5.1 This standard defines measurement procedures for estimating the risk of noise-induced hearing loss among users of noise producing equipment. It is applicable to ground vehicles, aircraft, watercraft, and mobile, transportable, and stationary equipment. The primary approach is to separately measure the sound level at operator ear locations for each normal operating condition. These levels can be combined with operational use scenarios and exposure criteria to define noise exposure severity. The data can also be used to define hearing protection requirements or administrative controls to preclude hearing hazards.5.2 The practice has the following limitations:5.2.1 The practice uses field portable measurement equipment.5.2.2 The practice produces data which may be compared with applicable criteria or limits if the limits are in terms of the quantities measured in this standard or which can be calculated from the measured data.1.1 This standard defines noise measurement procedures for estimating the risk of hearing loss among users of noise producing equipment. It is applicable to ground vehicles, aircraft, watercraft, and other mobile, transportable, or stationary equipment.1.2 This standard does not recommend noise exposure limit levels or criteria for any application discussed.1.3 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard. No other units of measurement are included in this standard.1.4 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.1.5 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

定价： 590元 / 折扣价： 502 元 加购物车

4.1 This test method may be used for material development, material comparison, quality assurance, characterization, and design data generation.4.2 Continuous fiber-reinforced ceramic matrix composites are candidate materials for structural applications requiring high degrees of wear and corrosion resistance and toughness at high temperatures.4.3 Creep tests measure the time-dependent deformation of a material under constant load at a given temperature. Creep rupture tests provide a measure of the life of the material when subjected to constant mechanical loading at elevated temperatures. In selecting materials and designing parts for service at elevated temperatures, the type of test data used will depend on the criteria for load-carrying capability which best defines the service usefulness of the material.4.4 Creep and creep rupture tests provide information on the time-dependent deformation and on the time-of-failure of materials subjected to uniaxial tensile stresses at elevated temperatures. Uniform stress states are required to effectively evaluate any nonlinear stress-strain behavior which may develop as the result of cumulative damage processes (for example, matrix cracking, matrix/fiber debonding, fiber fracture, delamination, etc.) which may be influenced by test mode, test rate, processing or alloying effects, environmental influences, or elevated temperatures. Some of these effects may be consequences of stress corrosion or subcritical (slow) crack growth. It is noted that ceramic materials typically creep more rapidly in tension than in compression. Therefore, creep data for design and life prediction should be obtained in both tension and compression.4.5 The results of tensile creep and tensile creep rupture tests of specimens fabricated to standardized dimensions from a particular material or selected portions of a part, or both, may not totally represent the creep deformation and creep rupture properties of the entire, full-size end product or its in-service behavior in different environments or at various elevated temperatures.4.6 For quality control purposes, results derived from standardized tensile test specimens may be considered indicative of the response of the material from which they were taken for given primary processing conditions and post-processing heat treatments.1.1 This test method covers the determination of the time-dependent deformation and time-to-rupture of continuous fiber-reinforced ceramic composites under constant tensile loading at elevated temperatures. This test method addresses, but is not restricted to, various suggested test specimen geometries. In addition, test specimen fabrication methods, allowable bending, temperature measurements, temperature control, data collection, and reporting procedures are addressed.1.2 This test method is intended primarily for use with all advanced ceramic matrix composites with continuous fiber reinforcement: unidirectional (1-D), bidirectional (2-D), and tridirectional (3-D). In addition, this test method may also be used with glass matrix composites with 1-D, 2-D, and 3-D continuous fiber reinforcement. This test method does not address directly discontinuous fiber-reinforced, whisker-reinforced, or particulate-reinforced ceramics, although the test methods detailed here may be equally applicable to these composites.1.3 Values expressed in this test method are in accordance with the International System of Units (SI) and IEEE/ASTM SI 10.1.4 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use. Hazard statements are noted in 7.1 and 7.2.

定价： 646元 / 折扣价： 550 元 加购物车

5.1 Determination of carbon monoxide is essential to evaluation of many air pollution concerns and pollution control strategies. This test method derives significance from providing such determination.5.2 Carbon monoxide is formed in the process of incomplete combustion of hydrocarbon fuels, and is a constituent of the exhaust of gasoline engines. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has set primary and secondary air quality standards for CO that are designed to protect the public health and welfare (3, 4).5.3 This test method is suitable for measurements appropriate for the purposes noted in 5.1 and 5.2.1.1 This test method is applicable to the determination of the carbon monoxide (CO) concentration of the atmosphere between 0.6 mg/m3 (0.5 ppm(v)) and 115 mg/m3 (100 ppm(v)). The measuring principle is based on the absorption of infrared radiation by CO in the 4.7 μm region (1).21.2 The test method has a limit of detection of about 0.6 mg/m3 (0.5 ppm(v)) carbon monoxide in air.1.3 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard. The values and units in parentheses are provided for information only and 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. See Section 9 for additional precautions.1.5 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

定价： 590元 / 折扣价： 502 元 加购物车

5.1 The primary purpose of this practice is to describe a procedure for collecting near real-time data on airborne particle concentration and size distribution in clean areas as indicated by single particle counting techniques. Implementation of some government and industry specifications requires acquisition of particle size and concentration data using an SPC.5.2 The processing requirements of many products manufactured in a clean room involves environmental cleanliness levels so low that a single particle counter with capability for detecting very small particles is required to characterize clean room air. Real-time information on concentration of airborne particles in size ranges from less than 0.1 μm to 5 μm and greater can be obtained only with an SPC. Definition of particles larger than approximately 0.05 μm may be carried out with direct measurement of light scattering from individual particles; other techniques may be required for smaller particles, such as preliminary growth by condensation before particle measurement.5.3 Particle size data are referenced to the particle system used to calibrate the SPC. Differences in detection, electronic and sample handling systems among the various SPCs may contribute to differences in particle characterization. Care must be exercised in attempting to compare data from particles that vary significantly in composition or shape from the calibration base material. Variations may also occur between instruments using similar particle sensing systems with different operating parameters. These effects should be recognized and minimized by using standard methods for SPC calibration and operation.5.4 In applying this practice, the fundamental assumption is made that the particles in the sample passing through the SPC are representative of the particles in the entire dust-controlled area being analyzed. Care is required that good sampling procedures are used and that no artifacts are produced at any point in the sample handling and analysis process; these precautions are necessary both in verification and in operation of the SPC.1.1 This practice covers the determination of the particle concentration, by number, and the size distribution of airborne particles in dust-controlled areas and clean rooms, for particles in the size range of approximately 0.01 to 5.0 μm. Particle concentrations not exceeding 3.5 × 106 particles/m 3 (100 000/ft3) are covered for all particles equal to and larger than the minimum size measured.1.2 This practice uses an airborne single particle counting device (SPC) whose operation is based on measuring the signal produced by an individual particle passing through the sensing zone. The signal must be directly or indirectly related to particle size.NOTE 1: The SPC type is not specified here. The SPC can be a conventional optical particle counter (OPC), an aerodynamic particle sizer, a condensation nucleus counter (CNC) operating in conjunction with a diffusion battery or differential mobility analyzer, or any other device capable of counting and sizing single particles in the size range of concern and of sampling in a cleanroom environment.1.3 Individuals performing tests in accordance with this practice shall be trained in use of the SPC and shall understand its operation.1.4 Since the concentration and the particle size distribution of airborne particles are subject to continuous variations, the choice of sampling probe configuration, locations, and sampling times will affect sampling results. Further, the differences in the physical measurement, electronic, and sample handling systems between the various SPCs and the differences in physical properties of the various particles being measured can contribute to variations in the test results. These differences should be recognized and minimized by using a standard method of primary calibration and by minimizing variability of sample acquisition procedures.1.5 Sample acquisition procedures and equipment may be selected for specific applications based on varying cleanroom class levels. Firm requirements for these selections are beyond the scope of this practice; however, sampling practices shall be stated that take into account potential spatial and statistical variations of suspended particles in clean rooms.NOTE 2: General references to cleanroom classifications follow Federal Standard 209E, latest revision. Where airborne particles are to be characterized in dust-controlled areas that do not meet these classifications, the latest revision of the pertinent specification for these areas shall be used.1.6 Units—The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard. The values given in parentheses after SI units 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. For specific hazards statements, see Section 8.1.8 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

定价： 590元 / 折扣价： 502 元 加购物车

5.1 This test method is used for material development, quality control, and material flexural specifications. Although flexural test methods are commonly used to determine design strengths of monolithic advanced ceramics, the use of flexure test data for determining tensile or compressive properties of CFCC materials is strongly discouraged. The nonuniform stress distributions in the flexure test specimen, the dissimilar mechanical behavior in tension and compression for CFCCs, low shear strengths of CFCCs, and anisotropy in fiber architecture all lead to ambiguity in using flexure results for CFCC material design data (1-4).3 Rather, uniaxial-forced tensile and compressive tests are recommended for developing CFCC material design data based on a uniformly stressed test condition.5.2 In this test method, the flexure stress is computed from elastic beam theory with the simplifying assumptions that the material is homogeneous and linearly elastic. This is valid for composites where the principal fiber direction is coincident/transverse with the axis of the beam. These assumptions are necessary to calculate a flexural strength value, but limit the application to comparative type testing such as used for material development, quality control, and flexure specifications. Such comparative testing requires consistent and standardized test conditions, that is, test specimen geometry/thickness, strain rates, and atmospheric/test conditions.5.3 Unlike monolithic advanced ceramics which fracture catastrophically from a single dominant flaw, CFCCs generally experience “graceful” fracture from a cumulative damage process. Therefore, the volume of material subjected to a uniform flexural stress may not be as significant a factor in determining the flexural strength of CFCCs. However, the need to test a statistically significant number of flexure test specimens is not eliminated. Because of the probabilistic nature of the strength of the brittle matrices and of the ceramic fiber in CFCCs, a sufficient number of test specimens at each testing condition is required for statistical analysis, with guidelines for sufficient numbers provided in 9.7. Studies to determine the exact influence of test specimen volume on strength distributions for CFCCs are not currently available.5.4 The four-point loading geometries (Geometries IIA and IIB) are preferred over the three-point loading geometry (Geometry I). In the four-point loading geometry, a larger portion of the test specimen is subjected to the maximum tensile and compressive stresses, as compared to the three-point loading geometry. If there is a statistical/Weibull character failure in the particular composite system being tested, the size of the maximum stress region will play a role in determining the mechanical properties. The four-point geometry may then produce more reliable statistical data.5.5 Flexure tests provide information on the strength and deformation of materials under complex flexural stress conditions. In CFCCs nonlinear stress-strain behavior may develop as the result of cumulative damage processes (for example, matrix cracking, matrix/fiber debonding, fiber fracture, delamination, etc.) which may be influenced by testing mode, testing rate, processing effects, or environmental influences. Some of these effects may be consequences of stress corrosion or subcritical (slow) crack growth which can be minimized by testing at sufficiently rapid rates as outlined in 10.3 of this test method.5.6 Because of geometry effects, the results of flexure tests of test specimens fabricated to standardized test dimensions from a particular material or selected portions of a component, or both, cannot be categorically used to define the strength and deformation properties of the entire, full-size end product or its in-service behavior in different environments. The effects of size and geometry shall be carefully considered in extrapolating the test results to other configurations and performance conditions.5.7 For quality control purposes, results from standardized flexure test specimens may be considered indicative of the response of the material lot from which they were taken with the given primary processing conditions and post-processing heat treatments.5.8 The flexure behavior and strength of a CFCC are dependent on its inherent resistance to fracture, the presence of fracture sources, damage accumulation processes, or combinations thereof. Analysis of fracture surfaces and fractography, though beyond the scope of this test method, is highly recommended.1.1 This test method covers the determination of flexural properties of continuous fiber-reinforced ceramic composites in the form of rectangular bars formed directly or cut from sheets, plates, or molded shapes. Three test geometries are described as follows:1.1.1 Test Geometry I—A three-point loading system utilizing center point force application on a simply supported beam.1.1.2 Test Geometry IIA—A four-point loading system utilizing two force application points equally spaced from their adjacent support points, with a distance between force application points of one-half of the support span.1.1.3 Test Geometry IIB—A four-point loading system utilizing two force application points equally spaced from their adjacent support points, with a distance between force application points of one-third of the support span.1.2 This test method applies primarily to all advanced ceramic matrix composites with continuous fiber reinforcement: unidirectional (1D), bidirectional (2D), tridirectional (3D), and other continuous fiber architectures. In addition, this test method may also be used with glass (amorphous) matrix composites with continuous fiber reinforcement. However, flexural strength cannot be determined for those materials that do not break or fail by tension or compression in the outer fibers. This test method does not directly address discontinuous fiber-reinforced, whisker-reinforced, or particulate-reinforced ceramics. Those types of ceramic matrix composites are better tested in flexure using Test Methods C1161 and C1211.1.3 Tests can be performed at ambient temperatures or at elevated temperatures. At elevated temperatures, a suitable furnace is necessary for heating and holding the test specimens at the desired testing temperatures.1.4 This test method includes the following:  Section 1Referenced Documents 2Terminology 3Summary of Test Method 4 5Interferences 6Apparatus 7Precautionary Statement 8Test Specimens 9Procedures 10Calculation of Results 11Report 12Precision and Bias 13Keywords 14References  CFCC Surface Condition and Finishing Annex A1Conditions and Issues in Hot Loading of Test Specimens into Furnaces Annex A2Toe Compensation on Stress-Strain Curves Annex A3Corrections for Thermal Expansion in Flexural Equations Annex A4Example of Test Report Appendix X11.5 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as the standard in accordance with IEEE/ASTM SI 10.1.6 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： 843元 / 折扣价： 717 元 加购物车

4.1 The reason for preserving military sampling standards is that many organizations throughout the world still use these standards in their current form. MIL-STD-1235B is no longer supported by the U.S. Department of Defense as of the mid-1990s and is out of print, but does exist in the public domain. This practice represents a conversion of MIL-STD-1235B to an ASTM-supported standard.4.2 This practice provides the tables and procedures for applying five different types of continuous sampling plans for inspection by attributes. These continuous sampling plans are discussed in Sections 6 – 10 of this practice and each section includes information on:(1) Initiation of 100 % inspection in use.(2) Requirements on when to switch to sampling inspection.(3) Conditions warranting a return to 100 % inspection.(4) When a change in Code Letter, if desired, can be made.(5) What to do when the checking inspector finds a defect that was originally found conforming by the screening inspector(s), that is, ineffective screening.(6) Situations where a defect is found before the switch to 100 % inspection causing excessive periods of 100 % inspection so action must be taken, that is, long periods of screening.4.2.1 Section 6 (Section 2 in MIL-STD-1235B) describes specific procedures and applications of the CSP-1 sampling plans – a single-level continuous sampling procedure which provides for alternating between sequences of 100 % inspection and sampling inspection.4.2.2 Section 7 (Section 3 in MIL-STD-1235B) describes specific procedures and applications of the CSP-F sampling plans – a variation of the CSP-1 plans in that CSP-F plans are applied to a relatively short run of product, thereby permitting smaller clearance numbers to be used.4.2.3 Section 8 (Section 4 in MIL-STD-1235B) describes specific procedures and applications of the CSP-2 sampling plans – a modification of CSP-1 in that 100 % inspection resumes only after a prescribed number of defect-free units separate any two defective sample units.4.2.4 Section 9 (Section 5 in MIL-STD-1235B) describes specific procedures and applications of the CSP-T sampling plans – a multi-level continuous sampling procedure which provides for reducing the sampling frequency upon demonstration of superior product quality.4.2.5 Section 10 (Section 6 in MIL-STD-1235B) describes specific procedures and applications of the CSP-V sampling plans – a single-level continuous sampling procedure which is an alternative to CSP-T in that these plans provide for reducing the clearance number in good quality situations where reduction of sampling frequency has no economic merit.AbstractThis practice establishes tables and procedures for applying five different types of continuous sampling plans for inspection by attributes using MIL-STD-1235B as a basis for sampling a steady stream of lots indexed by AQL. This practice represents a conversion of MIL-STD1235B to an ASTM-supported standard.1.1 This practice establishes tables and procedures for applying five different types of continuous sampling plans for inspection by attributes using MIL-STD-1235B as a basis for sampling a steady stream of lots indexed by AQL.1.2 This practice provides the sampling plans of MIL-STD-1235B in ASTM format for use by ASTM committees and others. It recognizes the continuing usage of MIL-STD-1235B in industries supported by ASTM. Most of the original text in MIL-STD-1235B is preserved in Sections 6 – 10 of this practice.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： 843元 / 折扣价： 717 元 加购物车

5.1 This test method may be used for material development, material comparison, quality assurance, characterization, and design data generation.5.2 Continuous fiber-reinforced ceramic composites (CFCCs) may be composed of continuous ceramic-fiber directional (1D, 2D, and 3D) reinforcements which are often contained in a fine-grain-sized (<50 µm) ceramic matrix with controlled porosity. Usually these composites have an engineered thin (0.1 to 10 µm) interface coating on the fibers to produce crack deflection and fiber pull-out.5.3 CFCC components have distinctive and synergistic combinations of material properties, interface coatings, porosity control, composite architecture (1D, 2D, and 3D), and geometric shape that are generally inseparable. Prediction of the mechanical performance of CFCC tubes (particularly with braid and 3D weave architectures) may not be possible by applying measured properties from flat CFCC plates to the design of tubes. This is because fabrication/processing methods may be unique to tubes and not replicable to flat plates, thereby producing compositionally similar but structurally and morphologically different CFCC materials. In particular, tubular components comprised of CFCC material form a unique synergistic combination of material, geometric shape, and reinforcement architecture that is generally inseparable. In other words, prediction of mechanical performance of CFCC tubes generally cannot be made by using properties measured from flat plates. Strength tests of transversely loaded CFCC tubes provide information on mechanical behavior and strength for a material subjected to a uniaxial, nonuniform stress.5.4 Unlike monolithic advanced ceramics that fracture catastrophically from a single dominant flaw, CMCs generally experience “graceful” fracture from a cumulative damage process. Therefore, while the volume of material subjected to a nonuniform, uniaxial flexural stress for transversely loaded tube test may be a significant factor for determining matrix cracking stress, this same volume may not be as significant a factor in determining the ultimate strength of a CMC. However, the probabilistic nature of the strength distributions of the brittle matrices of CMCs requires a statistically significant number of test specimens for statistical analysis and design. Studies to determine the exact influence of test specimen volume on strength distributions for CMCs have not been completed. It should be noted that tensile flexural strengths obtained using different recommended test specimens with different volumes of material in the gage sections may be different due to these volume effects. Practice C1683 provides guidance on the scaling of statistical parameters for strength to account for differences in effective volume, effective area, or both.5.5 Flexural strength tests provide information on the strength and deformation of materials under stresses induced from transverse loading of tubes. Nonuniform but uniaxial stress states are inherent in these types of tests, and subsequent evaluation of any nonlinear stress-strain behavior must take into account the asymmetric and anisotropic behavior of the CMC under multiaxial stressing. This nonlinear behavior may develop as the result of cumulative damage processes (for example, matrix cracking, matrix/fiber debonding, fiber fracture, delamination, etc.) which may be influenced by testing mode, testing rate, processing effects, or environmental effects. Some of these effects may be consequences of stress corrosion or subcritical (slow) crack growth that can be minimized by testing at sufficiently rapid rates as outlined in this test method.5.6 The results of flexural strength tests of test specimens fabricated to standardized dimensions from a particular material or selected portions of a part, or both, may not totally represent the strength and deformation properties of the entire, full-size end product or its in-service behavior in different environments.5.7 For quality control purposes, results derived from standardized flexural strength test specimens may be considered indicative of the response of the material from which they were taken for, given primary processing conditions and post-processing heat treatments.5.8 The flexural behavior and flexural strength of a CMC are dependent on its inherent resistance to fracture, the presence of flaws, damage accumulation processes, or combinations thereof. Analyses of fracture surfaces and fractography, though beyond the scope of this test method, are highly recommended.1.1 This test method covers the determination of flexural strength, including stress-strain response, under monotonic loading of continuous fiber-reinforced advanced ceramic tubes at ambient temperature. This test method addresses tubular test specimen geometries, test specimen/grip fabrication methods, testing modes (force, displacement, or strain-control), testing rates (force rate, stress rate, displacement rate, or strain rate), and data collection and reporting procedures.1.2 In this test method, an advanced ceramic composite tube/cylinder with a defined gage section and a known wall thickness is subjected to four-point flexure while supported in a four-point loading system utilizing two force-application points spaced an inner span distance that are centered between two support points located an outer span distance apart. The applied transverse force produces a constant moment in the gage section of the tube and results in uniaxial flexural stress-strain response of the composite tube that is recorded until failure of the tube. The flexural strength and the flexural fracture strength are determined from the resulting maximum force and the force at fracture, respectively. The flexural strains, the flexural proportional limit stress, and the flexural modulus of elasticity in the longitudinal direction are determined from the stress-strain data. Note that flexural strength as used in this test method refers to the maximum tensile stress produced in the longitudinal direction of the tube by the introduction of a monotonically applied transverse force, where ‘monotonic’ refers to a continuous, nonstop test rate without reversals from test initiation to final fracture. The flexural strength is sometimes used to estimate the tensile strength of the material.1.3 This test method is intended for advanced ceramic matrix composite tubes with continuous fiber reinforcement: unidirectional (1D, filament wound and tape lay-up), bidirectional (2D, fabric/tape lay-up and weave), and tridirectional (3D, braid and weave). These types of ceramic matrix composites can be composed of a wide range of ceramic fibers (oxide, graphite, carbide, nitride, and other compositions) in a wide range of crystalline and amorphous ceramic matrix compositions (oxide, carbide, nitride, carbon, graphite, and other compositions). This test method may also be applicable to some types of functionally graded tubes such as ceramic fiber-wound tubes comprised of monolithic advanced ceramics. It is not the intent of this test method to dictate or normalize material fabrication including fiber layup or number of plies comprising the composite, but to instead provide an appropriate and consistent methodology for discerning the effects of different fabrication or fiber layup methods on flexural behavior of resulting tubular geometries.1.4 This test method does not directly address discontinuous fiber-reinforced, whisker-reinforced, or particulate-reinforced ceramics, although the test methods detailed here may be equally applicable to these composites if it can be shown that these materials display the damage-tolerant behavior of continuous fiber-reinforced ceramics.1.5 The test method is applicable to a range of test specimen tube geometries based on the intended application that includes composite material property and tube radius. Therefore, there is no “standard” test specimen geometry for a typical test setup. Lengths of the composite tube, lengths of the inner span, and lengths of the outer span are determined so as to provide a gage length with uniform bending moment. A wide range of combinations of material properties, tube radii, wall thicknesses, tube lengths, and lengths of inner and outer spans section are possible.1.5.1 This test method is specific to ambient temperature testing. Elevated temperature testing requires high-temperature furnaces and heating devices with temperature control and measurement systems and temperature-capable testing methods that are not addressed in this test method.1.6 This test method addresses tubular test specimen geometries, test specimen preparation methods, testing rates (that is, induced applied moment rate), and data collection and reporting procedures in the following sections: Section 1Referenced Documents Section 2Terminology Section 3Summary of Test Method Section 4 Section 5Interferences Section 6Apparatus Section 7Hazards Section 8Test Specimens Section 9Test Procedure Section 10Calculation of Results Section 11Report Section 12Precision and Bias Section 13Keywords Section 14Appendixes  Overview of Flexural Test Configurations Appendix X1Fixtures with Cradles Appendix X21.7 Values expressed in this test method are in accordance with the International System of Units (SI) and IEEE/ASTM SI 10.1.8 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. Specific hazard statements are given in Section 8.1.9 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