微信公众号随时随地查标准

QQ交流1群(已满)

QQ群标准在线咨询2

QQ交流2群

购买标准后,可去我的标准下载或阅读

定价: 590元 / 折扣价: 502 加购物车

在线阅读 收 藏

5.1 Assumptions of the Theis (1) equation affect specific capacity and transmissivity estimated from specific capacity. These assumptions are given below:5.1.1 Aquifer is homogeneous and isotropic.5.1.2 Aquifer is horizontal, of uniform thickness, and infinite in areal extent.5.1.3 Aquifer is confined by impermeable strata on its upper and lower boundaries.5.1.4 Density gradient in the flowing fluid must be negligible and the viscous resistance to flow must obey Darcy's Law.5.1.5 Control well penetrates and receives water equally from the entire thickness of the aquifer.5.1.6 Control well has an infinitesimal diameter.5.1.7 Control well discharges at a constant rate.5.1.8 Control well operates at 100 percent efficiency.5.1.9 Aquifer remains saturated throughout the duration of pumping.5.2 Implications of Assumptions and Limitations of Method.5.2.1 The simplifying assumptions necessary for solution of the Theis equation and application of the method are never fully met in a field situation. The satisfactory use of the method may depend upon the application of one or more empirical correction factors being applied to the field data.5.2.2 Generally the values of transmissivity derived from specific capacity vary from those values determined from aquifer tests utilizing observation wells. These differences may reflect 1) that specific-capacity represents the response of a small part of the aquifer near the well and may be greatly influenced by conditions near the well such as a gravel pack or graded material resulting from well development, and 2) effects of well efficiency and partial penetration.5.2.3 The values of transmissivity estimated from specific capacity data are considered less accurate than values obtained from analysis of drawdowns that are observed some distance from the pumped well.NOTE 1: The quality of the result produced by this practice 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 practice 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.5.3 Withdrawal well test field procedures are used with appropriate analytical procedures in appropriate hydrogeological sites to determine transmissivity and storage coefficient of aquifers and hydraulic conductivity of confining beds.1.1 This practice describes a procedure for conducting a specific capacity test, computing the specific capacity of a control well, and estimating the transmissivity in the vicinity of the control well. Specific capacity is the well yield per unit drawdown at an identified time after pumping started.1.2 This practice is used in conjunction with Test Method D4050 for conducting withdrawal and injection well tests.1.3 The method of determining transmissivity from specific capacity is a variation of the nonequilibrium method of Theis (1)2 for determining transmissivity and storage coefficient of an aquifer. The Theis nonequilibrium method is given in Practice D4106.1.4 Limitations—The limitations of the technique for determining transmissivity are primarily related to the correspondence between the field situation and the simplifying assumptions of the Theis method.1.5 The scope of this practice is limited by the capabilities of the apparatus.1.6 All observed and calculated values shall conform to the guidelines for significant digits and rounding established in Practice D6026.1.6.1 The procedures used to specify how data are collected/recorded and calculated in this practice are regarded as the industry standard. In addition, they are representative of the significant digits that should generally be retained. The procedures used do not consider material variation, purpose for obtaining the data, special purpose studies, or any considerations for the user’s objectives; and it is common practice to increase or reduce significant digits of reported data to commensurate with these considerations. It is beyond the scope of this practice to consider significant digits used in analysis methods for engineering design.1.7 Units—The values stated in SI units or inch-pound units are to be regarded separately as standard. The values stated in each system may not be exact equivalents; therefore, each system shall be used independently of the other. Combining values for the two systems may result in nonconformance with the standard. Reporting of results in units other than SI shall not be regarded as noncompliance with this standard.1.8 This practice offers a set of instructions for performing one or more specific operations. This document cannot replace education or experience and should be used in conjunction with professional judgment. Not all aspects of the practice may be applicable in all circumstances. This ASTM standard is not intended to represent or replace the standard of care by which the adequacy of a given professional service must be judged, nor should this document be applied without the 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.1.9 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.1.10 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

定价: 590元 / 折扣价: 502 加购物车

在线阅读 收 藏

This specification covers electrical-fusion-welded steel pipe for high-pressure service at moderate temperatures. Heat treatment may or may not be required to attain the desired properties or to comply with applicable code requirements. An analysis of each mill heat of plate material shall be made, also, an analysis of the finished deposited weld material from each 500 ft or fraction thereof shall be made. The mechanical test requirements includes one tension test specimen to represent each lot of finished pipe, and one transverse-guided-weld-bend test (two specimens) to represent each lot of finished pipe. Also, radiographic examination shall be made on the full length of each weld.1.1 This specification2 covers steel pipe: electric-fusion-welded with filler metal added, fabricated from pressure-vessel quality plate of any of several analyses and strength levels and suitable for high-pressure service at moderate temperatures. Heat treatment may or may not be required to attain the desired properties or to comply with applicable code requirements. Supplementary requirements are provided for use when additional testing or examination is desired.1.2 The specification nominally covers pipe 16 in. [400 mm] in outside diameter or larger with wall thicknesses up to 3 in. [75 mm], inclusive. Pipe having other dimensions may be furnished provided it complies with all other requirements of this specification.1.3 Several grades and classes of pipe are provided.1.3.1 Grade designates the type of plate used.1.3.2 Class designates the type of heat treatment performed during manufacture of the pipe, whether the weld is radiographically examined, and whether the pipe has been pressure tested as listed in 1.3.3.1.3.3 Class designations are as follows (Note 1):Class Heat Treatment on Pipe Radiography,see Section Pressure Test,see Section       10 none    none    none11 none    9    none12 none    9    8.313 none    none    8.320 stress relieved, see 5.3.1    none    none21 stress relieved, see 5.3.1    9    none22 stress relieved, see 5.3.1    9    8.323 stress relieved, see 5.3.1    none    8.330 normalized, see 5.3.2    none    none31 normalized, see 5.3.2    9    none32 normalized, see 5.3.2    9    8.333 normalized, see 5.3.2    none    8.340 normalized and tempered, see 5.3.3    none    none41 normalized and tempered, see 5.3.3    9    none42 normalized and tempered, see 5.3.3    9    8.343 normalized and tempered, see 5.3.3    none    8.350 quenched and tempered, see 5.3.4    none    none51 quenched and tempered, see 5.3.4    9    none52 quenched and tempered, see 5.3.4    9    8.353 quenched and tempered, see 5.3.4    none    8.3NOTE 1: Selection of materials should be made with attention to temperature of service. For such guidance, Specification A20/A20M may be consulted.1.4 The values stated in either SI units or inch-pound units are to be regarded separately as standard. Within the text, the SI units are shown in brackets. 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 non-conformance with the standard. The inch-pound units shall apply unless the “M” designation of this specification is specified in the order.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 加购物车

在线阅读 收 藏

4.1 A variety of irradiation processes use low energy electron beam facilities to modify product characteristics. Dosimetry requirements, the number and frequency of measurements, and record keeping requirements will vary depending on the type and end use of the products being processed. Dosimetry is often used in conjunction with physical, chemical, or biological testing of the product, to help verify specific treatment parameters.NOTE 2: In many cases dosimetry results can be related to other quantitative product properties; for example, gel fraction, melt flow, elastic modulus, molecular weight distribution, or degree of cure.4.2 Radiation processing specifications usually include a minimum or maximum absorbed dose limit, or both. For a given application these limits may be set by government regulation or by limits inherent to the product itself.4.3 Critical operating parameters must be controlled to obtain reproducible dose distribution in processed materials. The electron beam energy, beam current, beam width and process line speed (conveying speed) affect absorbed dose.4.4 Before any electron beam facility can be routinely utilized, it must be characterized to determine the relationship between dose to product and the main operating parameters. This involves testing of the process equipment, calibrating the measuring instruments and the dosimetry system, and demonstrating the ability to consistently deliver the required dose within predetermined specifications.4.5 In order to establish metrological traceability for a dosimetry system and to measure doses with a known level of uncertainty, it is necessary to calibrate the dosimetry system under irradiation conditions that are consistent with those encountered in routine use. For example, a dosimetry system calibration conducted using penetrating gamma radiation or high energy electrons may result in significant dose measurement errors when the dosimetry system is used at low energy electron beam facilities. Details of calibration are discussed in Section 5.1.1 This practice covers dosimetric procedures to be followed in installation qualification, operational qualification and performance qualification (IQ, OQ, PQ), and routine processing at electron beam facilities to ensure that the product has been treated with an acceptable range of absorbed doses. Other procedures related to IQ, OQ, PQ, and routine product processing that may influence absorbed dose in the product are also discussed.1.2 The electron beam energy range covered in this practice is between 80 and 300 keV, generally referred to as low energy.1.3 Dosimetry is only one component of a total quality assurance program for an irradiation facility. Other measures may be required for specific applications such as medical device sterilization and food preservation.1.4 Other specific ISO and ASTM standards exist for the irradiation of food and the radiation sterilization of health care products. For the radiation sterilization of health care products, see ISO 11137-1. In those areas covered by ISO 11137-1, that standard takes precedence. For food irradiation, see ISO 14470. Information about effective or regulatory dose limits for food products is not within the scope of this practice (see ASTM F1355 and F1356).1.5 This document is one of a set of standards that provides recommendations for properly implementing dosimetry in radiation processing, and describes a means of achieving compliance with the requirements of ISO/ASTM 52628. It is intended to be read in conjunction with ISO/ASTM 52628.1.6 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: 525元 / 折扣价: 447 加购物车

在线阅读 收 藏

3.1 This test method provides a means of determining the electrical resistivity of carbon or graphite specimens. The use of specimens that do not conform to the specimen size limitations described in the test method may result in an alteration of test method accuracy.1.1 This test method covers the determination of the electrical resistivity of manufactured carbon and graphite articles at room temperature.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 加购物车

在线阅读 收 藏

5.1 This guide is significant in that it addresses the data and information options of each component of the ecological risk assessment process, for both a screening and complex ERA. It outlines the data and information options while recognizing that an ecological risk assessment may be focused to achieve a particular stated goal. This guide is not intended to represent the views of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), or any other regulatory agency, on data collection for ecological risk assessment.5.2 This guide is to be used by managers, scientists, and technical staff of contractors, industry, government agencies, and universities responsible for conducting ecological risk assessments at contaminated sites. It is to be used to guide data collection phases of the ecological risk assessment. It will assist in the development of the conceptual site model (see Guide E1689) and the identification of potential assessment and measurement endpoints (see Guide E1848 and US EPA’s Generic Ecological Assessment Endpoints, 2016 (5)). While it was written to assist in planning an ERA, the list also may be used in the review of a completed ERA.1.1 An ecological-risk assessment (ERA) is a process for organizing and analyzing data, information, assumptions, and uncertainties to evaluate the likelihood that adverse ecological effects might occur or are occurring as a result of a stressor. This guide is intended to assist remedial project teams, specifically ecological risk assessors, in identifying data and information options that may be used to perform a screening or complex ecological risk assessment (ERA) at a contaminated site.NOTE 1: While the intent of ERA is to evaluate risk (that is, the probability of adverse effects occurring in ecological receptors), there are no measures, statistics, or metrics that calculate or express risk explicitly. However, various metrics or indices, a common example being the hazard quotient, are used to inform risk assessments.1.2 The identification of data and information options for human health risk assessment is outside the scope of this guide.1.3 This guide is intended to provide a list for identifying data and information options and does not recommend a specific course of action for ERA activities.1.4 This guide addresses data and information options for the ecological risk assessment, not verification or long-term monitoring studies.1.5 This guide lists many of the common data and information options for ERA, but there may be others relevant for any particular site.1.6 This guide considers one component of an ERA, that is, identification of data and information options. Other ASTM guides have been developed, for example, Guides E1689 and E1848, and are being developed to cover other components of the risk assessment process.1.7 This guide does not provide information on how to perform any of the analytical procedures used to perform a risk assessment once data collection options are defined.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 加购物车

在线阅读 收 藏

5.1 This test method is used to determine the mechanical properties in flexure of engineered ceramic components with multiple longitudinal hollow channels, commonly described as “honeycomb” channel architectures. The components generally have 30 % or more porosity and the cross-sectional dimensions of the honeycomb channels are on the order of 1 mm or greater.5.2 The experimental data and calculated strength values from this test method are used for material and structural development, product characterization, design data, quality control, and engineering/production specifications.NOTE 1: Flexure testing is the preferred method for determining the nominal “tensile fracture” strength of these components, as compared to a compression (crushing) test. A nominal tensile strength is required, because these materials commonly fail in tension under thermal gradient stresses. A true tensile test is difficult to perform on these honeycomb specimens because of gripping and alignment challenges.5.3 The mechanical properties determined by this test method are both material and architecture dependent, because the mechanical response and strength of the porous test specimens are determined by a combination of inherent material properties and microstructure and the architecture of the channel porosity [porosity fraction/relative density, channel geometry (shape, dimensions, cell wall thickness, etc.), anisotropy and uniformity, etc.] in the specimen. Comparison of test data must consider both differences in material/composition properties as well as differences in channel porosity architecture between individual specimens and differences between and within specimen lots.5.4 Test Method A is a user-defined specimen geometry with a choice of four-point or three-point flexure testing geometries. It is not possible to define a single fixed specimen geometry for flexure testing of honeycombs, because of the wide range of honeycomb architectures and cell sizes and considerations of specimen size, cell shapes, pitch, porosity size, crush strength, and shear strength. As a general rule, the experimenter will have to define a suitable test specimen geometry for the particular honeycomb structure of interest, considering composition, architecture, cell size, mechanical properties, and specimen limitations and using the following guidelines. Details on specimen geometry definition are given in 9.2.5.4.1 Four-point flexure (Test Method A1) is strongly preferred and recommended for testing and characterization purposes. (From Test Method C1161 section 4.5: “The three-point test configuration exposes only a very small portion of the specimen to the maximum stress. Therefore, three-point flexural strengths are likely to be much greater than four-point flexural strengths. Three-point flexure has some advantages. It uses simpler test fixtures, it is easier to adapt to high temperature and fracture toughness testing, and it is sometimes helpful in Weibull statistical studies. However, four-point flexure is preferred and recommended for most characterization purposes.”)5.4.2 The three-point flexure test configuration (Test Method A2) may be used for specimens which are not suitable for 4-point testing, with the clear understanding that 3-point loading exposes only a very small portion of the specimen to the maximum stress, as compared to the much larger maximum stress volume in a 4-point loading configuration. Therefore, 3-point flexural strengths are likely to be greater than 4-point flexural strengths, based on statistical flaw distribution factors.5.5 Test Method B (with a specified specimen size and a 4-point-1/4 point flexure loading geometry) is widely used in industry for cordierite and silicon carbide honeycomb structures with small cell size (cell pitch ~2 mm). Test Method B is provided as a standard test geometry that provides a baseline specimen size for honeycomb structures with appropriate properties and cell size with the benefit of experimental repeatability, reproducibility and comparability. (See 9.3 for details on Test Method B.)NOTE 2: Specific fixture and specimen configurations were chosen for Test Method B to provide a balance between practical configurations and linear cell count effect limits and to permit ready comparison of data without the need for Weibull-size scaling.5.6 The calculation of the flexure stress in these porous specimens is based on small deflection elastic beam theory with assumptions that (1) the material properties are isotropic and homogeneous, (2) the moduli of elasticity in tension and compression are identical, and (3) the material is linearly elastic. If the porous material in the walls of the honeycomb is not specifically anisotropic in microstructure, it is also assumed that the microstructure of the wall material is uniform and isotropic. To understand the effects of some of these assumptions, see Baratta et al. (6).NOTE 3: These assumptions may limit the application of the test to comparative type testing such as used for material development, quality control, and flexure specifications. Such comparative testing requires consistent and standardized test conditions both for specimen geometry and porosity architecture, as well as experimental conditions—loading geometries, strain rates, and atmospheric/test conditions.5.7 Three flexure strength values (defined in Section 3 and calculated in Section 11) may be calculated in this test method. They are the nominal beam strength, the wall fracture strength, and the honeycomb structure strength.5.7.1 Nominal Beam Strength—The first approach to calculating a flexure strength is to make the simplifying assumption that the specimen acts as a uniform homogeneous material that reacts as a continuum. Based on these assumptions, a nominal beam strength SNB can be calculated using the standard flexure strength equations with the specimen dimensions and the breaking force. (See Section 11.)5.7.1.1 A linear cell count effect (specimen size-cell count effect) has been noted in research on the flexure strength of ceramic honeycomb test specimens (7, 8). If the cell size is too large with respect to the specimen dimensions and if the linear cell count (the integer number of cells along the shortest cross-sectional dimension) is too low (<15), channel porosity has a geometric effect on the moment of inertia that produces an artificially high value for the nominal beam strength. (See Appendix X1.) With the standard elastic beam equations the strength value is overestimated, because the true moment of inertia of the open cell structure is not accounted for in the calculation.5.7.1.2 This overestimate becomes increasingly larger for specimens with lower linear cell counts. The linear cell count has to be 15 or greater for the calculated nominal beam strength, SNB, to be within a 10 % overestimate of the wall fracture strength SWF.NOTE 4: The study by Webb, Widjaja, and Helfinstine (7) showed that for cells with a square cross section a minimum linear cell count of 15 should be maintained to minimize linear cell count effects on the calculated nominal beam strength. (This study is summarized in Appendix X1.)5.7.1.3 For those smaller test specimens (where the linear cell count is between 2 and 15), equations for wall fracture strength and honeycomb structure strength are given in Section 11. These equations are used to calculate a more accurate value for the flexure strength of the honeycomb, as compared to the calculated nominal beam strength.5.7.2 Wall Fracture Strength, SWF, is calculated using the true moment of inertia of the honeycomb architecture, based on the geometry, dimensions, cell wall thickness, and linear count of the channels in the honeycomb structure. The wall fracture strength is a calculation of the true failure stress in the outer fiber surface of the specimen. (Appendix X1 describes the calculation as cited in the Webb, Widjaja, and Helfinstine (7) report). Section 11 on calculations gives the formula for calculating the moment of inertia for test specimens with square honeycomb channels and uniform cell wall thickness.NOTE 5: The moment of inertia formula given in Section 11 and Appendix X1 is only applicable to square cell geometries. It is not suitable for rectangular, circular, hexagonal, or triangular geometries. Formulas for those geometries have to be developed from geometric analysis and first principles.5.7.3 Honeycomb Structure Strength, SHS, is calculated from the wall fracture strength SWF. This calculation gives a flexure strength value which is independent of specimen-cell size geometry effects. The honeycomb structure strength value can be used for comparison of different specimen geometries with different channel sizes. It also gives a flexure strength value that can be used for stress models that assume continuum strength. (See Appendix X1.) Section 11 on calculations gives the formula for calculating the honeycomb structure strength for test specimens with square honeycomb channels and uniform cell wall thickness.5.7.4 The following recommendations are made for calculating a flexure strength for the ceramic honeycomb test specimens.5.7.4.1 For flexure test specimens where the linear cell count is 15 or greater, the nominal beam strength SNB calculation and the honeycomb structure strength SHS are roughly equivalent in value (within 10 %). The nominal beam strength SNB calculation can be used considering this variability.5.7.4.2 For flexure test specimens where the linear cell count is between 5 and 15, the nominal beam strength SNB calculation may produce a 10 % to 20 % overvalue. The SNB value should be used with caution.5.7.4.3 For flexure test specimens where the linear cell count is less than 5, the nominal beam strength SNB calculation may produce a 20 % to 100 % overvalue. It is recommended that the honeycomb structure strength SHS be calculated and used as a more accurate flexure strength number.5.7.4.4 If specimen availability and test configuration permit, test specimens with a linear cell count of 15 or greater are preferred to reduce the specimen linear cell count effect on nominal beam strength SNB to less than 10 %.5.8 Flexure test data for porous ceramics will have a statistical distribution, which may be analyzed and described by Weibull statistics, per Practice C1239.5.9 This flexure test can be used as a characterization tool to assess the effects of fabrication variables, geometry and microstructure variations, and environmental exposure on the mechanical properties of the honeycombs. The effect of these variables is assessed by flexure testing a specimen set in a baseline condition and then testing a second set of specimens with defined changes in geometry or fabrication methods or after controlled environmental exposure.5.9.1 Geometry and microstructure variations would include variations in cell geometry (shape dimensions, cell wall thickness, and count) and wall porosity (percent, size, shape, morphology, etc.).5.9.2 Fabrication process variations would include forming parameters, drying and binder burn-out conditions, sintering conditions, heat treatments, variations in coatings, etc.5.9.3 Environmental conditioning would include extended exposure at different temperatures and different corrosive atmospheres (including steam).5.10 This flexure test may be used to assess the thermal shock resistance of the honeycomb ceramics, as described in Test Method C1525.5.11 The flexure test is not the preferred method for determining the Young's modulus of these porous structures. (For this reason, the deflection of the flexure test bar is not commonly measured in this test.) Young's modulus measurements by sonic resonance (Test Method C1198) or by impulse excitation (Test Method C1259) give more reliable and repeatable data.5.12 It is beyond the scope of this standard to require fractographic analysis at the present time. Fractographic analysis for critical flaws in porous honeycomb ceramics is extremely difficult and of very uncertain value.1.1 This test method covers the determination of the flexural strength (modulus of rupture in bending) at ambient conditions of advanced ceramic structures with 2-dimensional honeycomb channel architectures.1.2 The test method is focused on engineered ceramic components with longitudinal hollow channels, commonly called “honeycomb” channels (see Fig. 1). The components generally have 30 % or more porosity and the cross-sectional dimensions of the honeycomb channels are on the order of 1 mm or greater. Ceramics with these honeycomb structures are used in a wide range of applications (catalytic conversion supports (1),2 high temperature filters (2, 3), combustion burner plates (4), energy absorption and damping (5), etc.). The honeycomb ceramics can be made in a range of ceramic compositions—alumina, cordierite, zirconia, spinel, mullite, silicon carbide, silicon nitride, graphite, and carbon. The components are produced in a variety of geometries (blocks, plates, cylinders, rods, rings).FIG. 1 General Schematics of Typical Honeycomb Ceramic Structures1.3 The test method describes two test specimen geometries for determining the flexural strength (modulus of rupture) for a porous honeycomb ceramic test specimen (see Fig. 2):FIG. 2 Flexure Loading ConfigurationsL = Outer Span Length (for Test Method A, L = User defined; for Test Method B, L = 90 mm)NOTE 1: 4-Point-1/4 Loading for Test Methods A1 and B.NOTE 2: 3-Point Loading for Test Method A2.1.3.1 Test Method A—A 4-point or 3-point bending test with user-defined specimen geometries, and1.3.2 Test Method B—A 4-point-1/4 point bending test with a defined rectangular specimen geometry (13 mm × 25 mm × > 116 mm) and a 90 mm outer support span geometry suitable for cordierite and silicon carbide honeycombs with small cell sizes.1.4 The test specimens are stressed to failure and the breaking force value, specimen and cell dimensions, and loading geometry data are used to calculate a nominal beam strength, a wall fracture strength, and a honeycomb structure strength.1.5 Test results are used for material and structural development, product characterization, design data, quality control, and engineering/production specifications.1.6 The test method is meant for ceramic materials that are linear-elastic to failure in tension. The test method is not applicable to polymer or metallic porous structures that fail in an elastomeric or an elastic-ductile manner.1.7 The test method is defined for ambient testing temperatures. No directions are provided for testing at elevated or cryogenic temperatures.1.8 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard (IEEE/ASTM SI 10). English units are sparsely used in this standard for product definitions and tool descriptions, per the cited references and common practice in the US automotive industry.1.9 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.1.10 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

定价: 843元 / 折扣价: 717 加购物车

在线阅读 收 藏

定价: 618元 / 折扣价: 526 加购物车

在线阅读 收 藏

4.1 The purpose of this guide is to ensure that a functional system will result when considering the use of prefabricated panel or H-bar insulation systems. Both systems require a varying degree of pre-engineering and prefabrication so that the insulation will produce the specified thermal, mechanical and environmental design requirements Both the prefabricated panels and H-bar systems which can also be used in combination with each other are to be designed to:4.1.1 Limit loss of heat from insulated surface.4.1.2 Limit exposed surface temperatures for burn protection of personnel.4.1.3 Maintain optimum temperatures of the insulated equipment at or above a specified minimum value required for the proper operation of the equipment.4.1.4 Produce a system or assembly that is designed to provide allowance for thermal expansion; is structurally adequate; is of a weathertight construction; and incorporates design features that promote efficient removal for inspection, repair and maintenance where required.1.1 This guide describes design, fabrication, shipping, handling, jobsite storage, and installation of prefabricated panel and H-Bar insulation systems for vessels, ducts, and equipment operating at temperatures above ambient. Typical applications include, but are not limited to, air and gas ducts, steam generating units, air quality control systems, fans, storage tanks, process vessels, and coke drums1.2 The insulation described herein is limited to systems consisting of insulating units specially designed to fit the surfaces to be insulated, and engineered for the service and environmental requirements. The insulation unit may also include special design features which facilitate the removal and replacement for maintenance and inspection.1.3 When prefabricated panels are used, each insulation unit factory preassembled and typically comprised of the insulation, an outer lagging to which the insulation is attached, an inner retaining wire mesh, optional foil lining, and means for mechanically securing multiple units together in an assembly.1.4 H-bar systems represent insulation units that are typically comprised of the insulation, outer lagging and a uniquely configured subgirt design which both supports the insulation and provides a means for mechanically securing multiple units together in an assembly. The design of the subgirt creates an “H” configuration which is fabricated from light gauge sheet metal. The subgirt components consist of: (1) a “J-bar” shape which frames the perimeter edges of the surface to be insulated, holds the insulation in place along the outer edge and provides a screen attachment point for the outer lagging; (2) the “H-bar” shape is placed at defined intervals. The web section of the “H-bar” supports the insulation while the exterior flange allows for the outer lagging to be attached with threaded fasteners.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.NOTE 1: When prefabricated panel or H-Bar insulation systems are specified, Test Methods C167, C177 and C1061, Material Specifications A36/A36M, A463/A463M, B209, C612, and Terminology C168 should be considered.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 加购物车

在线阅读 收 藏

5.1 This test method is used to measure the apparent viscosity of hydrocarbon resins at elevated temperatures. Elevated temperature viscosity values of a hydrocarbon resin may be related to the properties of coatings, adhesives and the like, containing such a resin.5.2 For hydrocarbon resins, values of apparent viscosity will usually be a function of shear rate under the conditions of test. Although the type of viscometer described in this test method operates under conditions of relatively low shear rate, shear rate depends on the spindle and rotational speed selected for a determination; therefore, comparisons between apparent viscosity values should be made only for measurements made with similar viscometers under conditions of equivalent shear rate.1.1 This test method covers the determination of the apparent viscosity of hydrocarbon resins having apparent viscosities up to 2,000,000 millipascal seconds (mPa·s) (Note 1) at temperatures up to 300 °C [572 °F].NOTE 1: The SI unit of (dynamic) viscosity is the pascal second. The centipoise (cP) is one millipascal second (mPa·s) and is frequently used as a viscosity unit.1.2 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.1.3 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 加购物车

在线阅读 收 藏

定价: 345元 / 折扣价: 294 加购物车

在线阅读 收 藏
416 条记录,每页 15 条,当前第 15 / 28 页 第一页 | 上一页 | 下一页 | 最末页  |     转到第   页