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

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

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 Both the loop breaking tenacity and the knot breaking tenacity, calculated from the breaking force measured under the conditions specified herein and the linear density of the fiber, are fundamental properties that are used to establish limitations on fiber-processing and upon their end-use applications. Physical properties, such as brittleness, not well defined by tests for breaking force and elongation can be estimated from the ratio of breaking tenacity measured in loop or knot tests, or both, and the normal tenacity as measured by Test Method D3822 provided both methods use the same gauge length and strain rate.5.2 This test method is not recommended for acceptance testing of commercial shipments in the absence of reliable information on between-laboratory precision (see Note 3). 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 of commercial shipments. In such a case, if there is a disagreement arising from differences in values reported by the purchaser and the supplier when using this test method for acceptance testing, the statistical bias, if any, between the laboratory of the purchaser and the laboratory of the supplier should be determined with each comparison being based on testing specimens randomly drawn from one sample of material of the type being evaluated.1.1 These test methods cover the measurement of the breaking tenacity of manufactured textile fibers taken from filament yarns, staple, or tow fiber, either crimped or uncrimped, and tested in either a double loop or as a strand formed into a single overhand knot.1.2 Methods for measuring the breaking tenacity of conditioned and wet (immersed) fibers in loop and knot form are included.1.3 Elongation in loop or knot tests has no known significance, and is usually not recorded.1.4 The basic distinction between the procedures described in these test methods and those included in Test Methods D2101 is the configuration of the specimen, that is, either as a double loop or in the configuration of a single overhand knot.1.5 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.1.6 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： 590元 / 折扣价： 502 元 加购物车

5.1 The measurement of the resistance to abrasion of textile webbing is very complex. The resistance to abrasion is affected by many factors that include the inherent mechanical properties of the fibers; the dimensions of the fibers; the structure of the yarns; the construction of the webbing; the type, kind, and amount of treatment added to the fibers, yarns, or webbing; the nature of the abradant; the variable action of the abradant over the specimen area abraded; the tension on the specimen; the pressure between the specimen and the abradant; and the dimensional changes in the specimen.5.2 The resistance of textile webbing to abrasion as measured by this test method does not include all the factors which account for wear performance or durability in actual use. While the abrasion resistance stated in terms of the number of cycles and durability (defined as the ability to withstand deterioration or wearing out in use, including the effects of abrasion) are frequently related, the relationship varies with different end uses. Different factors may be necessary in any calculation of predicted durability from specific abrasion data.5.3 Laboratory tests may be reliable as an indication of relative end use in cases where the difference in abrasion resistance of various materials is large, but they should not be relied upon where differences in laboratory test findings are small. In general, the results should not be relied upon for prediction of performance during actual wear life for specific end uses unless there are data showing the specific relationship between laboratory abrasion tests and actual wear in the intended end use.5.4 These general observations apply to most webbings that are used in automotive, aerospace, industrial, and military applications.5.5 This test method can be used for acceptance testing of commercial shipments but comparisons should be made with caution because estimates of between-laboratory precision are incomplete.5.6 If there are differences of 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, use samples for such comparative tests that are as homogenous as possible, drawn from the same lot of material as the samples that resulted in disparate results during initial testing, and randomly assigned in equal numbers to each laboratory. The test results from the laboratories involved should be compared using a statistical test for unpaired data, at a probability level chosen prior to the testing series. If bias is found, either its cause must be found and corrected, or future test results must be adjusted in consideration of the known bias.1.1 This test method covers the determination of abrasion resistance of textile webbing using a hex bar abrasion tester.1.1.1 The resistance is expressed as a percentage of retained breaking strength.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 standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.1.4 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

定价： 590元 / 折扣价： 502 元 加购物车

5.1 This test method can be used for acceptance testing of commercial shipments but comparisons should be made with caution because estimates of between-laboratory precision are incomplete.5.1.1 If there are differences of 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, use samples for such comparative tests that are as homogeneous as possible, drawn from the same lot of material as the samples that resulted in disparate results during initial testing, and randomly assigned in equal numbers to each laboratory. The test results from the laboratories involved should be compared using a statistical test for unpaired data, at a probability level chosen prior to the testing series. If 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 Elongation is an indication of the ability of a fiber to absorb energy. The elongation of textile materials must be great enough to withstand strains experienced in processing and end use, and to absorb the energies of applied forces repeatedly.1.1 This test method covers the determination of the breaking strength and elongation of textile webbing, tape and braided materials using a split-drum type specimen clamp.1.2 This test method is limited to materials with a maximum width of 90 mm (3.5 in.) and a maximum breaking strength of no more than 89000 N (20000 lb).1.3 The values stated in either SI units or U.S. Customary units are to be regarded separately as standard. Within the text, the U.S. Customary units are given in parentheses. The values stated in each system are not exact equivalents; therefore, each system shall be used independently of the other.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 Test Method D3822 using test specimens having gauge lengths of 10 mm [0.4 in.] or greater is considered satisfactory for acceptance testing of commercial shipments since the test method has been used extensively in the trade for acceptance testing. Critical differences noted in Tables 1 and 2 were obtained on man-made fibers having a gauge length of 25 mm [1.0 in.] and 250 mm [10 in.]. Natural fibers or fibers having lesser or greater gauge lengths may provide different values and may require comparative testing. (See 5.1.1.)(A) The critical differences were calculated using t = 1.960, which is based on infinite degrees of freedom.(A) The critical differences were calculated using t = 1.960, which is based on infinite degrees of freedom5.1.1 In cases of a dispute arising from differences in reported test results when using Test Method D3822 for acceptance testing of commercial shipments, the purchaser and the supplier should conduct comparative tests to determine if there is a statistical bias between their laboratories. Competent statistical assistance is recommended for the investigation of bias. As a minimum, the 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 results from the two laboratories should be compared using Student's t-test for unpaired data and an acceptable probability level chosen by the two parties before the testing begins. 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 for that material in view of test results with consideration to the known bias.5.2 The breaking tenacity, calculated from the breaking force and the linear density, and the elongation are fundamental properties that are widely used to establish limitations on fiber processing or conversion and on their end-use applications. Initial modulus is a measure of the resistance of the fiber to extension at forces below the yield point. The tangent modulus and tensile stress at specified elongation may be used to differentiate between the probable performance of fibers in processing and end-use performance. The breaking toughness is an indication of the durability of materials produced from the fiber.5.3 It is recognized that computerized results are used extensively in the industry. When comparing results from two laboratories using computerized tensile testers, the algorithms used to derive results must be examined for parity, that is, how the maximum slope and specimen failure or rupture are determined.5.4 The breaking strength of wet fibers tested in air may be different from wet fibers tested while immersed.5.4.1 Tests on wet specimens are usually made only on fibers which show a loss in breaking force when wet or when exposed to high humidity, for example, yarns made from animal fibers and man-made fibers based on regenerated and modified cellulose. Wet tests are made on flax fiber to detect adulteration by failure to show a gain in breaking force.1.1 This test method covers the measurement of tensile properties of natural and man-made single textile fibers of sufficient length to permit mounting test specimens in a tensile testing machine.1.2 This test method is also applicable to continuous (filament) and discontinuous (staple) fibers or filaments taken from yarns or tow. When the fibers to be tested contain crimp, or if the tow or yarns have been subjected to bulking, crimping, or texturing process, the tensile properties are determined after removal of the crimp.NOTE 1: Testing of filaments taken from yarns or tow, included in this test method was originally covered in Test Method D2101, that is discontinued.1.3 The words “fiber” and “filament” are used interchangeably throughout this test method.1.4 This test method is also applicable to fibers removed from yarns, or from yarns processed further into fabrics. It should be recognized that yarn and manufacturing processes can influence or modify the tensile properties of fibers. Consequently, tensile properties determined on fibers taken from yarns, or from yarns that have been processed into fabrics, may be different than for the same fibers prior to being subjected to yarn or fabric manufacturing processes.1.5 This test method provides directions for measuring the breaking force and elongation at break of single textile fibers and for calculating breaking tenacity, initial modulus, chord modulus, tangent modulus, tensile stress at specified elongation, and breaking toughness.1.6 Procedures for measuring the tensile properties of both conditioned and wet single fibers are included. The test method is applicable to testing under a wide range of conditions.1.7 As the length of the test specimen decreases, the tensile strength is likely to increase, but the accuracy of the tensile properties determined may decrease, which may require the need to increase the number of test specimens. This is particularly true for those properties dependent on the measurement of elongation, since the shorter lengths increase the relative effect of slippage and stretching of the test specimens within the jaws of either clamp.1.8 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.1.9 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.1.10 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

定价： 646元 / 折扣价： 550 元 加购物车

This method provides for the determination of the steady state thermal resistance of a fabric or layers of fabrics and for the determination of the temperature regulating factor (TRF) as defined below. This test method is considered satisfactory for acceptance testing of commercial shipments because the round robin testing shows high precision and no bias for testing of textile fabrics and foams.5.1.1 If there are differences of practical significance between reported test results for two laboratories (or more), comparative test should be performed to determine if there is a statistical bias between them, using competent statistical assistance. As a minimum, use the samples for such a comparative test that are as homogeneous as possible, drawn from the same lot of material as the samples that resulted in disparate results during initial testing and randomly assigned in equal numbers to each laboratory. The test results from the laboratories involved should be compared using a statistical test for unpaired data, a probability level chosen prior to the testing series. If 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.This test method is useful in quality and cost control during manufacture. It can be used to establish criteria for establishing thermal and comfort parameters for textiles particularly used in the clothing industry.1.1 This test method covers the determination of the overall thermal transmission coefficient due to conduction for dry specimens of textile fabrics, battings, and other materials and the determination of the temperature regulating factor (TRF) defined below.1.2 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.

定价： 0元 / 折扣价： 0 元

5.1 This test method provides a procedure for identification of those finished textile floor covering materials that can be rated as flame-resistant under specific controlled laboratory conditions.5.2 This test method does not specify the use of an underlay material. If an underlay material is used to assess the effect of a specific underlay in combination with a specific floor covering, such a variation in procedure must be noted in the report.5.3 In this test, results are observed with the specimens in a horizontal plane. Different results are possible if the same material is tested or used in any other plane.5.4 Test Method D2859 for testing finished textile floor covering materials for flammability is considered satisfactory for acceptance testing of commercial shipments since the method has been used extensively in the trade for acceptance testing. In cases of disagreement arising from differences in values reported by the purchaser and the seller when using this method for acceptance testing, the statistical bias, if any, between the laboratory of the purchaser and the laboratory of the seller shall be determined with each comparison being based on testing specimens randomly drawn from one sample of material of the type being evaluated.5.5 The test procedures of this standard are similar but not identical to those contained in the standards for the surface flammability of carpets and rugs of the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission4 (see also 1.1). The acceptance criterion of these CPSC standards requires that at least seven out of eight individual specimens of a given carpet or rug have passed the test, that is, that the charred portion of a tested specimen shall not extend to within 25.4 mm (1.0 in.) of the edge of the hole in the flattening frame at any point.5.6 The acceptance criterion of this test method is consistent with that of CPSC standards (see Section 10).1.1 This fire-test-response standard describes a test method for the determination of the flammability of finished textile floor covering materials when exposed to an ignition source under controlled laboratory conditions.1.1.1 Carpets and rugs offered for sale in the United States are required by the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) to comply with the test methods in 16 CFR 1630 or 16 CFR 1631, as appropriate.1.1.2 This test method is similar but not identical to the test methods contained in 16 CFR 1630 and CFR 1631 and issued by CPSC. If compliance with one of the CPSC test methods is required, this test method does not ensure regulatory compliance.1.2 This test method is applicable to all types of textile floor coverings, regardless of the method of fabrication or whether they are made from natural or man-made fibers. It is possible to apply this test method to unfinished material; however, the results of such a test shall not be considered a satisfactory evaluation of a textile floor covering material for ultimate consumer use.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 is used to measure and describe the response of materials, products, or assemblies to heat and flame under controlled conditions, but does not by itself incorporate all factors required for fire hazard or fire risk assessment of the materials, products, or assemblies under actual fire conditions.1.5 Fire testing of products and materials is inherently hazardous, and adequate safeguards for personnel and property shall be employed in conducting these tests1.6 The text of this standard 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.1.7 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.1.8 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

定价： 515元 / 折扣价： 438 元 加购物车

5.1 Limited accuracy in measuring the change in length produces errors in estimating values for shrinkage below 10 %. However, this test is being used for low level shrinkage fibers because the results give have been found to give an adequate indication of average shrinkage at the lower levels. The test is not adequate for determining variability in average shrinkage at low levels. If there are differences of 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, use the samples for such a comparative tests that are as homogeneous as possible, drawn from the same lot of material as the samples that resulted in disparate results during initial testing and randomly assigned in equal numbers to each laboratory. The test results from the laboratories involved should be compared using a statistical test for unpaired data, 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 This test method for testing the shrinkage of fibers is not recommended for acceptance testing of commercial shipments of fibers because only a limited amount of data is available. See Section 14.5.3 This test method may be used for acceptance testing of commercial shipments of fibers; but caution is advised since information on between laboratory precision is incomplete. Comparative tests as directed in 5.1 are advised.1.1 This test method covers the measurement of the unrestrained shrinkage of a bundle of crimped or uncrimped fibers from exposure to some environment, for instance, boiling water for 15 min.1.1.1 This test method may be used on fibers from tow and fibers removed from spun or continuous filament yarn.NOTE 1: For measurement of shrinkage of single fibers, refer to Test Method D5104.1.2 The values stated in either inch-pound or SI units are to be regarded separately as the standard. The values stated in each system are not exact equivalents, therefore, each system must be used independently of the other.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 Acceptance Testing—this test method is not considered satisfactory for acceptance testing of commercial shipments of fabric. The between-laboratory precision of this test method is poor and, because of the nature of abrasion testing itself, technicians frequently fail to obtain results in agreement on the same type of testing instrument, both within and between laboratories. Although this test method is not recommended for acceptance testing, it is useful because it is used widely, especially outside the United States.5.1.1 In case of a dispute arising from differences in reported test results when using this test method for acceptance testing of commercial shipments, the purchaser and the supplier should conduct comparative tests to determine if there is a statistical bias between their laboratories. Competent statistical assistance is recommended for the investigation of bias. As a minimum, the two parties should take a group of test specimens that are as homogeneous as possible and that are from a lot of material of the type in question. The test specimens then should be assigned randomly in equal numbers to each laboratory for testing. The average results from the two laboratories should be compared using Students t-test for unpaired data and an acceptable probability level chosen by the two parties before the testing is begun. 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 in light of the known bias.5.2 The resistance to abrasion also is affected greatly by the conditions of the tests, such as the nature of abradant; variable action of the abradant over the area of specimen abraded, the tension on the specimen, the pressure between the specimen and abradant, and the dimensional changes in the specimen.5.3 Abrasion tests are all subject to variation due to changes in the abradant during specific tests. The abradant must be changed accordingly at frequent intervals or checked periodically against a standard. With disposable abradants, the abradant is used only once or changed after limited use. With permanent abradants that use hardened metal or equivalent surfaces, it is assumed that the abradant will not change appreciably in a specific series of tests, but obviously similar abradants used in different laboratories will not likely change at the same rate due to differences in usage. Permanent abradants also may change due to pick up of finishing or other material from test fabrics and must accordingly be cleaned at frequent intervals. The measurement of the relative amount of abrasion also may be affected by the method of evaluation and may be influenced by the judgment of the operator.5.4 The resistance of textile materials to abrasion as measured on a testing machine in the laboratory is generally only one of several factors contributing to wear performance or durability as experienced in the actual use of the material. While “abrasion resistance” (often stated in terms of the number of cycles on a specified machine, using a specified technique to produce a specified degree or amount of abrasion) and “durability” (defined as the ability to withstand deterioration or wearing out in use, including the effects of abrasion) frequently are related, the relationship varies with different end uses, and different factors may be necessary in any calculation of predicted durability from specific abrasion data.5.4.1 Laboratory tests may be reliable as an indication of relative end-use performance in cases where the difference in abrasion resistance of various materials is large, but they should not be relied upon where differences in laboratory test findings are small. In general, they should not be relied upon for prediction of actual wear-life in specific-end uses unless there are data showing the specific relationship between laboratory abrasion tests and actual wear in the intended end-use.5.5 These general observations apply to all types of fabrics, including woven, nonwoven, and knit apparel fabrics, household fabrics, industrial fabrics, and floor coverings. It is not surprising, therefore, to find that there are many different types of abrasion testing machines, abradants, testing conditions, testing procedures, methods of evaluation of abrasion resistance, and interpretation of results.5.6 All the test methods and instruments so far developed for abrasion resistance may show a high degree of variability in results obtained by different operators and in different laboratories; however, they represent the methods now most widely in use.5.7 Since there is a definite need for measuring the relative resistance to abrasion, standardized test methods are desirable and useful and may clarify the problem and lessen the confusion.1.1 This test method covers the determination of the abrasion resistance of textile fabrics using the Martindale abrasion tester. The method is generally applicable to knit, woven, and nonwoven fabrics; however, material thickness may limit suitability for testing due to specimen holder capacity.1.2 The values stated in inch-pound units are to be regarded as standard. The values given in parentheses are mathematical conversions to SI units that are provided for information only and are not considered standard.1.3 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.NOTE 1: For other current test methods of testing the abrasion resistance of textiles refer to Test Methods D3884, D3885, D3886, D4157, D4158, and AATCC TM93.1.4 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 This guide provides symbols and a system for their use by which care instructions for textile products can be conveyed in a simple, space-saving, and easily understood pictorial format that is not language dependent. See also ADJD5489-E-PDF. Currently, the FTC Care Labeling Rule recognizes Guide D5489-96c.4.2 Care symbols are an important means for identifying the appropriate care procedure for home laundering, commercial laundering, professional textile care, and coin-operated drycleaning, of textile products.4.3 Care labeling using symbols can be used by the purchaser to select textiles on the basis of the care method required without knowledge of the language. The FTC Care Labeling Rule specifies Guide D5489-96c symbols. Additional changes in words and symbols have been added to this guide which are not covered by 16 CFR 423. In the United States, when care symbols only are to be included in a care label, the FTC requires that the Guide D5489-96c version of symbols must be used. However, the symbols, as included in this standard version (Guide D5489-18), may be used if symbols are used in addition to full care instructions written in English wording.4.4 In countries in which a word-based care labeling system is required, the care symbol system may be used as a supplemental system.4.5 The word-based instructions for each symbol in this guide are harmonious with Terminology D123, and Terminology D3136, the United States Federal Trade Commission Care Labeling Rule, 16 CFR 423, and industry practice (see Figs. 1 and 2).FIG. 1 Commercial and Home Laundering and Professional Textile Care SymbolsNOTE 1: This figure illustrates the symbols to use for laundering and drycleaning instructions. As a minimum, laundering instructions shall include, in order, four symbols: washing, bleaching, drying, and ironing; and, professional textile care instructions shall include one symbol. Additional symbols or words may be used to clarify the instructions.FIG. 2 Guide to Order of ASTM Care Symbols4.6 The care label symbol system is based on five basic care symbols representing five operations: washing, bleaching, drying, ironing, and professional textile care.4.7 One color is used for all care symbols in this care labeling system.NOTE 1: While this symbol system uses one color, it is harmonious with tri-color systems such as the Canadian system because the instructions are clear whether printed in one or three colors.4.8 This guide does not specify the type of label material or fabric to use. However, appropriateness for consumer comfort is recommended.1.1 This guide provides a uniform system of symbols for the disclosure of care instructions on textile products such as apparel, piece goods, and household and institutional articles, hereinafter referred to as “textile,” or “textile product.”1.2 This guide provides a comprehensive system of symbols to represent care instructions reducing language-dependent care instructions.1.3 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as the standard. The values given in parentheses are for information only.1.4 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.1.5 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

定价： 590元 / 折扣价： 502 元 加购物车

5.1 The measurement of the resistance to abrasion of textile and other materials is very complex. The resistance to abrasion is affected by many factors, such as the inherent mechanical properties of the fibers; the dimensions of the fibers; the structure of the yarns; the construction of the fabrics; and the type, kind, and amount of finishing material added to the fibers, yarns, or fabric.5.2 The resistance to abrasion is also greatly affected by the conditions of the tests, such as the nature of abradant; variable action of the abradant over the area of specimen abraded, the tension of the specimen, the pressure between the specimen and abradant, and the dimensional changes in the specimen.5.3 Abrasion tests are all subject to variation due to changes in the abradant during specific tests. The abradant must accordingly be changed at frequent intervals or checked periodically against a standard. With disposable abradants, the abradant is used only once or changed after limited use. With permanent abradants that use hardened metal or equivalent surfaces, it is assumed that the abradant will not change appreciably in a specific series of tests, but obviously similar abradants used in different laboratories will not likely change at the same rate due to differences in usage. Permanent abradants may also change due to pick up of finishing or other material from test fabrics and must accordingly be cleaned at frequent intervals. The measurement of the relative amount of abrasion may also be affected by the method of evaluation and may be influenced by the judgment of the operator.5.4 The resistance of textile materials to abrasion as measured on a testing machine in the laboratory is generally only one of several factors contributing to wear performance or durability as experienced in the actual use of the material. While “abrasion resistance” (often stated in terms of the number of cycles on a specified machine, using a specified technique to produce a specified degree or amount of abrasion) and “durability” (defined as the ability to withstand deterioration or wearing out in use, including the effects of abrasion) are frequently related, the relationship varies with different end uses, and different factors may be necessary in any calculation of predicted durability from specific abrasion data. Laboratory tests may be reliable as an indication of relative end-use performance in cases where the difference in abrasion resistance of various materials is large, but they should not be relied upon where differences in laboratory test findings are small. In general, they should not be relied upon for prediction of actual wear-life in specific end uses unless there are data showing the specific relationship between laboratory abrasion tests and actual wear in the intended end-use.5.5 These general observations apply to all types of fabrics, including woven, nonwoven, and knit apparel fabrics, household fabrics, industrial fabrics, and floor coverings. It is not surprising, therefore, to find that there are many different types of abrasion testing machines, abradants, testing conditions, testing procedures, methods of evaluation of abrasion resistance, and interpretation of results.5.6 All the test methods and instruments so far developed for abrasion resistance may show a high degree of variability in results obtained by different operators and in different laboratories; however, they represent the methods now most widely in use. This test method provides a comparative measurement of the resistance of woven textile fabrics to abrasion, and may not necessarily predict the actual performance of fabrics in actual use.5.7 If there are differences of practical significance between reported test results for two or more laboratories, comparative tests should be performed to determine if there is a statistical bias between them, using competent statistical assistance. As a minimum, test samples 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. 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 bias is found, either its cause must be found and corrected, or future test results must be adjusted in consideration of the known bias.1.1 This test method covers the determination of the abrasion resistance of woven textile fabrics using the oscillatory cylinder tester. This test method may not be usable for some fabric constructions.NOTE 1: Other procedures for measuring the abrasion resistance of textile fabrics are given in: Guides D3884 and D4158, and Test Methods D3885, D3886, and AATCC 93.1.2 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 standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.1.4 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

定价： 590元 / 折扣价： 502 元 加购物车

5.1 The resistance to abrasion of textile materials is affected by many factors in a complex manner. The results obtained from the use of this instrument assist in evaluating these factors relative to the wear serviceability of the final textile product in specific end uses. The resistance to abrasion is affected by many factors that include the inherent mechanical properties of the fibers; the dimensions of the fibers; the structure of the yarns; the construction of the fabrics; the type, kind, amount of treatment added to the fibers, yarns or fabric; the nature of the abradant; the tension on the specimen; the pressure between the specimen and the abradant; and the dimensional changes in the specimen. Experience has shown in many instances, that relative results obtained with this instrument when used on a series of fabrics, agreed with those obtained based upon performance in end use. However, caution is advised because anomalous results may occur due to uncontrolled factors in manufacturing or other processes. Specific instances have been described.4,5,6,7 In any event, anomalous results should be studied to further understand the complex behavior that may occur as a result of abrasion that may in turn assist in the development of more durable fabrics.5.2 Testing some specimens under “wet” conditions can add another dimension to the evaluation of some textiles. Such testing under “wet” conditions can help ascertain the effect of changes in a fabric's resistance to abrasion when it becomes wet. This test can also increase the uniformity of the abrading action by washing away abrasion debris and preventing the build up of broken fibers that can interfere with the proper progression of the tests.5.3 This test is used as a guide in evaluating textiles in quality control and in research.5.3.1 If there are differences of 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 homogenous as possible, that are drawn from the material from which the disparate test results were obtained, and that are randomly assigned in equal numbers to each laboratory for testing. Other fabrics 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 a cause must be found and corrected, or future test results must be adjusted in consideration of the known bias.5.4 This test is unique and is significantly different from any other existing abrading test.5.5 This guide may also be used as a technique for pretreating material for subsequent testing. For example, a predetermined number of abrasion cycles at specified test conditions may be performed on a series of specimens, which are then subjected to a strength or barrier performance test.5.6 The resistance of textile materials to abrasion as measured by this guide does not include all the factors which account for wear performance or durability in actual use. While the “abrasion resistance” stated in terms of the number of cycles and “durability” (defined as the ability to withstand deterioration or wearing out in use, including the effects of abrasion) are frequently related. The relationship varies with different end uses, and different factors may be necessary in any calculation of predicted durability from specific abrasion data.5.6.1 Laboratory tests may be reliable as an indication of relative end-use suitability in cases where the difference in abrasion resistance of various materials is large, but they should not be relied upon for prediction of performance during actual wear life for specific end uses unless there are data showing the specific relationship between laboratory abrasion tests and actual wear in the intended end use.5.7 The pressure and tension used is varied, depending on the mass and nature of the material and the end use application. Whenever possible all materials that are to be compared with each other should be tested under the same pressure and tension.5.8 When abrasion tests are continued to total destruction, abrasion resistance comparisons are not practical for fabrics have a different mass because the change in abrasion resistance is not directly proportional to the change in the fabric mass.5.9 All the guides and instruments that have been developed for abrasion resistance may show a high degree of variability in results obtained by different operators and in different laboratories; however, they represent the methods most widely used in the industry. Because there is a definite need for measuring the relative resistance to abrasion, this is one of the several standardized guides and methods that is useful to help minimize the inherent variation in results that may occur.1.1 This guide covers the determination of the resistance to abrasion of a wide range of textile materials using the uniform abrasion testing instrument. Fabrics of all types including carpets, garments and nonwovens may be tested under this method.NOTE 1: Other procedures for measuring the abrasion resistance of textile fabrics are given in: Test Methods D3884, D3885, D3886, D4157, D4966, and AATCC Test Method 93.1.1.1 Provisions are provided for testing specimens in dry and wet conditions. Four options for evaluation are included:Option 1—Fabric RuptureOption 2—Mass LossOption 3—Thickness LossOption 4—Breaking Strength Loss1.1.2 Provision is provided for testing specimens in the wet state.1.2 The values stated in either SI units or inch-pound units are to be regarded separately as the standard. Within the text, the inch-pound units are shown in parentheses. 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 nonconformance with the specification.1.3 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.1.4 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

定价： 590元 / 折扣价： 502 元 加购物车

5.1 The measurement of the resistance to abrasion of textile and other materials is very complex and may be affected by a number of factors, including:5.1.1 The inherent mechanical properties of the fibers; the dimensions of the fibers; the structure of the yarns; the construction of the fabrics; and the type, kind, and amount of finishing material added to the fibers, yarns, or fabric.5.1.2 The conditions of the tests, such as the nature of abradant, variable action of the abradant over the area of specimen abraded, the tension of the specimen, the pressure between the specimen and abradant, and the dimensional changes in the specimens.5.1.3 Changes in the abradant during specific tests.NOTE 2: The abradant must accordingly be discarded at frequent intervals or checked periodically against a standard. With disposable abradants, the abradant is used only once or discarded after limited use. With permanent abradants that use hardened metal or equivalent surfaces, it is assumed that the abradant will not change appreciably in a specific series of tests. Similar abradants used in different laboratories will not change at the same rate, due to differences in usage. Permanent abradants may also change due to pick up of finishing or other material from test fabrics and must accordingly be cleaned at frequent intervals.5.1.4 The method of evaluation, which may be influenced by the judgment of the operator.5.2 The resistance of textile materials to abrasion as measured on a testing machine in the laboratory is generally only one of several factors contributing to wear performance or durability as experienced in the actual use of the material. While “abrasion resistance” (often stated in terms of the number of cycles on a specified machine, using a specified technique to produce a specified degree or amount of abrasion) and “durability” (defined as the ability to withstand deterioration or wearing out in use, including the effects of abrasion) are frequently related, the relationship varies with different end uses, and different factors may be necessary in any calculation of predicted durability from specific abrasion data. Laboratory tests may be reliable as an indication of relative end-use performance in cases where the difference in abrasion resistance of various materials is large, but they should not be relied upon where differences in laboratory test findings are small. In general, they should not be relied upon for prediction of actual wear-life in specific end uses unless there are data showing the specific relationship between laboratory abrasion tests and actual wear in the intended end-use.5.3 Before definite predictions of fabric usefulness can be drawn from an abrasion test as made on the rotary platform abrader (Fig. 1), actual end-use trials should be conducted and related to the abrasion test. Different types of wear (for example, wear on men's clothing at cuffs, crotch, etc.) may correspond to different ratings of the rotary platform abrader test.FIG. 1 Rotary Platform AbraderNOTE 1: Vacuum suction system not shown.5.3.1 In making a comparison of different fabrics (that is, of different fibers, weights, etc.) the rotary platform abrader test will not always reveal a difference known to exist when the fabrics are actually used. Therefore, end-use trials should be conducted in conjunction with the abrasion test, at least as a guide for future testing of these fabrics.5.3.2 Uncontrolled manufacturing or finishing variations occurring within a fabric or within lots of the same style of fabric can, however, be detected satisfactorily with the rotary platform abrader tester.5.4 These general observations apply to all types of fabrics, including woven, nonwoven, and knit apparel fabrics, household fabrics, industrial fabrics, and floor coverings.1.1 This guide covers the determination of the abrasion resistance of textile fabrics using the rotary platform abrader.NOTE 1: Other procedures for measuring the abrasion resistance of textile fabrics are given in Test Methods D3389, D3885, D3886, D4157, D4158, D4685, D4966, and AATCC 93. To determine the abrasion resistance of leather, refer to Test Method D7255.1.2 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard. No other units of measurement are included in this standard.1.2.1 Exception—English units are used when referencing rotational speed.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