定价： 515元 / 折扣价： 438 元 加购物车

定价： 515元 / 折扣价： 438 元 加购物车

This specification covers requirements and test methods for the qualification of metallic mechanical fittings for use with outside diameter controlled thermoplastic gas distribution pipe and tubing. Types of mechanical fittings: clamped insert fitting; compression fitting; compression gasket fitting; and stab-type fitting. The following tests shall be performed: tensile strength test; temperature cycling test; constant tensile load joint test; and elevated temperature sustained pressure test.1.1 This specification covers requirements and test methods for the qualification of metallic mechanical fittings for use with outside diameter controlled thermoplastic gas distribution pipe and tubing as specified in Specification D2513, F2785, or F2945.1.2 The test methods described are not intended to be routine quality control tests.1.3 This specification covers the types of mechanical fittings described in 3.3.1.4 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.1.5 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.1.6 The following safety hazards caveat pertains only to the test method portion, Section 7, of this specification. 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

定价： 515元 / 折扣价： 438 元 加购物车

5.1 The purpose of the alkaline polysulfide immersion test is to determine the presence of mechanical damage, wear-through, and other gross defects in the coating. Most metallic coatings are intended to be protective and the presence of gross defects indicates a serious reduction of such protection.5.2 The protection afforded by well applied coatings may be diminished by improper handling following plating or as a result of wear or mechanical damage during testing or while in service. The alkaline polysulfide test serves to indicate if the damage has extended down to the copper or copper alloy basis metal since it will not detect exposed nickel underplate.5.3 The alkaline polysulfide test has been specified in several ASTM specifications for tin-plated coatings, namely Specifications B246 and B545. This test could also be used to detect gross defects and mechanical damage in other metallic coatings, such as tin-nickel alloy (Specification B605), nickel (Specification B689), gold (Specification B488), palladium (Specification B679), and autocatalytic nickel-phosphorous coatings (Specification B733).5.4 This test detects mechanical damage that exposes copper underplate and copper basis metal. Such damage may occur in any post-plating operation or even towards the end of the plating operation. It is most often seen to occur in product assembly operations.5.5 If properly performed, this test will also detect wear-through, provided the wear-through reaches a copper or copper-alloy layer.5.6 Many types of gross defects are too small to be seen, except at magnifications so high (as in SEM) that a realistic assessment of the measurement area cannot be easily made. Other defects, such as many types of wear-through, provide insufficient contrast with the coating surface. Gross defects tests (as with porosity tests) are, therefore, used to magnify the defect sites by producing visible reaction products in and around the defects.5.7 The polysulfide solution will react with copper and copper alloys to produce a dark brown or black stain (the defect indications) at the site of the defect. Silver also turns black under the same conditions. The test solution will not react with nickel and is only useful when the presence or absence of copper exposure is a specific requirement.5.8 The polysulfide immersion test is relatively insensitive to the presence of small pores. It shall not be used as a general porosity test. (Test Method B809 should be used instead.)5.9 The extent and location of the gross defects or mechanical damage (revealed by this test) may or may not be detrimental to product performance or service life. Such determinations shall be made by the user of the test through practical experience or judgment.5.10 The present test can be used on samples of various geometries, such as curved surfaces. It can also be used for selective area coating if allowance is made for tarnish creepage from bare copper alloy areas.5.11 This test is destructive in that it reveals the presence of gross defects by contaminating the surface with reaction-product films. Any parts exposed to this test shall not be placed in service.5.12 However, the defect indications on the sample surfaces that result from this test are stable; samples may be retained for reference purposes.5.13 This test is neither recommended for predictions of product performance nor is it intended to simulate field failure mechanisms. For such product performance evaluations, an environmental test that is known to simulate actual failure mechanisms should be used.1.1 This test method covers equipment and methods for detecting gross defects and mechanical damage (including wear-through) in metallic coatings where the breaks in the coating penetrate down to a copper or copper alloy substrate.1.2 This test method is suitable for coatings consisting of single or combined layers of any coating that does not significantly tarnish in an alkaline polysulfide solution. Examples are gold, nickel, tin, tin-lead, and palladium, or their alloys.1.3 Recent reviews of porosity testing (which include those for gross defects) and testing methods can be found in literature.2,3 An ASTM guide to the selection of porosity and gross defect tests for electrodeposits and related metallic coatings is available as Guide B765. Other related porosity test standards are Test Methods B735, B741, B798, B799, and B809.1.4 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as the standard. The values given in parentheses are for information only.1.5 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.1.6 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

定价： 515元 / 折扣价： 438 元 加购物车

定价： 156元 / 折扣价： 133 元 加购物车

5.1 The property KIc determined by this test method characterizes the resistance of a material to fracture in a neutral environment in the presence of a sharp crack under essentially linear-elastic stress and severe tensile constraint, such that (1) the state of stress near the crack front approaches tritensile plane strain, and (2) the crack-tip plastic zone is small compared to the crack size, specimen thickness, and ligament ahead of the crack.5.1.1 Variation in the value of KIc can be expected within the allowable range of specimen proportions, a/W and W/B. KIc may also be expected to rise with increasing ligament size. Notwithstanding these variations, however, KIc is believed to represent a lower limiting value of fracture toughness (for 2 % apparent crack extension) in the environment and at the speed and temperature of the test.5.1.2 Lower and more highly variable values of fracture toughness can be obtained from specimens that fail by cleavage fracture; for example, specimens of ferritic steels tested at temperatures in the ductile-to-brittle transition region or below. Specimens failing by cleavage are also more likely to exhibit warm prestressing effects, where precracking at a temperature higher than the test temperature can artificially increase the fracture toughness measured (2). The present test method is not intended for cleavage fracture. Instead, the user is referred to Test Method E1921 and E1820 which are applicable to cleavage fracture and contain safeguards against warm prestressing. Likewise this test method should not be used when specimen failure is accompanied by appreciable plastic deformation even after the specimen size has been maximized within product dimensional constraints. Guidance on testing elastic-plastic materials is given in Test Method E1820.5.1.3 The value of KIc obtained by this test method may be used to estimate the relation between failure stress and crack size for a material in service wherein the conditions of high constraint described above would be expected. Background information concerning the basis for development of this test method in terms of linear elastic fracture mechanics may be found in Refs (1) and (3).5.1.4 Cyclic forces can cause crack extension at KI values less than KIc. Crack extension under cyclic or sustained forces (as by stress corrosion cracking or creep crack growth) can be influenced by temperature and environment. Therefore, when KIc is applied to the design of service components, differences between laboratory test and field conditions shall be considered.5.1.5 Plane-strain fracture toughness testing is unusual in that there can be no advance assurance that a valid KIc will be determined in a particular test. Therefore, compliance with the specified validity criteria of this test method is essential.5.1.6 Residual stresses can introduce bias into the indicated KQ and KIc value determinations. The effect can be especially significant for specimens removed from as-heat treated or otherwise non-stress relieved stock, from weldments, from complex wrought products, rapidly-solidified castings, additively-manufactured products or from products with intentionally induced residual stresses. In addition, residual stresses will redistribute when the specimen is extracted from the host product and machined. The magnitude of residual stress influence on KQ and KIc in the test specimen may be quite different from that in the original or finish machined product. In addition, the behavior of cracks in the full-sized product may not be predictable from the fracture toughness measured on the specimen because of the influence of the different residual stresses in each. Indications of residual stress include distortion during specimen machining, results that are specimen configuration dependent, and irregular fatigue precrack growth (either excessive crack front curvature or out-of-plane growth). Guide B909 provides supplementary guidelines for plane strain fracture toughness testing of aluminum alloy products for which complete stress relief is not practicable. Guide B909 includes additional guidelines for recognizing when residual stresses may be significantly biasing test results, and methods for minimizing the effects of residual stress during testing.5.2 This test method can serve the following purposes:5.2.1 In research and development, to establish in quantitative terms significant to service performance, the effects of metallurgical variables such as composition or heat treatment, or of fabricating operations such as welding or forming, on the fracture toughness of new or existing materials.5.2.2 In service evaluation, to establish the suitability of a material for a specific application for which the stress conditions are prescribed and for which maximum flaw sizes can be established with confidence.FIG. 2 Double–Cantilever Clip-In Displacement Gage Showing Mounting by Means of Integral Knife Edges(Gage Design Details are Given in Annex A1)5.2.3 For specifications of acceptance and manufacturing quality control, but only when there is a sound basis for specifying minimum KIc values, and then only if the dimensions of the product are sufficient to provide specimens of the size required for valid KIc determination. The specification of KIc values in relation to a particular application should signify that a fracture control study has been conducted for the component in relation to the expected loading and environment, and in relation to the sensitivity and reliability of the crack detection procedures that are to be applied prior to service and subsequently during the anticipated life.1.1 This test method covers the determination of fracture toughness (KIc and optionally KIsi) of metallic materials under predominantly linear-elastic, plane-strain conditions using fatigue precracked specimens having a thickness of 1.6 mm (0.063 in.) or greater2 subjected to slowly, or in special (elective) cases rapidly, increasing crack-displacement force. Details of test apparatus, specimen configuration, and experimental procedure are given in the annexes. Two procedures are outlined for using the experimental data to calculate fracture toughness values:1.1.1 The KIc test procedure is described in the main body of this test standard and is a mandatory part of the testing and results reporting procedure for this test method. The KIc test procedure is based on crack growth of up to 2 % percent of the specimen width. This can lead to a specimen size dependent rising fracture toughness resistance curve, with larger specimens producing higher fracture toughness results.1.1.2 The KIsi test procedure is described in Appendix X1 and is an optional part of this test method. The KIsi test procedure is based on a fixed amount of crack extension of 0.5 mm, and as a result, KIsi is less sensitive to specimen size than KIc. This less size-sensitive fracture toughness, KIsi, is called size-insensitive throughout this test method. Appendix X1 contains an optional procedure for reinterpreting the force-displacement test record recorded as part of this test method to calculate the additional fracture toughness value, KIsi.NOTE 1: Plane-strain fracture toughness tests of materials thinner than 1.6 mm (0.063 in.) that are sufficiently brittle (see 7.1) can be made using other types of specimens (1).3 There is no standard test method for such thin materials.1.2 This test method is divided into two parts. The first part gives general recommendations and requirements for testing and includes specific requirements for the KIc test procedure. The second part consists of Annexes that give specific information on displacement gage and loading fixture design, special requirements for individual specimen configurations, and detailed procedures for fatigue precracking. Additional annexes are provided that give specific procedures for beryllium and rapid-force testing, and the KIsi test procedure, which provides an optional additional analysis procedure for the test data collected as part of the KIc test procedure.1.3 General information and requirements common to all specimen configurations:  SectionReferenced Documents 2Terminology 3 Stress-Intensity Factor 3.1.1 Plane-Strain Fracture Toughness 3.1.2 Crack Plane Orientation 3.1.4Summary of Test Method 4 5 Significance 5.1 Precautions 5.1.1 – 5.1.5 Practical Applications 5.2Apparatus (see also 1.4) 6 Tension Machine 6.1 Fatigue Machine 6.2 Loading Fixtures 6.3 Displacement Gage, Measurement 6.4Specimen Size, Configurations, and Preparation (see also 1.5) 7 Specimen Size Estimates 7.1 Standard and Alternative Specimen Configurations 7.2 Fatigue Crack Starter Notches 7.3.1 Fatigue Precracking (see also 1.6) 7.3.2 Crack Extension Beyond Starter Notch 7.3.2.2General Procedure 8 Specimen Measurements    Thickness 8.2.1  Width 8.2.2  Crack Size 8.2.3  Crack Plane Angle 8.2.4 Specimen Testing    Loading Methods 8.3  Loading Rate 8.4  Test Record 8.5Calculation and Interpretation of Results 9 Test Record Analysis 9.1 Pmax/PQ Validity Requirement 9.1.3 Specimen Size Validity Requirements 9.1.4Reporting 10Precision and Bias 111.4 Specific requirements related to test apparatus:Double-Cantilever Displacement Gage Annex A1Testing Fixtures Annex A2Bend Specimen Loading Fixture Annex A2.1Compact Specimen Loading Clevis Annex A2.21.5 Specific requirements related to individual specimen configurations:Bend Specimen SE(B) Annex A3Compact Specimen C(T) Annex A4Disk-Shaped Compact Specimen DC(T) Annex A5Arc-Shaped Tension Specimen A(T) Annex A6Arc-Shaped Bend Specimen A(B) Annex A71.6 Specific requirements related to special test procedures:Fatigue Precracking KIc and KIsi Specimens Annex A8Hot-Pressed Beryllium Testing Annex A9Rapid-Force Testing Annex A10Determination of KIsi Appendix X11.7 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as the standard. The values given in parentheses are for information only.1.8 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.1.9 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

定价： 843元 / 折扣价： 717 元 加购物车

定价： 590元 / 折扣价： 502 元 加购物车

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

定价： 0元 / 折扣价： 0 元

定价： 843元 / 折扣价： 717 元 加购物车

定价： 515元 / 折扣价： 438 元 加购物车

3.1 This practice is intended to confirm the method of obtaining and evaluating the fluorescent penetrant indications on metallic surgical implants.1.1 This practice is intended as a standard for fluorescent penetrant inspection of metallic surgical implants.1.2 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.1.3 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

定价： 515元 / 折扣价： 438 元 加购物车

定价： 590元 / 折扣价： 502 元 加购物车

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

定价： 515元 / 折扣价： 438 元 加购物车

定价： 590元 / 折扣价： 502 元 加购物车