5.1 This test method is intended to be used for compliance with compositional specifications for iron content in manganese ores. It is assumed that all who use these procedures will be trained analysts capable of performing common laboratory procedures skillfully and safely. It is expected that work will be performed in a properly equipped laboratory and that proper waste disposal procedures will be followed. Appropriate quality control practices must be followed such as those described in Guide E882.1.1 This test method covers the determination of iron in manganese ore in the range from 2 % to 20 %.NOTE 1: As used in this test method (except as related to the term relative standard deviation), “percent” or “%” refers to mass fraction (wt/wt) of the form 1g/100g.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： 515元 加购物车

5.1 Bacteria that exist in biofilms are phenotypically different from suspended cells of the same genotype. Research has shown that biofilm bacteria are more difficult to kill than suspended bacteria (4, 5). Laboratory biofilms are engineered in growth reactors designed to produce a specific biofilm type. Altering system parameters will correspondingly result in a change in the biofilm. The purpose of this practice is to direct a user in the growth of a P. aeruginosa or S. aureus biofilm by clearly defining the operational parameters to grow a biofilm that can be assessed for efficacy using the Standard Test Method for Evaluating Disinfectant Efficacy Against Pseudomonas aeruginosa Biofilm Grown in CDC Biofilm Reactor Using Single Tube Method (E2871).5.2 Operating the CDC Biofilm Reactor at the conditions specified in this method generates biofilm at log densities (log10 CFU per coupon) ranging from 8.0 to 9.5 for P. aeruginosa and 7.5 to 9.0 for S. aureus. These levels of biofilm are anticipated on surfaces conducive to biofilm formation such as the conditions outlined in this method.5.2.1 To achieve an S. aureus biofilm with a population comparable to that for P. aeruginosa using the bacterial liquid growth medium conditions specified here, the S. aureus biofilm must be grown at 36 °C ±2 °C rather than at room temperature (21 °C ±2 °C).1.1 This practice specifies the parameters for growing a Pseudomonas aeruginosa (ATCC 15442) or Staphylococcus aureus (ATCC 6538) biofilm that can be used for disinfectant efficacy testing using the Test Method for Evaluating Disinfectant Efficacy Against Pseudomonas aeruginosa Biofilm Grown in CDC Biofilm Reactor Using Single Tube Method (E2871) or in an alternate method capable of accommodating the coupons used in the CDC Biofilm Reactor. The resulting biofilm is representative of generalized situations where biofilm exist on hard, non-porous surfaces under shear rather than being representative of one particular environment. Additional bacteria may be grown using the basic procedure outlined in this document, however, alternative preparation procedures for frozen stock cultures and biofilm generation (for example, medium concentrations, baffle speed, temperature, incubation times, coupon types, etc.) may be necessary.1.2 This practice uses the CDC Biofilm Reactor created by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (1).2 The CDC Biofilm Reactor is a continuously stirred tank reactor (CSTR) with high wall shear. The reactor is versatile and may also be used for growing or characterizing various species of biofilm, or both (2-4) provided appropriate adjustments are made to the growth media and operational parameters of the reactor.1.3 Basic microbiology training is required to perform this practice.1.4 Units—The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard. No other units of measurement are included in this practice.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 加购物车

4.1 This guide should be used to support existing decision frameworks for the selection and application of analytical procedures to sediment programs.4.2 Activities described in this guide should be conducted by persons familiar with current sediment site characterization and remediation techniques, sediment remediation science and technology, toxicology concepts, risk and exposure assessment methodologies, and ecological evaluation protocols.4.3 This guide may be used by various parties involved in sediment programs, including regulatory agencies, project sponsors, environmental consultants, toxicologists, risk assessors, site remediation professionals, environmental contractors, analytical testing laboratories, data validators, data reviewers and users, and other stakeholders, which may include, but are not limited to, owners, buyers, developers, lenders, insurers, government agencies, and community members and groups.4.4 This guide is not intended to replace or supersede federal, state, local or international regulatory requirements. Instead this guide may be used to complement and support such requirements.4.5 This guide provides a decision framework based on over-arching features and elements that should be customized by the user based on site-specific conditions, regulatory context, and sediment program objectives for a particular site. This guide should not be used alone as a prescriptive checklist.4.6 The selection and application of analytical methods and test procedures for sediment programs is an evolving science. This guide provides a systematic but flexible decision framework to accommodate variations in approaches by regulatory agency and by user based on project objectives, site complexity, unique site features, programmatic and regulatory requirements, newly developed guidance, newly published scientific research, use of alternative scientifically-based methods and procedures, changes in regulatory criteria, advances in scientific knowledge and technical capability, multiple lines of evidence approach, and unforeseen circumstances.4.7 The user of this guide should review the overall structure and components of this guide before proceeding with use, including: Section 1 - ; Section 2 - References; Section 3 - Terminology; Section 4 - . The remainder of this guide is organized as a tool kit to support the selection and application of a range of test methods and procedures that may be used at various stages of a sediment program, including: Section 5 - Physical Property Test Methods; Section 6 - Chemistry Analytical Methods; Section 7 - Passive Sampling Methods; Section 8 - Biological Test Methods; Section 9 - Environmental Forensics Analytical Methods; and Section 10 - Analytical Methods Development. Nonmandatory Appendix X1 – Appendix X13 provide users of this guide with additional information. A list of References and a Bibliography are provided at the end of this guide.4.8 Project Scoping and Planning—This guide supports that systematic planning process for selection and application of analytical procedures used for sediment programs. The use of this guide compliments applicable existing guidance used to develop a Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) and to establish data quality objectives (DQO) necessary to meet project goals and to fully understand data quality. This process encourages planners to identify and focus on the key issues that must be addressed and resolved for successful, cost-effective, and defensible project outcomes.4.9 The use of this guide also supports the development and refinement of a Conceptual Site Model (CSM) as part of the planning process for site activities that involve gathering environmental data.4.10 Implementation of the guide is site-specific. The user of this guide may choose to customize the implementation of the guide for particular types and/or phases of sediment programs.4.11 This guide may be initiated at any time during a sediment program, including: site characterization, assessment, remedy selection, remedial design, remedial implementation, remedial operation and maintenance, baseline and long-term monitoring, remedy optimization, and corrective action.4.12 Use of this guide supports the use of systematic project planning, dynamic work strategies, use of innovative sampling and analytical technologies, and application of best management practices and guiding principles as applied to contaminated sediment programs.4.13 Use of this guide supports a multiple lines of evidence approach, including a weight of evidence approach, for assessment, remediation, and monitoring of contaminated sediments.4.14 Use of this guide is consistent with the Sediment-RBCA process which guides the user to acquire and evaluate additional data, obtain the appropriate data and refine goals, objectives, receptors, exposure pathways, and the site conceptual model. As the Sediment-RBCA process proceeds, data and conclusions reached at each tier help focus subsequent tiered evaluation. This integrative process results in efficient, cost-effective decision-making and timely, appropriate response actions for contaminated sediment programs.4.15 Planning Framework—When applying this guide, the user should undertake a systematic project planning and scoping process to collect information to assist in making site-specific, user-defined decisions for a particular project. Planning activities should include the following factors: (a) Assemble an experienced team of project professionals; (b) Engage stakeholders early and often in the planning process; (c) Define, agree on, and document clearly stated project objectives and intended outcomes; (d) Recognize that sediment programs are complex, uncertainty is high, that an appropriate projectspecific approach may be developed with the investment of time and effort, and that compromise and uncertainty are inherent in the process; (e) Identify the applicable regulatory program(s); (f) Compile existing site data; and (g) Establish a plan for documenting and reporting key decisions and results. These project planning and scoping activities should be carried forward as the project progresses.4.16 Experience and Expertise—The users of this guide should consider assembling a team of experienced project professionals with appropriate expertise to scope, plan and execute a sediment data acquisition program. The team may include: regulatory agencies, project sponsors, environmental consultants, toxicologists, risk assessors, site remediation professionals, environmental contractors, analytical testing laboratories, and data reviewers, data validators, data users, and other stakeholders.4.17 Stakeholders—The users of this guide are encouraged to engage key stakeholders early and often in the project planning and scoping process, especially regulators, project sponsors, and service providers including analytical testing laboratories. A concerted ongoing effort should be made by the guide user to continuously engage stakeholders as the project progresses in order to gain insight, technical support and input for resolving technical issues and challenges that may arise during project implementation.4.18 Documentation—The users of this guide should establish a plan for documenting and reporting the results of the project planning process, including: key challenges, options considered, decisions taken, data acquisition approach, data results, and project outcomes relative to project objectives. Project documentation may include: Project Work Plans, Sampling and Analysis Plans (SAP), Quality Assurance Project Plans (QAPP), Technical Memos, and Project Reports. The user must ensure that the test methods used meet the analytical rigor required by the regulatory agency or agencies having oversight authority for the project.4.19 The users of this guide are encouraged to continuously update and refine the project Conceptual Site Model (CSM), Work Plans and Reports used to describe the physical properties, chemical composition and occurrence, biologic features, and environmental conditions of the sediment project.4.20 Key Considerations—This guide supports users in the identification of key considerations for designing and implementing sediment program data acquisition plans, including discussion of applicability and use limitations of analytical methods and testing procedures.4.21 Challenges—This guide is designed to assist the user in more fully understanding and navigating the challenges inherent in the selection and application of analytical methods and test procedures for use in sediment programs, specifically challenges in generating analytical data of sufficient sensitivity to support the stringent regulatory screening levels applied to sediment programs. USEPA (2005a) (1)5 has long recognized the challenges associated with sediment programs, as summarized below:4.21.1 Sources may be various, large, ongoing, and/or difficult to control,4.21.2 Impacts may be diffuse, large, and diverse,4.21.3 Environment may be dynamic, increasing the difficulty in understanding effects of natural forces and man-made events on sediment movement and stability and contaminant fate and transport,4.21.4 Cleanup work often involves engineering challenges and higher costs than for other media,4.21.5 Mixed land uses and numerous property owners and communities with differing views, opinions, and impacts often complicate cleanup efforts, and4.21.6 Ecologically valuable resources and/or legislatively protected species or habitats may be present.1.1 This is a guide for the selection and application of a range of analytical methods and testing procedures that may be used during sediment programs, including physical properties testing, chemical analytical methods, passive sampling procedures, bioassays and toxicity testing, environmental forensics methods and procedures, and methods development procedures for sediment programs.1.2 Sediment programs vary greatly in terms of environmental complexity, physical, chemical and biological characteristics, human health and ecological risk concerns, and geographic and regulatory context. This guide provides information for the selection and application of analytical methods and testing protocols applicable to a wide range of sediment programs.1.3 This guide describes widely accepted considerations and best practices used in the selection and application of analytical procedures used during sediment programs. This guide supports and complements existing regulations and technical guidance.1.4 This guide is designed for general application to a wide range of sediment programs performed under international, federal, state and local environmental programs. This guide describes the selection and application of analytical methods and test procedures, not the requirements for specific regulatory jurisdictions. This guide compliments but does not replace regulatory agency requirements.1.5 This guide may be used for a wide range of sediment programs, including programs with overlapping regulatory jurisdictions, programs without a clearly established regulatory framework, voluntary programs, Brownfield programs, and international programs. The users of this guide should be aware of the appropriate regulatory requirements that apply to sediment programs. The user should consult applicable regulatory agency requirements to identify appropriate technical decision criteria and seek regulatory approvals, as necessary, prior to selection and application of analytical methods and test procedures to sediment programs.1.6 This guide supports the collaboration of stakeholders, including project sponsors, regulators, laboratory service providers, and others, on the selection and application of analytical procedures to sediment programs. This guide highlights key considerations for designing sediment program data acquisition plans, including applicability and use limitations of analytical methods and test procedures, and data usability considerations. This guide recognizes the challenges inherent in selection and application of analytical methods and test procedures for sediment systems, as well as the challenges inherent in generating analytical data of sufficient sensitivity to meet regulatory criteria applied to sediment programs.1.7 ASTM standard guides are not regulations; they are consensus standard guides that may be followed voluntarily to support applicable regulatory requirements.1.8 Test methods, procedures, and guidelines published by ASTM, USEPA, and other U.S. and international agencies are used for sediment programs, many of which are referenced by this guide. However, these documents do not provide guidance on the selection and application of analytical methods and test procedures for sediment programs. This guide was developed for that purpose.1.9 This guide may be used in conjunction with other ASTM guides developed for sediment programs.1.10 The user of this guide should review existing information and data available for a sediment project to determine the most appropriate entry point into and use of this guide.1.11 Table of Contents:   SectionIntroduction   1Referenced Documents 2Terminology 3 4Physical Property Test Methods 5Chemistry Analytical Methods 6Passive Sampling Methods 7Biological Test Methods 8Environmental Forensics Analytical Methods 9Analytical Method Development 10Key Differences in Physical Properties of Sediment and Soil Appendix X1Guidelines for Collection of Sediment Samples for Physical Properties Testing Appendix X2Key Concepts in Sediment Stratigraphy for Physical Properties Testing Appendix X3Quick Reference Guide for Sediment Chemistry Analytical Method Selection Appendix X4Sampling Reference Guide for Sediment Chemistry Analytical Methods Appendix X5Critical Success Factors for Sediment Chemistry Analytical Programs Appendix X6Quick Reference Guide for Passive Sampling Method Selection Appendix X7Advantages and Limitations of Passive Sampler Types for Organic Compounds Appendix X8Methodologies and Equations for Determining Aqueous Chemical Concentrations from Passive Sampler Results Appendix X9Pros and Cons Evaluation of Biological Test Methods Appendix X10Decision Tree for Biological Testing Selection Appendix X11Species List for Biological Testing Appendix X12Daubert Criteria to Guide the Selection and Application of Analytical Test Methods Used for Environmental Sediment Forensics Appendix X13References  Bibliography  1.12 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.1.13 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： 983元 加购物车

4.1 Intended Users: 4.1.1 This guide may be used by various parties involved in sediment corrective action programs, including regulatory agencies, project sponsors, environmental consultants, toxicologists, risk assessors, site remediation professionals, environmental contractors, and other stakeholders.4.2 Reference Material: 4.2.1 This guide should be used in conjunction with other ASTM guides listed in 2.1 (especially Guides E3163, E3240, E3242, E3344 and E3382), as well as the material in the References section.4.3 Flexible Site-Specific Implementation: 4.3.1 This guide provides a systematic but flexible framework to accommodate variations in approaches by regulatory agencies and by the user based on project objectives, site complexity, unique site features, regulatory requirements, newly developed guidance, newly published scientific research, changes in regulatory criteria, advances in scientific knowledge and technical capability, and unforeseen circumstances.4.3.1.1 This guide provides a monitoring plan development, execution and analysis framework based on over-arching features and elements that should be customized by the user based on site-specific conditions, regulatory context, and sediment corrective action objectives.4.3.1.2 Implementation of the guide is site-specific. The user may choose to customize the implementation of the guide for a particular site, especially smaller, less complex sites.4.3.1.3 This guide should not be used alone as a prescriptive checklist.4.3.2 The users of this guide are encouraged to update and refine (when needed) the conceptual site model, Project Work Plans and Project Reports used to describe the physical properties, chemical composition and occurrence, biologic features, and environmental conditions of the sediment corrective action project.4.4 Regulatory Frameworks: 4.4.1 This guide is intended to be applicable to a broad range of local, state, tribal, federal, or international jurisdictions, each with its own unique regulatory framework. As such, this guide does not provide a detailed discussion of the requirements or guidance associated with any of these regulatory frameworks, nor is it intended to supersede applicable regulations and guidance. The user of this guide will need to be aware of (and comply with) the regulatory requirements and guidance in the jurisdiction where the work is being performed.4.5 Systematic Project Planning and Scoping Process: 4.5.1 When applying this guide, the user should undertake a systematic project planning and scoping process to collect information to assist in making site-specific, user-defined decisions for a particular project, including assembling an experienced team of project professionals. These practitioners should have the appropriate expertise to scope, plan, and execute a sediment monitoring program. This team may include, but is not limited to, project sponsors, environmental consultants, toxicologists, site remediation professionals, analytical chemists, geochemists, and statisticians.4.6 Stakeholder Engagement: 4.6.1 The users of this guide are encouraged to engage key stakeholders early and often in the project planning and scoping process, especially regulators, project sponsors, and service providers. A concerted ongoing effort should be made by the user to continuously engage stakeholders as the project progresses in order to gain insight, technical support and input for resolving technical issues and challenges that may arise during project implementation.4.7 Other Considerations: 4.7.1 The over-arching process for risk-based corrective action a sediment sites is not covered in detail in this guide. Guide E3240 contains extensive information concerning that process.4.7.2 Sediment sampling and laboratory analyses is not covered in detail. Guide E3163 contain extensive information concerning sediment sampling and laboratory analysis methodologies.4.7.3 Developing representative background concentrations for the sediment site is not covered in detail in this guide. Guides E3242, E3344 and E3382 contain extensive information concerning that topic.4.7.4 In this guide, “sediment” (3.1.15) is defined as a matrix being found at the bottom of a water body. Upland soils of sedimentary origin are excluded from consideration as sediment in this guide.4.7.5 In this guide, only COC concentrations are considered. Residual background radioactivity is out of scope.4.8 Structure and Components of This Guide: 4.8.1 The user of this guide should review the overall structure and components of this guide before proceeding with use, including:Section 1 Section 2 Referenced DocumentsSection 3 TerminologySection 4 Section 5 Components of a Generic Monitoring ProgramSection 6 Generic Considerations for Sediment Site Monitoring ProgramsSection 7 Types of Sediment Remedial Action Monitoring ProgramsSection 8 Baseline Monitoring Programs: General ConsiderationsSection 9 Remedy Implementation Monitoring Programs: General ConsiderationsSection 10 Post-Remedy Monitoring Programs: General Considerations and Program Planning ExamplesSection 11 KeywordsAppendix X1 Discussion of Monitoring Program Development, Data Quality Objective Development and Statistical Analysis of Data ProcessesAppendix X2 Case Study: Monitoring of Sediment Remediation ActivitiesReferences  1.1 This guide pertains to corrective action monitoring before (baseline monitoring), during (remedy implementation monitoring) and after (post-remedy monitoring) sediment remedial activities. It does not address monitoring performed during remedial investigations, pre-remedial risk assessments, and pre-design investigations.1.2 Sediment monitoring programs (baseline, remedy implementation and post-remedy) are typically used in contaminated sediment corrective actions performed under various regulatory programs, including the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA). Although many of the references cited in this guide are CERCLA-oriented, the guide is applicable to corrective actions performed under local, state, tribal, federal, and international corrective action programs. However, this guide does not provide a detailed description of the monitoring program requirements or existing guidance for each jurisdiction. This guide is intended to inform, complement, and support but not supersede the guidelines established by local, state, tribal, federal, or international agencies.1.3 This guide provides a framework, which includes widely accepted considerations and best practices for monitoring sediment remedy efficacy.1.4 This guide is related to several other guides. Guide E3240 provides an overview of the sediment risk-based corrective action (RBCA) process, including the role of risk assessment and representative background. Guide E3163 discusses appropriate laboratory methodologies to use for the chemical analysis of potential contaminants of concern (PCOCs) in various media (such as, sediment, porewater, surface water and biota tissue) taken during sediment monitoring programs; it also discusses biological testing and community assessment. Guide E3382 describes the overall framework to determine representative background concentrations (including Conceptual Site Model [CSM] considerations) for a contaminated sediment site; Guides E3344 (methodologies for selecting representative background reference areas) and E3242 (statistical and chemical methodologies used in developing representative background concentrations for a sediment site) complement Guide E3382.1.5 Units—The values stated in SI or CGS units are to be regarded as the standard. No other units of measurement are included in this standard.1.6 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.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 加购物车

4.1 Metal parts made by additive manufacturing differ from their traditional metal counterparts made by forging, casting, or welding. Additive manufacturing produces layers melted or sintered on top of each other. The part’s shape is controlled by a computer as well as by the layers. The computer directs energy from a laser or electron beam onto a powder bed or wire input material. These processing approaches have the potential of creating flaws that are undesirable in the as-built or finished part. In general, processing parameter anomalies and disruptions during a build may induce such “flaws.” Flaws can also be introduced because of contaminants present in the input material.4.2 Established NDT procedures such as those given in ASTM E07 standards are the basis for the NDT procedures discussed in this guide. These NDT procedures are used to inspect production parts before or after post-processing or finishing operations, or after receipt of finished parts by the end user prior to installation. The NDT procedures described in this guide are based on procedures developed for conventionally manufactured cast, wrought, or welded production parts.4.3 Application of the NDT procedures discussed in this guide is intended to reduce the likelihood of material or component failure, thus mitigating or eliminating the attendant risks associated with loss of function, and possibly, the loss of ground support personnel, crew, or mission.4.4 Input Materials—The input materials covered in this guide consist of, but are not limited to, ones made from aluminum alloys, titanium alloys, nickel-based alloys, cobalt-chromium alloys, and stainless steels. Input materials are either powders or wire.NOTE 3: When electron beams are used, the beam couples effectively with any electrically conductive material, including aluminum and copper-based alloys.4.4.1 Powders—High-quality powders required for AM process are produced by (1) plasma atomization, (2) inert gas atomization, or (3) centrifugal atomization using rotating electrodes (Fig. 1).(A) Abbreviations used: … = unknown or not applicable, CAD = computer aided design, CMM = coordinate measuring machine, CT = computed tomography, DED = directed energy deposition, EBM = electron beam melting, ET = eddy current testing, EMF = electromagnetic frequency, HIP = hot isostatic pressing, IRT = irfrared thermography, LOF = lack of fusion, MET = optical metrology, PA = plasma arc, PBF = powder bed fusion, PCRT = process compensated resonance testing, PT = penetrant testing, SLM = selective laser melting, and UT = ultrasonic testing.(B) Portions of table courtesy of AMAZE FP7 project.(C) Discontinuities or indications detected by NDT that are not necessarily rejectable.(D) Due to rapidly quenching, which may also lead to metastable or nonequilibrium morphologies.(E) Issue during long builds.(F) ISO TC 261 JG59 N 237 Guide.(G) If surface or near surface.NOTE 15: There are longstanding NDT standard flaw classes for welds and castings. In general, the defect classes for welded and cast parts differ from the flaw classes for AM parts.4.9 Process-Flaw Correlation—Given the range of materials and processes encountered in metal additive manufacturing, the process origins of flaws are still being characterized. However, examples exist. For example, when the energy input is insufficient, successive scan tracks do not properly fuse together and flaws appear along the scan line. In L-PBF parts, incomplete wetting and balling effects associated with insufficient energy input have been shown to lead to pores or voids. In addition, EB-PBF parts can show large voids or cavities extending across several layers when the process parameters are not carefully chosen. Smaller spherical pores can also develop in EBM parts due to entrapment of gases originally present gas-atomized metal powders.4.10 Flaw-Property Correlation—Parts with flaws, for example, porosity, LOF, skipped layers, stop/start flaws, inclusions, or excessive surface roughness, can exhibit degraded strength and fatigue properties compared with parts with fewer flaws. Furthermore, it is accepted practice to identify regions experiencing principle stresses before NDT is performed to assess the potential effect of any detected flaws in those regions. In addition to flaw type, size, and location, other flaw characteristics may be relevant, such as number, total volume, flaw/length (aspect ratio), orientation, and average nearest neighbor distance, and proximity to surfaces.(A) Abbreviations used: DED = Directed Energy Deposition, HAZ = Heat Affected Zone, HIP = Hot Isostatic Pressing(A) Abbreviations used: … = not applicable, AE = Acoustic Emission, CR = Computed Radiography, CT = Computed Tomography, DR = Digital Radiology, ET = Eddy Current Testing, IRT = Infrared Thermography, LT = Leak Testing , MET = Metrology, MT = Magnetic Particle Testing, NR = Neutron Radiography, PCRT = Process Compensated Resonance Testing, PT = Penetrant Testing, RT = Radiographic Testing, UT = Ultrasonic Testing, and VT = Visual Testing.(B) Includes Digital Imaging.(C) Especially helpful when characterizing internal passageways or cavities (complex geometry parts) for underfill and overfill, or other internal features not accessible to MET, PT, or VT (including borescopy).(D) Applicable if on surface.(E) Radiographic methods are not optimal for detecting tight laminar features like cracking and LOF, which typically do not exhibit enough density change.(F) If large enough to cause a leak or pressure drop across the part.(G) Macroscopic cracks only.(H) Conventional neutron radiography (NR) allows determination of internal and external dimensions.(I) Pycnometry (Archimedes principle).(J) Density variations will only show up in imaged regions having equivalent thickness.(K) If inclusions are large enough and sufficient scattering contrast exists.(L) Residual stress can be assessed if resulting from surface post-processing (for example, peening).1.1 This guide discusses the use of established and emerging nondestructive testing (NDT) procedures used to inspect metal parts made by additive manufacturing (AM).1.2 The NDT procedures covered produce data related to and affected by microstructure, part geometry, part complexity, surface finish, and the different AM processes used.1.3 The parts tested by the procedures covered in this guide are used in aerospace applications; therefore, the inspection requirements for discontinuities and inspection points in general are different and more stringent than for materials and components used in non-aerospace applications.1.4 The metal materials under consideration include, but are not limited to, aluminum alloys, titanium alloys, nickel-based alloys, cobalt-chromium alloys, and stainless steels.1.5 The manufacturing processes considered use powder and wire feedstock, and laser or electron energy sources. Specific powder bed fusion (PBF) and directed energy deposition (DED) processes are discussed.1.6 This guide discusses NDT of parts after they have been fabricated. Parts will exist in one of three possible states: (1) raw, as-built parts before post-processing (heat treating, hot isostatic pressing, machining, etc.), (2) intermediately machined parts, or (3) finished parts after all post-processing is completed.1.7 The NDT procedures discussed in this guide are used by cognizant engineering organizations to detect both surface and volumetric flaws in as-built (raw) and post-processed (finished) parts.1.8 The NDT procedures discussed in this guide are computed tomography (CT, Section 7, including microfocus CT), eddy current testing (ET, Section 8), optical metrology (MET, Section 9), penetrant testing (PT, Section 10), process compensated resonance testing (PCRT, Section 11), radiographic testing (RT, Section 12), infrared thermography (IRT, Section 13), and ultrasonic testing (UT, Section 14). Other NDT procedures such as leak testing (LT) and magnetic particle testing (MT), which have known utility for inspection of AM parts, are not covered in this guide.1.9 Practices and guidance for in-process monitoring during the build, including guidance on sensor selection and in-process quality assurance, are not covered in this guide.1.10 This guide is based largely on established procedures under the jurisdiction of ASTM Committee E07 on Nondestructive Testing and is the direct responsibility of the appropriate subcommittee therein.1.11 This guide does not recommend a specific course of action for application of NDT to AM parts. It is intended to increase the awareness of established NDT procedures from the NDT perspective.1.12 Recommendations about the control of input materials, process equipment calibration, manufacturing processes, and post-processing are beyond the scope of this guide and are under the jurisdiction of ASTM Committee F42 on Additive Manufacturing Technologies. Standards under the jurisdiction of ASTM F42 or equivalent are followed whenever possible to ensure reproducible parts suitable for NDT are made.1.13 Recommendations about the inspection requirements and management of fracture critical AM parts are beyond the scope of this guide. Recommendations on fatigue, fracture mechanics, and fracture control are found in appropriate end user requirements documents, and in standards under the jurisdiction of ASTM Committee E08 on Fatigue and Fracture.NOTE 1: To determine the deformation and fatigue properties of metal parts made by additive manufacturing using destructive tests, consult Guide F3122.NOTE 2: To quantify the risks associated with fracture critical AM parts, it is incumbent upon the structural assessment community, such as ASTM Committee E08 on Fatigue and Fracture, to define critical initial flaw sizes (CIFS) for the part to define the objectives of the NDT.1.14 This guide does not specify accept-reject criteria used in procurement or as a means for approval of AM parts for service. Any accept-reject criteria are given solely for purposes of illustration and comparison.1.15 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.1.16 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.1.17 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： 983元 加购物车

4.1 This practice is used to evaluate the ability of a radiographic interpreter to discriminate low contrast slit images in a radiographic interpretation environment. A radiographic viewer, as described in Specification E1390, and a viewing environment, as described in Guide E94, are strongly recommended. The minimum acceptable test score in any given application depends on the requirements of the application. Using parties should develop and maintain records of their test results to guide the establishment of acceptable test scores for their applications. (See Note 1.)NOTE 1: During round robin testing with experienced radiographic interpreters, 76 % of the interpreters achieved a score of 85 % or higher, and 95 % achieved a score of 80 % or higher. The average score was 90.7 %, and the standard deviation was 6.7 %. In a second study from 2017, with both certified radiographers and uncertified personnel, the average and standard deviation among certified radiographers was 90.4 ± 4.0 % and among uncertified personnel was 88.4 ± 4.9 %. It was found that on each test page there are 3 or 4 images where the average score for each was less than 80 % correct and the remainder of the images all individually scored greater than 80 % on average. A limited number of the general public was examined, and the average score among these was 75.0 ± 3.3 %.4.2 Administration of the Test 4.2.1 The test procedure described in this practice is intended to determine the ability of a radiographic interpreter to detect low contrast images in a low light level environment. Appropriate dark adaptation time should be permitted. A minimum of 1 min is recommended; however, longer dark adaptation times may be required by some users.4.2.2 The test shall be administered by or under the direction of a test administrator (see 3.2.4). The individual being tested shall not know the identification of the plate or orientation prior to the test.4.2.3 The interpretation of each of the 25 image areas on a plate is recorded on an answer sheet, Fig. 2, by drawing a line corresponding to the location and orientation of the slit image in that image area. Where no line image is detected, a circle should be drawn on the answer sheet in the area corresponding to the image area in which no slit image was detected. An example score sheet is given in Fig. 3, illustrating typical line locations and orientations and illustrating the method for marking answers. The markings shown in the sample score sheet are not taken from any of the actual test plates; however, they illustrate typical distributions of slit images. Fig. 2 of this practice may be photocopied to provide answer sheets, or the using organization may generate their own suitable answer sheet. In any case, the answer sheet must have provisions for recording both the location and orientation of the indication in each of the 25 image locations.FIG. 2 Visual Acuity Test Score SheetFIG. 3 Example of Completed Visual Acuity Test Score Sheet4.2.4 The order in which the indications are marked is not important. The reader may mark the indications in order, or may mark the easier images and return to the more difficult images.4.2.5 Once the score sheet is completed, the test administrator shall determine the identity and orientation of the plate that was read and score the answers using the appropriate answer key.1.1 This practice details the procedure for determining the low-contrast visual acuity of a radiographic interpreter by evaluating the ability of the individual to detect linear images of varying radiographic noise, contrast, and sharpness. No statement is made regarding the applicability of these images to evaluate the competence of a radiographic interpreter. There is no correlation between these images of slit phantoms and the ability to detect cracks or other linear features in an actual radiographic examination. The test procedure follows from work performed by the National Institute of Standards and Technology presented in NBS Technical Note 1143, issued June 1981.1.2 The visual acuity test set consists of five individual plates, each containing a series of radiographic images of 0.5 in. (12.7 mm) long slits in thin metal shims. The original radiographs used to prepare the illustrations were generated using various absorbers, geometric parameters (unsharpness, slit widths), and source parameters (kV, mA, time) to produce images of varying noise, contrast, and sharpness. Each radiographic image has a background density of 1.8 ± 0.15. The images are viewed in a radiographic interpretation environment as used for the evaluation of production radiographic films, for example, illuminators and background lighting as described in Guide E94 and Specification E1390, and without optical magnification.1.3 Each visual acuity test plate consists of 25 individual image areas. The images are arranged in 5 rows and 5 columns as shown in Fig. 1. Each image area is 2 in. x 2 in. (51 mm x 51 mm). All identification is on the back side of the plate. Each plate can be viewed from any of the four orientations (that is, it can be viewed with any of the four edges “up” on the illuminator). Since there are five different plates in the set, this makes for a total of 20 different patterns that can be viewed. The identification of which of the five plates and which of the four orientations were viewed in any given test can be determined from the designation on the back side.FIG. 1 Layout of Visual Acuity Test Plate1.4 Within the image areas, the slit image may appear in any of five locations, that is, in any of the four corners of the image area, or near the center. No more than one slit image will appear in any one image area. The slit image may be horizontal, vertical, slant left, or slant right. Several of the plates include one or more image areas in which there is no slit image.1.5 Use of this standard requires procurement of the adjunct test plates.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： 590元 加购物车

5.1 This practice describes procedures applicable to both shop and field conditions. More comprehensive or precise measurements of the characteristics of complete systems and their components will generally require laboratory techniques and electronic equipment such as oscilloscopes and signal generators. Substitution of these methods is not precluded where appropriate; however, their usage is not within the scope of this practice.5.2 This document does not establish system acceptance limits, nor is it intended as a comprehensive equipment specification.5.3 While several important characteristics are included, others of possible significance in some applications are not covered.5.4 Since the parameters to be evaluated and the applicable test conditions must be specified, this practice shall be prescribed only by those familiar with ultrasonic NDT technology and the required tests shall be performed either by such a qualified person or under his supervision.5.5 Implementation may require more detailed procedural instructions in the format of the using facility.5.6 In the case of evaluation of a complete system, selection of the specific tests to be made should be done cautiously; if the related parameters are not critical in the intended application, then their inclusion may be unjustified. For example, vertical linearity may be irrelevant for a go/no-go test with a flaw gate alarm, while horizontal linearity might be required only for accurate flaw-depth or thickness measurement from the display screen.5.7 No frequency of system evaluation or calibration is recommended or implied. This is the prerogative of the using parties and is dependent on application, environment, and stability of equipment.5.8 Certain sections are applicable only to instruments having receiver gain controls calibrated in decibels (dB). While these may sometimes be designated “gain,” “attenuator,” or “sensitivity” on various instruments, the term “gain controls” will be used in this practice in referring to those which specifically control instrument receiver gain but not including reject, electronic distance-amplitude compensation, or automatic gain control.5.9 These procedures can generally be applied to any combination of instrument and search unit of the commonly used types and frequencies, and to most straight-beam examination, either contact or immersed. Certain sections are also compatible with angle-beam, wheel, delay-line, and dual-search unit techniques. Their use, however, should be mutually agreed upon and so identified in the test report.5.10 The validity of the results obtained will depend on the precision of the instrument display readings. This is assumed to be ±0.04 in. (±1 mm), yielding between 1 % and 2 % of full scale (fs) readability for available instrumentation having suitable screen graticules and display sharpness.1.1 This practice describes procedures for evaluating the following performance characteristics of ultrasonic pulse-echo examination instruments and systems: Horizontal Limit and Linearity; Vertical Limit and Linearity; Resolution - Entry Surface and Far Surface; Sensitivity and Noise; Accuracy of Calibrated Gain Controls. Evaluation of these characteristics is intended to be used for comparing instruments and systems or, by periodic repetition, for detecting long-term changes in the characteristics of a given instrument or system that may be indicative of impending failure, and which, if beyond certain limits, will require corrective maintenance. Instrument characteristics measured in accordance with this practice are expressed in terms that relate to their potential usefulness for ultrasonic testing. Instrument characteristics expressed in purely electronic terms may be measured as described in Guide E1324.1.2 Ultrasonic examination systems using pulsed-wave trains and A-scan presentation (rf or video) may be evaluated.1.3 The procedures are applicable to shop or field conditions; additional electronic measurement instrumentation is not required.1.4 This practice establishes no performance limits for examination systems; if such acceptance criteria are required, these must be specified by the using parties. Where acceptance criteria are implied herein, they are for example only and are subject to more or less restrictive limits imposed by customer's and end user's controlling documents.1.5 The specific parameters to be evaluated, conditions and frequency of test, and report data required must also be determined by the user.1.6 This practice may be used for the evaluation of a complete examination system, including search unit, instrument, interconnections, fixtures and connected alarm and auxiliary devices, primarily in cases where such a system is used repetitively without change or substitution. This practice is not intended to be used as a substitute for calibration or standardization of an instrument or system to inspect any given material. There are limitations to the use of standard reference blocks for that purpose.21.7 Required test apparatus includes selected test blocks and a precision external attenuator (where specified) in addition to the instrument or system to be evaluated.1.8 Precautions relating to the applicability of the procedures and interpretation of the results are included.1.9 Alternate procedures, such as examples described in this document, or others, may only be used with customer approval.1.10 Units—The values stated in inch-pound units are to be regarded as standard. The values given in parentheses are mathematical conversions to SI units that are provided for information only and are not considered standard.1.11 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.1.12 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 加购物车

5.1 This practice is intended for the semi-automated or automated ultrasonic examination of electrofusion joints used in the construction and maintenance of polyethylene piping systems.5.2 Polyethylene piping has been used instead of steel alloys in the petrochemical, power, water, gas distribution, and mining industries due to its reliability and resistance to corrosion and erosion.5.3 The joining process can be subject to a variety of flaws including, but not limited to: lack of fusion, cold fusion, particulate contamination, inclusions, short stab depth, and voids.5.4 Polyethylene material can have a range of acoustic characteristics that make electrofusion joint examination difficult. Polyethylene materials are highly attenuative, which often limits the use of higher ultrasonic frequencies. It also exhibits a natural high frequency filtering effect. An example of the range of acoustic characteristics is provided in Table 1.6 The table notes the wide range of acoustic velocities reported in the literature. This makes it essential that the reference blocks are made from pipe grade polyethylene with the same density cell class as the electrofusion fitting examined.(A) A range of velocity and attenuation values have been noted in the literature (1-9).5.5 Polyethylene is reported to have a shear velocity of 987 m/s. However, due to extremely high attenuation in shear mode (on the order of 5 dB/mm (127 dB/in.) at 2 MHz) no practical examinations can be carried out using shear mode (6).5.6 Due to the wide range of applications, joint acceptance criteria for polyethylene pipe are usually project-specific.5.7 A cross-sectional view of a typical joint between polyethylene pipe and an electrofusion coupling is illustrated in Fig. 1.FIG. 1 Typical Cross-Sectional View of an Electrofusion Coupling Joint1.1 This practice covers procedures for phased array ultrasonic testing (PAUT) of electrofusion joints in polyethylene pipe systems. Although high density polyethylene (HDPE) and medium density polyethylene (MDPE) materials are most commonly used, the procedures described may apply to other types of polyethylene.NOTE 1: The notes in this practice are for information only and shall not be considered part of this practice.NOTE 2: This standard references HDPE and MDPE for pipe applications defined by Specification D3350.1.2 This practice does not address ultrasonic examination of butt fusions. Ultrasonic testing of polyethylene butt fusion joints is addressed in Practice E3044/E3044M.1.3 Phased array ultrasonic testing (PAUT) of polyethylene electrofusion joints uses longitudinal waves introduced by an array probe mounted on a zero degree wedge. This practice is intended to be used on polyethylene electrofusion couplings for use on polyethylene pipe ranging in diameters from nominal 4 in. to 28 in. (100 mm to 710 mm) and for coupling wall thicknesses from 0.3 in. to 2 in. (8 mm to 50 mm). Greater and lesser thicknesses and diameters may be tested using this standard practice if the technique can be demonstrated to provide adequate detection on mockups of the same geometry.1.4 This practice does not specify acceptance criteria.1.5 The values stated in either SI units or inch-pound units are to be regarded separately as standard. The values stated in each system are not necessarily exact equivalents; therefore, to ensure conformance with the standard, each system shall be used independently of the other, and values from the two systems shall not be combined.1.6 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： 590元 加购物车

5.1 Silver may be used to treat consumer textile products to provide enhanced antimicrobial (fungi, bacteria, viruses) properties (3, 4). At any point in a textile product’s lifecycle, there may be a need to measure the amount of silver present. This standard prescribes a test method based on ICP-OES or ICP-MS analysis that manufacturers, producers, analysts, policymakers, regulators, and others may use for measurement of total silver in textiles. As described in Guide E3025, determination of total silver in a consumer textile product is one component of a tiered approach to determine if silver is present, possibly as nanomaterial(s) (one or more external dimensions in the nanoscale), prior to measuring the form and dimension of the Ag that is found. ICP-OES or ICP-MS analysis alone is not sufficient to determine whether a textile contains silver nanomaterial(s).NOTE 4: There are many different chemical and physical forms of silver that are used to treat textiles and an overview of this topic is provided in Guide E3025.5.2 As described in Guide E3025, the amount of silver in a textile can decrease over time as silver metal and silver compounds can react with oxygen and other oxidation-reduction (redox) active agents present in the environment to form soluble ionic species which are released by contact with moisture (for example, from ambient humidity, washing, body sweat, rain, or other sources). Hence, if silver is measured in a textile, the result may only be indicative of that moment in the article’s life cycle and great care is necessary in drawing temporal inferences from the results.5.3 If silver is measured by ICP-OES or ICP-MS analysis, additional analyses are needed to elucidate the form of silver in the textile specimen. This step is necessary because ICP-OES or ICP-MS results are for total silver independent of chemical and physical form and textiles may be treated with silver in sizes that range from the nanoscale (for example, salt nanoparticles) to the micrometer scale (for example, particulates or fibers).5.4 If no silver is detected by ICP-OES, the more sensitive ICP-MS should be used to determine if silver is present in a test specimen. If no silver is detected in a textile sample using appropriate (fit for purpose) analytical techniques, then testing can be terminated.NOTE 5: Typical method detection limits are 0.6 µg Ag/L by ICP-OES and 0.002 µg Ag/L by ICP-MS which are comparable to limits successfully used to detect silver in a range of products, including sports textiles and wound dressings (2).5.5 Results of ICP-OES or ICP-MS analysis may be qualitative or quantitative, depending upon the efficacy of the digestion procedure for the textile matrix. Regardless, ICP-OES or ICP-MS analysis is recommended as a first step to screen for the presence of silver in a textile and results can be used to inform subsequent more detailed analyses as part of a tiered approach to determine if a textile contains silver nanomaterial(s).1.1 This test method covers the use of inductively coupled plasma–optical emission spectrometry (ICP-OES) and inductively coupled plasma–mass spectrometry (ICP-MS) analyses for determination of the mass fraction of total silver in consumer textile products made of any combination of natural or manufactured fibers. Either ICP-OES or ICP-MS analysis is recommended as a first step to test for and quantify silver in a textile and results can be used to inform subsequent, more detailed analyses as part of the tiered approach described in Guide E3025 to determine if a textile contains silver nanomaterial(s).1.2 This test method prescribes acid digestion to prepare test sample solutions from samples of textiles utilizing an appropriate internal standard followed by external calibration and analysis with either ICP-OES or ICP-MS to quantify total silver.1.3 This test method is believed to provide quantitative results for textiles made of fibers of rayon, cotton, polyester, and lycra that contain metallic silver (see Section 17). It is the analyst’s responsibility to establish the efficacy (ability to achieve the planned and desired analytical result) of this test method for other textile matrices and forms of silver.1.4 Units—The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard. No other units of measurements are included in this standard.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： 646元 加购物车

5.1 The practice can be used to evaluate coupon materials of any composition, insofar as the coupon can be small enough to fit inside filter units mentioned in 4.1.5.2 This practice defines procedures that are quantitative, scalable, rapid, sensitive, and safe, while minimizing labor and addressing statistical confidence (1, 2).5.2.1 Quantitative—The total number of spores per coupon is determined by dilution-plating, and all spores remaining on the coupon are assayed for activity in the extraction tube to provide confidence that all the spores were accounted for.5.2.2 Statistical Confidence—The use of five independent preparations of spore inocula for a statistical n of 5.5.2.3 Sensitivity—Allows for complete detection of all culturable spores inoculated on a coupon, including the spores that remain attached to the coupon.5.2.3.1 The limit of detection is dependent on the culturability of fully matured spores to germinate, outgrow and divide in the presence of the extraction medium (1% tryptic soy broth, 100 mM L-Alanine, 1 mM inosine, 0.05% Tween 80) and/or on tryptic soy agar.5.2.3.2 Results presented in Refs (1, 3) (and currently unpublished results) indicate that these media, combined with the test temperatures and conditions described herein will generate results with a high level of practical confidence for detecting culturable Bacillus spores.5.2.4 Safety—Inoculated coupons are contained within filter units.5.2.5 Simplicity of Testing—Tests and extractions are performed in the same filter unit to minimize coupon handling steps.5.2.6 Scalable and Rapid—A maximum of 36 samples can be processed in 1 h by two technicians; a total of 300 samples have been processed by six technicians in 5 h (1, 2).5.2.7 Wide application for numerous Bacillus species and strains. The method has also been modified and used for vegetative bacteria and viruses as well (1, 2).1.1 This practice is used to quantify the efficacy of liquid or solid decontaminants on Bacillus spores dried on the surface of coupons made from porous and non-porous materials. This practice can distinguish between bactericidal and bacteriostatic chemicals within decontamination mixtures. This is important because many decontaminants contain both reactive compounds and high concentrations of bacteriostatic surfactants. All test samples are directly compared to pre-neutralized controls, un-inoculated negative growth controls, and solution controls on the same day as the test in order to increase practical confidence in the inactivation data.1.2 This procedure should be performed only by those trained in microbiological techniques, are familiar with antimicrobial (sporicidal) agents and the application instructions of the antimicrobial products.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 may involve hazardous materials, operations, and equipment. 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： 646元 加购物车

4.1 This practice is applicable to all interior and exterior installed building products in the use phase of the product, specifically in the form present in the occupied building. This practice does not cover products during installation processes since those exposures are covered by occupational regulations.4.2 This practice specifies the required information to include in the OESR screening report for product decision makers to assess the potential for occupant health exposure from installed building products in an occupied building operated under normal and anticipated conditions of use.4.3 Fundamental to the selection and use of building products is the consideration of the likelihood of occupant exposure and possible risk to substances in those installed building products.4.4 This practice does not purport to offer full risk information, nor does it purport to be equivalent to an exposure or risk assessment. Rather, it provides screening to inform the product decision maker about conditions that could generate additional discussions with manufacturers or others.4.5 The informational requirements for an OESR are identified in Section 5.4.6 For substances with hazard classifications in 5.3, the OESR informs product decision makers about substances in an installed building product that might trigger a hazard warning to a user or building occupant. This information is designed to help the product decision maker determine whether added information is needed to evaluate exposure and risk more fully in the context of the installed building product’s specific use or application.4.7 The OESR screening report is required to be updated based on the requirements in 9.3.4.8 The OESR is completed by last manufacturer of the building product; this is the manufacturer offering the external or internal building product to the market. This manufacturer may need to obtain information from other manufacturers in its supply chain.NOTE 1: The manufacturer offering the building product to the market is aware of the form, function, and likely uses of the building product under normal conditions of use. If the product contains hazardous substance(s), it is likely that the manufacturer has information about the hazards from the product under foreseeable emergencies in compliance with OSHA requirements.1.1 This practice provides the information required for publishing a screening report for occupant exposure from substances in installed building products (OESR) to communicate possible human health impacts in an occupied building to product specifiers, building owners, and others.1.2 This practice is applicable to all interior and exterior building products in the form used and incorporated into an occupied building.1.3 An article going into the construction market that has potential hazards based upon an evaluation of the United Nations Globally Harmonized System of Classification and Labelling of Chemicals (GHS) (1)2 mixtures guidance is included in the scope of this practice.1.4 This practice does not cover product fabrication or installation processes because these are subject to worker safety and health regulations and law.1.5 The final building product manufacturer offering the building product to the market or agent is responsible for providing this information and completing this report.1.6 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard. No other units of measurement are included in this 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： 646元 加购物车

5.1 This guide applies to temperature sources with controlled temperature solid blocks. They are known under various names such as dry-well calibrators, dry-block calibrators, and temperature block calibrators. They are typically comprised of solid block materials such as metal or ceramic, a temperature-regulating device, a control sensor, and some built-in indicator of temperature in a portable package. Dry-block calibrators are commonly used for calibration of industrial thermometers. These calibrators are commonly used in either two modes: (1) the direct mode in which the calibrator is used as the calibrated reference, or (2) comparison mode in which the calibrator is an isothermal temperature source for comparing thermometers under test to a separate calibrated reference thermometer. The uncertainty of these calibrations is dependent on which of these two modes is used and a variety of thermal properties of the specific dry-block designs.5.2 A thermally uniform, stable, and accurate temperature zone for calibration may be achieved with given measurement uncertainty. Various thermal properties of dry-block calibrator blocks have been identified that shall be characterized and/or quantified to determine uncertainty of measurements and care taken during the calibration process to optimize results appropriately. Temperature stability has been long recognized as a variable to be characterized. Others include axial temperature uniformity, radial temperature uniformity, stem conduction, block loading, hysteresis, and controller accuracy. External factors that influence results include ambient temperature, drafts, and power fluctuations. Recognizing and testing these properties will greatly improve calibration results.1.1 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as the standard. No other units of measurement are included in this standard.1.2 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.1.3 This guide is intended for use with dry-block temperature calibrators without the use of fluids or thermal contact-enhancing media over a range of -100 °C to 1700 °C.1.4 In this guide, the essential features of dry-block calibrators used for the purpose of thermometer calibration in either the direct or comparison mode are described. The direct mode is defined as using the dry-block calibrator as a standalone instrument with the control sensor and the calibrator display serving as the reference while the comparison mode uses an external sensor and ancillary measurement system as the reference.1.5 Measurement practices to optimize the accuracy of a dry-block calibrator to obtain optimum results are proposed in this guide.1.6 Tests that can be performed to define uncertainty limits and how they may be used in creating uncertainty budgets are proposed in this guide.1.7 Dry-block calibrator accessories such as built-in reference thermometers, switch testing circuitry, computer communications, or current loops will not be discussed.1.8 It is advised that liquid-in-glass thermometers not be used in dry-block calibrators, as using liquid-in-glass thermometers with a metal block may cause damage to the readout of the thermometer.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 加购物车

1.1 This specification is intended to provide a basis for identification of non-removable permanent foaming fixatives as a long-term measure used to immobilize or isolate radioactive contamination, or both, minimize worker exposure, and to protect uncontaminated areas against the spread of radioactive contamination.1.2 The values stated in inch-pound units are to be regarded as standard. The values given in parentheses are mathematical conversions to SI units that are provided for information only and are not considered standard.1.3 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.1.4 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

定价： 515元 加购物车

4.1 U.S. Department of Justice standards for assessing the performance of ballistic-resistant torso body armor require conditioning of soft armor test items prior to ballistic testing.4.2 This practice method may be applicable for certification testing or for research and development testing.4.3 This practice has only been evaluated for ballistic-resistant body armor and has not been assessed for applicability to any other type of protective system.1.1 This practice applies only to the conditioning of soft body armor via temperature, humidity, and tumbling exposure prior to ballistic resistance testing.1.2 This practice is intended for soft armor for law enforcement applications, and its purpose is to subject test items to conditions intended to provide some indication of the test item ability to withstand conditions of heat, moisture, and mechanical wear (folding and abrasion) that might be encountered during wear.1.2.1 This practice is not intended for soft armor to be used in military applications.1.3 In this practice, “other standards and specifications” and “unless specified elsewhere” refer to documents that require the use of this practice. Purchasers and other users are responsible for the “other standards and specifications” and for specifying any requirements that supersede those of this practice.1.4 Units—The values stated in either SI units or inch-pound units are to be regarded separately as standard. The values stated in each system are not necessarily exact equivalents; therefore, to ensure conformance with the standard, each system shall be used independently of the other, and values from the two systems shall not be combined.1.5 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 加购物车

3.1 These terms have particular application to fire debris analysis. In addition, several sources of definitions were used in the development of this terminology: Hawley’s Condensed Chemical Dictionary, Fifteenth Edition (1);4 Kirk’s Fire Investigation, Fifth Edition (2); The Chemistry and Technology of Petroleum, Third Edition (3); Merriam-Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary, Tenth Edition (4); and Fire Debris Analysis (5). A suitable definition was developed after all of the sources were found wanting.1.1 This terminology standard is a compilation of terms and corresponding definitions that are used in fire debris analysis. Some legal or scientific terms that are generally understood or defined adequately in other readily available sources are included.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： 590元 加购物车