5.1 The displacement transducer plays an important role in geotechnical applications to measure change in dimensions of specimens.5.2 The displacement transducer must be calibrated/verified for use in the laboratory to ensure reliable conversions of the sensor's electrical output to engineering units.5.3 The displacement transducer should be calibrated/verified before initial use, at least annually thereafter, after any change in the electronic configuration that employs the sensor, after any significant change in test conditions using the transducer that differ from conditions during the last calibration/verification, and after any physical action on the transducer that might affect its response.5.4 Displacement transducer generally has a working range within which voltage output is linearly proportional to displacement of the transducer. This procedure is applicable to the linear range of the transducer. Recommended practice is to use the displacement transducer only within its linear working range.NOTE 1: Verification as in Practices E2309/E2309M should not be confused with calibration1.1 This practice outlines the procedure for calibration/verification of displacement transducers and their readout systems for geotechnical purposes. It covers any transducer used to measure displacement, which gives an electrical output that is linearly proportional to displacement. This includes linear variable displacement transducers (LVDTs), linear displacement transducers (LDTs) and linear strain transducers (LSTs).1.2 This calibration/verification procedure is used to determine the relationship between output of the transducer and its readout system and change in length. This relationship is used to convert readings from the transducer readout system into engineering units.1.3 This calibration/verification procedure also is used to determine the accuracy of the transducer and its readout system over the range of its use to compare with the manufacturer’s specifications for the instrument and the suitability of the instrument for a specific application.1.4 Units—The values stated in either SI units or inch-pound units given in brackets are to be regarded separately as the standard. The values stated in each system may not be exact equivalents; therefore, each system shall be used independently of the other. Combination values from the two systems may result in non-conformance with standard.1.5 All observed and calculated values shall conform to the guidelines for significant digits and rounding established in Practice D6026 unless superseded by this standard.1.5.1 The procedures used to specify how data are collected, recorded or calculated in this standard are regarded as the industry standard. In addition they are representative of the significant digits that generally should be retained. The procedures used do not consider material variation, purpose for obtaining the data, special purpose studies, or any consideration for the user’s objectives; it is common practice to increase or reduce significant digits of reported data to be commensurate with these considerations. It is beyond the scope of this standard to consider significant digits used in analytical methods for engineering design.1.6 This practice offers a set of instructions for performing one or more specific operations. This standard cannot replace education or experience and should be used in conjunction with professional judgment. Not all aspects of this 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 consideration of a project’s many unique aspects. The word “standard” in the title of this document means only that the document has been approved through the ASTM consensus process.1.7 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.1.8 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

定价： 590元 / 折扣价： 502 元 加购物车

4.1 A major concern of metals producers, warehouses, and users is to establish and maintain the identity of metals from melting to their final application. This involves the use of standard quality assurance practices and procedures throughout the various stages of manufacturing and processing, at warehouses and materials receiving, and during fabrication and final installation of the product. These practices typically involve standard chemical analyses and physical tests to meet product acceptance standards, which are slow. Several pieces from a production run are usually destroyed or rendered unusable through mechanical and chemical testing, and the results are used to assess the entire lot using statistical methods. Statistical quality assurance methods are usually effective; however, mixed grades, off-chemistry, and nonstandard physical properties remain the primary causes for claims in the metals industry. A more comprehensive verification of product properties is necessary. Nondestructive means are available to supplement conventional metals grade verification techniques, and to monitor chemical and physical properties at selected production stages, in order to assist in maintaining the identities of metals and their consistency in mechanical properties.4.2 Nondestructive methods have the potential for monitoring grade during production on a continuous or statistical basis, for monitoring properties such as hardness and case depth, and for verifying the effectiveness of heat treatment, cold-working, and the like. They are quite often used in the field for solving problems involving off-grade and mixed-grade materials.4.3 The nondestructive methods covered in this guide provide both direct and indirect responses to the sample being evaluated. Spectrometric analysis instruments respond to the presence and percents of alloying constituents. The electromagnetic (eddy current) and thermoelectric methods, on the other hand, are among those that respond to properties in the sample that are affected by chemistry and processing, and they yield indirect information on composition and mechanical properties. In this guide, the spectrometric methods are classified as quantitative, whereas the methods that yield indirect readings are termed qualitative.4.4 This guide describes a variety of qualitative and quantitative methods. It summarizes the operating principles of each method, provides guidance on where and how each may be applied, gives (when applicable) the precision and bias that may be expected, and assists the investigator in selecting the best candidates for specific grade verification or sorting problems.4.5 For the purposes of this guide, the term “nondestructive” includes techniques that may require the removal of small amounts of metal during the examination, without affecting the serviceability of the product.4.6 The nondestructive methods covered in this guide provide quantitative and qualitative information on metals properties; they are listed as follows:4.6.1 Quantitative: 4.6.1.1 X-ray fluorescence spectrometry, and4.6.1.2 Optical emission spectrometry.4.6.2 Qualitative: 4.6.2.1 Electromagnetic (eddy current),4.6.2.2 Conductivity/resistivity,4.6.2.3 Thermoelectric,4.6.2.4 Chemical spot tests,4.6.2.5 Triboelectric, and4.6.2.6 Spark testing (special case).1.1 This guide is intended for tutorial purposes only. It describes the general requirements, methods, and procedures for the nondestructive identification and sorting of metals.1.2 It provides guidelines for the selection and use of methods suited to the requirements of particular metals sorting or identification problems.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. For specific precautionary statements, see Section 10.1.4 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： 646元 / 折扣价： 550 元 加购物车

4.1 Testing machines that apply and measure displacement are used in many industries. They may be used in research laboratories to determine material properties, and in production lines to qualify products for shipment. The displacement measuring devices integral to the testing machines may be used for measurement of crosshead or actuator displacement over a defined range of operation. The accuracy of the displacement value shall be traceable to the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) or another recognized National Laboratory. Practices E2309 provides a procedure to verify these machines and systems, in order that the measured displacement values may be traceable. A key element to having traceability is that the devices used in the verification produce known displacement characteristics, and have been calibrated in accordance with adequate calibration standards.1.1 These practices cover procedures and requirements for the calibration and verification of displacement measuring systems by means of standard calibration devices for static and quasi-static testing machines. This practice is not intended to be complete purchase specifications for testing machines or displacement measuring systems. Displacement measuring systems are not intended to be used for the determination of strain. See Practice E83.1.2 These procedures apply to the verification of the displacement measuring systems associated with the testing machine, such as a scale, dial, marked or unmarked recorder chart, digital display, etc. In all cases the buyer/owner/user must designate the displacement-measuring system(s) to be verified.1.3 The values stated in either SI units or inch-pound units are to be regarded separately as standard. The values stated in each system 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.1.4 Displacement values indicated on displays/printouts of testing machine data systems—be they instantaneous, delayed, stored, or retransmitted—which are within the Classification criteria listed in Table 1, comply with Practices E2309/E2309M.1.5 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.1.6 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 practice is intended to provide standardized procedures for evaluating linear phased-array ultrasonic probes. It is not intended to define performance and acceptance criteria, but rather to provide data from which such criteria may be established.5.2 Implementation may require more detailed procedural instructions in a format of the using facility.5.3 The measurement data obtained may be employed by users of this guide to specify, describe, or provide performance criteria for procurement and quality assurance, or service evaluation of the operating characteristics of linear phased-array ultrasonic probes. All or portions of the standard practice may be used as determined by the user.5.4 The measurements are made primarily under pulse-echo conditions. To determine the relative performance of a probe element as either a transmitter or a receiver may require additional tests.5.5 While these procedures relate to many of the significant parameters, others that may be important in specific applications may not be treated. These might include power handling capability, breakdown voltage, wear properties of contact units, radio-frequency interference, and the like.5.6 Care must be taken to ensure that comparable measurements are made and that users of the standard practice follow similar procedures. The conditions specified or selected (if optional) may affect the test results and lead to apparent differences.5.7 Interpretation of some test results, such as the shape of the frequency response curve, may be subjective. Small irregularities may be significant. Interpretation of the test results is beyond the scope of this practice.5.8 Certain results obtained using the procedures outlined may differ from measurements made with phased-array ultrasonic test instruments. These differences may be attributed to differences in the nature of the experiment or the electrical characteristics of the instrumentation.5.9 The pulse generator used to obtain the frequency response and time response of the probe must have a rise time, duration, and spectral content sufficient to excite the probe over its full bandwidth, otherwise time distortion and erroneous results may result.1.1 This practice covers measurement procedures for evaluating certain characteristics of phased-array ultrasonic probes that are used with phased-array ultrasonic examination instrumentation.1.2 This practice describes means for obtaining performance data that may be used to define the acoustic and electric responses of phased-array ultrasonic probes including contact (with or without a wedge) and immersion linear phased-array probes used for ultrasonic nondestructive testing with central frequencies ranging from 0.5 MHz to 10 MHz. Frequencies outside of this range may use the same methods but the testing equipment may vary.1.3 When ultrasonic values dependent on material are specified in this practice, they are based on carbon steel with an ultrasonic wave propagation speed of 5920 m/s (±50 m/s) for longitudinal wave modes and 3255 m/s (±30 m/s) for transverse or shear wave modes.1.4 This practice describes some of the characterization and verification procedures that can be carried out at the end stage of the manufacturing process of linear phased array probes. This practice does not describe the methods or acceptance criteria used to verify the performance of the combined phased array ultrasonic instrument and probe system.1.5 While this practice is intended to provide standardized procedures for evaluating linear phased-array ultrasonic probes, it may, with suitable modifications, be used for evaluation of configurations other than linear; for example, 1.5D or 2D matrix array probes.1.6 Units—The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as the 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.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

This practice covers the standards for the verification and calibration of polarimeters required to maintain these instruments and ensure that the optical setup is within specification for satisfactory measurements. Verification and calibration procedures are performed using two types of procedures: Procedure A (verification) and Procedure B (calibration). Procedure A is done by measuring individual components and their orientation to ensure that they comply accordingly. Procedure B is done by determining the accuracy of the polarimeter using a calibrated gage or retarder.1.1 Polarimeters and polariscopes used for measuring stress in glass are described in Test Methods F218, C148, and C978. These instruments include a light source and several optical elements (polarizers, optical retarders, filters, and so forth) that require occasional cleaning, realigning, and calibration. The objective of these practices is to describe the calibration and verification procedures required to maintain these instruments in calibration and ensure that the optical setup is within specification for satisfactory measurements.1.2 It is mandatory throughout these practices that both verification and calibration are carried out by qualified personnel who fully understand the concepts used in measurements of stress retardation and are experienced in the practices of measuring procedures described in Test Methods F218, C148, and C978.1.3 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 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

4.1 It is well understood how to measure the forces applied to a specimen under static conditions. Practices E4 details the required process for verifying the static force measurement capabilities of testing machines. During dynamic operation however, additional errors may manifest themselves in a testing machine. Further verification is necessary to confirm the dynamic force measurement capabilities of testing machines.NOTE 1: The static machine verification accomplished by Practices E4 simply establishes the reference. Indicated forces measured from the force cell are compared with the dynamometer conditioned forces statically for confirmation and then dynamically for dynamic verification of the fatigue testing system's force output.NOTE 2: The dynamic accuracy of the force cell's output will not always meet the accuracy requirement of this standard without correction. Dynamic correction to the force cell output can be applied provided that verification is performed after the correction has been applied.NOTE 3: Overall test accuracy is a combination of measurement accuracy and control accuracy. This practice provides methods to evaluate either or both. As control accuracy is dependent on many more variables than measurement accuracy it is imperative that the test operator utilize appropriate measurement tools to confirm that the testing machine’s control behavior is consistent between verification activities and actual testing activities.4.2 Dynamic errors are primarily span dependent, not level dependent. That is, the error for a particular force endlevel during dynamic operation is dependent on the immediately preceding force endlevel. Larger spans imply larger absolute errors for the same force endlevel.4.3 Due to the many test machine factors that influence dynamic force accuracy, verification is recommended for every new combination of potential error producing factors. Primary factors are specimen design, machine configuration, test frequency, and loading span. Clearly, performing a full verification for each configuration is often impractical. To address this problem, dynamic verification is taken in two parts.4.3.1 First, one or more full verifications are performed at least annually. The main body of this practice describes that procedure. This provides the most accurate estimate of dynamic errors, as it will account for electronic as well as acceleration-induced sources of error.4.3.2 The second part, described in Annex A1, is a simplified verification procedure. It provides a simplified method of estimating acceleration-induced errors only. This procedure is to be used for common configuration changes (that is, specimen/grip/crosshead height changes).4.4 Dynamic verification of the fatigue system is recommended over the entire range of force and frequency over which the planned fatigue test series is to be performed. Endlevels are limited to the machine's verified static force as defined by the current static force verification when tested in accordance with Practices E4.NOTE 4: There is uncertainty as to whether or not the vibration in a frame will be different when operating in compression as opposed to tension. As a consequence, this practice recommends performing verifications at maximum tension and maximum compression endlevels. The total span does not need to be between those two levels, but can be performed as two tests.NOTE 5: Primary electronic characteristics affecting dynamic measurement accuracy are noise and bandwidth. Excessive noise is generally the dominant effect at the minimum test frequency. Insufficient bandwidth-induced errors are generally most significant at the maximum test frequency.1.1 This practice covers procedures for the dynamic verification of cyclic force amplitude control or measurement accuracy during constant amplitude testing in an axial fatigue testing system. It is based on the premise that force verification can be done with the use of a strain gaged elastic element. Use of this practice gives assurance that the accuracies of forces applied by the machine or dynamic force readings from the test machine, at the time of the test, after any user applied correction factors, fall within the limits recommended in Section 9. It does not address static accuracy which must first be addressed using Practices E4 or equivalent.1.2 Verification is specific to a particular test machine configuration and specimen. This standard is recommended to be used for each configuration of testing machine and specimen. Where dynamic correction factors are to be applied to test machine force readings in order to meet the accuracy recommended in Section 9, the verification is also specific to the correction process used. Finally, if the correction process is triggered or performed by a person, or both, then the verification is specific to that individual as well.1.3 It is recognized that performance of a full verification for each configuration of testing machine and specimen configuration could be prohibitively time consuming and/or expensive. Annex A1 provides methods for estimating the dynamic accuracy impact of test machine and specimen configuration changes that may occur between full verifications. Where test machine dynamic accuracy is influenced by a person, estimating the dynamic accuracy impact of all individuals involved in the correction process is recommended. This practice does not specify how that assessment will be done due to the strong dependence on owner/operators of the test machine.1.4 This practice is intended to be used periodically. Consistent results between verifications is expected. Failure to obtain consistent results between verifications using the same machine configuration implies uncertain accuracy for dynamic tests performed during that time period.1.5 This practice addresses the accuracy of the testing machine's force control or indicated forces, or both, as compared to a dynamometer's indicated dynamic forces. Force control verification is only applicable for test systems that have some form of indicated force peak/valley monitoring or amplitude control. For the purposes of this verification, the dynamometer's indicated dynamic forces will be considered the true forces. Phase lag between dynamometer and force transducer indicated forces is not within the scope of this practice.1.6 The results of either the Annex A1 calculation or the full experimental verification must be reported per Section 10 of this standard.1.7 This practice provides no assurance that the shape of the actual waveform conforms to the intended waveform within any specified tolerance.1.8 This standard is principally focused at room temperature operation. It is believed there are additional issues that must be addressed when testing at high temperatures. At the present time, this standard practice must be viewed as only a partial solution for high temperature testing.1.9 The values stated in inch-pound units are to be regarded as standard. No other units of measurement are included in this standard.1.10 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.1.11 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

定价： 777元 / 折扣价： 661 元 加购物车

5.1 The availability of a standard procedure, standard material, and standard plots should allow the investigator to check his laboratory technique. This practice should lead to electrochemical impedance curves in the literature which can be compared easily and with confidence.5.2 Samples of a standard ferritic type 430 stainless steel (UNS 430000) used to obtain the reference plots are available for those who wish to check their equipment. Suitable resistors and capacitors can be obtained from electronics supply houses.5.3 This test method may not be appropriate for electrochemical impedance measurements of all materials or in all environments.1.1 This practice covers an experimental procedure which can be used to check one's instrumentation and technique for collecting and presenting electrochemical impedance data. If followed, this practice provides a standard material, electrolyte, and procedure for collecting electrochemical impedance data at the open circuit or corrosion potential that should reproduce data determined by others at different times and in different laboratories. This practice may not be appropriate for collecting impedance information for all materials or in all environments.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： 646元 / 折扣价： 550 元 加购物车

4.1 Material testing requires repeatable and predictable testing machine speed. The speed measuring devices integral to the testing machines may be used for measurement of crosshead speed over a defined range of operation. The accuracy of the speed value shall be traceable to a National or International Standards Laboratory. Practices E2658 provides procedures to verify testing machines, in order that the indicated speed values may be traceable. A key element to having traceability is that the devices used in the verification produce known speed characteristics, and have been calibrated in accordance with adequate calibration standards.4.2 Verification of testing machine speed at a minimum consists of either or both of the following options:4.2.1  Verifying the capability of the testing machine to move the crosshead at the speed selected.4.2.2 Verifying the capability of the testing machine to adequately indicate the speed of the crosshead.4.3 Where applicable, determine the testing machine's ramp-to-speed condition. This condition can be significant especially when verifying fast speeds or testing conditions with very short testing durations.4.4 This procedure will establish the relationship between the actual crosshead speed and the testing machine indicated speed and or selected setting. It is this relationship that will allow confidence in the reported displacement over time data acquired by the testing machine during use.NOTE 1: Many material tests never reach the desired test speed. Unless the actual data from the material test is examined, it is often impossible to know if the test speed has been reached or is repeatable from test to test.1.1 These practices cover procedures and requirements for the calibration and verification of testing machine speed by means of standard calibration devices. This practice is not intended to be complete purchase specifications for testing machines.1.2 These practices apply to the verification of the speed application and measuring systems associated with the testing machine, such as a scale, dial, marked or unmarked recorder chart, digital display, setting, etc. In all cases the buyer/owner/user must designate the speed-measuring system(s) to be verified.1.3 These practices give guidance, recommendations, and examples, specific to electro-mechanical testing machines. The practice may also be used to verify actuator speed for hydraulic testing machines.1.4 This standard cannot be used to verify cycle counting or frequency related to cyclic fatigue testing applications.1.5 Since conversion factors are not required in this practice, either SI units (mm/min), or English [in/min], can be used as the standard.1.6 Speed measurement values and or settings on displays/printouts of testing machine data systems-be they instantaneous, delayed, stored, or retransmitted-which are within the Classification criteria listed in Table 1, comply with Practices E2658.1.7 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.1.8 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

定价： 590元 / 折扣价： 502 元 加购物车

This practice covers procedures for the verification and classification of extensometer systems, but it is not intended to be a complete purchase specification. The practice is applicable only to instruments that indicate or record values that are proportional to changes in length corresponding to either tensile or compressive strain. Extensometer systems are classified on the basis of the magnitude of their errors. The apparatus for verifying extensometer systems shall provide a means for applying controlled displacements to a simulated specimen and for measuring these displacements accurately. Extensometer systems shall be classified in accordance with the requirements as to maximum error of strain indicated: Class A; Class B-1; Class B-2; Class C; Class D; and Class E. Extensometer systems shall be categorized in three types according to gage length: Type 1; Type 2; and Type 3. A verification procedure for extensometer systems shall be done in accordance with the specified requirements.1.1 This practice covers procedures for the verification and classification of extensometer systems, but it is not intended to be a complete purchase specification. The practice is applicable only to instruments that indicate or record values that are proportional to changes in length corresponding to either tensile or compressive strain. Extensometer systems are classified on the basis of the magnitude of their errors.1.2 Because strain is a dimensionless quantity, this document can be used for extensometers based on either SI or US customary units of displacement.NOTE 1: Bonded resistance strain gauges directly bonded to a specimen cannot be calibrated or verified with the apparatus described in this practice for the verification of extensometers having definite gauge points. (See procedures as described in Test Methods E251.)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： 646元 / 折扣价： 550 元 加购物车

4.1 There have been instances in the past in which undesired collisions between authorized vehicles and AVBS have occurred. Properly selected, designed, and installed safety devices that are able to inhibit deployment of active barriers when authorized vehicles are in the hazard detection space, in direct proximity to the barrier, can minimize the likelihood that such accidents occur.4.2 Unintended barrier/vehicle collisions can be very hazardous, will frequently result in significant damage to property, and can also result in personal injury or death, depending on conditions surrounding an incident.4.3 It is recognized that some vehicle types may not be reliably detected by an individual detection device and an owner may desire placing AVBS in service even though not all vehicle types may be reliably detected. In such determination of use, an owner shall carefully consider such system performance limitations and safety risks, appropriate alternative controls that will minimize safety hazards, and what risks are able to be accepted before placing equipment into service. This practice is intended to provide the owners, designers, installers, integrators, and equipment providers with information that may be important to such decisions, but it is not intended to determine what risks/hazards are acceptable.4.4 It is also recognized that there may be particular conditions in which an owner may determine that it is not acceptable to have safety devices installed in AVBS. For example, there may be conditions under which the security risks are determined to be more important to an owner than the possible safety hazards. In such circumstances, the owner shall accept the safety risks and possible consequences that are associated with such a determination that safety devices will not be used.4.5 If an owner determines that safety devices are not to be used, then it is possible that the owner may choose to implement some alternate means to mitigate or reduce a portion of the safety risks.1.1 This practice is intended to provide methods for selecting, integrating, and verification of active vehicle barrier safety devices so that vehicle barrier systems are reliably and safely controlled when in operation.1.2 There are a number of risks associated with the operation and use of active vehicle barrier systems (AVBS). One of the risks is that of undesired collision between an active vehicle barrier (AVB) and an authorized vehicle. Such risks can be minimized through proper design, construction, installation, operation, and training in the use of such systems.1.3 The proper selection, installation, and use of safety devices that will prevent an AVBS from activating or deploying while an authorized vehicle is transiting the barrier, or when such an authorized vehicle is stopped while a portion of the vehicle is located in the path of or in an unsafe proximity to a barrier, can minimize the likelihood of unintended collision between a barrier and authorized vehicle.1.4 For this practice, safety refers to the ability of the barrier to operate without causing unintended damage to vehicles or injury to people via operation or deployment of the barrier, when an authorized vehicle is transiting the barrier. Security refers to the ability to operate or deploy the barrier to serve its intended purpose of stopping an unauthorized vehicle from passing through the barrier location.1.5 Pedestrians are excluded from the scope of this practice. It is assumed, for the purposes of this practice, that pedestrians are excluded from potentially hazardous locations in the immediate vicinity of AVBS moving components. It is recognized that authorized pedestrians may be present in the area of the movable AVBS for required purposes, such as inspection of vehicles that are stopped. The presence of “casual” pedestrians shall be kept away from the movable elements of the AVBS.1.6 This practice is not intended to address any of the following:1.6.1 Overall performance of vehicle barrier systems or effectiveness as a barrier against any vehicles (see Test Method F2656/F2656M).1.6.2 Impact energy able to be withstood by vehicle barrier systems.1.6.3 Serviceability of barrier systems.1.6.4 Selection of vehicle barrier systems for any particular use.1.6.5 Pedestrian Detection Safety Devices—This practice considers that pedestrians are excluded from hazard zones in the vicinity of vehicle barrier systems; and that only trained and authorized people, such as maintenance staff and security officers performing necessary functions, will be present in the hazard areas when the active barriers are in operation.1.6.6 Design and installation of vehicle barrier systems, other than performance of associated vehicle detection safety devices, and the verification that safety devices are able to be overridden under designated emergency conditions, as required by owners.1.6.7 Operating procedures or instructions for operational use of active vehicle barrier systems once they are installed and placed into service. Although such operating procedures are essential for the safe operation of AVBS in practice, development and implementation of such procedures is beyond the scope of this practice.1.7 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.1.8 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

定价： 646元 / 折扣价： 550 元 加购物车

5.1 Particle size and shape are important in predicting the performance of catalytic materials. They influence the bulk density of the final product and thereby the effectiveness of performance.5.2 Establishing a verification reference for the analyzer that is commercially available and dimensionally reliable to close tolerances enables different analyzers to be easily checked to equivalent standards.5.3 This practice may also be followed to analyze catalytic materials for quality manufacturing purposes. Sections 9 and 10 instruct on sample count determination as well as sampling recommendations. Test Method D6299 may be utilized to monitor performance of the analyzer in measuring the size and shape of catalytic materials.1.1 This practice covers the calibration and verification of Dynamic Imaging Analyzers (analyzers) using catalytic and non-catalytic reference materials. The measurement range of analyzers covers from 500 µm to 20 000 µm.1.2 This practice may also be used to analyze catalytic materials once the analyzer has been calibrated and verified.1.3 Units—The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard; however, English and mesh units are also acceptable with conversions provided in Appendix X3.1.4 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 practice provides criteria for the verification of the silica sediment removal efficiency of hydrodynamic separators.4.2 Verification can be used to support certification of the technology within different AHJs provided that:4.2.1 HDS units are sized using the resulting performance data to treat the prescribed water quality flow rate or annual mass load requirement at the level of performance desired by the certifying entity.4.2.2 Scaling of results to different MTD model sizes is in accordance with this standard.4.2.3 The technology is designed consistently with the tested unit such that it operates within the specified limits determined by the verification as well as other restrictions placed by the certification entity.1.1 This practice covers the criteria for the laboratory verification of Hydrodynamic Separators (HDS) as it relates to the removal of suspended solids in stormwater runoff.1.2 HDS manufactured treatment devices are placed as offline or online treatment devices along storm drain pipe lines to remove suspended solids and associated pollutants from stormwater runoff. These devices may be used to target removal of other pollutants which are not covered in this standard. The criteria in this standard specifically relate to the removal of silica particles in controlled laboratory conditions, which is considered an appropriate surrogate for predicting the removal of stormwater solids from actual stormwater runoff.1.3 This practice provides guidelines for independent regulatory entities, collectively referred to as Authority Having Jurisdictions (AHJs), to streamline data requirements for the certification of HDS devices within their jurisdiction. For any given AHJ, additional criteria may also apply.1.4 Units—The values stated in inch-pound units are to be regarded as standard, except for methods to establish and report sediment concentration and particle size. It is convention to exclusively describe sediment concentration in mg/L and particle size in mm or μm, both of which are SI units. The SI units given in parentheses are mathematical conversions, which are provided for information purposes only and are not considered standard. Reporting of test results in units other than inch-pound units shall not be regarded as non-conformance with this test method.1.5 Acceptance of test results attained according to this specification may be subject to specific requirements set by a Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP), a specific verification protocol, or AHJ. It is advised to review one or all of the above to ensure compliance.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: This practice is also intended to ensure that the data resulting from completion of testing in accordance with the ASTM test methods referenced herein can be utilized to satisfy the requirements of the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection’s manufactured treatment device (MTD) certification process.1.7 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

定价： 590元 / 折扣价： 502 元 加购物车

3.1 The primary objective of this verification guide is to determine the “air pollution-prevention potential” (possible reduction in VOC or HAP emissions) of factory-applied liquid coatings.3.2 The overall objective of this guide is to verify the above pollution-prevention characteristics and basic performance characteristics of liquid coating technologies. Use of this guide can increase acceptance of more environmentally friendly technologies for product finishing with an accompanying reduction in emissions to the atmosphere. The specific objectives of this guide are to (1) quantify the VOC and HAP content of liquid coatings and (2) verify the basic quality and durability performance of these coatings.3.3 The primary criteria for verification of liquid coatings will be:3.3.1 Confirm that use of the coating will significantly reduce VOC and HAP content or emissions (or both) during application or cure, or both.3.3.2 Confirm that the coating can provide an acceptable finish (appearance, hardness, flexibility, etc.) for the intended end use.3.4 The test results from this guide can provide to potential users the best data available to determine whether the coating will provide a pollution-prevention benefit while meeting the finish quality requirements for its intended use. This guide intends to supply end users with unbiased technical data to assist them in this decision-making process.3.5 The quantitative air pollution-prevention potential depends on a multitude of factors; therefore, the liquid coatings are to be applied in accordance with the coating vendor’s instructions and the resulting verification data reflect only the specific conditions of the test. To quantify the environmental benefit (air pollution-prevention potential), a test to quantify the VOC or HAP emissions from the new liquid coatings will be conducted and compared to data for existing coatings typically used in the target industry.1.1 This guide provides a generic testing procedure to verify the air pollution-prevention characteristics and basic properties of liquid coatings applied to metal, plastic, wood, or composite substrates in a factory/manufacturing environment. Thus it may be used to evaluate these liquid coatings to verify their volatile organic compound (VOC) and organic hazardous air pollutant (HAP) content as well as basic performance properties.1.2 This guide is adapted from a procedure used by the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to establish third party verification of the physical properties and performance of coatings that have potential to reduce air emissions. The data from the verification testing is available on the internet at the EPA’s Environmental Technology Verification (ETV) Program website (http://www.epa.gov/etv/centers/center6.html) under the “P2 Innovative Coatings and Coating Equipment Pilot.”1.3 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as the standard. The values given 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

5.1 Multi-axis force measuring platforms are used to measure the ground reaction forces produced at the interface between a subject's foot or shoe and the supporting ground surface. These platforms are used in various settings ranging from research laboratories to healthcare facilities. The use of force platforms has become particularly important in gait analysis where clinical evaluations have become a billable clinical service.5.2 Of particular importance is the application of force platforms in the treatment of cerebral palsy (CP) (1, 2).3 An estimated 8000 to 10 000 infants born each year will develop CP (3) while today’s affected population is over 764 000 patients (4). Quantitative gait analysis, using force platforms and motion capture systems, provides a valuable tool in evaluating the pathomechanics of children with CP. This type of mechanical evaluation provides a quantitative basis for treating neuromuscular conditions. In other words, surgical decisions are in part guided by information gained from the use of force platform measurements (5, 6).5.3 Another application is treatment of spina bifida. According to the Gait and Clinical Movement Analysis Society (GCMAS) (7), an instrumented gait analysis is the standard of expert care for children with gait abnormalities secondary to spina bifida. The main objective of diagnostic gait analysis is to define the pathological consequences of neural tube defects as they relate to gait. The use of instrumented gait analysis allows physicians to determine which surgical or non-surgical interventions would provide the best outcome.5.4 More recently, force platforms have been used for pre- and post-surgical evaluation of TKA (total knee arthroplasty) and THA (total hip arthroplasty) patients. Such data provides an objective measure of the mechanical outcome of the surgical procedure.5.5 In addition to the clinical applications there are numerous medical and human performance research activities which rely on accurate measurement of ground reaction forces by using multi-axis force platform measurement instruments.5.6 As a standards organization, ASTM has historically provided excellent standards for the calibration of force transducers and force-measuring instrumentation. Force platforms, however, are different from force transducers. Force platforms typically provide a large active working surface, whereas force transducers provide more or less a single point of interaction with the load-applying environment. Moreover, force platforms typically provide six-axis measurements and are expected to be used in environments causing multi-axial loading.1.1 This standard recommends practices for performance verification of multi-axis force platforms commonly used for measuring ground reaction forces during gait, balance, and other activities.1.1.1 This standard provides a method to quantify the relationship between applied input force and force platform output signals across the manufacturer’s defined spatial working surface and specified force operating range.1.1.2 This standard provides definitions of the critical parameters necessary to quantify the behavior of multi-axis force measuring platforms and the methods to measure the parameters.1.1.3 This standard presents methods for the quantification of spatially distributed errors and absolute measuring performance of the force platform at discrete spatial intervals and discrete force levels on the working surface of the platform.1.1.4 This standard further defines certain important derived parameters, notably COP (center of pressure) and methods to quantify and report the measuring performance of such derived parameters at spatial intervals and force levels across the working range of the force platform.1.1.5 This standard defines the requirements for a report suitable to characterize the force platform’s performance and provide traceable documentation to be distributed by the manufacturer or calibration facility to the users of such platforms.1.1.6 Dynamic characteristics and applications where the force platform is incorporated in other equipment, such as instrumented treadmills and stairs, are beyond the scope of this standard.1.1.7 This standard is written for purposes of multi-axis force platform verification. However, the methods and procedures are applicable to calibration of force platforms by manufacturers.1.2 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as the standard. Other metric and inch-pound values are regarded as equivalent when required.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： 590元 / 折扣价： 502 元 加购物车

This specification describes a process for verifying the intended function and compliance with safety objectives of avionics systems by means of system-level testing. This verification process includes functional verification planning, testing, resolution of test failures, and regression analysis and testing. It also covers organizational requirements and the process of product definition (function identification, classification, and specification) as well as the requirements for producing a statement of verification.1.1 This specification provides a process for performing system level verification of aircraft systems and equipment. It provides a means of compliance that can be used for systems and equipment with software and Airborne Electronic Hardware (AEH) that have not been addressed by traditional development assurance methods.1.2 This process can be used to show compliance to regulations that require a demonstration that functionality was implemented as intended, including safety mitigations that address failure conditions for software and AEH aspects for aircraft systems and equipment.1.3 While this specification was developed with systems and equipment installed on aircraft certification level 1 and 2 (or class I and II in accordance with Advisory Circular (AC) 23.1309-1) normal category aeroplanes in mind, the content may be more broadly applicable. It is the responsibility of the Applicant to substantiate broader applicability as a specific means of compliance and obtain concurrence for its use from the applicable Civil Aviation Authority (CAA).1.4 When using this specification, regulations that govern system safety requirements applicable to the aircraft still apply. In complying with those regulations, additional architectural mitigations such as redundancy, independence, separation, system monitors, etc., may be required in addition to the verification process specified in this specification.1.5 The system level verification activities expected by this specification increase as the severity of the failure conditions applicable to or affected by the function increase. Those functions, which have hazardous and catastrophic failure conditions, receive additional activities through this process to provide detailed scrutiny. For normal category aircraft, refer to Practice F3309, Practice F3230, or AC 23.1309-1 for more information on the identification and classification of system failure conditions. Involvement of the applicable CAA personnel or their designees in this system verification process should be discussed early in the project.1.6 This verification process specifically addresses definition, identification, and verification of system functions. Processes conducted under this specification may not satisfy all applicable external requirements; additional review on the part of the system developer, integrator, or installer may be required to meet specific requirements or the specified mission of the aircraft, or both.1.7 The values stated in inch-pound units are to be regarded as standard. No other units of measurement are included in this standard.1.8 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.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： 590元 / 折扣价： 502 元 加购物车