5.1 Appropriate application of this practice should result in a WQE achievable by the laboratory in applying the tested method/matrix/analyte combination to routine sample analysis. That is, a laboratory should be capable of measuring concentrations greater than WQEZ %, with the associated RSD equal to Z % or less.5.2 The WQE values may be used to compare the quantitation capability of different methods for analysis of the same analyte in the same matrix within the same laboratory.5.3 The WQE procedure should be used to establish the within-laboratory quantitation capability for any application of a method in the laboratory where quantitation is important to data use. The intent of the WQE is not to impose reporting limits. The intent is to provide a reliable procedure for establishing the quantitative characteristics of the method (as implemented in the laboratory for the matrix and analyte) and thus to provide the laboratory with reliable information characterizing the uncertainty in any data produced. Then the laboratory can make informed decisions about censoring data and has the information necessary for providing reliable estimates of uncertainty with reported data.1.1 This practice establishes a uniform standard for computing the within-laboratory quantitation estimate associated with Z % relative standard deviation (referred to herein as WQEZ %), and provides guidance concerning the appropriate use and application.1.2 WQEZ % is computed to be the lowest concentration for which a single measurement from the laboratory will have an estimated Z % relative standard deviation (Z % RSD, based on within-laboratory standard deviation), where Z is typically an integer multiple of 10, such as 10, 20, or 30. Z can be less than 10 but not more than 30. The WQE10 % is consistent with the quantitation approaches of Currie (1)2 and Oppenheimer, et al. (2).1.3 The fundamental assumption of the WQE is that the media tested, the concentrations tested, and the protocol followed in developing the study data provide a representative and fair evaluation of the scope and applicability of the test method, as written. Properly applied, the WQE procedure ensures that the WQE value has the following properties:1.3.1 Routinely Achievable WQE Value—The laboratory should be able to attain the WQE in routine analyses, using the laboratory’s standard measurement system(s), at reasonable cost. This property is needed for a quantitation limit to be feasible in practical situations. Representative data must be used in the calculation of the WQE.1.3.2 Accounting for Routine Sources of Error—The WQE should realistically include sources of bias and variation that are common to the measurement process and the measured materials. These sources include, but are not limited to intrinsic instrument noise, some typical amount of carryover error, bottling, preservation, sample handling and storage, analysts, sample preparation, instruments, and matrix.1.3.3 Avoidable Sources of Error Excluded—The WQE should realistically exclude avoidable sources of bias and variation (that is, those sources that can reasonably be avoided in routine sample measurements). Avoidable sources include, but are not limited to, modifications to the sample, modifications to the measurement procedure, modifications to the measurement equipment of the validated method, and gross and easily discernible transcription errors (provided there is a way to detect and either correct or eliminate these errors in routine processing of samples).1.4 The WQE applies to measurement methods for which instrument calibration error is minor relative to other sources, because this practice does not model or account for instrument calibration error, as is true of most quantitation estimates in general. Therefore, the WQE procedure is appropriate when the dominant source of variation is not instrument calibration, but is perhaps one or more of the following:1.4.1 Sample Preparation, and especially when calibration standards do not go through sample preparation.1.4.2 Differences in Analysts, and especially when analysts have little opportunity to affect instrument calibration results (as is the case with automated calibration).1.4.3 Differences in Instruments (measurement equipment), such as differences in manufacturer, model, hardware, electronics, sampling rate, chemical-processing rate, integration time, software algorithms, internal signal processing and thresholds, effective sample volume, and contamination level.1.5 Data Quality Objectives—For a given method, one typically would compute the WQE for the lowest RSD for which the data set produces a reliable estimate. Thus, if possible, WQE10 % would be computed. If the data indicated that the method was too noisy, so that WQE10 % could not be computed reliably, one might have to compute instead WQE20 %, or possibly WQE30 %. In any case, a WQE with a higher RSD level (such as WQE50 %) would not be considered, though a WQE with RSD < 10 % (such as WQE5 %) could be acceptable. The appropriate level of  RSD is based on the data quality objective(s) for a particular use or uses. This practice allows for calculation of WQEs with user selected  RSDs less than 30 %.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： 646元 / 折扣价： 550 元 加购物车

6.1 The purpose of this specification is to establish minimum impact attenuation requirements for playground surfacing materials in order to reduce the risk of severe head injury from falls.6.2 This specification provides a uniform means of quantifying the impact attenuation performance of playground surfacing materials and is appropriately used to compare the relative performance of different playground surfacing materials.6.3 This specification is to be used as a reference for specifying the impact attenuation performance of playground surfacing materials.6.4 In combination with data relating impact test scores to head injury, the information generated by application of this specification is suitable to estimate the relative risk of a severe head injury due to a fall.AbstractThis specification specifies impact attenuation performance requirements for playground surfaces and surfacing materials and provides a means of determining impact attenuation performance using a test method that simulates the impact of a child’s head with the surface. The test method quantifies impact in terms of g-max and Head Injury Criterion (HIC) scores. G-max is the measure of the maximum acceleration (shock) produced by an impact. The Head Injury Criterion or HIC score is an empirical measure of impact severity based on published research describing the relationship between the magnitude and duration of impact accelerations and the risk of head trauma..Two test methods shall be used to determine the impact attenuation of a playground surface or surfacing materials: critical fall height test, and installed surface performance test. The following apparatus shall be required for implementation of the two test methods: temperature measuring device, impact test system, acceleration measurement system, drop height measurement system, and battery-operated equipment.1.1 This specification establishes minimum performance requirements for the impact attenuation of playground surfacing materials installed within the use zone of playground equipment.1.2 This specification is specific to surfacing used in conjunction with playground equipment, such as that described in Specifications F1148, F1487, F1918, CSAZ614 (Canada), and SS457 (Singapore).1.3 This specification establishes an impact attenuation performance criterion for playground surfacing materials; expressed as a critical fall height.1.4 This specification establishes procedures for determining the critical fall height of playground surfacing materials under laboratory conditions. The laboratory test is mandatory for surfaces to conform to the requirements of this specification.1.5 The laboratory test required by this specification addresses the performance of dry surfacing materials.1.6 This specification also provides optional procedures to determine the critical fall height under wet or frozen test conditions, or both.1.7 The critical fall height of a playground surfacing material determined under laboratory conditions does not account for important factors that have the potential to influence the actual performance of installed surfacing materials. Factors that are known to affect surfacing material performance include but are not limited to aging, moisture, maintenance, exposure to temperature extremes (for example, freezing), exposure to ultraviolet light, contamination with other materials, compaction, loss of thickness, shrinkage, submersion in water, and so forth.1.8 The impact attenuation specification and test methods established in this specification are specific to the risk of head injury. There is only limited evidence that conformance with the requirements of this specification reduces the risk of other kinds of serious injury (for example, long bone fractures).NOTE 1: The relative risk of fatality and of different degrees of head injury may be estimated using the information in Appendix X1, which shows the relationships between the Head Injury Criterion (HIC) scores of an impact and the probability of head injury.1.9 This specification relates only to the impact attenuation properties of playground surfacing materials and does not address other factors that contribute to fall-related injuries. While it is believed that conformance with the requirements of this specification will reduce the risk of serious injury and death from falls, adherence to this specification will not prevent all injuries and deaths.1.10 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.1.11 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.1.12 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

It is intended that this practice be used to provide a sample representative of the coal from which it is collected. Because of the variability of coal and the wide variety of mechanical sampling equipment available, caution should be used in all stages of the sample collection process, the design of sampling system specifications, the equipment procurement and the acceptance testing of installed equipment.After removal from the sampling system and further preparation (Practice D 2013), the sample may be analyzed for a number of different parameters. These parameters may define the lot's value, its ability to meet specifications, its environmental impact, as well as other properties.1.1 This practice covers procedures for the mechanical collection of a sample under Classification I-B-1 and I-B-2 (Practice D 2234/D 2234M) and the within-system preparation (reduction and division) of gross samples utilizing various components of the mechanical sampling system.1.2 This practice describes mechanical sampling procedures for coals (1) by size and condition of preparation (for example, mechanically cleaned coal or raw coal) and (2) by sampling characteristics.1.3 The values stated in either SI units or inch-pound units are to be regarded separately as standard. Within the text the inch-pound units are shown in brackets. The values stated in each system may not be exact equivalents; therefore, use each system 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 and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.

定价： 0元 / 折扣价： 0 元

4.1 Because of concerns for safety and the protection of nuclear materials from theft, stringent specifications are placed on chemical processes and the chemical and physical properties of nuclear materials. Strict requirements for the control and accountability of nuclear materials are imposed on the users of those materials. Therefore, when analyses are made by a laboratory to support a project such as the fabrication of nuclear fuel materials, various performance requirements may be imposed on the laboratory. One such requirement is often the use of qualified methods. Their use gives greater assurance that the data produced will be satisfactory for the intended use of those data. A qualified method will help assure that the data produced will be comparable to data produced by the same qualified method in other laboratories.4.2 This guide provides guidance for qualifying measurement methods and for maintaining qualification. Even though all practices would be used for most qualification programs, there may be situations in which only a selected portion would be required. Care should be taken, however, that the effectiveness of qualification is not reduced when applying these practices selectively. The recommended practices in this guide are generic; based on these practices, specific actions should be developed to establish a qualification program.1.1 This guide provides guidance for selecting, validating, and qualifying measurement methods when qualification is required for a specific program. The recommended practices presented in this guide provide a major part of a quality assurance program for the laboratory data (see Fig. 1). Qualification helps to assure that the data produced will meet established requirements.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

1.1 This guide is intended to assist the maintenance engineer in the preparation of a specification or work instruction for re-coating items that are presently coated with what is known within the nuclear power industry as an "unqualified coating."

定价： 0元 / 折扣价： 0 元

5.1 The practice can be used to evaluate coupon materials of any composition, insofar as the coupon can be prepared small enough to fit inside a 50-ml conical tube.5.2 This practice defines procedures that are quantitative, scalable, rapid, sensitive, safe, reduces consumables, minimizes labor and addresses statistical confidence (1, 2, 4).5.2.1 Quantitative—The total number of spores per coupon is determined by dilution-plating, and all spores remaining on the coupon are assayed for activity in the extraction tube to provide confidence that 100 % of spores were assayed.5.2.2 Statistical Confidence—The use of five independent preparations of spore inoculum for a statistical N of 5.5.2.3 Sensitivity—Allows for complete detection of all viable spores inoculated on a coupon, including the spores that remain attached to the coupon.5.2.4 Safety—Inoculated coupons are contained within 0.2 µm filter-capped 50-ml conical tubes. The 0.2 µm filter allows vaporous decontaminants to pass through while preventing escape of spores, thereby providing an important level of containment when working with pathogenic strains.5.2.5 Simplicity of Testing—Tests and extractions are performed in the same 50-ml conical tube to minimize handling steps.5.2.6 Scalable and Rapid—A maximum of 36 samples can be processed in 1 h by two technicians; a total of 300 samples have been processed by six technicians in 5 h (1-3).5.2.7 Wide application for numerous Bacillus species and strains.NOTE 1: This practice differs from similar quantitative methods (E2111, E2197 and E2414) in the size and variety of coupon materials available for testing, in the practical confidence of the statistics, the application of the decontaminant, scalability and sensitivity.1.1 This practice is used to quantify the efficacy of vaporous decontaminants on Bacillus spores dried on the surface of coupons made from porous and non-porous materials and contained within 0.2µm filter-capped tubes.1.2 This practice should be performed only by those trained in microbiological techniques, are familiar with antimicrobial (sporicidal) agents and with the end use of such products.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： 590元 / 折扣价： 502 元 加购物车

4.1 This section lists and explains the characteristics that are used to describe a stationary obstacle.4.2 It is essential that sufficient information about the obstacle is recorded using this practice so that the obstacle can be replicated. This will allow comparisons to be made between test method performances that use obstacles with similar characteristics.4.3 Class: 4.3.1 When describing an obstacle to be utilized in ASTM Committee F45 test methods, two classes are defined:4.3.1.1 Genuine—The obstacle being described is an existing real world object (for example, a chair, table, machinery, or equipment). Any identifying information, such as make, model, SKU, etc., should be recorded.4.3.1.2 Artifact—The obstacle being described has been constructed according to the characteristics outlined in this section. Obstacles of this class are intended to be replicable.4.4 Parts of the Obstacle: 4.4.1 Each characteristic can be used to describe a property of the entire obstacle or a part of the obstacle. All parts of the obstacle must be uniquely named and identified in the test report described in Section 6.4.5 Shape: 4.5.1 The shape refers to the relationships between the external, physical boundaries of the obstacle. All shapes can be in contact with the ground or elevated above the ground (see Fig. 1, Fig. 2, and Fig. 3). The unique obstacle shapes are:4.5.1.1 Bar (for example, column)4.5.1.2 Panel (for example, sign, pallet, shelf)4.5.1.3 Cuboid4.5.1.4 Sphere4.5.1.5 Cone4.5.1.6 Other—Obstacle shapes that do not fall into one of the above categories (for example, a pile of fabric). An obstacle can use a single shape to describe its overall volume or multiple shapes to describe parts of the obstacle. For example, the shape of a desk could be described as an elevated horizontal panel with two vertical panels spanning from the ground to the horizontal panel or the shape of a table could be described as an elevated horizontal panel with one or more vertical bars spanning from the ground to the horizontal panel (see Fig. 3).FIG. 1 Obstacle Shapes, Shown with Hard Edges in Varying Directions (Left to Right):Vertical Bar, Horizontal Bar, Vertical Panel, Horizontal Panel, Elevated Horizontal PanelFIG. 2 Obstacle Shapes (Left to Right): Cuboid (Shown with Hard Edges), Sphere, ConeFIG. 3 Example Combinations of Obstacle Shapes, Shown with Hard Edges (Left to Right): Elevated Horizontal Panel with Two Vertical Panels Spanning from the Ground to the Horizontal Panel (for example, Desk), Elevated Horizontal Panel with Four Vertical Bars Spanning from the Ground to the Horizontal Panel (for example, Table), the Same as the Previous but with Inset Vertical Bars (for example, Table)4.6 Face Quality: 4.6.1 The faces of each obstacle can either be closed (that is, it has a surface that fills that face) or open (that is, it has no surface on that face).4.6.2 This characteristic can vary for each face of the obstacle or part of the obstacle: top, bottom, front, back, left, right. Some obstacles may not have clearly discernible faces (for example, sphere, cone).4.6.3 See Fig. 4 for examples of obstacles with closed and open faces.FIG. 4 Examples of Obstacle Face Variations (Left to Right): Sphere with Closed Faces, Cuboid with All Closed Faces, Cuboid with Open Front Face, and Cuboid with Open Top Face4.7 Taper: 4.7.1 If the boundaries of any part of the obstacle change dimension and narrow toward one end, it is considered tapered.4.8 Edge Quality.4.9 The quality of the vertices where the boundaries of the shape meet (see Fig. 5), which can be internal or external on the obstacle. The edge characteristics can be:4.9.1 Hard edges:4.9.1.1 Cornered (the angle between the two surfaces forming the edge is 90°)4.9.1.2 Chamfered (the angle between the two surfaces forming the edge is greater than 90°)4.9.2 Rounded:4.9.2.1 Fillets (partially rounded)4.9.2.2 Cylindrical (completely rounded, eliminating one or more faces of the shape)FIG. 5 Obstacle Shape Edge Variations, Shown on a Vertical Bar (Left to Right): Cornered, Chamfered, Fillets, and Cylindrical4.10 Direction: 4.10.1 The direction of the obstacle is dependent on which side is its front. This characteristic will be referenced in other standards when specifying how to orient the obstacle within a test method apparatus.4.11 Dimensions: 4.11.1 The size of the obstacle overall (that is, its entire volume) and of its individual parts (for example, for an obstacle whose shape is a plane with legs, the size of the horizontal plane, the vertical bars, and the inset of the vertical bars from the edge of the horizontal plane) can be described according to the following characteristics:4.11.2 Width4.11.3 Length/depth4.11.4 Height4.11.5 Elevation (from ground to bottom edge boundary)4.11.6 Taper (if applicable)4.11.6.1 Location on the obstacle where the taper begins (that is, when the boundaries begin to narrow)4.11.6.2 Length of the part of the obstacle that is tapered4.11.6.3 Angle of the taper4.11.7 Edge (if not cornered)4.11.7.1 Setback distance of chamfered edge (if applicable)4.11.7.2 Radius of rounded edge (if applicable)4.11.8 The units used to measure the dimensions of the obstacle and the approximate accuracy of those measurements shall be reported.4.12 Material: 4.12.1 The material(s) the obstacle is made of: metal, wood, foam, glass, plastic, fabric, composite materials, etc.4.12.2 If the material is intended to block or reflect a certain type of sensor, this should be stated on the test report.4.12.3 If the density of the material is known and is relevant for the test method in which the obstacle is utilized, this should be stated on the test report.4.13 Surface: 4.13.1 Characteristics of the obstacle’s surface include, but are not limited to:4.13.2 Color4.13.3 Reflectivity4.13.4 Opacity (for example, glass, plexiglass)4.13.5 Porosity—Solid (for example, wood, steel) or non-solid surface with repeated perforations or openings (for example, fencing)4.13.6 Uniformity—Uniform or variable (that is, patterned, striped)4.13.7 Other—Obstacle surface qualities that do not fall into one of the above categories.4.14 Note—Test pieces from other standards can be described using this practice. For example, the cylindrical test pieces from ANSI/ITSDF B56.5 can be described as vertical or horizontal bars with cylindrical edges and flat black surface qualities.4.15 Examples of common surface characteristics referenced in other standards are listed in the appendix (see X1.1).4.16 Other Relevant Features: 4.16.1 Any other relevant characteristics that pertain to the physical nature of the obstacle should be recorded. For example, if the obstacle features lights, produces air flow, or emanates sound.4.17 Obstacle Description Persistence: 4.17.1 When the obstacle is utilized in a test method, the characteristics of the specific obstacle that are recorded shall not vary for the duration of the test, except if the obstacle contains flexible material, which may cause its shape or dimensions to vary. For example, a soft partition may move due to air flow in the environment. If the obstacle becomes damaged during testing causing its shape or dimensions, or both, to change, an A-UGV may now interact with the obstacle differently than it did before it was damaged. If any characteristics of the obstacle change, it is considered a new and different obstacle from what was previously utilized.1.1 This practice specifies physical characteristics that can be used to describe obstacles utilized within ASTM Committee F45 test methods. The obstacle characteristics specified in this practice are not described with respect to the manner in which they will be sensed or detected by an A-UGV. Rather, the obstacles are described according to their real world characteristics. For example, the real world characteristics of a wooden box that is flat black on one side can be described according to its actual dimensions, material, and color. An A-UGV with a lidar sensor may have difficulty detecting the side of the box that is flat black, which could make the obstacle appear smaller to the A-UGV compared to its actual dimensions in the real world. However, this may not be the case for other A-UGVs due to the wide variety of sensors used to detect obstacles, so the actual, real world characteristics are used to describe it instead.1.2 Real world, existing objects can be used as obstacles and described using this practice. The characteristics specified herein can also be used to construct test artifacts to use as representative obstacles that are intended to have similar characteristics to that of real world obstacles. The obstacles that can be described using this practice may be found in indoor and outdoor environments.1.3 This practice does not purport to cover all relevant obstacle characteristics that may have an effect on A-UGV performance. The characteristics specified in this practice are limited to the physical properties which are considered to be the most salient in terms of the effects they can have on A-UGV performance. As such, the user of this standard may select the level of detail to use in order to describe the characteristics of an obstacle in such a way. The characteristics are also limited to those which are more easily measurable and replicable when comparing test method results that use similar obstacles.1.4 This practice only covers obstacles that exist on or above the ground, sometimes referred to as positive obstacles, and remain stationary while the A-UGV is performing tasks. Stationary real world obstacles of this type include pallets on the ground, desks and tables, and other A-UGVs. This practice does not include obstacles that exist below the ground (for example, holes), sometimes referred to as negative obstacles. This practice does not cover boundaries or features in an environment that are unchanging and known prior to an A-UGV task, such as walls, racks, or other infrastructure.1.5 This practice specifies a variety of physical characteristics of an obstacle, including shapes, dimensions, and surface qualities. This practice does not specify the location properties of an obstacle within a test method apparatus aside from measurements in reference to the ground plane of the environment.1.6 When constructing a test artifact as an obstacle representative of a genuine obstacle (see 4.1), a combination of characteristics can be selected and used to guide fabrication. The use of similar genuine obstacles (that is, real world objects) may decrease reproducibility of testing conditions compared to using artifact obstacles (that is, those that are fabricated for the purposes of testing), unless the same real world object is used between multiple tests.1.7 This practice does not specify A-UGV performance in the presence of obstacles. The intent of this practice is to enable comparisons between tests that use obstacles with similar characteristics.1.8 This practice does not require that certain obstacle characteristics be used as part of a test method. The test requestor can elect specific obstacle characteristics to be used as part of a test method.1.9 Obstacles described using this practice can be utilized in test methods specified by other ASTM Committee F45 standards, such as Test Method F3244 – 17. In the appendix, a baseline test is described that can be used to determine if an obstacle is able to be detected by an A-UGV’s sensors prior to utilizing the obstacle in another ASTM Committee F45 test method (see X1.2).1.10 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as the standard. The values given in parentheses are not precise mathematical conversions to imperial units. They are close approximate equivalents for the purpose of specifying material dimensions or quantities that are readily available to avoid excessive fabrication costs of test apparatuses while maintaining repeatability and reproducibility of the test method results. These values given in parentheses are provided for information only and are not considered standard.1.11 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.1.12 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