5.1 Corrosion products, in the form of particulate and dissolved metals, in the steam and water circuits of electricity generating plants are of great concern to power plant operators. Aside from indicating the extent of corrosion occurring in the plant, the presence of corrosion products has deleterious effects on plant integrity and efficiency. Deposited corrosion products provide sites at which chemicals, which are innocuous at low levels, may concentrate to corrosive levels and initiate under-deposit corrosion. Also, corrosion products in feedwater enter the steam generating components where deposition on heat transfer surfaces reduces the overall efficiency of the plant.5.2 Most plants perform some type of corrosion product monitoring. The most common method is to sample for long time periods, up to several days, after which laboratory analysis of the collected sample gives the average corrosion product level over the collection time period. This methodology is referred to as integrated sampling. With the more frequent measurements in the on-line monitor, a time profile of corrosion product transport is obtained. Transient high corrosion product levels can be detected and measured, which cannot be accomplished with integrated sampling techniques. With this newly available data, plant operators may begin to correlate periods of high corrosion product levels with controllable plant operating events. In this way, operators may make more informed operational decisions with respect to corrosion product generation and transport.1.1 This test method covers the operation, calibration, and data interpretation for an on-line corrosion product (metals) monitoring system. The monitoring system is based on x-ray fluorescence (XRF) analysis of metals contained on membrane filters (for suspended solids) or resin membranes (for ionic solids). Since the XRF detector is sensitive to a range of emission energy, this test method is applicable to simultaneous monitoring of the concentration levels of several metals including titanium, vanadium, chromium, manganese, iron, cobalt, nickel, copper, zinc, mercury, lead, and others in a flowing sample. A detection limit below 1 ppb can be achieved for most metals.1.2 This test method includes a description of the equipment comprising the on-line metals monitoring system, as well as, operational procedures and system specifications.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 This guide is designed to help identify and integrate affected stakeholder interests and to include relevant scientific and technical information when developing occupational safety and health standards that include or are proposed to include an OEG.5.2 This guide shall be used when updating an occupational safety and health standard containing an OEG.5.3 While use of the CBSD process is required for occupational safety and health standards that include an OEG, it may also be used to improve stakeholder involvement and technical input for other occupational safety and health standards.5.4 The CBSD process is intended:(1) To obtain representation on the committee or subcommittee from sectors that are substantially impacted by a specific standard project; and(2) To obtain adequate input when the project requires review and analysis of information that is highly technical, very specialized, or not widely available.1.1 This guide presents a framework for a stakeholder-focused, consensus-based decision-making process for occupational safety and health standard development activities that include adoption or development of occupational exposure guidelines (OEGs) as a part of occupational health and safety standards.1.2 This guide applies to safety and health standard development activities in which an occupational exposure guideline will be included as one element of a comprehensive standard that addresses safety and health management strategies such as communication, monitoring, and controls. It is not meant to be used to develop an OEG apart from the context of such management strategies. In cases where other occupational exposure limit (OEL) establishing bodies have developed OELs, those may be reviewed, assimilated, or adapted rather than recreated ab initio.1.3 This guide does not replace existing consensus-based decision-making or committee participation processes that are used to develop safety and health standards. It is intended to be used in conjunction with such processes to improve scientific and technical input and stakeholder involvement in occupational safety and health decision-making for such standards.1.4 Limitations—This guide does not prescribe specific methods for generating or evaluating scientific and technical data related to assessing a particular occupational safety and health issue. Occupational safety and health standards apply to a wide variety of substances and occupational exposure circumstances. It is not possible to anticipate all situations where an OEG may be useful for a standard. This guide will be helpful in promoting appropriate balance and input, but the consensus process must deal with real-world complexities that individual standards may involve.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

5.1 This test method establishes a means to verify the prevention, to the extent possible, of IHE in steel fasteners during manufacture by maintaining strict controls during production operations such as surface preparation, pretreatments, and plating or coating. It is intended to be used as a qualification test for new or revised plating or coating processes and as a periodic inspection audit for the control of a plating or coating process.5.2 Passing this test allows fasteners to be stressed in tension to the minimum specified tensile load in air with almost no possibility of time delayed fracture in air as a result of IHE from processing. If the amount of residual hydrogen is not sufficient to induce cracking or fracture in the specimen under worst case conditions, then it can be concluded that all of the lots of fasteners processed during that period will not have sufficient residual hydrogen from processing to induce hydrogen embrittlement of the fasteners under stress in air if the process remains in control, unchanged and stable.5.3 If certified specimens with demonstrated sensitivity to IHE, processed with the fasteners, have a threshold ≥75 % of the incremental step load notched bend fracture stress, NFS(B)F1624, it is assumed that all fasteners processed the same way during the period will also pass any sustained load IHE test.FIG. 1 Dimensional Requirements for a 0.4W-Notched Square Bar Bend Specimen1.1 This test method covers a procedure to prevent, to the extent possible, internal hydrogen embrittlement (IHE) of fasteners by monitoring the plating or coating process, such as those described in Specifications F1137 and F1941. The process is quantitatively monitored on a periodic basis with a minimum number of specimens as compared to qualifying each lot of fasteners being plated or coated. Trend analysis is used to ensure quality as compared to statistical sampling analysis of each lot of fasteners. This test method consists of a mechanical test for the evaluation and control of the potential for IHE that may arise from various sources of hydrogen in a plating or coating process.1.2 This test method consists of a mechanical test, conducted on a standard specimen used as a witness, for the evaluation and control of the potential for IHE that may arise from various sources of hydrogen in a plating or coating process.1.3 This test method is limited to evaluating hydrogen induced embrittlement due only to processing (IHE) and not due to environmental exposure (EHE, see Test Method F1624).1.4 This test method is not intended to measure the relative susceptibility of steels to either IHE or EHE.1.5 This test method is limited to evaluating processes used for plating or coating ferrous fasteners.1.6 This test method uses a notched square bar specimen that conforms to Test Method F519, Type 1e, except that the radius is increased to accommodate the deposition of a larger range of platings and coatings. For the background on Test Method F519 testing, see publications ASTM STP 5432 and ASTM STP 962.3 The stress concentration factor is at a Kt = 3.1 ± 0.2. The sensitivity is demonstrated with a constant imposed cathodic potential to control the amount of hydrogen. Both the sensitivity and the baseline for residual hydrogen will be established with tests on bare metal specimens in air.1.7 The sensitivity of each lot of specimens to IHE shall be demonstrated. A specimen made of AISI E4340 steel heat treated to a hardness range of 50 to 52 HRC is used to produce a “worst case” condition and maximize sensitivity to IHE.1.8 The test is an accelerated (≤24 h) test method to measure the threshold for hydrogen stress cracking, and is used to quantify the amount of residual hydrogen in the specimen. The specimen undergoes sustained load and slow strain rate testing by using incremental loads and hold times under displacement control to measure a threshold stress in an accelerated manner in accordance with Test Method F1624.1.9 In this test method, bending is used instead of tension because it produces the maximum local limit load tensile stress in a notched bar of up to 2.3 times the yield strength as measured in accordance with Test Method E8/E8M. A fastener that is unintentionally exposed to bending on installation may attain this maximum local tensile stress.1.10 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： 590元 / 折扣价： 502 元 加购物车

This specification covers steel sheet, zinc-coated (galvanized) or zinc-iron alloy-coated (galvannealed) by the hot-dip process in coils and cut lengths. The material is available in several designations as follows: commercial steel, forming steel, deep drawing steel, extra deep drawing steel, structural steel, high strength low alloy steel, high strength low alloy steel with improved formability, solution hardened steel, and bake hardenable steel. Structural steel, high strength low alloy steel, solution hardened steel, and bake hardenable steel are available in several grades based on mechanical properties. Yield strength, elongation, and bending properties of the steel shall be determined. A bend test shall be done to the coated sheets.1.1 This specification covers steel sheet, zinc-coated (galvanized) or zinc-iron alloy-coated (galvannealed) by the hot-dip process in coils and cut lengths.1.2 The product is produced in various zinc or zinc-iron alloy-coating weights [masses] or coating designations as shown in Table 1 and in Table S2.1.1.3 Product furnished under this specification shall conform to the applicable requirements of the latest issue of Specification A924/A924M, unless otherwise provided herein.1.4 The product is available in a number of designations, grades, and classes in four general categories that are designed to be compatible with different application requirements.1.4.1 Steels with mandatory chemical requirements and typical mechanical properties.1.4.2 Steels with mandatory chemical requirements and mandatory mechanical properties.1.4.3 Steels with mandatory chemical requirements and mandatory mechanical properties that are achieved through solid-solution or bake hardening.1.5 Units—This specification is applicable to orders in either inch-pound units (as A653) or SI units (as A653M). Values in inch-pound and SI units are not necessarily equivalent. Within the text, SI units are shown in brackets. Each system shall be used independently of the other.1.6 The text of this specification references notes and footnotes that provide explanatory material. These notes and footnotes, excluding those in tables and figures, shall not be considered as requirements of this specification.1.7 Unless the order specifies the “M” designation (SI units), the product shall be furnished to inch-pound units.1.8 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.1.9 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

定价： 646元 / 折扣价： 550 元 加购物车

4.1 Use—This guide is intended to reflect a reasonable baseline process for the completion of PCAs for use on a voluntary basis. No implication is intended that use of this guide be required to have conducted a PCA in a commercially prudent and reasonable manner. The baseline process described in this guide is subject to a moderate level of uncertainty. Because the objectives, risk tolerance, schedule, and budget of users can be dramatically different there are varying levels of PCA and due diligence that can be exercised that are both more and less comprehensive than this guide that may be appropriate to meet the objectives of the user. In accordance with ASTM protocols, this guide does not recommend a specific course of action or scope of work. Users should consider their requirements, the purpose that the PCA is to serve, and their risk tolerance to refine the scope of assessment and consultant qualifications in order to establish appropriate objectives for the assessment.4.2 Clarification of Use of Assessments: 4.2.1 Specific Point in Time—A user should only rely on the PCR for the point in time that the observations and research were conducted.4.2.2 Site-Specific—The PCA prepared in accordance with this guide is site-specific in that it relates to the physical condition of primary improvements on a specific parcel of commercial real estate. Consequently, this guide does not address many additional issues in commercial real estate transactions such as economic obsolescence, the purchase of business entities, or physical deficiencies relating to off-site conditions.4.2.3 Specific Objectives—PCAs are completed to address specific objectives identified to the consultant by the user. The consultant should be consulted prior to use of the PCA to address any other objective.4.2.4 Intended Users—PCAs are typically completed for use by contracting parties. In some cases, the use of or reliance on reports may be extended to additional parties by mutual agreement of the contracting parties. Use of or reliance on PCAs by others may violate the rights of contracting parties and fail to satisfy the objectives of such unauthorized parties.4.3 Principles—The following principles are an integral part of this guide. They are intended to be referred to in resolving ambiguity, or in exercising discretion accorded the user or consultant in conducting a PCA, or in judging whether a user or consultant has conducted appropriate inquiry or has otherwise conducted an adequate PCA.4.3.1 Uncertainty Not Eliminated—No PCA can wholly eliminate the uncertainty regarding the presence of physical deficiencies and the performance of building systems or building components. Preparation of a PCR in accordance with this guide is intended to reduce, but not eliminate, the uncertainty regarding the potential for building system or building component failure and to reduce the potential that such building system or building component may not be initially observed. This guide also recognizes the inherent subjective nature of reported opinions as to such issues as workmanship, quality of original installation, and estimating the RUL of any given component or system. Users should work with their consultant to consider modifications to the scope of the PCA that may reduce uncertainties.4.3.2 Suggested Remedies—The guide recognizes that a suggested remedy may be determined under time constraints, formed without the aid of engineering calculations, testing, exploratory probing, the removal or relocation of materials, design, or other technically exhaustive means. Furthermore, there may be other alternatives or more appropriate schemes or methods to remedy a physical deficiency. The suggested remedies are generally formed without detailed knowledge from those familiar with the historical or actual performance of the building system or building component.4.3.3 Not Technically Exhaustive—The PCA is not intended to be construed as technically exhaustive. There is a point at which the cost of information obtained, or the time required to conduct the PCA and prepare the PCR, may outweigh the usefulness of the information and, in fact, may be a material detriment to the orderly and timely completion of a commercial real estate transaction. It is the intent of this guide to attempt to identify a balance between limiting the costs and time demands inherent in performing a PCA and reducing the uncertainty about unknown physical deficiencies resulting from completing additional inquiry.4.3.4 Representative Observations—The purpose of conducting representative observations is to convey to the user the expected magnitude of commonly encountered or anticipated conditions. Recommended representative observation quantities for various asset types are provided in Annex A1; however, if in the consultant’s opinion, the recommended representative observations are unwarranted as a result of homogeneity of the asset or other reasons deemed appropriate, the field observer may survey sufficient units, areas, buildings, building systems, and building components so as to comment with reasonable confidence as to the representative presence of physical deficiencies at such repetitive or similar areas, building systems, and building components. If there is more than one building on the subject property, and they are homogeneous with respect to approximate age, use, basic design, materials, and systems, it is not a requirement of this guide for the field observer to observe the building systems and building components within each individual building to describe or comment on their condition within the PCR. The descriptions and observations provided in the PCR are to be construed as representative of all similar improvements.4.3.4.1 User-Mandated Representative Observations—A user may mandate the representative observations required for a given subject property or a particular building system or building component. Such representative observations may be more or less detailed than this guide's recommended representative observations as provided in Annex A1.4.3.4.2 Extrapolation of Findings—Consultant may reasonably extrapolate representative observations and findings to all typical areas or systems of the subject property for the purposes of describing such conditions within the PCR and preparing the opinions of costs for suggested remedies.4.3.5 Level of Due Diligence is Variable—Not every subject property will warrant the same level of assessment. The appropriate level of assessment is guided by the purpose the PCA is to serve; type of subject property; age of the improvements; expertise and risk tolerance of the user; and time available for preparing and reviewing the opinions contained in the PCR.4.4 Prior PCR Usage—This guide recognizes that PCRs prepared in accordance with this guide may include information that subsequent users and consultants may want to use to avoid duplication and to reduce cost. Therefore, this guide includes procedures to assist users and consultants in determining the appropriateness of using such information. In addition to the specific procedures contained elsewhere in this guide, the following should be considered:4.5 Use of Prior PCR Information—Information contained in prior property condition reports may be helpful to assist in understanding the subject property and planning the walk-through survey and research for the completion of a current PCR. Such information should serve only as an aid to a consultant in fulfilling the requirements of this guide and to assist the field observer in the walk-through survey, research, and the field observer’s understanding of the subject property; and should be verified during the completion of a current assessment.4.5.1 Comparison with a Previously Prepared PCR—Discrepancies between a PCR and a previously prepared PCR are not indicative that either PCR is deficient. User requirements and objectives, the purpose of the PCR, qualifications and experience of the assessment team, time available to complete the PCR, access to and availability of information, hindsight, new or additional information, enhanced visibility because of improved weather or site conditions, equipment not in a shutdown mode, specific building systems and building components observed, and other factors may significantly impact the findings and opinions of the PCR. It should not be concluded or assumed that a previous PCR was deficient because the previous PCA did not discover a certain physical deficiency, or because opinions of costs in the previous PCR are different. Because a PCR contains a representative indication of the condition of the subject property at the time of the walk-through survey and is dependent on the information available to the consultant at that time, the PCR should be evaluated on the reasonableness of judgments made at the time and under the circumstances in which they are made.4.5.2 Conducting Current Walk-Through Surveys—At a minimum, for a PCR to be consistent with this guide, a new walk-through survey, interviews, and solicitation and review of building and fire department records for recorded material violations should be performed.4.6 Actual Knowledge Exception—If the user or consultant conducting a PCA has actual knowledge that the information from a prior PCR is not accurate, or if it is obvious to the field observer that the information is not accurate, such information from a prior PCR should not be used.4.7 Contractual Issues—This guide recognizes that contractual and legal obligations may exist between prior and subsequent users of PCRs, or between users and consultants who performed prior PCRs, or both. Consideration of such contractual obligations is beyond the scope of this guide. Furthermore, a subsequent user of a prior PCA should be apprised that the report may have been prepared for purposes other than the current desired purpose of the PCR and should determine the contractual purpose and scope of the prior PCA.4.8 Rules of Engagement—The contractual and legal obligations between a user and consultant (and other parties, if any) are outside the scope of this guide. No specific legal relationship between the user and consultant was considered during the preparation of this guide.1.1 Purpose—The purpose of this guide is to provide a framework for conducting a property condition assessment (PCA) of the primary improvements at commercial real estate properties by performing a walk-through survey and conducting research as outlined within this guide.1.1.1 Physical Deficiencies—The goal of the baseline process for property condition assessments is to identify and communicate material physical deficiencies to a user.1.1.2 Walk-Through Survey—This guide outlines procedures for conducting a walk-through survey to identify physical deficiencies, and recommends various building systems and building components that should be observed by the field observer.1.1.3 Document Reviews and Interviews—The scope of this guide includes document reviews, research, and interviews to augment the walk-through survey to assist with understanding the subject property and identification of physical deficiencies.1.1.4 Property Condition Report—The work product resulting from completing a PCA in accordance with this guide is a property condition report (PCR). The PCR incorporates the information obtained during the Walk-Through Survey, the Document Review and Interviews sections of this guide and includes opinions of costs for suggested remedies of observed physical deficiencies.1.2 Objectives—Objectives in the development of this guide are to: (1) provide a framework for conducting a property condition assessment (PCA) of the primary improvements located on a parcel of commercial real estate; (2) facilitate consistent and pertinent content in PCRs; (3) develop pragmatic and reasonable recommendations and expectations for site observations, document reviews and research associated with conducting PCAs and preparing PCRs; (4) establish reasonable expectations for PCRs; (5) assist in developing an industry standard of care for appropriate baseline observations and research; and (6) recommend protocols for the consultants for communicating observations, opinions, and recommendations in a manner meaningful to the user.1.3 Out of Considerations and Excluded Activities—The use of this guide is strictly limited to the scope set forth herein. Section 12 and Appendix X1 of this guide identify, for informational purposes, certain considerations and physical conditions that may exist on the subject property, and certain activities or procedures (not an all-inclusive list) that are beyond the scope of this guide but may warrant consideration by parties to a commercial real estate transaction to enhance the PCA. Users should work with a knowledgeable consultant to identify additional considerations and concerns to be evaluated. The decision to inquire into out-of-scope considerations or extend the assessment to include excluded activities is to be made by the user. No assessment of out-of-scope considerations is required for a PCA to be conducted in conformance with this guide.1.4 Organization of This guide—This guide consists of several sections, an Annex and two (2) Appendixes. Section 1 is the . Section 3 on Terminology contains definitions of terms both unique to this guide and not unique to this guide, and acronyms. Section 4 sets out the of this guide, and Section 5 describes the User's Responsibilities. Sections 6 through 11 provide guidelines for the main body of the PCR, including the scope of the walk-through survey, preparation of the opinions of costs to address physical deficiencies, and preparation of the PCR. Section 12 provides additional information regarding out-of-scope considerations, activities, and procedures (see section 1.3). Annex A1 provides guidance relating to specific asset types that are considered as integral to this guide. Appendix X1 describes additional concerns a user may consider in modification of the scope of the PCR. Appendix X2 and Appendix X3 outline an approach to limited accessibility screenings.     TABLE OF CONTENTS1    1.1 Purpose  1.2 Objectives  1.3 Out of Considerations and Excluded Activities  1.4 Organization of This guide  1.5 Multiple Buildings  1.6 Safety Concerns3 Terminology  3.2 Definitions  3.3 Abbreviations and Acronyms4   4.1 Use  4.2 Clarification of Use of Assessments  4.3 Principles  4.4 Prior PCR Usage  4.5 Use of Prior PCR Information  4.6 Actual Knowledge Exception  4.7 Contractual Issues  4.8 Rules of Engagement5 User's Responsibilities  5.1 Objectives and of Assessment  5.2 Point of Contact  5.3 Access  5.4 User Disclosure6 Property Condition Assessment  6.1 Objective  6.2 PCA Components  6.3 Coordination of Components  6.4 Consultant's Duties7 The Consultant  7.1 Qualifications of the Consultant  7.2 Staffing of the Field Observer  7.3 Independence of the Consultant  7.4 Qualifications of the Field Observer  7.5 Qualifications of the PCR Reviewer  7.6 The Field Observer and PCR Reviewer May Be a Single Individual  7.7 Not a Professional Architectural or Engineering Service8 Document Review and Interviews  8.1 Objective  8.2 Verification of Information Provided by Others  8.3 Accuracy and Completeness  8.4 Government Agency Provided Information  8.5 Pre-Survey Questionnaire  8.6 Owner/User Provided Documentation and Information  8.7 Interviews9 Walk-Through Survey  9.1 Objective  9.2 Frequency  9.3 Photographs  9.4   9.5 Additional Considerations10 Opinions of Costs to Remedy Physical Deficiencies  10.1 Purpose  10.2   10.3 Opinions of Costs Attributes11 Property Condition Report  11.1 Format  11.2 Writing Protocols  11.3 Documentation  11.4 Executive Summary  11.5 Purpose and   11.6 Walk-Through Survey  11.7 Document Reviews and Interviews  11.8 Additional Considerations  11.9 Qualifications  11.10 Limiting Conditions  11.11 Exhibits12 Out of Considerations  12.1 Activity Exclusions  12.2 Warranty, Guarantee, and Code Compliance Exclusions  12.3 Additional/General Considerations13 KeywordsAnnex A1 GUIDANCE AND ENHANCED DUE DILIGENCE SERVICES  A1.1 Multifamily Properties  A1.2 Commercial Office Buildings  A1.3 Retail Buildings   Appendix X1 GUIDANCE AND ENHANCED DUE DILIGENCE SERVICES  X1.1 Qualifications  X1.2 Modifications to the Baseline ProcessAppendix X2 AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT (ADA) ABBREVIATED ADA SCREENINGAppendix X3 FAIR HOUSING ACT (FHA) ABBREVIATED FHA SCREENING1.5 Multiple Buildings—If the subject property is comprised of multiple buildings, it is the intent of this guide that all of the primary improvements are discussed in one PCR.1.6 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.1.7 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

定价： 843元 / 折扣价： 717 元 加购物车

5.1 The results of this test method may be used to determine nitrogen oxides and carbon monoxide emission concentrations from natural gas combustion at stationary sources.5.2 This test method may also be used to monitor emissions during short-term emission tests or periodically in order to optimize process operation for nitrogen oxides and carbon monoxide control.1.1 This test method covers the determination of nitrogen oxides (NO and NO2), carbon monoxide (CO), and oxygen (O2) concentrations in controlled and uncontrolled emissions from natural gas-fired reciprocating engines, combustion turbines, boilers, and process heaters using portable analyzers with electrochemical sensors. Due to the inherent cross sensitivities of the electrochemical cells, this test method should not be applied to other pollutants or emission sources without a complete investigation of possible analytical interferences and a comparative evaluation with EPA test methods.1.1.1 The procedures and specifications of this test method were originally developed during laboratory and field tests funded by the Gas Research Institute (GRI).2 Comparative emission tests were conducted only on natural gas-fired combustion sources. Subsequently, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) sponsored Environmental Technology Verification (ETV) program conducted further evaluations of electrochemical cell analyzers, which included laboratory tests and field tests on natural gas and diesel-fueled generators. The EPA has reviewed the ETV test results, published additional information, and provided technical input that has been considered in the update of this test method.31.2 This test method contains notes that are explanatory and are not part of the mandatory requirements of the standard.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： 646元 / 折扣价： 550 元 加购物车

4.1 Process Capability—Process capability can be defined as the natural or inherent behavior of a stable process that is in a state of statistical control (1).4 A “state of statistical control” is achieved when the process exhibits no detectable patterns or trends, such that the variation seen in the data is believed to be random and inherent to the process. Process capability is linked to the use of control charts and the state of statistical control. A process must be studied to evaluate its state of control before evaluating process capability.4.2 Process Control—There are many ways to implement control charts, but the most popular choice is to achieve a state of statistical control for the process under study. Special causes are identified by a set of rules based on probability theory. The process is investigated whenever the chart signals the occurrence of special causes. Taking appropriate actions to eliminate identified special causes and preventing their reappearance will ultimately obtain a state of statistical control. In this state, a minimum level of variation may be reached, which is referred to as common cause or inherent variation. For the purpose of this standard, this variation is a measure of the uniformity of process output, typically a product characteristic.4.3 Process Capability Indices—The behavior of a process (as related to inherent variability) in the state of statistical control is used to describe its capability. To compare a process with customer requirements (or specifications), it is common practice to think of capability in terms of the proportion of the process output that is within product specifications or tolerances. The metric of this proportion is the percentage of the process spread used up by the specification. This comparison becomes the essence of all process capability measures. The manner in which these measures are calculated defines the different types of capability indices and their use. Two process capability indices are defined in 5.2 and 5.3. In practice, these indices are used to drive process improvement through continuous improvement efforts. These indices may be used to identify the need for management actions required to reduce common cause variation, compare products from different sources, and to compare processes.4.4 Process Performance Indices—When a process is not in a state of statistical control, the process is subject to special cause variation, which can manifest itself in various ways on the process variability. Special causes can give rise to changes in the short-term variability of the process or can cause long-term shifts or drifts of the process mean. Special causes can also create transient shifts or spikes in the process mean. Even in such cases, there may be a need to assess the long-term variability of the process against customer specifications using process performance indices, which are defined in 6.2 and 6.3. These indices are similar to those for capability indices and differ only in the estimate of variability used in the calculation. This estimated variability includes additional components of variation due to special causes. Since process performance indices have additional components of variation, process performance usually has a wider spread than the process capability spread. These measures are useful in determining the role of measurement and sampling variability when compared to product uniformity.4.5 Attribute capability applications occur where attribute data are being used to assess a process and may involve the use of non-conforming units or non-conformities per unit.4.6 Additional measures and methodology to process assessments include the index Cpm, which incorporates a target parameter for variable data, and the calculation of Rolled Throughput Yield (RTY), that measures how good a series of process steps are.AbstractThis practice provides guidance for determining process capability and performance under several common scenarios of use including: normal distribution-based capability and performance indices such as Cp, Cpk, Pp, and Ppk; process capability using attribute data for non-conforming units and non-conformities per unit type variables; and additional methods in working with process capability or performance.1.1 This practice provides guidance for determining process capability and performance under several common scenarios of use including: (a) normal distribution based capability and performance indices such as Cp, Cpk, Pp, and Ppk; (b) process capability using attribute data for non-conforming units and non-conformities per unit type variables, and (c) additional methods in working with process capability or performance.1.2 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

定价： 590元 / 折扣价： 502 元 加购物车

4.1 This practice describes the use of control charts as a tool for use in statistical process control (SPC). Control charts were developed by Shewhart (2)3 in the 1920s and are still in wide use today. SPC is a branch of statistical quality control (3, 4), which also encompasses process capability analysis and acceptance sampling inspection. Process capability analysis, as described in Practice E2281, requires the use of SPC in some of its procedures. Acceptance sampling inspection, described in Practices E1994, E2234, and E2762, requires the use of SPC to minimize rejection of product.4.2 Principles of SPC—A process may be defined as a set of interrelated activities that convert inputs into outputs. SPC uses various statistical methodologies to improve the quality of a process by reducing the variability of one or more of its outputs, for example, a quality characteristic of a product or service.4.2.1 A certain amount of variability will exist in all process outputs regardless of how well the process is designed or maintained. A process operating with only this inherent variability is said to be in a state of statistical control, with its output variability subject only to chance, or common, causes.4.2.2 Process upsets, said to be due to assignable, or special causes, are manifested by changes in the output level, such as a spike, shift, trend, or by changes in the variability of an output. The control chart is the basic analytical tool in SPC and is used to detect the occurrence of special causes operating on the process.4.2.3 When the control chart signals the presence of a special cause, other SPC tools, such as flow charts, brainstorming, cause-and-effect diagrams, or Pareto analysis, described in various references (4-8), are used to identify the special cause. Special causes, when identified, are either eliminated or controlled. When special cause variation is eliminated, process variability is reduced to its inherent variability, and control charts then function as a process monitor. Further reduction in variation would require modification of the process itself.4.3 The use of control charts to adjust one or more process inputs is not recommended, although a control chart may signal the need to do so. Process adjustment schemes are outside the scope of this practice and are discussed by Box and Luceño (9).4.4 The role of a control chart changes as the SPC program evolves. An SPC program can be organized into three stages (10).4.4.1 Stage A, Process Evaluation—Historical data from the process are plotted on control charts to assess the current state of the process, and control limits from this data are calculated for further use. See Ref. (1) for a more complete discussion on the use of control charts for data analysis. Ideally, it is recommended that 100 or more numeric data points be collected for this stage. For single observations per subgroup at least 30 data points should be collected (6, 7). For attributes, a total of 20 to 25 subgroups of data are recommended. At this stage, it will be difficult to find special causes, but it would be useful to compile a list of possible sources for these for use in the next stage.4.4.2 Stage B, Process Improvement—Process data are collected in real time and control charts, using limits calculated in Stage A, are used to detect special causes for identification and resolution. A team approach is vital for finding the sources of special cause variation, and process understanding will be increased. This stage is completed when further use of the control chart indicates that a state of statistical control exists.4.4.3 Stage C, Process Monitoring—The control chart is used to monitor the process to confirm continually the state of statistical control and to react to new special causes entering the system or the reoccurrence of previous special causes. In the latter case, an out-of-control action plan (OCAP) can be developed to deal with this situation (7, 11). Update the control limits periodically or if process changes have occurred.NOTE 1: Some practitioners combine Stages A and B into a Phase I and denote Stage C as Phase II (10).AbstractThis guide covers fundamental concepts, applications, and mathematical relationships associated with reliability as used in industrial areas and as applied to simple components, processes, and systems or complex final products. This guide summarizes selected concepts, terminology, formulas, and methods associated with reliability and its application to products and processes.1.1 This practice provides guidance for the use of control charts in statistical process control programs, which improve process quality through reducing variation by identifying and eliminating the effect of special causes of variation.1.2 Control charts are used to continually monitor product or process characteristics to determine whether or not a process is in a state of statistical control. When this state is attained, the process characteristic will, at least approximately, vary within certain limits at a given probability.1.3 This practice applies to variables data (characteristics measured on a continuous numerical scale) and to attributes data (characteristics measured as percentages, fractions, or counts of occurrences in a defined interval of time or space).1.4 The system of units for this practice is not specified. Dimensional quantities in the practice are presented only as illustrations of calculation methods. The examples are not binding on products or test methods treated.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： 843元 / 折扣价： 717 元 加购物车

1.1 These test methods cover the determination of major organic impurities in refined phenol manufactured by the cumene (isopropylbenzene) process. Two test methods are employed to determine the stated major impurities. 1.2 Test Method A determines the concentration of major impurities such as mesityl oxide, cumene, [alpha]-methylstyrene, 2-methylbenzofuran, acetophenone, and dimethylbenzyl alcohol. 1.3 Test Method B determines the hydroxyacetone content. 1.4 The following applies to all specified limits in this standard: for purposes of determining conformance with this standard, an observed value or a calculated value shall be rounded off "to the nearest unit" in the last right-hand digit used in expressing the specification limit, in accordance with the rounding-off method of Practice E29. 1.5 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety problems, 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 Section 6.

定价： 0元 / 折扣价： 0 元

1.1 This practice describes the operation and production control of metal powder bed fusion (PBF) machines and processes to meet critical applications such as commercial aerospace components and medical implants. The requirements contained herein are applicable for production components and mechanical test specimens using powder bed fusion (PBF) with both laser and electron beams.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 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： 525元 / 折扣价： 447 元 加购物车

5.1 The AHP method allows you to generate a single measure of desirability for project/product/process alternatives with respect to multiple attributes (qualitative and quantitative). By contrast, life-cycle cost (Practice E917), net savings (Practice E1074), savings-to-investment ratio (Practice E964), internal rate-of-return (Practice E1057), and payback (Practice E1121) methods all require you to put a monetary value on benefits and costs in order to include them in a measure of project/product/process worth.5.2 Use AHP to evaluate a finite and generally small set of discrete and predetermined options or alternatives. Specific AHP applications are ranking and choosing among alternatives. For example, rank alternative building locations with AHP to see how they measure up to one another, or use AHP to choose among building materials to see which is best for your application.5.3 Use AHP if no single alternative exhibits the most preferred available value or performance for all attributes. This is often the result of an underlying trade-off relationship among attributes. An example is the trade-off between low desired energy costs and large glass window areas (which may raise heating and cooling costs while lowering lighting costs).5.4 Use AHP to evaluate alternatives whose attributes are not all measurable in the same units. Also use AHP when performance relative to some or all of the attributes is impractical, impossible, or too costly to measure. For example, while life-cycle costs are directly measured in monetary units, the number and size of offices are measured in other units, and the public image of a building may not be practically measurable in any unit. To help you choose among candidate buildings with these diverse attributes, use AHP to evaluate your alternatives.5.5 The AHP method is well-suited for application to a variety of sustainability-related topics. Guide E2432 states when applying the concept of sustainability, it is necessary to assess and balance three dissimilar yet interrelated general principles—environment, economic, and social—based on the best information available at the time the decision is made. Use AHP for pairwise comparisons among environmental attributes, among economic attributes, and among social attributes, and for establishing relative importance weights for each attribute and for each of the three general principles to which the attributes are attached. Use the AHP-established relative importance weights to select the preferred project/product/process from among the competing alternatives.5.6 Potential users of AHP include architects, developers, owners, or lessors of buildings, real estate professionals (commercial and residential), facility managers, building material manufacturers, equipment manufacturers, product and process engineers, life cycle assessment experts, and agencies managing building portfolios.1.1 This practice presents a procedure for calculating and interpreting AHP scores of a project’s/product’s/process’ total overall desirability when making capital investment decisions.3 Projects include design, construction, operation, and disposal of commercial and residential buildings and other engineered structures.4 Products include materials, components, systems, and equipment.5 Processes include procurement, materials management, work flow, fabrication and assembly, quality control, and services.1.2 In addition to monetary benefits and costs, the procedure allows for the consideration of characteristics or attributes which decision makers regard as important, but which are not readily expressed in monetary terms. Examples of such attributes that pertain to the selection among project/product/process alternatives are: a construction projects’s building alternatives whose nonmonetary attributes are location/accessibility, site security, maintainability, quality of the sound and visual environment, and image to the public and occupants; building products based on their economic and environmental performance; and sustainability-related issues for key construction processes that address environmental needs, while considering project safety, cost, and schedule.1.3 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.1.4 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

定价： 646元 / 折扣价： 550 元 加购物车

4.1 In this test method, the amount of particulate generated into the air by operating a vacuum cleaner over a specific floor covering that is contaminated with dust will be determined. Particles from the motor, floor covering, and the test dust will all be measured. The amount of dust generated in the laboratory practice will differ from that in residential/commercial installations because of variations in floor coverings, soil and other solid particulate compositions, the vacuuming process used by individual operators, the air exchange rate of heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) systems, and other factors.4.2 To provide a uniform basis for measuring the performance in 4.1, a standardized test chamber, equipment, floor covering material, and dust particulate are used in this test method.4.3 Due to the large range of generated particle counts observed among products in the vacuum cleaner industry at the present time, the test results of the maximum particle counts generated under this test method are expressed in Log10 equivalents for evaluation and comparison of product performance.1.1 This test method provides a laboratory test for the measurement of particulate generated as a direct result of the vacuuming process.1.2 This test method is applicable to all residential/commercial uprights, canisters, stickvacs, central vacuum systems, and combination cleaners.1.3 This test method applies to test dust removal from floor coverings not the removal of surface litter and debris.1.4 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard. The values given in parentheses are for information only.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

1.1 Purpose—The purpose of this guide is to describe a scientific methodology for conducting environmental health site assessments (EHSAs) for military deployments. EHSAs are prepared to evaluate potential environmental exposures that may impact the health of deployed personnel as directed by Presidential Review Directive 5; Chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff memorandum MCM-0006-02; and Department of Defense Instruction 6490.3. This guide is intended to assist the user in developing conceptual site models (CSMs) for deployment sites. CSMs are used to define the exposure pathways. The exposure pathways assist in the evaluation of potential health impacts. The goal of this guide is to identify complete and potentially complete exposure pathways that may affect the health of deployed personnel.1.2 This guide provides a series of steps designed to obtain sufficient information to evaluate potential environmental exposures that may affect the health of deployed personnel. It is most applicable when only a limited amount of information about the deployment area is available. If it becomes apparent to the environmental health professional in predeployment planning activities that sufficient information exists to evaluate the health significance of potential environmental exposures, it will not be necessary to complete the data collection activities described in this process. In this event, the environmental health professional will document their justification for not completing the data collection activities. An obvious example would be deployment to a major city in a developed county.1.3 Information generated by this process will be used for environmental health risk assessments. Environmental health risk assessments are beyond the scope of this guide.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 requirements prior to use.

定价： 0元 / 折扣价： 0 元

This specification covers sheet steel in coils and cut lengths coated with lead-tin alloy by the hot-dip process. The material, also known as terne-coated sheet, is available in four designations as commercial steel, deep drawing steel, extra deep drawing steel, and structural steel. Amount of copper, nickel, chromium, molybdenum, vanadium, titanium, columbium, and boron shall conform to the chemical composition requirements of this specification. Yield strength, tensile strength, elongation, and bending shall conform to the mechanical property requirements.1.1 This specification covers sheet steel in coils and cut lengths coated with lead-tin alloy (terne metal, see 3.2.3) by the hot-dip process. This material is commonly known as terne and is used where ease of solderability and a degree of corrosion resistance are desirable. It is especially suitable where resistance to gasoline is required. Terne-coated sheet is also used for stamping, where the coating acts as a lubricant in the die, lessening difficulties in drawing. The weight of coating, always expressed as total coating on both sides, shall be specified in accordance with Table 1.1.2 Material furnished under this specification shall conform to the applicable requirements of the latest issue of Specification A924/A924M, unless otherwise provided herein.1.3 Terne-coated steel is available in a number of designations, types, and grades.1.4 This specification is applicable to orders in either inch-pound units (as A308) or SI units (as A308M). Values in inch-pound and SI units are not necessarily equivalent. Within the text, SI units are shown in brackets. Each system shall be used independently of the other.1.5 Unless the order specifies the “M” designation (SI units), the product shall be furnished to inch-pound units.1.6 The text of this specification references notes and footnotes that provide explanatory material. These notes and footnotes, excluding those in tables and figures, shall not be considered as requirements of this specification.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 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 transport of any suspended solids or corrosion products from the preboiler cycle has been shown to be detrimental to all types of steam generating equipment. Corrosion product transport as low as 10 ppb can have significant impact on steam generators performance.5.2 Deposited corrosion products on pressurized water reactor (PWR) steam generator tubes can reduce heat transfer, and, if the deposit is sufficiently thick, can provide a local area for impurities in the bulk water to concentrate, resulting in a corrosive environment. In boiling water reactor (BWR) plants, the transport of corrosion products can cause fuel failure, out of core radiation problems from activation reactions, and other material related problems.5.3 In fossil plants, the transport of corrosion products can reduce heat transfer in the boilers leading to tube failures from overheating. The removal of these corrosion products by chemical cleaning is expensive and potentially harmful to the boiler tubes.5.4 Normally, grab samples are not sensitive enough to detect changes in the level of corrosion product transport. Also, system transients may be missed by only taking grab samples. An integrated sample over time will increase the sensitivity for detecting the corrosion products and provide a better understanding of the total corrosion product transport to steam generators.1.1 This practice is applicable for sampling condensed steam or water, such as boiler feedwater, for the collection of suspended solids and (optional) ionic solids using a 0.45-μm membrane filter (suspended solids) and ion exchange media (ionic solids). As the major suspended component found in most boiler feedwaters is some form of corrosion product from the preboiler system, the device used for this practice is commonly called a corrosion product sampler.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： 590元 / 折扣价： 502 元 加购物车