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

3.1 The primary objective of this verification guide is to determine the “air pollution-prevention potential” (possible reduction in VOC or HAP emissions) of factory-applied liquid coatings.3.2 The overall objective of this guide is to verify the above pollution-prevention characteristics and basic performance characteristics of liquid coating technologies. Use of this guide can increase acceptance of more environmentally friendly technologies for product finishing with an accompanying reduction in emissions to the atmosphere. The specific objectives of this guide are to (1) quantify the VOC and HAP content of liquid coatings and (2) verify the basic quality and durability performance of these coatings.3.3 The primary criteria for verification of liquid coatings will be:3.3.1 Confirm that use of the coating will significantly reduce VOC and HAP content or emissions (or both) during application or cure, or both.3.3.2 Confirm that the coating can provide an acceptable finish (appearance, hardness, flexibility, etc.) for the intended end use.3.4 The test results from this guide can provide to potential users the best data available to determine whether the coating will provide a pollution-prevention benefit while meeting the finish quality requirements for its intended use. This guide intends to supply end users with unbiased technical data to assist them in this decision-making process.3.5 The quantitative air pollution-prevention potential depends on a multitude of factors; therefore, the liquid coatings are to be applied in accordance with the coating vendor’s instructions and the resulting verification data reflect only the specific conditions of the test. To quantify the environmental benefit (air pollution-prevention potential), a test to quantify the VOC or HAP emissions from the new liquid coatings will be conducted and compared to data for existing coatings typically used in the target industry.1.1 This guide provides a generic testing procedure to verify the air pollution-prevention characteristics and basic properties of liquid coatings applied to metal, plastic, wood, or composite substrates in a factory/manufacturing environment. Thus it may be used to evaluate these liquid coatings to verify their volatile organic compound (VOC) and organic hazardous air pollutant (HAP) content as well as basic performance properties.1.2 This guide is adapted from a procedure used by the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to establish third party verification of the physical properties and performance of coatings that have potential to reduce air emissions. The data from the verification testing is available on the internet at the EPA’s Environmental Technology Verification (ETV) Program website (http://www.epa.gov/etv/centers/center6.html) under the “P2 Innovative Coatings and Coating Equipment Pilot.”1.3 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as the standard. The values given in parentheses are for information only.1.4 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.1.5 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

定价： 590元 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

3.1 This guide is primarily intended to assist decision-makers and spill-responders in contingency planning, spill response, and training.3.2 This guide is not specific to site or type of oil.1.1 This guide covers the use of chemical cleaning agents on oiled shorelines. This guide is not applicable to other chemical agents nor to the use of such products in open waters.1.2 The purpose of this guide is to provide information that will enable spill responders to decide whether to use chemical shoreline cleaning agents as part of the oil spill cleanup response.1.3 This is a general guide only. It is assumed that conditions at the spill site have been assessed and that these conditions are suitable for the use of cleaning agents. It is assumed that permission has been obtained to use the chemical agents. Variations in the behavior of different types of oil are not dealt with in this guide and may change some of the parameters noted herein.1.4 This guide covers two different types of shoreline cleaners: those that disperse oil into the water and those that disperse little oil into the water under low energy levels. The selection criteria for these two types can differ widely. This guide does not cover dispersants.1.5 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard. No other units of measurement are included in this 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, 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 加购物车

4.1 This section provides a description of the environmental conditions listed in Section 1 and describes the sub-conditions within each condition. Examples provided for many of the conditions and sub-conditions are provided as guidance only. Each of the conditions described should be evaluated and documented as set forth in Sections 5, 6, and 7.4.2 Environmental Consistency: Static, Dynamic, Transitional: 4.2.1 Static is when the environment is similar throughout the test apparatus. For example, there are minor fluctuations in temperature throughout the apparatus as shown in Fig. 1 and Fig. 2. Dynamic is when the environment significantly differs within the test apparatus. For example, when the temperature changes between repetitions as shown in Fig. 3. Transitional is when the environment significantly differs in different areas within the test apparatus as shown in Fig. 4. The intent here is to not give specific guidance, but to provide a high-level classification of a particular set of environmental conditions. If environment consistency is dynamic or transitional, or both, a report form (see Section 7) for each unique set of environmental conditions should be completed.FIG. 1 Example of Static Environment using TemperatureFIG. 2 Example of Static Environment using Temperature and Showing a Transition between Two Static EnvironmentsFIG. 3 Example of Dynamic Environment using Temperature and Showing that the Environment Changed during the TestFIG. 4 Example of Transitional Environment using Temperature; Portions of the Environment May Remain Static or May Be Dynamic (for example, Cold to Colder)4.3 Lighting: 4.3.1 Various lighting conditions can potentially affect A-UGV optical sensor performance by affecting sensor and in turn, A-UGV responsiveness. Lighting sources can include ambient lighting as well as light emitters associated A-UGV operation. Two setups for lighting include direct or ambient source(s) applied to the A-UGV. Direct lighting can also include reflected light from a highly reflective surface and implies that the source is directed at the light-affected components of the A-UGV (for example, sensors). Indirect or ambient light includes lighting where the source is not directly applied to the light-affected components of the A-UGV. Light intensity is divided into five levels exemplified through dark, dim, typical indoor lighting, spotlight, and full sunlight.4.3.2 Ambient Lighting Type: 4.3.2.1 Exposed bulb (for example, fluorescent, can lights),4.3.2.2 Spotlight (for example, direct away from the A-UGV),4.3.2.3 Sunlight (for example, the A-UGV is tested in bright sunlight),4.3.2.4 Reflected (for example, bulb directed at the ceiling),4.3.2.5 Filtered (for example, diffused light through translucent glass).4.3.3 Directed Lighting Type: 4.3.3.1 Exposed bulb,4.3.3.2 Spotlight,4.3.3.3 Sunlight (for example, the A-UGV faces/navigates towards low sun position),4.3.3.4 Reflected,4.3.3.5 Filtered,4.3.3.6 Laser,4.3.3.7 Light from another vehicle.4.3.4 Lighting Source Location—Document indirect and direct light source location and elevation with respect to the A-UGV (refer to Fig. 5).FIG. 5 Lighting Direction (a) Top View and (b) Side View and (c) Elevation View with Respect to the A-UGV4.3.5 Lighting Levels: 4.3.5.1 Level 1: 0 to 1 lux (for example, dark).4.3.5.2 Level 2: 2 to 99 lux (for example, dim).4.3.5.3 Level 3: 100 to 1000 lux (for example, office environment).4.3.5.4 Level 4: 1001 to 9999 lux (for example, high intensity work light, spotlight).4.3.5.5 Level 5: 10 000 lux and above (for example, full sunlight).4.3.6 Spectrum—Identify primary color and peak wavelength.4.3.7 Polarization—Identify the polarizing source and angle with respect to a known reference (for example, world coordinates).4.3.8 If more specificity of measurement is required, the following documents and standards may be used: “Recommended Light Levels” from the National Optical Astronomy Observatory9 and ISO 15469.4.4 External Emission: 4.4.1 When emitters are outside of the A-UGV (for example, from another A-UGV, the environment) that can potentially interfere with the A-UGV sensor system. External radiation sources can affect the A-UGV performance, for example: multiple time-of-flight cameras, fork-lift pedestrian lights, 3D structured light sensors, light detection and ranging sensors (LIDAR).4.4.2 External Emitter Configuration: 4.4.2.1 Type of emitter(s).4.4.2.2 Quantity of emitter(s).4.4.3 External Emitter Source Location—Document emitter source location and elevation with respect to the A-UGV (refer to Fig. 5); add an external emitter symbol on the test method drawing in the appropriate location.4.4.4 Spectrum—Identify primary color and peak wavelength.4.5 Temperature: 4.5.1 Temperature variability and extremes can affect the A-UGV performance. Temperature ranges span from low to high extremes expressed in five levels. Temperature variations can affect onboard electronics, create condensation, cause hydraulic fluid viscosity, reduce battery life and recharge rate.4.5.2 Temperature Levels (in °C): 4.5.2.1 Level 1: below 0°C to 0°C (for example, freezer).4.5.2.2 Level 2: 0°C to 15°C (for example, perishable storage).4.5.2.3 Level 3: 16°C to 26°C (for example, office, warehouse).4.5.2.4 Level 4: 27°C to 49°C (for example, warehouse).4.5.2.5 Level 5: above 49°C (for example, foundries, forges).4.6 Humidity: 4.6.1 Humidity refers to the amount of water vapor contained in the air around the vehicle. High humidity combined with dew point temperature causes condensation that can short electronics and affect lenses and other A-UGV components. Greater than 60 % humidity causes a large increase in corrosion of metallic parts. Low humidity, on the other hand, will see a dramatic rise in static electricity and the need for adequate discharge.4.6.2 Relative Humidity Level: 4.6.2.1 Low – less than 30 %.4.6.2.2 Moderately Low – 31 to 55 %.4.6.2.3 Moderately High – 56 to 75%.4.6.2.4 High – greater than 75 %.4.6.3 Dew Point Temperature—The highest temperature at which airborne water vapor will condense to form liquid dew.4.7 Electrical Interference: 4.7.1 Some surfaces are not conductive enough to provide adequate grounding for an A-UGV. Ground vehicles have a floating electrical ground. As static builds up on the vehicle and the voltage drop from the positive lead of the battery and the chassis changes, the electronic components of the vehicle are negatively impacted. Strong magnetic fields can impact the onboard electrical components, and in particular, any data storage within the onboard computer. Many A-UGVs require wireless network connections for full functionality. Radio frequency (RF) interference can degrade these networks and A-UGV capability.4.7.2 For Electro-magnetic compatibility issues, refer to:4.7.2.1 BS EN 12895 Electromagnetic Compatibility – Emissions and Immunity.4.7.2.2 MIL-STD-462 – EMI Emissions and Susceptibility.4.7.2.3 IEC 61000-4-1 Electromagnetic Compatibility (EMC) – Part 4-1: Testing and Measurement Techniques – Overview of Immunity Tests4.7.2.4 IEC 61000-6 – Emission Standards for Industrial Environments4.8 Air Flow and Quality: 4.8.1 Air flow and quality refers to the ability that an A-UGV can discern an object or light in the presence of air particulates or wind, or both. Air quality can affect the A-UGV performance in terms of object detection, navigation, and docking. Air quality depends upon the size and volumetric density of particulates in the air. For relative comparison, the average human eye cannot see particles smaller than 40 μm, fog from water vapor typically includes particle sizes from 5 μm to 50 μm, and dust particles are typically 0.1 μm to 100 μm. An ISO Class 1 cleanroom has no more than 10 particles larger than 0.1 μm in a cubic meter of air. Fog (water vapor) particle density of 1 amg allows human visibility of about 125 m at ground level.4.8.2 Air Velocity and Direction—Document air flow source location and elevation with respect to the A-UGV (refer to Fig. 5).4.8.3 Air Particle Density—Optionally, measure the air particle size and volumetric density.4.8.3.1 Clear – (for example, clean room, no visible air particulates).4.8.3.2 Moderate – (for example, visible fog, dust, light to moderate rain/snow/fog).4.8.3.3 Dense – (for example, dust storm, heavy snow/rain/fog).4.8.4 If more specificity of measurement is required, the following standards may be used:4.8.4.1 Air particle density – Clear: ISO 14644-1.4.9 Floor or Ground Surface: 4.9.1 A-UGV mobility is affected by ground surface conditions including: surface texture/roughness, deformability, sloped (ramp) or undulation (lack of flatness). Ground surface conditions can affect A-UGV: traction, vibration affecting the electronics integrity, positioning, and stability.4.9.2 Type(s): 4.9.2.1 Approximate similar to the following examples where multiple floor types may be present and indicated on the report form: for example, concrete, linoleum tile, carpet, dirt, grass, asphalt, wood plank, etc.4.9.2.2 Indicate floor anomalies within the test space: for example, floor grate, manhole cover, undetectable (by vehicle sensors) divots, transparent flooring, etc.4.9.3 Coefficient of Friction: 4.9.3.1 High (for example, brushed concrete, asphalt).4.9.3.2 Moderate (for example, polished/sealed concrete, steel plates, packed dirt).4.9.3.3 Low (for example, icy, wet, lubricated, dry sand).4.9.4 Gap/Step—Known infrastructure that could be a part of the A-UGV map (see Fig. 6).FIG. 6 Gap and Step4.9.4.1 Gap—Length, width, depth, and angle of gap with respect to a reference frame.4.9.4.2 Step—Length, width, depth, and angle of step with respect to a reference frame.4.9.4.3 For each gap/step, a description of the gap/step should also be documented. Examples: sharp gap (between loading dock and truck) vs. rounded gap (pothole, floor divot); sharp step (square channel metal) vs. rounded step (cable or cable cover, speed bump/hump).4.9.5 Deformability: 4.9.5.1 Rigid (for example, concrete, asphalt).4.9.5.2 Semi-rigid (for example, compacted dirt or gravel, wet sand, industrial carpet).4.9.5.3 Soft – malleable (for example, snow, mud, dry sand, padded carpet).4.9.6 Grade (Ramp)—Known infrastructure that could be a part of the A-UGV map.4.9.6.1 Level 1*: 0  % to 3 % (for example, nominally flat floor).4.9.6.2 Level 2*: 4 % to 7 % (for example, transitional ramp in factories).4.9.6.3 Level 3: 8 % to 10 % (for example, yard ramp = 8 % to 9 %).4.9.6.4 Level 4: 11 % to 15 % (for example, steep road grade).4.9.6.5 Level 5: 16 % and above.NOTE 1: ITSDF B56.5 defines a ramp as “a variation in floor grade in excess of 3 % and of a length where rating data variance is required.” UL 3100 Section 16.1 states “The AGV shall be capable of meeting all requirements for operation and control on an even grade and a sloped grade up to 3 % of grade.”4.9.7 Undulation (Lack of Flatness on the Apparatus Ground Surface): 4.9.7.1 Flat – 0 mm to 6 mm variation over 3 m.4.9.7.2 Moderately flat – more than 6 mm to 12 mm variation over 3 m.4.9.7.3 Non-flat – more than 12 mm to 51 mm variation over 3 m.4.9.7.4 Outdoor – more than 51 mm variation over 3 m.4.9.8 Particulates (document type and describe): 4.9.8.1 None (for example, dry, clean).4.9.8.2 Fine (for example, cardboard dust, concrete dust).4.9.8.3 Coarse (for example, sand, pebbles).4.9.9 If more specificity of measurement is required, the following standards may be used:4.9.9.1 Deformability: ASTM Test Method E1274.4.9.9.2 Undulation: ASTM Test Method E1155M.4.9.9.3 Coefficient of Friction: ANSI B101.3.4.10 Boundaries: 4.10.1 Boundaries refer to the defining apparatus, existing structure, or ground anomalies, or combinations thereof, within which the A-UGV navigates. The characteristics for boundaries include:4.10.2 Opaque walls (for example, white drywall, opaque plastic, reflective or flat black test boundaries, corrugated metal, curb from the road).4.10.3 Semi-transparent walls – (for example, clear glass, frosted glass, translucent plastic).4.10.4 Negative obstacles (for example, cliff, curb from the sidewalk, loading dock, drainage channel).4.10.5 Virtual walls (for example, A-UGV prohibited areas mapped within the vehicle controller at edges of pedestrian walkways, edges of negative obstacles, restricted areas).4.10.6 Porous walls (for example, wire mesh fencing, chain-link fencing).4.10.7 Elevated dividers (for example, racking, post and beam fencing, retractable-belt dividers).4.10.8 Building infrastructure (for example, machinery, equipment, A-UGV chargers).4.10.9 Floor markings (for example, tape, paint).4.10.10 Mixture of the above boundaries (for example, railing and kickplate in front of a negative drop-off at edge of a platform, post and beam fencing with wire mesh covering).4.10.11 Moving boundaries (for example, moving sliding or hinged doors, moving curtains); the environment should be labeled as static unless the boundary moves during a test, in which case the environment should be labeled as dynamic, for example, an A-UGV drives past a soft partition that moves or an A-UGV drives through a soft partition that causes it to move.4.10.12 If more specificity of measurement is required, the following standards and references may be used:4.10.12.1 Floor Markings:(1) Automotive Industry Action Group (AIAG) Occupational Health and Safety OH-2, Pedestrian and Vehicle Safety Guideline (includes description and marking depictions).(2) ANSI/ITSDF B56.5 (section 8.11.2 describes Hazardous Zones).(3) “Implementation of 5S Quality Tool in Manufacturing Company: A Case Study.”101.1 When conducting test methods, it is important to consider the role that the environmental conditions play in the Automatic through Autonomous – Unmanned Ground Vehicle (A-UGV) performance. Various A-UGVs are designed to be operated both indoors and outdoors under conditions specified by the manufacturer. Likewise, end users of the A-UGV will be operating these vehicles in a variety of environmental conditions. When conducting and replicating F45 test methods by vehicle manufacturers and users, it is important to specify and document the environmental conditions under which the A-UGV is to be tested as there will be variations in vehicle performance caused by the conditions, especially when comparing and replicating sets of test results. It is also important to consider changes in environmental conditions during the course of operations (for example, transitions between conditions). As such, environmental conditions specified in this practice are static, dynamic, or transitional, or combinations thereof; with the A-UGV stationary or in motion. This practice provides brief introduction to the following list of environmental conditions that can affect performance of the A-UGV: Lighting, External sensor emission, Temperature, Humidity, Electrical Interference, Air quality, Ground Surface, and Boundaries. This practice then breaks down each condition into sub-categories so that the user can document the various aspects associated with the category prior to A-UGV tests defined in ASTM F45 Test Methods (for example, F3244). It is recommended that salient environment conditions be documented when conducting F45 test methods.1.2 The environmental conditions listed in 1.1 to be documented for A-UGV(s) being tested are described and parameterized in Section 4 and allow a basis for performance comparison in test methods. The approach is to divide the list of environmental conditions into sub-conditions that represent the various aspects of the major category (for example, sunlight within ambient lighting). Where necessary, this practice also provides guidelines (for example, lighting direction) to document environmental conditions in an existing environment.1.3 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as the standard. The values given in parentheses are not precise mathematical conversion to imperial units. They are close approximate equivalents for the purpose of specifying material dimensions or quantities that are readily available to avoid excessive fabrication costs of test apparatuses while maintaining repeatability and reproducibility of the test method results. These values given in parentheses 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： 843元 加购物车

4.1 This test method, when applied to aerospace transparencies of either monolithic glass/plastic or laminated combinations, is a measure of the ability of the transparency to withstand the effects of artificially induced environments. The test applies to configurations employing electrically conductive coatings, and also to uncoated materials.4.2 The resistance of the transparent enclosure to environmental effects may vary appreciably depending on the size, geometry, material of construction, coating integrity, coating density, and other factors.1.1 This test method covers determination of the effects of exposure to thermal shock, condensing humidity, and simulated weather on aerospace transparent enclosures.1.2 This test method is not recommended for quality control, nor is it intended to provide a correlation to actual service life.1.3 Units—The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard. No other units of measurement are included in this standard.1.3.1 Exceptions—Certain inch-pound units are furnished in parentheses (not mandatory) and certain temperatures in Fahrenheit associated with other standards are also furnished.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 加购物车

定价： 481元 / 折扣价： 409 元 加购物车

定价： 646元 加购物车

定价： 927元 加购物车

定价： 156元 / 折扣价： 133 元 加购物车

定价： 260元 / 折扣价： 221 元 加购物车

5.1 The purpose of this guide is to provide a logical, tiered approach in the development of environmental health criteria coincident with level and effort in the research, development, testing, and evaluation of new materials for military use. Various levels of uncertainty are associated with data collected from previous stages. Following the recommendation in the guide should reduce the relative uncertainty of the data collected at each developmental stage. At each stage, a general weight of evidence qualifier shall accompany each exposure/effect relationship. They may be simple (for example, low, medium, or high confidence) or sophisticated using a numerical value for each predictor as a multiplier to ascertain relative confidence in each step of risk characterization. The specific method used will depend on the stage of development, quantity and availability of data, variation in the measurement, and general knowledge of the dataset. Since specific formulations, conditions, and use scenarios may not be known until the later stages, exposure estimates can be determined when practical (for example, Engineering and Manufacturing Development; see 6.6). Exposure data can then be used with other toxicological data collected from previous stages in a quantitative risk assessment to determine the relative degree of hazard.5.2 Data developed from the use of this guide are designed to be consistent with criteria required in weapons and weapons system development (for example, programmatic environment, safety and occupational health evaluations, environmental assessments/environmental impact statements, toxicity clearances, and technical data sheets).5.3 Information shall be evaluated in a flexible manner consistent with the needs of the authorizing program. This requires proper characterization of the current problem. For example, compounds may be ranked relative to the environmental criteria of the prospective alternatives, the replacement compound, and within bounds of absolute environmental values. A weight of evidence (evaluation of uncertainty and variability) must also be considered with each criterion at each stage to allow for a proper assessment of the potential for adverse environmental or occupational effects; see 6.8.5.4 This standard approach requires environment, safety, and occupational health (ESOH) technical experts to determine the magnitude of the hazard and system engineers/researchers to evaluate the acceptability of the risk. Generally, the higher developmental stages require a higher managerial level of approval.1.1 This guide is intended to determine the relative environmental influence of new substances, consistent with the research and development (R&D) level of effort and is intended to be applied in a logical, tiered manner that parallels both the available funding and the stage of research, development, testing, and evaluation. Specifically, conservative assumptions, relationships, and models are recommended early in the research stage, and as the technology is matured, empirical data will be developed and used. Munition constituents are included and may include propellants, oxidizers, explosives, binders, stabilizers, metals, dyes, and other compounds used in the formulation to produce a desired effect. Munition systems range from projectiles, grenades, rockets/missiles, training simulators, to smokes and obscurants. Given the complexity of issues involved in the assessment of environmental fate and effects and the diversity of the systems used, this guide is broad in scope and not intended to address every factor that may be important in an environmental context. Rather, it is intended to reduce uncertainty at minimal cost by considering the most important factors related to human health and environmental impacts of energetic materials. This guide provides an outline for collecting data useful in a relative ranking procedure to provide the systems scientist with a sound basis for prospectively determining a selection of candidates based on environmental and human health criteria. The general principles in this guide are applicable to substances other than energetics if intended to be used in a similar manner with similar exposure profiles.1.2 The scope of this guide includes:1.2.1 Energetic and other new/novel materials and compositions in all stages of research, development, test and evaluation.1.2.2 Environmental assessment, including:1.2.2.1 Human and ecological effects of the unexploded energetics and compositions on the environment.1.2.2.2 Environmental transport mechanisms of the unexploded energetics and composition.1.2.2.3 Degradation and bioaccumulation properties.1.2.3 Occupational health impacts from manufacture and use of the energetic substances and compositions to include load, assembly, and packing of the related munitions.1.3 Given the wide array of applications, the methods in this guide are not prescriptive. They are intended to provide flexible, general methods that can be used to evaluate factors important in determining environmental consequences from use of new substances in weapon systems and platforms.1.4 Factors that affect the health of humans as well as the environment are considered early in the development process. Since some of these data are valuable in determining health effects from generalized exposure, effects from occupational exposures are also included.1.5 This guide does not address all processes and factors important to the fate, transport, and potential for effects in every system. It is intended to be balanced effort between scientific and practical means to evaluate the relative environmental effects of munition compounds resulting from intended use. It is the responsibility of the user to assess data quality as well as sufficiently characterize the scope and magnitude of uncertainty associated with any application of this standard.1.6 Integration of disparate information and data streams developed from using the methods described in this guide is challenging and may not be straight-forward. Professional assistance from subject matter experts familiar with the fields of toxicology and risk assessment is advised.1.7 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.1.8 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

定价： 590元 加购物车

4.1 Environmentally sound management of underground storage tank systems involves a broad range of preventative maintenance activities directed toward preventing accidental releases of regulated substances, and effectively detecting and responding to such releases when, and if, they do occur. Numerous technical guidelines are presently available addressing specific procedures for release prevention and response for underground tank systems, including guidelines for tank system design, installation, operation and maintenance, leak detection, spill control, periodic equipment inspections, corrective action for affected environmental media, tank system closure, and operator training. This guide presents an overview, identifying key management considerations and referring the user to other related ASTM standards and industry guidelines for more detailed information.4.2 Tank System Design and Installation—The first step in environmentally sound management of tank systems is to design and install the tank system so as to minimize the potential for release of regulated substances to the environment. This guide addresses key considerations related to the types of tank systems to be used, compatibility of regulated substances to construction materials, types of spill containment and overfill prevention devices, corrosion protection, leak detection proper installation practices, and system operation.4.3 Preventative Maintenance—Even for properly designed and installed tank systems, practical measures are needed to detect and terminate leaks and respond to releases in a timely manner so as to minimize regulated substance losses and associated environmental effects. This guide reviews general considerations including release detection measures, possible indicators of a release, appropriate record-keeping procedures, tank system inspection, equipment testing, response planning and release control measures. Some preventative maintenance activities are recommended while others are mandated by state or federal regulations. This guide addresses federally mandated activities4.4 Inspections—Inspections are a critical component of a sound UST management plan. Both third-party professional and operator inspections can identify potential risks associated with component compromise and operational issues that may increase the risk of an uncontained release. Some inspections are required by regulatory requirements. The scope, frequency and necessary qualifications to perform required inspections vary by jurisdiction. This guide outlines the scope and schedule of federally required walkthrough inspections.4.5 Equipment Testing—Testing can confirm the functional status of various UST components. Some UST equipment and components must be tested in accordance with federal regulations. Spill prevention equipment and containment sumps used for interstitial monitoring of piping must be tested at least once every three years. Electronic and mechanical release detection components must be tested annually. Cathodic protection systems must be tested within six months of installation, then at least every three years and within six months of any repair activity. This guide outlines the scope and schedule of federally required equipment testing.4.6 Fueling Procedure—Careful loading, unloading, and dispensing of liquids to and from underground storage tanks is the most important day-to-day activity to ensure proper handling of liquids and prevention of releases. This guide is developed to addresses UST system management. Dispensers and dispensing activities may be sources of releases but are not considered a component of the UST system and are not include in the regulatory requirements addressed by this guide.4.7 Corrective Action for Affected Environmental Media—Following discovery and control of a release regulated substance from an underground tank system, corrective actions may be required for affected soil and groundwater as needed to protect human health, safety, and environmental resources. This guide reviews a risk-based process for investigation, evaluation, and remediation of affected environmental media consistent with the guidelines provided in Guide E2081.4.8 Tank System Closure—If it is determined that an underground tank system will no longer be used to store regulated substances, the system must be taken out of service, either temporarily or permanently, and, when appropriate, decommissioned and removed in a manner that minimizes the potential for future releases or safety hazards. This guide reviews the general procedures for properly removing tank systems from service, as well as the options for tank system closure by means of tank excavation and backfill placement or in-place closure methods.4.9 Tank Management Practice Education, and Operator Training—Personnel training is a key element of successful environmental management of UST systems. It is important that persons involved in the installation, operation, or maintenance of tank systems understand the release prevention, appropriate leak detection, and response procedures. This guide outlines the scope and schedule of several key training areas that may be appropriate depending on individual job assignments, including: tank system installation and maintenance; general measures for release prevention; leak detection equipment operation and maintenance; release control and emergency response measures; and regulated substance and waste handling measures. This guide outlines the scope of federally mandated operator training.4.10 Recognized Practice—Some federally mandated testing and inspection requirements can be satisfied by following a practice developed by a nationally recognized association or independent testing laboratory such as provided in 40 CFR §280.35(a)(1)(ii)(B) and 40 CFR §280.40(a)(3). Many such practices are referenced in this guide. Not all practices developed by nationally recognized associations or independent testing laboratories are accepted by the USEPA or the implementing agency. To determine if a practice satisfies the federal requirements, the owner or operator should consult with the implementing agency.1.1 The framework discussed in this guide is limited to facilities with underground storage tanks (USTs) storing regulated substances at ambient temperature and atmospheric pressure. This guide is not intended to provide detailed technical specifications for implementation of the approaches described in this document, nor to be used as an enforcement tool, but rather to identify the important information used for environmental management of underground tank systems. The term “must” is used where United States federal requirements apply. References to ASTM standards and other industry guidelines have been provided to address implementation of the approaches discussed in this guide. Many states and some local agencies have adopted rules that place additional responsibilities on the owners/operators of UST systems. Refer to state and local regulations that may contain additional requirements. It is not possible to identify all considerations or combinations of conditions pertinent to a unique underground storage tank system.1.2 This guide addresses principal considerations related to the prevention of, and response to environmental releases from tank systems and is organized in the sections listed below:    Section 1:  Section 2: Lists relevant ASTM Standards and other industry or regulatory guidance documents Section 3: Defines the key terminology used in this guide Section 4: Describes the significance and use of this guide Section 5: Tank System Design and Installation Section 6: Preventive Maintenance and Inspection Plan Section 7: Fueling Procedure Section 8: Dispensing Activities Section 9: Release Response Plan Section 10: Corrective Action for Affected Environmental Media Section 11: Tank System Closure Section 12: UST Management Practice and Operator Training Appendix X1: Recurring Release Detection and Cathodic Protection Requirements (Quick Glance) is intended to be a quick reference guide for monitoring information Related Material: Documents related to environmental management of underground storage tanks1.3 The values stated in inch-pound 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. Some specific hazards statements are given in Section 7 on Hazards.1.5 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

定价： 646元 加购物车

定价： 590元 加购物车

定价： 590元 加购物车