5.1 The values obtained by this test method are applicable only to conditions that specifically duplicate the procedures used.5.2 After the regression characteristics of a pipe material and manufacturing process have been determined by this test method, one pressure may be used for quality-control purposes. This pressure shall be one of the points used in the original determination and be agreed upon between the individuals concerned.5.3 This test method deals with cyclic internal pressure performance of a pipe and omits creep and nonrecoverable deformation measurements.5.4 For determination of the cyclic hydrostatic design basis using data from this test method see Practice D2992.5.5 In the application of the following test requirements and recommendations it is assumed that test specimens of a given sample of pipe are truly representative of that material and manufacturing process. In tests conducted to show the effect of temperature and pressures on the life span of the pipe, great care must be taken to ensure that the specimens being tested are representative of the group being studied. Departure from this assumption could introduce discrepancies that are greater than those introduced by departure from the details of the procedure outlined in this test method.1.1 This test method covers the determination of the failure characteristics of reinforced plastic pipe when subjected to cyclic internal hydraulic pressure. It is limited to pipe in which the ratio of outside diameter to wall thickness is 10:1 or more.1.2 The values stated in inch-pound units are to be regarded as the standard. The values in parentheses are for information only.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.NOTE 1: There is no known ISO equivalent to this standard.1.4 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

定价： 515元 / 折扣价： 438 元 加购物车

4.1 The useful life of photovoltaic modules may depend on their ability to withstand repeated temperature cycling with varying amounts of moisture in the air. These test methods provide procedures for simulating the effects of cyclic temperature and humidity environments. An extended duration damp heat procedure is provided to simulate the effects of long term exposure to high humidity.4.2 The durations of the individual environmental tests are specified by use of this test method; however, commonly used durations are 50 and 200 thermal cycles, 10 humidity-freeze cycles, and 1000 h of damp heat exposure, as specified by module qualification standards such as IEC 61215 and IEC 61646. Longer durations can also be specified for extended duration module stress testing.4.3 Mounting—Test modules are mounted so that they are electrically isolated from each other, and in such a manner to allow free air circulation around the front and back surfaces of the modules.4.4 Current Biasing: 4.4.1 During the thermal cycling procedure, test modules are operated without illumination and with a forward-bias current equal to the maximum power point current at standard reporting conditions (SRC, see Test Methods E1036) flowing through the module circuitry.4.4.2 The current biasing is intended to stress the module interconnections and solder bonds in ways similar to those that are believed to be responsible for fill-factor degradation in field-deployed modules.4.5 Effects of Test Procedures—Data generated using these test methods may be used to evaluate and compare the effects of simulated environment on test specimens. These test methods require determination of both visible effects and electrical performance effects.4.5.1 Effects on modules may vary from none to significant changes. Some physical changes in the module may be visible when there are no apparent electrical changes in the module. Similarly, electrical changes may occur with no visible changes in the module.4.5.2 All conditions of measurement, effects of cycling, and any deviations from this test method must be described in the report so that an assessment of their significance can be made.4.6 Sequencing—If these test methods are performed as part of a combined sequence with other environmental or non-environmental tests, the results of the final electrical tests (6.2) and visual inspection (6.3) determined at the end of one test may be used as the initial electrical tests and visual inspection for the next test; duplication of these tests is not necessary unless so specified.1.1 These test methods provide procedures for stressing photovoltaic modules in simulated temperature and humidity environments. Environmental testing is used to simulate aging of module materials on an accelerated basis.1.2 Three individual environmental test procedures are defined by these test methods: a thermal cycling procedure, a humidity-freeze cycling procedure, and an extended duration damp heat procedure. Electrical biasing is utilized during the thermal cycling procedure to simulate stresses that are known to occur in field-deployed modules.1.3 These test methods define mounting methods for modules undergoing environmental testing, and specify parameters that must be recorded and reported.1.4 These test methods do not establish pass or fail levels. The determination of acceptable or unacceptable results is beyond the scope of these test methods.1.5 Any of the individual environmental tests may be performed singly, or may be combined into a test sequence with other environmental or non-environmental tests, or both. Certain pre-conditioning tests such as annealing or light soaking may also be necessary or desirable as part of such a sequence. The determination of any such sequencing and pre-conditioning is beyond the scope of this test method.1.6 These test procedures are limited in duration and therefore the results of these tests cannot be used to determine photovoltaic module lifetimes.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.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： 515元 / 折扣价： 438 元 加购物车

3.1 In this test method, susceptibility to localized corrosion of aluminum is indicated by a protection potential (Eprot) determined by cyclic galvanostaircase polarization (1). The more noble this potential, the less susceptible is the alloy to initiation of localized corrosion. The results of this test method are not intended to correlate in a quantitative manner with the rate of propagation of localized corrosion that one might observe in service.3.2 The breakdown (Eb), and protection potentials (Eprot) determined by the cyclic GSCP method correlate with the constant potential corrosion test (immersion-glassware) result for aluminum (1, 6, 7). When the applied potential was more negative than the GSCP Eprot, no pit initiation was observed. When the applied potential was more positive than the GSCP Eprot, pitting occurred even when the applied potential was less negative than Eb.3.2.1 Severe crevice corrosion occurred when the separation of Eb and Eprot was 500 mV or greater and Eprot was less than −400 mV Vs. SCE (in 100 ppm NaCl) (1, 6, 8). For aluminum, Eprot determined by cyclic GSCP agrees with the repassivation potential determined by the scratch potentiostatic method (1, 9). Both the scratch potentiostatic method and the constant potential technique for determination of Eprot require much longer test times and are more involved techniques than the GSCP method.3.3 DeBerry and Viebeck (3-5) found that the breakdown potentials (Eb) (galvanodynamic polarization, similar to GSCP but no kinetic information) had a good correlation with the inhibition of localized corrosion of 304L stainless steel by surface active compounds. They attained accuracy and precision by avoiding the strong induction effect which they observed by the potentiodynamic technique.3.4 If this test method is followed using the specific alloy discussed it will provide (GSCP) measurements that will reproduce data developed at other times in other laboratories.3.5 Eb and Eprotobtained are based on the results from eight different laboratories that followed the standard procedure using aluminum alloy 3003-H14 (UNS A93003). Eb and Eprot are included with statistical analysis to indicate the acceptable range.1.1 This test method covers a procedure for conducting cyclic galvanostaircase polarization (GSCP) to determine relative susceptibility to localized corrosion (pitting and crevice corrosion) for aluminum alloy 3003-H14 (UNS A93003) (1).2 It may serve as guide for examination of other alloys (2-5). This test method also describes a procedure that can be used as a check for one's experimental technique and instrumentation.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

This practice can be used to describe the effects of materials, manufacturing, and design variables on the fatigue resistance of metallic stemmed femoral components subjected to cyclic loading for relatively large numbers of cycles. The recommended test assumes a “worst case” situation where proximal support for the stem has been lost. It is also recognized that for some materials the environment may have an effect on the response to cyclic loading. The test environment used and the rationale for the choice of that environment should be described in the report. It is recognized that actual in vivo loading conditions are not ofconstant amplitude. However, there is not sufficient information available to create standard load spectrums for metallic stemmed femoral components. Accordingly, a simple periodic constant amplitude force is recommended. In order for fatigue data on femoral stems to be useful for comparison, it must be reproducible among different laboratories. Consequently, it is essential that uniform procedures be established.1.1 This practice describes a method for the fatigue testing of metallic stemmed femoral components used in hip arthroplasty. The described method is intended to be used to evaluate the comparison of various designs and materials used for stemmed femoral components used in the arthroplasty. This practice covers procedures for the performance of fatigue tests using (as a forcing function) a periodic constant amplitude force. 1.2 This practice applies primarily to one-piece prostheses and modular components, with head in place such that prostheses should not have an anterior/posterior bow, and should have a nearly straight section on the distal 50 mm of the stem. This practice may require modifications to accommodate other femoral stem designs. 1.3 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as the standard. 1.4 For additional information see Refs. (1-5) .

定价： 0元 / 折扣价： 0 元

3.1 The procedure described is used to observe the behavior of steels under exposure conditions that retard the formation of a protective type of rust. It is also used to evaluate seal coat on insulation.3.2 This practice should not be used to rank steels that form a protective type of rust under atmospheric exposure conditions.1.1 This practice covers procedures for conducting cyclic humidity exposures with a corrosive dip.2 It sets forth the conditions required in cyclic humidity testing.1.2 This practice does not prescribe the type of exposure specimen or exposure periods nor the interpretation to be given to the results.1.3 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard. The values given in parentheses are 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 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： 515元 / 折扣价： 438 元 加购物车

3.1 An indication of the susceptibility to initiation of localized corrosion in this test method is given by the potential at which the anodic current increases rapidly. The more noble this potential, obtained at a fixed scan rate in this test, the less susceptible is the alloy to initiation of localized corrosion. The results of this test are not intended to correlate in a quantitative manner with the rate of propagation that one might observe in service when localized corrosion occurs.3.2 In general, once initiated, localized corrosion can propagate at some potential more electropositive than that at which the hysteresis loop is completed. In this test method, the potential at which the hysteresis loop is completed is determined at a fixed scan rate. In these cases, the more electropositive the potential at which the hysteresis loop is completed the less likely it is that localized corrosion will occur.3.3 If followed, this test method will provide cyclic potentiodynamic anodic polarization measurements that will reproduce data developed at other times in other laboratories using this test method for the two specified alloys discussed in 3.4. The procedure is used for iron-, nickel-, or cobalt-based alloys in a chloride environment.3.4 A standard potentiodynamic polarization plot is included. These reference data are based on the results from five different laboratories that followed the standard procedure, using specific alloys of Type 304 stainless steel, UNS S30400 and Alloy C-276, UNS N10276.3 Curves are included which have been constructed using statistical analysis to indicate the acceptable range of polarization curves.3.5 The availability of a standard test method, standard material, and standard plots should make it easy for an investigator to check his techniques to evaluate susceptibility to localized corrosion.1.1 This test method covers a procedure for conducting cyclic potentiodynamic polarization measurements to determine relative susceptibility to localized corrosion (pitting and crevice corrosion) for iron-, nickel-, or cobalt-based alloys in a chloride environment. This test method also describes an experimental procedure which can be used to check one's experimental technique and instrumentation.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： 702元 / 折扣价： 597 元 加购物车

定价： 260元 / 折扣价： 221 元 加购物车

This practice can be used to describe the effects of materials, manufacturing, and design variables on the fatigue resistance of metallic stemmed femoral components subjected to cyclic loading for relatively large numbers of cycles. The recommended test assumes a worst case situation in which proximal support for the stem has been lost. It is also recognized that, for some materials, the environment has an effect on the response to cyclic loading (see 12.7). The test environment used and rationale for the choice of that environment should be described in the test report.It is recognized that actual in vivo loading conditions are not constant amplitude. However, sufficient information is not available to create standard load spectrums for metallic stemmed femoral components. A simple periodic constant amplitude force is accordingly recommended.1.1 This practice covers a method for the fatigue testing of metallic stemmed femoral components used in hip arthroplasty. The described method is intended to be used for evaluation in comparisons of various designs and materials used for stemmed femoral components used in the arthroplasty. This practice covers procedures for the performance of fatigue tests using (as a forcing function) a periodic constant amplitude force.1.2 This practice applies primarily to one-piece prostheses and femoral stems with modular heads, with the head in place. Such prostheses should not have an anterior-posterior A-P bow or a medial-lateral M-L bow, and they should have a nearly straight section on the distal 50 mm of the stem. This practice may require modifications to accommodate other femoral stem designs.1.3 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as the standard.This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.

定价： 0元 / 折扣价： 0 元

4.1 These practices provide information on the resistance to cyclic laboratory aging.1.1 These practices cover the determination of the resistance of adhesives to cyclic accelerated service conditions by exposing bonded specimens to conditions of high and low temperatures and high and low relative humidities. The extent of degradation is determined from changes in strength properties as a result of exposure to the test conditions (Note 1). It is recognized that no accelerated procedure for degrading materials correlates perfectly with actual service conditions, and that no single or small group of laboratory test conditions will simulate all actual service conditions. Consequently, care must be exercised in the interpretation and use of data obtained in this practice. The test condition, the number of cycles of the test condition to be used, the particular strength property to be used to determine the extent of degradation, and whether test specimens or test panels are to be used, are specified in the material specification.NOTE 1: These practices/conditions are intended for use with specimens described in the approved ASTM strength test methods for adhesives as follows:Test Methods D897, D903, D906, D950, D1002, D1062, and Test Method D1344.1.2 The values stated in SI units 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, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.1.4 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

定价： 515元 / 折扣价： 438 元 加购物车

4.1 Types of architectural joint systems included in this test method are the following:4.1.1 Metallic systems;4.1.2 Compression seals:4.1.2.1 With frames, and4.1.2.2 Without frames,4.1.3 Strip seals;4.1.4 Preformed sealant systems (see Appendix X1):4.1.4.1 With frames, and4.1.4.2 Without frames,4.1.5 Preformed foams and sponges:4.1.5.1 Self-Expanding, and4.1.5.2 Nonexpanding,4.1.6 Fire barriers:4.1.6.1 Used as joint systems, and4.1.6.2 Used as a part of the joint system, and4.1.7 Elastomeric membrane systems:4.1.7.1 With nosing material(s), and4.1.7.2 Without nosing material(s).4.2 This test method will assist users, producers, building officials, code authorities, and others in verifying some performance characteristics of representative specimens of architectural joint systems under common test conditions. The following performance characteristics are verifiable:4.2.1 The maximum joint width,4.2.2 The minimum joint width, and4.2.3 The movement capability.4.3 This test compares similar architectural joint systems by cycling but does not accurately reflect the system's application. Similar refers to the same type of architectural system within the same subsection under 4.1.4.4 This test method does not provide information on:4.4.1 Durability of the architectural joint system under actual service conditions, including the effects of cycled temperature on the joint system,4.4.2 Loading capability of the system and the effects of a load on the functional parameters established by this test method,4.4.3 Rotational, vertical, and horizontal shear capabilities of the specimen,4.4.4 Any other attributes of the specimen, such as fire resistance, wear resistance, chemical resistance, air infiltration, watertightness, and so forth, and4.4.5 Testing or compatibility of substrates.4.5 This test method is only to be used as one element in the selection of an architectural joint system for a particular application. It is not intended as an independent pass/fail acceptance procedure. In conjunction with this test method, other test methods are to be used to evaluate the importance of other service conditions such as durability, structural loading, and compatibility.1.1 This test method covers testing procedures for architectural joint systems. This test method is intended for the following uses for architectural joint systems:1.1.1 To verify movement capability information supplied to the user by the producer,1.1.2 To standardize comparison of movement capability by relating it to specified nominal joint widths,1.1.3 To determine the cyclic movement capability between specified minimum and maximum joint widths without visual deleterious effects, and1.1.4 To provide the user with graphic information, drawings or pictures in the test report, depicting them at minimum, maximum, and nominal joint widths during cycling.1.2 This test method is intended to be used only as part of a specification or acceptance criterion due to the limited movements tested.1.3 The values stated in either SI units or inch-pound units are to be regarded separately as standard. The values stated in each system are not necessarily exact equivalents; therefore, to ensure conformance with the standard, each system shall be used independently of the other, and values from the two systems shall not be combined.1.4 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 Test Methods A, B, and C provide a means of evaluating the tensile modulus of geogrids and geotextiles for applications involving small-strain cyclic loading. The test methods allow for the determination of cyclic tensile modulus at different levels of prescribed or permanent strain, thereby accounting for possible changes in cyclic tensile modulus with increasing permanent strain in the material. These test methods shall be used for research testing and to define properties for use in specific design methods.5.2 In cases of dispute arising from differences in reported test results when using these test methods for acceptance testing of commercial shipments, the purchaser and supplier should conduct comparative tests to determine if there is a statistical bias between their laboratories. Competent statistical assistance is recommended for the investigation of bias. As a minimum, the two parties should take a group of test specimens which are as homogeneous as possible and which are from a lot of material of the type in question. The test specimens should then be randomly assigned in equal numbers to each laboratory for testing. The average results from the two laboratories should be compared using Student’s t-test for unpaired data and an acceptable probability level chosen by the two parties before the testing began. If a bias is found, either its cause shall be found and corrected or the purchaser and supplier shall agree to interpret future test results in light of the known bias.5.3 All geogrids can be tested by Test Method A or B. Some modification of techniques may be necessary for a given geogrid depending upon its physical makeup. Special adaptations may be necessary with strong geogrids, multiple-layered geogrids, or geogrids that tend to slip in the clamps or those which tend to be damaged by the clamps.5.4 Most geotextiles can be tested by Test Method C. Some modification of clamping techniques may be necessary for a given geotextile depending upon its structure. Special clamping adaptations may be necessary with strong geotextiles or geotextiles made from glass fibers to prevent them from slipping in the clamps or being damaged as a result of being gripped in the clamps.5.5 These test methods are applicable for testing geotextiles either dry or wet. It is used with a constant rate of extension type tension apparatus.5.6 These test methods may not be suited for geogrids and geotextiles that exhibit strengths approximately 100 kN/m (600 lbf/in.) due to clamping and equipment limitations. In those cases, 100-mm (4-in.) width specimens may be substituted for 200-mm (8-in.) width specimens.1.1 These test methods cover the determination of small-strain tensile properties of geogrids and geotextiles by subjecting wide-width specimens to cyclic tensile loading.1.2 These test methods (A, B, and C) allow for the determination of small-strain cyclic tensile modulus by the measurement of cyclic tensile load and elongation.1.3 This test method is intended to provide properties for design. The test method was developed for mechanistic-empirical pavement design methods requiring input of the reinforcement tensile modulus. The use of cyclic modulus from this test method for other applications involving cyclic loading should be evaluated on a case-by-case basis.1.4 Three test methods (A, B, and C) are provided to determine small-strain cyclic tensile modulus on geogrids and geotextiles.1.4.1 Test Method A—Testing a relatively wide specimen of geogrid in cyclic tension in kN/m (lbf/ft).1.4.2 Test Method B—Testing multiple layers of a relatively wide specimen of geogrid in cyclic tension in kN/m (lbf/ft).1.4.3 Test Method C—Testing a relatively wide specimen of geotextile in cyclic tension in kN/m (lbf/ft).1.5 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard. The values given in parentheses are provided for information only and are not considered standard.1.6 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.1.7 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

定价： 590元 / 折扣价： 502 元 加购物车

5.1 This test method is a standard procedure for determining the resistance to water penetration under uniform or cyclic static air pressure differences of installed exterior windows, skylights, curtain walls, and doors. The air-pressure differences acting across a building envelope vary greatly. These factors should be considered fully prior to specifying the test pressure difference to be used.NOTE 1: In applying the results of tests by this test method, note that the performance of a wall or its components, or both, may be a function of proper installation and adjustment. In service, the performance will also depend on the rigidity of supporting construction and on the resistance of components to deterioration by various causes, vibration, thermal expansion and contraction, and so forth. It is difficult to simulate the identical complex wetting conditions that can be encountered in service, with large wind-blown water drops, increasing water drop impact pressures with increasing wind velocity, and lateral or upward moving air and water. Some designs are more sensitive than others to this upward moving water.NOTE 2: This test method does not identify unobservable liquid water which may penetrate into the test specimen.5.2 Laboratory tests are designed to give an indication of the performance of an assembly. Field performance may vary from laboratory performance since the supporting structure for the test specimen, methods of mounting, and sealing in the laboratory can only simulate the actual conditions that will exist in the building. Shipping, handling, installation, acts of subsequent trades, aging, and other environmental conditions all may have an adverse effect upon the performance of the installed product. This field test procedure provides a means for determining the performance of a product once installed in the building.5.3 The field test may be made at the time the window, skylight, curtain-wall, or door assemblies are initially installed and before the interior of the building is finished. At this time, it is generally easier to check the interior surfaces of the assemblies for water penetration and to identify the points of penetration. The major advantage of testing when assemblies are initially installed is that errors in fabrication or installation can be readily discovered and corrections made before the entire wall with its component assemblies is completed at which time the expense of corrective work may be increased many times.5.4 The field test may also be made after the building is completed and in service to determine whether or not reported leakage problems are due to the failure of the installed assemblies to resist water penetration at the specified static air pressure difference. Generally it is possible to conduct tests on window, skylight, and door assemblies without too much difficulty, and to identify sources of leakage. A curtain-wall assembly, on the other hand, may not be accessible from the inside without the removal of interior finished walls and ceilings. Even with removal of interior walls and ceilings, it may not be possible to observe curtain-wall surfaces behind spandrel beams. The feasibility of conducting a meaningful static air pressure difference water penetration test on an in-service building must be carefully evaluated before being specified.5.5 Weather conditions can affect the static air pressure difference measurements. If wind gusting causes pressure fluctuation to exceed ±10 % from the specified test pressure, the test should not be conducted.5.6 Generally it is more convenient to use an interior mounted pressure chamber from which air is exhausted to obtain a lower pressure on the interior surface of the specimen. A calibrated rack of nozzles is then used to spray water at the proper rate on the exterior surface. Under circumstances where it is desirable to use an exterior-mounted pressure chamber, the spray rack must be located in the pressure chamber and air supplied to maintain a higher pressure on the exterior surface. Exterior chambers are difficult to attach readily and seal to exterior surfaces.5.7 Even though the equipment requirements are similar, this procedure is not intended to measure air infiltration because of the difficulty of isolating the component air leakage from the extraneous leakage through weep holes, mullion joints, trim, or other surrounding materials.1.1 This test method covers the determination of the resistance of installed exterior windows, curtain walls, skylights, and doors to water penetration when water is applied to the outdoor face and exposed edges simultaneously with a static air pressure at the outdoor face higher than the pressure at the indoor face.1.2 This test method is applicable to any curtain-wall area or to windows, skylights, or doors alone. It is intended primarily for determining the resistance to water penetration through such assemblies for compliance with specified performance criteria, but it may also be used to determine the resistance to penetration through the joints between the assemblies and the adjacent construction. Other procedures may be appropriate to identify sources of leakage.1.3 This test method addresses water penetration through a manufactured assembly. Water that penetrates the assembly, but does not result in a failure as defined herein, may have adverse effects on the performance of contained materials such as sealants and insulating or laminated glass. This test method does not address these issues.1.4 The proper use of this test method requires a knowledge of the principles of pressure measurement.1.5 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.1.6 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. For specific hazard statements, see 7.1.1.7 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

定价： 590元 / 折扣价： 502 元 加购物车

4.1 This test method is used to determine the dimensional changes and physical stability of the product upon exposure to specified cyclic thermal conditions. It is also useful in determining the integrity of the bond between the metal foil and the SBS-modified bituminous compound.1.1 This test method covers the measurement of movement due to cyclic thermal exposure of SBS (styrene-butadiene-styrene)-modified bituminous sheets with a factory-applied metal foil surface.1.2 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard. The values in parentheses are for information only.1.3 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.1.4 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

定价： 590元 / 折扣价： 502 元 加购物车

4.1 This test method can be used to describe the effects of materials, manufacturing, and design variables on the fatigue performance of metallic tibial trays subject to cyclic loading for relatively large numbers of cycles.4.2 The loading of tibial tray designs in vivo will, in general, differ from the loading defined in this practice. The results obtained here cannot be used to directly predict in vivo performance. However, this practice is designed to allow for comparisons between the fatigue performance of different metallic tibial tray designs, when tested under similar conditions.4.3 In order for fatigue data on tibial trays to be comparable, reproducible, and capable of being correlated among laboratories, it is essential that uniform procedures be established.1.1 This test method covers a procedure for the fatigue testing of metallic tibial trays used in partial knee joint replacements.1.2 This test method covers the procedures for the performance of fatigue tests on metallic tibial components using a cyclic, constant-amplitude force. It applies to tibial trays which cover either the medial or the lateral plateau of the tibia.1.3 This test method may require modifications to accommodate other tibial tray designs.1.4 This test method is intended to provide useful, consistent, and reproducible information about the fatigue performance of metallic tibial trays with unsupported mid-section of the condyle.1.5 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard. No other units of measurement are included in this standard.1.6 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.1.7 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

定价： 590元 / 折扣价： 502 元 加购物车

4.1 This practice may be used for material development, material comparison, quality assurance, characterization, reliability assessment, and design data generation.4.2 Continuous fiber-reinforced ceramic matrix composites are generally characterized by crystalline matrices and ceramic fiber reinforcements. These materials are candidate materials for structural applications requiring high degrees of wear and corrosion resistance, and high-temperature inherent damage tolerance (that is, toughness). In addition, continuous fiber-reinforced glass matrix composites are candidate materials for similar but possibly less demanding applications. Although flexural test methods are commonly used to evaluate the mechanical behavior of monolithic advanced ceramics, the nonuniform stress distribution in a flexural test specimen in addition to dissimilar mechanical behavior in tension and compression for CFCCs leads to ambiguity of interpretation of test results obtained in flexure for CFCCs. Uniaxially loaded tensile tests provide information on mechanical behavior for a uniformly stressed material.4.3 The cyclic fatigue behavior of CFCCs can have appreciable nonlinear effects (for example, sliding of fibers within the matrix) which may be related to the heat transfer of the specimen to the surroundings. Changes in test temperature, frequency, and heat removal can affect test results. It may be desirable to measure the effects of these variables to more closely simulate end-use conditions for some specific application.4.4 Cyclic fatigue by its nature is a probabilistic phenomenon as discussed in STP 91A (1) and STP 588 (2).4 In addition, the strengths of the brittle matrices and fibers of CFCCs are probabilistic in nature. Therefore, a sufficient number of test specimens at each testing condition is required for statistical analysis and design, with guidelines for sufficient numbers provided in STP 91A (1), STP 588 (2), and Practice E739. Studies to determine the influence of test specimen volume or surface area on cyclic fatigue strength distributions for CFCCs have not been completed. The many different tensile test specimen geometries available for cyclic fatigue testing may result in variations in the measured cyclic fatigue behavior of a particular material due to differences in the volume of material in the gage section of the test specimens.4.5 Tensile cyclic fatigue tests provide information on the material response under fluctuating uniaxial tensile stresses. Uniform stress states are required to effectively evaluate any nonlinear stress-strain behavior which may develop as the result of cumulative damage processes (for example, matrix microcracking, fiber/matrix debonding, delamination, cyclic fatigue crack growth, etc.)4.6 Cumulative damage due to cyclic fatigue may be influenced by testing mode, testing rate (related to frequency), differences between maximum and minimum force (R or Α), effects of processing or combinations of constituent materials, environmental influences (including test environment and pre-test conditioning), or combinations thereof. Some of these effects may be consequences of stress corrosion or subcritical (slow) crack growth which can be difficult to quantify. Other factors which may influence cyclic fatigue behavior are: matrix or fiber material, void or porosity content, methods of test specimen preparation or fabrication, volume percent of the reinforcement, orientation and stacking of the reinforcement, test specimen conditioning, test environment, force or strain limits during cycling, wave shapes (that is, sinusoidal, trapezoidal, etc.), and failure mode of the CFCC.4.7 The results of cyclic fatigue tests of test specimens fabricated to standardized dimensions from a particular material or selected portions of a part, or both, may not totally represent the cyclic fatigue behavior of the entire, full-size end product or its in-service behavior in different environments.4.8 However, for quality control purposes, results derived from standardized tensile test specimens may be considered indicative of the response of the material from which they were taken for given primary processing conditions and post-processing heat treatments.4.9 The cyclic fatigue behavior of a CFCC is dependent on its inherent resistance to fracture, the presence of flaws, or damage accumulation processes, or both. There can be significant damage in the CFCC test specimen without any visual evidence such as the occurrence of a macroscopic crack. This can result in a loss of stiffness and retained strength. Depending on the purpose for which the test is being conducted, rather than final fracture, a specific loss in stiffness or retained strength may constitute failure. In cases where fracture occurs, analysis of fracture surfaces and fractography, though beyond the scope of this practice, is recommended.1.1 This practice covers the determination of constant-amplitude, axial tension-tension cyclic fatigue behavior and performance of continuous fiber-reinforced advanced ceramic composites (CFCCs) at ambient temperatures. This practice builds on experience and existing standards in tensile testing CFCCs at ambient temperatures and addresses various suggested test specimen geometries, specimen fabrication methods, testing modes (force, displacement, or strain control), testing rates and frequencies, allowable bending, and procedures for data collection and reporting. This practice does not apply to axial cyclic fatigue tests of components or parts (that is, machine elements with nonuniform or multiaxial stress states).1.2 This practice applies primarily to advanced ceramic matrix composites with continuous fiber reinforcement: uni-directional (1-D), bi-directional (2-D), and tri-directional (3-D) or other multi-directional reinforcements. In addition, this practice may also be used with glass (amorphous) matrix composites with 1-D, 2-D, 3-D, and other multi-directional continuous fiber reinforcements. This practice does not directly address discontinuous fiber-reinforced, whisker-reinforced or particulate-reinforced ceramics, although the methods detailed here may be equally applicable to these composites.1.3 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as the standard and are in accordance with IEEE/ASTM SI 10.1.4 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. Refer to Section 7 for specific precautions.

定价： 590元 / 折扣价： 502 元 加购物车