5.1 Cyclic triaxial strength test results are used for evaluating the ability of a soil to resist the shear stresses induced in a soil mass due to earthquake or other cyclic loading.5.1.1 Cyclic triaxial strength tests may be performed at different values of effective confining pressure on isotropically consolidated specimens to provide data required for estimating the cyclic stability of a soil.5.1.2 Cyclic triaxial strength tests may be performed at a single effective confining pressure, usually equal to 100 kN/m2 [14.5 lb/in.2], or alternate pressures as appropriate on isotropically consolidated specimens to compare cyclic strength results for a particular soil type with that of other soils, Ref (2).5.2 The cyclic triaxial test is a commonly used technique for determining cyclic soil strength.5.3 Cyclic strength depends upon many factors, including density, confining pressure, applied cyclic shear stress, stress history, grain structure, age of soil deposit, specimen preparation procedure, and the frequency, uniformity, and shape of the cyclic wave form. Thus, close attention must be given to testing details and equipment.5.4 There are certain limitations inherent in using cyclic triaxial tests to simulate the stress and strain conditions of a soil element in the field during an earthquake.5.4.1 Nonuniform stress conditions within the test specimen are imposed by the specimen end platens. This can cause a redistribution of void ratio within the specimen during the test.5.4.2 A 90° change in the direction of the major principal stress occurs during the two halves of the loading cycle on isotropically consolidated specimens.5.4.3 The maximum cyclic shear stress that can be applied to the specimen is controlled by the stress conditions at the end of consolidation and the pore-water pressures generated during testing. For an isotropically consolidated contractive (volume decreasing) specimen tested in cyclic compression, the maximum cyclic shear stress that can be applied to the specimen is equal to one-half of the initial total axial pressure. Since cohesionless soils are not capable of taking tension, cyclic shear stresses greater than this value tend to lift the top platen from the soil specimen. Also, as the pore-water pressure increases during tests performed on isotropically consolidated specimens, the effective confining pressure is reduced, contributing to the tendency of the specimen to neck during the extension portion of the load cycle, invalidating test results beyond that point.5.4.4 While it is advised that the best possible intact specimens be obtained for cyclic strength testing, it is sometimes necessary to reconstitute soil specimens. It has been shown that different methods of reconstituting specimens to the same density may result in significantly different cyclic strengths. Also, intact specimens will almost always be stronger than reconstituted specimens.5.4.5 The interaction between the specimen, membrane, and confining fluid has an influence on cyclic behavior. Membrane compliance effects cannot be readily accounted for in the test procedure or in interpretation of test results. Changes in porewater pressure can cause changes in membrane penetration in specimens of cohesionless soils. These changes can significantly influence the test results.5.4.6 The mean total confining pressure is asymmetric during the compression and extension stress application when the chamber pressure is constant. This is totally different from the symmetric stress in the simple shear case of the level ground liquefaction.Note 1—The quality of the result produced by this standard is dependent on the competence of the personnel performing it, and the suitability of the equipment and facilities used. Agencies that meet the criteria of Practice D3740 are generally considered capable of competent and objective testing/sampling/inspection/etc. Users of this standard are cautioned that compliance with Practice D3740 does not in itself assure reliable results. Reliable results depend on many factors; Practice D3740 provides a means of evaluating some of those factors.1.1 This test method covers the determination of the cyclic strength (sometimes called the liquefaction potential) of saturated soils in either intact or reconstituted states by the load-controlled cyclic triaxial technique.1.2 The cyclic strength of a soil is evaluated relative to a number of factors, including: the development of axial strain, magnitude of applied cyclic stress, number of cycles of stress application, development of excess pore-water pressure, and state of effective stress. A comprehensive review of factors affecting cyclic triaxial test results is contained in the literature (1).21.3 Cyclic triaxial strength tests are conducted under undrained conditions to simulate essentially undrained field conditions during earthquake or other cyclic loading.1.4 Cyclic triaxial strength tests are destructive. Failure may be defined on the basis of the number of stress cycles required to reach a limiting strain or 100 % pore pressure ratio. See Section 3 for Terminology.1.5 This test method is generally applicable for testing cohesionless free draining soils of relatively high permeability. When testing well-graded materials, silts, or clays, pore-water pressures monitored at the specimen ends may not represent pore-water pressure values throughout the specimen. However, this test method may be followed when testing most soil types if care is taken to ensure that problem soils receive special consideration when tested and when test results are evaluated.1.6 All observed and calculated values shall conform to the guide for significant digits and rounding established in Practice D6026. The procedures in Practice D6026 that are used to specify how data are collected, recorded, and calculated are regarded as the industry standard. In addition, they are representative of the significant digits that should generally be retained. The procedures do not consider material variation, purpose for obtaining the data, special purpose studies, or any considerations for the objectives of the user. Increasing or reducing the significant digits of reported data to be commensurate with these considerations is common practice. Consideration of the significant digits to be used in analysis methods for engineering design is beyond the scope of this standard.1.6.1 The method used to specify how data are collected, calculated, or recorded in this standard is not directly related to the accuracy to which the data can be applied in design or other uses, or both. How one applies the results obtained using this standard is beyond its scope.1.7 The values stated in either SI units or inch-pound units [presented in brackets] 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. Reporting of test results in units other than SI shall not be regarded as nonconformance with this test method.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 and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.

定价： 0元 / 折扣价： 0 元

5.1 This test method provides data on classifying polymer-modified bituminous membranes by their performance related to the fatigue conditions to which they are subjected.5.2 This test method is applicable to testing specimens consisting of a single ply of the polymer-modified bitumen material or a multiple-ply composite that includes the polymer-modified bitumen material.5.3 This test method is conducted on both unaged and heat-aged specimens to determine the effect of heat exposure on the membrane material's ability to resist deterioration from cyclic strain. This test method may also be conducted on specimens subjected to other laboratory exposure conditions that are not specified herein.1.1 This test method determines the effect of constant cyclic displacement on polymer-modified bituminous membrane specimens. In this test method, a relatively low travel rate of cycling is used and the material is tested for a specified number of cycles under conditions of increased amplitude or lower temperature.1.2 The values stated in either SI units or inch-pound units are to be regarded separately as standard. The values stated in each system may not be exact equivalents; therefore, each system shall be used independently of the other. Combining values from the two systems may result in nonconformance with the 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 / 折扣价： 438 元 加购物车

5.1 This test method is a standard procedure for determining the resistance to water penetration under cyclic static air pressure differences. The air-pressure differences acting across a building envelope vary greatly. These factors should be fully considered prior to specifying the test pressure difference to be used.NOTE 1: In applying the results of tests by this test method, note that the performance of a wall or its components, or both, may be a function of proper installation and adjustment. In service, the performance will also depend on the rigidity of supporting construction and on the resistance of components to deterioration by various causes, vibration, thermal expansion and contraction, etc. It is difficult to simulate the identical complex wetting conditions that can be encountered in service, with large wind-blown water drops, increasing water drop impact pressures with increasing wind velocity, and lateral or upward moving air and water. Some designs are more sensitive than others to this upward moving water.NOTE 2: This test method does not identify unobservable liquid water which may penetrate into the test specimen.1.1 This test method covers the determination of the resistance of exterior windows, curtain walls, skylights, and doors to water penetration when water is applied to the outdoor face and exposed edges simultaneously with a cyclic static air pressure at the outdoor face higher than the pressure at the indoor face.1.2 This test method is applicable to any curtain-wall area or to windows, skylights, or doors alone.1.3 This test method addresses water penetration through a manufactured assembly. Water that penetrates the assembly, but does not result in a failure as defined herein, may have adverse effects on the performance of contained materials such as sealants and insulating or laminated glass. This test method does not address these issues.1.4 The proper use of this test method requires a knowledge of the principles of pressure measurement.1.5 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as the standard. The values given in parentheses are mathematical conversions to inch-pound units that are provided for information only and are not considered standard.1.6 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use. For specific hazard statements, see 7.1.

定价： 590元 / 折扣价： 502 元 加购物车

5.1 This test method is used to evaluate automotive manual transmission fluids for thermal instability, which results in deterioration of synchronizer performance.5.2 This test method may also be utilized in other specifications and classifications of transmission and gear lubricants such as the following:5.2.1 (final API designation of PG-1),5.2.2 Military Specification MIL-L-2105,5.2.3 SAE Information Report J308 Axle and Manual Transmission Lubricants, and5.2.4 Mack Truck GO-H Gear Lubricant Specification.1.1 This test method covers the thermal stability of fluids for use in heavy duty manual transmissions when operated at high temperatures.1.2 The lubricant performance is measured by the number of shifting cycles that can be performed without failure of synchronization when the transmission is operated while continuously cycling between high and low range.1.3 Correlation of test results with truck transmission service has not been established. However, the procedure has been shown to appropriately separate two transmission lubricants, which have shown satisfactory and unsatisfactory field performance in the trucks of one manufacturer.1.4 Changes in this test method may be necessary due to refinements in the procedure, obsolescence of parts, or reagents, and so forth. These changes will be incorporated by Information Letters issued by the ASTM Test Monitoring Center (TMC). The test method will be revised to show the content of all the letters, as issued.1.5 The values stated in inch-pound units are to be regarded as standard. The values given in parentheses are mathematical conversions to SI units that are provided for information only and are not considered standard.1.5.1 Exception—When materials, products, or equipment are available only in inch-pound units, SI units are omitted.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 test method is arranged as follows:  Section  1Referenced Documents  2Terminology  3Summary of Test Method  4  5Apparatus  6 Test Transmission  6.2 Transmission Mounts  6.3 Oil-Circulating System  6.4 Oil Return Hole  6.5 Air Pressure Controls  6.6 Drive System  6.7 Instrumentation  6.8 Thermocouple Placement  6.9Reagents and Materials  7Safety  8Preparation of Apparatus  9 Cleaning of Parts  9.1 Assembly  9.2Calibration  10 Transmission and Test Stand Calibration  10.1 Reference Oils  10.2 Reference Oil Test Frequency  10.3 Instrumentation Calibration  10.4 Shift Time Calibration  10.5Operating Procedure  11 System Flush and Charge  11.1 Test Operation  11.2 Shut-Down Procedure  11.3 Transmission Disassembly  11.4Determination of Test Results  12 Failure Criteria  12.1 Shifter Fork Wear  12.2 Test Validity Determination  12.3Report  13Precision and Bias  14Keywords  15Test Validity Calculations and Limits Annex A5HTCT Test Report Forms and Data Dictionary Annex A6Manual Transmission Cyclic Durability Test Parts Inspection and Wear Measurements Annex A71.8 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

4.1 Nitroxide radicals (H-Tempo, O-Tempo (4-oxo-2,2,6,6-tetramethylpiperidine-1-oxyl), etc.) are widely used as inhibitors of thermopolymerization in the processes of transportation, storage, and separation of monomers (isoprene, butadiene, styrene, etc.). This test method provides a procedure for assaying nitroxide radicals in monomers.4.2 This procedure can be used for determination of the content of nitroxide radicals (H-Tempo, O-Tempo, etc.) in other solvents (dimethyl formamide, DMSO etc.).1.1 This test method is designed to determine the content of nitroxide radical 4-hydroxy-2,2,6,6-tetramethylpiperidine-1-oxyl (H-Tempo) in butadiene, isoprene, and styrene.1.2 This test method is applicable to samples with nitroxide radical 4-hydroxy-2,2,6,6-tetramethylpiperidine-1-oxyl (H-Tempo) with concentrations to 100 mg⁄kg. The limit of detection (LOD) is 0.47 mg/kg for nitroxide radical 4-hydroxy-2,2,6,6-tetramethylpiperidine-1-oxyl (H-Tempo) and the limit of quantitation (LOQ) is 1.6 mg/kg nitroxide radical 4-hydroxy-2,2,6,6-tetramethylpiperidine-1-oxyl (H-Tempo).1.3 The following applies for the purposes of determining the conformance of the test results using this test method to applicable specifications, results shall be rounded of in accordance with the rounding-off method of Practice E29.1.4 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard. No other units of measurement 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： 590元 / 折扣价： 502 元 加购物车

5.1 Structural design of exterior windows, curtain walls, doors, and impact protective systems is typically based on positive and negative design pressure(s). Design pressures based on wind speeds with a mean recurrence interval (usually 25 to 100 years) that relates to desired levels of structural reliability and are appropriate for the type and importance of the building (1).6 The adequacy of the structural design is substantiated by other test methods such as Test Methods E330/E330M and E1233/E1233M which discuss proof loads as added factors of safety. However, these test methods do not account for other factors such as impact from windborne debris followed by fluctuating pressures associated with a severe windstorm environment. As demonstrated by windstorm damage investigations, windborne debris is present in hurricanes and has caused a significant amount of damage to building envelopes (2-7). The actual in-service performance of fenestration assemblies and impact protective systems in areas prone to severe windstorms is dependent on many factors. Windstorm damage investigations have shown that the effects of windborne debris, followed by the effects of repeated or cyclic wind loading, were a major factor in building damage (2-7).5.1.1 Many factors affect the actual loading on building surfaces during a severe windstorm, including varying wind direction, duration of the wind event, height above ground, building shape, terrain, surrounding structures, and other factors (1). The resistance of fenestration or impact protective systems assemblies to wind loading after impact depends upon product design, installation, load magnitude, duration, and repetition.5.1.2 Windows, doors, and curtain walls are building envelope components often subject to damage in windstorms. The damage caused by windborne debris during windstorms goes beyond failure of building envelope components such as windows, doors, and curtain walls. Breaching of the envelope exposes a building's contents to the damaging effects of continued wind and rain (1, 4-7). A potentially more serious result is internal pressurization. When the windward wall of a building is breached, the internal pressure in the building increases, resulting in increased outward acting pressure on the other walls and the roof. The internal pressure coefficient (see ASCE/SEI 7), which is one of several design parameters, can increase by a factor as high as four. This can increase the net outward acting pressure by a factor as high as two.5.1.3 The commentary to ANSI/ASCE 7-93 discusses internal pressure coefficients and the increased value to be used in designing envelopes with “openings” as follows:“Openings” in Table 9 (Internal Pressure Coefficients for Buildings) means permanent or other openings that are likely to be breached during high winds. For example, if window glass is likely to be broken by missiles during a windstorm, this is considered to be an opening. However, if doors and windows and their supports are designed to resist specified loads and the glass is protected by a screen or barrier, they need not be considered openings. (109)Thus, there are two options in designing buildings for windstorms with windborne debris: buildings designed with “openings” (partially enclosed buildings) to withstand the higher pressures noted in the commentary to ANSI/ASCE 7-93 and, alternatively, building envelope components designed so they are not likely to be breached in a windstorm when impacted by windborne debris. The latter approach reduces the likelihood of exposing the building contents to the weather.5.2 In this test method, a test specimen is first subjected to specified missile impact(s) followed by the application of a specified number of cycles of positive and negative static pressure differential (8). The assembly must satisfy the pass/fail criteria established by the specifying authority, which may allow damage such as deformation, deflection, or glass breakage.5.3 The windborne debris generated during a severe windstorm varies greatly, depending upon windspeed, height above the ground, terrain, surrounding structures, and other sources of debris (4). Typical debris in hurricanes consists of missiles including, but not limited to, roof gravel, roof tiles, signage, portions of damaged structures, framing lumber, roofing materials, and sheet metal (4, 7, 9). Median impact velocities for missiles affecting residential structures considered in Ref (7) ranged from 9 m/s (30 fps) to 30 m/s (100 fps). The missiles and their associated velocity ranges used in this test method are selected to reasonably represent typical debris produced by windstorms.5.4 To determine design wind loads, averaged wind speeds are translated into air pressure differences. Superimposed on the averaged winds are gusts whose aggregation, for short periods of time (ranging from fractions of seconds to a few seconds) may move at considerably higher speeds than the averaged winds. Wind pressures related to building design, wind intensity versus duration, frequency of occurrence, and other factors are considered.5.4.1 Wind speeds are typically selected for particular geographic locations and probabilities of occurrence from wind speed maps such as those prepared by the National Weather Service, from appropriate wind load documents such as ASCE/SEI 7 or from building codes enforced in a particular geographic region.5.4.2 Equivalent static pressure differences are calculated using the selected wind speeds (1).5.5 Cyclic pressure effects on fenestration assemblies after impact by windborne debris are significant (6-8, 10-12). It is appropriate to test the strength of the assembly for a time duration representative of sustained winds and gusts in a windstorm. Gust wind loads are of relatively short duration. Other test methods, such as Test Methods E330/E330M and E1233/E1233M, do not model gust loadings. They are not to be specified for the purpose of testing the adequacy of the assembly to remain unbreached in a windstorm environment following impact by windborne debris.5.6 Further information on the subjects covered in Section 5 is available in Refs (1-12).1.1 This test method covers the performance of exterior windows, curtain walls, doors, and impact protective systems impacted by missile(s) and subsequently subjected to cyclic static pressure differentials. A missile propulsion device, an air pressure system, and a test chamber are used to model some conditions which may be representative of windborne debris and pressures in a windstorm environment. This test method is applicable to the design of entire fenestration or impact protection systems assemblies and their installation. The performance determined by this test method relates to the ability of elements of the building envelope to remain unbreached during a windstorm.NOTE 1: Exception: Exterior garage doors and rolling doors are governed by ANSI/DASMA 115 and are beyond the scope of this test method.1.2 The specifying authority shall define the representative conditions (see 10.1).1.3 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. Certain values contained in reference documents cited herein may be stated in inch-pound units and must be converted by the user.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. Specific hazard statements are given in Section 7.1.5 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 can be used to describe the effects of materials, manufacturing, and design variables on the fatigue performance of metallic tibial trays subject to cyclic loading for relatively large numbers of cycles.4.2 The loading of tibial tray designs in vivo will, in general, differ from the loading defined in this practice. The results obtained here cannot be used to directly predict in-vivo performance. However, this practice is designed to allow for comparisons between the fatigue performance of different metallic tibial tray designs, when tested under similar conditions.4.3 In order for fatigue data on tibial trays to be comparable, reproducible, and capable of being correlated among laboratories, it is essential that uniform procedures be established.1.1 This practice covers a procedure for the fatigue testing of metallic tibial trays used in knee joint replacements using a cyclic, constant-amplitude force. It applies to tibial trays that cover both the medial and lateral plateaus of the tibia. This practice may require modifications to accommodate other tibial tray designs.1.2 This practice is intended to provide useful, consistent, and reproducible information about the fatigue performance of metallic tibial trays with one unsupported condyle. The results are applicable to the laboratory test conditions and may not correlate with in vivo performance.1.3 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard. No other units of measurement are included in this standard.1.4 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.1.5 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

定价： 590元 / 折扣价： 502 元 加购物车

5.1 These cyclic test methods are intended to measure the performance of vertical elements of the lateral force resisting system subjected to earthquake loads. Since these loads are cyclic, the loading process simulates the actions and their effects on the specimens.5.2 The monotonic test is intended to provide data from a continuous displacement ramp loading of a matched test specimen with boundary conditions identical to the specimens that will be cyclically tested. The results from the monotonic test, when employed, are primarily intended for defining the amplitudes of load cycles for the three cyclic protocols.NOTE 2: The monotonic test is not intended to serve as an equivalent alternative to the cyclic protocols of this Test Method or the procedures of Test Methods E72 or Practice E564.1.1 These test methods cover the evaluation of the shear stiffness, shear strength, and ductility of the vertical elements of lateral force resisting systems, including applicable shear connections and hold-down connections, under quasi-static cyclic (reversed) load conditions.1.2 These test methods are intended for specimens constructed from wood or metal framing braced with solid sheathing or other methods or structural insulated panels.1.3 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.1.4 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： 646元 / 折扣价： 550 元 加购物车

1.1 This test method covers the determination of the benzene content of specific cyclic hydrocarbon products.1.2 Benzene may be determined over a range from 5 to 300 mg/kg.1.3 The products in which benzene can be determined include cyclohexane, toluene, individual C8 aromatics, cumene, and styrene.1.4 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.

定价： 0元 / 折扣价： 0 元

When a laboratory-accelerated test simulates the changing conditions to which automotive finishes are exposed, more realistic corrosion failures are produced.Cyclic corrosion tests are effective for evaluating a variety of corrosion mechanisms, such as general, galvanic, crevice, etc. The cyclic corrosion tests make use of many types of environments, such as salt fog (Practice B 117), humidity (Practice D 2247 or Practice D 1735) and dry conditions to accelerate metallic corrosion. In cyclic corrosion testing, specimens can be exposed to many different types of environmental conditions and cycled from one environment to another.In all tests it is imperative to expose control specimens with an established corrosion performance together with the test specimens to make a comparison possible of the corrosion performance of the two sets.Guidelines are included for those who evaluate the corrosion performance of painted metal parts in cyclic corrosion tests. These guidelines are intended to help ensure that the results of the tests can be used to reach conclusions concerning the variables under study, without being affected by the test procedure itself. The guidelines are also intended to assist users of this type of test in obtaining good inter-laboratory agreement of results.This guide is not intended to be a substitute for the described cyclic corrosion test standard. In all cases, the laboratory should obtain the most recent published standard for complete details. The published standard supersedes this guide.1.1 This guide is designed to assist in determining the appropriate corrosion test methods for automotive painted steel.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 and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory requirements prior to use.

定价： 0元 / 折扣价： 0 元

5.1 Cyclic direct simple shear strength test results are used most often for evaluating the ability of a soil to resist shear stresses induced in a soil mass during earthquake loading, offshore storm loading, etc.5.2 In this test, the cyclic strength is measured under constant volume conditions that are equivalent to undrained conditions; hence, the test is applicable to field conditions in which the soils have consolidated under one set of stresses, and then are subjected to changes in stress/strain without time for further drainage to take place.5.3 The cyclic strength is a function of many factors including density, confining pressure, stress history, grain structure, specimen preparation procedure, frequency, and characteristics of the cyclic loading applied. Therefore, test factors shall be considered during evaluation of test results.5.4 The state of stress within the direct simple shear specimen is not sufficiently defined nor uniform enough to allow rigorous interpretation of the results. Expressing the data in terms of the shear stress and vertical effective stress on the horizontal plane is useful for engineering purposes. Some effective stress parameters that could be derived from a cyclic direct simple shear test shall not be confused with corresponding parameters derived from other shear tests having better defined states of stress (that is, cyclic triaxial tests).5.5 The values of settlement in saturated soil after cyclic loading can be assessed from the test results by allowing volume change at the end of the shearing to achieve same vertical effective stresses as at end of primary consolidation.5.6 The data from the consolidation portion of this test are comparable to results obtained using Test Method D2435/D2435M provided that the more rigorous consolidation procedure of Test Method D2435/D2435M is followed.1.1 This test method defines equipment specifications and testing procedures for the measurement of cyclic strength, number of cycles to liquefaction or cyclic properties (Modulus and Damping) of soils, after one-dimensional consolidation using a cyclic mode of loading.1.2 The cyclic shearing can be applied using load control or displacement control. It shall be the responsibility of the agency requesting this test to specify the magnitude and frequency of the cyclic loading. Other loading histories may be used if required by the agency requesting the testing.1.3 This test method is written specifically for devices that test cylindrical specimens enclosed in a wire-reinforced membrane or a soft membrane within a stack of rigid rings (this test method applies to Teflon coated rigid rings as well). Other types of shear devices are beyond the scope of this test method.1.4 This test method can be used for testing cohesionless free draining soils or fine grained soils. However, this test method may be followed when testing most soil types if care is taken to ensure that any special considerations required for such soils are accounted for.1.5 The shearing phase of this test is conducted under constant volume conditions. Since the lateral confinement system prevents radial specimen strains, the constant volume condition is accomplished by preventing specimen height change during shear. Shearing under constant volume can be performed on dry or saturated specimens. The constant volume condition is equivalent to the undrained condition for fully saturated specimens. Cyclic direct simple shear testing with truly undrained conditions (restricting pore water flow from and into the specimen) can be performed using some simple shear devices, but is beyond the scope of this standard.21.6 The cyclic strength of a soil is determined based on the number of cycles required to reach a limiting double amplitude shear strain or a single amplitude shear strain, while liquefaction is more commonly defined as 100 % change in vertical stress ratio (change in effective vertical stress during shearing divided by effective vertical stress at end of primary consolidation). The change in vertical stress ratio in constant volume shearing is equivalent to the excess pore pressure ratio (excess pore pressure during shearing divided by effective vertical stress at end of primary consolidation) under undrained conditions. The strain criterion is only applicable when performing load controlled tests; 100 % change in vertical stress ratio can be used for both, load and displacement control. For displacement control testing, the criterion to stop the test could be a specified number of cycles.1.7 This test method is applicable to testing intact, reconstituted, or compacted specimens; however, it does not include specific guidance for preparing, reconstituting or compacting test specimens.1.8 It shall be the responsibility of the agency requesting this test to specify the magnitude of the consolidation stress prior to shear and, if assigned, an unloading consolidation stage may be required for over-consolidating the specimen.1.9 All recorded and calculated values shall conform to the guide for significant digits and rounding established in Practice D6026.1.9.1 The procedures used to specify how data are collected/recorded and calculated in this test method are regarded as the industry standard. In addition, they are representative of the significant digits that shall generally be retained. The procedures used do not consider material variation, purpose for obtaining the data, special purpose studies, or any considerations for the user’s objectives; 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 test method to consider significant digits used in analysis methods for engineering design.1.9.2 Measurements made to more significant digits or better sensitivity than specified in this standard shall not be regarded as nonconformance with this standard.1.10 Units—The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as the standard. Reporting test results in units other than SI shall be regarded as conformance with this test method. In the engineering profession it is customary practice to use, interchangeably, units representing both mass and force, unless dynamic calculations (F=Ma) are involved. This implicitly combines two separate systems of units, that is, the absolute system and the gravimetric system. It is scientifically undesirable to combine two separate systems within a single standard. This test method has been written using SI units; however, inch-pound conversions are given in the gravimetric system, where the pound (lbf) represents a unit of force (weight). The use of balances or scales recording pounds of mass (lbm), or the recording of density in lb/ft3 shall not be regarded as nonconformance with this test method.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 / 折扣价： 550 元 加购物车

5.1 The cyclic triaxial test permits determination of the secant modulus and damping coefficient for cyclic axial loading of a prismatic soil specimen in hydrostatically consolidated, undrained conditions. The secant modulus and damping coefficient from this test may be different from those obtained from a torsional shear type of test on the same material.5.2 The secant modulus and damping coefficient are important parameters used in dynamic, performance evaluation of both natural and engineered structures under dynamic or cyclic loads such as caused by earthquakes, ocean wave, or blasts. These parameters can be used in dynamic response analyses including, finite elements, finite difference, and linear or non-linear analytical methods.Note 1—The quality of the result produced by this standard is dependent on the competence of the personnel performing it, and the suitability of the equipment and facilities used. Agencies that meet the criteria of Practice D3740 are generally considered capable of competent and objective testing/sampling/inspection/etc. Users of this standard are cautioned that compliance with Practice D3740 does not in itself assure reliable results. Reliable results depend on many factors; Practice D3740 provides a means of evaluating some of those factors.1.1 These test methods cover the determination of the modulus and damping properties of soils in either intact or reconstituted states by either load or stroke controlled cyclic triaxial techniques. The standard is focused on determining these properties for soils in hydrostatically consolidated, undrained conditions.1.2 The cyclic triaxial properties of initially saturated or unsaturated soil specimens are evaluated relative to a number of factors including: strain level, density, number of cycles, material type, and effective stress.1.3 These test methods are applicable to both fine-grained and coarse-grained soils as defined by the unified soil classification system or by Practice D2487. Test specimens may be intact or reconstituted by compaction in the laboratory.1.4 Two test methods are provided for using a cyclic loader to determine the secant Young's modulus (E) and damping coefficient (D) for a soil specimen. The first test method (A) permits the determination of E and D using a constant load apparatus. The second test method (B) permits the determination of E and D using a constant stroke apparatus. The test methods are as follows:1.4.1 Test Method A—This test method requires the application of a constant cyclic load to the test specimen. It is used for determining the secant Young's modulus and damping coefficient under a constant load condition.1.4.2 Test Method B—This test method requires the application of a constant cyclic deformation to the test specimen. It is used for determining the secant Young's modulus and damping coefficient under a constant stroke condition.1.5 The development of relationships to aid in interpreting and evaluating test results are left to the engineer or office requesting the test.1.6 Limitations—There are certain limitations inherent in using cyclic triaxial tests to simulate the stress and strain conditions of a soil element in the field during an earthquake, with several summarized in the following sections. With due consideration for the factors affecting test results, carefully conducted cyclic triaxial tests can provide data on the cyclic behavior of soils with a degree of accuracy adequate for meaningful evaluations of modulus and damping coefficient below a shearing strain level of 0.5 %.1.6.1 Nonuniform stress conditions within the test specimen are imposed by the specimen end platens.1.6.2 A 90° change in the direction of the major principal stress occurs during the two halves of the loading cycle on isotropically confined specimens.1.6.3 The maximum cyclic axial stress that can be applied to a saturated specimen is controlled by the stress conditions at the end of confining stress application and the pore-water pressures generated during undrained compression. For an isotropically confined specimen tested in cyclic compression, the maximum cyclic axial stress that can be applied to the specimen is equal to the effective confining pressure. Since cohesionless soils cannot resist tension, cyclic axial stresses greater than this value tend to lift the top platen from the soil specimen. Also, as the pore-water pressure increases during tests performed on isotropically confined specimens, the effective confining pressure is reduced, contributing to the tendency of the specimen to neck during the extension portion of the load cycle, invalidating test results beyond that point.1.6.4 While it is advised that the best possible intact specimens be obtained for cyclic testing, it is sometimes necessary to reconstitute soil specimens. It has been shown that different methods of reconstituting specimens to the same density may result in significantly different cyclic behavior. Also, intact specimens will almost always be stronger and stiffer than reconstituted specimens of the same density.1.6.5 The interaction between the specimen, membrane, and confining fluid has an influence on cyclic behavior. Membrane compliance effects cannot be readily accounted for in the test procedure or in interpretation of test results. Changes in pore-water pressure can cause changes in membrane penetration in specimens of cohesionless soils. These changes can significantly influence the test results.1.7 The values stated in either SI units or inch-pound units [presented in brackets] 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. Reporting of test results in units other than SI shall not be regarded as nonconformance with this test method.1.8 All observed and calculated values shall conform to the guide for significant digits and rounding established in Practice D6026. The procedures in Practice D6026 that are used to specify how data are collected, recorded, and calculated are regarded as the industry standard. In addition, they are representative of the significant digits that should generally be retained. The procedures do not consider material variation, purpose for obtaining the data, special purpose studies, or any considerations for the objectives of the user. Increasing or reducing the significant digits of reported data to be commensurate with these considerations is common practice. Consideration of the significant digits to be used in analysis methods for engineering design is beyond the scope of this standard.1.8.1 The method used to specify how data are collected, calculated, or recorded in this standard is not directly related to the accuracy to which the data can be applied in design or other uses, or both. How one applies the results obtained using this standard is beyond its scope.1.9 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.

定价： 0元 / 折扣价： 0 元

5.1 The outdoor corrosion of painted metals is influenced by many factors, including: corrosive atmospheres, rain, condensed dew, UV light, wet/dry cycling, and temperature cycling. These factors frequently have a synergistic effect on one another. This practice is intended to provide a more realistic simulation of the interaction of these factors than is found in traditional tests with continuous exposure to a static set of corrosive conditions.5.2 Results obtained from this practice can be used to compare the relative durability of materials subjected to the specific test cycle used.5.3 No single exposure test can be specified as a complete simulation of actual use conditions in outdoor environments. Results obtained from exposures conducted according to this practice can be considered as representative of actual outdoor exposures only when the degree of rank correlation has been established for the specific materials being tested. The relative durability of materials in actual outdoor service can be very different in different locations because of differences in UV radiation, time of wetness, temperature, pollutants, and other factors. Therefore, even if results from a specific artificial test condition are found to be useful for comparing the relative durability of materials exposed in a particular exterior environment, it cannot be assumed that they will be useful for determining relative durability for a different environment.5.4 Even though it is very tempting, it is not recommended to calculate an “acceleration factor” relating x hours of laboratory exposure to y months of exterior exposure. Different materials and different formulations of the same material can have significantly different acceleration factors. The acceleration factor also varies depending on the variability in rate of degradation in the laboratory test and in actual outdoor exposure.5.5 This practice is best used to compare the relative performance of materials tested at the same time in the same exposure device. Because of possible variability between the same type of exposure devices, it is not recommended to compare the amount of degradation in materials exposed for the same duration at separate times, or in separate devices running the same test condition. This practice should not be used to establish a “pass/fail” approval of materials after a specific period of exposure unless performance comparisons are made relative to a control material exposed simultaneously, or the variability in the test is rigorously quantified so that statistically significant pass/fail judgments can be made.5.6 This practice has been found useful for air-dry industrial maintenance paints on steel3,4,5,6,7 and zinc-rich primers but its applicability has not yet been assessed for highly UV-stabilized coating systems, such as for automotive applications.1.1 This practice covers basic principles and operating practice for cyclic corrosion/UV exposure of paints on metal, using alternating periods of exposure in two different cabinets: a cycling salt fog/dry cabinet, and a fluorescent UV/condensation cabinet.1.2 This practice is limited to the methods of obtaining, measuring, and controlling exposure conditions, and procedures. It does not specify specimen preparation nor evaluation of results.1.3 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard. No other units of measurement are included in this standard.1.4 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.1.5 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

定价： 515元 / 折扣价： 438 元 加购物车

4.1 This guide describes techniques of deactivation that can be used to compare a series of cracking catalysts at equilibrium conditions or to simulate the equilibrium conditions of a specific commercial unit and a specific catalyst.1.1 This guide covers the deactivation of fluid catalytic cracking (FCC) catalyst in the laboratory as a precursor to small scale performance testing such as catalyst activities (Test Method D3907) or activities plus selectivities (Test Methods D5154 and D7964). FCC catalysts are deactivated in the laboratory in order to simulate the aging that occurs during continuous use in a commercial fluid catalytic cracking unit (FCCU). Deactivation for purposes of this guide constitutes hydrothermal deactivation of the catalyst and metal poisoning by nickel and vanadium. Hydrothermal treatment is used to simulate the physical changes that occur in the FCC catalyst through repeated regeneration cycles. Hydrothermal treatment (steaming) destabilizes the faujasite (zeolite Y), resulting in reduced crystallinity and surface area. Further decomposition of the crystalline structure occurs in the presence of vanadium, and to a lesser extent in the presence of nickel. Vanadium is believed to form vanadic acid in a hydrothermal environment resulting in destruction of the zeolitic portion of the catalyst. Nickel’s principle effect is to poison the selectivity of the FCC catalyst. Hydrogen and coke production is increased in the presence of nickel, due to the dehydrogenation activity of the metal. Vanadium also exhibits significant dehydrogenation activity, the degree of which can be influenced by the oxidation and reduction conditions prevailing throughout the deactivation process. The simulation of the metal effects that one would see commercially is part of the objective of deactivating catalysts in the laboratory. Catalyst deactivation by hydrothermal treatment only is addressed in Guide D4463/D4463M.1.2 The two basic approaches to laboratory-scale simulation of commercial equilibrium catalysts described in this guide are as follows:1.2.1 Cyclic Propylene Steaming (CPS) Method, in which the catalyst is impregnated with the desired metals via an incipient wetness procedure (Mitchell method)2 followed by a prescribed steam deactivation.1.2.2 Crack-on Methods, in which fresh catalyst is subjected to a repetitive sequence of cracking (using a feed with enhanced metals concentrations), stripping, and regeneration in the presence of steam. Two specific procedures are presented here, a procedure with alternating metal deposition and deactivation steps and a modified Two-Step procedure, which includes a cyclic deactivation process to target lower vanadium dehydrogenation activity.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 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.1.4 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

3.1 This practice is issued to provide information useful in establishing sampling and handling procedures. It is expected that this information will only be utilized in conjunction with an existing health and safety program and consultation with the appropriate SDS. The information provided herein cannot be used as a substitute for expert safety and medical advice, but rather as a supplement to such advice.1.1 This practice covers procedures for sampling and handling several liquid cyclic products. These specifically cover liquids at ambient temperature and include benzene, toluene, xylenes, cyclohexane, styrene, pyridine, ethylbenzene, isopropylbenzene, and alpha-methylstyrene in a manner which represents and preserves product quality.1.2 Any person sampling or handling these products should consult the applicable Safety Data Sheet (SDS) for specific first aid instructions and information on the proper equipment to have available for use in the event of personal contact or exposure.1.3 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard. No other units of measurement are included in this standard.1.4 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use. For specific hazard statements, see Sections 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7 and an appropriate SDS.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