定价： 975元 / 折扣价： 829 元

定价： 1177元 / 折扣价： 1001 元 加购物车

定价： 605元 / 折扣价： 515 元

定价： 0元 / 折扣价： 0 元 加购物车

定价： 819元 / 折扣价： 697 元 加购物车

定价： 689元 / 折扣价： 586 元 加购物车

5.1 Activated carbons used in containment systems for nuclear reactors must be capable of functioning under both normal operating conditions and those conditions which may exist following a design basis accident (DBA). Adsorbent beds that are part of recirculatory systems inside containment may be exposed to the peak pressure, temperature, and steam content of a post-DBA condition.5.2 Carbon beds outside containment will be protected by fast-acting shutoff valves from the sudden rise in pressure, temperature, and humidity of the containment atmosphere which would exist following a DBA. However, some rise in temperature and humidity will be experienced even by beds outside containment if they are reconnected to containment after the initial pressure rise (due to escape of steam into the containment volume) has been reduced by containment coolers. The amount of radioactivity that can reach either type of adsorption system is conceivably quite high; hence, there is a possibility of a bed temperature rise due to decay heating. The gaseous radioactive contaminants of most interest are organic iodides. In this test, CH3I is used to typify the performance of the carbon on organic iodine compounds in general. The test described here provide a reasonable picture of the effectiveness of an activated carbon for organic iodides under normal and post-DBA conditions. The equipment and methods described can be used, with discretion, for similar tests at different gas flow conditions and, to some extent, on different gaseous radioactive contaminants and other adsorbents.AbstractThis standard covers the specifications for physical properties and performance requirements of virgin impregnated activated carbon to be used for the removal of gaseous radioiodine species from gas streams. The activated carbon furnished under this specification shall be virgin material. Each batch of impregnated activated carbon shall conform to the requirements for physical properties prescribed. The following test methods shall used to determine the physical properties and performance capability of the sample: apparent density; particle size distribution; ash content; moisture content; ignition temperature; ball-pan hardness; and pH.1.1 This standard covers the specifications for physical properties and performance requirements of virgin impregnated activated carbon to be used for the removal of gaseous radioiodine species from gas streams.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 international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

定价： 515元 / 折扣价： 438 元 加购物车

5.1 This test method describes a test procedure for evaluating the ∆T associated with RF power deposition during an MR procedure, involving a specific frequency of RF irradiation of a passive implant. The method allows characterization of the heating propensity of an implant rather than the prediction of heating during a specific MR procedure in a patient. The results may be used as an input to a computational model for estimating ∆T due to the presence of that implant in a patient. The combination of the test results and the computational model results may then be used to help assess the safety of a patient with the implant during an MR examination.1.1 This test method covers measurement of radio frequency (RF)-induced heating on or near a passive medical implant within a phantom during magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). The test method does not specify levels of heating considered to be safe to the patient and relies on users to define their own acceptance criteria.1.2 This test method does not address other possible safety issues which include, but are not limited to: issues of magnetically-induced displacement, magnetically-induced torque, image artifact, acoustic noise, tissue heating, interaction among devices, and the functionality of the device and the MR system.1.3 The amount of RF-induced temperature rise (∆T) for a given incident electric field will depend on the RF frequency, which is dependent on the static magnetic field strength of the MR system. While the focus in this test method is on 1.5 tesla (T) or 3 T MR systems, the ∆T for an implant in MR systems of other static magnetic field strengths or magnet designs can be evaluated by suitable modification of the method described herein.1.4 This test method assumes that testing is done on devices that will be entirely inside the body. Testing for devices with other implantation conditions (e.g., external fixation devices, percutaneous needles, catheters or tethered devices such as ablation probes) is beyond the scope of this standard; for such devices, modifications of this test method may be necessary.NOTE 1: RF-heating induced by any electrically conductive implanted device may be impacted by the presence of other metallic or otherwise electrically conductive devices present nearby.1.5 This test method is written for several possible RF exposure systems, including Volume RF transmit coils. The exposure system needs to be properly characterized, within the stated uncertainties, in term of local background RF exposure for the implants which are tested.1.6 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard.1.7 A device with deployed dimensions of less than 2 cm in all directions may not need to be tested with respect to RF-induced heating, as it is expected to generate ∆T of less than 2°C over 1 h of exposure at 1.5 T/64-MHz or 3 T/128-MHz frequencies (1, 2)2 and ANSI/AAMI/ISO 14708-3:2017). This condition is not valid when multiple replicas of the device (e.g., multiple anchors) are implanted within 3 cm of the device.NOTE 2: The above values were derived from existing data and literature. The 3 cm distance is recommended to avoid any RF coupling with other neighboring devices.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 A main purpose of using robots in emergency response operations is to enhance the safety and effectiveness of emergency responders operating in hazardous or inaccessible environments. The testing results of the candidate robot shall describe, in a statistically significant way, how reliably the robot is able to perform the specified types of tasks and thus provide emergency responders sufficiently high levels of confidence to determine the applicability of the robot.5.2 This test method addresses robot performance requirements expressed by emergency responders and representatives from other interested organizations. The performance data captured within this test method are indicative of the testing robot’s capabilities. Having available a roster of successfully tested robots with associated capabilities data to guide procurement and deployment decisions for emergency responders is consistent with the guideline of “Governments at all levels have a responsibility to develop detailed, robust, all-hazards response plans” as stated in National Response Framework.5.3 This test method is part of a test suite and is intended to provide a capability baseline for the robotic communications systems based on the identified needs of the emergency response community. Adequate testing performance will not ensure successful operation in all emergency response environments due to possible extreme communications difficulties. Rather, this standard is intended to provide a common comparison that can aid in choosing appropriate systems. This standard is also intended to encourage development of improved and innovative communications systems for use on emergency response robots.5.4 The standard apparatus is specified to be easily fabricated to facilitate self-evaluation by robot developers and provide practice tasks for emergency responders to exercise robot actuators, sensors, and operator interfaces. The standard apparatus can also be used to support operator training to establish operator proficiency.5.5 Although the test method was developed first for emergency response robots, it may be applicable to other operational domains, such as law enforcement and armed services.1.1 Purpose: 1.1.1 The purpose of this test method, as a part of a suite of radio communication test methods, is to quantitatively evaluate a teleoperated robot’s (see Terminology E2521) capability to perform maneuvering and inspection tasks in a non-line-of-sight environment.1.1.2 Robots shall possess a certain set of radio communication capabilities, including performing maneuvering and inspection tasks in a non-line-of-sight environment, to suit critical operations for emergency responses. The capability for a robot to perform these types of tasks in obstructed areas down range is critical for emergency response operations. This test method specifies a standard set of apparatuses, procedures, and metrics to evaluate the robot/operator capabilities for performing these tasks.1.1.3 Emergency response robots shall be able to operate remotely using the equipped radios in line-of-sight environments, in non-line-of-sight environments, and for signal penetration through such impediments as buildings, rubbles, and tunnels. Additional capabilities include operating in the presence of electromagnetic interference and providing link security and data logging. Standard test methods are required to evaluate whether candidate robots meet these requirements.1.1.4 ASTM E54.08.01 Task Group on Robotics specifies a radio communication test suite, which consists of a set of test methods for evaluating these communication capabilities. This non-line-of-sight range test method is a part of the radio communication test suite. The apparatuses associated with the test methods challenge specific robot capabilities in repeatable ways to facilitate comparison of different robot models as well as particular configurations of similar robot models.1.1.5 This test method establishes procedures, apparatuses, and metrics for specifying and testing the capability of radio (wireless) links used between the operator station and the testing robot in a non-line-of-sight environment. These links include the command and control channel(s) and video, audio, and other sensor data telemetry.1.1.6 This test method is intended to apply to ground based robotic systems and small unmanned aerial systems (sUAS) capable of hovering to perform maneuvering and inspection tasks down range for emergency response applications.1.1.7 This test method specifies an apparatus that is, first of all, an essentially clear radio frequency channel for testing. In addition, a standard line-of-sight barrier between the testing operator control unit (OCU) and the robot is specified. Fig. 1 provides an illustration.FIG. 1 Test Fabrication at An Air StripLeft: The non-line-of-sight range test method uses an airstrip or flat, paved road with robot test stations placed in front of and behind a wall constructed of stacked 12 m (40 ft) International Standards Organization (ISO) shipping containers. Right: Robot test stations are prototyped behind the wall with targets on the barrels for visual inspection tasks and circular paths for maneuvering tasks.NOTE 1: Frequency coordination and interoperability are not addressed in this standard. These issues should be resolved by the affected agencies (Fire, Police, and Urban Search and Rescue) and written into Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) that guide the responses to emergency situations.1.1.8 The radio communication test suite quantifies elemental radio communication capabilities necessary for robots intended for emergency response applications. As such, based on their particular capability requirements, users of this test suite can select only the applicable test methods and can individually weight particular test methods or particular metrics within a test method. The testing results should collectively represent an emergency response robot’s overall radio communication capability. These test results can be used to guide procurement specifications and acceptance testing for robots intended for emergency response applications.NOTE 2: As robotic systems are more widely applied, emergency responders might identify additional or advanced robotic radio communication capability requirements to help them respond to emergency situations. They might also desire to use robots with higher levels of autonomy, beyond teleoperate onto help reduce their workload—see NIST Special Publication 1011-II-1.0. Further, emergency responders in expanded emergency response domains might also desire to apply robotic technologies to their situations, a source for new sets of requirements. As a result, additional standards within the suite would be developed. This standard is, nevertheless, standalone and complete.1.2 Performing Location—This test method shall be performed in a testing laboratory or the field where the specified apparatus and environmental conditions are implemented.1.3 Units—The values stated in SI units shall be the standard. The values given in parentheses are not precise mathematical conversions to inch-pound units. They are close approximate equivalents for the purpose of specifying material dimensions or quantities that are readily available to avoid excessive fabrication costs of test apparatuses while maintaining repeatability and reproducibility of the test method results. These values given in parentheses facilitate testing but are not considered standard.1.4 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of 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： 777元 / 折扣价： 661 元 加购物车

5.1 This test method is part of an overall suite of related tests that provide reproducible measures of radio communications for remotely operated robots. It measures the maximum line-of-sight radio communications range between a robot and its remote operator interface using omnidirectional robot maneuvering and visual acuity tasks to evaluate the degradation of essential mission capabilities due to communications latency and loss.5.2 This test method is inexpensive, easy to fabricate, and simple to conduct so it can be replicated widely. This enables comparisons across various testing locations and dates to determine best-in-class system capabilities and remote operator proficiency.5.3 Evaluations—This test method can be conducted in a controlled environment with no radio frequency interference and minimal radio propagation effects to measure baseline capabilities that can be compared widely across robotic systems. It also can be embedded into any operational training scenario as a practical measure of line-of-sight radio communications range with additional degradation due to uncontrolled variables such as radio frequency interference, weather, etc. The results of these scenario tests can be compared across robotic systems only when conducted in the same environment in similar conditions. However, the results cannot be compared reliably to results from other venues or environmental conditions due to the uncontrolled variables.5.4 Procurement—This test method can be used to identify inherent capability trade-offs in systems, make informed purchasing decisions, and verify performance during acceptance testing. This aligns requirement specifications and user expectations with existing capability limits.5.5 Training—This test method can be used to focus operator training as a repeatable practice task or as an embedded task within training scenarios. Operators can learn system behaviors during radio communication degradation and refine techniques to mitigate issues while performing tasks. The resulting measures of remote operator proficiency enable tracking of perishable skills over time, along with comparisons of performance across organizations, regions, or national averages.5.6 Innovation—This test method can be used to inspire technical innovation, demonstrate break-through capabilities, and measure the reliability of systems performing specific tasks within an overall mission sequence. Combining or sequencing multiple tests can guide manufacturers toward implementing the combinations of capabilities necessary to perform essential mission tasks.1.1 This test method is intended for remotely operated ground robots using radio communications to transmit real-time data between a robot and its remote operator interface. This test method measures the maximum line-of-sight radio communications distance at which a robot can maintain omnidirectional steering, speed control, precise stopping, visual acuity, and other functionality. This test method is one of several related radio communication tests that can be used to evaluate overall system capabilities.1.2 A remote operator is in control of all functionality, so an onboard camera and remote operator display are typically required. Assistive features or autonomous behaviors may improve the effectiveness or efficiency of the overall system.1.3 Different user communities can set their own thresholds of acceptable performance within this test method to address various mission requirements.1.4 Performing Location—This test method may be performed anywhere the specified apparatuses and environmental conditions can be implemented.1.5 The International System of Units (a.k.a. SI Units) and U.S. Customary Units (a.k.a. Imperial Units) are used throughout this document. They are not mathematical conversions. Rather, they are approximate equivalents in each system of units to enable the use of readily available materials in different countries. The differences between the stated dimensions in each system of units are insignificant for the purposes of comparing test method results, so each system of units is separately considered standard within this test method.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： 646元 / 折扣价： 550 元 加购物车

定价： 345元 / 折扣价： 294 元 加购物车