This practice establishes both the global and the numerical procedures for the systematic interpretation and analysis of psychophysiological detection of deception (PDD) data. Examiners shall use the method for which they have been formally trained, and these procedures shall be correctly matched to the PDD examination format.1.1 These practices establish procedures for the systematic interpretation and analysis of Psychophysiological Detection of Deception (PDD) data.1.2 Any test data analysis procedure used shall be correctly matched to the PDD examination format. Examiners shall use evaluation methods for which they have been formally trained.1.2.1 Acceptable test data analysis procedures are those published in refereed or technical journals, and for which published replications of the procedures have confirmed their efficacy.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： 515元 / 折扣价： 438 元 加购物车

5.1 These test methods determine whether copper products will be resistant to embrittlement when exposed to elevated temperatures in a reducing atmosphere.5.1.1 It is assumed that all who use these test methods will be trained personnel capable of performing these procedures skillfully and safely. It is expected that work will be performed in a properly equipped facility.1.1 These test methods describe procedures for determining the presence of cuprous oxide (Cu2O) in products made from deoxidized and oxygen-free copper.1.2 The test methods appear in the following order:  Sections   Microscopical Examination without Thermal Treatment 9 – 11Microscopical Examination after Thermal Treatment 13 – 15Closed Bend Test after Thermal Treatment 17 – 19Reverse Bend Test after Thermal Treatment 21 – 231.3 Units—The values stated in inch-pound units are to be regarded as standard. The values given in parentheses are mathematical conversions to SI units that are provided for information only and are not considered standard.1.4 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

5.1 PCRT Applications and Capabilities—PCRT has been applied successfully to a wide range of NDT applications in the manufacture and maintenance of metallic and non-metallic parts. Examples of anomalies detected are discussed in 1.1. PCRT has been shown to provide cost effective and accurate NDT solutions in many industries including automotive, aerospace, and power generation. Examples of successful applications currently employed in commercial use include, but are not limited to:(1) Silicon nitride bearing elements(2) Steel, iron, and aluminum rocker and control arms(3) Aircraft and industrial gas turbine engine components (blades, vanes, disks)(4) Cast cylinder heads and cylinder blocks(5) Sintered powder metal gears and clutch plates(6) Machined forged steel steering and transmission components (gears, shafts, racks)(7) Ceramic oxygen sensors(8) Silicon wafers(9) Gears, including those with induction hardened or carburized teeth(10) Ceramic matrix composite (CMC) material samples and components(11) Components with shot peened surfaces(12) Machined or rolled-formed fasteners(13) Components made with additive manufacturing(14) Aircraft landing gear, wheel, and brake components(15) Components made with metal injection molding5.2 General Approach and Equipment Requirements for PCRT via Swept Sine Input: 5.2.1 PCRT systems comprise hardware and software capable of inducing vibrations, recording the component response to the induced vibrations, and executing analysis of the data collected. Inputting a swept sine wave into the part has proven to be an effective means of introducing mechanical vibration and can be achieved with a high quality signal generator coupled with an appropriate active transducer in physical contact with the part. Collection of the part’s frequency response can be achieved by recording the signal generated by an appropriate passive vibration transducer. The software required to analyze the available data may include a variety of suitable statistical analysis and pattern recognition tools. Measurement accuracy and repeatability are extremely important to the application of PCRT.5.2.2 Hardware Requirements—A swept sine wave signal generator and response measurement system operating over the desired frequency range of the test part are required with accuracy better than 0.002 %. The signal generator should be calibrated to applicable industry standards. Transducers must be operable over same frequency range. Three transducers are typically used; one Drive transducer and two Receive transducers. Transducers typically operate in a dry environment, providing direct contact coupling to the part under examination. However, non-contacting response methods can operate suitably when parts are wet or oil-coated. Other than fixturing and transducer contact, no other contact with the part is allowed as these mechanical forces dampen certain vibrations. For optimal examination, parts should be placed precisely on the transducers (generally, ±0.062 in. (1.6 mm) in each axis provides acceptable results). The examination nest and cabling shall isolate the Drive from Receive signals and ground returns, so as to not produce (mechanical or electrical) cross talk between channels. Excessive external vibration or audible noise, or both, will compromise the measurements.5.3 Constraints and Limitations: 5.3.1 PCRT cannot separate parts based on visually detectable anomalies that do not affect the structural integrity of the part. It may be necessary to provide additional visual inspection of parts to identify these indications.5.3.2 Excessive process variation of parts may limit the sensitivity of PCRT. For example, mass/dimensional variations exceeding 5 % may cause PCRT to be unusable.5.3.3 Specific anomaly identification is highly unlikely. PCRT is a whole body measurement and differentiating between a crack and a void in the same location is generally not possible. It may be possible to differentiate some anomalies by using multiple patterns and training sets. The use of physics-based modeling and simulation to predict the resonance frequency spectrum of a component may also allow relationships between resonance frequencies and defect locations/characteristics to be established.5.3.4 PCRT will only work with stiff objects that provide resonances whose frequency divided by their width at half of the maximum amplitude (Q) are greater than 400 to 500. Although steel parts may be very stiff and perfectly reasonable to use for PCRT, steel foil would generally not be.5.3.5 While PCRT can be applied to painted and coated parts in many cases, the presence of some surface coatings such as vibration-absorbing materials and heavy oil layers may limit or preclude the application of PCRT.5.3.6 While PCRT can be applied to parts over a wide range of temperatures, it should not be applied to parts that are rapidly changing temperature. The part temperature should be stabilized before collecting resonance data.5.3.7 Misclassified parts in the teaching set, along with the presence of unknown anomalies in the teaching set, can significantly reduce the accuracy and sensitivity of PCRT.1.1 This practice describes a general procedure for using the process compensated resonance testing (PCRT) via swept sine input method for metallic or non-metallic parts to compare resonance patterns from a sample under test to reference teaching sets of known acceptable and targeted defect samples. The resonance pattern differences can be used to distinguish acceptable parts with normal process variation from parts with targeted material states and defects that will cause performance deficiencies. These material states and defects include, but are not limited to, cracks, voids, porosity, shrink, inclusions, discontinuities, grain and crystalline structure differences, density-related anomalies, heat treatment variations, material elastic property differences, residual stress, and dimensional variations. This practice is intended for use with instruments capable of exciting, measuring, recording, and analyzing multiple whole body, mechanical vibration resonance frequencies in acoustic or ultrasonic frequency ranges, or both.1.2 Units—The values stated in inch-pound units are to be regarded as standard. The values given in parentheses are mathematical conversions to SI units that are provided for information only and are not considered standard.1.3 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

5.1 Accurate measurement of organic carbon in water at low and very low levels is of particular interest to the electronic, life sciences, and steam power generation industries.5.2 Elevated levels of organics in raw water tend to degrade ion exchange resin capacity. Elevated levels of organics in high purity water tend to support biological growth and, in some cases, are directly detrimental to the processes that require high purity water.5.3 In power generation, naturally occurring organics can become degraded to CO2 and low molecular weight organic acids that, in turn, are corrosive to the process equipment. Their effect on conductivity may also cause water chemistry operating parameters to be exceeded, calling for plant shutdown. Halogenated and sulfonated organics may not be detectable by conductivity but at boiler temperatures will release highly corrosive chlorides, sulfates, etc.5.4 In process water in other industries, organic carbon can signify in-leakage of substances through damaged piping and components, or an unacceptable level of product loss.5.5 In wastewater treatment, organic carbon measurement of influent and process water can help optimize treatment schemes. Measurement of organic carbon at discharge may contribute to regulatory compliance.5.6 In life sciences, control of organic carbon is necessary to demonstrate compliance with regulatory limits for some types of waters.1.1 This guide covers the selection, establishment, and application of monitoring systems for carbon and carbon compounds by on-line, automatic analysis, and recording or otherwise signaling of output data. The system chosen will depend on the purpose for which it is intended (for example, regulatory compliance, process monitoring, or to alert the user to adverse trends) and on the type of water to be monitored (low purity or high purity, with or without suspended particulates, purgeable organics, or inorganic carbon). If it is to be used for regulatory compliance, the test method published or referenced in the regulations should be used in conjunction with this guide and other ASTM test methods. This guide covers carbon concentrations of 0.05 µg/L to 50 000 mg/L. Low end sensitivity and quantitative results may vary among instruments. This guide covers the on-line measurement techniques listed in Table 1. Additional laboratory test methods are available: Test Methods D4129, D4839, D5904, D6317, and D7573.1.2 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. For specific hazard statements, see Section 9.1.4 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

4.1 Accurate gas chromatographic determination of trace levels of thiophene in benzene involves special analytical problems because of the difficulties of trace level analysis. These problems arise from the low concentration levels that need to be measured, the type of column and detector needed for analysis, and the potential interference from the benzene matrix.4.2 This test method was found applicable for determining thiophene in refined benzene conforming to the specifications described in Specifications D2359, D4734, and D5871 and may be applicable toward other grades of benzene if the user has taken the necessary precautions as described in the text.4.3 This test method was developed as an alternative technique to Test Method D4735.1.1 This test method covers the determination of thiophene in refined benzene using gas chromatography and sulfur selective detection. The test method is applicable to the determination of thiophene at levels of 0.02 to 2.18 mg thiophene per kg in benzene (mg/kg) on the AED, 0.03 to 1.87 mg/kg on the PFPD, and 0.03 to 2.11 mg/kg on the SCD. The range of the test method may be extended by modifying the sample injection volume, split ratios, calibration range, or sample dilution with thiophene-free solvent.1.2 In determining the conformance of the test results using this method to applicable specifications, results shall be rounded off in accordance with the rounding-off method of Practice E29.1.3 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 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

5.1 This test method is useful for the determination of total chemically bound nitrogen in wastewaters and other waters.1.1 This test method covers the determination of the total nitrogen content of water in concentrations from 0.5 to 1000 mg/L. Higher nitrogen concentrations may be determined by making the proper dilutions.1.2 This test method does not determine molecular nitrogen (N2).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

5.1 Cyanide and hydrogen cyanide are highly toxic. Regulations have been established to require the monitoring of cyanide in industrial and domestic wastes and surface waters.35.2 This test method is applicable for natural waters, industrial wastewaters and effluents.1.1 This test method is used to determine the concentration of total cyanide in an aqueous wastewater or effluent. This test method detects the cyanides that are free (HCN and CN–) and strong-metal-cyanide complexes that dissociate and release free cyanide when refluxed under strongly acidic conditions.1.2 This test method may not be applicable to process solutions from precious metals mining operations.1.3 This procedure is applicable over a range of approximately 2 to 500 μg/L (parts per billion) total cyanide. Higher concentrations can be measured with sample dilution or lower injection volume.1.4 The determinative step of this test method utilizes flow injection with amperometric detection based on Test Method D6888. Prior to analysis, samples must be distilled with a micro-distillation apparatus described in this test method or with a suitable cyanide distillation apparatus specified in Test Methods D2036.1.5 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard. No other units of measurement are included in this standard.1.6 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use. Specific hazard statements are given in 8.6 and Section 9.1.7 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

定价： 590元 / 折扣价： 502 元 加购物车

4.1 This test method can be used to determine total sulfur levels in process feeds and finished products that fall within the scope of this test method.4.2 Low levels of sulfur in process feed stocks can poison expensive catalysts used in petroleum refining processes. This test method can be used to monitor sulfur levels in these feedstocks.1.1 This test method covers the determination of total sulfur in liquid hydrocarbons with a final boiling point less than 450 °C by gas chromatography using a flame photometric detector.1.2 This test method is applicable for total sulfur levels from 0.5 mg/kg S to 100 mg/kg S.NOTE 1: The pooled limit of quantification (PLOQ) derived from the 2002 interlaboratory cooperative test program was determined to be 1 mg/kg S.NOTE 2: Samples can also be tested at other total sulfur levels, but the precision statements may not apply.1.3 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as 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 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

5.1 The POD analysis method described herein is based on a well-known and well established statistical regression method. It shall be used to quantify the demonstrated POD for a specific set of examination parameters and known range of discontinuity sizes under the following conditions.5.1.1 The initial response from a nondestructive evaluation inspection system is ultimately binary in nature (that is, hit or miss).5.1.2 Discontinuity size is the predictor variable and can be accurately quantified.5.1.3 A relationship between discontinuity size and POD exists and is best described by a generalized linear model with the appropriate link function for binary outcomes.5.2 This practice does not limit the use of a generalized linear model with more than one predictor variable or other types of statistical models if justified as more appropriate for the hit/miss data.5.3 If the initial response from a nondestructive evaluation inspection system is measurable and can be classified as a continuous variable (for example, data collected from an Eddy Current inspection system), then Practice E3023 may be more appropriate.5.4 Prior to performing the analysis it is assumed that the discontinuity of interest is clearly defined; the number and distribution of induced discontinuity sizes in the POD specimen set is known and well-documented; discontinuities in the POD specimen set are unobstructed; and the POD examination administration procedure (including data collection method) is well-designed, well-defined, under control, and unbiased. The analysis results are only valid if convergence is achieved and the model adequately represents the data.5.5 The POD analysis method described herein is consistent with the analysis method for binary data described in MIL-HDBK-1823A, and is included in several widely utilized POD software packages to perform a POD analysis on hit/miss data. It is also found in statistical software packages that have generalized linear modeling capability. This practice requires that the analyst has access to either POD software or other software with generalized linear modeling capability.5.6 This practice does not apply to hit/miss data resulting from a POD examination based on the Point Estimate Method (PEM), also referred to as the “29 out of 29” method. (See X1.2.4.5 for more detail.)1.1 This practice covers the procedure for performing a statistical analysis on nondestructive testing hit/miss data to determine the demonstrated probability of detection (POD) for a specific set of examination parameters. Topics covered include the standard hit/miss POD curve formulation, validation techniques, and correct interpretation of results.1.2 The values stated in inch-pound units are to be regarded as standard. The values given in parentheses are mathematical conversions to SI units that are provided for information only and are not considered standard.1.3 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.1.4 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

定价： 646元 / 折扣价： 550 元 加购物车

5.1 The principal use of this standard is in the identification of effective groundwater monitoring constituents for a detection-monitoring program. The significance of the guide is to minimize the false positive rate for the facility by only monitoring those constituents that are intrinsic to the waste mass and eliminate those constituents that are present in background in concentrations that confound evaluation from downgradient wells.5.2 Governing regulations require large generic lists of constituents to be monitored in an effort to detect a release from a WMU. However, identification and selection of parameters based on site-specific physical and chemical conditions are in many cases also acceptable to regulatory agencies and result in a more effective and environmentally protective groundwater monitoring system.5.2.1 Naturally occurring soil and groundwater constituents within and near a WMU area should be determined prior to the development of a monitoring program. This is important in the selection of site-specific constituents lists and avoiding difficulties with a regulatory authority regarding sources of monitored constituents.5.2.2 Site-specific lists of constituents relative to the WMU will provide for the regulator those constituents which will effectively measure the performance of a WMU rather than the use of a generic list that could include naturally occurring constituents as well as those not present in the WMU.5.3 Site-specific constituent lists often result in fewer monitored constituents (that is, monitoring programs are optimized). This process is critical to the overall success of the monitoring program for the following reasons:5.3.1 The reduction of the monitoring constituents to only those found or expected to be found or derived from site-specific source material will reduce the number of false-positive results since only those parameters that could indicate a release are monitored.5.3.2 The use of constituents that contrast significantly to background groundwater eliminates those that could lead to erroneous results merely due to temporal and spatial variability of components found in the natural geochemistry of the upper-most water-bearing zone.5.3.3 Where statistics are required, fewer statistical comparisons through well and constituent optimization enhances the statistical power (or effectiveness) of the monitoring program (Gibbons, 1994; USEPA, April 1998).5.3.4 Eliminating the cost of unnecessary laboratory analyses produces a more efficient and cost-effective monitoring program and minimizes the effort needed by both the local enforcement agency and the owner/operator to respond (either with correspondence or additional field/laboratory efforts) to erroneous detection decisions.5.4 This type of approach is acceptable to regulatory agencies arid applicable under most groundwater monitoring programs.NOTE 1: For example, in the United States, determining the alternate constituent list at Solid Waste Facilities, 40 CFR 258.54(a)(l) allows for deletion of 40 CFR 258 Appendix I constituents if it can be shown that the removed constituents are not reasonably expected to be in or derived from the waste contained in the unit. 40 CFR 258(a)(2) allows approved States to establish an alternate list of inorganic parameters in lieu of all or some of the heavy metals (constituents 1-14 in Appendix I to Part 258), if the alternative constituents provide a reliable indication of inorganic releases from the unit to groundwater.5.5 The framework for this standard is generally based on the guidelines established under 40 CFR 258.54(a)(l) to optimize a groundwater-monitoring network in such a manner as to still provide an early warning system of a release from the WMU. This guidance document is, however, applicable for most WMU, not just those associated with solid waste disposal facilities. In determining the alternative constituents, consideration must be made for: (1) the types, quantities, and concentrations of constituents in wastes managed at the waste management unit (or WMU); (2) the mobility, stability, and persistence of waste constituents in the unsaturated zone beneath the WMU; (3) the detectability of indicator parameters, waste constituents, and reaction products in groundwater; and (4) the concentration or contrast between monitoring constituents in leachate and in background groundwater.5.6 An essential factor in this guide is the knowledge of the quality of the potential source material [for example, the types and concentrations of liquid or other leachable wastes (that is, leachate) within the WMU]. The characterization of the source material is critical in determining an optimum set of indicator parameters that provide an early warning system of a release from the unit. Details for the appropriate levels of effort to characterize the waste stream or source(s) in the WMU are not included within this guidance document. Waste stream and/or source data collected by the owner/operator as well as liquid data from key collection points (that is, sumps or natural gravity drain collection points) are an integral part of any waste characterization process.5.7 Another key factor to be used in this guide is knowledge of background quality of groundwater unaffected by the WMU and knowledge of local sources other than the WMU that may presently be impacting groundwater quality. The main objective then is to choose those constituents that are derived from the WMU (for example, are present in the leachate or residual liquids) at much higher concentrations than groundwater and/or that are only present in the waste or waste residuum (for example, leachate) and absent in groundwater. The analytes chosen must also be mobile, persistent, and easily quantifiable in the specific hydrogeologic and groundwater regime.1.1 This standard provides a general method of selecting effective constituents for detection monitoring programs at Waste Disposal Facilities. The process described in this standard presents a methodology that takes into consideration physical and chemical characteristics of the source material(s), the surrounding hydrogeologic regime, and site-specific geochemistry to identify and select those parameters that provide most effective detection of a potential release from a waste management unit (WMU).1.2 In the following sections, details of an evaluation of effective monitoring constituents for a groundwater detection-monitoring program were based on site-specific waste characterization.1.3 The statistical methodology described in the following sections should be used as guidance. Other methods may also be appropriate based on site-specific conditions or for monitoring situations or media that are not presented in this standard.1.4 This guide offers an organized collection of information or a series of options and does not recommend a specific course of action. This document cannot replace education, experience and professional judgements. Not all aspects of this guide may be applicable in all circumstances. This ASTM standard is not intended to represent or replace the standard of care by which the adequacy of a given professional service must be judged without consideration of a project's many unique aspects. The word standard in the title of this document only means that the document has been approved through the ASTM consensus process.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 and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory requirements prior to use.

定价： 590元 / 折扣价： 502 元 加购物车

Concepts:This guide summarizes the equipment, field procedures, and interpretation methods for using the metal detection method for locating subsurface metallic objects. Personnel requirements are as discussed in Practice D3740.Method—Metal detectors are electromagnetic instruments that work on the principle of induction, using typically two coils (antennas); a transmitter and a receiver. Both coils are fixed in respect to each other and are used near the surface of the earth. Either an alternating or a pulsed voltage is applied to the transmitter coil causing electrical eddy currents to be induced in the earth. The electrical currents flowing in the earth are proportional to electrical conductivity of the medium. Theses currents generate eddy currents in buried metallic objects that is detected and measured by the receiver (Fig. 1).Parameter Measured and Representative Values:Frequency Domain Metal Detectors:Frequency domain metal detectors apply an alternating current having a fixed frequency and amplitude to the transmit coil which generates a time-varying magnetic field around the coil. This field induces eddy currents in nearby metallic objects that in turn generate time-varying magnetic fields of their own. These eddy-fields induce a voltage in the receiver coil. The presence of metal causes small changes in the phase and amplitude of the receiver voltage. Most metal detectors amplify the differences in the receiver coil voltage caused by nearby metal and generate an audible sound or meter (analog or digital) reading.Ground conductivity meters (frequency domain metal detectors) measure the two-components of the secondary magnetic field simultaneously. The first is the quadrature-phase component which indicates soil electrical conductivity and is measured in millisiemens per meter (mS/m). The second is the inphase component, which is related to the subsurface magnetic susceptibility and is measured in parts per thousand (ppt) (that is, the ratio between the primary and secondary magnetic fields).(1) Conductivity Measurements (Quadrature-Phase Component)Metallic objects within a few feet of the surface will cause induced magnetic field distortions that will result in zero or even negative values of measured conductivity. Deeper metallic objects will cause less field distortion and lead to measured conductivities which are abnormally high in comparison to site background values.(2) Inphase ComponentInphase measurements are more sensitive to metal than conductivity measurements. Thus, inphase anomalies may indicate the presence of metal at a greater depth than the conductivity measurements.Time Domain Metal Detectors:In time domain metal detectors, a transmitter generates a pulsed primary magnetic field in the earth. After each pulse, secondary magnetic fields are induced briefly from moderately conductive earth, and for a longer time from metallic targets. Between each pulse, the metal detector waits until the response from the conductive earth dissipates, and then measures the prolonged buried metal response. This response is measured in millivolts (mV).Equipment—Metal detectors generally consist of transmitter electronics and transmitter coil, power supply, receiver electronics and receiver coil. Metal detectors are usually single individual portable.Typical “treasure-hunter” metal detectors provide an audible signal and/or meter reading (analog or digital) when metal is detected.Quadrature and inphase measurements from ground conductivity meters are shown either on analog or digital meters. These measurements can often be recorded digitally in the field using a small field recorder, strip-chart recorder, or computer.Time domain metal detectors can consist of either one or two receiver coils. When two coils are used, one coil is typically placed above the other. Readings from both coils are recorded simultaneously. In order to improve detection of deeper metallic targets, the differential response from the two receiver coils can be used to suppress the response from smaller, shallower metallic targets. Some time domain metal detectors are mounted on wheels, allowing for the use of odometers to provide location data.Limitations and Interferences:General Limitations Inherent to Geophysical Methods:A fundamental limitation of all geophysical methods is that a given set of data cannot be associated with a unique set of subsurface conditions. In most situations, surface geophysical measurements alone cannot resolve all ambiguities, and some additional information, such as borehole data, is advised. Because of this inherent limitation in the geophysical methods, a metal detector survey alone can never be considered a complete assessment of subsurface conditions. Properly integrated with other geologic information, metal detector surveying is a highly effective method of obtaining subsurface information.In addition, all surface geophysical methods are inherently limited by decreasing resolution with depth.Limitations Specific to the Metal Detection Method:Several factors influence metal detector response: the properties of the target, the properties of the soil/rock, and the characteristics of the metal detector itself. The target’s size, depth, and condition of burial are the three most important factors.The larger the surface area of the target, the greater the eddy current that may be induced, and the greater the depth at which the target may be detected.The metal detector’s response decreases at a rate equal to the reciprocal of its depth up to the sixth power (1/depth6). Therefore, if the distance to the target is doubled, the metal detector response will decrease by a factor of 64. Consequently, the metal detector is a relatively shallow-depth device. It is generally restricted to detecting small objects at relatively shallow depths or larger targets at limited depths. Generally, most metal detectors are incapable of responding to targets at depths much greater than 6 m.Although the shape, orientation, and composition of a target will influence the metal detector response, these factors will have much less influence than will the size and depth of the target. Target deterioration, however, has a significant impact. Metallic containers will corrode in natural soils conditions. If a container is corroded, its surface area will be significantly reduced, and in turn will degrade the response of a metal detector.Because the metal detector’s response weakens rapidly with increasing distance to the target, system gain and instrument stability are important. The size of the coil controls the size and depth of the metallic target that can be detected as shown in Fig. 2.Interferences Caused by Natural and Cultural Conditions:Sources of noise referred here do not include those of a physical nature such as difficult terrain or man-made obstructions but rather those of a geologic, ambient, or cultural nature that can adversely affect the measurements and hence the interpretation.Natural Sources of Noise—Some kinds of soil/rock, particularly those containing high iron content (often known as mineralized soil) affect receiver coil output strongly enough to indicate the presence of a metal target with certain kinds of metal detectors. Some types of metal detectors provide a means for compensating the output for the ground effect. This usually requires the operator to position the detector near the ground (but not near a metal target) and adjust a control until the target signal disappears. Small variations in the soil characteristics and stones (particularly those containing metallic compounds) can cause small changes in the detector output. Often these changes cause small target-like signals, known as “ground noise.” These can confuse the operator because they sound like small targets.Cultural Sources of Noise—Cultural sources of noise can include interference from electrical power lines, communications equipment, nearby buildings, and metal fences. Interference from power lines is inversely proportional to the distance between power line and detector; therefore most metal detectors with small coils are generally unaffected.Surveys should not be made in close proximity to buildings, metal fences or buried metal pipe lines that can be detected by the metal detection method, unless detection of the buried pipe line, for example, is the object of the survey. It is sometimes difficult to predict the appropriate distance from the potential sources of noise. Measurements made on-site can quickly yield the magnitude of the problem, and adjustments can then be made.Precaution must also be taken to remove metal from the operator, or to minimize its effects. Steel-toe boots, respirators, and air bottles can all cause considerable problems with noise.Summary—During the course of designing and carrying out a metal detection survey, the sources of ambient, geologic and cultural noise must be considered and the time of occurrence and location noted. The exact form of the interference is not always predictable, as it not only depends upon the type of noise and the magnitude of the noise but also upon the distance from the source of noise and possibly the time of day.1.1 Purpose and Application—This guide summarizes the equipment, field procedures, and interpretation methods for the assessment of subsurface materials using the metal detection method. Metal detectors respond to the presence of both ferrous and nonferrous metals by inducing eddy currents in conductive objects. Metal detectors are either frequency domain (continuous frequency or wave) or time domain (pulsed) systems. A wide range of metal detectors is commonly available.1.1.1 Metal detectors can detect any kind of metallic material, including both ferrous metals such as iron and steel, and non-ferrous metals such as aluminum and copper. In contrast, magnetometers only detect ferrous metals.1.1.2 Metal detector measurements can be used to detect the presence of buried metal trash, drums (Tyagi et al, 1983) (1) and tanks, abandoned wells (Guide D6285); to trace buried utilities; and to delineate the boundaries of landfill metal and trench metal. They are also used to detect metal based unexploded ordnance (UXO).1.2 Limitations:1.2.1 This guide provides an overview of the metal detection method. This guide does not provide or address the details of the theory, field procedures, or interpretation of the data. References are included for that purpose and are considered an essential part of this guide. It is recommended that the user of this guide be familiar with the references cited and with the ASTM standards D420, D653, D5088, D5608, D5730, D5753, D6235, D6429, and D6431.1.2.2 This guide is limited to metal detection measurements made on land. The metal detection method can be adapted for a number of special uses on land, water, airborne and ice.1.2.3 The approaches suggested in this guide for the metal detection method are commonly used, widely accepted, and proven. However, other approaches or modifications to the metal detection method that are technically sound may be substituted.1.2.4 This guide offers an organized collection of information or a series of options and does not recommend a specific course of action. This document cannot replace education or experience and should be used in conjunction with professional judgment. Not all aspects of this guide may be applicable in all circumstances. This ASTM standard is not intended to represent or replace the standard of care by which the adequacy of a given professional service must be judged, nor should this document be applied without consideration of a project’s many unique aspects. The word “Standard” in the title of this document means only that the document has been approved through the ASTM consensus process.1.3 The values stated in SI units are regarded as standard. The values given in parentheses are inch-pound units, which are provided for information only and are not considered standard.1.4 Precautions:1.4.1 It is the responsibility of the user of this guide to follow any precautions in the equipment manufacturer's recommendations and to establish appropriate health and safety practices.1.4.2 If the method is used at sites with hazardous materials, operations, or equipment, it is the responsibility of the user of this guide to establish appropriate safety and health practices and to determine the applicability of any regulations prior to use.1.4.3 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 and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory requirements prior to use.

定价： 0元 / 折扣价： 0 元

5.1 This test method is intended for the routine analysis of reactive metals and reactive metal alloys to verify compliance with compositional specifications such as those specified by Committees B09 and B10. It is expected that all who use this test method will be trained analysts capable of performing common laboratory procedures skillfully and safely. It is expected that the work will be performed in a properly equipped laboratory.1.1 This test method applies to the determination of hydrogen in reactive metals and reactive metal alloys, particularly titanium and zirconium, with mass fractions from 9 mg/kg to 320 mg/kg.1.2 This method has been interlaboratory tested for titanium and zirconium and alloys of these metals and can provide quantitative results in the range specified in 1.1. It may be possible to extend the quantitative range of this method provided a method validation study, as described in Guide E2857, is performed and the results of the study show the method extension meets laboratory data quality objectives. This method may also be extended to alloys other than titanium and zirconium provided a method validation study, as described in Guide E2857, is performed.1.3 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use. For specific hazards, see Section 9.1.4 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

5.1 This test method is necessary because of the need for rapid reliable tests for carbonaceous material in waters and sediments.5.2 It is used for determining the concentration of organic carbon in water that comes from a variety of natural, domestic, and industrial sources. Typically, these measurements are used to monitor organic pollutants in domestic and industrial waste water.5.3 When a sample is homogenized so that particulate, immiscible phases, and dissolved carbon from both organic and inorganic sources is determined, the measurement is called total carbon (TC). When inorganic carbon response is eliminated by removing the dissolved CO2 prior to the analysis or the dissolved CO2 concentration subtracted from the total carbon concentration, the measurement is called total organic carbon (TOC). When particulates and immiscible phases are removed prior to analysis the measurement is called dissolved carbon (DC), or dissolved organic carbon (DOC) if inorganic carbon response has been eliminated.5.4 Homogenizing or sparging of a sample, or both, may cause loss of volatile organics, thus yielding a negative error. The extent and significance of such losses must be evaluated on an individual basis. If significant quantities of volatile carbonaceous materials are present or may be present in samples organic carbon should be determined by the difference between the total carbon and the inorganic carbon concentrations. When organic carbon determined both by difference and by sparging agree it is acceptable to determine organic carbon by sparging for similar samples.5.5 The relationship of TOC to other water quality parameters such as COD and BOD is described in the literature.51.1 This test method covers the determination of total and organic carbon in water and waste water, including brackish waters and brines in the range from 2 to 20 000 mg/L. This test method has the advantages of a wide range of concentration which may be determined without sample dilution and the provision for boat or capillary introduction of samples containing sediments and particulate matter where syringe injection is inappropriate.1.2 This procedure is applicable only to that carbonaceous matter in the sample that can be introduced into the reaction zone. When syringe injection is used to introduce samples into the combustion zone, the syringe needle opening size limits the maximum size of particles that can be present in samples. Sludge and sediment samples must be homogenized prior to sampling with a micropipetor or other appropriate sampler and ladle introduction into the combustion zone is required.1.3 The precision and bias information reported in this test method was obtained in collaborative testing that included waters of the following types: distilled, deionized, potable, natural, brine, municipal and industrial waste, and water derived from oil shale retorting. Since the precision and bias information reported may not apply to waters of all matrices, it is the user’s responsibility to ensure the validity of this test method on samples of other matrices.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. For specific precautionary statements, see 9.1 and 10.2.1.1.6 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 Source water protection calls for a rapid and reliable optical method to identify and quantify the oil spill contamination, such as water-soluble fraction of aromatic compounds from the BTEX family (benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylenes) and naphthalene from the polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon (PAH) group.5.2 This test method identifies the presence of contamination and quantifies the target contamination component(s) to provide a threshold-based alert signal.5.3 This test method can be used by drinking water treatment plant operators and decision makers as a first line of defense for both initially detecting petroleum product spills, as well as tracking attenuation over time, in source water to prevent contaminant uptake into the processed water and treatment infrastructure.1.1 This test method covers the (1) detection of trace level (µg/L range) of oil and petroleum (water-soluble fraction) pollutants in surface and ground drinking water sources, (2) identification of the compounds, and (3) alerting analysts with a contaminant concentration prediction. This test method facilitates identification and quantification from 20 to 1000 µg/L of target contaminants, including: water-soluble fraction of aromatic compounds from the BTEX family (benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylenes) and naphthalene from the polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon (PAH) group, referred to as BTEXN in this test method, in water samples with up to 15 mg/L of dissolved organic carbon (DOC). The main approach involves analyzing and characterizing key water intake locations before the treatment and developing the contaminant library. The water-soluble (BTEXN) contaminants are associated with, but not limited to petroleum oils and fuels including commercial diesel fuel, gasoline, kerosene, heavy oil, fuel oil and lubricate oil, etc.1.2 The data sets are analyzed using multivariate methods to test contaminant identification and quantification. The multivariate methods include classification and regression algorithms to analyze fluorescence EEM data acquired in the laboratory. The common goal of these algorithms is to reduce multidimensionality and eliminate noise of fluorescence and background signals. Automated identification-quantification methods linked directly to the instrument acquisition-analysis software are commercially available.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

This practice can be used for detection of hexavalent chromium on galvanized and zinc/aluminum alloy coated steel surfaces. Hexavalent chromium-bearing treatments (passivates) can be applied to coated steels to prevent storage stain. Chrome passivation may interfere with the successful pretreatment of galvanized steel, as well as contaminate cleaning and pretreatment baths on a coil coating line. This practice is designed to be a qualitative means of screening chrome passivated coils from those which are not chrome passivated. The following materials will be required to perform the stripping procedure: (1) dark colored or brown polyethylene wash bottle, or brown glass dropper bottle, and (2) test specimens which may be cut panels or coil stock. The following chemical reagents are required to perform this procedure: 1,5-diphenylcarbohydrazide, acetone, ethanol, phosphoric acid, and distilled water. The preparation of indicator solution, procedure of detection, and evaluation of pink color development are detailed. If a material that yields a negative result is suspected of having chromium on the surface, instrumental methods should be used. This technique is not recommended for acrylic resin containing passivation treatments.1.1 This practice can be used to detect the presence of hexavalent chromium on galvanized and zinc/aluminum alloy coated steel surfaces. Hexavalent chromium-bearing treatments (passivates) can be applied to coated steels to prevent storage stain. While passivated 55 % aluminum-zinc alloy coated steel is commonly painted, passivated galvanized steel is not. Chrome passivation may interfere with the successful pretreatment of galvanized steel, as well as contaminate cleaning and pretreatment baths on a coil coating line.1.2 The amount of hexavalent chromium that will cause the indicator to produce a discernible pink color is in the range of 0.5 parts per million dissolved in the indicator solution. It is possible that a coated steel surface that produces a negative result does have chromium on the surface. If a material that yields a negative result is suspected of having chromium on the surface, instrumental methods should be used. Chrome deposits of 1 mg/ft2 can be easily missed by analytical instruments such as the scanning electron microscope with energy dispersive x-ray analysis (EDXA) capability. Auger electron spectroscopy (AES) or electron spectroscopy for chemical analysis (ESCA) can identify chemical species present in the levels required for adequate detection. Stripping the metallic coating and analyzing for chrome by atomic absorption or inductively coupled plasma can also give reliable results in detecting the presence of chrome.1.3 This practice is designed to be a qualitative means of screening chrome passivated coils from those which are not chrome passivated.1.4 Some chromium-free passivates are being used commercially. Although these products will test negative for hexavalent chromium, they may interfere with cleaning and pretreating. Chromium bearing passivates that contain film forming constituents such as acrylic resins are also being commercially applied. The reaction of these products to the spot test will vary. Abrading the surface with emery paper will improve the likelihood of reliable detection. This technique is not recommended for acrylic resin containing passivation treatments.1.5 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as the standard. The values given in parentheses are for information only.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： 515元 / 折扣价： 438 元 加购物车