5.1 The thermal diffusivity is a parameter that arises in the solution of transient heat conduction problems. It generally characterizes the rate at which a heat pulse will diffuse through a solid material.5.2 The number of parameters required for solution of a transient heat conduction problem depends on both the geometry and imposed boundary conditions. In a few special cases, only the thermal diffusivity of the material is required. In most cases, separate values of k, ρ, and cp are required in addition to α. This test method provides a consistent set of parameters for numerical or analytical heat conduction calculations related to heat transport through rocks.5.3 In order to use this test method for determination of the thermal diffusivity, the parameters (k, ρ, cp) must be determined under as near identical specimen conditions as possible.5.4 The diffusivity determined by this test method can only be used to analyze heat transport in rock under thermal conditions identical to those existing for the k, ρ, and cp measurements.NOTE 2: 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.1.1 This test method involves calculation of the thermal diffusivity from measured values of the mass density, thermal conductivity, and specific heat at constant pressure. It is applicable for any materials where these data can be determined. The temperature range covered by this test method is 293 to 573 K. This test method is closely linked to the overall test procedure used in obtaining the primary data on density, specific heat, and thermal conductivity. It cannot be used as a “stand alone” test method because the thermal diffusivity values calculated by this test method are dependent on the nature of the primary data base. The test method furnishes general guidelines to calculate the thermal diffusivity but cannot be considered to be all-inclusive to capture issues related to the density, specific heat, and thermal conductivityNOTE 1: The diffusivity, as determined by this test method, is intended to be a volume average value, with the averaging volume being ≥ 2 × 10−5 m3 (20 cm3). This requirement necessitates the use of specimens with volumes greater than the minimum averaging volume and precludes use of flash methods of measuring thermal diffusivity, such as the laser pulse technique.1.2 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as the standard. No other units of measurements are included in this standard.1.3 This test method is intended to apply to isotropic samples; that is, samples in which the thermal transport properties do not depend on the direction of heat flow. If the thermal conductivity depends on the direction of heat flow, then the diffusivity derived by this test method must be associated with the same direction as that utilized in the conductivity measurement.1.4 The thermal conductivity, specific heat, and mass density measurements must be made with specimens that are as near identical in composition and water content as possible.1.5 The generally inhomogeneous nature of geologic formations precludes the unique specification of a thermal diffusivity characterizing an entire rock formation or soil layer. Geologic media are highly variable in character, and it is impossible to specify a test method for diffusivity determination that will be suitable for all possible cases. Some of the most important limitations arise from the following factors:1.5.1 Variable Mineralogy—If the mineralogy of the formation under study is highly variable over distances on the same order as the size of the sample from which the conductivity, specific heat, and density specimens are cut, then the calculated diffusivity for a given set of specimens will be dependent on the precise locations from which these specimens were obtained.1.5.2 Variable Porosity—The thermal properties of porous rock or soil are highly dependent on the amount and nature of the porosity. A spatially varying porosity introduces problems of a nature similar to those encountered with a spatially varying composition. In addition, the character of the porosity may preclude complete dehydration by oven drying.1.6 All observed and calculated values shall conform to the guidelines for significant digits and rounding established in Practice D6026.1.6.1 The procedure 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.1.7 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 and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.

定价： 590元 / 折扣价： 502 元 加购物车

4.1 This test method can be used to make reliable and reproducible measurements in soil in the range from the detection level to the percent levels of each of seven explosive compounds.4.2 This test method does not attempt to quantify the reactivity or mobility of the explosive content, only the concentration of these compounds in the soil.4.3 This test method can be used to determine the extent of contamination resulting from the use, misuse, or spillage of explosive compounds. It is useful to determine the effectiveness of clean-up actions at disposal sites, and to determine the environmental impact at explosives disposal, manufacturing, or storage sites.1.1 This test method describes a procedure for the laboratory determination of the concentration of nitroaromatic and nitramine explosives in soil. The explosives involved in this test method are as follows: HMX (octahydro-1,3,5,7-tetranitro-1,3,5,7-tetrazocine), RDX (hexahydro-1,3,5-trinitrol-1,3,5-triazine), TNT (2,4,6-trinitrotoluene), TNB (1,3,5 trinitrobenzene), DNB (1,3 dinitrobenzene), tetryl (methyl-2,4,6-trinitrophenylnitramine), and 2,4-DNT (2,4-dinitrotoluene).1.2 All observed and calculated values shall conform to the guidelines for significant digits and rounding established in Practice D6026.1.2.1 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 analysis methods for engineering design.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 the safety concerns 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 This test method can be used to determine if soils could have an adverse reaction with hydraulic cement concrete.1.1 This test method is for the determination of water-soluble sulfate in soils.1.2 This test method was developed for concentrations of water-soluble sulfate in soils between 0.02 and 3.33 % sulfate by mass.1.3 This test method does not determine sulfur in any form except as sulfate.1.4 Some governing bodies regulate the movement of soils from one area to another. It is up to the sampler and laboratory to comply with all regulations.1.5 The text of this test method refers to notes and footnotes that provide explanatory material. These notes and footnotes (excluding those in tables and figures) shall not be considered as requirements of this standard.1.6 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard. No other units of measurement are included in this standard.1.7 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.1.8 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

定价： 515元 / 折扣价： 438 元 加购物车

1.1 This test method covers an accelerated procedure for determining the relative disbonding characteristics of electrically insulating coating systems applied to steel pipe exteriors. The coating is applied for the purpose of preventing or mitigating corrosion that may occur in underground service. The pipe may be exposed to elevated temperatures while under cathodic protection. This test method is intended for use with samples of coated pipe taken from commercial production and is applicable to such samples when the coating functions as an electrical barrier. 1.2 The values stated in SI units to three significant figures are to be regarded as the 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 and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.

定价： 0元 / 折扣价： 0 元

This test method provides a rapid means of determining the acute toxicity of an aqueous waste, or waste extract, prior to and following biological treatment, and contributes to assessing the potential biodegradability of the waste (see 1.1, 1.2, and Note 1). The change in toxicity to the marine bacterium P. phosphoreum with respect to time may serve as an indication of the biodegradation potential. Sample analyses are usually obtained in 45 to 60 min, with as little as 5 mL of sample required (5). Samples with high suspended solids concentrations may test nontoxic to the bacteria, while still exhibiting significant toxicity to freshwater organisms, due to those suspended solids. The absorbance correction procedure included in this test method allows for the analysis of highly colored lightabsorbing samples, by providing a means for mathematically adjusting the light output readings to account for light lost due to absorption. 1.1 This test method (1) covers a procedure for the rapid evaluation of the toxicity of wastewaters and aqueous extracts from contaminated soils and sediments, to the luminescent marine bacterium Photobacterium phosphoreum, prior to and following biological treatment. This test method is meant for use as a means to assess samples resulting from biotreatability studies. Sensitivity data for P. phosphoreum to over 1300 chemicals have been reported in the literature (2). Some of the publications are very relevant to this test method (3). The data obtained from this test method, when combined with respirometry, total organic carbon (TOC), biochemical oxygen demand (BOD), chemical oxygen demand (COD), or spectrophotometric data, can assist in the determination of the degree of biodegradability of a contaminant in water, soil, or sediment (3). The percentage difference between the IC20 of treated and untreated sample is used to assess the progress of detoxification. 1.2 This test method is applicable to the evaluation of the toxicity (to a specific microbe) and its implication on the biodegradation of aqueous samples from laboratory research bio-reactors (liquid or soil), pilot-plant biological treatment systems, full-scale biological treatment systems, and land application processes (see Notes 1 and 2). Note 1—If the biologically treated material is to be discharged in such a manner as to potentially impact surface waters and ground water, or both, then the user must consult appropriate regulatory guidance documents to determine the proper test species for evaluating potential environmental impact (4). Correlations between data concerning reduction in toxicity produced by this test method and by procedures for acute or short-term chronic toxicity tests, or both, utilizing invertebrates and fish (see Guides E729 and E1192E729E1192), should be established, wherever possible. Note 2—Color (especially red and brown), turbidity, and suspended solids interfere with this test method by absorbing or reflecting light. In these situations data are corrected for these effects by use of an absorbance correction procedure included in this test method (see 5.3, 6.1, and 6.2). 1.3 The results of this test method are reported in terms of an inhibitory concentration (IC), which is the calculated concentration of sample required to produce a specific quantitative and qualitative inhibition. The inhibition measured is the quantitative reduction in light output of luminescent marine bacteria (that is, IC20 represents the calculated concentration of sample that would produce a 20 % reduction in the light output of exposed bacteria over a specified time). 1.4 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as the standard. The values given in parentheses are for information only. 1.5 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use. Specific hazard statements are given in Section 9.

定价： 0元 / 折扣价： 0 元

5.1 The pullout test method is intended as a performance test to provide the user with a set of design values for the test conditions examined.5.1.1 The test method is applicable to all geosynthetics and all soils.5.1.2 This test method produces test data, which can be used in the design of geosynthetic-reinforced retaining walls, slopes, and embankments, or in other applications where resistance of a geosynthetic to pullout under simulated field conditions is important.5.1.3 The test results may also provide information related to the in-soil stress-strain response of a geosynthetic under confined loading conditions.5.2 The pullout resistance versus normal stress plot obtained from this test is a function of soil gradation, plasticity, as-placed dry unit weight, moisture content, length and surface characteristics of the geosynthetic, and other test parameters. Therefore, results are expressed in terms of the actual test conditions. The test measures the net effect of a combination of pullout mechanisms, which may vary depending on type of geosynthetic specimen, embedment length, relative opening size, soil type, displacement rate, normal stress, and other factors.5.3 Information between laboratories on precision is incomplete. In cases of dispute, comparative tests to determine if there is a statistical bias between laboratories may be advisable.1.1 Resistance of a geosynthetic to pullout from soil is determined using a laboratory pullout box.1.2 The test method is intended to be a performance test conducted as closely as possible to replicate design or as-built conditions. It can also be used to compare different geosynthetics, soil types, etc., and thereby be used as a research and development test procedure.1.3 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard. The values stated in parentheses are provided for information only.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 Information on pH of soil is used as an aid in evaluating the corrosivity of a soil environment. Some metals are more sensitive to the pH of their environment than others, and information on the stability of a metal as a function of pH and potential is available in the literature.31.1 This test method covers a procedure for determining the pH of a soil in corrosion evaluations. The principle use of the test is to supplement soil resistivity measurements and thereby identify conditions under which the corrosion of metals in soil may be accentuated (see G57 – 78 (2012)).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： 515元 / 折扣价： 438 元 加购物车

Computers are becoming an integral part of each testing laboratory. A variety of automated test devices which collect and store data now exist. A variety of software programs to perform calculations and produce reported results are used. There is no consistency in the formats used to store data. Consequently, it is time consuming and expensive to exchange computerized test data files among organizations. This guide presents a standard yet versatile format that can be used to exchange data across systems. This guide defines the principal data elements that are considered important and worth recording and storing permanently in a computerized data storage system from which larger databases may be prepared. These data elements are not intended to be requirements of any specific or single database. The format permits only those elements that a specific user may require. Additional data elements may be added using the general outline of this guide. Those elements must be added in a manner consistent with the definitions in this guide, such that a computer program written to follow this guide can successfully read the entire data file, including one that contains data elements not identified in this guide. This guide does not define how to obtain and record specific data. That activity is covered by each specific test method. This guide may be incomplete for some applications. It is intended that additions to the formats will be made as requests come from each ASTM subcommittee responsible for a particular standard. Those additions will be made without rendering older files unreadable. The recommended format in this guide does not require that all data elements be included in the data base. A user may elect to omit any data element without affecting the ability of the file format structure to work. However, those elements that are required in the report section of the relevant ASTM standard should be included in the standardized data file. Following ASTM recommended practice, all data are stored in SI units. 1.1 This guide covers recommended data formats for the exchange of mechanical test data for soils and rocks. From this guide, a standardized file of data can be prepared that can be read by others who use this guide.1.2 The format specified in this guide is used for the exchange of data between computer programs, users, agencies, etc. It is not necessary that test data for internal use be stored in this format, only that a program adhering to this guide have the capability to read, or write test data in this format, or both.1.3 This guide does not cover digital geospacial data which is treated Specification D 5714.1.4 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.1.5 This guide offers an organized collection of information or a series of options and does not recommend a specific course of action. This document cannot replace education or experience and should be used in conjunction with professional judgment. Not all aspects of this guide 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.

定价： 0元 / 折扣价： 0 元

5.1 This analysis method is used for the testing of soil samples for asbestos. The emphasis is on detection and analysis of sieved particles for asbestos in the soil. Debris identifiable as bulk building material that is readily separable from the soil is to be analyzed and reported separately.5.2 The coarse fraction of the sample (>2 mm to <19 mm) may contain large pieces of asbestos-containing material that may release fibers and break down during the sieving process into smaller pieces that pass through the 2-mm sieve into the medium fraction. If this alteration of the original sample is not desired by the investigator, these pieces should be removed from the sample before sieving and returned to the coarse fraction before analysis.5.3 This test method does not describe procedures or techniques required to evaluate the safety or habitability of buildings or outdoor areas potentially contaminated with asbestos-containing materials or compliance with federal, state, or local regulations or statutes. It is the investigator's responsibility to make these determinations.5.4 Whereas this test method produces results that may be used for evaluation of sites contaminated by construction, mine, and manufacturing wastes; deposits of natural occurrences of asbestos; and other sources of interest to the investigator, the application of the results to such evaluations and the conclusions drawn there from, including any assessment of risk or liability, is beyond the scope of this test method and is the responsibility of the investigator.1.1 This test method covers a procedure to: (1) identify asbestos in soil, (2) provide an estimate of the concentration of asbestos in the sampled soil (dried), and (3) optionally to provide a concentration of asbestos reported as the number of asbestos structures per gram of sample.1.2 In this test method, results are produced that may be used for evaluation of sites contaminated by construction, mine and manufacturing wastes, deposits of natural occurrences of asbestos (NOA), and other sources of interest to the investigator.1.3 This test method describes the gravimetric, sieve, and other laboratory procedures for preparing the soil for analysis as well as the identification and quantification of any asbestos detected. Pieces of collected soil and material embedded therein that pass through a 19-mm sieve will become part of the sample that is analyzed and for which results are reported.1.3.1 Asbestos is identified and quantified by polarized light microscopy (PLM) techniques including analysis of morphology and optical properties. Optional transmission electron microscopy (TEM) identification and quantification of asbestos is based on morphology, selected area electron diffraction (SAED), and energy dispersive X-ray analysis (EDXA). Some information about fiber size may also be determined. The PLM and TEM methods use different definitions and size criteria for fibers and structures. Separate data sets may be produced.1.4 This test method has an analytical sensitivity of 0.25 % by weight with optional procedures to allow for an analytical sensitivity of 0.1 % by weight.1.5 This test method does not purport to address sampling strategies or variables associated with soil environments. Such considerations are the responsibility of the investigator collecting and submitting the sample. Appendix X2 covering elements of soil sampling and good field practices is attached.1.6 Units—The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as the standard. Other units may be cited in the method for informational purposes only.1.7 Hazards—Asbestos fibers are acknowledged carcinogens. Breathing asbestos fibers can result in disease of the lungs including asbestosis, lung cancer, and mesothelioma. Precautions should be taken to avoid creating and breathing airborne asbestos particles when sampling and analyzing materials suspected of containing asbestos.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： 646元 / 折扣价： 550 元 加购物车

5.1 Soil placed as engineering fill (embankments, foundation pads, road bases) is compacted to a dense state to obtain satisfactory engineering properties such as, shear strength, compressibility, or permeability. In addition, foundation soils are often compacted to improve their engineering properties. Laboratory compaction tests provide the basis for determining the percent compaction and molding water content needed to achieve the required engineering properties, and for controlling construction to assure that the required compaction and water contents are achieved.5.2 During design of an engineered fill, shear, consolidation, permeability, or other tests require preparation of test specimens by compacting at some molding water content to some unit weight. It is common practice to first determine the optimum water content (wopt) and maximum dry unit weight (γd,max) by means of a compaction test. Test specimens are compacted at a selected molding water content (w), either wet or dry of optimum (wopt) or at optimum (wopt), and at a selected dry unit weight related to a percentage of maximum dry unit weight (γd,max). The selection of molding water content (w), either wet or dry of optimum (wopt) or at optimum (wopt) and the dry unit weight (γd,max) may be based on past experience, or a range of values may be investigated to determine the necessary percent of compaction.5.3 Experience indicates that the methods outlined in 5.2 or the construction control aspects discussed in 5.1 are extremely difficult to implement or yield erroneous results when dealing with certain soils. 5.3.1 – 5.3.3 describe typical problem soils, the problems encountered when dealing with such soils and possible solutions for these problems.5.3.1 Oversize Fraction—Soils containing more than 30 % oversize fraction (material retained on the 3/4-in. (19-mm) sieve) are a problem. For such soils, there is no ASTM test method to control their compaction and very few laboratories are equipped to determine the laboratory maximum unit weight (density) of such soils (USDI Bureau of Reclamation, Denver, CO and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Vicksburg, MS). Although Test Methods D4914/D4914M and D5030/D5030M determine the “field” dry unit weight of such soils, they are difficult and expensive to perform.5.3.1.1 One method to design and control the compaction of such soils is to use a test fill to determine the required degree of compaction and the method to obtain that compaction, followed by use of a method specification to control the compaction. Components of a method specification typically contain the type and size of compaction equipment to be used, the lift thickness, acceptable range in molding water content, and the number of passes.NOTE 3: Success in executing the compaction control of an earthwork project, especially when a method specification is used, is highly dependent upon the quality and experience of the contractor and inspector.5.3.1.2 Another method is to apply the use of density correction factors developed by the USDI Bureau of Reclamation (2, 3) and U.S. Corps of Engineers (4). These correction factors may be applied for soils containing up to about 50 to 70 % oversize fraction. Each agency uses a different term for these density correction factors. The USDI Bureau of Reclamation uses D ratio (or D–VALUE), while the U.S. Corps of Engineers uses Density Interference Coefficient (Ic).5.3.1.3 The use of the replacement technique (Test Method D698–78, Method D), in which the oversize fraction is replaced with a finer fraction, is inappropriate to determine the maximum dry unit weight, γd,max, of soils containing oversize fractions (4).5.3.2 Degradation—Soils containing particles that degrade during compaction are a problem, especially when more degradation occurs during laboratory compaction than field compaction, as is typical. Degradation typically occurs during the compaction of a granular-residual soil or aggregate. When degradation occurs, the maximum dry-unit weight increases (1, p. 73) so that the laboratory maximum value is not representative of field conditions. Often, in these cases, the maximum dry unit weight is impossible to achieve in the field.5.3.2.1 Again, for soils subject to degradation, the use of test fills and method specifications may help. Use of replacement techniques is not correct.5.3.3 Gap Graded—Gap-graded soils (soils containing many large particles with limited small particles) are a problem because the compacted soil will have larger voids than usual. To handle these large voids, standard test methods (laboratory or field) typically have to be modified using engineering judgement.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, and the like. 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.1.1 These test methods cover laboratory compaction methods used to determine the relationship between molding water content and dry unit weight of soils (compaction curve) compacted in a 4 or 6-in. (101.6 or 152.4-mm) diameter mold with a 5.50-lbf (24.5-N) rammer dropped from a height of 12.0 in. (305 mm) producing a compactive effort of 12 400 ft-lbf/ft3 (600 kN-m/m3).NOTE 1: The equipment and procedures are similar as those proposed by R. R. Proctor (Engineering News Record—September 7, 1933) with this one major exception: his rammer blows were applied as “12 inch firm strokes” instead of free fall, producing variable compactive effort depending on the operator, but probably in the range 15 000 to 25 000 ft-lbf/ft3 (700 to 1200 kN-m/m3). The standard effort test (see 3.1.4) is sometimes referred to as the Proctor Test.1.1.1 Soils and soil-aggregate mixtures are to be regarded as natural occurring fine- or coarse-grained soils, or composites or mixtures of natural soils, or mixtures of natural and processed soils or aggregates such as gravel or crushed rock. Hereafter referred to as either soil or material.1.2 These test methods apply only to soils (materials) that have 30 % or less by mass of particles retained on the 3/4-in. (19.0-mm) sieve and have not been previously compacted in the laboratory; that is, do not reuse compacted soil.1.2.1 For relationships between unit weights and molding water contents of soils with 30 % or less by mass of material retained on the 3/4-in. (19.0-mm) sieve to unit weights and molding water contents of the fraction passing 3/4-in. (19.0-mm) sieve, see Practice D4718/D4718M.1.3 Three alternative methods are provided. The method used shall be as indicated in the specification for the material being tested. If no method is specified, the choice should be based on the material gradation.1.3.1 Method A: 1.3.1.1 Mold—4-in. (101.6-mm) diameter.1.3.1.2 Material—Passing No. 4 (4.75-mm) sieve.1.3.1.3 Layers—Three.1.3.1.4 Blows per Layer—25.1.3.1.5 Usage—May be used if 25 % or less (see 1.4) by mass of the material is retained on the No. 4 (4.75-mm) sieve.1.3.1.6 Other Usage—If this gradation requirement cannot be met, then Method C may be used.1.3.2 Method B: 1.3.2.1 Mold—4-in. (101.6-mm) diameter.1.3.2.2 Material—Passing 3/8-in. (9.5-mm) sieve.1.3.2.3 Layers—Three.1.3.2.4 Blows per Layer—25.1.3.2.5 Usage—May be used if 25 % or less (see 1.4) by mass of the material is retained on the 3/8-in. (9.5-mm) sieve.1.3.2.6 Other Usage—If this gradation requirement cannot be met, then Method C may be used.1.3.3 Method C: 1.3.3.1 Mold—6-in. (152.4-mm) diameter.1.3.3.2 Material—Passing 3/4-in. (19.0-mm) sieve.1.3.3.3 Layers—Three.1.3.3.4 Blows per Layer—56.1.3.3.5 Usage—May be used if 30 % or less (see 1.4) by mass of the material is retained on the 3/4-in. (19.0-mm) sieve.1.3.4 The 6-in. (152.4-mm) diameter mold shall not be used with Method A or B.NOTE 2: Results have been found to vary slightly when a material is tested at the same compactive effort in different size molds, with the smaller mold size typically yielding larger values of density/unit weight (1, pp. 21+).21.4 If the test specimen contains more than 5 % by mass of oversize fraction (coarse fraction) and the material will not be included in the test, corrections must be made to the unit mass and molding water content of the specimen or to the appropriate field-in-place density test specimen using Practice D4718/D4718M.1.5 This test method will generally produce a well-defined maximum dry unit weight for non-free draining soils. If this test method is used for free-draining soils the maximum unit weight may not be well defined, and can be less than obtained using Test Methods D4253.1.6 All observed and calculated values shall conform to the guidelines for significant digits and rounding established in Practice D6026, unless superseded by this standard.1.6.1 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.1.6.2 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.1.7 The values in inch-pound units are to be regarded as the standard. The values stated in SI units are provided for information only, except for units of mass. The units for mass are given in SI units only, g or kg.1.7.1 It is common practice in the engineering profession to concurrently use pounds to represent both a unit of mass (lbm) and a force (lbf). This implicitly combines two separate systems of units; that is, the absolute system and the gravitational system. It is scientifically undesirable to combine the use of two separate sets of inch-pound units within a single standard. This standard has been written using the gravitational system of units when dealing with the inch-pound system. In this system, the pound (lbf) represents a unit of force (weight). However, the use of balances or scales recording pounds of mass (lbm) or the recording of density in lbm/ft3 shall not be regarded as a nonconformance with 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.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： 646元 / 折扣价： 550 元 加购物车

5.1 Soil toxicity tests provide information concerning the toxicity and bioavailability of chemicals associated with soils to terrestrial organisms. As important members of the soil fauna, lumbricid earthworms and enchytraeid potworms have a number of characteristics that make them appropriate organisms for use in the assessment of potentially hazardous soils. Earthworms may ingest large quantities of soil, have a close relationship with other soil biomasses (for example, invertebrates, roots, humus, litter, and microorganisms), constitute up to 92 % of the invertebrate biomass of soil, and are important in recycling nutrients (1, 2).4 Enchytraeids contribute up to 5.2 % of soil respiration, constitute the second-highest biomass in many soils (the highest in acid soils in which earthworms are lacking) and effect considerably nutrient cycling and community metabolism (3-5). Earthworms and potworms accumulate and are affected by a variety of organic and inorganic compounds (2-10, 11-14). In addition, earthworms and potworms are important in terrestrial food webs, constituting a food source for a very wide variety of organisms, including birds, mammals, reptiles, amphibians, fish, insects, nematodes, and centipedes (15, 16, 3). A major change in the abundance of soil invertebrates such as lumbricids or enchytraeids, either as a food source or as organisms functioning properly in trophic energy transfer and nutrient cycling, could have serious adverse ecological effects on the entire terrestrial system.5.2 A number of species of lumbricids and enchytraeid worms have been used in field and laboratory investigations in the United States and Europe. Although the sensitivity of various lumbricid species to specific chemicals may vary, from their study of four species of earthworms (including E. fetida) exposed to ten organic compounds representing six classes of chemicals, Neuhauser, et al (7) suggest that the selection of earthworm test species does not affect the assessment of a chemical's toxicity markedly. The sensitivity of various enchytraeid species has not been investigated in a comparable way so far, but ecological importance and practicability reasons favor strongly the selection of a species belonging to the genus Enchytraeus.5.2.1 E. fetida is a species whose natural habitats are those of very high organic matter such as composts and manure piles. It was selected as the test species because it (1) is bred in the laboratory easily; (2) is the earthworm species used most commonly in laboratory experiments (17); (3) has been studied extensively, producing a data pool on the toxicity and bioaccumulation of a variety of compounds (2, 7, 8, 18-23); (4) has been approved for use in toxicity testing by the European Union (EU) and the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD); and (5) has been used by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for the toxicity screening of hazardous waste sites (24).5.2.2 The recommended enchytraeid test species is Enchytraeus albidus Henle 1837 (white potworm). E. albidus is one of the biggest (up to 15 mm) species of the oligochaete family Enchytraeidae and it is distributed world-wide (25, 26). E. albidus is found in marine, limnic, and terrestrial habitats, mainly in decaying organic matter (seaweed, compost) and rarely in meadows (4, 26). This broad ecological tolerance and some morphological variations might indicate that there are different races for this species. E. albidus is commercially available, sold as food for fish, can be bred easily in a wide range of organic waste materials and has a short life cycle (33 to 74 days; 27, 28). E. albidus was studied in various tests, which covered a wide range of compounds (28-30). In addition, it is currently under investigation for use in toxicity testing and soil quality assessment by the European Union (EU), the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), and the International Organization for Standardization (ISO). Other species of the genus Enchytraeus are also suitable, for example, E. buchholzi Vejdovsky 1879 or E. crypticus Westheide and Graefe 1992 (see Annex A4). Those species are true soil inhabitants and are smaller in size. Other species of Enchytraeus may be used, but they should be identified clearly and the rationale for their selection should be reported.5.3 Results from soil toxicity tests might be an important consideration when assessing the hazards of materials to terrestrial organisms.5.4 Information might also be obtained on the bioaccumulation of chemicals associated with soil by analysis of animal tissues for the chemicals being monitored. These results are useful for studying the biological availability of chemicals.5.5 The soil toxicity test might be used to determine the temporal or spatial distribution of soil toxicity. Test methods can be used to detect horizontal and vertical gradients in toxicity.5.6 Results of soil toxicity tests could be used to compare the sensitivities of different species.5.7 An understanding of the effect of these parameters on toxicity and bioaccumulation may be gained by varying soil characteristics such as pH, clay content, and organic material.5.8 Results of soil toxicity tests may be useful in helping to predict the effects likely to occur with terrestrial organisms in field situations.5.8.1 Field surveys can be designed to provide either a qualitative or quantitative evaluation of biological effects within a site or among sites.5.8.2 Soil surveys evaluating biological effects are usually part of more comprehensive analyses of biological, chemical, geological, and hydrographic conditions. Statistical correlation can be improved and costs reduced if subsamples of soil for laboratory toxicity tests, geochemical analyses, and community structure are taken simultaneously from the same grab of the same site.5.9 Soil toxicity and bioaccumulation tests can be an important tool for making decisions regarding the extent of remedial action necessary for contaminated terrestrial sites.1.1 This guide covers procedures for obtaining laboratory data to evaluate the adverse effects of contaminants (for example, chemicals or biomolecules) associated with soil to earthworms (Family Lumbricidae) and potworms (Family Enchytraeidae) from soil toxicity or bioaccumulation tests. The methods are designed to assess lethal or sublethal toxic effects on earthworms or bioaccumulation of contaminants in short-term tests (7 to 28 days) or on potworms in short to long-term tests (14 to 42 days) in terrestrial systems. Soils to be tested may be (1) reference soils or potentially toxic site soils; (2) artificial, reference, or site soils spiked with compounds; (3) site soils diluted with reference soils; or (4) site or reference soils diluted with artificial soil. Test procedures are described for the species Eisenia fetida (see Annex A1) and for the species Enchytraeus albidus (see Annex A4). Methods described in this guide may also be useful for conducting soil toxicity tests with other lumbricid and enchytraeid terrestrial species, although modifications may be necessary.1.2 Modification of these procedures might be justified by special needs. The results of tests conducted using atypical procedures may not be comparable to results using this guide. Comparison of results obtained using modified and unmodified versions of these procedures might provide useful information concerning new concepts and procedures for conducting soil toxicity and bioaccumulation tests with terrestrial worms.1.3 The results from field-collected soils used in toxicity tests to determine a spatial or temporal distribution of soil toxicity may be reported in terms of the biological effects on survival or sublethal endpoints (see Section 14). These procedures can be used with appropriate modifications to conduct soil toxicity tests when factors such as temperature, pH, and soil characteristics (for example, particle size, organic matter content, and clay content) are of interest or when there is a need to test such materials as sewage sludge and oils. These methods might also be useful for conducting bioaccumulation tests.1.4 The results of toxicity tests with (1) materials (for example, chemicals or waste mixtures) added experimentally to artificial soil, reference soils, or site soils, (2) site soils diluted with reference soils, and (3) site or reference soils diluted with artificial soil, so as to create a series of concentrations, may be reported in terms of an LC50 (median lethal concentration) and sometimes an EC50 (median effect concentration). Test results may be reported in terms of NOEC (no observed effect concentration), LOEC (lowest observed effect concentration) or as an ECx (concentration where x % reduction of a biological effect occurs. Bioaccumulation test results are reported as the magnitude of contaminant concentration above either the Day 0 tissue baseline analysis or the Day 28 tissues from the negative control or reference soil (that is, 2x, 5x, 10x) (see A3.9).1.5 This guide is arranged as follows:   1  Referenced Documents  2  Terminology  3  Summary of Guide  4   5  Interferences  6  Apparatus  7  Safety Precautions  8  Soil  9  Test Organism 10  Procedure 11  Analytical Methodology 12  Acceptability of Test 13  Calculation of Results 14  Report 15  Annexes     Annex A1. Eisenia fetida     Annex A2. Artificial Soil Composition     Annex A3. Bioaccumulation Testing Utilizing Eisenia fetida   Annex A4. Enchytraeid Reporduction Test (ERT)  References  1.6 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard. No other units of measurement are included in this standard.1.7 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use. While some safety considerations are included in this guide, it is beyond the scope of this standard to encompass all safety requirements necessary to conduct soil toxicity tests. Specific precautionary statements are given in Section 8.1.8 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： 843元 / 折扣价： 717 元 加购物车

This specification covers hubless cast iron soil pipe and fittings for use in gravity flow applications. These pipe and fittings are intended for non-pressure applications, as the selection of the proper size for sanitary drain, waste, vent, and storm drain systems allows free air space for gravity drainage. The pipe and fittings shall be iron castings suitable for installation and service for sanitary, storm drain, waste, and vent piping applications. The pipe and fittings shall meet all applicable requirements and tests given in this specification. Tensile test and chemical test shall be made to conform to the requirements specified. The pipe and fittings shall be uniformly coated with a material suitable for the purpose that is adherent, not brittle, and without a tendency to scale.1.1 This specification covers hubless cast iron soil pipe and fittings for use in gravity flow applications. It establishes standards covering material, manufacture, mechanical and chemical properties, dimensions, coating, test methods, inspection, certification, and product marking for hubless cast iron soil pipe and fittings. These pipe and fittings are intended for non-pressure applications, as the selection of the proper size for sanitary drain, waste, vent, and storm drain systems allows free air space for gravity drainage.1.2 The EDP/ASA numbers indicated in this section represent a Uniform Industry Code adopted by the American Supply Association (ASA). A group designation prefix, 022, is assigned to hubless products, followed by the four-digit identification assigned to individual items and a check digit. This system has been instituted to facilitate EDP control through distribution channels, and is to be used universally in ordering and specifying product items. Those items with no EDP numbers are either new, special, or transitory and will be assigned numbers on subsequent prints of this specification.1.3 This specification covers pipe and fittings of the following patterns and applies to any other patterns that conform with the dimensions found in Tables 1 and 2 and all other applicable requirements given in this specification.21.3.1 Lengths:  FiguresEDP/ASA Identification Numbersfor Hubless Pipe Fig. 110 ft (3.0 m) in sizes and 5 ft. (1.5 m)11/2 , 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8,10, 12, and 15 in. Fig. 1, Fig. 2Method of Specifying Fittings Fig. 31.3.2 Fittings: Quarter Bend Fig. 5Quarter Bend, Reducing Fig. 6Quarter Bend, with Side Opening Fig. 7Quarter Bend, with Heel Opening Fig. 8Quarter Bend, Tapped Fig. 9Quarter Bend, Double Fig. 10Quarter Bend, Long Fig. 11Short Sweep Fig. 12Long Sweep Fig. 13Long Sweep, Reducing Fig. 14Fifth Bend Fig. 15Sixth Bend Fig. 16Eighth Bend Fig. 17Eighth Bend, Long Fig. 18Sixteenth Bend Fig. 19Sanitary Tee Fig. 20Sanitary Tee with Side Opening Fig. 21Sanitary Tee with 2 in. Side Opening R or L/R and L Fig. 22Sanitary Tee, New Orleans Special with Side Opening Fig. 23Sanitary Tee with 45° Side Openings and New Orleans Fig. 24Sanitary Special Tee Tapped Fig. 25Sanitary Tapped Tee, Horizontal Twin Fig. 26Sanitary Tapped Tee, Double Vertical Fig. 27Y Branch Fig. 28Y Branch, Double Fig. 29Y Branch, Upright Fig. 30Upright Y Wide Center Florida Special Fig. 31Y Branch, Combination 1/8 Bend Fig. 32Y Branch, Combination 1/8 Bend Double Fig. 33Sanitary Cross Fig. 34Sanitary Cross with Side Opening Fig. 35Sanitary Cross, New Orleans, with Side Openings Fig. 36Sanitary Cross, New Orleans, with 45° Special and Regular Side Openings Fig. 37Sanitary Cross, Tapped Fig. 38Test Tee Fig. 39Tapped Extension Piece Fig. 40Increaser-Reducer Fig. 41Increaser-Reducer, Short Fig. 42Tapped Adapter Fig. 43Blind Plug Fig. 44Iron Body Cleanout, Tapped Fig. 45P Trap Fig. 46P Trap, Long Fig. 47P Trap, Deep Seal Fig. 48P Trap, with Primer Fig. 49P Trap, with Tapped Inlet Fig. 50Tapped Inlet, Double Fig. 51Modified Combination Wye and 1/8  Bend, Double Fig. 52Modified Combination Wye and 1/8  Bend, Double, Extended Fig. 53Two-Way Cleanout Fig. 54Twin Cleanout Fig. 55Closet Bend, Regular and Reducing Fig. 56Closet Flange Riser Fig. 57Tapping Bosses Fig. 58Double Sweep Sanitary Tee (Extended) Fig. 59Running Trap with Double Vents Fig. 60P Trap with Tapped or Hubless Side Inlet Fig. 61Vented Tub Wye Extended, Double Fig. 62Vented Tub Wye Extended Offset, Left or Right Fig. 63Vented Tub Wye Fig. 64Double Two-Way Cleanout Fig. 651.4 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.1.5 The committee with jurisdiction over this standard is aware of another comparable standard published by the Cast Iron Soil Pipe Institute, CISPI 301.NOTE 1: The text of this standard references notes and footnotes that provide explanatory material. These notes and footnotes (excluding those in tables and figures) shall not be considered as requirements of the 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： 983元 / 折扣价： 836 元 加购物车

This test method can be used to determine the lime content of uncured soil-lime mixtures.Lime content in soil-lime mixtures is needed by agencies such as highway departments, to determine lime content in soil-lime mixtures for payments to contractors, to check compliance with specifications, or to check the efficacy of quality control measures.Lime content is also needed by producers of soil-lime mixtures who have to determine lime content for production control purposes.Note 1—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 ensure reliable results. Reliable results depend on many factors; Practice D3740 provides a means of evaluating some of those factors.1.1 This test method covers the determination of the lime content of soil-lime mixtures sampled from a project under construction or at the pug-mill, or both.1.2 In soils with highly variable amounts of CaCo3 (such as caliche), it may be difficult to obtain a representative sample.1.3 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard. The values stated in inch-pound units are provided for information only.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