5.1 Gloss3 is associated with the capacity of a surface to reflect more light in some directions than in others. The directions associated with mirror (or specular) reflection normally have the highest reflectances. Gloss is best seen and analyzed when the surfaces studied are illuminated by a light source that provides strong contrasting patterns of light and dark. Such a light source is described in this test method.5.2 The simplest concept of gloss is that it corresponds to the mirror-like reflectances of surfaces. However, the distributions and intensities of this surface-reflected light are (for real materials) highly variable and affected by a variety of factors: surface smoothness and contour, refractive index, absorptance, angle of incidence, and (to a generally small extent) wavelength. From the great variety of surface-reflection patterns met in materials of commerce, it has been possible to identify seven surface-reflection criteria or “types of gloss” regularly used by skilled technologists for intercomparing and rating their products for gloss. Six of the seven criteria, or “types of gloss,” are identified in the section on definitions. The seventh, luster or contrast gloss, is seldom of concern to the coatings industry.1.1 This test method covers the visual evaluation of gloss differences of coating surfaces, using special types of lamps for illumination. It identifies six aspects or types of gloss that one may look for when using the lamp to assess gloss differences between surfaces. It describes the conditions for using the lamps to best identify small differences in each of the six types of gloss. Four levels of visual gloss differences are distinguished.1.2 While this technique is useful for both weathered and unweathered specimens, it has not been applied to metallics.1.3 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.1.4  This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of whoever uses this standard to consult and 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

5.1 The guide may be used to demonstrate the effectiveness of topical antimicrobial products using pigskin as a surrogate for human skin and the cup scrub technique for sampling.5.2 The techniques described can be used to simulate Test Method E1174 and will use the pigskin substrate to overcome limitations posed by exposure of human subjects to potentially pathogenic microorganisms, while offering the benefit of applicability to a wide variety of hand-washing conditions that cannot be simulated in test tubes.5.3 Use of the pigskin surrogate offers less expensive and higher throughput screening.1.1 This guide is designed to demonstrate the effectiveness of hand hygiene topical antimicrobial products using pigskin as a surrogate model.1.2 Knowledge of microbiological techniques is required for these procedures.1.3 This standard guide can be used to evaluate topical antimicrobial handwash or handrub formulations.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 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

5.1 Rock for erosion control consists of individual pieces of natural stone. The ability of these individual pieces of stone to resist deterioration due to weathering action affects the stability of the integral placement of rock for erosion control and hence, the stability of construction projects, structures, shorelines, and stream banks.5.2 The sodium sulfate or magnesium sulfate soundness test is one method by which to estimate qualitatively the durability of rock under weathering conditions. This test method was developed to be used in conjunction with additional test methods listed in Practice D4992. This test method does not provide an absolute value, but rather an indication of the resistance to freezing and thawing; therefore, the results of this test method are not to be used as the sole basis for the determination of rock durability.5.3 This test method has been used to evaluate many different types of rocks. There have been occasions when test results have provided data that have not agreed with the durability of rock under actual field conditions; samples yielding a low soundness loss have disintegrated in actual usage, and the reverse has been true.NOTE 1: The quality of results produced by this standard is dependent on the competence of the personnel performing it and 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 and Practice D3740 provides a means of evaluating some of them.1.1 This test method covers test procedures for evaluating the soundness of rock for erosion control by the effects of a sodium or magnesium sulfate solution on slabs of rock. It is an accelerated weathering test. The rock slabs, prepared in accordance with procedures in Practice D5121, are intended to be representative of erosion control sized materials and their inherent weaknesses. The test is appropriate for breakwater stone, armor stone, riprap and gabion sized rock materials.1.1.1 The limitations of this test are twofold. First the test is a simulation of freezing and thawing conditions using accelerated life cycling techniques. The test evaluates the internal expansive force derived from the rehydration of the salt upon re-immersion, an event that may not occur in some natural environments, to simulate the expansion of water rather than the actual freezing of water. Secondly, the size of the cut rock slab specimens may eliminate some of the internal defects present in the rock structure. The test specimens may not be representative of the quality of the larger rock samples used in construction. Careful examination of the rock source and proper sampling are essential in minimizing this limitation.1.2 The use of reclaimed concrete and other materials for erosion control is beyond the scope of this test method.1.3 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 test results in units other than SI shall not be regarded as nonconformance with this standard.1.3.1 The gravitational system of inch-pound units is used when dealing with inch-pound units. In this system, the pound (lbf) represents a unit of force (weight), while the unit for mass is slugs. The slug unit is not given unless dynamic (F=ma) calculations are involved.1.3.2 It is common practice in the engineering/construction profession to concurrently use pounds to represent both a unit of mass (lbm) and of force (lbf). This practice implicitly combines two separate systems of units; the absolute and the gravitational systems. It is scientifically undesirable to combine the use of two separate sets of inch-pound units within a single standard. As stated, this standard includes the gravitational system of inch-pound units and does not use/present the slug unit for mass. However, the use of balances or scales recording pounds of mass (lbm) or recording density in lbm/ft3 shall not be regarded as nonconformance with this standard.1.3.3 Calculations are done using only one set of units; either SI or gravitational inch-pound. Other units are permissible, provided appropriate conversion factors are used to maintain consistency of units throughout the calculations, and similar significant digits or resolution, or both are maintained.1.4 All observed and calculated values shall conform to the guidelines for significant digits and rounding established in Practice D6026, unless superseded by this standard.1.4.1 For purposes of comparing measured or calculated value(s) with specified limits, the measured or calculated value(s) shall be rounded to the nearest decimal or significant digits in the specified limits.1.4.2 The procedures used to specify how data are collected/recorded or calculated, in this 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 standard to consider significant digits used in analytical methods for engineering design.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： 702元 / 折扣价： 597 元 加购物车

5.1 The sulfur print reveals the distribution of sulfur as sulfide inclusions in the specimen. The sulfur print complements macroetch methods by providing an additional procedure for evaluating the homogeneity of a steel product.5.2 Sulfur prints of as-cast specimens generally reveal the solidification pattern and may be used to assess the nature of deoxidation, that is, rimming action versus killed steel sulfur distributions.5.3 Sulfur prints will reveal segregation patterns, including refilled cracks, and may reveal certain physical irregularities, for example, porosity or cracking.5.4 The nature of metal flow, such as in various forging operations, can be revealed using sulfur prints of specimens cut parallel to the metal flow direction.5.5 The sulfur print method is suitable for process control, research and development studies, failure analysis, and for material acceptance purposes.5.6 The intensity of the sulfur print is influenced by the concentration of sulfur in the steel, the chemical composition of the sulfide inclusions, the aggressiveness of the aqueous acid solution, and the duration of the contact printing between the acid soaked emulsion coated paper and the ground surface of the specimen (this time is the order of seconds rather than minutes). Very low sulfur content steels will produce too faint an image to be useful for macrostructural evaluations. Selection of appropriate printing practices including selection of type of emulsion coated media, acid type and strength, will yield satisfactory prints. Very faint images in the sulfur print can be made more visible by scanning the sulfur print into a PC, and using a photo editor to increase the color saturation. Steels with compositions that produce predominantly titanium or chromium sulfides will not produce useful images.1.1 This practice provides information required to prepare sulfur prints (also referred to as Baumann Prints) of most ferrous alloys to reveal the distribution of sulfide inclusions.1.2 The sulfur print reveals the distribution of sulfides in steels with bulk sulfur contents between about 0.010 and 0.40 weight percent.1.3 Certain steels contain complex sulfides that do not respond to the test solutions, for example, steels containing titanium sulfides or chromium sulfides.1.4 The sulfur print test is a qualitative test. The density of the print image should not be used to assess the sulfur content of a steel. Under carefully controlled conditions, it is possible to compare print image intensities if the images are formed only by manganese sulfides.1.5 The sulfur print image will reveal details of the solidification pattern or metal flow from hot or cold working on appropriately chosen and prepared test specimens.1.6 This practice does not address acceptance criteria based on the use of the method.1.7 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard. No other units of measurement are included in this standard.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 specific precautionary statements, see Section 9.1.9 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

SNM monitors are an effective and unobtrusive means to search pedestrians for concealed SNM. Nuclear facility security plans often include SNM monitors as one means to help prevent theft or unauthorized removal of designated quantities of SNM from access areas. This guide describes a way to evaluate and categorize the relative performance of available SNM monitors that might be considered for use in a security plan. The significance of the evaluation for monitor users is that evaluated monitoring equipment has a verified capability. Unexpected deficiencies such as low sensitivity for highly self-absorbing forms of SNM, lower than expected sensitivity in areas having high natural background intensity, or a high nuisance-alarm probability from electronic noise or faulty alarm logic often can be detected during evaluation and corrected before a monitor is placed in operation or further marketed. The significance of the evaluation for monitor manufacturers is that it may disclose deficiencies in design or construction that, when corrected, will improve the product. A monitor verified to be in a particular sensitivity category will be a product that customers who need that level of performance can purchase in good faith. The established sensitivity categories for evaluated monitors will provide information to regulatory agencies on the performance range of monitoring equipment for detecting small quantities of SNM. Independent monitor evaluation will encourage monitor manufacturers to provide appropriate documentation for calibrating and operating their monitors to obtain the best possible performance for detecting SNM. The underlying assumptions in this guide are that SNM monitors are applied in a wide range of background environments at facilities that process a variety of chemical and physical forms of SNM. The operational experience with a monitor at one facility provides little comparative information for a user of SNM monitors at another facility where the environment and materials are different. A laboratory evaluation in a characterized environment using characterized test sources and providing information on both SNM detection probability and nuisance alarm probability does provide useful comparative information on different monitors. The user of evaluation results is warned that the results are comparative ones for selection of monitoring equipment used to detect small quantities of SNM. Obtaining equivalent or better results for monitoring small quantities of SNM at any facility rests on properly installing the monitor at an appropriate location, maintaining monitor calibration, keeping the monitor in good repair with a testing and maintenance program, and providing proper training for operating personnel. The evaluation uses essentially unshielded test sources; hence, results are based on detecting the entire gamma-ray or neutron spectrum of the sources. The effect of deliberate use of shielding materials on the performance of SNM monitors is beyond the scope of this guide.1.1 The requirement to search pedestrians for special nuclear material (SNM) to prevent its theft has long been a part of both United States Department of Energy and United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission rules for the physical protection of SNM. Information on the application of SNM monitors to perform such searches is provided in Guide C1112. This guide establishes a means to compare the performance of different SNM pedestrian monitors operating in a specific laboratory environment. The goal is to provide relative information on the capability of monitors to search pedestrians for small quantities of concealed SNM under characterized conditions. The outcome of testing assigns a sensitivity category to a monitor related to its SNM mass-detection probability; the monitor’s corresponding nuisance-alarm probability for that sensitivity category is also determined and reported. 1.2 The evaluation uses a practical set of worst-case environmental, radiation emission, and radiation response factors so that a monitor’s lowest level of performance in a practical operating environment for detecting small quantities of SNM is evaluated. As a result, when that monitor is moved from laboratory to routine operation, its performance will likely improve. This worst-case procedure leads to unclassified evaluation results that understate rather than overstate the performance of a properly used SNM monitor in operational use. 1.3 The evaluation applies to two types of SNM monitors that are used to detect small quantities of SNM. Both are automatic monitors; one monitors pedestrians as they walk through a portal formed by the monitor’s radiation detectors (walkthrough or portal monitor), and the other monitors pedestrians who are stationary for a short period of time while they are monitored (wait-in monitor). The latter can be a portal monitor with a delay mechanism to halt a pedestrian for a few seconds or it can be an access-control booth or room that contains radiation detectors to monitor a pedestrian waiting for clearance to pass. 1.4 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard. 1.5 This standard does not purport to address 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

5.1 Test Method—It was determined through field testing that intake valve deposits could adversely affect the driveability of certain automobiles.7 Southwest Research Institute and BMW of North America (BMW NA) jointly conducted testing to develop this test method to determine an unleaded automotive spark-ignition engine fuel's propensity to form intake valve deposits. This testing concluded that if an automotive spark-ignition engine fuel could keep intake valve deposits at or below a certain average weight per valve at the end of mileage accumulation, then that automotive spark-ignition engine fuel could be used in the BMW vehicle-engine combination for a specified period without intake valve deposits causing driveability degradation. Minimizing intake valve deposits may be necessary to maintain vehicle driveability and tailpipe emissions control.5.1.1 State and Federal Legislative and Regulatory Action—Legislative activity and rulemaking primarily by California Air Resources Board8 and the Environmental Protection Agency9 necessitate the acceptance of a standardized test method to evaluate the intake system deposit forming tendency of an automotive spark-ignition engine fuel.5.1.2 Relevance of Results—The operating conditions and design of the engine and vehicle used in this test method are not representative of all modern automobiles. These factors shall be considered when interpreting test results.5.2 Test Validity: 5.2.1 Procedural Compliance—The test results are not considered valid unless the test is completed in compliance with all requirements of this test method. Deviations from the parameter limits presented in Sections 10 and 11 will result in an invalid test. Engineering judgment shall be applied during conduct of the test method when assessing any anomalies to ensure validity of the test results.5.2.2 Vehicle Compliance—A test is not considered valid unless the vehicle met the quality control inspection requirements as described in Section 10.1.1 This test method covers a vehicle test procedure for evaluation of intake valve deposit formation of unleaded spark-ignition engine fuels. This test method uses a 1985 model BMW 318i2 vehicle. Mileage is accumulated following a specified driving schedule on either public road or test track. This test method is adapted from the original BMW of North America/Southwest Research Institute Intake Valve Deposit test and maintains as much commonality as possible with the original test. Chassis dynamometers shall not be used for this test procedure as the BMW NA/SwRI IVD Test was not intended to be applicable to chassis dynamometers and no correlation between road operation and chassis dynamometers has been established.NOTE 1: If there is any doubt as to the latest edition of Test Method D5500, contact ASTM International.1.2 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard. The values given in parentheses after SI units 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. Specific statements on hazards are given throughout this test method.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

4.1 This practice may be used to evaluate pertinent performance characteristics of machine washable or drycleanable bedcoverings.4.2 The characteristics to be evaluated and the acceptance criteria assigned to these areas shall be set by mutual agreement between purchaser and supplier.4.3 The significance and use of specific properties are discussed in the appropriate test methods and performance standards.1.1 This practice may be used to evaluate specific characteristics of importance in the performance of bedcoverings and accessories (machine washable or drycleanable, woven and knit) including bedspreads, comforters, quilts, pillowshams, dust ruffles, and blankets, hereinafter referred to collectively as bedcoverings.1.2 This practice is not to be used to evaluate bedcoverings that are refurbished by handwashing.1.3 This practice shall not be construed to be a standard of performance for bedcoverings.1.4 This practice shall not be used to evaluate sheets.1.5 This practice may be used by mutual agreement between purchaser and supplier to set purchasing specifications.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

5.1 Requirements for aseptic processing areas include readily cleanable floors, walls, and ceilings that have smooth, non-porous surfaces; particle, temperature, and humidity controls; and cleaning and disinfecting procedures to produce and maintain aseptic conditions. These controls, combined with careful and thorough evaluation of the chemical agents used for the cleaning and disinfection program, should lead to achieving the specified cleanliness standards and control of microbial contamination of products. Qualification of disinfectants in pharmaceutical, biotechnology, medical device facilities, and associated controlled environments, along with validation of the cleaning and disinfection process, is subject to scrutiny by regulatory agencies.5.2 An effective cleaning and disinfection program in aseptic processing areas of a Good Manufacturing Practice (GMP) - regulated facility is critical to assure product quality. Manufacturers are held to a high standard when it comes to product sterility, and regulatory agencies increasingly request validation data to support sanitization and disinfection procedures. Regulatory authorities expect evidence of the effectiveness of disinfection agents against environmental microorganisms isolated from the facility. The FDA Guideline for Aseptic Processing states, “The suitability, efficacy, and limitations of disinfecting agents and procedures should be assessed. The effectiveness of these disinfectants and procedures should be measured by their ability to ensure that potential contaminants are adequately removed from surfaces.”75.3 Basic knowledge regarding the effectiveness of different chemical agents against vegetative bacteria, fungi, and spores will aid in selecting chemical agents.5.4 An understanding of test methods used to assess disinfectant effectiveness is important. Most methods are adaptable, allowing the user to customize the methods to their specific requirements.1.1 This guide identifies important factors to consider when selecting a disinfectant for use in a cleanroom or similar controlled environment and recommends test methods suitable for evaluating disinfectants. The proper selection of disinfecting agent combined with qualification testing is a key element of a successful disinfection program. Regulatory guidance such as United States Pharmacopoeia Chapter <1072>, “Disinfectants and Antiseptics” and the FDA Guidance for Industry, “Sterile Drug Products Produced by Aseptic Processing–Current Good Manufacturing Practice” address the necessity of disinfectant effectiveness testing but do not clearly define acceptable test methods.1.2 An understanding of microbiology and microbiological techniques is essential. Knowledge in the following areas is recommended: microorganisms, antimicrobial products (disinfectants, sporicides, and decontamination agents), the chemistry of disinfection, mechanism of activity of disinfectants on cells, application procedures, cleanroom surfaces, and environmental conditions within a cleanroom. This information is available in several published texts listed in the bibliography.1.3 The theoretical basis for disinfectant activity is not addressed in this guide. An understanding of the effect of disinfectant concentration on microbial reduction (concentration exponent) and kinetics is desirable in determining the use-dilution of different disinfectants and in using dilution to neutralize a disinfectant for efficacy testing. USP chapter <1072> provides further information on this topic.1.4 This guide is written for the cleanroom environment, although many of the principles outlined in this standard are applicable to manufacturing and processing environments outside of the cleanroom.1.5 Evaluation of disinfectants for biofilm control is outside the scope of this document.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

5.1 This non-proprietary laboratory test method allows for the reproducible testing of whole footwear and footwear-related soling materials for evaluating relative slip performance. Other ASTM test methods generally employ a standardized test foot primarily for evaluation of flooring materials.1.1 This test method2 determines the dynamic coefficient of friction between footwear and floorings under reproducible laboratory conditions for evaluating relative slip performance. The method is applicable to all types of footwear, outsole units, heel top lifts and sheet soling materials, also to most types of floorings, including matting and stair nosing, and surface contaminants on the flooring surface, including but not limited to liquid water, ice, oil and grease. The method may also be applied to surfaces such as block pavers, turf and gravel.1.2 Special purpose footwear or fittings containing spikes, metal studs or similar may be tested on appropriate surfaces but the method does not fully take account of the risk of tripping due to footwear/ground interlock.1.3 The values stated in the ASTM test method in metrics are to be regarded as the standard. The values in parentheses are for information.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

5.1 This guide supports the development of material behavior models that can be used to estimate performance of the EBS materials during the post-closure period of a high-level nuclear waste repository for times much longer than can be tested directly. This guide is intended for modeling the degradation behaviors of materials proposed for use in an EBS designed to contain radionuclides over tens of thousands of years and more. There is both national and international recognition of the importance of the use and long-term performance of engineered materials in geologic repository design. Use of the models developed following the approaches described in this guide is intended to address established regulations, such as:5.1.1 U.S. Public Law 97–425, the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982, provides for the deep geologic disposal of high-level radioactive waste through a system of multiple barriers. These barriers include engineered barriers designed to prevent the migration of radionuclides out of the engineered system, and the geologic host medium that provides an additional transport barrier between the engineered system and biosphere. The regulations of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission for geologic disposal require a performance confirmation program to provide data through tests and analyses, where practicable, that demonstrate engineered systems and components that are designed or assumed to act as barriers after permanent closure are functioning as intended and anticipated.5.1.2 IAEA Safety Requirements specify that engineered barriers shall be designed and the host environment shall be selected to provide containment of the radionuclides associated with the wastes.5.1.3 The Swedish Regulatory Authority has provided general advice to the repository developer that the application of best available technique be followed in connection with disposal, which means that the siting, design, construction, and operation of the repository and appurtenant system components should be carried out so as to prevent, limit, and delay releases from both engineered and geological barriers as far as is reasonably possible.5.1.4 The Regulatory Authority in Finland identified the need to support the safety assessment stating that the input data and models utilized in the safety case shall be based on high-quality research data and expert judgement. Data and models shall be validated as far as possible and correspond to the conditions likely to prevail at the disposal site during the assessment period.5.1.5 The Office of Nuclear Regulation in the United Kingdom will regulate an operating geological repository under the Nuclear Installations Act through application of the Safety Assessment Principles developed for all nuclear facilities and the post-closure disposal period will be regulated under the Radioactive Substances Act by the Environmental Agency. A Memorandum of Understanding outlines how the two regulators work together10.5.2 This guide aids in defining acceptable methods for making useful estimations of long-term behavior of materials from such sources as test data, scientific theory, and analogs.5.3 This guide recognizes that technical information and test data regarding the actual behavior of EBS materials will by necessity be based on test durations that are short relative to the time periods required for geologic disposal (for example, thousands of years and longer). In addition to use in formulating acceptable long-term performance models, data from short-term tests are used to support EBS design and the selection of materials. For example, low confidence in the ability to model the degradation of one material may justify the selection of alternative EBS barrier materials that can be modelled with higher confidence. It is expected that the model will correctly represent material behavior in the intended applications of establishing design criteria, comparison of performance assessment results with safety limits, and so forth. See Section 21 for further discussion on model support and confidence.5.4 The EBS environment of interest is that defined by the natural conditions (for example, minerals, moisture, biota, and mechanical stresses); changes that occur over time, during repository construction and operation, and as a consequence of radionuclide decay, namely, radiation, radiation-induced damage, heating, and radiolytic effects on the solution chemistry; and changes that may occur over the post-closure period. Environmental conditions associated with disruptive events (for example, mechanical stress from seismic events) and processes (for example, changes in water chemistry) should also be considered.1.1 This guide addresses how various test methods and data analyses can be used to develop models for the evaluation of the long-term alteration behavior of materials used in an engineered barrier system (EBS) for the disposal of spent nuclear fuel (SNF) and other high-level nuclear waste in a geologic repository. The alteration behavior of waste forms and EBS materials is important because it affects the retention of radionuclides within the disposal system either directly, as in the case of waste forms in which the radionuclides are initially immobilized, or indirectly, as in the case of EBS containment materials that restrict the ingress of groundwater or the egress of radionuclides that are released as the waste forms degrade.1.2 The purpose of this guide is to provide a scientifically-based strategy for developing models that can be used to estimate material alteration behavior after a repository is permanently closed (that is, in the post-closure period). Because the timescale involved with geological disposal precludes direct validation of predictions, mechanistic understanding of the processes based on detailed data and models and consideration of the range of uncertainty are recommended.1.3 This guide addresses the scientific bases and uncertainties in material behavior models and the impact on the confidence in the EBS design criteria and repository performance assessments using those models. This includes the identification and use of conservative assumptions to address uncertainty in the long-term performance of materials.1.3.1 Steps involved in evaluating the performance of waste forms and EBS materials include problem definition, laboratory and field testing, modeling of individual and coupled processes, and model confirmation.1.3.2 The estimates of waste form and EBS material performance are based on models derived from theoretical considerations, expert judgments, and interpretations of data obtained from tests and analyses of appropriate analogs.1.3.3 For the purpose of this guide, tests are categorized according to the information they provide and how it is used for model development, support, and use. These tests may include but are not limited to: attribute tests, characterization tests, accelerated tests, service condition tests, and confirmation tests.1.4 This guide does not address testing required to define or characterize the repository environment (that is, the groundwater quantity or chemistry, host rock properties, etc.). The logical approach and testing concepts described herein can be applied to the disposal system.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： 843元 / 折扣价： 717 元 加购物车

4.1 The field examination, sampling, and petrographic examination in this practice along with appropriate laboratory testing may be used to determine the suitability of rock for erosion control. Factors to consider include identification and delineation of areas or zones of the rock, beds, and facies of unsuitable or marginal composition and properties due to weathering, alteration, structural weaknesses, porosity, and other potentially deleterious characteristics.4.2 Evaluate both the rock mass properties and the rock material properties.4.2.1 The rock mass properties are the lithologic properties of the in situ rock that are evaluated on a macroscopic scale in the field. These properties include features such as fractures, joints, faults, bedding, schistosity, and lineations, as well as the lateral and vertical extent of the rock unit.4.2.2 The rock material properties are those lithologic properties that may be evaluated using small specimens and thus can be subject to meaningful laboratory testing. These properties would include mineral composition, grain size, rock hardness, degree of weathering, porosity, unit weight, and many others.4.3 Rock proposed for use in erosion control applications are normally classified as either filter bedding stone, riprap stone, armor stone, or breakwater stone. However, these procedures may be also extended to rocks used in groin and gabion structures.4.4 In cases in which only stockpile samples are to be obtained for laboratory testing, a full quarry geological examination may not be required. It is the responsibility of the specifier of this standard to indicate which sections of this Practice apply to the specific project.NOTE 2: The quality of the result produced by this standard is dependent upon 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 evaluation some of those factors.1.1 This practice covers the evaluation of rock to be used for erosion control. The complexity and extent of this evaluation will be governed by the size and design requirements of the individual project, the quantity and quality of rock required, and the potential risk for property damage or loss of human life.1.2 It is not intended that all of the evaluations listed in this practice be addressed for every project. For some small, less critical jobs, a visual inspection of the rock may be all that is necessary. Several of the evaluations listed may be necessary on large, complex, high-hazard projects. It is the responsibility of the designer to determine the intensity and number of evaluations made on any one project.1.3 Examination of the rock at the source, evaluation of similar rock exposed to the environment at any field installations, as well as laboratory tests may be necessary to determine the properties of the rock as related to its predicted performance at the site of intended use (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6).21.4 The examination of the rock at its source is essential to its evaluation for erosion control and aids in the planning of the subsequent laboratory examinations. Very large pieces of rock up to several tons weight are used in the control of erosion; take great care with the field descriptions and in the sampling program to assure that zones of impurities or weaknesses that might not occur in ordinary size specimens are recorded and evaluated for their deleterious potential under the conditions of intended use. It is necessary that the intended method of rock removal be studied to ascertain whether the samples taken will correspond to the blasting, handling, and weathering history of the rock that will finally be used (3).1.5 The specific procedures employed in the laboratory examinations depend on the kind of rock, its characteristics, mineral components, macro and micro structure, and perhaps most importantly, the intended use, size of the pieces, and the exposure conditions at the site of use (1, 2, 3, 4).1.6 It is assumed that this practice will be used by personnel who are qualified by education and experience to plan the necessary evaluations and to conduct them so that the necessary parameters of the subject rock will be defined. Therefore, this practice does not attempt to detail the laboratory techniques required, but rather to mention them and only detail those properties that are of special concern in the course of the examination for rock to be used for erosion control.1.7 Units—The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard. The inch-pound units given in parentheses are provided for information only.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.NOTE 1: Erosion stone pieces can weigh from several hundred pounds to several tons. Exercise caution at all times as the mass of each piece represents a potential pinch point and a lifting, handling, and carrying hazard.1.9 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 this 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 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.1.10 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 This practice provides a protocol to compare different decontamination technologies with a standard contamination mechanism and analysis of subsequent decontamination factors/efficiencies.5.2 The use of this practice provides for the preparation of test coupons with a known amount of fixed radiological or surrogate contaminant on the surface.5.3 A standard test coupon is described and a list of potential spray equipment, contaminants, and contaminating solutions is provided within the procedure.5.4 This method describes a contamination simulation process that meets the requirements of testing performed (previously) by the U.S. Department of Energy and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.1.1 This practice is intended to provide a basis for simulating radioactive contamination consistent with processes used to evaluate decontamination. The methods described provide a “fixed-type” radiological or surrogate contamination on porous surfaces; these methods provide a surface contamination that is not easily removed by brushing or flushing with water.1.2 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard. The values given in parentheses after SI units are provided for information only and are not considered standard.1.3 This practice is intended to be practiced primarily on porous surfaces such as concrete, marble, granite, grout, brick, tile, asphalt, vinyl floor tile, latex painted gypsum wall board and polyurethane coated wood. Preparation of non-porous substrates is not addressed, although similar methodology may be used.1.4 The chemical simulants shall not include nor generate toxic by-products as defined by U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) during preparation, application, or removal under normal conditions. A Safety Data Sheet shall be provided so that appropriate PPE can be selected.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

6.1 This guide can be used to quantitatively assess the intensity of specific attributes of hair odors resulting from hair-care products.6.2 This guide may be utilized for product development, research guidance, and quality control.6.3 These are suggested procedures and are not meant to exclude alternate procedures that may effectively provide the same or similar results.1.1 This guide covers standardized procedures for the quantitative sensory assessment of fragrance/odor intensity or attribute intensity of fragrances in hair-care products through all stages of use (point of purchase, lather, in use, wet hair after rinse, and dry hair) under laboratory conditions with trained assessors.1.2 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.1.3 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 Supplementary cementitious materials (SCM) covered under existing ASTM specifications are fly ash, slag cement, raw and calcined natural pozzolans including calcined clays, silica fume, and ground-glass pozzolan. The use of these materials, and limits established in existing specifications, are based on data obtained from research programs, field testing, and long term performance monitoring. Performance of SCM in specific concrete mixtures is commonly verified through preconstruction testing. This guide provides an approach to assessing the properties of materials that are not covered under existing specifications, and for assessing the performance of those materials in concrete.4.2 If an ASCM does not yet have a significant record of performance in concrete, a comprehensive evaluation based on this Guide should be undertaken, and it should be recognized that this ASCM might be introduced for a specific project or into a limited marketplace to initially demonstrate its performance. The user should bear in mind the intended end use of the ASCM and use appropriate test methods to establish its suitability. An ASCM that demonstrates good performance through a comprehensive evaluation as outlined in this guide could then be considered to have access to broader markets and could be considered for inclusion in an ASTM standard for SCM. For this reason, the test program to demonstrate acceptable performance should include concrete mixtures with a range of characteristics specific to the ASCM’s intended use.4.3 In the absence of long-term durability or acceptable field performance, prospective users are advised to apply appropriate risk management and engineering practice in the use of an ASCM.1.1 This guide is intended to provide a technical approach to the evaluation of alternative supplementary cementitious materials such as pozzolans and hydraulic materials that fall outside the scope of Specifications C618, C989/C989M, C1240, and C1866/C1866M. This guide provides the initial steps for a comprehensive evaluation of an ASCM that provides due diligence for its specific intended uses in concrete; however, it does not evaluate conformance to all possible performance criteria for all types of concrete mixtures.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 Performing the tests or meeting the test limits in this guide should not imply that the material tested meets the requirements of Specifications C618, C989/C989M, C1240, and C1866/C1866M. These materials should not be represented as such and each specific source is to be evaluated separately.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

5.1 This bench test method was designed as a replacement for Test Method D5844. Test Method D5844 was designed to measure the ability of an engine oil to protect valve train components against rusting or corrosion under low temperature, short-trip service, and was correlated with vehicles in that type of service prior to 1978.55.1.1 Correlation between these two test methods has been demonstrated for most, but not all, of the test oils evaluated.1.1 This test method covers a Ball Rust Test (BRT) procedure for evaluating the anti-rust ability of fluid lubricants. The procedure is particularly suitable for the evaluation of automotive engine oils under low-temperature, acidic service conditions.1.2 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard. The values given in parentheses after SI units are provided for information only and are not considered standard.1.2.1 Exceptions—Where there is no direct equivalent, such as the units for screw threads, national pipe threads/diameters, and tubing size.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. See 7.1.1 – 7.1.3 and 8.2.1.1.1.4 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： 646元 / 折扣价： 550 元 加购物车