定价： 78元 / 折扣价： 67 元 加购物车

5.1 This practice can be used to determine if a constant, proportional, or linear bias correction can improve the degree of agreement between two methods that purport to measure the same property of a material.5.2 The bias correction developed in this practice can be applied to a single result (X) obtained from one test method (method X) to obtain a predicted result ( Y^) for the other test method (method Y).NOTE 6: Users are cautioned to ensure that Y^ is within the scope of method Y before its use.5.3 The between methods reproducibility established by this practice can be used to construct an interval around Y^ that would contain the result of test method Y, if it were conducted, with approximately 95 % probability.5.4 This practice can be used to guide commercial agreements and product disposition decisions involving test methods that have been evaluated relative to each other in accordance with this practice.5.5 The magnitude of a statistically detectable bias is directly related to the uncertainties of the statistics from the experimental study. These uncertainties are related to both the size of the data set and the precision of the processes being studied. A large data set, or, highly precise test method(s), or both, can reduce the uncertainties of experimental statistics to the point where the “statistically detectable” bias can become “trivially small,” or be considered of no practical consequence in the intended use of the test method under study. Therefore, users of this practice are advised to determine in advance as to the magnitude of bias correction below which they would consider it to be unnecessary, or, of no practical concern for the intended application prior to execution of this practice.NOTE 7: It should be noted that the determination of this minimum bias of no practical concern is not a statistical decision, but rather, a subjective decision that is directly dependent on the application requirements of the users.1.1 This practice covers statistical methodology for assessing the expected agreement between two different standard test methods that purport to measure the same property of a material, and for the purpose of deciding if a simple linear bias correction can further improve the expected agreement. It is intended for use with results obtained from interlaboratory studies meeting the requirement of Practice D6300 or equivalent (for example, ISO 4259). The interlaboratory studies shall be conducted on at least ten materials in common that among them span the intersecting scopes of the test methods, and results shall be obtained from at least six laboratories using each method. Requirements in this practice shall be met in order for the assessment to be considered suitable for publication in either method, if such publication includes claim to have been carried out in compliance with this practice. Any such publication shall include mandatory information regarding certain details of the assessment outcome as specified in the Report section of this practice.1.2 The statistical methodology is based on the premise that a bias correction will not be needed. In the absence of strong statistical evidence that a bias correction would result in better agreement between the two methods, a bias correction is not made. If a bias correction is required, then the parsimony principle is followed whereby a simple correction is to be favored over a more complex one.NOTE 1: Failure to adhere to the parsimony principle generally results in models that are over-fitted and do not perform well in practice.1.3 The bias corrections of this practice are limited to a constant correction, proportional correction, or a linear (proportional + constant) correction.1.4 The bias-correction methods of this practice are method symmetric, in the sense that equivalent corrections are obtained regardless of which method is bias-corrected to match the other.1.5 A methodology is presented for establishing the numerical limit (designated by this practice as the between methods reproducibility) that would be exceeded about 5 % of the time (one case in 20 in the long run) for the difference between two results where each result is obtained by a different operator using different apparatus and each applying one of the two methods X and Y on identical material, where one of the methods has been appropriately bias-corrected in accordance with this practice, in the normal and correct operation of both test methods.NOTE 2: In earlier versions of this standard practice, the term “cross-method reproducibility” was used in place of the term “between methods reproducibility.” The change was made because the “between methods reproducibility” term is more intuitive and less confusing. It is important to note that these two terms are synonymous and interchangeable with one another, especially in cases where the “cross-method reproducibility” term was subsequently referenced by name in methods where a D6708 assessment was performed, before the change in terminology in this standard practice was adopted.NOTE 3: Users are cautioned against applying the between methods reproducibility as calculated from this practice to materials that are significantly different in composition from those actually studied, as the ability of this practice to detect and address sample-specific biases (see 6.7) is dependent on the materials selected for the interlaboratory study. When sample-specific biases are present, the types and ranges of samples may need to be expanded significantly from the minimum of ten as specified in this practice in order to obtain a more comprehensive and reliable between methods reproducibility that adequately cover the range of sample-specific biases for different types of materials.1.6 This practice is intended for test methods which measure quantitative (numerical) properties of petroleum or petroleum products.1.7 The statistical calculations of this practice are also applicable for assessing the expected agreement between two different test methods that purport to measure the same property of a material using results that are not as described in 1.1, provided the results and associated statistics from each test method are obtained from a specifically designed multi-lab study or from a proficiency testing program (e.g.: ILCP) where for each sample a single result is provided by each lab for each test method. The comparison sample set shall comprise at least ten different materials that span the intersecting scopes of the test methods with no material exceeding the leverage requirement in Practice D6300. Results and statistics shall meet requirements in 1.7.1. Requirements in this practice shall be met in order for the assessment to be considered suitable for publication in either method, if such publication includes claim to have been carried out in compliance with this practice. Any such publication shall include mandatory information regarding certain details of the assessment as specified in the Report section of this practice. RXY shall be based on the published reproducibility of the methods.1.7.1 For each test method and sample, results and statistics used to perform the assessment in 1.7 shall meet the following requirements:(1) No. of results (N) ≥ 10,(2) Anderson Darling statistic ≤ 1.12 (based on Normal Distribution),(3) Standard Error (sesample) is calculated using published reproducibility evaluated at the sample mean, N, and the factor 2.8 as follows:(4) sesample is numerically less than [Rpub / (2.8 √10 )], and(5) Sample standard deviation (ssample) per root-mean-square technique is not statistically greater than Rpub / 2.8 for at least 80 % of the samples in the comparison data set based on an F-test using 30 as the assumed degrees of freedom for Rpub, and (N − 1) for ssample at the 0.05 significance level.1.8 The methodology in this practice can also be used to perform linear regression analysis between two variables (X, Y) where there is known uncertainty in both variables that may or may not be constant over the regression range. The common acronym used to describe this type of linear regression is ReXY (Regression with errors in X and Y). The ReXY technique for assessing the correlation between two variables as described in this practice can be used for investigative applications where the strict data input requirement may not be met, but the outcome can still be useful for the intended application. Use of this practice for ReXY should be conducted under the tutelage of subject matter experts familiar with the statistical theory and techniques described in this practice, the methodologies associated with the production and collection of the results to be used for the regression analysis, and interpretation of assessment outcome relative to the intended application.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

Contributory value, an alternative model to acquisition cost valuation, provides an economic and logical basis for efficient and cost-effective property management. This value should be the basis for allocating resources and developing and improving systems and processes for the acquisition, control, accounting and disposal of such property.Contributory valuation is based on the premise that an organization invests in property for the reason that the availability of the property is necessary to the success of the organization, either the accomplishment of a mission or the generation of profit.The contributory valuation model assumes that the life-cycle cost of acquisition, maintenance, control and disposal of a property asset should be evaluated in the manner of any capital investment; it should yield an appropriate return on assets (ROA) in terms of profit or a contribution to the agency’or institution’mission success.The use of contributory valuation eliminates the distortions in worth associated with acquisition valuation and encourages a more rational allocation of resources to the management and control of property. This valuation enables an organization to devote the preponderance of its attention and resources to the property that contributes the greatest value to the goods and services produced.The Property Management Efficiency Factor (described in Section 10) can be used to trend the value added by the property management function and to compare performance with similar organizations.1.1 This practice covers the assignment of a value to property that provides an economic and logical basis for efficient and cost-effective property management. This value should be the basis for allocating resources and developing and improving systems and processes for the acquisition, control, accounting and disposal of such property.1.2 While acquisition cost and depreciation of property are useful and appropriate for financial accounting and reporting purposes, this information does not reflect the value of property to an organization or the costs and other damages the organization would incur if the property were lost, damaged, destroyed, or inappropriately released or handled. This financial information is therefore inadequate for property management purposes.1.3 The degree to which property is controlled and the cost of that control must be reasonable and commensurate with the practical consequences of both a shortage; that is, the property not being available when needed due to loss, damage or destruction; or an overage; that is, maintaining inventories of excess property.1.4 The valuation of property for the purposes of management and control is to be based upon the risks and costs of shortages and overages as well as the cost of owning property.

定价： 0元 / 折扣价： 0 元

4.1 LRP should be administratively controlled and managed using less resource-intensive methods than higher risk property.4.2 The type and scope of control and management should be commensurate with the level of risk. The entity shall determine the level of risk considering the following criteria:4.2.1 Scarcity,4.2.2 Technological obsolescence,4.2.3 Lead time,4.2.4 Standardization,4.2.5 Criticality,4.2.6 Sensitivity,4.2.7 Threshold/monetary values,4.2.8 Environmentally regulated,4.2.9 National security/threat,4.2.10 Schedule constraints,4.2.11 Vulnerability,4.2.12 Societal or personal safety,4.2.13 Documented business agreements (for example, contract, grant, memorandum of agreement), and4.2.14 Initial accounting treatment.NOTE 1: The listing in 4.2.1 – 4.2.14 is not all inclusive and may be supplemented by the entity and country. The management threshold/monetary value for item 4.2.7 in the United States and internationally may fluctuate up to 5000.00 or higher depending on agency and industry type.4.3 The information received from conducting standard asset Life Cycle Processes (LCP) within each Life Cycle Stage (LCS) for LRP may not provide sufficient value to the entity that is equal to or greater than the cost associated with performing the processes.4.4 Entities should establish policies and procedures, based on certain criteria in determining whether all or selected asset LCP should be conducted for LRP.4.5 The success of any entity is dependent in part on its operational effectiveness. To be effective entities should shift their focus from “risk avoidance” to one of “risk management.” The required processes and associated cost to eliminate all risk is prohibitive and contrary to producing timely, high-quality, and competitive products and services.4.6 While a variety of different strategies can mitigate or eliminate risk, the process for identifying risk includes:4.6.1 Vulnerability of the asset, and4.6.2 Consequence of a loss.4.7 The process for managing the risk includes:4.7.1 Reduction of risk, and4.7.2 Prioritization of the risk management based on importance.1.1 This practice covers the assessment of risk and management of low risk property (LRP).1.2 This practice is directed at tangible LRP.1.3 This practice does not promote mismanagement or dereliction of duty to protect property, nor protecting property unreasonably – to the extent that usefulness is impaired. This practice recognizes the constraints of materiality and costs versus benefits in the control and management of property.1.4 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

定价： 515元 / 折扣价： 438 元 加购物车

The calculated cost of property loss and destruction in combination with the cost of overages presents a logical foundation for the development of alternative models which can be used to evaluate the effectiveness of property management systems and provide relevant information to management useful for the distribution of resources to the task of property utilization and control.The understanding of an organization’loss, destruction and overage cost of inventory is a necessary prerequisite to the development of cost effective systems for the management of movable, durable assets.The costing model used in this standard assumes that individual categories of property represent a range of realized costs to an organization and that these loss or destruction costs can range from significant to minimal.The use of overage is a necessary corollary to the model since there can be significant costs associated with the inventory and control of unneeded assets.1.1 This practice covers the assignment of a value to categories and complete populations of lost or destroyed property assets for the purpose of determining the composite cost of all such losses on a periodic basis. This practice does not address the valuation of individual property assets.1.2 The reason for assigning a loss or destruction value is to establish an economic basis for the allocation of resources to manage property efficiently and in a cost effective manner.1.3 The direct cost of lost, damaged or destroyed (LDD) property has little to do with the acquisition, book or market value of such assets. While in many organizations, the value of LDD property is reflected at acquisition cost in the General Ledger accounts this approach is only appropriate for the financial reporting of property assets.1.4 The calculation of the cost of loss or destruction of property for the purposes of computing a necessary factor to be used in the equation applied under Practice E 2219 is to be based upon the consideration of both the risk of an inventory shortage as well as the benefits of inventory control and overage management.1.5 The valuation of property for the purposes of management and control is to be based upon the consideration of both the risk of an inventory shortage and benefits of inventory management as contained in this standard.

定价： 0元 / 折扣价： 0 元

A physical inventory is a form of an assessment or audit. While inventories can take many forms, organizations should ensure that the information resulting from the inventory has a value to the organization, which is at least equal to, if not in excess of, the costs of conducting the inventory.Inventories involve significant time to plan, execute and reconcile, involve significant property staff, and disrupt mission operations.Effective property control techniques are critical to reduce or eliminate the impact of lost, damaged and destroyed property and to ensure compliance with accepted practices concerning property accounting.The following results should be achieved as the result of an inventory:4.4.1 Verification that property on record is on-hand in the physical location assigned, in the proper custodial area in serviceable condition, and is assigned an organization identification control number.4.4.2 Identification of unrecorded property so that it can be reconciled to property and financial records and assigned for reuse.4.4.3 Location and identification of missing items.4.4.4 Reconciliation of custodial, accountable property, and financial records for miscoded, missing or items in need of repair.Positive inventory results when measured in accordance with Practice E 2132 are a key measure of the overall health and effectiveness of a property control system.1.1 This practice covers the management of administratively controlled movable, durable property.1.2 Generally, organizations should establish and maintain control of such property inventories in a manner that will strike a balance between the costs of control and the risks of sustaining incidents of lost damaged or destroyed property.1.3 The creation and maintenance of cost effective property management systems is of vital concern, and the costs of inventory control used to identify and locate property should be continually assessed against the physical inventory results.1.4 The cost effective and timely identification and location of property assets is a critical economic factor in the success of any organization.

定价： 0元 / 折扣价： 0 元

5.1 Abrasion resistance is a performance factor of paramount importance for many rubber products, such as tires, conveyor belts, power transmission belts, hoses, footwear, and floor covering. A test capable of measuring resistance to abrasion of rubber, including uniformity of wear behavior under abrasive/frictional service conditions is therefore highly desirable.5.2 This test method may be used to estimate the relative abrasion resistance of different rubbers. Since conditions of abrasive wear in service are complex and vary widely, no direct correlation between this accelerated test and actual performance can be assumed.5.3 This test method is suitable for comparative testing, quality control, specification compliance testing, referee purposes, and research and development work.1.1 This test method covers the measurement of abrasion resistance of rubbers (vulcanized thermoset rubbers and thermoplastic elastomers) that are subject to abrasive/frictional wear in actual service. The abrasion resistance is measured by moving a test piece across the surface of an abrasive sheet mounted to a revolving drum, and is expressed as volume loss in cubic millimetres or abrasion resistance index in percent. For volume loss, a smaller number indicates better abrasion resistance, while for the abrasion resistance index, a smaller number denotes poorer abrasion resistance.1.2 Test results obtained by this test method shall not be assumed to represent the wear behavior of rubber products experienced in actual service.1.3 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as the standard. The values in parentheses are for information only.1.4 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to 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

1.1 The thermophysical property tables for normal hydrogen are for use in the calculation of the pressure-volume-temperature (PVT), thermodynamic, and transport properties of hydrogen for process design and operations, particularly as they relate to hydrogen fuel cell applications. Tables are provided for gaseous hydrogen at temperatures between 50 K and 500 K at pressures to 500 MPa. These tables were developed by the National Institute of Standards and Technology from a Standard Reference Database product REFPROP, version 10.02.1.2 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

This specification covers methyl n-amyl ketone (98 % grade) for use in paint, varnish, lacquer, and related products. The apparent specific gravity, color, distillation range, water, acidity, and purity of the material shall be tested to meet the requirements prescribed.1.1 The thermophysical property tables for propane are used in calculating the pressure-volume-temperature (PVT), thermodynamic, and transport properties of propane for process design and operations. Two tables provide properties at the conditions of liquid-vapor equilibrium (saturation properties), one for liquid and one for vapor, at temperatures between 90 K and the critical point, 380 K. A third table provides properties at selected T, p points for the equilibrium phase at temperatures between 90 K and 600 K at pressures to 20 MPa. The tables were developed by the National Institute of Standards and Technology from a Standard Reference Database product REFPROP, version 10.0.1.2 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： 646元 / 折扣价： 550 元 加购物车