6.1 This practice is designed to assist the forensic explosives examiner in selecting and organizing an analytical scheme for identifying explosive residues. The amount and condition of the sample, as well as the availability of instrumental techniques, will determine the selected analytical scheme.6.2 The forensic explosives examiner considers relevant issues about the case investigation and submitted items, such as sample size, complexity and condition, environmental effects, and collection methods used. Considerations include test methods, sample preparation schemes, test sequences, and acceptable degrees of sample alteration and consumption that will be different for each case submission.6.3 This practice is used when insufficient material is present to follow Practice E3253.6.4 This practice is used in conjunction with the referenced documents.6.5 This practice does not attempt to address all the issues regarding sample analyses. There could be additional tests or analyses performed to provide further discrimination and characterization of samples.1.1 This practice covers the evaluation, selection, and application of techniques to establish an examination scheme for use by forensic explosives examiners to identify residues from low and high explosives. A foundation for the consistent approach to the analysis of visible and non-visible explosive residues from post-blast or other explosive-related scenes is provided. Methods for the development of identifying information that follows an efficient order of testing are described.1.2 This practice establishes requirements for the use of visual, physical, analytical, and instrumental techniques that provide structural and chemical information for an identification of an explosive residue.1.3 Techniques used in the examination of explosive residues include visual and microscopical inspection, physical characterization, ignition susceptibility testing, chemical and spot testing, and instrumental methods.1.4 This standard is intended for use by competent forensic science practitioners with the requisite formal education, discipline-specific training (see Practice E2917), and demonstrated proficiency to perform forensic casework (refer to the T/SWGFEX Suggested Guide for Explosives Analysis Training).1.5 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.1.6 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

定价： 590元 / 折扣价： 502 元 加购物车

5.1 Explosive reactivity has resulted when parts made from some light alloys, typically high in aluminum and magnesium, are loaded under shear conditions while in contact with certain lubricants. A typical example is a threaded part, lubricated with a chlorofluorocarbon grease, pulled up normally tight.1.1 This test method is used to evaluate for explosive reactivity of various lubricants in the presence of aerospace alloys under high shear conditions.1.2 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as the standard. In cases where materials, products, or equipment are available in inch-pound units only, SI units are omitted.1.3 This standard is used to measure and describe the response of materials, products, or assemblies to heat and flame under controlled conditions, but does not by itself incorporate all factors required for fire hazard or fire risk assessment of the materials, products, or assemblies under actual fire conditions.1.4 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.

定价： 0元 / 折扣价： 0 元

4.1 This test method can be used to make reliable and reproducible measurements in soil in the range from the detection level to the percent levels of each of seven explosive compounds.4.2 This test method does not attempt to quantify the reactivity or mobility of the explosive content, only the concentration of these compounds in the soil.4.3 This test method can be used to determine the extent of contamination resulting from the use, misuse, or spillage of explosive compounds. It is useful to determine the effectiveness of clean-up actions at disposal sites, and to determine the environmental impact at explosives disposal, manufacturing, or storage sites.1.1 This test method describes a procedure for the laboratory determination of the concentration of nitroaromatic and nitramine explosives in soil. The explosives involved in this test method are as follows: HMX (octahydro-1,3,5,7-tetranitro-1,3,5,7-tetrazocine), RDX (hexahydro-1,3,5-trinitrol-1,3,5-triazine), TNT (2,4,6-trinitrotoluene), TNB (1,3,5 trinitrobenzene), DNB (1,3 dinitrobenzene), tetryl (methyl-2,4,6-trinitrophenylnitramine), and 2,4-DNT (2,4-dinitrotoluene).1.2 All observed and calculated values shall conform to the guidelines for significant digits and rounding established in Practice D6026.1.2.1 The procedures used to specify how data are collected/recorded or calculated, in this standard are regarded as the industry standard. In addition, they are representative of the significant digits that generally should be retained. The procedures used do not consider material variation, purpose for obtaining the data, special purpose studies, or any considerations for the user’s objectives; and it is common practice to increase or reduce significant digits of reported data to be commensurate with these considerations. It is beyond the scope of this standard to consider significant digits used in analysis methods for engineering design.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 the safety concerns associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.

定价： 0元 / 折扣价： 0 元

5.1 This practice may be used to accomplish several ends: to establish a worldwide frame of reference for terminology, metrics, and procedures for reliably determining trace detection performance of ETDs; as a demonstration by the vendor that the equipment is operating properly to a specified performance score; for a periodic verification by the user of detector performance after purchase; and as a generally-acceptable template adaptable by international agencies to specify performance requirements, analytes and dosing levels, background challenges, and operations.5.2 It is expected that current ETD systems will exhibit wide ranges of performance across the diverse explosive types and compounds considered. As in previous versions, this practice establishes the minimum performance that is required for a detector to be considered effective in the detection of trace explosives. An explosives detector is considered to have “minimum acceptable performance” when it has attained a test score of at least 80.1.1 This practice may be used for measuring, scoring, and improving the overall performance of detectors that alarm on traces of explosives on swabs. These explosive trace detectors (ETDs) may be based on, but are not limited to, chemical detection technologies such as ion mobility spectrometry (IMS) and mass spectrometry (MS).1.2 This practice considers instrumental (post-sampling) trace detection performance, involving specific chemical analytes across eight types of explosive formulations in the presence of a standard background challenge material. This practice adapts Test Method E2677 for the evaluation of limit of detection, a combined metric of measurement sensitivity and repeatability, which requires ETDs to have numerical responses.1.3 This practice considers the effective detection throughput of an ETD by factoring in the sampling rate, interrogated swab area, and estimated maintenance requirements during a typical eight hour shift.1.4 This practice does not require, but places extra value on, the specific identification of targeted compounds and explosive formulations.1.5 The functionality of multi-mode instruments (those that may be switched between detection of trace explosives, drugs of interest, chemical warfare agents, and other target compounds) may also be tested. A multi-mode instrument under test shall be set to the mode that optimizes operational conditions for the detection of trace explosives. This practice requires the use of a single set of ETD operational settings for calculating a system test score based on the factors described in 1.2, 1.3, and 1.4. A minimum acceptable score is derived from criteria established in Practice E2520 – 07, and an example of such a test is presented in Appendix X1 (Example 2).1.6 Intended Users—ETD developers and manufacturers, testing laboratories, and international agencies responsible for enabling effective deterrents to terrorism.1.7 Actual explosives as test samples would be preferable, but standard explosive formulations are not widely available, nor are methods for depositing these quantitatively and realistically on swabs. This practice considers sixteen compounds that are available from commercial suppliers. This does not imply that only these sixteen are important to trace detection. Most ETDs are able to detect many other compounds, but these are either chemically similar (hence redundant) to the ones considered, or are unavailable from commercial suppliers for reasons of stability and safety. Under typical laboratory practices, the sixteen compounds considered are safe to handle in the quantities used.1.8 This practice is not intended to replace any current standard procedure employed by agencies to test performance of ETDs for specific applications. Those procedures may be more rigorous, use different compounds or actual explosive formulations, employ different or more realistic background challenges, and consider environmental sampling procedures and other operational variables.1.9 This practice recommends one method for preparation of test swabs, pipetting, because this method is simple, reproducible, quantitative, documented, and applicable to most current detection technologies. Other methods, such as inkjet printing and dry transfer, may generate more realistic analyte distributions and particle sizes, but these methods are not widely available and less familiar. They may be used if the procedures are validated and documented properly.1.10 With any deposition method, some compounds are difficult to present to the ETD inlet quantitatively due to volatility and loss during the swab preparation process. Problematic issues pertinent to this practice are identified along with recommended instructions.1.11 Units—The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard. No other units of measurement are included in this standard.1.12 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.1.13 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

定价： 646元 / 折扣价： 550 元 加购物车