Lost persons are at risk of injury or death from extended periods of isolation, either mental, physical, or both. Their inability to solve immediate problems requires that search and rescue (SAR) personnel use the most efficient and effective techniques to resolve the lost person's situation and to minimize the risks of injury or death. Searching for immobile or unresponsive subjects, including those deceased, places further limitations upon the search options that are available to search managers. Where appropriate, the guide identifies these limitations. The use of the listed techniques improves the probability of locating a lost or missing person when applied to land search incidents. These techniques may be employed at the discretion of and under the direction and control of a land search manager. Terms used in this guide are not intended to be comprehensive, nor are they presumed to be inclusive of all terminology used in the search function.1.1 This guide identifies and describes techniques that may be used by individuals or agencies when searching for persons, property, or evidence on land. The application of one or more of these techniques to any particular land search will depend upon the individual circumstances of the search and the judgment of the person responsible for conducting the search. 1.2 This guide assists individuals and agencies by providing a list of techniques for their consideration during a land search and by providing a brief description of the application of the technique to land search. Some advantages and disadvantages, as well as the most common uses of the techniques, are discussed in the guide. The guide does not, however, purport to discuss all aspects of conducting a land search. 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

AbstractThese test methods cover determination of the total normal emittance of surfaces by means of portable, inspection-meter instruments. At least two different types of instruments are commercially available for performing this measurement. Test Method A uses an instrument which measures radiant energy reflected from the specimen and Test Method B utilizes an instrument which measures radiant energy emitted from the specimen. Both test methods are limited in accuracy by the degree to which the emittance properties of calibrating standards are known and by the angular emittance characteristics of the surfaces being measure. Test Method A is normally subject to a small error caused by the difference in wavelength distributions between the radiant energy emitted by the two cavities at different temperatures, and that emitted by a blackbody at the specimen temperature. Test Method B also has nongray errors since the detector is not at absolute zero temperature. Test Method A is subject to small errors that may be introduced if the orientation of the sensing component is changed between calibration and specimen measurements. This type of error results from minor changes in alignment of the optical system. Test Method A is subject to error when curved specular surfaces of less than about a certain radius are measured. These errors can be minimized by using calibrating standards that have the same radius of curvature as the test surface. Test Method A can measure reflectance on specimens that are either opaque or semi-transparent in the wavelength region of interest. However, if emittance is to be derived from the reflectance data on a semi-transparent specimen, a correction must be made for transmittance losses. Test Method B is subject to several possible significant errors. These may be due to variation of the test surface temperature during measurements, differences in temperature between the calibrating standards and the test surfaces, changes in orientation of the sensing component between calibration and measurement, errors due to irradiation of the specimen with thermal radiation by the sensing component, and errors due to specimen curvature. Test Method B is limited to emittance measurements on specimens that are opaque to infrared radiation in the wavelength region of interest. 1.1 These test methods cover determination of the total normal emittance (Note 1) of surfaces by means of portable, as well as desktop, inspection-meter instruments. Note 1: Total normal emittance (εN) is defined as the ratio of the normal radiance of a specimen to that of a blackbody radiator at the same temperature. The equation relating εN to wavelength and spectral normal emittance [εN(λ)] is where: L b(λ, T)   =   Planck's blackbody radiation function = c1λ−5(ec2/λT − 1)−1, c1   =   3.7415 × 10−16W·m 2, c2   =   1.4388 × 10−2 m·K, T   =   absolute temperature, K, λ   =   wavelength, m,   =   σT4, and σ   =   Stefan-Boltzmann constant = 5.66961 × 10 −8 W·m−2·K−4 1.2 These test methods are intended for measurements on large surfaces, or small samples, or both, when rapid measurements must be made and where a nondestructive test is desired. They are particularly useful for production control tests. 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

4.1 Once the extent and type of oiling has been defined and documented using proper procedures (see Guides F1686 and F1687), decisions are made on the appropriate course of action for site cleaning and restoration. In some cases, natural recovery (accompanied by monitoring) can be the preferred approach whereas in other cases, active response may be preferred and appropriate. This guide summarizes the principal response techniques available for shoreline, wetland, and terrain habitats.4.2 This guide is intended to minimize the potential for added impact to the environment from use of response techniques in an overly-aggressive manner or in unsuitable conditions or habitats.4.3 In Section 5, typical considerations, which can limit the applicability of a given technique are addressed in Constraints. An example that is applicable to all techniques other than natural recovery, is special permission will likely be needed for any response operations at sites with known culturally or historically important resources. Also, in Section 5, a synopsis of main trade-offs from use of a particular technique is provided in Environmental Effects.1.1 This guide describes methods to clean and remediate stranded oil on marine and lake shorelines, on river banks and other inland water body shorelines, and terrestrial habitats. The primary goal of any countermeasure is to aid recovery while minimizing additional impact.1.2 This guide describes 22 different tactics that are available for consideration. These options range from natural recovery to active physical or biochemical intervention.1.3 The tactics listed might not be appropriate under all possible circumstances, and multiple countermeasures could be appropriate on the same shoreline, river bank, lake shore or terrestrial habitat.1.4 This guide describes technical considerations for selecting appropriate response countermeasures or techniques.1.5 Selection of specific countermeasures for use during a spill response is guided by properties of the oil, degree of oiling, site accessibility, geomorphology, substrate and vegetation type, mobility of available equipment, hydrologic (coastal and inland) and meteorological conditions, and the presence of sensitive natural and archeological resources. It is advisable to consult with appropriate regulatory authorities since certain response options may require government authorization or approval, or both.1.6 This guide does not address response to submerged, sunken or buried oil.1.7 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.1.8 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

4.1 Geomembranes are used as barriers to prevent liquids from leaking from landfills, ponds, and other containments. For this purpose, it is desirable that the geomembrane have as little leakage as practical.4.2 The liquids may contain contaminants that, if released, can cause damage to the environment. Leaking liquids can erode the subgrade, causing further damage. Leakage can result in product loss or otherwise prevent the installation from performing its intended containment purpose.4.3 Geomembranes are often assembled in the field, either by unrolling and welding panels of the geomembrane material together in the field, unfolding flexible geomembranes in the field, or a combination of both.4.4 Geomembrane leaks can be caused by poor quality of the subgrade, poor quality of the material placed on the geomembrane, accidents, poor workmanship, manufacturing defects, and carelessness.4.5 Experience demonstrates that geomembranes can have leaks caused during their installation and placement of material(s) on the geomembrane.4.6 Electrical leak location methods are an effective and proven quality assurance measure to locate leaks. Such methods have been used successfully to locate leaks in electrically insulating geomembranes such as polyethylene, polypropylene, polyvinyl chloride, chlorosulfonated polyethylene, and bituminous geomembranes installed in basins, ponds, tanks, ore and waste pads, and landfill cells.4.7 The principle behind these techniques is to place a voltage across a sufficiently electrically insulating geomembrane and then locate areas where electrical current flows through leaks in the geomembrane (as shown schematically in Fig. 1). Other electrical leak paths such as pipe penetrations, flange bolts, steel drains, and batten strips on concrete and other extraneous electrical paths should be electrically isolated or insulated to prevent masking of leak signals caused by electrical short-circuiting through those preferential electrical paths. The only electrical paths should be through leaks in the geomembrane. These electrical detection methods for locating leaks in geomembranes can be performed on exposed geomembranes, on geomembranes covered with water, or on geomembranes covered with an earthen material layer.FIG. 1 Schematic of the Electrical Leak Location Method (Earthen Material-Covered Geomembrane System is Shown)1.1 This guide is intended to assist individuals or groups in assessing different options available for locating leaks in installed geomembranes using electrical methods. For clarity, this guide uses the term “leak” to mean holes, punctures, tears, knife cuts, seam defects, cracks, and similar breaches in an installed geomembrane (as defined in 3.2.6).1.2 This guide does not cover systems that are restricted to seam testing only, nor does it cover systems that may detect leaks non-electrically. It does not cover systems that only detect the presence, but not the location, of leaks.1.3 (Warning—The electrical methods used for geomembrane leak location could use high voltages, resulting in the potential for electrical shock or electrocution. This hazard might be increased because operations might be conducted in or near water. In particular, a high voltage could exist between the water or earth material and earth ground, or any grounded conductor. These procedures are potentially very dangerous, and can result in personal injury or death. The electrical methods used for geomembrane leak location should be attempted only by qualified and experienced personnel. Appropriate safety measures must be taken to protect the leak location operators as well as other people at the site.)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： 646元 / 折扣价： 550 元 加购物车

4.1 This practice provides one way for a laboratory to develop data-based Type A estimates of uncertainty as referred to in Section A22 in Form and Style for ASTM Standards.4.2 Laboratories accredited under ISO/IEC 17025 are required to present uncertainty estimates for their test results. This practice provides procedures that use test results to develop uncertainty estimates for an individual laboratory.4.3 Generally, these test results will be from a single sample of stable and homogeneous material known as a control or check sample.4.4 The true value of the characteristic(s) of the control sample being measured will ordinarily be unknown. However, this methodology may also be used if the control sample is a reference material, in which case the test method bias may also be estimated and incorporated into the uncertainty estimate. Many test methods do not have true reference materials available to provide traceable chains of uncertainty estimation.4.5 This practice also allows for ongoing monitoring of the laboratory uncertainty. As estimates of the level of uncertainty change, possibly as contributions to uncertainty are identified and minimized, revision to the laboratory uncertainty will be possible.AbstractThis practice describes techniques for a laboratory to estimate the uncertainty of a test result using data from test results on a control sample. This practice provides one method for a laboratory to estimate Measurement Uncertainty in accordance with Section A22.3 in Form and Style for ASTM Standards. This practice describes the use of control charts to evaluate the data obtained and presents a special type of control chart to monitor the estimate of uncertainty.This practice provides one way for a laboratory to develop data-based Type A estimates of uncertainty as referred to in Section A22 in Form and Style for ASTM Standards.1.1 This practice describes techniques for a laboratory to estimate the uncertainty of a test result using data from test results on a control sample. This practice provides one method for a laboratory to estimate Measurement Uncertainty in accordance with Section A22.3 in Form and Style for ASTM Standards.1.2 Uncertainty as defined by this practice applies to the capabilities of a single laboratory. Any estimate of uncertainty determined through the use of this practice applies only to the individual laboratory for which the data are presented.1.3 The laboratory uses a well defined and established test method in determining a series of test results. The uncertainty estimated using this practice only applies when the same test method is followed. The uncertainty only applies for the material types represented by the control samples, and multiple control samples may be needed, especially if the method has different precision for different sample types or response levels.1.4 The uncertainty estimate determined by this practice represents the intermediate precision of test results. This estimate seeks to quantify the total variation expected within a single laboratory using a single established test method while incorporating as many known sources of variation as possible.1.5 This practice does not establish error estimates (error budget) attributed to individual factors that could influence uncertainty.1.6 This practice describes the use of control charts to evaluate the data obtained and presents a special type of control chart to monitor the estimate of uncertainty.1.7 The system of units for this standard is not specified. Dimensional quantities in the standard are presented only as illustrations of calculation methods. The examples are not binding on products or test methods treated.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 Petrographic examinations are made for the following purposes:5.1.1 To determine the mineralogy of the material that may be observed by petrographic methods (in this method, by use of XRD) and that may have a bearing on the performance of the material in its intended use.5.1.2 To determine the relative amounts of the constituents of the sample which is essential for proper evaluation of the sample when the constituents may differ significantly in properties that have a bearing on the performance of the material in its intended use.5.1.3 This method helps to evaluate mineral aggregate sources for suitability as a material to be used for construction, renovation, or modification of equine surfaces. The information gathered will allow for the comparison of the composition of new mineral sources with samples of other mineral aggregate from one or more sources, for which test data or performance records are available.5.2 This method may be used by a petrographer employed directly by those for whom the examination is made. The employer should tell the petrographer, in as much detail as necessary, the purposes and objectives of the examination, the kind of information needed, and the extent of examination desired. Pertinent background information, including results of prior testing, should be made available. The petrographer’s advice and judgment should be sought regarding the extent of the examination.5.3 This method may form the basis for establishing arrangements between a purchaser of consulting petrographic service and the petrographer. In such a case, the purchaser and the consultant should together determine the kind, extent, and objectives of the examination and analyses to be made and should record their agreement in writing. The agreement may stipulate specific determinations to be made, observations to be reported, funds to be obligated, or a combination of these or other conditions.1.1 X-Ray diffraction (XRD) is a tool for identifying minerals, such as quartz and feldspar, and types of clay present in bulk samples of equine surfaces. Determining the mineralogy of a given bulk sample provides insight into surface properties, such as abrasion resistance by comparing the relative differences of hardness of the various mineral fractions such as quartz or feldspar or the plasticity differences in clay minerals such as smectite or kaolinite. XRD techniques are qualitative in nature and only semi-quantitative.1.2 Particle size distribution analyses methods including hydrometer tests to determine proportions of sand, silt, and clay fractions based upon particle size but are not able to distinguish particles by shape or mineralogy of materials. In addition to a qualitative detection of minerals present in a sample, XRD methods are also semi-quantitative and also yield important data on the relative proportion of particular minerals present.1.3 XRD techniques are generally semi-quantitative in nature. Even so, such semiquantitative data is useful in determining relative proportions of each mineral type. This method is also semi-qualitative in nature as it is geared for the determination or mineral groups. For example, it will determine the relative amount of alkali feldspars (such as K-feldspar or Nafeldspar) from Plagioclase-feldspar but not necessarily if the Plagioclase-feldspar is albite or anorthite nor whether the K-feldspar is orthoclase of microcline. Likewise, it will differentiate smectite from mica from kaolinite but not whether the smectite is montmorillonite or saponite. More precise determination of mineral species by XRD is possible but involves more advanced preparation and treatment methods than what is within the scope of this standard.1.4 The XRD method herein primarily makes use of “Glass Slide Method” but may be subject to modification depending on the user’s needs.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

6.1 This test method provides standard procedures for experimentally determining the XEC for use in the measurement of residual and applied stresses using x-ray diffraction techniques. It also provides a standard means of reporting the precision of the XEC.6.2 This test method is applicable to any crystalline material that exhibits a linear relationship between stress and strain in the elastic range, that is, only applicable to elastic loading.6.3 This test method should be used whenever residual stresses are to be evaluated by x-ray diffraction techniques and the XEC of the material are unknown.1.1 This test method covers a procedure for experimentally determining the x-ray elastic constants (XEC) for the evaluation of residual and applied stresses by x-ray diffraction techniques. The XEC relate macroscopic stress to the strain measured in a particular crystallographic direction in polycrystalline samples. The XEC are a function of the elastic modulus, Poisson’s ratio of the material and the hkl plane selected for the measurement. There are two XEC that are referred to as 1/2 S2hkl and S1 hkl.1.2 This test method is applicable to all x-ray diffraction instruments intended for measurements of macroscopic residual stress that use measurements of the positions of the diffraction peaks in the high back-reflection region to determine changes in lattice spacing.1.3 This test method is applicable to all x-ray diffraction techniques for residual stress measurement, including single, double, and multiple exposure techniques.1.4 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.1.5 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 This test method is intended to be used for compliance with compositional specifications for manganese content in iron ores, concentrates, and agglomerates. It is assumed that all who use these procedures 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 and that proper waste disposal procedures will be followed. Appropriate quality control practices must be followed such as those described in Guide E882.1.1 These test methods cover the determination of manganese in iron ores, concentrates, and agglomerates. The following two test methods are included:  Sections Test Method A (Pyrophosphate (Potentiometric))  8 – 15 Test Method B (Periodate (Spectrophotometric)) 16 – 221.2 Test Method A covers the determination of manganese in the range from 2.5 % to 15.0 %. Test Method  B covers the determination of manganese in the range of 0.01 % to 5.00 %.NOTE 1: The lower limit for this test method is set at 50 % relative error for the lowest grade material tested in the interlaboratory study in accordance with Practice E1601.1.3 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 and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.

定价： 590元 / 折扣价： 502 元 加购物车

4.1 When this test method is used to measure the threshold impact sensitivity of a material, a relative sensitivity assessment is obtained which permits the ranking of materials.4.2 This test method may also be used for acceptance-testing materials for use in liquid oxygen systems. Twenty separate samples of the material submerged in liquid oxygen are subjected to 98 J (72 ft·lbf) or as specified. Impact energy delivered through a 12.7-mm (1/2-in.) diameter contact. More than one indication of sensitivity is cause for immediate rejection. A single explosion, flash, or other indication of sensitivity during the initial series of 20 tests requires that an additional 40 samples be tested without incident to ensure acceptability of the material.4.3 The threshold values are determined by this test method at ambient pressure. The sensitivity of materials to mechanical impact is known to increase with increasing pressure. Since most liquid oxygen systems operate at pressures above ambient condition, some consideration should be given to increased sensitivity and reactivity of materials at higher pressure when selecting materials for use in pressurized system.1.1 This method2,3,4 covers the determination of compatibility and relative sensitivity of materials with liquid oxygen under impact energy using the Army Ballistic Missile Agency (ABMA)-type impact tester. Materials that are impact-sensitive with liquid oxygen are generally also sensitive to reaction by other forms of energy in the presence of oxygen.1.2 This standard should be used to measure and describe the properties of materials, products, or assemblies in response to heat and flame under controlled laboratory conditions and should not be used to describe or appraise the fire hazard or fire risk of materials, products, or assemblies under actual fire conditions. However, results of this test may be used as elements of a fire risk assessment which takes into account all of the factors which are pertinent to an assessment of the fire hazard of a particular end use.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.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： 0元 / 折扣价： 0 元

5.1 Transmutation Processes—The effect on materials of bombardment by neutrons depends on the energy of the neutrons; therefore, it is important that the energy distribution of the neutron fluence, as well as the total fluence, be determined.1.1 This practice describes procedures for the determination of neutron fluence rate, fluence, and energy spectra from the radioactivity that is induced in a detector specimen.1.2 The practice is directed toward the determination of these quantities in connection with radiation effects on materials.1.3 For application of these techniques to reactor vessel surveillance, see also Test Methods E1005.1.4 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.NOTE 1: Detailed methods for individual detectors are given in the following ASTM test methods: E262, E263, E264, E265, E266, E343, E393, E481, E523, E526, E704, E705, and E854.1.5 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

定价： 646元 / 折扣价： 550 元 加购物车

5.1 This practice provides a protocol to compare different decontamination technologies with a standard contamination mechanism and analysis of subsequent decontamination factors/efficiencies.5.2 The use of this practice provides for the preparation of test coupons with a known amount of fixed radiological or surrogate contaminant on the surface.5.3 A standard test coupon is described and a list of potential spray equipment, contaminants, and contaminating solutions is provided within the procedure.5.4 This method describes a contamination simulation process that meets the requirements of testing performed (previously) by the U.S. Department of Energy and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.1.1 This practice is intended to provide a basis for simulating radioactive contamination consistent with processes used to evaluate decontamination. The methods described provide a “fixed-type” radiological or surrogate contamination on porous surfaces; these methods provide a surface contamination that is not easily removed by brushing or flushing with water.1.2 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.1.3 This practice is intended to be practiced primarily on porous surfaces such as concrete, marble, granite, grout, brick, tile, asphalt, vinyl floor tile, latex painted gypsum wall board and polyurethane coated wood. Preparation of non-porous substrates is not addressed, although similar methodology may be used.1.4 The chemical simulants shall not include nor generate toxic by-products as defined by U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) during preparation, application, or removal under normal conditions. A Safety Data Sheet shall be provided so that appropriate PPE can be selected.1.5 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.1.6 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

定价： 590元 / 折扣价： 502 元 加购物车

5.1 Most analytical methods used in air pollutant measurements are comparative in nature and require calibration or standardization, or both, often with known blends of the gas of interest. Since many of the important air pollutants are reactive and unstable, it is difficult to store them as standard mixtures of known concentration for extended calibration purposes. An alternative is to prepare dynamically standard blends as required. This procedure is simplified if a constant source of the gas of interest can be provided. Permeation tubes provide this constant source, if properly calibrated and if maintained at constant temperature. Permeation tubes have been specified as reference calibration sources, for certain analytical procedures, by the Environmental Protection Agency (3).1.1 This practice describes a means for using permeation tubes for dynamically calibrating instruments, analyzers, and analytical procedures used in measuring concentrations of gases or vapors in atmospheres (1, 2).21.2 Typical materials that may be sealed in permeation tubes include: sulfur dioxide, nitrogen dioxide, hydrogen sulfide, chlorine, ammonia, propane, and butane (1).1.3 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard.1.4 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.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

4.1 This test method can be extended to use any material that has the necessary nuclear and activation properties that suit the experimenter's particular situation. No attempt has been made to fully describe the myriad problems of counting techniques, neutron-fluence depression, and thick-foil self-shielding. It is assumed that the experimenter will refer to existing literature on these subjects. This test method does offer a referee technique (the standard gold foil) to aid the experimenter when they are in doubt of their ability to perform the radiometric technique with sufficient accuracy.4.2 The standard comparison technique uses a set of foils that are as nearly identical as possible in shape and mass. The foils are fabricated from any material that activates by an (n, γ) reaction, preferably having a cross section approximately inversely proportional to neutron speed in the thermal energy range. Some of the foils are irradiated in a known neutron field (at NIST) or other standards laboratory). The foils are counted in a fixed geometry on a stable radiation-detecting instrument. The neutron-induced reaction rate of the foils is computed from the counting data, and the ratio of the known neutron fluence rate to the computed reaction rate is determined. For any given foil, neutron energy spectrum, and counting set-up, this ratio is a constant. Other foils from the identical set can now be exposed to an unknown neutron field. The magnitude of the fluence rate in the unknown field can be obtained by comparing the reaction rates as determined from the counting data from the unknown and reference field, with proper corrections to account for spectral differences between the two fields (see Section 5). One important feature of this technique is that it eliminates the need for knowing the detector efficiency.4.3 This test method follows the Stoughton and Halperin convention for reporting thermal neutron fluence. Other conventions are the Wescott convention (followed in Test Method E481) and the Hogdahl convention. Practice E261 explains the three conventions and gives conversion formulae relating values determined by the different conventions. Reference (1)3 discusses the three thermal-neutron conventions in detail.1.1 The purpose of this test method is to define a general procedure for determining an unknown thermal-neutron fluence rate by neutron activation techniques. It is not practicable to describe completely a technique applicable to the large number of experimental situations that require the measurement of a thermal-neutron fluence rate. Therefore, this method is presented so that the user may adapt to their particular situation the fundamental procedures of the following techniques.1.1.1 Radiometric counting technique using pure cobalt, pure gold, pure indium, cobalt-aluminum, alloy, gold-aluminum alloy, or indium-aluminum alloy.1.1.2 Standard comparison technique using pure gold, or gold-aluminum alloy, and1.1.3 Secondary standard comparison techniques using pure indium, indium-aluminum alloy, pure dysprosium, or dysprosium-aluminum alloy.1.2 The techniques presented are limited to measurements at room temperatures. However, special problems when making thermal-neutron fluence rate measurements in high-temperature environments are discussed in 9.2. For those circumstances where the use of cadmium as a thermal shield is undesirable because of potential spectrum perturbations or of temperatures above the melting point of cadmium, the method described in Test Method E481 can be used in some cases. Alternatively, gadolinium filters may be used instead of cadmium. For high temperature applications in which aluminum alloys are unsuitable, other alloys such as cobalt-nickel or cobalt-vanadium have been used.1.3 This test method may be used to determine the equivalent 2200 m/s fluence rate. The accurate determination of the actual thermal neutron fluence rate requires knowledge of the neutron temperature, and determination of the neutron temperature is not within the scope of the standard.1.4 The techniques presented are suitable only for neutron fields having a significant thermal neutron component, in which moderating materials are present, and for which the average scattering cross section is large compared to the average absorption cross section in the thermal neutron energy range.1.5 Table 1 indicates the useful neutron-fluence ranges for each detector material.TABLE 1 Useful Neutron Fluence Ranges of Foil MaterialFoil Material Form ≈ Useful Range (neutrons/cm 2)Indium pure or alloyed with aluminum 103 to 1012Gold pure or alloyed with aluminum 107 to 1014Dysprosium pure or alloyed with aluminum 103 to 1010Cobalt pure or alloyed with aluminum 1014 to 10201.6 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.1.7 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

定价： 646元 / 折扣价： 550 元 加购物车

5.1 This practice may be used to continuously demonstrate the proficiency of analytical measurement systems that are used for establishing and ensuring the quality of petroleum and petroleum products.5.2 Data accrued, using the techniques included in this practice, provide the ability to monitor analytical measurement system precision and bias.5.3 These data are useful for updating test methods as well as for indicating areas of potential measurement system improvement.5.4 Control chart statistics can be used to compute limits that the signed difference (Δ) between two single results for the same sample obtained under site precision conditions is expected to fall outside of about 5 % of the time, when each result is obtained using a different measurement system in the same laboratory executing the same test method, and both systems are in a state of statistical control.1.1 This practice covers information for the design and operation of a program to monitor and control ongoing stability and precision and bias performance of selected analytical measurement systems using a collection of generally accepted statistical quality control (SQC) procedures and tools.NOTE 1: A complete list of criteria for selecting measurement systems to which this practice should be applied and for determining the frequency at which it should be applied is beyond the scope of this practice. However, some factors to be considered include (1) frequency of use of the analytical measurement system, (2) criticality of the parameter being measured, (3) system stability and precision performance based on historical data, (4) business economics, and (5) regulatory, contractual, or test method requirements.1.2 This practice is applicable to stable analytical measurement systems that produce results on a continuous numerical scale.1.3 This practice is applicable to laboratory test methods.1.4 This practice is applicable to validated process stream analyzers.1.5 This practice is applicable to monitoring the differences between two analytical measurement systems that purport to measure the same property provided that both systems have been assessed in accordance with the statistical methodology in Practice D6708 and the appropriate bias applied.NOTE 2: For validation of univariate process stream analyzers, see also Practice D3764.NOTE 3: One or both of the analytical systems in 1.5 may be laboratory test methods or validated process stream analyzers.1.6 This practice assumes that the normal (Gaussian) model is adequate for the description and prediction of measurement system behavior when it is in a state of statistical control.NOTE 4: For non-Gaussian processes, transformations of test results may permit proper application of these tools. Consult a statistician for further guidance and information.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

1.1 This guide establishes the minimum national standard for training the emergency medical technician (basic) to perform patient management techniques for patients of all ages. 1.2 This guide is one of a series which together describe the minimum training standard for the emergency medical technician (basic). 1.3 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety problems, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.

定价： 0元 / 折扣价： 0 元