3.1 These test methods are designed to broaden the scope of the earlier editions of the test method by the inclusion of tall oil and tall oil derived products as test materials and will be referenced in Test Methods D803.3.2 The acid number is an important property of pine chemical products, such as tall oil, and the products obtained by the fractionation of tall oil. It is the test method widely used to determine the total free acid content of these products.3.3 The potentiometric test method should be used when the most reproducible results are required.1.1 These test methods are intended for determining the acid number of pine chemical products as defined in Terminology D804 including tall oil products, wood and gum rosin, and other related materials. These test methods may not be applicable to all modified rosin products. Two test methods are covered, as follows:1.1.1 Potentiometric method (referee), and1.1.2 Internal indicator method (alternate).1.2 The potentiometric method is suitable for use with both light- and dark-colored products. It should be considered the referee method. The internal indicator method is suitable for use only with light- and medium-colored products with a Gardner color of less than 12. It should be considered the alternate method.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

This specification covers solid, dry-cast, concrete facing brick intended for interior and exterior use in constructing structural and facing masonry components and are made from portland cement, water, and suitable mineral aggregates with or without the inclusion of other materials. Concrete facing bricks shall be grouped into density classifications as either lightweight, medium weight, or normal weight. Specimens shall be sampled, tested, and conform accordingly to the specified physical requirements (oven-dry density, maximum water absorption, and minimum net area compressive strength) suitable for their density classification.1.1 This specification covers solid, dry-cast, concrete facing brick and other solid concrete masonry facing units intended for interior and exterior use in constructing structural and facing masonry components and are made from portland cement, water, and suitable mineral aggregates with or without the inclusion of other materials.NOTE 1: Specification C55 addresses concrete building brick used in non-facing, utilitarian applications (previously referred to in earlier editions of Specification C55 as Grade S—for general use where moderate strength and resistance to frost action and moisture penetration are required). This specification differs from Specification C55 in that it includes expanded consideration for properties of concrete units used in facing applications and other exposures (previously referred to in earlier editions of Specification C55 as Grade N—for use as architectural veneer and facing units in exterior walls and for use where high strength and resistance to moisture penetration and severe frost action are desired).1.2 The text of this specification references notes and footnotes which provide explanatory material. These notes and footnotes (excluding those in tables and figures) shall not be considered as requirements of the standard.1.3 The values stated in inch-pound units are to be regarded as standard. The values given in parentheses are mathematical conversions to SI units that are provided for information only and are not considered standard.NOTE 2: Concrete facing brick and other solid concrete masonry facing units covered by this specification are made from lightweight or normal weight aggregates, or both.NOTE 3: When particular features are desired, such as density classification, high compressive strength, surface textures for appearance or bond, finish, color, fire resistance, insulation, acoustical properties, or other special features, such properties should be specified separately by the purchaser. Suppliers should be consulted as to the availability of concrete facing brick and other concrete masonry facing units having the desired features.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 Hydrogen cyanide is highly toxic. In relatively low quantities, hydrogen cyanide can cause asphyxia and death.5.2 The National Fire Protection Association has assigned a flammability rating of 4 (severe fire hazard) to hydrogen cyanide.1.1 This practice is used to collect samples for the determination of gaseous hydrogen cyanide (HCN) from any combustion device or atmosphere where cyanide may be present. While primarily designed for the measurement of gas phase HCN, the sample collection described in this practice also includes cyanide ion (CN-) absorbed particles that may be present in the sampling atmosphere.1.1.1 Samples can be collected from a closed chamber such as the NBS smoke box described in Test Method E662 provided it is equipped with sampling ports.1.1.2 Open chambers such as industrial work areas or large scale fires can be monitored for HCN with this practice.1.1.3 The HCN emissions of a flow through system can be determined by sampling from its discharge stack. Examples of such systems include large scale manufacturing applications and the cone calorimeter described in Test Method E1354.1.2 This practice can be used to monitor HCN levels in lab scale fire smoke effluents in order to estimate toxicity of gases produced from burning materials. See Guide E800.1.3 The concentration range of hydrogen cyanide will be dependent on the volume of gas sampled, the volume of sodium hydroxide solution placed in the impinger during sampling, and the analytical method used to measure cyanide. For example, the lower limit of detection would be 0.002-mg/m3 when 0.1-m3 of combustion effluent is collected into 100-mL sodium hydroxide solution based on a detection limit of 0.002 mg/L cyanide in the impinger solution when using the flow injection analysis (FIA) system described in Test Method D6888.1.4 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard. No other units of measurement are included in this standard.1.5 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.1.6 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

定价： 590元 / 折扣价： 502 元 加购物车

4.1 The purpose of this practice is to standardize the routine description of peat and other organic soils for various uses (such as, peatland inventories and resource evaluations). This practice should be used to supplement other field information, such as, site location, surface morphology, surface vegetation, water table, moisture content, fiber content, wood content, and visually identifiable plant types and parts.NOTE 1: This standard is a visual/manual method and is not meant to replace the more precise method of laboratory classification of peat (see Classification D4427). It should also be noted, this practice is independent of the determination of whether an articluar deposit contains peat that is defined in Classification D4427 on the basis of laboratory determination of ash content (see Test Method D2974).1.1 This practice covers the visual determination of the degree of humification of peat and other highly organic soils by visually evaluating the color of the water expelled upon compression. This practice is not used for the determination of the degree of organic decomposition of organic matter in mineral soils.1.2 This practice offers a set of instructions for performing one or more specific operations. This document cannot replace education or experience and should be used in conjunction with professional judgment. Not all aspects of this practice 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 though the ASTM consensus process.1.3 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.1.4 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

定价： 515元 / 折扣价： 438 元 加购物车

5.1 This practice is intended to measure air flow through materials used to fill joints found in building construction.5.2 This practice does not purport to establish all required criteria for the selection of an air barrier assembly. Therefore, the results should be used only for comparison purposes and should not be seen as the equivalent to field installed building systems.1.1 This practice is intended to determine the air leakage rate of aerosol foam sealants as measured in a standardized jig. This practice provides a procedure for preparing the test apparatus and further describes the application of aerosol foam sealant and other joint fillers to the apparatus prior to conducting Test Method E283.1.2 This practice allows testing laboratories to quantify the air leakage rate of aerosol foam sealants or joint filling products using Test Method E283 and reporting the data in L/(s · m2) according to Practice E29.1.3 This practice is used in conjunction with Test Method E283. Although Test Method E283 is a laboratory test method used with fenestration products, individuals interested in performing field air leakage tests on installed units should reference Test Method E783 and AAMA 502.1.4 Aerosol foam sealants are used for a variety of end use applications generally intended to reduce air leakage in the building envelope.1.5 Insulating type materials also will be found suitable for evaluation with this practice.1.6 There are no other known practices or test methods that specify the preparation of the assemblies used to determine the air leakage rate of gap filling sealants, dry preformed foams or insulations.1.7 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard. The values given in parentheses after SI units are provided for information only and are not considered standard.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： 590元 / 折扣价： 502 元 加购物车

5.1 Acceptance Testing—This method of testing fabrics for resistance to pilling is not recommended for acceptance testing. If it is used for acceptance testing, it should be used with caution because interlaboratory data are not available. In some cases the purchaser and the supplier may have to test a commercial shipment of one or more specific materials by the best available method, even though the method has not been recommended for acceptance testing.5.1.1 If there are differences or practical significance between reported test results for two laboratories (or more), comparative tests should be performed to determine if there is a statistical bias between them, using competent statistical assistance. As a minimum, the test samples should be used that are as homogeneous as possible, drawn from the material from which the disparate test results were obtained, and randomly assigned in equal numbers to each laboratory for testing. Other materials with established test values may be used for this purpose. The test results from the two laboratories should be compared using a statistical test for unpaired data, at a probability level chosen prior to the testing series. If a bias is found, either its cause must be found and corrected, or future test results for that material must be adjusted in consideration of the known bias.5.2 The pilling of textile fabrics is a very complex property because it is affected by many factors which may include type of fiber or blends, fiber dimensions, yarn and fabric construction, fabric finishing treatments and refurbishing method. Testing before refurbishing may be advisable. The pilling resistance of a specific fabric in actual wear varies more with general conditions of use and individual wearers than in replicate fabric specimens subjected to controlled laboratory tests. This experience should be borne in mind when adopting levels of acceptability for any series of standards.5.3 Pills vary appreciably in size and appearance and depend on the presence of lint and degree of color contrast. These factors are not evaluated when pilling is rated solely on the number of pills. The development of pills may be accompanied by other surface phenomena such as loss of cover, color change, or the development of fuzz. Since the overall acceptability of a specific fabric is dependent on both the characteristics of the pills and the other factors affecting surface appearance, it is suggested that fabrics tested in the laboratory be evaluated subjectively with regard to their acceptability and not rated solely on the number of pills developed. A series of standards, based on graduated degrees of surface change of the fabric type being tested, may be set up to provide a basis for subjective ratings. The visual standards are most advantageous when the laboratory test specimens correlate closely in appearance with worn fabrics and show a similar ratio of pills to fuzz. Counting the pills and weighing their number with respect to their size and contrast, as a combined measure of pilling resistance, is not recommended because of the excessive time required for counting, sizing, and calculation.5.4 The degree of fabric pilling is evaluated by comparing the tested specimens with visual standards, which may be actual fabrics or photographs of fabrics, showing a range of pilling resistance. The observed resistance to pilling is reported on an arbitrary scale ranging from 5 (no pilling) to 1 (very severe pilling).5.5 This test method is applicable to a wide variety of woven and knitted fabrics that vary in pilling propensity as a result of variations in fiber, yarn & fabric structure, and finish.1.1 This test method covers the determination of the propensity of a fabric to form pills and other related surface changes on textiles using the brush pilling tester. This procedure is generally intended to be used for upholstery, automotive, luggage and heavy duty uniform fabrics because it is highly abrasive. This does not, however, preclude it from being used for other types of fabrics. If unsure, comparison testing should be performed to ensure that this test method replicates pilling on the final product.NOTE 1: For other test methods for the pilling resistance of textiles, refer to Test Methods D3512/D3512M, D3514/D3514M, and D4970/D4970M.1.2 The values stated in either SI units or inch-pound units are to be regarded separately as standard. The values stated in each system may not be exact equivalents; therefore, each system shall be used independently of the other. Combining values from the two systems may result in non-conformance with the standard.1.3 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.1.4 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

定价： 590元 / 折扣价： 502 元 加购物车

3.1 These test methods are designed to broaden the scope of the earlier editions of the test method by the inclusion of tall oil and tall oil derived products as test materials and is referenced in Test Methods D803.3.2 The saponification number is an important property of tall oil and the products obtained by the fractionation of tall oil. It is the test method widely used to determine the total acid content, both free and combined, of these products.3.3 The potentiometric test method should be used when the most reproducible results are required.1.1 These test methods cover the determination of the saponification number of tall oil and products obtained by the fractionation of tall oil such as rosin, fatty acids and distilled tall oil as defined in Terminology D804. These test methods are also applicable to gum and wood rosin. Two test methods are covered as follows:1.1.1 Test method using a potentiometric method, and1.1.2 Test method using an internal indicator method.1.2 The potentiometric method is suitable for use with both light- and dark-colored test samples. It should be considered the referee method. The internal indicator method is suitable for use only with light- and medium-colored test samples. It should be considered the alternate method.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 Acceptance Testing—This method of testing fabrics for resistance to pilling is not recommended for acceptance testing. If it is used for acceptance testing, it should be used with caution because the between-laboratory precision is poor. In some cases the purchaser and the supplier may have to test a commercial shipment of one or more specific materials by the best available test method, even though the test method is not recommended for acceptance testing.5.1.1 If there are differences or practical significance between reported test results for two laboratories (or more), comparative tests should be performed to determine if there is a statistical bias between them, using competent statistical assistance. As a minimum, the test samples should be used that are as homogeneous as possible, drawn from the material from which the disparate test results were obtained, and randomly assigned in equal numbers to each laboratory for testing. Other materials with established test values may be used for this purpose. The test results from the two laboratories should be compared using a statistical test for unpaired data, at a probability level chosen prior to the testing series. If a bias is found, either its cause must be found and corrected, or future test results must be adjusted in consideration of the known bias.5.2 The pilling of textile fabrics is a very complex property because it is affected by many factors which may include type of fiber or blends, fiber dimensions, yarn and fabric construction, fabric finishing treatments and refurbishing method. Testing before refurbishing may be adviseable. The pilling resistance of a specific fabric in actual wear varies more with general conditions of use and individual wearers than in replicate fabric specimens subjected to controlled laboratory tests. This experience should be borne in mind when adopting levels of acceptability for any series of standards.5.3 Pills vary appreciably in size and appearance and depend on the presence of lint and degree of color contrast. These factors are not evaluated when pilling is rated solely on the number of pills. The development of pills may be accompanied by other surface phenomena such as loss of cover, color change, or the development of fuzz. Since the overall acceptability of a specific fabric is dependent on both the characteristics of the pills and the other factors affecting surface appearance, it is suggested that fabrics tested in the laboratory be evaluated subjectively with regard to their acceptability and not rated solely on the number of pills developed. A series of standards, based on graduated degrees of surface change of the fabric type being tested, may be set up to provide a basis for subjective ratings. The visual standards are most advantageous when the laboratory test specimens correlate closely in appearance with worn fabrics and show a similar ratio of pills to fuzz. Counting the pills and weighing their number with respect to their size and contrast, as a combined measure of pilling resistance, is not recommended because of the excessive time required for counting, sizing, and calculating.5.4 The degree of fabric pilling is evaluated by comparing the tested specimens with visual standards, which may be actual fabrics or photographs of fabrics, showing a range of pilling resistance. The observed resistance to pilling is reported on an arbitrary scale ranging from 5 (no pilling) to 1 (very severe pilling).5.5 This test method is applicable to a wide variety of woven and knitted fabrics that vary in pilling propensity as a result of variations in fiber, yarn and fabric structure, and finish.1.1 This test method covers the determination of the propensity of a fabric to form pills and other related surface changes on textiles using the random tumble pilling tester. The procedure is generally applicable to all types of woven and knitted apparel fabrics.NOTE 1: For other test methods for the pilling resistance of textiles, refer to Test Methods D3511/D3511M, D3514/D3514M, and D4970/D4970M.1.2 Some fabrics that have been treated with a silicone resin may not be satisfactorily tested by this procedure because the silicone resin may transfer onto the cork liners in the test chamber and cause erroneous results.1.3 The values stated in either SI units or inch-pound units are to be regarded separately as standard. The values stated in each system may not be exact equivalents; therefore, each system shall be used independently of the other. Combining values from the two systems may result in non-conformance with the standard.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

Low operating temperature fuel cells such as proton exchange membrane (PEM) fuel cells require high purity hydrogen for maximum material performance and lifetime. Analysis to part-per-billion (ppb) concentration of individual cation contaminants such as potassium, sodium and ammonium in hydrogen and related fuel cell supply gases is necessary for assuring a feed gas of sufficient purity to satisfy fuel cell system needs. More specifically, cations such as ammonium causes irreversible performance degradation of proton exchange membranes used in low temperature fuel cells by reacting with protons in the membrane to form ammonium ions.Although not intended for application to gases other than hydrogen and related fuel cell supply gases, techniques within this test method can be applied to other gaseous samples requiring cation analysis.1.1 This test method describes a procedure for the determination of cations in hydrogen and other fuel cell feed gases. It has been successfully applied to other types of gaseous samples including air, engine exhaust, and landfill samples. An ion chromatograph/conductivity detector (IC/CD) system is used to determine cations. Sensitivity from low part per billion (ppb, μg/l, μg/kg) up to part per million (ppm, mg/l, mg/kg) concentration are achievable dependant on the amount of hydrogen or other fuel cell gas sampled. This test method can be applied to other gaseous samples requiring analysis of trace constituents provided an assessment of potential interferences has been accomplished.1.2 The values stated in inch-pound 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 and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.

定价： 0元 / 折扣价： 0 元

4.1 These test methods for the chemical analysis of metals and alloys are primarily intended as referee methods to test such materials for compliance with compositional specifications particularly those under the jurisdiction of ASTM Committee A01 on Steel, Stainless Steel, and Related Alloys. It is assumed that all who use these test methods will be trained analysts capable of performing common laboratory procedures skillfully and safely. It is expected that work will be performed in a properly equipped laboratory under appropriate quality control practices such as those described in Guide E882.1.1 These test methods cover the chemical analysis of tool steels and other similar medium- and high-alloy steels having chemical compositions within the following limits:Element Composition Range, %Aluminum   0.005 to 1.5Boron   0.001 to 0.10Carbon   0.03  to 2.50Chromium   0.10  to 14.0Cobalt   0.10  to 14.0Copper   0.01  to 2.0Lead   0.001 to 0.01Manganese   0.10  to 15.00Molybdenum   0.01  to 10.00Nickel   0.02  to 4.00Nitrogen   0.001 to 0.20Phosphorus   0.002 to 0.05Silicon   0.10  to 2.50Sulfur   0.002 to 0.40Tungsten   0.01  to 21.00Vanadium   0.02  to 5.501.2 The test methods in this standard are contained in the sections indicated below:    SectionsCarbon, Total, by the Combustion— Thermal Conductivity Method— Discontinued 1986   125–135Carbon, Total, by the Combustion Gravimetric Method—Discontinued 2012   78–88Chromium by the Atomic Absorption Spectrometry Method (0.006 % to 1.00 %) 174–183Chromium by the Peroxydisulfate Oxidation—Titration Method   (0.10 % to 14.00 %) 184–192Chromium by the Peroxydisulfate-Oxidation Titrimetric Method—Discontinued 1980   117–124Cobalt by the Ion-Exchange— Potentiometric Titration Method     (2 % to 14 %)  52–59Cobalt by the Nitroso-R-Salt  Spectrophotometric Method  (0.10 % to 5.0 %)  60–69Copper by the Neocuproine  Spectrophotometric Method  (0.01 % to 2.00 %) 89–98Copper by the Sulfide Precipitation- Electrodeposition Gravimetric Method   (0.01 % to 2.0 %)  70–77Lead by the Ion-Exchange—Atomic  Absorption Spectrometry Method (0.001 % to 0.01 %) 99–108Manganese by the Periodate  Spectrophotometric Method  (0.10 % to 5.00 %) 9–18Molybdenum by the Ion Exchange– 8-Hydroxyquinoline Gravimetric Method    203–210Molybdenum by the Thiocyanate Spectrophotometric Method  (0.01 % to 1.50 %) 162–173Nickel by the Dimethylglyoxime Gravimetric Method (0.1 % to 4.0 %) 144–151Phosphorus by the Alkalimetric Method  (0.01 % to 0.05 %) 136–143Phosphorus by the Molybdenum Blue  Spectrophotometric Method (0.002 % to 0.05 %) 19–29Silicon by the Gravimetric Method  (0.10 % to 2.50 %) 45–51Sulfur by the Gravimetric Method—Discontinued 1988   29–35Sulfur by the Combustion-Iodate  Titration Method—Discontinued 2012   36–44Sulfur by the Chromatographic Gravimetric Method—Discontinued 1980   109–116Tin by the Solvent Extraction— Atomic Absorption Spectrometry Method (0.002 % to 0.10 %) 152–161Vanadium by the Atomic Absorption Spectrometry Method (0.006 % to 0.15 %) 193–2021.3 Test methods for the determination of carbon and sulfur not included in this standard can be found in Test Methods E1019.1.4 Some of the composition ranges given in 1.1 are too broad to be covered by a single test method and therefore this standard contains multiple test methods for some elements. The user must select the proper test method by matching the information given in the and Interference sections of each test method with the composition of the alloy to be analyzed.1.5 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as 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 hazards statements are given in Section 6 and in special “Warning” paragraphs throughout these test methods.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 Acceptance Testing—This method of testing fabrics for resistance to pilling is not recommended for acceptance testing. If it is used for acceptance testing, it should be used with caution because interlaboratory data are not available. In some cases the purchaser and the supplier may have to test a commercial shipment of one or more specific materials by the best available method, even though the method has not been recommended for acceptance testing.5.1.1 If there is a disagreement arising from differences in values reported by the purchaser and the supplier when using Test Method D3514 for acceptance testing, the statistical bias, if any, between the laboratory of the purchaser and the laboratory of the supplier should be determined based on testing specimens randomly drawn from one sample of material of the type being evaluated. Competent statistical assistance is recommended for the investigation of bias. A minimum of two parties should take a group of test specimens which are as homogeneous as possible and which are from a lot of material of the type in question. The test specimens should then be randomly assigned in equal numbers to each laboratory for testing. The average test results from the two laboratories should be compared using an acceptable statistical protocol and probability level chosen by the two parties before the testing begins. Appropriate statistical disciplines for comparing data must be used when the purchaser and supplier cannot agree. If a bias is found, either its cause must be found and corrected, or the purchaser and the supplier must agree to interpret future test results with consideration for the known bias.5.2 The pilling of textile fabrics is a very complex property because it is affected by many factors which may include type of fiber or blends, fiber dimensions, yarn and fabric construction, and fabric finishing treatments. The pilling resistance of a specific fabric in actual wear varies more with general conditions of use and individual wearers than in replicate fabric specimens subjected to controlled laboratory tests. This experience should be borne in mind when adopting levels of acceptability for any series of standards.5.3 Finishes and fabric surface changes may exert a large effect on pilling. It is recommended that fabrics be tested after laundering or drycleaning, or both. Testing before refurbishing may also be advisable. Prior agreement between interested parties should determine the state of test.5.4 Pills vary appreciably in size and appearance and depend on the presence of lint and degree of color contrast. These factors are not evaluated when pilling is rated solely on the number of pills. The development of pills may be accompanied by other surface phenomena such as loss of cover, color change, or the development of fuzz. Since the overall acceptability of a specific fabric is dependent on both the characteristics of the pills and the other factors affecting surface appearance, it is suggested that fabrics tested in the laboratory be evaluated subjectively with regard to their acceptability and not rated solely on the number of pills developed. A series of standards, based on graduated degrees of surface change of the fabric type being tested, may be set up to provide a basis for subjective ratings. The visual standards are most advantageous when the laboratory test specimens correlate closely in appearance with worn fabrics and show a similar ratio of pills to fuzz. Counting the pills and weighting their number with respect to their size and contrast, as a combined measure of pilling resistance, is not recommended because of the excessive time required for counting, sizing, and calculation.5.5 The degree of fabric pilling is evaluated by comparing the tested specimens with visual standards, which may be actual fabrics or photographs of fabrics, showing a range of pilling resistance. The observed resistance to pilling is reported on an arbitrary scale ranging from 5 (no pilling) to 1 (very severe pilling).5.6 This test method is applicable to a wide variety of woven and knitted fabrics that vary in pilling propensity as a result of variations in fiber, yarn and fabric structure, and finish. The applicability of the test method to non-woven fabrics has not been determined.1.1 This test method covers the determination of the propensity of a fabric to form pills and other related surface changes on textiles using the Stoll Quartermaster Universal Wear Tester with the frosting attachment. The procedure is generally applicable to all types of woven and knitted fabrics.NOTE 1: For other current test methods of testing the pilling resistance of textiles, refer to Test Methods D3511/D3511M, D3512/D3512M, and D4970/D4970M.1.2 The values stated in either SI units or inch-pound units are to be regarded separately as standard. The values stated in each system are not necessarily exact equivalents; therefore, to ensure conformance with the standard, each system shall be used independently of the other, and values from the two systems shall not be combined.1.3 The fabric may be laundered or dry cleaned before testing.1.4 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.1.5 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

定价： 590元 / 折扣价： 502 元 加购物车

5.1 The test method is used to estimate qualitatively the durability of weak rocks through weakening and disintegration resulting from a standard two cycles of wetting and drying in the service environment. (1-7).35.2 This test method is used to assign quantitative durability index values to weak rocks. A primary example is the Franklin Rating System (1).NOTE 1: The quality of the result produced by this standard is dependent on the competence of the personnel performing it, and the suitability of the equipment and facilities used. Agencies that meet the criteria of Practice D3740 are generally considered capable of competent and objective testing, sampling, inspection, and so forth. Users of this standard are cautioned that compliance with Practice D3740 does not in itself assure reliable results. Reliable results depend on many factors; Practice D3740 provides a means of evaluating some of those factors.1.1 This test method covers the determination of the slake durability index of a shale or other weak rock after three drying and two wetting cycles with abrasion effects.1.2 Units—The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard. The values given in parentheses are mathematical conversions to inch-pound units, which are provided for information only and are not considered standard. Reporting of test results in units other than SI shall not be regarded as nonconformance with this test method.1.3 All observed and calculated values shall conform to the guidelines for significant digits and rounding established in Practice D6026.1.3.1 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.1.4 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： 515元 / 折扣价： 438 元 加购物车

4.1 These test methods for the chemical analysis of metals and alloys are primarily intended as referee methods to test such materials for compliance with compositional specifications, particularly those under the jurisdiction of ASTM Committee A01 on Steel, Stainless Steel, and Related Alloys. It is assumed that all who use these test methods will be trained analysts capable of performing common laboratory procedures skillfully and safely. It is expected that work will be performed in a properly equipped laboratory under appropriate quality control practices such as those described in Guide E882.1.1 These test methods cover the chemical analysis of stainless, heat-resisting, maraging, and other similar chromium-nickel-iron alloys having chemical compositions within the following limits:   Element Composition Range, %  Aluminum   0.002 to  5.50  Boron   0.001 to  0.20  Carbon   0.01 to  1.50  Chromium   0.01 to 35.00  Cobalt   0.01 to 15.00  Niobium   0.01 to  4.00  Copper   0.01 to  5.00  Lead   0.001 to  0.50  Manganese   0.01 to 20.00  Molybdenum   0.01 to  7.00  Nickel   0.01 to 48.00  Nitrogen   0.001 to  0.50  Phosphorus   0.002 to  0.35  Selenium   0.01 to  0.50  Silicon   0.01 to  4.00  Sulfur   0.002 to  0.50  Tantalum   0.01 to  0.80  Tin   0.001 to  0.05  Titanium   0.01 to  4.50  Tungsten   0.01 to  4.50  Vanadium   0.005 to  1.00  Zirconium   0.001 to  0.201.2 The test methods in this standard are contained in the sections indicated below:  SectionsAluminum, Total, by the 8-Quinolinol Gravimetric Method (0.20 % to 7.00 %) 119–126Aluminum, Total, by the 8-Quinolinol Spectrophotometric Method (0.003 % to 0.20 %) 71–81Carbon, Total, by the Combustion–Thermal Conductivity Method–Discontinued 1986 153–163Carbon, Total, by the Combustion Gravimetric Method (0.05 % to 1.50 %)–Discontinued 2013 98–108Chromium by the Atomic Absorption Spectrometry Method (0.006 % to 1.00 %) 202–211Chromium by the Peroxydisulfate Oxidation–Titration Method (0.10 % to 35.00 %) 212–220Chromium by the Peroxydisulfate-Oxidation Titrimetric Method-Discontinued 1980 145–152Cobalt by the Ion-Exchange–Potentiometric Titration Method (2 % to 15 %) 53–60Cobalt by the Nitroso-R-Salt Spectrophotometric Method (0.01 % to 5.0 %) 61–70Copper by the Neocuproine Spectrophotometric Method (0.01 % to 5.00) %) 109–118Copper by the Sulfide Precipitation-Electrodeposition Gravimetric Method (0.01 % to 5.00 %) 82–89Lead by the Ion-Exchange-Atomic Absorption Spectrometry Method (0.001 % to 0.50 %) 127–136Manganese by the Periodate Spectrophotometric Method (0.01 % to 5.00 %) 9–18Molybdenum by the Ion Exchange–8-Hydroxyquinoline Gravimetric Method 242–249Molybdenum by the Thiocyanate Spectrophotometric Method (0.01 % to 1.50 %) 190–201Nickel by the Dimethylglyoxime Gravimetric Method (0.1 % to 48.0 %) 172–179Phosphorus by the Alkalimetric Method (0.02 % to 0.35 %) 164–171Phosphorus by the Molybdenum Blue Spectrophotometric Method (0.002 % to 0.35 %) 19–30Silicon by the Gravimetric Method (0.05 % to 4.00 %) 46–52Sulfur by the Gravimetric Method-Discontinued 1988 30–36Sulfur by the Combustion-Iodate Titration Method (0.005 % to 0.5 %)-Discontinued 2014 37–45Sulfur by the Chromatographic Gravimetric Method-Discontinued 1980 137–144Tin by the Solvent Extraction–Atomic Absorption Spectrometry Method (0.002 % to 0.10 %) 180–189Tin by the Sulfide Precipitation-Iodometric Titration Method (0.01 % to 0.05 %) 90–97Titanium by the Diantipyrylmethane Spectrophotometric Method (0.01 % to 0.35 %) 231–241Vanadium by the Atomic Absorption Spectrometry Method (0.006 % to 0.15 %) 221–2301.3 Test methods for the determination of carbon and sulfur not included in this standard can be found in Test Methods E1019.1.4 Some of the composition ranges given in 1.1 are too broad to be covered by a single test method and therefore this standard contains multiple test methods for some elements. The user must select the proper test method by matching the information given in the and Interference sections of each method with the composition of the alloy to be analyzed.1.5 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as 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 hazards statements are given in Section 6 and in special “Warning” paragraphs throughout these test methods.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： 918元 / 折扣价： 781 元 加购物车

4.1 These test methods for the chemical analysis of metals and alloys are primarily intended as referee methods to test such materials for compliance with compositional specifications, particularly those under the jurisdiction of the ASTM Committee A01 on Steel, Stainless Steel and Related Alloys. It is assumed that all who use these test methods will be trained analysts capable of performing common laboratory procedures skillfully and safely. It is expected that work will be performed in a properly equipped laboratory under appropriate quality control practices such as those described in Guide E882.1.1 These test methods cover the chemical analysis of high-temperature, electrical, magnetic, and other similar iron, nickel, and cobalt alloys having chemical compositions within the following limits:    Element Composition Range, %               Aluminum 0.005 to 18.00    Beryllium 0.001 to  0.05    Boron 0.001 to  1.00    Calcium 0.002 to   0.05    Carbon 0.001 to  1.10    Chromium 0.10  to 33.00    Cobalt 0.10  to 75.00    Columbium (Niobium) 0.01  to  6.0    Copper 0.01  to 10.00    Iron 0.01  to 85.00    Magnesium 0.001 to  0.05    Manganese 0.01  to  3.0    Molybdenum 0.01  to 30.0    Nickel 0.10  to 84.0    Nitrogen 0.001 to  0.20    Phosphorus 0.002 to  0.08    Silicon 0.01  to  5.00    Sulfur 0.002 to  0.10    Tantalum 0.005 to 10.0    Titanium 0.01  to  5.00    Tungsten 0.01  to 18.00    Vanadium 0.01  to  3.25    Zirconium 0.01  to  2.50  1.2 The test methods in this standard are contained in the sections indicated below:  Sections   Aluminum, Total, by the 8-Quinolinol Gravimetric Method (0.20 %   to 7.00 %) 100 – 107Carbon, Total, by the Combustion-Thermal Conductivity Method—Discontinued 1986 124 – 134Carbon, Total, by the Combustion Gravimetric Method (0.05 % to 1.10 %)—Discontinued 2014 79 – 89Chromium by the Atomic Absorption Spectrometry Method   (0.006 % to 1.00 %) 165 – 174Chromium by the Peroxydisulfate Oxidation—Titration Method (0.10 % to 33.00 %)  175 – 183Chromium by the Peroxydisulfate-Oxidation Titrimetric Method—   Discontinued 1980 116 – 123Cobalt by the Ion-Exchange-Potentiometric Titration Method (2 %   to 75 %)  53 – 60Cobalt by the Nitroso-R-Salt Spectrophotometric Method (0.10 %    to 5.0 %)  61 – 70Copper by Neocuproine Spectrophotometric Method (0.01 % to   10.00 %)  90 – 99Copper by the Sulfide Precipitation-Electrodeposition Gravimetric Method (0.01 % to 10.00 %)  71 – 78Iron by the Silver Reduction Titrimetric Method (1.0 % to 50.0 %) 192 –199Manganese by the Metaperiodate Spectrophotometric Method   (0.05 % to 2.00 %)  9 – 18Molybdenum by the Ion Exchange—8-Hydroxyquinoline Gravi- metric Method (1.5 % to 30 %) 184 – 191Molybdenum by the Thiocyanate Spectrophotometric Method   (0.01 % to 1.50 %) 153 – 164Nickel by the Dimethylglyoxime Gravimetric Method (0.1 % to 84.0 %) 135 – 142Phosphorus by the Molybdenum Blue Spectrophotometric Method   (0.002 % to 0.08 %) 19  – 30Silicon by the Gravimetric Method (0.05 % to 5.00 %) 46  – 52Sulfur by the Gravimetric Method—Discontinued   1988 Former 30  – 36Sulfur by the Combustion-Iodate Titration Method (0.005 % to 0.1 %)—Discontinued 2014 37  – 45Sulfur by the Chromatographic Gravimetric Method—Discontinued   1980 108 – 115Tin by the Solvent Extraction–Atomic Absorption Spectrometry   Method (0.002 % to 0.10 %) 143  – 1521.3 Methods for the determination of carbon and sulfur not included in this standard can be found in Test Methods E1019.1.4 Some of the composition ranges given in 1.1 are too broad to be covered by a single method and therefore this standard contains multiple methods for some elements. The user must select the proper method by matching the information given in the and Interference sections of each method with the composition of the alloy to be analyzed.1.5 Units—The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as 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 hazards statements are given in Section 6 and in special “Warning” paragraphs throughout these test methods.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

4.1 This guide covers procedures for crevice-corrosion testing of iron-base and nickel-base stainless alloys in seawater. The guidance provided may also be applicable to crevice corrosion testing in other chloride containing natural waters and various laboratory prepared aqueous chloride environments.4.1.1 While this guide focuses on testing of iron-base and nickel-base stainless alloys, the procedures and evaluations methods described herein have been successfully applied to characterize the crevice corrosion performance of other alloy systems (see, for example, Aylor et al.3).NOTE 1: In the case of copper alloys, the occurrence of crevice-related corrosion associated with different corrosion mechanisms takes place immediately adjacent to the crevice former rather than within the occlusion.4.2 This guide describes the use of a variety of crevice formers including the nonmetallic, segmented washer design referred to as the multiple crevice assembly (MCA) as described in 9.2.2.4.3 In-service performance data provide the most reliable determination of whether a material would be satisfactory for a particular end use. Translation of laboratory data from a single test program to predict service performance under a variety of conditions should be avoided. Terms, such as immunity, superior resistance, etc., provide only a general and relatively qualitative description of an alloy's corrosion performance. The limitations of such terms in describing resistance to crevice corrosion should be recognized.4.4 While the guidance provided is generally for the purpose of evaluating sheet and plate materials, it is also applicable for crevice-corrosion testing of other product forms, such as tubing and bars.4.5 The presence or absence of crevice corrosion under one set of conditions is no guarantee that it will or will not occur under other conditions. Because of the many interrelated metallurgical, environmental, and geometric factors known to affect crevice corrosion, results from any given test may or may not be indicative of actual performance in service applications where the conditions may be different from those of the test.1.1 This guide covers information for conducting crevice-corrosion tests and identifies factors that may affect results and influence conclusions.1.2 These procedures can be used to identify conditions most likely to result in crevice corrosion and provide a basis for assessing the relative resistance of various alloys to crevice corrosion under certain specified conditions.1.3 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard. The values given in parentheses after SI units are provided for information only and are not considered standard.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 a specific warning statement, see 7.1.1.5 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