5.1 This test method may be used for routine inspection purposes by subjecting a required number of specimens to the test conditions for a specified time and noting the number that fail. The cracking obtained with the test reagent is indicative of what may be expected from a wide variety of surface-active agents, soaps, and organic substances that are not absorbed appreciably by the polymer.5.2 Environmental stress-cracking is a property that is highly dependent upon the nature and level of the stresses applied and on the thermal history of the specimen (1). Under the conditions of the test method, high local multiaxial stresses are developed through the introduction of a controlled imperfection (2, 3). Environmental stress-cracking has been found to occur most readily under such conditions.NOTE 2: Different types of polyethylene plastics as defined in Specification D1248 are generally tested under different levels of strain and stress. When it is expressly desired to compare the types at equal levels of strain, the specimens for all types should be tested under Condition B, Table 1 (4) .(A) Dimensional values are not exactly equivalent. However, for referee purposes the metric units shall apply.(B) For referee purposes, concentration of Igepal will be consistent with the appropriate material standard. If no concentration is given, then 10 % volume solution shall be used.(C) At a temperature of 100°C, a full-strength reagent, rather than an aqueous solution of a reagent, is generally used because solutions tend to change their compositions by water evaporation losses during the period of test.5.3 Information from this test method is not intended to be used for direct application to engineering problems.NOTE 3: Caution should be used in comparing and ranking various ethylene plastics into distinct and separate groups by this test method (see Section 13 and Note 12).As thermal history is recognized as an important variable, test results by this test method employing laboratory molded samples cannot necessarily be expected to show agreement with test results from samples obtained by other means. The true performance potential of a given ethylene plastic may, however, best be determined with specimens obtained from commercially prepared items (5).1.1 This test method covers the determination of the susceptibility of ethylene plastics, as defined in Terminology D883, to environmental stress-cracking when subjected to the conditions herein specified. Under certain conditions of stress and in the presence of environments such as soaps, wetting agents, oils, or detergents, ethylene plastics may exhibit mechanical failure by cracking.1.2 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as 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: There is no known ISO equivalent to this standard.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： 777元 加购物车

4.1 Uses—This practice sets forth a procedure for conducting limited environmental due diligence. This practice is intended for use on a voluntary basis by parties who wish to assess the environmental condition of a subject property where a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment is, initially, deemed to be unnecessary by the user and the parties do not seek CERCLA LLPs. This practice is intended primarily as a commercially prudent or reasonable approach to conducting an inquiry designed to identify potential environmental concerns in connection with a subject property. 4.2 Clarifications on Use:  4.2.1 Use Not Intended for CERCLA Liability Protection—This document is not intended to permit a user to satisfy CERCLA LLPs, that is, the practices that constitute all appropriate inquiries into the previous ownership and uses of the subject property consistent with “generally accepted good commercial and customary standards and practices” as defined in 42 U.S.C. §9601(35)(B). 4.2.2 Transaction Screen Does Not Identify Recognized Environmental Conditions—This practice does not define a scope of assessment sufficient to identify recognized environmental conditions as defined in Practice E1527 and Practice E2247. 4.2.3 Residential Tenants/Purchasers and Others—Although this practice is not intended for residential purposes, it may be used at the user’s discretion for residential tenants of multifamily residential buildings, tenants of single-family homes or other residential real estate, or purchasers of dwellings for residential use to conduct a transaction screen in connection with these transactions. 4.2.4 Site-Specific—This practice is site-specific in that it relates to assessment of environmental conditions at a subject property. Consequently, this practice does not address many additional issues raised in transactions such as purchases of business entities, or interests therein, or of their assets, that may well involve environmental liabilities pertaining to properties previously owned or operated or other off-site environmental liabilities. 4.3 Who May Conduct—The transaction screen process may be conducted by the user, or some other person, including environmental consultants, lenders, brokers, appraisers, corporations, lawyers, government agencies (civilian and military), or any other party looking to screen environmental property risk. The transaction screen process can be performed by but does not require the judgment of an environmental professional. If an environmental professional is contracted to prepare a transaction screen questionnaire, nothing in this practice requires the professional to develop opinions and conclusions. Some government programs permit use of this practice when combined with an additional requirement for professional opinions or conclusions or both. Nothing in this practice precludes a user from contracting with any person identified herein for mutually agreed upon additional services. 4.4 Inquiry Beyond the Transaction Screen Process—If further inquiry is needed after performance of the transaction screen process, the user should determine, in the exercise of the user’s reasonable business judgment, whether further inquiry may be limited to those specific issues identified as of concern or should proceed to further inquiry (see 5.9). 4.5 No transaction screen can wholly eliminate uncertainty regarding potential environmental concerns in connection with a subject property. 4.5.1 Not every property will warrant the use of a limited environmental assessment such as the transaction screen. The appropriate use of the transaction screen will be guided by the type of property subject to assessment, the expertise and risk tolerance of the user , and the information developed in the course of the inquiry. 4.5.2 Transaction screens must be evaluated based on the reasonableness of judgments made at the time and under the circumstances in which they were made. Subsequent environmental site assessments or transaction screens should not be considered valid standards to judge the appropriateness of any prior assessment based on hindsight, new information, use of developing technology or analytical techniques, or other factors. 4.6 Continued Viability of Transaction Screen—A transaction screen meeting or exceeding this practice and completed more than 180 days previously may be used to the extent allowed by 4.6.1 and 4.6.2. 4.6.1 Subject to 4.6.2, a prior transaction screen or other due diligence may be used in its entirety or as an information source if, in the reasonable judgment of the user, the prior transaction screen or other due diligence meets or exceeds the requirements of this practice and the conditions at the subject property likely to affect potential environmental concerns in connection with the subject property are not likely to have changed materially since the last transaction screen or other due diligence was conducted. In making this judgment, the user should consider the type of property assessed and the conditions in the area surrounding the subject property. Note 2: Some government programs and some lenders allow the use of a transaction screen completed within the prior 12 months. 4.6.2 If the user, or any other preparer conducting a transaction screen has actual knowledge that the information being used from a prior transaction screen is no longer accurate or if it is obvious, based on other information obtained by means of the transaction screen or known to the person conducting the transaction screen, that the information being used is not accurate at the time of the current transaction screen, such information from a prior transaction screen may not be used. 4.7 The contractual and legal obligations between a preparer and a user (and other parties, if any) are beyond the scope of this practice. 4.7.1 The contractual and legal obligations between prior and subsequent users of transaction screens or between those who conducted prior transaction screens and those who would like to use such prior transaction screens are beyond the scope of this practice. 4.8 If the user is aware of any specialized knowledge or experience that is material to potential environmental concerns in connection with the subject property, and the preparer is not the user, it is the user’s responsibility to communicate any information based on such specialized knowledge or experience to the preparer. The user should do so before the preparer conducts the site visit. 1.1 Purpose—The purpose of this practice is to define a good practice in the United States of America for conducting a transaction screen2 for a subject property where the user wishes to conduct limited environmental due diligence (that is, less than a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment). If the driving force behind the environmental due diligence is a desire to qualify for one of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) Landowner Liability Protections (LLPs), this practice should not be applied. Instead, the ASTM E1527: Standard Practice for Environmental Site Assessments: Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Process or ASTM E2247: Standard Practice for Environmental Site Assessments: Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Process for Forestland or Rural Property may be used. 1.1.1 This practice will not satisfy the requirement to conduct all appropriate inquiries into the previous ownership and uses of the subject property consistent with “generally accepted good commercial and customary standards and practices” as defined in 42 U.S.C. §9601(35)(B) to qualify for one of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) Landowner Liability Protections (LLPs). Users who desire to conduct environmental due diligence to qualify for one of the CERCLA LLPs should conduct assessment activities in conformity with “Standards and Practices for All Appropriate Inquiries,” 40 C.F.R. Part 312; ASTM E1527: Standard Practice for Environmental Site Assessments: Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Process or ASTM E2247: Standard Practice for Environmental Site Assessments: Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Process for Forestland or Rural Property. 1.2 An evaluation of business environmental risk associated with a parcel of commercial real estate may necessitate investigation beyond that identified in this practice. See Sections 1.4 and 9. 1.2.1 Potential Environmental Concerns—The goal of conducting a transaction screen is to identify potential environmental concerns as defined in 3.2.36. 1.2.2 Other Federal, State, and Local Environmental Laws—This practice does not address requirements of any state or local laws or of any federal laws. Users are cautioned that federal, state, and local laws may impose environmental assessment obligations that are beyond the scope of this practice. In some cases, government agencies permit the use of this practice in connection with their programs but sometimes impose additional requirements going beyond this practice. Users should also be aware that there are likely to be other legal obligations with regard to chemicals of concern discovered on property that are not addressed in this practice and may pose risks of civil or criminal sanctions or both for non-compliance. 1.3 Objective—The objective guiding the development of this practice is to facilitate standardized transaction screens. 1.3.1 Note of Caution—The user should be cautious in applying this practice to properties with known current or historical handling of chemicals of concern. See Note 1. 1.3.2 Potentially Appropriate Uses—This practice may be especially appropriate for properties in rural, non-industrial, or undeveloped locations or, subject to the criteria of a lending institution, in connection with a financing of properties that are expected to have few environmental concerns. Note 1: In general, a transaction screen assessment is not suitable for purposes of evaluating environmental conditions of a property having activities that use, handle, store, or dispose of large volumes of chemicals, either currently or in the past. Such activities include, but are not limited to, manufacturing, vehicle fueling, dry cleaning, metal plating and finishing, circuit board manufacturing, junkyard, and landfill activities which would prompt the need for further inquiry. Refuting the presumption of a potential environmental concern on such properties normally requires the specialized knowledge and experience of an environmental professional completing a detailed environmental assessment such as a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment. 1.4 Considerations Beyond the —The use of this practice is strictly limited to the scope set forth in this section. Section 9 of this practice identifies, for informational purposes, certain environmental conditions (not an all-inclusive list) that may exist on a subject property that are beyond the scope of this practice but may warrant consideration by parties to a commercial real estate transaction. The need to include an investigation of any such conditions in the scope of services should be evaluated based upon, among other factors, the nature of the subject property and the reasons for performing the assessment (for example, a more comprehensive evaluation of business environmental risk) and should be agreed upon as additional services beyond the scope of this practice prior to initiation of the Transaction Screen Process. 1.5 Organization of This Practice—This practice has several parts and one appendix. Section 1 is the . Section 2 refers to other ASTM standards in the Referenced Documents. Section 3, Terminology, has definitions of terms not unique to this practice, descriptions of terms unique to this practice, and acronyms. Section 4 is of this practice. Section 5 is the Introduction to the Transaction Screen Process. Section 6 sets forth the Transaction Screen Questionnaire itself. Sections 7 and 8 contain the Guide to the Transaction Screen Questionnaire and its various parts. Section 9 provides additional information regarding non-scope considerations. See 1.4. 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 加购物车

定价： 590元 加购物车

定价： 927元 加购物车

定价： 646元 加购物车

定价： 646元 加购物车

定价： 646元 加购物车

5.1 Direct-push groundwater sampling and profiling are economical methods for obtaining discrete interval groundwater quality samples in many soils and unconsolidated formations without the expense of permanent monitoring well installation (1-10).4 Many of these devices can be used to profile groundwater quality or contamination and/or hydraulic conductivity with depth by performing repetitive sampling and testing events. DP groundwater sampling is often used in expedited site characterization (Practice D6235) and as a means to accomplish high resolution site characterization (HRSC) (11, 12). The formation to be sampled should be sufficiently permeable to allow filling of the sampler in a relatively short time. The zone to be sampled and/or slug tested can be isolated by matching sampler screen length to obtain discrete samples of thin saturated, permeable layers. Use of these sampling and hydraulic testing techniques will result in more detailed characterization of sites containing multiple aquifers. The field conditions, sampler design and data quality objectives should be reviewed to determine if development (Guide D5521/D5521M) of the screened formation is appropriate. The samplers do not have a filter pack designed to retain fines like conventional wells, but only a slotted screen or wire-mesh covered ports. So, obtaining low turbidity samples may be difficult or even impossible in formations with a significant proportion of fine-grained materials. With most systems turbidity will always be high so consult Guide D6564/D6564M if field filtration of samples is required. Discrete water sampling, combined with knowledge of location and thickness of target aquifers, may better define conditions in thin multiple aquifers than monitoring wells with long screened intervals that can intersect and allow for intercommunication of multiple aquifers (4, 6, 11-15). DP sampling performed without knowledge of the location and thickness of target aquifers can result in sampling of the wrong aquifer or penetration through confining beds. Results from DP explorations can be used to develop conceptual site models, guide placement of permanent groundwater monitoring wells, and direct remediation efforts. These devices are often used under dynamic work plans (11, 16) to complete site characterizations in a single mobilization. However, multiple sampling events can be performed to depict conditions over time or refine earlier work if needed.5.2 Targeting Aquifer Sample Test Zones for Accurate Sampling—As with any investigation it is important to phase the investigation such that target intervals for groundwater sampling are accurately located. For sites that allow surface push of the sampling device, discrete water sampling is often performed in conjunction with the cone penetration test (Test Method D6067/D6067M) (4-6, 13, 14) or continuous soil sampling (Guide D6282/D6282M) which is often used for stratigraphic mapping of aquifers and to delineate high-permeability zones for sampling. Alternately, resistivity logging, or injection logging (Practice D8037/D8037M) may be used to assess formation permeability and lithology prior to the groundwater sampling or profiling activities to guide selection of sampling intervals (10, 15, 17). In such cases, DP water sampling is normally performed close to previous test holes. In complex depositional environments (12), thin aquifers may vary in continuity such that water sampling devices may not intersect the same layer at equivalent depths as companion HPT, cone penetrometer, or electrical resistivity profiling soundings.5.2.1 When volatile organic contaminants (VOC) such as trichloroethylene (TCE) or benzene are present in the subsurface, logging with the membrane interface probe (MIP) (Practice D7352) may be performed prior to groundwater sampling. MIP logs identify where significant concentrations of many VOCs are present and may be used to guide selection of groundwater sampling locations, depths and intervals (17). When petroleum fuels are present in the subsurface laser induced fluorescence (LIF) (Practice D6187) or the Optical Imaging Profiler (OIP) (18) may be used to identify where significant petroleum contamination is present to assist in guiding selection of sample locations and depths.5.3 Slug tests can be performed with several of the DP groundwater samplers (D7242/D7242M) to determine hydraulic conductivity over discrete intervals. Development of the screened interval should be conducted to assure that formation flow into and out of the device is representative of natural formation conditions. Development with a simple inertial pump to surge and purge the formation is often adequate. Other methods for development (D5521/D5521M) may be advised depending on field conditions and data quality objectives.5.4 Water sampling chambers may be sealed to maintain in situ pressures and to allow for pressure measurements and permeability testing (Practice D7242/D7242M) (6, 13, 19). Sealing of samples under pressure may reduce the possible volatilization of some organic compounds. Field comparisons may be used to evaluate any systematic errors in sampling equipments and methods. Comparison studies may include the need for pressurizing samples, or the use of vacuum to extract fluids more rapidly from low hydraulic conductivity soils (8.2.3.1(2)).5.5 DP groundwater profiling tools (7, 8, 10, 20, 21) allow the investigator to sample groundwater at multiple depths during incremental advancement of the device. Clean water is injected through the screen(s) or port(s) of these tools to keep the screens open and rinsed as advancement proceeds. Concerns for cross contamination and contaminant drag down must be considered. Some tools have an inline pressure transducer either above grade or down hole to monitor pressure required to inject water into the formation during advancement. The pressure injection log may be used to guide selection of permeable zones for sampling. When the injection flow rate is also measured, estimates of formation permeability may be calculated.5.6 Degradation of water samples during handling and transport can be reduced if discrete water sampling events with sealed screen samplers are combined with real time field analysis of potential contaminants. In limited studies, researchers have found that the combination of discrete sealed screen sampling with onsite field analytical testing provide accurate data of aquifer water quality conditions at the time of testing (4, 6). DP water sampling with exposed screen sampling devices, which may require development or purging, are considered as screening tools depending on precautions that are taken during testing.5.7 In difficult driving conditions, penetrating to the desired depth to make sure of sealing of the sampler screen may not be possible. If the screen cannot be inserted into the formation with an adequate seal, the water-sampling event would require sealing in accordance with Practice D5092/D5092M to isolate the aquifer. Selection of the appropriate equipment and methods to reach required depth at the site of concern should be made in consultation with experienced operators or manufacturers. If there is no information as to the subsurface conditions, initial explorations consisting of penetration-resistance tests, such as Test Method D6067/D6067M, resistivity profiling, or DP logging with the injection logging system (Practice D8037/D8037M) to perform trials can be performed to select the appropriate testing system.5.7.1 Typical penetration depths for a specific equipment configuration depend on many variables. Some of the variables are the driving system, the diameter of the sampler and riser pipes, and the resistance of the materials.5.7.2 Certain subsurface conditions may prevent sampler insertion. Penetration is not possible in hard rock and sometimes not possible in softer rocks such as claystones and shales. Coarse particles such as gravels, cobbles, and boulders may be difficult to penetrate or cause damage to the sampler or riser pipes. Cemented soil zones may be difficult to penetrate depending on the strength and thickness of the layers. If layers are present that prevent DP from the surface, then rotary or percussion drilling methods (Guide D6286/D6286M) can be employed to advance a boring through impeding layers to reach testing zones.5.7.3 Driving systems are generally selected based on testing depths and the materials to be penetrated. For systems using primarily static reaction force to insert the sampler, depth will be limited by the reaction weight of the equipment or anchoring stability and penetration resistance of the material. The ability to pull back the rod string is also a consideration. Impact or percussion soil probing has an advantage of reducing the reaction weight required for penetration. Penetration capability in clays may be increased by reducing rod friction by enlarging tips or friction reducers. However, over reaming of the hole may increase the possibility of rod buckling and may allow for communication of differing groundwater tables. Hand-held equipment is generally used on very shallow explorations, typically less than 5 m [15 ft] depth, but depths on the order of 10 m [30 ft] have been reached in very soft lacustrine clays. Intermediate size driving systems, such as small truck-mounted hydraulic-powered push and impact drivers, typically work within depth ranges from 5 to 30 m [20 to 100 ft]. Larger DP machines may be capable of reaching 60 m [200 ft] depending on subsurface conditions. Heavy static-push cone penetrometer vehicles, such as 20 ton trucks, typically work within depth ranges from 15 to 45 m [50 to 150 ft], and also reach depth ranges on the order of 100 m [300 ft] in soft ground conditions. Guide D6286/D6286M shows depth ranges of other drilling equipment to attain greater depths.NOTE 1: Users and manufacturers cannot agree on depth ranges for different soil types. Users should consult with experienced local producers and manufacturers to determine depth capability for their specific site conditions.5.8 Combining multiple-sampling events in a single-sample chamber (profiling) without decontamination (Practice D5088) is generally discouraged. In this application, purging of the screen or sampling chamber should be performed to make sure of isolation of the sampling event. Purging should be performed by removing several volumes of fluid until new chemical properties have been stabilized or elements are flushed with fluid of known chemistry. Purging requirements may depend upon the materials used in the sampler and the sampler design (Guide D6634/D6634M). Rinsate samples may be collected and analyzed to assess concerns with carryover of contaminants from overlying zones that are heavily contaminated. Monitoring water quality parameters (pH, specific conductance, dissolved oxygen, oxidation-reduction potential, etc.) to stability is often used to document when representative water is being purged from a sampling interval (Practice D6771).5.9 Bottom-up profiling by driving a DP groundwater sampler to the base of the formation and retracting incrementally, while the screen is exposed, for sampling at decreasing depths should be avoided as this may lead to cross contamination and inaccurate contaminant distribution information. Slug tests should not be performed by bottom-up profiling as there is poor or no control on the length of formation being tested under these conditions.5.10 Screens designed and deployed in dual tube use are generally designed for use inside the dual tubing and overdriving the screen past the casing can damage the sampler screen and subsequent exposed screen samples would be subject to cross contamination. Use equipment according to manufactures instructions.NOTE 2: The quality of the result produced by this standard is dependent on the competence of the personnel performing it, and the suitability of the equipment and facilities used. Practitioners that meet the criteria of Practice D3740 are generally considered capable of competent and objective testing/sampling/inspection/etc. Users of this standard are cautioned that compliance with Practice D3740 does not in itself assure reliable results. Reliable results depend on many factors; Practice D3740 provides a means of evaluating some of those factors.Practice D3740 was developed for agencies engaged in the testing and/or inspection of soils and rock. As such, it is not totally applicable to agencies performing this field practice. However, users of this practice should recognize that the framework of Practice D3740 is appropriate for evaluating the quality of an agency performing this practice. Currently there is no known qualifying national authority that inspects agencies that perform this practice.1.1 This guide covers a review of methods for sampling groundwater at discrete points or in increments by insertion of groundwater sampling devices using Direct Push Methods (D6286/D6286M, see 3.3.2). By directly pushing the sampler, the soil is displaced and helps to form an annular seal above the sampling zone. Direct-push water sampling can be one time, or multiple sampling events. Knowledge of site specific geology and hydrogeologic conditions is necessary to successfully obtain groundwater samples with these devices.1.2 Direct-push methods of water sampling are used for groundwater quality and geohydrologic studies. Water quality and permeability may vary at different depths below the surface depending on geohydrologic conditions. Incremental sampling or sampling at discrete depths is used to determine the distribution of contaminants and to more completely characterize geohydrologic environments. These explorations are frequently advised in characterization of hazardous and toxic waste sites and for geohydrologic studies.1.3 This guide covers several types of groundwater samplers; sealed screen samplers, profiling samplers, dual tube sampling systems, and simple exposed screen samplers. In general, sealed screen samplers driven to discrete depth provide the highest quality water samples. Profiling samplers using an exposed screen(s) which are purged between sampling events allow for more rapid sample collection at multiple depths. Simple exposed screen samplers driven to a test zone with no purging prior to sampling may result in more questionable water quality if exposed to upper contaminated zones, and in that case, would be considered screening devices.1.4 Methods for obtaining groundwater samples for water quality analysis and detection of contaminants are presented. These methods include use of related standards such as; selection of purging and sampling devices (Guide D6452 and D6634/D6634M), sampling methods (Guide D4448 and D6771) and sampling preparation and handling (Guides D5903, D6089, D6517, D6564/D6564M, and D6911).1.5 When appropriately installed and developed many of these devices may be used to perform pneumatic slug testing (Practice D7242/D7242M) to quantitatively evaluate formation hydraulic conductivity over discrete intervals of unconsolidated formations. These slug tests provide reliable determinations of hydraulic conductivity and can be performed after water quality sampling is completed.1.6 Direct-push water sampling is limited to unconsolidated formations that can be penetrated with available equipment. In strong soils damage may result during insertion of the sampler from rod bending or assembly buckling. Penetration may be limited, or damage to samplers or rods can occur in certain ground conditions, some of which are discussed in 5.7. Drilling equipment such as sonic drilling (Practice D6914/D6914M) or rotary drilling (Guide D6286/D6286M) can be used to advance holes past formations difficult to penetrate using typical Direct Push equipment. Some soil formations do not yield water in a timely fashion for direct-push sampling. In the case of unyielding formations, direct-push soil sampling can be performed (Guide D6282/D6282M).1.7 Direct push water sampling with one-time sealed screen samplers can also be performed using cone penetrometer equipment (Guide D6067/D6067M).1.8 This guide does not address installation of permanent water sampling systems such as those presented in Practice D5092/D5092M. Direct-push monitoring wells for long term monitoring are addressed in Guide D6724/D6724M and Practice D6725/D6725M.1.9 Units—The values stated in either SI units or inch-pound units [presented in brackets] 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. Reporting of test results in units other than SI shall not be regarded as nonconformance with this standard.1.10 All observed and calculated values shall conform to the guidelines for significant digits and rounding established in Practice D6026, unless superseded by this standard.1.11 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.1.12 This guide offers an organized collection of information or a series of options and does not recommend a specific course of action. This document cannot replace education or experience and should be used in conjunction with professional judgment. Not all aspects of this guide may be applicable in all circumstances. This ASTM standard is not intended to represent or replace the standard of care by which the adequacy of a given professional service must be judged, nor should this document be applied without consideration of a project's many unique aspects. The word “Standard” in the title of this document means only that the document has been approved through the ASTM consensus process.1.13 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 加购物车

定价： 590元 加购物车

5.1 This guide provides guidance to persons managing or responsible for designing sampling and analytical plans for determining whether sample compositing may assist in more efficiently meeting study objectives. Samples must be composited properly, or useful information on contamination distribution and sample variance may be lost.5.2 The procedures described for mixing samples and obtaining a representative subsample are broadly applicable to waste sampling where it is desired to transport a reduced amount of material to the laboratory. The mixing and subsampling sections provide guidance to persons preparing sampling and analytical plans and field personnel.5.3 While this guide generally focuses on solid materials, the attributes and limitations of composite sampling apply equally to static liquid samples.1.1 Compositing and subsampling are key links in the chain of sampling and analytical events that must be performed in compliance with project objectives and instructions to ensure that the resulting data are representative. This guide discusses the advantages and appropriate use of composite sampling, field procedures and techniques to mix the composite sample, and procedures to collect an unbiased and precise subsample(s) from a larger sample. It discusses the advantages and limitations of using composite samples in designing sampling plans for characterization of wastes (mainly solid) and potentially contaminated media. This guide assumes that an appropriate sampling device is selected to collect an unbiased sample.1.2 The guide does not address: where samples should be collected (depends on the objectives) (see Guide D6044), selection of sampling equipment, bias introduced by selection of inappropriate sampling equipment, sample collection procedures or collection of a representative specimen from a sample, or statistical interpretation of resultant data and devices designed to dynamically sample process waste streams. It also does not provide sufficient information to statistically design an optimized sampling plan, or determine the number of samples to collect or calculate the optimum number of samples to composite to achieve specified data quality objectives (see Practice D5792). Standard procedures for planning waste sampling activities are addressed in Guide D4687.1.3 The sample mixing and subsampling procedures described in this guide are considered inappropriate for samples to be analyzed for volatile organic compounds. Volatile organics are typically lost through volatilization during sample collection, handling, shipping, and laboratory sample preparation unless specialized procedures are used. The enhanced mixing described in this guide is expected to cause significant losses of volatile constituents. Specialized procedures should be used for compositing samples for determination of volatiles such as combining directly into methanol (see Guide D4547).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 加购物车

定价： 927元 加购物车

定价： 646元 加购物车

定价： 260元 / 折扣价： 221 元 加购物车

定价： 481元 / 折扣价： 409 元 加购物车

定价： 345元 / 折扣价： 294 元 加购物车