定价： 590元 加购物车

4.1 Because of concerns for safety and the protection of nuclear materials from theft, stringent specifications are placed on chemical processes and the chemical and physical properties of nuclear materials. Strict requirements for the control and accountability of nuclear materials are imposed on the users of those materials. Therefore, when analyses are made by a laboratory to support a project such as the fabrication of nuclear fuel materials, various performance requirements may be imposed on the laboratory. One such requirement is often the use of qualified methods. Their use gives greater assurance that the data produced will be satisfactory for the intended use of those data. A qualified method will help assure that the data produced will be comparable to data produced by the same qualified method in other laboratories.4.2 This guide provides guidance for qualifying measurement methods and for maintaining qualification. Even though all practices would be used for most qualification programs, there may be situations in which only a selected portion would be required. Care should be taken, however, that the effectiveness of qualification is not reduced when applying these practices selectively. The recommended practices in this guide are generic; based on these practices, specific actions should be developed to establish a qualification program.1.1 This guide provides guidance for selecting, validating, and qualifying measurement methods when qualification is required for a specific program. The recommended practices presented in this guide provide a major part of a quality assurance program for the laboratory data (see Fig. 1). Qualification helps to assure that the data produced will meet established requirements.1.3 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.1.4 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

定价： 590元 加购物车

5.1 The number and distribution of viable and non-viable cells within, or on the surface of, a biomaterial scaffold is one of several important characteristics that may determine in vivo product performance of cell/biomaterial constructs (see 5.7); therefore, there is a need for standardized test methods to quantify cell viability.5.2 There are a variety of static and dynamic methods to seed cells on scaffolds, each with different cell seeding efficiencies. In general, static methods such as direct pipetting of cells onto scaffold surfaces have been shown to have lower cell seeding efficiencies than dynamic methods that push cells into the scaffold interior. Dynamic methods include: injection of cells into the scaffold, cell seeding on biomaterials contained in spinner flasks or perfusion chambers, or seeding that is enhanced by the application of centrifugal forces. The methods described in this guide can assist in establishing cell seeding efficiencies as a function of seeding method and for standardizing viable cell numbers within a given methodology.5.3 As described in Guide F2315, thick scaffolds or scaffolds highly loaded with cells lead to diffusion limitations during culture or implantation that can result in cell death in the center of the construct, leaving only an outer rim of viable cells. Spatial variations of viable cells such as this may be quantified using the tests within this guide. The effectiveness of the culturing method or bioreactor conditions on the viability of the cells throughout the scaffold can also be evaluated with the methods described in this guide.5.4 These test methods can be used to quantify cells on non-porous or within porous hard or soft 3-D synthetic or natural-based biomaterials, such as ceramics, polymers, hydrogels, and decellularized extracellular matrices. The test methods also apply to cells seeded on porous coatings.5.5 Test methods described in this guide may also be used to distinguish between proliferating and non-proliferating viable cells. Proliferating cells proceed through the DNA synthesis (S) phase and the mitosis (M) phase to produce two daughter cells. Non-proliferating viable cells are in some phase of the cell cycle, but are not necessarily proceeding through the cell cycle culminating in proliferation.5.6 Viable cells may be under stress or undergoing apoptosis. Assays for evaluating cell stress or apoptosis are not addressed in this guide.5.7 While cell viability is an important characteristic of a TEMP, the biological performance of a TEMP is dependent on additional parameters. Additional tests to evaluate and confirm the cell identity, protein expression, genetic profile, lineage progression, extent of differentiation, activation status, and morphology are recommended.5.8 The main focus of this document is not scaffold toxicity or the toxicity of the scaffold raw materials. This document is meant to address the situation where a scaffold that is thought to be cytocompatible is cultured with cells and the user desires to assess the viability of cells within the construct. Prior to conducting the tests described herein, the raw materials used to make the scaffold should be assessed as described in Practice F748. This testing may include assessment of the release of toxic leachables from the raw materials.5.9 Methods that remove the cells from a 3-D scaffold may reduce the cell number and viability due to the manipulation required.5.10 Some scaffold constructs may prevent reliable measurements of cell viability within the scaffolds using the methods described herein. Scaffolds may limit diffusion of assay components into and out of the scaffolds. This is especially problematic for methods that require dyes to penetrate into the scaffold, that require detergents or other cell-lysing agents to diffuse into the construct, that require lysed-cell components to diffuse out of the constructs, or that require assay reactants to diffuse into or out of the scaffold. Diffusion in scaffolds and assay results may also be affected by dense cell populations in scaffolds, the generation of tissue-like structures by the cells within the scaffold, and the presence of cell-generated extracellular matrix (ECM) in the scaffold. The formation of tight junctions between cells and cell-ECM interactions may also limit diffusion, especially in the case of hard tissues such as bone.5.11 Assay results may be affected by interactions between assay components and the scaffold. Assay components may adsorb to the surface of the scaffold which would affect their participation in the assay and the resulting assay signal. Biochemical interactions between the scaffold and assay components may cause activation or inhibition of the assay chemistries.5.12 Different cell viability tests may measure different things and may not agree with one another. A large variety of cell viability assays have been developed to measure different aspects of the cell death process. Some of the common measurements include penetration of dyes into the cell, cell metabolic activity, cellular ATP, and leakage of intracellular components out of the cell. Each of these phenomena are related to the state of cell viability in different ways, and may represent different attributes of the cell death process. The mechanism of cell death will also affect the results for these different types of viability measurements. Necrosis, oxygen depravation, starvation, chemical toxicity, apoptosis, anoikis, and mechanical damage represent some of the causes of cell death. Each of these mechanisms may have different effects on the different aspects of cell death that are measured by cell viability assays.1.1 This guide is a resource of cell viability test methods that can be used to assess the number and distribution of viable and non-viable cells within porous and non-porous, hard or soft biomaterial scaffolds, such as those used in tissue-engineered medical products (TEMPs).1.2 In addition to providing a compendium of available techniques, this guide describes materials-specific interactions with the cell assays that can interfere with accurate cell viability analysis, and includes guidance on how to avoid or account for, or both, scaffold material/cell viability assay interactions.1.3 These methods can be used for 3-D scaffolds containing cells that have been cultured in vitro or for scaffold/cell constructs that are retrieved after implantation in living organisms.1.4 This guide does not propose acceptance criteria based on the application of cell viability test methods.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

定价： 590元 加购物车

4.1 This section lists and explains the characteristics that are used to describe a stationary obstacle.4.2 It is essential that sufficient information about the obstacle is recorded using this practice so that the obstacle can be replicated. This will allow comparisons to be made between test method performances that use obstacles with similar characteristics.4.3 Class: 4.3.1 When describing an obstacle to be utilized in ASTM Committee F45 test methods, two classes are defined:4.3.1.1 Genuine—The obstacle being described is an existing real world object (for example, a chair, table, machinery, or equipment). Any identifying information, such as make, model, SKU, etc., should be recorded.4.3.1.2 Artifact—The obstacle being described has been constructed according to the characteristics outlined in this section. Obstacles of this class are intended to be replicable.4.4 Parts of the Obstacle: 4.4.1 Each characteristic can be used to describe a property of the entire obstacle or a part of the obstacle. All parts of the obstacle must be uniquely named and identified in the test report described in Section 6.4.5 Shape: 4.5.1 The shape refers to the relationships between the external, physical boundaries of the obstacle. All shapes can be in contact with the ground or elevated above the ground (see Fig. 1, Fig. 2, and Fig. 3). The unique obstacle shapes are:4.5.1.1 Bar (for example, column)4.5.1.2 Panel (for example, sign, pallet, shelf)4.5.1.3 Cuboid4.5.1.4 Sphere4.5.1.5 Cone4.5.1.6 Other—Obstacle shapes that do not fall into one of the above categories (for example, a pile of fabric). An obstacle can use a single shape to describe its overall volume or multiple shapes to describe parts of the obstacle. For example, the shape of a desk could be described as an elevated horizontal panel with two vertical panels spanning from the ground to the horizontal panel or the shape of a table could be described as an elevated horizontal panel with one or more vertical bars spanning from the ground to the horizontal panel (see Fig. 3).FIG. 1 Obstacle Shapes, Shown with Hard Edges in Varying Directions (Left to Right):Vertical Bar, Horizontal Bar, Vertical Panel, Horizontal Panel, Elevated Horizontal PanelFIG. 2 Obstacle Shapes (Left to Right): Cuboid (Shown with Hard Edges), Sphere, ConeFIG. 3 Example Combinations of Obstacle Shapes, Shown with Hard Edges (Left to Right): Elevated Horizontal Panel with Two Vertical Panels Spanning from the Ground to the Horizontal Panel (for example, Desk), Elevated Horizontal Panel with Four Vertical Bars Spanning from the Ground to the Horizontal Panel (for example, Table), the Same as the Previous but with Inset Vertical Bars (for example, Table)4.6 Face Quality: 4.6.1 The faces of each obstacle can either be closed (that is, it has a surface that fills that face) or open (that is, it has no surface on that face).4.6.2 This characteristic can vary for each face of the obstacle or part of the obstacle: top, bottom, front, back, left, right. Some obstacles may not have clearly discernible faces (for example, sphere, cone).4.6.3 See Fig. 4 for examples of obstacles with closed and open faces.FIG. 4 Examples of Obstacle Face Variations (Left to Right): Sphere with Closed Faces, Cuboid with All Closed Faces, Cuboid with Open Front Face, and Cuboid with Open Top Face4.7 Taper: 4.7.1 If the boundaries of any part of the obstacle change dimension and narrow toward one end, it is considered tapered.4.8 Edge Quality.4.9 The quality of the vertices where the boundaries of the shape meet (see Fig. 5), which can be internal or external on the obstacle. The edge characteristics can be:4.9.1 Hard edges:4.9.1.1 Cornered (the angle between the two surfaces forming the edge is 90°)4.9.1.2 Chamfered (the angle between the two surfaces forming the edge is greater than 90°)4.9.2 Rounded:4.9.2.1 Fillets (partially rounded)4.9.2.2 Cylindrical (completely rounded, eliminating one or more faces of the shape)FIG. 5 Obstacle Shape Edge Variations, Shown on a Vertical Bar (Left to Right): Cornered, Chamfered, Fillets, and Cylindrical4.10 Direction: 4.10.1 The direction of the obstacle is dependent on which side is its front. This characteristic will be referenced in other standards when specifying how to orient the obstacle within a test method apparatus.4.11 Dimensions: 4.11.1 The size of the obstacle overall (that is, its entire volume) and of its individual parts (for example, for an obstacle whose shape is a plane with legs, the size of the horizontal plane, the vertical bars, and the inset of the vertical bars from the edge of the horizontal plane) can be described according to the following characteristics:4.11.2 Width4.11.3 Length/depth4.11.4 Height4.11.5 Elevation (from ground to bottom edge boundary)4.11.6 Taper (if applicable)4.11.6.1 Location on the obstacle where the taper begins (that is, when the boundaries begin to narrow)4.11.6.2 Length of the part of the obstacle that is tapered4.11.6.3 Angle of the taper4.11.7 Edge (if not cornered)4.11.7.1 Setback distance of chamfered edge (if applicable)4.11.7.2 Radius of rounded edge (if applicable)4.11.8 The units used to measure the dimensions of the obstacle and the approximate accuracy of those measurements shall be reported.4.12 Material: 4.12.1 The material(s) the obstacle is made of: metal, wood, foam, glass, plastic, fabric, composite materials, etc.4.12.2 If the material is intended to block or reflect a certain type of sensor, this should be stated on the test report.4.12.3 If the density of the material is known and is relevant for the test method in which the obstacle is utilized, this should be stated on the test report.4.13 Surface: 4.13.1 Characteristics of the obstacle’s surface include, but are not limited to:4.13.2 Color4.13.3 Reflectivity4.13.4 Opacity (for example, glass, plexiglass)4.13.5 Porosity—Solid (for example, wood, steel) or non-solid surface with repeated perforations or openings (for example, fencing)4.13.6 Uniformity—Uniform or variable (that is, patterned, striped)4.13.7 Other—Obstacle surface qualities that do not fall into one of the above categories.4.14 Note—Test pieces from other standards can be described using this practice. For example, the cylindrical test pieces from ANSI/ITSDF B56.5 can be described as vertical or horizontal bars with cylindrical edges and flat black surface qualities.4.15 Examples of common surface characteristics referenced in other standards are listed in the appendix (see X1.1).4.16 Other Relevant Features: 4.16.1 Any other relevant characteristics that pertain to the physical nature of the obstacle should be recorded. For example, if the obstacle features lights, produces air flow, or emanates sound.4.17 Obstacle Description Persistence: 4.17.1 When the obstacle is utilized in a test method, the characteristics of the specific obstacle that are recorded shall not vary for the duration of the test, except if the obstacle contains flexible material, which may cause its shape or dimensions to vary. For example, a soft partition may move due to air flow in the environment. If the obstacle becomes damaged during testing causing its shape or dimensions, or both, to change, an A-UGV may now interact with the obstacle differently than it did before it was damaged. If any characteristics of the obstacle change, it is considered a new and different obstacle from what was previously utilized.1.1 This practice specifies physical characteristics that can be used to describe obstacles utilized within ASTM Committee F45 test methods. The obstacle characteristics specified in this practice are not described with respect to the manner in which they will be sensed or detected by an A-UGV. Rather, the obstacles are described according to their real world characteristics. For example, the real world characteristics of a wooden box that is flat black on one side can be described according to its actual dimensions, material, and color. An A-UGV with a lidar sensor may have difficulty detecting the side of the box that is flat black, which could make the obstacle appear smaller to the A-UGV compared to its actual dimensions in the real world. However, this may not be the case for other A-UGVs due to the wide variety of sensors used to detect obstacles, so the actual, real world characteristics are used to describe it instead.1.2 Real world, existing objects can be used as obstacles and described using this practice. The characteristics specified herein can also be used to construct test artifacts to use as representative obstacles that are intended to have similar characteristics to that of real world obstacles. The obstacles that can be described using this practice may be found in indoor and outdoor environments.1.3 This practice does not purport to cover all relevant obstacle characteristics that may have an effect on A-UGV performance. The characteristics specified in this practice are limited to the physical properties which are considered to be the most salient in terms of the effects they can have on A-UGV performance. As such, the user of this standard may select the level of detail to use in order to describe the characteristics of an obstacle in such a way. The characteristics are also limited to those which are more easily measurable and replicable when comparing test method results that use similar obstacles.1.4 This practice only covers obstacles that exist on or above the ground, sometimes referred to as positive obstacles, and remain stationary while the A-UGV is performing tasks. Stationary real world obstacles of this type include pallets on the ground, desks and tables, and other A-UGVs. This practice does not include obstacles that exist below the ground (for example, holes), sometimes referred to as negative obstacles. This practice does not cover boundaries or features in an environment that are unchanging and known prior to an A-UGV task, such as walls, racks, or other infrastructure.1.5 This practice specifies a variety of physical characteristics of an obstacle, including shapes, dimensions, and surface qualities. This practice does not specify the location properties of an obstacle within a test method apparatus aside from measurements in reference to the ground plane of the environment.1.6 When constructing a test artifact as an obstacle representative of a genuine obstacle (see 4.1), a combination of characteristics can be selected and used to guide fabrication. The use of similar genuine obstacles (that is, real world objects) may decrease reproducibility of testing conditions compared to using artifact obstacles (that is, those that are fabricated for the purposes of testing), unless the same real world object is used between multiple tests.1.7 This practice does not specify A-UGV performance in the presence of obstacles. The intent of this practice is to enable comparisons between tests that use obstacles with similar characteristics.1.8 This practice does not require that certain obstacle characteristics be used as part of a test method. The test requestor can elect specific obstacle characteristics to be used as part of a test method.1.9 Obstacles described using this practice can be utilized in test methods specified by other ASTM Committee F45 standards, such as Test Method F3244 – 17. In the appendix, a baseline test is described that can be used to determine if an obstacle is able to be detected by an A-UGV’s sensors prior to utilizing the obstacle in another ASTM Committee F45 test method (see X1.2).1.10 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as the standard. The values given in parentheses are not precise mathematical conversions 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.1.11 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 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

6.1 The purpose of this specification is to establish minimum impact attenuation requirements for playground surfacing materials in order to reduce the risk of severe head injury from falls.6.2 This specification provides a uniform means of quantifying the impact attenuation performance of playground surfacing materials and is appropriately used to compare the relative performance of different playground surfacing materials.6.3 This specification is to be used as a reference for specifying the impact attenuation performance of playground surfacing materials.6.4 In combination with data relating impact test scores to head injury, the information generated by application of this specification is suitable to estimate the relative risk of a severe head injury due to a fall.AbstractThis specification specifies impact attenuation performance requirements for playground surfaces and surfacing materials and provides a means of determining impact attenuation performance using a test method that simulates the impact of a child’s head with the surface. The test method quantifies impact in terms of g-max and Head Injury Criterion (HIC) scores. G-max is the measure of the maximum acceleration (shock) produced by an impact. The Head Injury Criterion or HIC score is an empirical measure of impact severity based on published research describing the relationship between the magnitude and duration of impact accelerations and the risk of head trauma..Two test methods shall be used to determine the impact attenuation of a playground surface or surfacing materials: critical fall height test, and installed surface performance test. The following apparatus shall be required for implementation of the two test methods: temperature measuring device, impact test system, acceleration measurement system, drop height measurement system, and battery-operated equipment.1.1 This specification establishes minimum performance requirements for the impact attenuation of playground surfacing materials installed within the use zone of playground equipment.1.2 This specification is specific to surfacing used in conjunction with playground equipment, such as that described in Specifications F1148, F1487, F1918, CSAZ614 (Canada), and SS457 (Singapore).1.3 This specification establishes an impact attenuation performance criterion for playground surfacing materials; expressed as a critical fall height.1.4 This specification establishes procedures for determining the critical fall height of playground surfacing materials under laboratory conditions. The laboratory test is mandatory for surfaces to conform to the requirements of this specification.1.5 The laboratory test required by this specification addresses the performance of dry surfacing materials.1.6 This specification also provides optional procedures to determine the critical fall height under wet or frozen test conditions, or both.1.7 The critical fall height of a playground surfacing material determined under laboratory conditions does not account for important factors that have the potential to influence the actual performance of installed surfacing materials. Factors that are known to affect surfacing material performance include but are not limited to aging, moisture, maintenance, exposure to temperature extremes (for example, freezing), exposure to ultraviolet light, contamination with other materials, compaction, loss of thickness, shrinkage, submersion in water, and so forth.1.8 The impact attenuation specification and test methods established in this specification are specific to the risk of head injury. There is only limited evidence that conformance with the requirements of this specification reduces the risk of other kinds of serious injury (for example, long bone fractures).NOTE 1: The relative risk of fatality and of different degrees of head injury may be estimated using the information in Appendix X1, which shows the relationships between the Head Injury Criterion (HIC) scores of an impact and the probability of head injury.1.9 This specification relates only to the impact attenuation properties of playground surfacing materials and does not address other factors that contribute to fall-related injuries. While it is believed that conformance with the requirements of this specification will reduce the risk of serious injury and death from falls, adherence to this specification will not prevent all injuries and deaths.1.10 The values stated in inch-pound units are to be regarded as standard. The values given in parentheses are mathematical conversions to SI units that are provided for information only and are not considered standard.1.11 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 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： 646元 加购物车

定价： 646元 加购物车

4.1 The mission of an analytical laboratory is to provide quality analyses on nuclear fuel cycle materials. An analytical laboratory QA program is comprised of planned and systematic actions needed to provide confidence that this mission is conducted in an acceptable and consistent manner.4.2 The analytical laboratories involved in the analysis of nuclear fuel cycle materials are required to implement a documented QA program. Regulatory agencies may mandate some form of control requirements for all or a part of a laboratory's operation. A documented QA program is also necessary for those laboratory operations required to comply with ASME NQA-1 or ISO/IEC 17025, or the requirements of many accreditation bodies. Even when not mandated, laboratory QA programs should be established as a sound and scientific technical practice. This guide provides guidance for establishing and maintaining a QA program to control those analytical operations vital to ensuring the quality of chemical analyses.4.3 Quality assurance programs are designed and implemented by organizations to assure that the quality requirements for a process, product or service will be fulfilled. The quality system is complementary to technical requirements that may be specific to a process or analytical method. Each laboratory should identify applicable program requirements and use standards to implement a quality program that meets the appropriate requirement. This guide may be used to develop and implement an analytical laboratory QA program. Other useful implementation standards and documents are listed in Section 2 and Appendix X1.4.4 The guides for QA in the analytical laboratory within the nuclear fuel cycle have been written to provide guidance for each of the major activities in the laboratory and are displayed in Fig. 1. The applicable standard for each subject is noted in the following sections.FIG. 1 Essential Elements of Analytical Laboratory Quality Assurance System4.5 Although this guide describes “Recommended Practices” and “Recommendations” and uses suggestive rather than prescriptive language (for example, “should” as opposed to “shall”), the elements being addressed should not be interpreted as optional. An effective and comprehensive laboratory quality assurance/quality control program completely and adequately considers and includes all elements listed in Sections 5 – 17 of this guide.1.1 This guide covers the establishment and maintenance of a quality assurance (QA) program for analytical laboratories within the nuclear industry. References to key elements of ASME NQA-1 and ISO/IEC 17025 provide guidance to the functional aspects of analytical laboratory operations. When implemented as recommended, the practices presented in this guide will provide a comprehensive QA program for the laboratory. The practices are grouped by functions, which constitute the basic elements of a laboratory QA program.1.2 The essential, basic elements of a laboratory QA program appear in the following order:  SectionOrganization 5Quality Assurance Program 6Training and Qualification 7Procedures 8Laboratory Records 9Control of Records 10Management of Customer Requests and Commitments to Customers 11Control of Procurement 12Control of Measuring Equipment and Materials 13Control of Measurements 14Control of Nonconforming Work 15Candidate Actions 16Preventative Actions 171.3 Collection of samples and associated sampling procedures are outside the scope of this guide. The user may refer to sampling practices developed by Subcommittee C26.02.1.4 Nuclear laboratories are required to handle a variety of hazardous materials, including but not limited to radioactive samples and materials. The need for proper handling of these materials is discussed in 13.2.4. While this guide focuses on the nuclear laboratory QA program, proper handling of nuclear materials is essential for proper function of the QA program.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： 646元 加购物车

5.1 This guide provides a list of the standards within Committee D04 that address the use of materials, specifications, and construction practices that could have broader sustainability benefits. This list is current, relative to the approval date of the standard.5.2 The standards discussed are listed in the Referenced Documents section.5.3 This guide is intended to be used as a reference for an owner, engineer, contractor, or combinations thereof, to identify potential sustainability strategies and the respective material and construction standards and specifications. It is important to note that these standards do not ensure sustainability goals are achieved; rather, they may be useful in determining inputs for sustainability metrics.1.1 This guide is intended to be a reference for locating specific test methods relating to materials and construction standards within the jurisdiction of Committee D04 on Road and Paving Materials that could be a strategy used to meet project sustainability goals.1.2 The guide needs to be reviewed and updated by Subcommittee D04.99 on Sustainable Asphalt Pavement Materials and Construction, on an as-needed basis, to remain viable.1.2.1 Additions or deletions to the reference list in Section 2 shall be submitted to Subcommittee D04.99 and balloted.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.1.4 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： 515元 加购物车

定价： 590元 加购物车

5.1 Under the severe conditions of this test method, the specimens undergo degradation at a rate that is dependent upon the thermal endurance of the polypropylene material under examination.5.2 The thermal level of this test method is considered sufficiently severe to cause failure of commercial grades of heat-stable polypropylene within a reasonable period of time. If desired, lower temperatures can be applied to estimate the performance of polypropylene materials with lower heat stability.5.3 The technique of specimen rotation described in this test method provides an estimate of the life-temperature relationship of polypropylene. If this test method is conducted at different temperatures on the same material, a more reliable estimate of the life-temperature relationship of polypropylene is determined. This test method can be conducted at several temperatures and the data interpreted through use of the Arrhenius relation, by plotting the logarithms of times to failure against the reciprocals of the temperatures in kelvins (K). Temperatures in the range from 100 to 150°C, with intervals of 10°C, are suggested for this purpose.5.4 The stability as determined under the prescribed test method is not directly related to the suitability of the compound for a use where different conditions prevail.5.5 The specimen rotation technique of thermal aging increases the probability that all specimens will be exposed similarly and that the effect of temperature gradients in an oven will be minimized.1.1 This test method provides a means for estimating the resistance of polypropylene, in molded form, to accelerated aging by heat in the presence of air using a forced draft oven.1.2 The stability determined by this test method is not directly related to the suitability of the material for use when different environmental conditions prevail and shall not be used to predict performance.NOTE 1: The specified thermal levels in this test method are considered sufficiently severe to cause failure of commercial grades of heat-stable polypropylene within a reasonable period of time. If desired, lower temperatures can be applied to estimate the performance of polypropylene with lower heat stabilities.1.3 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as the standard. The values 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.NOTE 2: This test method and ISO 4577–1983 are technically similar but different in preparation of test specimens, thickness of test specimen, measurement of the number of air flow changes in the ovens, and the number of air changes per hour required.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

4.1 A laboratory quality assurance program is an essential program for laboratories within the nuclear industry. Guide C1009 provides guidance for establishing a quality assurance program for an analytical laboratory within the nuclear industry. This guide deals with the control of measurements aspect of the laboratory quality assurance program. Fig. 1 shows the relationship of measurement control with other essential aspects of a laboratory quality assurance program.FIG. 1 Quality Assurance of Analytical Laboratory Data4.2 The fundamental purposes of a measurement control program are to provide the with-use assurance (real-time control) that a measurement system is performing satisfactorily and to provide the data necessary to quantify measurement system performance. The with-use assurance is usually provided through the satisfactory analysis of quality control samples (reference value either known or unknown to the analyst). The data necessary to quantify measurement system performance is usually provided through the analysis of quality control samples or the duplicate analysis of process samples, or both. In addition to the analyses of quality control samples, the laboratory quality control program should address (1) the preparation and verification of standards and reagents, (2) data analysis procedures and documentation, (3) calibration and calibration procedures, (4) measurement method qualification, (5) analyst qualification, and (6) other general program considerations. Other elements of laboratory quality assurance also impact the laboratory quality control program. These elements or requirements include (1) chemical analysis procedures and procedure control, (2) records storage and retrieval requirements, (3) internal audit requirements, (4) organizational considerations, and (5) training/qualification requirements. To the extent possible, this standard will deal primarily with quality control requirements rather than overall quality assurance requirements, which are addressed in Guide C1009.4.3 Although this guide uses suggestive rather than prescriptive language (for example, “should” as opposed to “shall”), the elements being addressed should not be interpreted as optional. An effective and comprehensive laboratory quality control program should, at minimum, completely and adequately consider and include all elements listed in Section 1 and in the corresponding referenced sections of this guide.1.1 This guide provides guidance for establishing and maintaining a measurement system quality control program. Guidance is provided for general program considerations, preparation of quality control samples, analysis of quality control samples, quality control data analysis, analyst qualification, measurement system calibration, measurement method qualification, and measurement system maintenance.1.2 This guidance is provided in the following sections:  SectionGeneral Quality Control Program Considerations 5Quality Control Samples 6Analysis of Quality Control Samples 7Quality Control Data Analysis 8Analyst Qualification 9Measurement System Calibration 10Qualification of Measurement Methods and Systems 11Measurement System Maintenance 121.3 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

定价： 590元 加购物车