5.1 This practice is for use by designers and specifiers, regulatory agencies, owners, contractors, and inspection organizations who are involved in rehabilitation of pressurized piping systems.1.1 This standard is intended to establish the minimum criteria necessary for use of a mechanically mixed, blended, epoxy barrier coating (AWWA Class I) that is applied to the interior of 1/2 in. (12.7 mm) to 36 in. (914.4 mm) metallic pipe or tube used in pressurized piping systems for corrosion protection and to improve flow rates. There is no restriction as to the developed length of the piping system other than the method of application (“blow through”, spin cast or hand sprayed) and the characteristics of the epoxy coating being applied but the manufacturer’s engineer shall be consulted for any limitations associated with this product, process and its application for the end user.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： 590元 / 折扣价： 502 元 加购物车

3.1 Portable hardness testers are used for testing materials that because of their size, location or other requirements such as test point are unable to be tested using traditional fixed instruments.3.2 Portable hardness testers, by their nature, induce variation that could influence the test results; therefore, hardness measurements made in accordance with this test method are not considered to meet the requirements of E10 or E18. The user should compare the results of the precision and bias studies in E110, E10 and E18 to understand the differences in results expected between portable and fixed instruments.3.3 Two test parameters that can significantly influence the measurement accuracy when using portable hardness testers are the alignment of the indenter to the test surface and the timing of the test forces. The user is cautioned to do everything possible to keep the centerline of the indenter perpendicular to the test surface and to apply the test forces using the same time cycle as defined in Test Method E10 or Test Methods E18.3.4 Portable hardness testers are delicate instruments that are subject to damage when they are moved from one test site to another. Therefore, repeating the daily verification process during the testing sequence is recommended to insure that they are working properly.3.5 Hardness testing at a specific location on a part may not represent the physical characteristics of the whole part or end product.AbstractThis test method establishes the standard procedures, including the calibration, precision and bias of the apparatus used, for the determination of indentation hardness of metallic materials by means of portable hardness testers.1.1 This test method defines the requirements for portable instruments that are intended to be used to measure the Rockwell or Brinell hardness of metallic materials by performing indentation tests on the surface of materials in the field or outside of a test lab, or in cases where the size or weight of the test piece prevents it from being tested on a standard E10 or E18 hardness tester.1.2 The principles used to measure the Rockwell or Brinell hardness are the same as those defined in the E18 standard test method for Rockwell or E10 standard test method for Brinell.NOTE 1: Standard test methods E10 and E18 will be referred to in this test method as the standard methods.1.3 The portable hardness testers covered by this test method are verified only by the indirect verification method. Although the portable hardness testers are designed to employ the same test conditions as those defined in the standard test methods, the forces applied by the portable Rockwell and Brinell testers and the depth measuring systems of the portable Rockwell testers may not meet the tolerance requirements of the standard methods. Portable hardness testers shall use indenters that meet the requirements of the standard test methods.1.4 This test method does not apply to portable hardness testers that measure hardness by a means or procedure that is different than those defined in E10 or E18 For example, this test method does not apply to the methods defined in ASTM standard Practice A833, Test Methods A956 and A1038 or B647.1.5 A report section is included to define how to indicate that the test result was obtained by using a portable device that conforms to this document.1.6 Annex A1 is included that defines the periodic indirect verification and daily verification requirements for these instruments.1.7 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.1.8 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

定价： 590元 / 折扣价： 502 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 The use of this test method can significantly reduce the risk of sudden catastrophic failure of threaded articles and fasteners, below their design strength, due to hydrogen embrittlement.1.1 This test method covers the determination of, on a statistical basis, the probability of the existence of hydrogen embrittlement or degradation in:1.1.1 A batch of barrel electroplated, autocatalytic plated, phosphated, or chemically processed threaded articles or fasteners and1.1.2 A batch of rack plated threaded articles, fasteners, or rod.1.2 Industrial practice for threaded articles, fasteners, and rod has evolved three graduated levels of test exposure to ensure reduced risk of hydrogen embrittlement (see Section 3). These levels have evolved from commercial applications having varying levels of criticality. In essence, they represent the confidence level that is required. They also represent the time that finished goods are held before they can be shipped and used. This time equates to additional cost to the manufacturer that may of necessity be added to the cost of the finished goods.1.3 This test method is applicable to threaded articles, fasteners, and rod made from steel with ≥1000 MPa (with corresponding hardness values of 300 HV10 kgf, 303 HB, or 31 HRc) or surface hardened threaded articles, fasteners, or rod.1.4 This test method shall be carried out after hydrogen embrittlement relief heat treatment in accordance with the requirements of Guide B850. It may also be used for assessing differences in processing solutions, conditions, and techniques. This test method has two main functions: first, when used with a statistical sampling plan it can be used for lot acceptance or rejection, and second, it can be used as a control test to determine the effectiveness of the various processing steps including pre- and post-baking treatments to reduce the mobile hydrogen in the articles, fasteners, or rod. While this test method is capable of indicating those items that are embrittled to the extent defined in Section 3, it does not guarantee complete freedom from embrittlement.1.5 This test method does not relieve the processor from imposing and monitoring suitable process control.1.6 This test method has been coordinated with ISO/DIS 10587 and is technically equivalent. (Warning—Great care should be taken when applying this test method. The heads of embrittled articles, fasteners, or rod may suddenly break off and become flying projectiles capable of causing blindness or other serious injury. This hazard can occur as long as 200 h after the test has started. Hence, shields or other apparatus should be provided to avoid such injury.)Note 1—Test Method F1940 can be used as a process control and verification to prevent hydrogen embrittlement in fasteners covered by this test method.Note 2—The use of inhibitors in acid pickling baths does not necessarily guarantee avoidance of hydrogen embrittlement.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

4.1 Finite element analysis is a valuable tool for evaluating the performance of metallic stents and in estimating quantities such as stress, strain, and displacement due to applied external loads and boundary conditions. FEA of stents is frequently performed to determine the worst-case size for experimental fatigue (or durability) testing and differentiation of performance between designs. A finite element analysis is especially valuable in determining quantities that cannot be readily measured.1.1 Purpose—This guide establishes recommendations and considerations for the development, verification, validation, and reporting of structural finite element models used in the evaluation of the performance of a metallic vascular stent design undergoing uniform radial loading. This standard guide does not directly apply to non-metallic or absorbable stents, though many aspects of it may be applicable. The purpose of a structural analysis of a stent is to determine quantities such as the displacements, stresses, and strains within a device resulting from external loading, such as crimping or during the catheter loading process, and in-vivo processes, such as expansion and pulsatile loading.1.2 Limitations—The analysis technique discussed in this guide is restricted to structural analysis using the finite element method. This document provides specific guidance for verification and validation (V&V) of finite element (FE) models of vascular stents subjected to uniform radial loading using ASME V&V40 as the basis for developing and executing risk-informed V&V plans.1.2.1 Users of this document are encouraged to read ASME V&V40 for an introduction to risk-informed V&V, and to read ASME V&V10 for further guidance on performing V&V of computational solid mechanics models. This document is not intended to cover all aspects of developing a finite element model of radial deformation of a stent. It is intended for a FE analyst with structural modeling experience.1.2.2 While risk-informed V&V is encouraged, it is not required. Analysts may utilize alternate V&V methods. The methodology employed should be developed by knowledgeable stakeholders with consideration as to the expectations and requirements of internal teams and external bodies that will assess the performance of the stent and the credibility of the model used to make performance predictions.1.2.3 If an alternative V&V method is employed, then Sections 5, 6, 7, and 10 that follow ASME V&V40 guidelines may be viewed as suggestions only. Other portions of the document that refer to question of interest, risk, and context of use may be viewed in the same manner.1.3 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as the standard. The values given in parentheses are for informational purposes only.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

At this time, none of these tests has been demonstrated to correlate with field service. It is essential that consideration be given to the appropriate pairing of metal and fluid since these procedures do not restrict the selection of either the containment material or the fluid for testing. Likewise, knowledge of the corrosion protection mechanism and the probable mode of failure of a particular metal is helpful in the selection of test conditions and the observation, interpretation, and reporting of test results. The design of solar heating and cooling systems strongly affects the applicability of the results of the laboratory screening tests. Therefore, the results of these laboratory procedures should be confirmed by component and systems testing under actual or simulated service conditions. Table 1 is provided to assist in an orderly consideration of the important factors in testing. It is expected that the user of the test procedure will investigate a range of test times and temperatures for the containment material in a metal/fluid pair, and adjust the time and temperature of testing as necessary. Note 1—Corrosion, whether general or localized, is a time-dependent phenomenon. This time dependence can show substantial nonlinearity. For example, formation of a protective oxide will diminish corrosion with time, while certain forms of localized attack accelerate with time. The minimum time required for a test to provide a corrosion rate that can be extrapolated for the prediction of long-term performance varies widely, depending on the selection of metal and fluid, and on the form of corrosion attack. Therefore, it is not possible to establish a single minimum length of test applicable to all materials and conditions. However, it is recommended that for the tests described in this practice, a test period of no less than 30 days be used. Furthermore, it is recommended that the effect of time of testing be evaluated to detect any significant time dependence of corrosion attack. It is essential for the meaningful application of these procedures that the length of the test be adequate to detect changes in the nature of the fluid that might significantly alter the corrosivity of the fluid. For example, exhaustion of chemical inhibitor or chemical breakdown of the fluid may occur after periods of months in selected cycles of operation. Note 2—Many fluids that may be considered for solar applications contain additives to minimize the corrosivity of the fluid. Many such additives are useful only within a specific concentration range, and some additives may actually accelerate corrosion if the concentration falls below a critical level. Depletion kinetics can be a strong function of the exposed metal surface area. Therefore, for tests involving fluids with such additives, consideration must be given to the ratio of metal surface area to fluid volume as it may relate to an operating system. TABLE 1 Significant Variables in Evaluation of Containment Material/Heat Transfer Fluid PairsA Test AspectVariable TemperatureFlow Rate I.Operating Conditions of System: A. Operating, full flow B. Stagnant, fullnormal operating fluid boiling point without pressurization or no-flow temperature with pressurization normal operating convection C. Stagnant, partial fill D. Stagnant, emptysame as stagnant, full no-flow temperature convection not applicable II.Test Specimen Design A. flat metal couple B. metal couple with crevice C. dissimilar metal couple D. dissimilar metal couple with crevice III.Fluid TypeA. fluid intended for use in system B. fluid pretreated by thermal exposure or chemical contamination IV.Test CycleA. long time, constant temperature B. cycles of heating, holding, and cooling C. cycles of operating full flow, and stagnation D. cycles of wetting and drying A In this table, the subdivisions are not necessarily related in correspondence to their lettering.1.1 This practice covers several laboratory test procedures for evaluating corrosion performance of metallic containment materials under conditions similar to those that may occur in solar heating and cooling systems. All test results relate to the performance of the metallic containment material only as a part of a metal/fluid pair. Performance in these laboratory test procedures, taken by itself, does not necessarily constitute an adequate basis for acceptance or rejection of a particular metal/fluid pair in solar heating and cooling systems, either in general or in a particular design. This practice is not intended to preclude the use of other screening tests, particularly when those tests are designed to more closely simulate field service conditions. 1.2 This practice describes apparatus and procedures for several tests, any one or more of which may be used to evaluate the deterioration of the metallic containment material in a metal/fluid pair. The procedures are designed to permit simulation, heating, and cooling systems including (1) operating full flow, (2) stagnant full, (3) stagnant partial fill, and (4) stagnant empty. Particular attention should be directed to properly reflecting whether the system is open or closed to atmosphere. 1.3 This practice covers the following six tests: Practice ABasic Immersion Test at Atmospheric Pressure Practice BHeat-Rejecting Surface Test at Atmospheric Pressure Practice CHigh-Pressure Test Practice DRepeated Dip Dry Test at Atmospheric Pressure Practice ECrevice Test at Atmospheric Pressure Practice FTube Loop Test at Atmospheric Pressure 1.4 Practice A is concerned with the interaction of metal and fluid when both are at the same temperature with no heat transfer from one to the other. It is regarded as useful for plumbing, pumps, tanking, etc., but of less significance, taken by itself, for collector panels. Practices B and F are concerned with the deterioration of the metal when there is transfer of heat from the metal into the heat transfer fluid. These practices are especially applicable to the collector panel. Practice C permits a variety of tests but is especially useful in relation to systems that experience high temperatures, or are closed to the atmosphere. Practices D and E evaluate specific corrosion problems that may be associated with particular metal/fluid pairs and particular designs of systems and components. 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 limitations prior to use.

定价： 0元 / 折扣价： 0 元

3.1 The maximum length and minimum diameter of the pipe shall be determined by the capacity of the blast equipment used.3.2 This guide is recommended for removing mill scale, rust scale, paints, zincs, and oxides.1.1 This guide covers metallic abrasive blasting to descale the interior of carbon steel pipe.1.2 This guide is recommended for use in conjunction with an abrasive reclamation system.1.3 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard. The values given in parentheses are mathematical conversions to inch-pound units that are provided for information only and are not considered standard.1.4 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

A1.1 A1.1.1 This test method is used to measure the torsional yield strength, maximum torque, and breaking angle of the bone screw under standard conditions. The results obtained in this test method are not intended to predict the torque encountered while inserting or removing a bone screw in human or animal bone. This test method is intended only to measure the uniformity of the product tested or to compare the mechanical properties of different, yet similarly sized, products.AbstractThis specification provides requirements for materials, finish and marking, care and handling, and the acceptable dimensions and tolerances for metallic bone screws that are implanted into bone. There are a large variety of medical bone screws currently in use, the following type of screws are used: type HA - spherical undersurface of head, shallow, asymmetrical buttress thread, and deep screw head, type HB - spherical undersurface of head, deep, asymmetrical buttress thread, and shallow screw head, type HC - conical undersurface of head, symmetrical thread, and type HD - conical undersurface of head, symmetrical thread. The torsional strength, breaking angle, axial pullout strength, insertion torque, self-tapping force, and removal torque shall be tested to meet the requirements prescribed.1.1 This specification provides requirements for materials, finish and marking, care and handling, and the acceptable dimensions and tolerances for metallic bone screws that are implanted into bone. The dimensions and tolerances in this specification are applicable only to metallic bone screws described in this specification.1.2 This specification provides performance considerations and standard test methods for measuring mechanical properties in torsion of metallic bone screws that are implanted into bone. These test methods may also be applicable to other screws besides those whose dimensions and tolerances are specified here. The following annexes are included:1.2.1 Annex A1—Test Method for Determining the Torsional Properties of Metallic Bone Screws.1.2.2 Annex A2—Test Method for Driving Torque of Medical Bone Screws.1.2.3 Annex A3—Test Method for Determining the Axial Pullout Load of Medical Bone Screws.1.2.4 Annex A4—Test Method for Determining the Self-Tapping Performance of Self-Tapping Medical Bone Screws.1.2.5 Annex A5—Specifications for Type HA and Type HB Metallic Bone Screws.1.2.6 Annex A6—Specifications for Type HC and Type HD Metallic Bone Screws.1.2.7 Annex A7—Specifications for Metallic Bone Screw Drive Connections.1.3 This specification is based, in part, upon ISO 5835, ISO 6475, and ISO 9268.1.4 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard. No other units of measurement are included in this standard.1.5 Multiple test methods are included in this standard. However, the user is not necessarily obligated to test using all of the described methods. Instead, the user should only select, with justification, test methods that are appropriate for a particular device design. This may only be a subset of the herein described test methods.1.6 This standard may involve the use of hazardous materials, operations, and equipment. This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.1.7 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 purpose of the alkaline polysulfide immersion test is to determine the presence of mechanical damage, wear-through, and other gross defects in the coating. Most metallic coatings are intended to be protective and the presence of gross defects indicates a serious reduction of such protection.5.2 The protection afforded by well applied coatings may be diminished by improper handling following plating or as a result of wear or mechanical damage during testing or while in service. The alkaline polysulfide test serves to indicate if the damage has extended down to the copper or copper alloy basis metal since it will not detect exposed nickel underplate.5.3 The alkaline polysulfide test has been specified in several ASTM specifications for tin-plated coatings, namely Specifications B246 and B545. This test could also be used to detect gross defects and mechanical damage in other metallic coatings, such as tin-nickel alloy (Specification B605), nickel (Specification B689), gold (Specification B488), palladium (Specification B679), and autocatalytic nickel-phosphorous coatings (Specification B733).5.4 This test detects mechanical damage that exposes copper underplate and copper basis metal. Such damage may occur in any post-plating operation or even towards the end of the plating operation. It is most often seen to occur in product assembly operations.5.5 If properly performed, this test will also detect wear-through, provided the wear-through reaches a copper or copper-alloy layer.5.6 Many types of gross defects are too small to be seen, except at magnifications so high (as in SEM) that a realistic assessment of the measurement area cannot be easily made. Other defects, such as many types of wear-through, provide insufficient contrast with the coating surface. Gross defects tests (as with porosity tests) are, therefore, used to magnify the defect sites by producing visible reaction products in and around the defects.5.7 The polysulfide solution will react with copper and copper alloys to produce a dark brown or black stain (the defect indications) at the site of the defect. Silver also turns black under the same conditions. The test solution will not react with nickel and is only useful when the presence or absence of copper exposure is a specific requirement.5.8 The polysulfide immersion test is relatively insensitive to the presence of small pores. It shall not be used as a general porosity test. (Test Method B809 should be used instead.)5.9 The extent and location of the gross defects or mechanical damage (revealed by this test) may or may not be detrimental to product performance or service life. Such determinations shall be made by the user of the test through practical experience or judgment.5.10 The present test can be used on samples of various geometries, such as curved surfaces. It can also be used for selective area coating if allowance is made for tarnish creepage from bare copper alloy areas.5.11 This test is destructive in that it reveals the presence of gross defects by contaminating the surface with reaction-product films. Any parts exposed to this test shall not be placed in service.5.12 However, the defect indications on the sample surfaces that result from this test are stable; samples may be retained for reference purposes.5.13 This test is neither recommended for predictions of product performance nor is it intended to simulate field failure mechanisms. For such product performance evaluations, an environmental test that is known to simulate actual failure mechanisms should be used.1.1 This test method covers equipment and methods for detecting gross defects and mechanical damage (including wear-through) in metallic coatings where the breaks in the coating penetrate down to a copper or copper alloy substrate.1.2 This test method is suitable for coatings consisting of single or combined layers of any coating that does not significantly tarnish in an alkaline polysulfide solution. Examples are gold, nickel, tin, tin-lead, and palladium, or their alloys.1.3 Recent reviews of porosity testing (which include those for gross defects) and testing methods can be found in literature.2,3 An ASTM guide to the selection of porosity and gross defect tests for electrodeposits and related metallic coatings is available as Guide B765. Other related porosity test standards are Test Methods B735, B741, B798, B799, and B809.1.4 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as the 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： 515元 / 折扣价： 438 元 加购物车

5.1 The property KIc determined by this test method characterizes the resistance of a material to fracture in a neutral environment in the presence of a sharp crack under essentially linear-elastic stress and severe tensile constraint, such that (1) the state of stress near the crack front approaches tritensile plane strain, and (2) the crack-tip plastic zone is small compared to the crack size, specimen thickness, and ligament ahead of the crack.5.1.1 Variation in the value of KIc can be expected within the allowable range of specimen proportions, a/W and W/B. KIc may also be expected to rise with increasing ligament size. Notwithstanding these variations, however, KIc is believed to represent a lower limiting value of fracture toughness (for 2 % apparent crack extension) in the environment and at the speed and temperature of the test.5.1.2 Lower and more highly variable values of fracture toughness can be obtained from specimens that fail by cleavage fracture; for example, specimens of ferritic steels tested at temperatures in the ductile-to-brittle transition region or below. Specimens failing by cleavage are also more likely to exhibit warm prestressing effects, where precracking at a temperature higher than the test temperature can artificially increase the fracture toughness measured (2). The present test method is not intended for cleavage fracture. Instead, the user is referred to Test Method E1921 and E1820 which are applicable to cleavage fracture and contain safeguards against warm prestressing. Likewise this test method should not be used when specimen failure is accompanied by appreciable plastic deformation even after the specimen size has been maximized within product dimensional constraints. Guidance on testing elastic-plastic materials is given in Test Method E1820.5.1.3 The value of KIc obtained by this test method may be used to estimate the relation between failure stress and crack size for a material in service wherein the conditions of high constraint described above would be expected. Background information concerning the basis for development of this test method in terms of linear elastic fracture mechanics may be found in Refs (1) and (3).5.1.4 Cyclic forces can cause crack extension at KI values less than KIc. Crack extension under cyclic or sustained forces (as by stress corrosion cracking or creep crack growth) can be influenced by temperature and environment. Therefore, when KIc is applied to the design of service components, differences between laboratory test and field conditions shall be considered.5.1.5 Plane-strain fracture toughness testing is unusual in that there can be no advance assurance that a valid KIc will be determined in a particular test. Therefore, compliance with the specified validity criteria of this test method is essential.5.1.6 Residual stresses can introduce bias into the indicated KQ and KIc value determinations. The effect can be especially significant for specimens removed from as-heat treated or otherwise non-stress relieved stock, from weldments, from complex wrought products, rapidly-solidified castings, additively-manufactured products or from products with intentionally induced residual stresses. In addition, residual stresses will redistribute when the specimen is extracted from the host product and machined. The magnitude of residual stress influence on KQ and KIc in the test specimen may be quite different from that in the original or finish machined product. In addition, the behavior of cracks in the full-sized product may not be predictable from the fracture toughness measured on the specimen because of the influence of the different residual stresses in each. Indications of residual stress include distortion during specimen machining, results that are specimen configuration dependent, and irregular fatigue precrack growth (either excessive crack front curvature or out-of-plane growth). Guide B909 provides supplementary guidelines for plane strain fracture toughness testing of aluminum alloy products for which complete stress relief is not practicable. Guide B909 includes additional guidelines for recognizing when residual stresses may be significantly biasing test results, and methods for minimizing the effects of residual stress during testing.5.2 This test method can serve the following purposes:5.2.1 In research and development, to establish in quantitative terms significant to service performance, the effects of metallurgical variables such as composition or heat treatment, or of fabricating operations such as welding or forming, on the fracture toughness of new or existing materials.5.2.2 In service evaluation, to establish the suitability of a material for a specific application for which the stress conditions are prescribed and for which maximum flaw sizes can be established with confidence.FIG. 2 Double–Cantilever Clip-In Displacement Gage Showing Mounting by Means of Integral Knife Edges(Gage Design Details are Given in Annex A1)5.2.3 For specifications of acceptance and manufacturing quality control, but only when there is a sound basis for specifying minimum KIc values, and then only if the dimensions of the product are sufficient to provide specimens of the size required for valid KIc determination. The specification of KIc values in relation to a particular application should signify that a fracture control study has been conducted for the component in relation to the expected loading and environment, and in relation to the sensitivity and reliability of the crack detection procedures that are to be applied prior to service and subsequently during the anticipated life.1.1 This test method covers the determination of fracture toughness (KIc and optionally KIsi) of metallic materials under predominantly linear-elastic, plane-strain conditions using fatigue precracked specimens having a thickness of 1.6 mm (0.063 in.) or greater2 subjected to slowly, or in special (elective) cases rapidly, increasing crack-displacement force. Details of test apparatus, specimen configuration, and experimental procedure are given in the annexes. Two procedures are outlined for using the experimental data to calculate fracture toughness values:1.1.1 The KIc test procedure is described in the main body of this test standard and is a mandatory part of the testing and results reporting procedure for this test method. The KIc test procedure is based on crack growth of up to 2 % percent of the specimen width. This can lead to a specimen size dependent rising fracture toughness resistance curve, with larger specimens producing higher fracture toughness results.1.1.2 The KIsi test procedure is described in Appendix X1 and is an optional part of this test method. The KIsi test procedure is based on a fixed amount of crack extension of 0.5 mm, and as a result, KIsi is less sensitive to specimen size than KIc. This less size-sensitive fracture toughness, KIsi, is called size-insensitive throughout this test method. Appendix X1 contains an optional procedure for reinterpreting the force-displacement test record recorded as part of this test method to calculate the additional fracture toughness value, KIsi.NOTE 1: Plane-strain fracture toughness tests of materials thinner than 1.6 mm (0.063 in.) that are sufficiently brittle (see 7.1) can be made using other types of specimens (1).3 There is no standard test method for such thin materials.1.2 This test method is divided into two parts. The first part gives general recommendations and requirements for testing and includes specific requirements for the KIc test procedure. The second part consists of Annexes that give specific information on displacement gage and loading fixture design, special requirements for individual specimen configurations, and detailed procedures for fatigue precracking. Additional annexes are provided that give specific procedures for beryllium and rapid-force testing, and the KIsi test procedure, which provides an optional additional analysis procedure for the test data collected as part of the KIc test procedure.1.3 General information and requirements common to all specimen configurations:  SectionReferenced Documents 2Terminology 3 Stress-Intensity Factor 3.1.1 Plane-Strain Fracture Toughness 3.1.2 Crack Plane Orientation 3.1.4Summary of Test Method 4 5 Significance 5.1 Precautions 5.1.1 – 5.1.5 Practical Applications 5.2Apparatus (see also 1.4) 6 Tension Machine 6.1 Fatigue Machine 6.2 Loading Fixtures 6.3 Displacement Gage, Measurement 6.4Specimen Size, Configurations, and Preparation (see also 1.5) 7 Specimen Size Estimates 7.1 Standard and Alternative Specimen Configurations 7.2 Fatigue Crack Starter Notches 7.3.1 Fatigue Precracking (see also 1.6) 7.3.2 Crack Extension Beyond Starter Notch 7.3.2.2General Procedure 8 Specimen Measurements    Thickness 8.2.1  Width 8.2.2  Crack Size 8.2.3  Crack Plane Angle 8.2.4 Specimen Testing    Loading Methods 8.3  Loading Rate 8.4  Test Record 8.5Calculation and Interpretation of Results 9 Test Record Analysis 9.1 Pmax/PQ Validity Requirement 9.1.3 Specimen Size Validity Requirements 9.1.4Reporting 10Precision and Bias 111.4 Specific requirements related to test apparatus:Double-Cantilever Displacement Gage Annex A1Testing Fixtures Annex A2Bend Specimen Loading Fixture Annex A2.1Compact Specimen Loading Clevis Annex A2.21.5 Specific requirements related to individual specimen configurations:Bend Specimen SE(B) Annex A3Compact Specimen C(T) Annex A4Disk-Shaped Compact Specimen DC(T) Annex A5Arc-Shaped Tension Specimen A(T) Annex A6Arc-Shaped Bend Specimen A(B) Annex A71.6 Specific requirements related to special test procedures:Fatigue Precracking KIc and KIsi Specimens Annex A8Hot-Pressed Beryllium Testing Annex A9Rapid-Force Testing Annex A10Determination of KIsi Appendix X11.7 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as the standard. The values given in parentheses are for information only.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： 843元 / 折扣价： 717 元 加购物车

At this time none of these practices have been demonstrated to correlate with field service. Because these procedures do not restrict the selection of either the containment material or the fluid for testing, it is essential that consideration be given to the appropriate pairing of metal and fluid. Likewise, knowledge of the corrosion protection mechanism and the probable mode of failure of a particular metal is helpful in the selection of test conditions and the observation, interpretation, and reporting of test results. It is important that consideration be given to each of the permitted variables in test procedure so that the results will be meaningfully related to field performance. It is especially important that the time of testing selected be adequate to correctly measure the rate of corrosion of the containment material. Note 1—Corrosion, whether general or localized, is a time-dependent phenomenon. This time dependence can show substantial nonlinearity. For example, formation of a protective oxide will diminish corrosion with time, while certain forms of localized attack accelerate corrosion with time. The minimum time required for a test to provide a corrosion rate that can be extrapolated for the prediction of long-term performance varies widely, depending on the selection of metal and fluid, and on the form of corrosion attack. Therefore, it is not possible to establish a single minimum length of test applicable to all materials and conditions. However, it is recommended that for the tests described in these practices, a test period of no less than 6 months be used. Furthermore, it is recommended that the effect of time of testing be evaluated to detect any significant time dependence of corrosion attack. It is essential for the meaningful application of these procedures that the length of test be adequate to detect changes in the nature of the fluid that might significantly alter the corrosivity of the fluid. For example, exhaustion of chemical inhibitor or chemical breakdown of the fluid may occur after periods of months in selected cycles of operation. Note 2—Many fluids that may be considered for solar applications contain additives to minimize the corrosivity of the fluid. Many such additives are useful only within a specific concentration range, and some additives may actually accelerate corrosion if the concentration falls below a critical level. Depletion kinetics can be a strong function of the exposed metal surface area. Therefore, for tests involving fluids with such additives, consideration must be given to the ratio of metal surface area to fluid volume as it may relate to an operating system.1.1 These practices cover test procedures simulating field service for evaluating the performance under corrosive conditions of metallic containment materials in solar heating and cooling systems. All test results relate to the performance of the metallic containment material only as a part of a metal/fluid pair. Performance in these test procedures, taken by itself, does not necessarily constitute an adequate basis for acceptance or rejection of a particular metal/fluid pair in solar heating and cooling systems, either in general or in a particular design. 1.2 These practices describe test procedures used to evaluate the resistance to deterioration of metallic containment materials in the several conditions that may occur in operation of solar heating and cooling systems. These conditions include: (1) operating full flow; (2) stagnant empty vented; (3) stagnant, closed to atmosphere, non-draindown; and (4) stagnant, closed to atmosphere, draindown. 1.3 The recommended practices cover the following three tests: 1.3.1 Practice A—Laboratory Exposure Test for Coupon Specimens. 1.3.2 Practice B—Laboratory Exposure Test of Components or Subcomponents. 1.3.3 Practice C—Field Exposure Test of Components or Subcomponents. 1.4 Practice A provides a laboratory simulation of various operating conditions of solar heating and cooling systems. It utilizes coupon test specimens and does not provide for heating of the fluid by the containment material. Practice B provides a laboratory simulation of various operating conditions of a solar heating and cooling system utilizing a component or a simulated subcomponent construction, and does provide for heating of the fluid by the containment material. Practice C provides a field simulation of various operating conditions of solar heating and cooling systems utilizing a component or a simulated subcomponent construction. It utilizes controlled schedules of operation in a field test. 1.5 The values stated in inch-pound units are to be regarded as standard. The values given in parentheses are mathematical conversions to SI units that are provided for information only and are not considered standard. 1.6 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use. For a specific safety precaution statement see Section 6.

定价： 0元 / 折扣价： 0 元

3.1 This practice is intended to confirm the method of obtaining and evaluating the fluorescent penetrant indications on metallic surgical implants.1.1 This practice is intended as a standard for fluorescent penetrant inspection of metallic surgical implants.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： 515元 / 折扣价： 438 元 加购物车

3.1 These test methods compile procedures which can be used to check the composition of purity of metallic zinc powder. This information is useful to both the formulator and users.1.1 These test methods cover procedures for the chemical analysis of metallic zinc powder in the form commercially known as zinc dust for use as a pigment in paints.1.2 The analytical procedures appear in the following order:  SectionsMoisture and Other Volatile Matter 7Coarse Particles 8Matter Soluble in Hexane 9 and 10Total Zinc 11 and 12Metallic Zinc 13 and 14Zinc Oxide 15Calcium 16 and 17Lead 18Iron 19Cadmium 20Chlorine 21 and 22Sulfur 23 and 241.3 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard. No other units of measurement are included in this standard.1.4 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.1.5 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

定价： 515元 / 折扣价： 438 元 加购物车

4.1 For criticality control of nuclear fuel in dry storage and transportation, the most commonly used neutron absorber materials are borated stainless steel alloys, borated aluminum alloys, and boron carbide aluminum alloy composites. The boron used in these neutron absorber materials may be natural or enriched in the nuclide 10B. The boron is usually incorporated either as an intermetallic phase (for example, AlB2, TiB2, CrB2, etc.) in an aluminum alloy or stainless steel, or as a stable chemical compound particulate such as boron carbide (B4C), typically in an aluminum MMC or cermet.4.2 While other neutron absorbers continue to be investigated, 10B has been most widely used in these applications, and it is the only thermal neutron absorber addressed in this standard.4.3 In service, many neutron absorber materials are inaccessible and not amenable to a surveillance program. These neutron absorber materials are often expected to perform over an extended period.4.4 Qualification and acceptance procedures demonstrate that the neutron absorber material has the necessary characteristics to perform its design functions during the service lifetime.4.5 The criticality control function of neutron absorber materials in dry cask storage systems and transportation packagings is only significant in the presence of a moderator, such as during loading of fuel under water, or water ingress resulting from hypothetical accident conditions.4.6 The expected users of this standard include designers, neutron absorber material suppliers and purchasers, government agencies, consultants and utility owners. Typical use of the practice is to summarize practices which provide input for design specification, material qualification, and production acceptance. Adherence to this standard does not guarantee regulatory approval; a government regulatory authority may require different tests or additional tests, and may impose limits or restrictions on the use of a neutron absorber material.1.1 This practice provides procedures for qualification and acceptance of neutron absorber materials used to provide criticality control by absorbing thermal neutrons in systems designed for nuclear fuel storage, transportation, or both.1.2 This practice is limited to neutron absorber materials consisting of metal alloys, metal matrix composites (MMCs), and cermets, clad or unclad, containing the neutron absorber boron-10 (10B).1.3 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.1.4 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

定价： 515元 / 折扣价： 438 元 加购物车

5.1 The primary purpose of the PMA test is to determine the presence of mechanical damage, wear through, and other gross defects in the coating. Most metallic coatings are intended to be protective, and the presence of gross defects indicates a serious reduction of such protection.5.2 The protection afforded by well applied coatings may be diminished by improper handling following plating or as a result of wear or mechanical damage during testing or while in service. The PMA test can serve to indicate the existence of such damage.5.3 This test is used to detect underplate and substrate metal exposed through normal wear during relative motions (mating of electrical contacts) or through mechanical damage. As such, it is a sensitive pass/fail test and, if properly performed, will rapidly detect wear through to base metals or scratches that enter the base metal layers.5.4 This test is relatively insensitive to small pores. It is not designed to be a general porosity test and shall not be used as such. The detection of pores will depend upon their sizes and the length of time that the reagent remains a liquid.5.5 This test cannot distinguish degrees of wear through or whether the wear through is to nickel or copper. Once base metal is exposed, the colored molybdenum complex is formed. While relatively small area defects (compared to the area of the droplet) may be seen at the bottom of the drop as tiny colored regions immediately after applying the PMA, any larger areas of exposed base metal will cause the entire droplet to turn dark instantly.5.6 The PMA test also detects mechanical damage that exposes underplate and substrate metal. Such damage may occur in any postplating operation or even at the end of the plating operation. It can often occur in assembly operations where plated parts are assembled into larger units by mechanical equipment.5.7 The PMA test identifies the locations of exposed base metal. The extent and location of these exposed areas may or may not be detrimental to performance. The PMA test is not recommended for predictions of product performance, nor is it intended to simulate field failure mechanisms. For such contact performance evaluations, an environmental test known to simulate actual failure mechanisms should be used.5.8 The PMA test is primarily intended for the evaluation of individual samples rather than large sample lots, since evaluations are normally carried out one at a time under the microscope (see Section 10).5.9 This test is destructive. Any parts exposed to the PMA test shall not be placed in service.1.1 This test standard covers equipment and methods for using phosphomolybdic acid (PMA) to detect gross defects and mechanical damage including wear through in metallic coatings of gold, silver, or palladium. These metals comprise the topmost metallic layers over substrates of nickel, copper, or copper alloys.1.2 Recent reviews of porosity testing, which include those for gross defects, and testing methods can be found in the literature.2, 3 An ASTM guide to the selection of porosity and gross defect tests for electrodeposits and related metallic coatings is available as Guide B765. Other related porosity and gross defects test standards are Test Methods B735, B741, B798, B799, B809, and B866, Specifications B488, B679,and B689.1.3 The values stated in SI units are the preferred units. Those in parentheses are for information only.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