4.1 Tests are conducted using standard test methods to generate test data that are used to make decisions for commercial, technical, and scientific purposes. It follows that the precision of a particular test method is an important quality characteristic or figure of merit for a test method and a decision process.4.2 An evaluation of the precision of a test method is normally conducted with (1) some selected group of materials as typically used with that method and (2) with a group of volunteer laboratories that have experience with the test method. The evaluation represents an event in time for the test method for these materials and laboratories. Another ITP precision evaluation with somewhat different materials or even with the same materials with the same laboratories at a different time, may generate precision results that differ from the initial ITP.4.3 Experience as indicated in Refs (1-4)4 and elsewhere has shown that the poor reproducibility among the laboratories of a typical ITP is almost always due to interlaboratory bias. Certain laboratories are always low or high compared to a reference as well as other laboratories in all tests. This usual outcome for many ITPs is addressed in this practice by the use of the three-step robust analysis procedures as described in Section 7.4.4 Caution is urged in applying precision results of a particular test method to product testing for consumer-producer product acceptance. Product acceptance procedures should be developed on the basis of precision data obtained in special programs that are specific to the commercial products and to the laboratories of the interested parties for this type of testing.1.1 This practice covers guidelines for evaluating precision and serves as the governing practice for interlaboratory test programs (ITP) used to evaluate precision for test methods as used in the rubber manufacturing and the carbon black industries. This practice uses the basic one way analysis of variance calculation algorithms of Practice E691. Although bias is not evaluated in this practice, it is an essential concept in understanding precision evaluation.1.2 This practice applies to test methods that have test results expressed in terms of a quantitative continuous variable. Although exceptions may occur, it is in general limited to test methods that are fully developed and in routine use in a number of laboratories.1.3 Two precision evaluation methods are given that are described as robust statistical procedures that attempt to eliminate or substantially decrease the influence of outliers. The first is a General Precision procedure intended for all test methods in the rubber manufacturing industry, and the second is a specific variation of the general precision procedure designated as Special Precision, that applies to carbon black testing. Both of these procedures use the same uniform level experimental design and the Mandel h and k statistics to review the precision database for potential outliers. However, they use slight modifications in the procedure for rejecting incompatible data values as outliers. The Special Precision procedure is specific as to the number of replicates per database cell or material-laboratory combination.1.4 This practice is divided into the following sections:  Section  1Referenced Documents  2Terminology  3  4Precision Evaluation—General Precision and Special Precision  5Steps in Organizing an Interlaboratory Test Program (ITP)  6Overview of the General Precision Analysis Procedure  7General Precision: Analysis Step 1  8 Preliminary Graphical Data Review  8.1 Calculation of Precision for Original Database  8.2 Detection of Outliers at 5 % Significance Level Using h and k Statistics  8.3 Generation of Revision 1 Database Using Outlier Treatment Option 1 or 2  8.4General Precision: Analysis Step 2  9 Calculation of Precision for Revision 1 Database  9.1 Detection of Outliers at 2 % Significance Level Using h and k Statistics  9.1 Generation of Revision 2 Database Using Outlier Treatment Option 1 or 2  9.1.2General Precision: Analysis Step 3  10 Calculation of Precision Using Revision 2 Database  10.1Special Precision Analysis—Carbon Black Testing  11Format for Precision Table and Clause in Test Method Standards  12Preparation of Report for Precision Analysis  13Definitions for Selected Terms Concerned with Precision and Testing Annex A1Statistical Model for Interlaboratory Testing Programs Annex A2Calculating the h and k Consistency Statistics for Outliers Annex A3Spreadsheet Calculation Formulas, Table Layout, and Calculation Sequence Annex A4Procedure for Calculating Replacement Values of Deleted Outliers Annex A5Example of General Precision Evaluation—Mooney Viscosity Testing Annex A61.5 Six annexes are presented; these serve as supplements to the main body of this practice. Annex A1 and Annex A2 are given mainly as background information that is important for a full understanding of precision evaluation. Annex A3 – Annex A5 contain detailed instructions and procedures needed to perform the operations as called for in various parts of the practice. The use of these annexes in this capacity avoids long sections of involved instruction in the main body of this practice. This allows for a better presentation and understanding of the central concepts involved in the evaluation of precision. Annex A6 is also important; it gives a complete example of precision evaluation that illustrates all of the procedures and options likely to be encountered in any precision evaluation, from the simple to the most complex.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： 918元 / 折扣价： 781 元 加购物车

5.1 High quality physical product standards for color or appearance are the keystone of a successful color control program. Standards are often grouped into three major categories: product standards, intermediate production control standards, and instrument standards. This guide deals only with physical product standards. Some instrument-based color control programs use “numerical standards,” derived from instrumental measurements of a physical product standard.AbstractThis guide covers three levels of physical product standards (preparation, maintenance, and distribution) for color or geometric appearance, or both, of coatings commonly used in the coatings industry. Described here is terminology to describe each level, and techniques for generating and caring for standards. Product standards are the only standards by which products should be accepted or rejected for color or appearance. A master standard is generated from the concept color submitted by the customer. Duplicate master standards, when needed, are generated from the master standard. Working standards are generated from a duplicate master standard. They are used in the laboratory or on the production line to accept or reject the color or appearance of coatings. After initial generation, product standards must be maintained to ensure they remain valid. This guide considers the characteristics of product standards, factors to be considered in their creation, and factors to be considered in their replacement.1.1 This guide covers three levels of physical product standards for color or appearance, or both, commonly used in the coatings industry, provides terminology to describe each level, and describes techniques for generating and caring for standards.1.2 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as the standard. The values given in parentheses are for information only.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

3.1 The terminology in this document is applicable to the standards and guides published by ASTM Committee F32.3.2 The definitions provided in this terminology standard shall be used when interpreting the meaning, purpose or applicability of a guide, standard, or a specific subsection therein.1.1 This terminology document is a compilation of definitions of terms, abbreviations, and acronyms used in F32 Land Search and Rescue Standards and Guides, collected in order to provide consistency in communications when used in writing and interpreting the Committee’s documents.

定价： 590元 / 折扣价： 502 元 加购物车

5.1 The flash point measures the response of the sample to heat and flame under controlled laboratory conditions. It is only one of a number of properties that must be considered in assessing the overall flammability hazard of a material.5.2 As a result of physical factors inherent in the apparatus and procedure, the closed cup flash point does not necessarily represent the minimum temperature at which a material can evolve flammable vapors, and the absence of a flash point does not guarantee nonflammability (see Appendix X1 and Appendix X2).5.3 Flash point is used in shipping and safety regulations to define flammable and combustible materials. Test Methods D56, D93, and D3278 are specified as test methods for determining the flash point of these materials.5.4 If the process or handling conditions dictate the usage of a flammable material at temperatures ranging upward from 5 to 10°C below the closed-cup flash point, then a flammable vapor might be present above the liquid. In such cases, it may be more appropriate to use the temperature limit of flammability (as determined by Test Method E1232) instead of flash point.5.5 For single component samples, small-scale methods involving equilibrium procedures and only one flame pass per specimen are preferred.5.6 For mixtures containing small concentrations of volatile components, special procedures are needed to minimize the loss of volatiles, with consequent elevation of the flash point, while the sample is being heated. (See X2.5.)5.7 In cases where errors caused by loss of volatiles, downwards flame direction and quenching are unacceptable, the “lower temperature limit of flammability” can be determined instead using Test Method E1232. The temperature limit of flammability test chamber is sufficiently large to overcome flame quenching effects in most cases of practical importance, thus, usually indicating the presence of vapor-phase flammability if it does exist.1.1 This test method covers the determination of the flash point of liquid and solid chemical compounds flashing from below −10 to 370°C (16 to 700°F). The procedures and apparatus in Test Methods D56, D93, D3278, D3828, and D3941 are to be used. Modification to these procedures are specified for tests on solids and viscous liquids. The significance of the results obtained is discussed along with possible sources of error and factors that might cause interference.1.2 Suggestions for adapting this procedure to mixtures of chemicals are included (see Appendix X2).1.3 This test method 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 or assemblies under actual fire conditions. However, results of this test method may be used as elements of a fire risk assessment that take into account all of the factors that are pertinent to an assessment of the fire hazard of a particular end use.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 Warning—Mercury has been designated by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and many state agencies as a hazardous material that can cause central nervous system, kidney, and liver damage. Mercury, or its vapor, may be hazardous to health and corrosive to materials. Caution should be taken when handling mercury and mercury containing products. See the applicable product Material Safety Data Sheet (MSDS) for details and EPA’s website — http://www.epa.gov/mercury/faq.htm — for additional information. Users should be aware that selling mercury or mercury-containing products, or both, into your state may be prohibited by state law.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. See also Section 8.1.7 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 Most commercial reflectometers and spectrophotometers with reflectance capability measure relative reflectance. The instrument reading is the ratio of the measured radiation reflected from the reference specimen to the measured radiation reflected by the test specimen. That ratio is dependent on specific instrument parameters.5.2 National standardizing laboratories and some research laboratories measure reflectance on instruments calibrated from basic principles, thereby establishing a scale of absolute reflectance as described in CIE Publication No. 44 (5). These measurements are sufficiently difficult and of prohibitive cost that they are usually left to laboratories that specialize in them.5.3 A standard that has been measured on an absolute scale could be used to transfer that scale to a reflectometer. While such procedures exist, the constraints placed on the mechanical properties restrict the suitability of some of the optical properties, especially those properties related to the geometric distribution of reflected radiation. Thus, reflectance factor standards that are sufficiently rugged or cleanable to use as permanent transfer standards, with the exception of the sintered PTFE standards, depart considerably from the perfect diffuser in the geometric distribution of reflected radiation.5.4 The geometric distribution of reflected radiance from such standards is sufficiently diffuse that such a standard can provide a dependable calibration of a directional-hemispherical or certain directional-directional reflectometers. Although pressed powder standards are subject to contamination and breakage, the reflectance factor of pressed powder can be sufficiently reproducible from specimen to specimen from a given lot of powder to allow the assignment of absolute reflectance factor values to all of the powder in a lot.5.5 Sintered PTFE materials exhibit sufficient reproducibility from within the same specimen after resurfacing or cleaning the specimen to allow the assignment of absolute reflectance factor values.5.6 Preparation of packed powder reflectance standards is covered in Practice E259. This practice describes the spectral and physical properties of these materials and of the sintered PTFE materials.1.1 This practice covers procedures for the preparation and use of acceptable transfer standards for NIR spectrophotometers. Procedures for calibrating the reflectance factor of materials on an absolute basis are contained in CIE Publication No. 44 (9). Both the pressed powder samples and the sintered PTFE materials are used as transfer standards for such calibrations because they have very stable reflectance factors that are nearly constant with wavelength and because the distribution of flux resembles closely that from the perfect reflecting diffuser.1.2 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard. No other units of measurement are included in this standard.1.3 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

4.1 This guide provides some major themes and examples for consideration related to compliance which are not necessarily captured in any single standard pertinent to light sport aircraft. The outline of this document is intended to loosely reflect the process that an organization would go through in order to reach and maintain production of a light sport aircraft that is demonstrably compliant with the applicable ASTM standards.4.2 These considerations are applicable to manufacturers which are responsible for conformity to processes and procedures required in ASTM standards for light sport aircraft. Manufacturers are encouraged to think through the contents of this guide, reference the ASTM light sport aircraft standards, establish, document and follow their own procedures.4.3 Manufacturers are responsible for determining which standards and revisions thereof are part of the regulatory package of any given CAA, along with any other requirements applicable within the agency’s jurisdiction.4.4 Following this guide does not ensure compliance of a particular light sport aircraft; however, following the explanations provided herein should assist manufacturers in avoiding common pitfalls of declaring compliance prematurely, determining shortcomings in current declarations of compliance, and maintaining a body of documentation sufficient to support a declaration of compliance.1.1 This document provides guidance to assist manufacturers in understanding and meeting ASTM standards for light sport aircraft. This guidance material presents philosophies, practices and considerations recommended by industry consensus, but does not present technical or business requirements that must be met.1.2 It is the intent of this guide to provide processes to be considered by organizations looking to develop or improve objective evidence of compliance for light sport aircraft. It does not attempt to identify all of the standards, regulations or other requirements that may be applicable to a given aircraft, production or testing process.1.3 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.1.4 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

定价： 646元 / 折扣价： 550 元 加购物车

1.1 The purpose of this guide is to provide the secondary ion mass spectrometry (SIMS) analyst with two procedures for determining relative sensitivity factors (RSFs) from ion implanted external standards. This guide may be used for obtaining the RSFs of trace elements (<1 atomic %) in homogeneous (chemically and structurally) specimens. This guide is useful for all SIMS instruments.1.2 This guide does not describe procedures for obtaining RSFs for major elements (>1 atomic %). In addition, this guide does not describe procedures for obtaining RSFs from implants in heterogeneous (either laterally or in-depth) specimens.1.3 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as 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 and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.

定价： 0元 / 折扣价： 0 元

1.1 This guide establishes essential and recommended elements in the procedures for the conduct of a psychophysiological detection of deception (PDD) examination.1.1.1 Other unique PDD applications are addressed separately.1.2 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

定价： 515元 / 折扣价： 438 元 加购物车

This practice covers the acceptance criteria for surface inspection of investment castings through visual examination. The material shall conform to Levels II, III, and IV acceptance criteria for features of surface pits, positive metal, parting line and ejector pin marks, gate height, and surface roughness. The material shall be free of any linear discontinuity.1.1 This practice covers the acceptance criteria for surface inspection of investment castings by visual examination.1.2 This practice is expressed in both inch-pound units and in SI units; however, unless the purchase order or contract specifies the applicable M-specification designation (SI units), the inch-pound units shall apply.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 nonconformance 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： 515元 / 折扣价： 438 元 加购物车

Micronucleus assays for genetic damage have been developed in many types of eucaryotic cells, both in vitro and in vivo. The occurrence of micronuclei is indicative of chromosomal damage or mitotic spindle dysfunction.1.1 This guide covers minimal criteria which should be met by a micronucleus assay system prior to the development of an ASTM Standard or Guide for the conduct of that assay.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 practice provides criteria that building design teams shall use to compare the environmental impacts associated with a reference building design and a final building design, including additions to existing buildings where applicable.5.2 This practice deals specifically with material selection for initial construction, including associated maintenance and replacement cycles over an assumed service life, taking operating energy use into account if required or explicitly allowed under the applicable code, standard, or rating system.1.1 This practice provides criteria to be applied irrespective of the assessment (LCA) tool that is used when LCA is undertaken at the whole building level to compare a final whole building design to a reference building design.1.2 The purpose of this practice is to support the use of whole building Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) in building codes, standards, and building rating systems by ensuring that comparative assessments of final whole building designs relative to reference building designs take account of the relevant building features, life cycle stages, and related activities in similar fashion for both the reference and final building designs of the same building.1.3 The criteria do not deal with building occupant behavior, possible future changes in building function, building rehabilitation or retrofit, or other matters that cannot be foreseen or reasonably estimated at the design or permitting stage, or both where this practice applies.1.4 Only environmental impacts and aspects of sustainability are addressed in this practice. The social and economic impacts and aspects of sustainability are not addressed in this practice.1.5 This practice does not deal with basic LCA methodology, calculation methods or related matters that are covered in cited international standards.1.6 This practice does not supersede or modify existing ISO standards for the application of LCA at the product level, nor does it address any of the following related applications:1.6.1 Aggregation of building products Environmental Product Declarations (EPD) at the whole building level;1.6.2 Rules for applying EPDs in a building code, standard, or rating system; and1.6.3 Comparability of building product EPDs.NOTE 1: ISO 14025 and ISO 21930 provide guidance on use and comparability of building products EPDs.1.7 This practice does not specify the impact categories or sustainability aspects to be addressed in building codes, standards, or building rating systems and users of this practice conform to the impact category requirements specified in the applicable code, standard, or rating system.1.8 The text of this standard contains notes that provide explanatory material. These notes shall not be considered as requirements of the standard.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： 515元 / 折扣价： 438 元 加购物车

Unmanned aircraft present unique challenges for applicants and examiners. Unlike manned aircraft, in which, regardless of the size and complexity of the aircraft, there are still basic similarities in concepts and operations, unmanned aircraft are varied in both flight capability and pilot interaction. Many aspects of unmanned aircraft operations are automated, and the pilots may not have the same information available to them (that is, pitch and bank) that pilots flying manned aircraft have available to them. This will create a situation in which some unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) will not be capable of meeting all the requirements of this practice or will not require the same skill sets that manned aircraft require.The examiner will have to decide which tasks the applicant's UAS will be capable of completing and test those tasks. As required, the examiner will note any limitations as a result of the UAS being incapable of performing a task on the applicant's certificate per 14 CFR 61.45(b)(2). If the applicant desires to have a certificate with no restrictions or limitations, he/she will need to use a UAS that is capable of completing all the tasks in this practice.Information considered directive in nature is described in this practice by the use of “shall” and “must” indicating the actions are mandatory. Guidance information is described in terms such as “should” and “may” indicating the actions are desirable or permissive but not mandatory. A list of acronyms is in Section 3.This practice includes the areas of operation and tasks that will demonstrate the pilot's ability to fly the unmanned aircraft safely and proficiently.1.1 This practice defines the knowledge, skills, and abilities required of unmanned aircraft pilots to be able to fly unmanned aircraft—single-engine land (SEL) in the national airspace system safely and for hire.1.2 The commercial unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) pilot practical test standards (PTS)-unmanned aircraft include the areas of operation and tasks that will demonstrate the pilot's ability to fly the unmanned aircraft safely and proficiently.1.3 This practice does not apply to pilots who will fly mini/small unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) for hire within visual range of the pilot, mini/small UAVs being those UAVs listed as lightly regulated.1.4 This practice provides a PTS intended to meet the Civil Aviation Authority’s (CAA) requirements for issuing commercial UAS pilot authorizations.1.5 The values given in inch-pound units are to be regarded as the standard. The values in parentheses are for information only.1.6 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.

定价： 0元 / 折扣价： 0 元

4.1 The scope of the Committee F24 is the development of standard methods of testing, performance specifications, definitions, standard methods of maintenance and operations, and best practices for amusement rides and devices. The work of this Committee F24 will be coordinated with other ASTM Committees and other societies and organizations having mutual interest.4.2 The intent of this standard guide is to serve as an overview for F24 standards and to outline processes and procedures to manage the lifecycle of an amusement ride or device. Persons looking for more details on an individual type of amusement ride or device should reference the specific standards available. See Appendix X1.1.1 This guide provides an overview of the appropriate F24 standard(s) to be applied during development and operation and use phases of an amusement ride or device.1.2 This guide sets forth procedures for owners, operators, designers, engineers, manufacturers, vendors, and suppliers to apply throughout the lifecycle of an amusement ride or device.1.3 This guide sets forth procedures for assessing and managing the end of operational life for an amusement ride or device, sub-system or component.1.4 This guide includes an appendix, which provides additional information to improve the understanding and application of the criteria presented in this standard guide.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

1.1 This test method covers the determination of the color of cresylic acids. The material under test is compared to arbitrary color standards that are expressed in terms of the "C" series color standards.1.2 The following applies to all specified limits in this test method for purposes of determining conformance with this standard. An observed value or a calculated value shall be rounded off "to the nearest unit" in the last right hand digit used in expressing limit, in accordance with the rounding off method of Practice E29.1.3 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. For specific hazard statements, see Section 6.

定价： 0元 / 折扣价： 0 元

4.1 Conformable Eddy Current Sensors—Conformable, eddy current sensors can be used on both flat and curved surfaces, including fillets, cylindrical surfaces, etc. When used with models for predicting the sensor response and appropriate algorithms, these sensors can measure variations in physical properties, such as electrical conductivity or magnetic permeability, or both, as well as thickness of conductive coatings on any substrate and nonconductive coatings on conductive substrates or on a conducting coating. These property variations can be used to detect and characterize heterogeneous regions within the conductive coatings, for example, regions of locally higher porosity.4.2 Sensors and Sensor Arrays—Depending on the application, either a single-sensing element sensor or a sensor array can be used for coating characterization. A sensor array provides a better capability to map spatial variations in coating thickness or conductivity, or both (reflecting, for example, porosity variations), and provides better throughput for scanning large areas. The size of the sensor footprint and the size and number of sensing elements within an array depend on the application requirements and constraints, and the nonconductive (for example, ceramic) coating thickness.4.3 Coating Thickness Range—The conductive coating thickness range over which a sensor performs best depends on the difference between the electrical conductivity of the substrate and conductive coating and available frequency range. For example, a specific sensor geometry with a specific frequency range for impedance measurements may provide acceptable performance for an MCrAlY coating over a nickel-alloy substrate for a relatively wide range of conductive coating thickness, for example, from 75 to 400 μm (0.003 to 0.016 in.). Yet, for another conductive coating-substrate combination, this range may be 10 to 100 μm (0.0004 to 0.004 in.). The coating characterization performance may also depend on the thickness of a nonconductive topcoat. For any coating system, performance verification on representative coated specimens is critical to establishing the range of optimum performance. For nonconductive coatings, such as ceramic coatings, the thickness measurement range increases with an increase of the spatial wavelength of the sensor (for example, thicker coatings can be measured with larger sensor winding spatial wavelength). For nonconductive coatings, when roughness of the coating may have a significant effect on the thickness measurement, independent measurements of the nonconductive coating roughness, for example, by profilometry, may provide a correction for the roughness effects.4.4 Process-Affected Zone—For some processes, for example, shot peening, the process-affected zone can be represented by an effective layer thickness and conductivity. These values can in turn be used to assess process quality. A strong correlation must be demonstrated between these “effective coating” properties and process quality.4.5 Three-Unknown Algorithm—Use of multiple-frequency impedance measurements and a three-unknown algorithm permits independent determination of three unknowns: (1) thickness of conductive nonmagnetic coatings, (2) conductivity of conductive nonmagnetic coatings, and (3) lift-off that provides a measure of the nonconductive coating thickness.4.6 Accuracy—Depending on the material properties and frequency range, there is an optimal measurement performance range for each coating system. The instrument, its air standardization or reference substrate standardization, or both, and its operation permit the coating thickness to be determined within ±15 % of its true thickness for coating thickness within the optimal range and within ±30 % outside the optimal range. Better performance may be required for some applications.4.7 Databases for Sensor Response—Databases of sensor responses may be used to represent the model response for the sensor. These databases may be based upon physical models or empirical relations. The databases list expected sensor responses (for example, the real and imaginary parts or the magnitude and phase of the complex transimpedance between the sense element and drive winding) over relevant ranges in the properties of interest. Example properties for a coated substrate material are the magnetic permeability or electrical conductivity of the substrate, or both, the electrical conductivity and thickness of the coating, and the lift-off. The ranges of the property values within the databases should span the expected property ranges for the material system to be examined.1.1 This practice covers the use of conformable eddy current sensors for nondestructive characterization of coatings without standardization on coated reference parts. It includes the following: (1) thickness measurement of a conductive coating on a conductive substrate, (2) detection and characterization of local regions of increased porosity of a conductive coating, and (3) measurement of thickness for nonconductive coatings on a conductive substrate or on a conductive coating. This practice includes only nonmagnetic coatings on either magnetic (μ ≠ μ0) or nonmagnetic (μ = μ0) substrates. In addition to discrete coatings on substrates, this practice can also be used to measure the effective thickness of a process-affected zone (for example, shot peened layer for aluminum alloys, alpha case for titanium alloys) and to assess the condition of other layered media such as joints (for example, lap joints and skin panels over structural supports). For specific types of coated parts, the user may need a more specific procedure tailored to a specific application.1.2 Specific uses of conventional eddy current sensors are covered by Practices D7091 and E376 and the following test methods issued by ASTM: B244 and E1004. Guidance for the use of conformable eddy current sensor arrays is provided in Guide E2884.1.3 Units—The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard. The values given in parentheses are mathematical conversions to inch-pound units that are provided for information only and are not considered standard.1.4 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.1.5 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

定价： 590元 / 折扣价： 502 元 加购物车