定价： 590元 / 折扣价： 502 元 加购物车

定价： 646元 / 折扣价： 550 元 加购物车

5.1 There are two primary types of vapor mitigation systems: Active and Passive (Table 1). Active vapor mitigation systems include: Sub-Slab Depressurization (SSD), Sub-Membrane Depressurization (SMD), Sub-Membrane Pressurization, Block-Wall Depressurization, Drain-tile Depressurization, Building Pressurization, Heat-Exchange Systems, and Indoor Air Treatment. Passive vapor mitigation systems include: Passive Venting, Floor Sealants, Vapor Barriers, and Increased Ventilation. Vapor mitigation systems may also consist of a combination of active and passive technologies.5.2 Development and implementation of a LTM Plan is important for ensuring the long-term protectiveness of the mitigation systems.5.3 The approach presented in this guide is a practical and streamlined process for establishing long-term monitoring requirements, monitoring time frames, and factors needed to determine when the use of a vapor mitigation system is no longer needed.5.4 This guide is intended to be used by environmental professionals including: consultants, building managers, local or regional governing or regulatory agencies, that are installing vapor mitigation systems, conducting monitoring of the vapor barriers, or developing LTM Plans for vapor mitigation systems. Vapor mitigation system installation and LTM activities should only be carried out by environmental professionals who are trained in the proper application of vapor mitigation systems and experienced in the monitoring described in this guide, as applicable.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 assure reliable results. Reliable results depend on many factors; Practice D3740 provides a means of evaluating some of those factors.(A) Initial Verification (System Startup)—Period of time immediately following system startup.(B) Operational Monitoring—Period of time needed to verify that the system is operating within requirements through typically expected annual conditions.(C) Long-Term Monitoring—Period of time following operational monitoring through system decommissioning.(D) Additional testing—These are actions that may need to be taken if there is a problem with the system or there is a change to the building/system.1.1 This guide presents factors to consider when developing Long-Term Monitoring (LTM) Plans for monitoring the performance of both active and passive vapor mitigation systems in buildings. This guide will also assist in developing appropriate performance standards to make sure that vapor mitigation systems remain protective of human health. Active and passive vapor mitigation systems have been used for a number of years on contaminated properties where residual volatile contaminants remain in the ground. This guide discusses a variety of vapor mitigations systems; however, its focus is on the development of long-term monitoring plans for vapor mitigation systems that are designed to remain in place for multiple years.1.2 A LTM Plan provides clear performance goals for a vapor mitigation system which help to reduce potential confusion and ineffective project management. The LTM Plan also defines performance monitoring time frames to efficiently test the vapor mitigation systems’ effectiveness without unnecessary and costly over-testing. This will also promote consistent monitoring. Vapor mitigation systems are often installed without adequate consideration of the long-term monitoring requirements necessary to make sure that they remain protective of human health for as long as the system remains in place. This guidance addresses the requirements of the LTM Plan to monitor a vapor mitigation system’s continued effectiveness. Installation verification that the vapor mitigation system was installed correctly is typically addressed in the Remedial Design stage of a contaminated Property Management and is not covered in this document.1.3 LTM Plan limitations, constraints and potential sources of error are discussed in this standard. This guide does not endorse a mitigation system vendor or testing of vapor mitigation systems. However, this guide does provide a reference for the common procedures for testing vapor mitigation systems and related terms, as appropriate.1.4 Units—The values stated in either International System (SI) units or English units are to be regarded separately as standard. The values stated in each system may not be exact equivalents; therefore, each system shall be used independently of the other. Combining values from the two systems may result in nonconformance with the standard. Reporting of test results in units other than SI shall not be regarded as nonconformance with this standard. The values given in parentheses are provided for informational purposes only and are not considered standard.1.5 All observed and calculated values shall conform to the guidelines for significant digits and rounding established in Practice D6026. For purposes of comparing a measured or calculated value(s) with specified limits, the measured or calculated value(s) shall be rounded to the nearest decimal of significant digits in the specified limit.1.6 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 with consideration of a project’s many unique aspects. The word “Standard” in the title of this document means only that the document has been approved through the ASTM consensus process.1.7 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.1.8 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

定价： 590元 / 折扣价： 502 元 加购物车

定价： 590元 / 折扣价： 502 元 加购物车

定价： 590元 / 折扣价： 502 元 加购物车

定价： 1058元 / 折扣价： 900 元 加购物车

4.1 General—CCPs can effectively be used to reclaim surface mines (5-10). First, CCPs are ideally suited for use in numerous reclamation applications. Any type of CCP may be evaluated for use in mine reclamation. Project specific testing is necessary to ensure that the CCPs selected for use on a given project will meet the project objectives. Second, the use of CCPs can save money because they are available in bulk quantities and reduce expenditures for the manufacture and purchase of Portland cement or quicklime. Third, large-scale use of CCPs for mine reclamation conserves valuable landfill space by recycling a valuable product to abate acid mine drainage and reduce the potential for mine subsidence, provided that the CCP is environmentally and technically suitable for the desired use. The availability of CCPs makes it possible to reclaim abandoned mineland that could not otherwise be reclaimed. The potential for leaching constituents contained in CCPs should be evaluated to ensure that there is no adverse environmental impact.4.2 Physical and Chemical Properties and Behavior of CCPs—Fly ash, bottom ash, boiler slag, FGD material and FBC ash, or combinations thereof, can be used for mine reclamation. Each of these materials typically exhibits general physical and chemical properties that must be considered in the design of a mine reclamation project using CCPs. The specific properties of these materials vary from source to source so environmental and engineering performance testing is recommended for the material(s) or combinations to be used in mine reclamation projects.4.2.1 Physical Properties: 4.2.1.1 Unit Weight—Unit weight is the weight per unit volume of material. Fly ash has a low dry unit weight, typically about 50 to 100 pcf (8 to 16 kN/m3). Bottom ash is also typically lighter than coarse grained soils of similar gradation. Stabilized FGD material from a wet scrubber and FGD material from a dry scrubber are also relatively lightweight, with unit weights similar to fly ash.4.2.1.2 Strength—Shear strength is the maximum resistance of a material to shearing stresses. The relatively high shear strength of fly ash is beneficial for CCP flowable fill formulations requiring strengths sufficient to prevent mine subsidence. The shear strength of non-self-hardening fly ash is primarily the result of internal friction. Cementitious CCPs experience a cementing action that is measured as cohesion and increases over time, which results in high compressive strength. Unconfined compressive strengths in excess of 1000 psi can be achieved for cementitious CCPs.4.2.1.3 Specific Gravity—Specific gravity is the ratio of the weight in air of a given volume of solids at a stated temperature to the weight in air of an equal volume of distilled water at a stated temperature. The particle specific gravity of fly ash is relatively low compared to that of natural materials, and generally ranges from 2.1 to 2.6.4.2.1.4 Grain-Size Distribution—Grain-size distribution describes the proportion of various particle sizes present in a material. Fly ash is a uniformly-graded product with spherical, very fine grained particles.4.2.1.5 Moisture Content—Moisture content is the ratio of the mass of water contained in the pore spaces of soil or rock material to the solid mass of particles in that material, expressed as a percentage. CCPs have almost no moisture when first collected after the combustion of coal. Power plant operators sometimes add moisture to facilitate transport and handling, a process termed “conditioning.”4.2.1.6 Coefficient of Permeability—Permeability is the capacity of a material to transmit a liquid. When compacted to its maximum dry density, fly ash can have permeabilities ranging from 10 to 10-3 gpd/ft2 (10-4 to 10-7 cm/s). These permeabilities are comparable to natural silty soils.4.2.2 Chemical Properties: 4.2.2.1 Elemental Composition—The major elemental components of CCPs are silica, aluminum, iron, calcium, magnesium, sodium, potassium, and sulfur. These elements are present in various amounts and combinations dependent primarily on the coal and type of CCP. The elements combine to form amorphous (glassy) or crystalline phases. Trace constituents may include elements such as arsenic, boron, cadmium, chromium, copper, chlorine, mercury, manganese, molybdenum, selenium, or zinc.4.2.2.2 Phase Associations—The primary elemental constituents of CCPs are present either as amorphous (glassy) phases or crystalline phases. Coal combustion fly ash is typically 70+ % amorphous material. FGD and FBC products are primarily crystalline, and the crystalline phases typically include lime (CaO), portlandite (Ca(OH)2), hannebachite (CaSO3 · 1/2 H2O), and forms of calcium sulfate.4.2.2.3 Free Lime Content—Free lime content varies among CCP sources and other potential activators (for example, lime kiln dust, cement kiln dust, quicklime, or Portland cement). Variability of free lime content in CCP sources is due to the type and efficiency of the emissions control technology that is used. FBC products typically contain up to 10 % free lime, while most Class F fly ash has no free lime content. The free lime content of other potential activators is also variable. For example, cement kiln dust typically ranges from 20 to 30 % free lime whereas quicklime contains 100 % free lime.4.2.2.4 Pozzolanic Activity—Most CCPs, with the exception of FGD material, are characterized as pozzolans due to the presence of siliceous or siliceous and aluminous materials that in themselves possess little or no cementitious value but will, in finely divided form and in the presence of moisture, chemically react with calcium hydroxide at ordinary temperatures to form compounds possessing cementitious properties.4.2.2.5 Buffer Capacity—The buffer capacity of the CCP is important in maintaining the high pH that generally is a requirement for neutralizing acidic materials such as acid mine drainage or for minimizing acid formation from acid forming materials. The CCP must have enough buffer capacity to maintain the pH of the treated areas so the area remains stable over time and under environmental stresses. Test Methods C400 can be applied to evaluate the buffer capacity of the CCP. Determine the basicity factor for the CCP as noted in Test Method B of Test Methods C400.4.3 Environmental Considerations: 4.3.1 Regulatory Framework: 4.3.1.1 Federal—The U.S. Department of the Interior Office of Surface Mining (OSM) is charged with the responsibility of ensuring that the national requirements for protecting the environment during coal mining are met and making sure the land is reclaimed after it is mined. When the use of CCPs happens at surface coal mines, state or federal coal-mining regulators are involved to the extent that SMCRA (Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act) requires the mine operator to ensure that:(1) All toxic materials are treated, buried, and compacted, or otherwise disposed of, in a manner designed to prevent contamination of ground or surface water (30 CFR 816/817.41).(2) The proposed land use does not present any actual or probable threat of water pollution (30 CFR 816/817.133).(3) The permit application contains a detailed description of the measures to be taken during mining and reclamation to ensure the protection of the quality and quantity of surface and ground water systems, both on- and off-site, from adverse effects of the mining and reclamation process (30 CFR 780.21 and Sections 401.402, or 404 of the Clean Water Act).(4) The rights of present users of such water are protected (30 CFR 816/817.41).(5) Any disposal of CCPs at mine sites must be in accordance with those standards and with applicable solid waste disposal requirements (30 CFR 816/817.89).SMCRA gives primary responsibility for regulating surface coal mine reclamation to the states, and 24 coal-producing states have chosen to exercise that responsibility. On federal lands and Indian reservations (Navajo, Hopi, and Crow) and in the coal states that have not set up their own regulatory programs (Tennessee and Washington), OSM issues the coal mine permits, conducts the inspections, and handles the enforcement responsibilities. As a result of the activities associated with the SMCRA, coal mine operators now reclaim as they mine, and mined lands are no longer abandoned without proper reclamation. OSM also collects and distributes funds from a tax on coal production to reclaim mined lands that were abandoned without being reclaimed before 1977. OSM has a Coal Combustion Residues Management Program that focuses on providing expert technical information on the use of CCPs in mine reclamation for the mining industry, regulatory agencies, and other stakeholders. Use of CCPS in reclamation procedures should be proposed in the mining permit application if possible, detailing the type and characteristics of the proposed CCP and the specific beneficial use for the location proposed. In 1999, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) completed a two-phased study of CCPs for the U.S. Congress as required by the Bevill Amendment to RCRA. At the conclusion of the first phase in 1993, EPA issued a formal regulatory determination that the characteristics and management of the four large-volume fossil fuel combustion waste streams (that is, fly ash, bottom ash, boiler slag, and flue gas emission control waste) do not warrant hazardous waste regulation under RCRA and that utilization practices for CCPs appear to be safe. In addition, EPA “encourage[d] the utilization of coal combustion by-products and support[ed] state efforts to promote utilization in an environmentally beneficial manner.” In the second phase of the study, EPA focused on the by-products generated from FBC boiler units and the use of CCPs from FBC and conventional boiler units for mine reclamation, among other things. Following completion of the study, EPA issued a regulatory determination that again concluded that hazardous waste regulation of these combustion residues was not warranted. However, EPA also decided to develop national solid waste regulatory standards for CCPs, including standards for placement of CCPs in surface or underground mines, either under RCRA, SMCRA, or a combination of the two programs (65 CFR 32214, May 22, 2000).4.3.1.2 State and Local—There is considerable variation in state-mandated permitting and other regulatory requirements for CCP utilization. Some states have specific beneficial use policies, while other states have no regulations or guidance addressing beneficial use. Although the NEPA (National Environmental Policy Act) strictly applies only to federally funded projects, many states have similar mechanisms for assessing the environmental impacts of non-Federal projects. These mechanisms may require state permits that address any or all of the following issues: wetlands/waterways, National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) discharge, underground injection, erosion and sediment control, air quality considerations, and storm water management.4.3.2 Water Quality—When planning to use CCPs for mine reclamation, one should consider the potential impacts on ground water and surface water to ensure protection of human health and the environment.4.3.2.1 Ground Water—The design and implementation of a mine reclamation project should consider the potential ground water impacts of CCPs to ensure the protection of human health and the environment. Considerable research has been conducted to assess and predict the potential impacts of CCP utilization on ground water quality. An assessment of ground water quality impacts should be performed by a qualified professional and should take into account project-specific considerations such as composition of CCPs, the typical leachability of CCPs, presence of acid forming materials or acid mine drainage, placement of CCPs relative to the ground water table, rates of infiltration, the type of placement used for the CCP, and constituent migration, attenuation in ground water, and location of sensitive receptors (that is, wells). Where protection of ground water is a special concern, the leaching characteristics of the CCP should be evaluated as part of the assessment of constituent migration and attenuation. Consideration should be given to the leachability of the CCP in the presence of AMD.NOTE 1: It is highly recommended that up-gradient and down-gradient wells be installed to determine background groundwater conditions prior to CCP placement. Then, following placement of CCPs, periodic monitoring of these wells should be done to determine any potential groundwater impact.]4.3.2.2 Surface Water—CCPs may affect surface water bodies during and after placement activities as a result of erosion and sediment transport. The engineering and construction practices recommended to minimize these effects on surface waters (in accordance with the requirements of the 30 CFR 816.43 through 816–49 and any applicable federal or state permit) include storing the CCPs in stockpiles employing effective storm water management controls to maximize runoff and minimize run-on. Impacts could also be minimized by limiting size of active working face of area being reclaimed.4.3.3 Air Quality—When planning to use CCPs for mine reclamation, one should consider the potential impacts to air quality including dusting and emissions.4.3.3.1 Dust Control—Dusting must be controlled during the transport and handling of CCPs in order to avoid fugitive dust and to ensure worker safety. Dust control measures routinely used on earthwork projects are effective in minimizing airborne particulates at CCP storage sites. Typical controls include appropriate hauling methods, use of windbreaks, moisture conditioning of the CCPs, storage in bins or silos, covering the CCPs with large tarpaulins, wetting or covering exposed CCP surfaces, and paving or wetting unpaved high-traffic haul roads with coarse materials.4.3.3.2 Radionuclides—Coal and fly ash are not significantly enriched in radioactive elements or in associated radioactivity compared to common soils or rocks (11). Certain radioactive elements including radium and uranium are known to occur naturally in CCPs (12) and other fill materials. The U.S. Department of Energy estimated the radium concentration of fly ash to be no more than 3.0 pCi/g (13). Radon emissions from the CCPs are not likely to exceed the naturally occurring ambient emissions.4.4 Economic Benefits—The use of CCPs for mine reclamation can have economic benefits. These benefits are affected by local and regional factors, including production rates, processing and handling costs, transportation costs, availability and cost of competing materials, environmental concerns, and the experience of materials specifiers, design engineers, purchasing agents, contractors, legislators, regulators, and other professionals. CCPs are competing as manufactured materials and not as waste products. Since CCPs are produced in the process of manufacturing electricity, these materials can present an advantage when utilized as raw products for finished goods. This is primarily due to the low overheads involved with the material production cost and the fact that some, but not all coal-fired power plants have immediate access to low-cost transportation. The transport of coal to the power plant can provide an excellent opportunity to return CCPs to a mine site to aid in mine reclamation projects.1.1 This guide covers the beneficial use of coal combustion products (CCPs) for abatement of acid mine drainage and revegetation for surface mine reclamation applications related to area mining, contour mining, and mountaintop removal mining. It does not apply to underground mine reclamation applications. There are many important differences in physical and chemical characteristics that exist among the various types of CCPs available for use in mine reclamation. CCPs proposed for each project must be investigated thoroughly to design CCP placement activities to meet the project objectives. This guide provides procedures for consideration of engineering, economic, and environmental factors in the development of such applications.1.2 The utilization of CCPs under this guide is a component of a pollution prevention program; Guide E1609 describes pollution prevention activities in more detail. Utilization of CCPs in this manner conserves land, natural resources, and energy.1.3 This guide applies to CCPs produced primarily from the combustion of coal.1.4 The testing, engineering, and construction practices for using CCPs in mine reclamation are similar to generally accepted practices for using other materials, including cement and soils, in mine reclamation.1.5 Regulations governing the use of CCPs vary by state. The user of this guide has the responsibility to determine and comply with applicable regulations.1.6 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.1.7 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.1.8 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

定价： 590元 / 折扣价： 502 元 加购物车

定价： 590元 / 折扣价： 502 元 加购物车

1.1 This specification establishes performance requirements for the performance of flame mitigation devices (FMDs) installed in disposable and pre-filled liquid containers, intended for consumer use where the liquid flashpoint is below 60 ºC [140 ºF]. (See Appendix X1.)1.1.1 Uses of disposable and pre-filled flammable liquid containers include but are not limited to fuels, fire starters, and additives for internal combustion engines.1.1.2 An FMD that complies with this specification minimizes the potential of flame jetting or container rupture from occurring.1.1.3 Containers without a significant area reduction at the container opening are not covered because there is no hazard of a flame jet or container rupture because an internal pressure rise does not result from an internal ignition. (See X1.5.)1.2 This specification does not apply to the following containers:1.2.1 Containers greater than 20 L [5.3 gal] or smaller than 100 mL [3.4 oz] in volume.1.2.2 Containers intended for beverages.1.2.3 Portable fuel containers as defined in Specification F852/F852M.1.2.4 One-time use portable emergency fuel containers for use by consumers as defined in Specification F2874.1.2.5 Containers not intended to be open to ambient conditions such as those for liquefied petroleum gas.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. Information on specific hazards associated with the test methods in this specification is shown in Section 4.4.1.5 This specification does not address hazards caused by fire and explosion nor hazards from vapors external to the container when the fuel in the container does not ignite. Further, this specification does not consider scenarios where confinement, obstructions, or preheating cause flame acceleration prior to the flame front reaching the interior of the container.1.6 This standard is used to measure and describe the response of materials, products, or assemblies to heat and flame under controlled conditions, but does not by itself incorporate all factors required for fire-hazard or fire-risk assessment of the materials, products, or assemblies under actual fire conditions.1.7 Fire testing is inherently hazardous. Adequate safeguards for personnel and property shall be employed in conducting these tests.1.8 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

定价： 590元 / 折扣价： 502 元 加购物车

定价： 646元 / 折扣价： 550 元 加购物车

定价： 646元 / 折扣价： 550 元 加购物车

5.1 The purpose of the methods, systems, and designs described in this practice is to reduce radiation exposures for occupants of residential buildings caused by radon and its progeny. The goal of mitigation is to maintain reduced radon concentrations in occupiable areas of buildings at levels as low as reasonably achievable. This practice includes sections on reducing radiation exposure caused by radon and its progeny for workers who install and repair radon mitigation systems. The goal for workers is to reduce exposures to radon and its progeny to levels as low as reasonably achievable.5.2 The methods, systems, designs, and materials described here have been shown to have a high probability of success in mitigating radon in attached and detached residential buildings, three stories or less in height (see EPA, “Radon Reduction Techniques for Existing Detached Houses, Technical Guidance (Third Edition) for Active Soil Depressurization Systems”). Application of these methods does not, however, guarantee reduction of radon levels below any specific level, since performance will vary with site conditions, construction characteristics, weather, and building operation.5.3 When applying this practice, contractors also shall conform to all applicable local, state, and federal regulations, and laws pertaining to residential building construction, remodeling, and improvement.1.1 This practice describes methods for reducing radon entry into existing attached and detached residential buildings three stories or less in height. This practice is intended for use by trained, certified or licensed, or both, or otherwise qualified individuals.1.2 These methods are based on radon mitigation techniques that have been effective in reducing radon levels in a wide range of residential buildings and soil conditions. These fan powered mitigation methods are listed in Appendix X1. More detailed information is contained in references cited throughout this practice.1.3 This practice is intended to provide radon mitigation contractors with a uniform set of practices that will ensure a high degree of safety and the likelihood of success in retrofitting low rise residential buildings with radon mitigation systems.1.4 The methods described in this practice apply to currently occupied or formerly occupied residential buildings, including buildings converted or being converted to residential use, as well as residential buildings changed or being changed by addition(s) or alteration(s), or both. The radon reduction activities performed on new dwellings, while under construction, before occupancy, and for up to one year after occupancy, are covered by Practice E1465.1.5 This practice also is intended as a model set of practices, which can be adopted or modified by state and local jurisdictions, to fulfill objectives of their specific radon contractor certification or licensure programs. Radon mitigation performed in accordance with this practice is considered ordinary repair.1.6 The methods addressed in this practice include the following categories of contractor activity: general practices, building investigation, systems design, systems installation, materials, monitors and labeling, post-mitigation testing, and documentation.1.7 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.1.8 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use. See Section 6 for specific safety hazards.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 This test method evaluates the ability of an automotive engine to mitigate preignition in the combustion chambers in turbocharged, direct injection, gasoline engines under low-speed and high-load operating conditions.5.2 Varying quality reference oils, with known preignition tendencies, were used in developing the operating conditions of the test procedure.5.3 The test method has applicability in gasoline-engine-oil specifications and is expected to be used in specifications and classifications of engine lubricating oils, such as the following:5.3.1 Specification D4485.5.3.2 ILSAC GF-6.5.3.3 SAE Classification J183.1.1 This laboratory engine test evaluates the ability of an automotive engine to mitigate preignition in the combustion chambers in gasoline, turbocharged, direct-injection (GTDI) engines under low-speed and high-load operating conditions. This test method is commonly known as the Ford low-speed, preignition (LSPI) test.1.1.1 In vehicles, equipped with relatively small GTDI spark-ignition engines, preignition has occasionally occurred when the vehicles are operated under low-speed and high-load conditions. Uncontrolled, preignition may cause destructive engine damage.1.2 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard. No other units of measurement are included in this standard.1.2.1 Exceptions—Where there is no direct SI equivalent such as screw threads, national pipe threads/diameters, tubing size, wire gauge, or specified single source equipment.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： 1058元 / 折扣价： 900 元 加购物车

5.1 To maintain the integrity of potentially vulnerable information systems while the vessel is at sea or in port, strategies and procedures can be used by every company, organization, and ship. Mitigating potential cyberattack events will allow for a better economic environment through secure consumer, employee, and corporate data. Informational infrastructure between ships, platforms, and onshore facilities are more interconnected today than a decade ago. The long-term health and economic viability of ship owners and operators depend on establishing and maintaining security that can measured and monitored.5.2 With the increase in cyberattacks in recent decades, maritime-based companies and governments have cited a need to update and train their workforce to mitigate the loss of data or intellectual theft from onboard systems.5.2.1 Vulnerable onboard systems can include, but are not limited to:5.2.1.1 Cargo management systems;5.2.1.2 Bridge systems;5.2.1.3 Propulsion and machinery management and power control systems;5.2.1.4 Access control systems;5.2.1.5 Passenger servicing and management systems;5.2.1.6 Passenger facing public networks;5.2.1.7 Administrative and crew welfare systems;5.2.1.8 Communications systems;5.2.1.9 Distributed computing devices that support an internet of things (IoT)-enabled ship; and5.2.1.10 Onboard sensors that facilitate wheelhouse automation, alerting, and IoT transmission.5.2.2 Many of these systems are critical to mariners while at sea. If any of said systems failed or were compromised while at sea because of a cyberattack, then the ship and its security could be compromised.5.3 By adopting these practices, mariners and shoreside employees at all levels of the organization should be able to identify potential threats or risk factors, as well as the abnormal indications that show a cyberattack underway.5.4 Cyberattacks can occur in multiple forms including, but not limited to, the following practices:5.4.1 Social engineering,5.4.2 Phishing,5.4.3 Waterholing,5.4.4 Ransomware,5.4.5 Scanning,5.4.6 Spear-phishing,5.4.7 Deploying botnets, and5.4.8 Subverting the supply chain.5.5 These suggested strategies extend to all individuals of a corporation, government, or organization. By adopting a basic and developed capability to defend from cyberattacks, mariners can continue proper practices out at sea while feeling confident that safety critical systems, business-critical data, personal data, and records are safe.5.6 In the event of system error, or in the case of cyberattack or infection, any files required to rebuild or repair a personal computer (PC)-based onboard system shall be on the ship already rather than from off-board sources using satellite communications systems. Most vessels currently do not have operating system disks on board, let alone proprietary software, drivers, or patches. This connectivity constraint and lack of multiple failsafe outputs also provide a single point of failure and vulnerability. In the future, system software and firmware may be kept current with over-the-air updates, which shall be encrypted.5.7 There are cross-system considerations that shall be considered for cyber-enabled ships. They may include such factors as:5.7.1 Human-system interfaces;5.7.2 Software availability, versions, and licensing;5.7.3 Network and communications, including remote access methods;5.7.4 Data trustworthiness and availability (that is, data assurance);5.7.5 Diagnostic and evaluation equipment that may be required to diagnose system problems;5.7.6 Cybersecurity, especially as it applies to safety critical and ship critical systems; and5.7.7 Onboard sensors and IoT infrastructure that provide data for ship operations and command decisions.5.8 By adopting these practices, companies and governments will notice the benefits of better cybersecurity. Some benefits may include, but are not limited to:5.8.1 Better business performance;5.8.2 Increased bandwidth efficiency provided by modern satellite communications;5.8.3 Better crew performance during drills or operations;5.8.4 Reinforcing a healthy safety and security awareness culture onboard seagoing vessels;5.8.5 Enhanced quality of life for ship crews;5.8.6 Better adherence to increasingly stringent regulations and the preservation of electronic records and logs;5.8.7 Tighter security controls and access to objective evidence using biometrics, such as fingerprinting and a company/government (that is, TWIC) issued personal identification card; and5.8.8 Resilient systems that can minimize the impact of cyber disruptions.1.1 This guide addresses the company or government organizational need to mitigate the likelihood of cyberattacks and reduce the extent of potential cyberattacks, which can leave sensitive personal data, corporate information, and critical infrastructure vulnerable to attackers.1.2 These recommendations are meant to serve as a guideline for corporate and government organizations to adopt for the protection of sensitive personal information and corporate data against hackers.1.3 Cybersecurity and cyberattacks are not limited to the maritime industry. With greater advancement in computer and information technology (IT), cyberattacks have increased in frequency and intensity over the past decade. These advancements provide hackers with more significant tools to attack vulnerable data and communication infrastructures. Cyberattacks have become an international issue to all governments and companies that interact with each other.1.4 Cybersecurity and the safety of cyber-enabled systems are among the most prevailing issues concerning the maritime industry as well as the global economy. Cyberattacks could affect the flow of trade or goods, but operator errors in complex, automated systems may also cause disruptions that may be mitigated with proper policies and personnel training.1.5 This guide is meant to provide strategies for protecting sensitive data onboard vessels and offshore operations.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 Moisture permeating from concrete substrates can detrimentally affect the performance of resilient floor covering systems. All resilient flooring and adhesive manufacturers have a maximum acceptable level of moisture in which their products can perform satisfactorily. If pre-installation moisture tests indicate that the moisture level is unacceptable for the specified floor covering to be installed, one option is to apply a topical treatment to the concrete substrate surface to mitigate the moisture condition. Experience has shown that certain types of membrane-forming moisture mitigation systems have more desirable properties and successful performance than others. Requirements for membrane-forming moisture mitigation systems to be used, and other related details, are generally included as part of the project plans, or specification details, and may vary from the minimum recommendations set forth in this practice.4.2 This practice is intended for use after it has been determined that a floor moisture condition exceeds the resilient floor covering or adhesive manufacturer’s requirements, or both, as tested according to Test Methods F1869, F2170, and F2420.4.3 Membrane-forming moisture mitigation systems are not intended for use over gypsum-based substrates or other moisture sensitive substrates.1.1 This practice covers the properties, application, and performance of a two-component resin based membrane-forming moisture mitigation system to high moisture concrete substrates prior to the installation of resilient flooring.1.2 This practice includes recommendations for the preparation of the concrete surface to receive a two-component resin based membrane-forming moisture mitigation system.1.3 This practice does not supersede written instructions of the two-component resin based membrane-forming moisture mitigation system manufacturer, the resilient flooring manufacturer, underlayment manufacturer, the adhesive manufacturer, or other components of the finish flooring system, or combinations thereof. Users of this practice shall review manufacturer’s technical data sheets and installation instructions for compatibility of system components.1.4 The following membrane-forming or non membrane-forming moisture mitigation systems are not included in the scope of this practice:1.4.1 Moisture mitigation systems that chemically react with any constituent of the concrete to form a gel or crystalline substance within the concrete.1.4.2 Penetrating, water- or solvent-based compounds that do not form a continuous membrane on the concrete surface.1.4.3 Water-based membrane-forming moisture mitigation systems are not included in the scope of this document.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.1.7 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

定价： 515元 / 折扣价： 438 元 加购物车