under conditions in which the aquifer is stratified and horizontal hydraulic conductivity is much greater than vertical hydraulic conductivity. In such a case the test would be considered to be representative of the average hydraulic conductivity of the portion of the aquifer adjacent to the open interval of the well.1.4 All observed and calculated values shall conform to the guidelines for significant digits and rounding established in Practice D6026.1.4.1 The procedures used to specify how data are collected/recorded and calculated in the standard are regarded as the industry standard. In addition, they are representative of the significant digits that generally should be retained. The procedures used do not consider material variation, purpose for obtaining the data, special purpose studies, or any considerations for the user’s objectives; and it is common practice to increase or reduce significant digits of reported data to be commensurate with these considerations. It is beyond the scope of this practice to consider significant digits used in analysis methods for engineering data.1.5 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. Reporting of results in units other than SI shall not be regarded as nonconformance with this standard.1.6 This practice offers a set of instructions for performing one or more specific operations. This document cannot replace education or experience and should be used in conjunction with professional judgment. Not all aspects of the practice may be applicable in all circumstances. This ASTM standard is not intended to represent or replace the standard of care by which the adequacy of a given professional service must be judged, nor should this document be applied without the consideration of a project’s many unique aspects. The word “Standard” in the title of this document means only that the document has been approved through the ASTM consensus process.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 Presence of even low concentrations of PVC in recycled PET flakes results in equipment corrosion problems during processing. The PVC contamination level shall dictate the market for use of the recycled polymer in secondary products. Procedures presented in this practice are used to identify the PVC contamination in recycled PET flakes.NOTE 4: These procedures may also be used to estimate the concentration of PVC contamination.1.1 This practice covers four procedures for separation and qualitative identification of poly(vinyl chloride) (PVC) contamination in poly(ethylene terephthalate) (PET) flakes.NOTE 1: Although not presented as a quantitative method, procedures presented in this practice may be used to provide quantitative results at the discretion of the user. The user assumes the responsibility to verify the reproducibility of quantitative results. Data from an independent source suggest a PVC detection level of 200 ppm (w/w) based on an original sample weight of 454 g.1.2 Procedure A is based on different fluorescence of PVC and PET when these polymers are exposed to ultraviolet (UV) light.1.3 Procedure B is an oven test based upon the charring of PVC when it is heated in air at 235°C.1.4 Procedures C and D are dye tests based on differential staining of PVC and PET.NOTE 2: Other polymers (for example, PETG) also absorb the stain or brightener. Such interferences will result in false positive identification of PVC as the contaminant.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. For specific hazards see Section 8.NOTE 3: There is no known ISO equivalent to this standard.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

5.1 With the increased use of geomembranes as a barrier material to restrict liquid migration from one location to another, a need has been created for standardized tests by which the continuity of the installed geomembrane, including the seams, can be evaluated. This practice is intended to meet such a need whenever the subgrade soil is nonconductive, or a geomembrane is installed on a nonconductive material.5.2 The use of a suitably conductive geotextile installed between a nonconductive soil or material and the geomembrane will permit electrical leak location survey to be conducted.5.3 The compatibility of a conductive geotextile and leak location equipment shall be assessed for each leak location technique considered (covered or exposed, when applicable). A realistic small-scale test shall have been conducted by the supplier of geotextile and/or leak detection equipment to demonstrate their mutual compatibility for a given leak detection technique.1.1 This standard practice describes standard procedures for using a conductive geotextile with electrical methods to locate leaks in exposed geomembranes and geomembranes covered with water or earth materials containing moisture.1.2 This standard practice provides guidance for the use of appropriate conductive geotextile used in leak location surveys on geomembranes. This guide includes all types of conductive geotextiles with sufficient conductivity for the particular electrical leak location method. A conductive geotextile is applicable to all types of geoelectric surveys when there is otherwise not a conductive layer under the geomembrane.1.3 This standard practice is intended to ensure that leak location surveys can always be performed with a reasonable level of certainty. This standard practice provides guidance for the use of appropriate conductive geotextiles used in leak location surveys on geomembranes.1.4 Leak location surveys can be used on nonconductive geomembranes installed in basins, ponds, tanks, ore and waste pads, landfill cells, landfill caps, other containment facilities, and building applications such as in parking garages, decks, and green roofs. The procedures are applicable for geomembranes made of nonconductive materials such as polyethylene, polypropylene, polyvinyl chloride, chlorosulfonated polyethylene, bituminous material, and other electrically insulating materials. Leak location surveys involving conductive or partially conductive geomembranes are not within the scope of this document.1.5 Warning—The electrical methods used for geomembrane leak location could use high voltages, resulting in the potential for electrical shock or electrocution. This hazard might be increased because operations might be conducted in or near water. In particular, a high voltage could exist between the water or earth material and earth ground, or any grounded conductor. These procedures are potentially VERY DANGEROUS, and can result in personal injury or death. Because of the high voltage that could be involved, and the shock or electrocution hazard, do not come in electrical contact with any leak unless the excitation power supply is turned off. The electrical methods used for geomembrane leak location should be attempted only by qualified and experienced personnel. Appropriate safety measures must be taken to protect the leak location operators as well as other people at the site.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

4.1 This practice establishes the basic parameters for controlling the application of the liquid penetrant method. This practice is written so it can be specified on the engineering drawing, specification, or contract. It is not a detailed how-to procedure to be used by the inspector and, therefore, must be supplemented by a detailed procedure that conforms to the requirements of this practice. Practice E165/E165M contains information to help develop detailed requirements.1.1 This practice establishes the minimum requirements for conducting liquid penetrant examination of nonporous metal and nonmetal components.NOTE 1: This practice replaces MIL-STD-6866.1.2 The penetrant examination processes described in this practice are applicable to in-process, final, and maintenance (in-service) examinations. These processes are applicable for the detection of discontinuities, such as lack of fusion, corrosion, cracks, laps, cold shuts, and porosity, that are open or connected to the surface of the component under examination.1.3 Caution must be exercised in the usage of elevated temperature with components manufactured from thermoplastic materials. Also, some cleaners, penetrants, and developers can have a deleterious effect on nonmetallic materials such as plastics. Prior to examination, tests should be conducted to ensure that none of the cleaning or examination materials are harmful to the components to be examined.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 are not necessarily exact equivalents; therefore, to ensure conformance with the standard, each system shall be used independently of the other, and values from the two systems shall not be combined.1.5 All areas of this practice may be open to agreement between the cognizant engineering organization and the supplier, or specific direction from the cognizant engineering organization.NOTE 2: Throughout this document, the term blacklight has been changed to UV-A to conform with the latest terminology in Terminology E1316. Blacklight can mean a broad range of ultraviolet radiation; fluorescent penetrant examination only uses the UV-A range.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： 646元 / 折扣价： 550 元 加购物车

4.1 Two general types of tables (Note 1) are given, one based on the concept of lot tolerance, LTPD, and the other on AOQL. The broad conditions under which the different types have been found best adapted are indicated below.4.1.1 For each of the types, tables are provided both for single sampling and for double sampling. Each of the individual tables constitutes a collection of solutions to the problem of minimizing the over-all amount of inspection. Because each line in the tables covers a range of lot sizes, the AOQL values in the LTPD tables and the LTPD values in the AOQL tables are often conservative.NOTE 1: Tables in Annex A1 – Annex A4 and parts of the text are reproduced by permission of John R. Wiley and Sons. More extensive tables and discussion of the methods will be found in that text.4.2 The sampling tables based on lot quality protection (LTPD) (the tables in Annex A1 and Annex A2) are perhaps best adapted to conditions where interest centers on each lot separately, for example, where the individual lot tends to retain its identity either from a shipment or a service standpoint. These tables have been found particularly useful in inspections made by the ultimate consumer or a purchasing agent for lots or shipments purchased more or less intermittently.4.3 The sampling tables based on average quality protection (AOQL) (the tables in Annex A3 and Annex A4) are especially adapted for use where interest centers on the average quality of product after inspection rather than on the quality of each individual lot and where inspection is, therefore, intended to serve, if necessary, as a partial screen for defective pieces. The latter point of view has been found particularly helpful, for example, in consumer inspections of continuing purchases of large quantities of a product and in manufacturing process inspections of parts where the inspection lots tend to lose their identity by merger in a common storeroom from which quantities are withdrawn on order as needed.4.4 The plans based on average quality protection (AOQL) consider the degree to which the entire inspection procedure screens out defectives in the product submitted to the inspector. Lots accepted by sample undergo a partial screening through the elimination of defectives found in samples. Lots that fail to be accepted by sample are completely cleared of defectives. Obviously, this requires a nondestructive test. The over-all result is some average percent defective in the product as it leaves the inspector, termed the average outgoing quality, which depends on the level of percent defective for incoming product and the proportion of total defectives that are screened out.4.5 Given a specific problem of replacing a 100 % screening inspection by a sampling inspection, the first step is to decide on the type of protection desired, to select the desired limit of percent defective lot tolerance (LTPD) or AOQL value for that type of protection, and to choose between single and double sampling. This results in the selection of one of the appended tables. The second step is to determine whether the quality of product is good enough to warrant the introduction of sampling. The economies of sampling will be realized, of course, only insofar as the percent defective in submitted product is such that the acceptance criteria of the selected sampling plan will be met. A statistical analysis of past inspection results should first be made, therefore, in order to determine existing levels and fluctuations in the percent defective for the characteristic or the group of characteristics under consideration. This provides information with respect to the degree of control as well as the usual level of percent defective to be expected under existing conditions. Determine a value from this and other information for the process average percent defective that should be used in applying the selected sampling table, if sampling is to be introduced.AbstractThis practice is primarily a statement of principals for the guidance of ASTM technical committees and others in the use of average outgoing quality limit, AOQL, and lot tolerance percent defective, LTPD, sampling plans for determining acceptable of lots of product. Two general types of tables are given, one based on the concept of lot tolerance, LTPD, and the other on AOQL. For each of the types, tables are provided both for single sampling and for double sampling. Each of the individual tables constitutes a collection of solutions to the problem of minimizing the over-all amount of inspection.1.1 This practice is primarily a statement of principals for the guidance of ASTM technical committees and others in the use of average outgoing quality limit, AOQL, and lot tolerance percent defective, LTPD, sampling plans for determining acceptable of lots of product.1.2 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： 843元 / 折扣价： 717 元 加购物车

4.1 The procedure and tables presented in this practice are based on the use of the Weibull distribution in acceptance sampling inspection. Details of this work, together with tables of sampling plans of other forms, have been published previously. See Refs (1-3).4 Since the basic computations required have already been made, it has been quite easy to provide these new factors. No changes in method or details of application have been made over those described in the publications referenced above. For this reason, the text portion of this report has been briefly written. Readers interested in further details are referred to these previous publications. Other sources of material on the underlying theory and approach are also available (4-7).4.2 The procedure to be used is essentially the same as the one normally used for attribute sampling inspection. The only difference is that sample items are tested for life or survival instead of for some other property. For single sampling, the following are the required steps:4.2.1 Using the tables of factors provided in Annex A1, select a suitable sampling inspection plan from those tabulated in Practice E2234.4.2.2 Draw at random a sample of items of the size specified by the selected Practice E2234 plan.4.2.3 Place the sample of items on life test for the specified period of time, t.4.2.4 Determine the number of sample items that failed during the test period.4.2.5 Compare the number of items that failed with the number allowed under the selected Practice E2234 plan.4.2.6 If the number that failed is equal to or less than the acceptable number, accept the lot; if the number failing exceeds the acceptable number, reject the lot.4.3 Both the sample sizes and the acceptance numbers used are those specified by Practice E2234 plans. It will be assumed in the section on examples that single sampling plans will be used. However, the matching double sampling and multiple sampling plans provided in MIL-STD-105 can be used if desired. The corresponding sample sizes and acceptance and rejection numbers are used in the usual way. The specified test truncation time, t, must be used for all samples.4.4 The probability of acceptance for a lot under this procedure depends only on the probability of a sample item failing before the end of the test truncation time, t. For this reason, the actual life at failure need not be determined; only the number of items failing is of interest. Life requirements and test time specifications need not necessarily be measured in chronological terms such as minutes or hours. For example, the life measure may be cycles of operation, revolutions, or miles of travel.4.5 The underlying life distribution assumed in this standard is the Weibull distribution (note that the exponential distribution is a special case of the Weibull). The Weibull model has three parameters. One parameter is a scale or characteristic life parameter. For these plans and procedures, the value for this parameter need not be known; the techniques used are independent of its magnitude. A second parameter is a location or “guaranteed life” parameter. In these plans and procedures, it is assumed that this parameter has a value of zero and that there is some risk of item failure right from the start of life. If this is not the case for some applications, a simple modification in procedure is available. The third parameter, and the one of importance, is the shape parameter, β.5 The magnitude of the conversion factors used in the procedures described in this report depends directly on the value for this parameter. For this reason, the magnitude of the parameter shall be known through experience with the product or shall be estimated from past research, engineering, or inspection data. Estimation procedures are available and are outlined in Ref (1).4.6 For the common case of random chance failures with the failure rate constant over time, rather than failures as a result of “infant mortality” or wearout, a value of 1 for the shape parameter shall be assumed. With this parameter value, the Weibull distribution reduces to the exponential. Tables of conversion factors are provided in Annex A1 for 15 selected shape parameter values ranging from 1/2 to 10, the range commonly encountered in industrial and technical practice. The value 1, used for the exponential case, is included. Factors for other required shape parameter values within this range may be obtained approximately by interpolation. A more complete discussion of the relationship between failure patterns and the Weibull parameters can be found in Refs (1-3).4.7 One possible acceptance criterion is the mean life for items making up the lot (μ). Mean life conversion factors or values for the dimensionless ratio 100t/μ have been determined to correspond to or replace all the p' or percent defective values associated with Practice E2234 plans. In this factor, t represents the specified test truncation time and μ the mean item life for the lot. For reliability or life-length applications, these factors are used in place of the corresponding p' values normally used in the use of Practice E2234 plans for attribute inspection of other item qualities. The use of these factors will be demonstrated by several examples (see Sections 5, 7, and 9).4.8 Annex Table 1A lists, for each selected shape parameter value, 100t/μ ratios for each of the Practice E2234 AQL [p'(%)] values. With acceptance inspection plans selected in terms of these ratios, the probability of acceptance will be high for lots whose mean life meets the specified requirement. The actual probability of acceptance will vary from plan to plan and may be read from the associated operating characteristic curves supplied in MIL-STD-105. The curves are entered by using the corresponding p'(%) value. Annex Table 1B lists 100t/μ ratios at the LQL for the quality level at which the consumer's risk is 0.10. Annex Table 1C lists corresponding 100t/μ ratios for a consumer's risk of 0.05.4.8.1 These ratios are to be used directly for the usual case for which the value for the Weibull location or threshold parameter (γ) can be assumed as zero. If γ is not zero but has some other known value, all that shall be done is to subtract the value for γ from t to get t0 and from m to get m0. These transformed values, t 0 and m0, are then employed in the use of the tables and for all other computations. A solution in terms of m0 and t0 can then be converted back to actual or absolute values by adding the value for γ to each.AbstractThis practice presents a procedure and related tables of factors for adapting Practice E2234 (equivalent to MIL-STD105) sampling plans to acceptance sampling inspection when the item quality of interest is life length or reliability. Factors are provided for three alternative criteria for lot evaluation: mean life, hazard rate, and reliable life. Inspection of the sample is by attributes with testing truncated at the end of some prearranged period of time. The Weibull distribution, together with the exponential distribution as a special case, is used as the underlying statistical model. The procedure and tables presented in this practice are based on the use of the Weibull distribution in acceptance sampling inspection.1.1 This practice presents a procedure and related tables of factors for adapting Practice E2234 (equivalent to MIL-STD-105) sampling plans to acceptance sampling inspection when the item quality of interest is life length or reliability. Factors are provided for three alternative criteria for lot evaluation: mean life, hazard rate, and reliable life. Inspection of the sample is by attributes with testing truncated at the end of some prearranged period of time. The Weibull distribution, together with the exponential distribution as a special case, is used as the underlying statistical model.1.2 A system of units is not specified by this practice.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： 843元 / 折扣价： 717 元 加购物车