3.1 This test method provides a standard method for determining the weight [mass] of aluminum coatings on iron or steel products, and for evaluating conformance of such products to a material specification under the jurisdiction of ASTM Committee A05 and its subcommittees as designated by a purchaser in a purchase order or contract.3.1.1 This test method may be and is used by other ASTM Committees and other standards writing bodies for the purpose of conformance testing.3.1.2 The material condition at the time of testing, sampling frequency, specimen location and orientation, reporting requirements, and other test parameters are contained in the pertinent material specification or in a general requirement specification for the particular product form.3.1.3 A coating of aluminum on iron or steel articles provides protection against corrosion by forming a relatively inert barrier. Specifications for aluminum-coated articles frequently provide for different designations or classes of coating so that the purchaser can select the coating weight [mass] most suitable for the intended application. The heavier coating will provide greater protection against mechanical damage which may break the coating.3.2 This test method determines the average coating weight [mass] over a specified area, from which the average thickness can be calculated. Other test methods not described herein can determine the thickness directly at point locations on the coating; in such cases, the required test method is described in that material specification or by reference to another appropriate test method standard.1.1 This test method covers procedures for determining the weight [mass] of coating on aluminum-coated iron or steel sheets and wire, and on other aluminum-coated iron and steel articles.1.2 Units—The final results determined by this test method shall be expressed in inch-pound units or SI units, depending on the units used in the material specification to which the results are to be compared. Certain portions of the procedure involving determination of specimen weight [mass] have traditionally been performed in SI units, and corresponding inch-pound units are not included.1.3 For sheet products, the final results are expressed as either coating weight [mass] total both sides, or coating weight [mass] separately on each side, depending on the specified requirements.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. For a specific precautionary statement, see Note 1.1.5 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

定价： 590元 / 折扣价： 502 元 加购物车

5.1 The impact strength of PVC profiles relates to suitability for service and to quality of processing. Impact tests are used for quality-control purposes and as an indication that products can withstand handling during assembling, installation, or in service.5.2 Results obtained by use of this test method are used in two ways:5.2.1 As the basis for establishing impact-test requirements in product standards, and5.2.2 To measure the effect of changes in materials or processing.1.1 This test method covers the determination of the energy required to crack or break rigid poly(vinyl chloride) (PVC) profile under specified conditions of impact by means of a falling weight.1.2 This test method is used either by itself or in conjunction with other methods for measuring PVC product toughness.1.3 Because of the wide variety of profile sizes and shapes and the wide variety of manufacturing procedures and field abuse, this test method does not correlate universally with all types of abuse. Therefore, correlations must be established as needed.1.4 The text of this standard references notes and footnotes which provide explanatory material. These notes and footnotes (excluding those in tables and figures) shall not be considered as requirements of this standard.1.5 The values stated in inch-pound units are to be regarded as the 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.NOTE 1: There is no known ISO equivalent to this standard.1.7 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

定价： 590元 / 折扣价： 502 元 加购物车

4.1 The results of this test method can be used to evaluate the pickle weight-loss (mass loss) characteristics of a given lot of sheet steel in dilute sulfuric acid solution, and may enable the enamel processor to select a pickling time that will provide satisfactory porcelain enamel bond.4.2 The results of this test method can be used to evaluate the effectiveness of the enamel processor's pretreatment system in preparing the steel for porcelain enameling, and may aid the processor in obtaining satisfactory porcelain enamel bond.1.1 This test method covers the evaluation of the weight-loss (mass loss) characteristics of sheet steel in sulfuric acid solution.1.2 This test method provides means of rating the effectiveness of in-plant pretreatment acid solutions in preparing steel surfaces for porcelain enameling.1.3 The values stated in inch-pound 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 and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.

定价： 0元 / 折扣价： 0 元

4.1 Interior paint films often become soiled, especially near doorways, windows, and play areas, and frequently need to be cleaned by scrubbing. This test method covers the determination of the relative resistance of paints to erosion when scrubbed.4.2 The precision of scrub resistance measurements in absolute physical values, such as Test Methods D2486 (cycles-to-failure or this test method, microlitres per 100 cycles), is poor due to the relatively large effect of subtle and difficult-to-control variables in test conditions. The test method described herein minimizes this problem by using a standard calibration panel as an integral part of each scrubbing operation and relating its weight loss to that of the paint film under test to establish the latter's scrub resistance.NOTE 1: The numerical scrub resistance values obtained by this test method are of significance only in relation to the specific calibration panel types with which the value is obtained. Thus, for example, a scrub resistance value of 83 with a Type X calibration panel would be reported as 83X.4.3 Results obtained by this test method do not necessarily represent the scrub resistance that might be determined if the test film is allowed to dry before testing appreciably longer than the seven-day period specified herein.4.4 Results obtained by this test method do not necessarily relate to ease of soil or stain removal (also referred to as “cleanability” or “cleansability”). To test for those characteristics use Test Methods D3450 and D4828.FIG. 1 Alignment of Panels for Scrubbing1.1 This test method covers an accelerated procedure for determining the resistance of paints to erosion caused by scrubbing. (Note: The term wet abrasion is sometimes used for scrubbing, and wet abrasion resistance or scrubbability for scrub resistance.) Although scrub resistance tests are intended primarily for interior coatings, they are sometimes used with exterior coatings as an additional measure of film performance.1.2 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as the standard. The values given in parentheses are for information only.1.3 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.1.4 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

定价： 590元 / 折扣价： 502 元 加购物车

4.1 The ability of a pipe coating to resist mechanical damage during shipping, handling, and installation will depend upon its impact resistance. This test method provides a systematic means for screening coating materials with regard to this property.1.1 This test method covers the determination of the energy required to rupture coatings applied to pipe under specified conditions of impact from a falling weight.1.2 The values stated in SI units to three significant decimals are to be regarded as the standard. The values given in parentheses are for information only.1.3 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.1.4 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

定价： 590元 / 折扣价： 502 元 加购物车

5.1 This test method provides a standard method, by the use of X-ray fluorescence (XRF) or isotope measuring instruments, for “on-line” determination of the weight [mass] of coatings on steel sheet produced on continuous production lines, for comparison with specification requirements, and for evaluating conformance of such products to a material specification under the jurisdiction of ASTM Committee A05 and its subcommittees as designated by a purchaser in a purchase order or contract. It may be applicable to other coatings, providing that the elemental nature of the coating and substrate are compatible with the technical aspects of XRF such as the absorption coefficient of the system, primary radiation, fluorescent radiation, type of detection.5.1.1 This test method determines the coating thickness by repeatedly detecting fluorescent radiation from multiple, defined single spot data points, from which a weight [mass] can be determined, and may be used by other ASTM Committees and other standards writing bodies for the purpose of conformance testing.5.1.2 The material condition at the time of testing, sampling frequency, specimen location and orientation, reporting requirements, and other test parameters are contained in the pertinent material specification or in a general requirement specification for the particular product form.5.1.3 A coating of zinc on steel sheet provides protection against corrosion. As the protection is provided by sacrificial loss of zinc, the degree of protection is proportional to the weight [mass] of zinc coating. Specifications for zinc coated steel sheet frequently provide for different designations of coating so that the purchaser can select the coating weight [mass] most suitable for the intended application.5.2 A reference is provided to the pertinent material specification for the procedures to be used to characterize the coating weight [mass] on production line coils of coated sheet.AbstractThis test method covers the use of X-ray fluorescence (XRF) for determining the coating weight (mass) of metallic coatings on steel sheets. This test method is intended to be used for “on-line” measurements of coatings on continuous production and is applicable to coatings such as tin mill products, zinc or zinc iron coatings, aluminum zinc-coating, zinc-aluminum coating, and zinc-nickel coating. This test method may be applicable to other coatings, provided that the elemental nature of the coating and substrate are compatible with the technical aspects of XRF such as the absorption coefficient of the system, primary radiation, fluorescent radiation, and type of detection. The test method includes the procedure for developing a single standard determination of coating weight (mass) and the procedures for both X-ray tube and isotope coating weight (mass) measuring instruments. The basic principle of the measurement by XRF method and the factors affecting accuracy and precision including equipment, data collection, and calibration of the instrument are detailed. The instrument shall be operated in a manner that meets the requirements specified for single data point definition, area of fluorescence, transverse scan speed, dwell time, and coating weight (mass) sampling width and location. The standard test condition and test locations across the strip width are illustrated.1.1 This test method covers the use of X-ray fluorescence (XRF) for determining the coating weight [mass] of metallic coatings on steel sheet. The test method is intended to be used for “on-line” measurements of coating on continuous production lines and includes procedures for both X-ray tube and isotope coating weight [mass] equipment. In the body of this test method, reference to zinc coating shall be interpreted to also include zinc alloy coating except where specifically stated otherwise.1.2 This test method is applicable to the coatings covered by the following ASTM Specifications: A463/A463M, A599/A599M, A623, A623M, A653/A653M, A792/A792M, A875/A875M, A879/A879M, A918, A924/A924M, A1046/A1046M, A1063/A1063M, and A1079.1.3 Units—The values stated in either SI units or inch-pound units are to be regarded separately as standard. The values stated in each system are not necessarily exact equivalents; therefore, to ensure conformance with the standard, each system shall be used independently of the other, and values from the two systems shall not be combined.1.4 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.1.5 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

定价： 590元 / 折扣价： 502 元 加购物车

5.1 Susceptibility to damage from concentrated out-of-plane impact forces is one of the major design concerns of many structures made of advanced composite laminates. Knowledge of the damage resistance properties of a laminated composite plate is useful for product development and material selection.5.2 Drop-weight impact testing can serve the following purposes:5.2.1 To establish quantitatively the effects of stacking sequence, fiber surface treatment, variations in fiber volume fraction, and processing and environmental variables on the damage resistance of a particular composite laminate to a concentrated drop-weight impact force or energy.5.2.2 To compare quantitatively the relative values of the damage resistance parameters for composite materials with different constituents. The damage response parameters can include dent depth, damage dimensions, and through-thickness locations, F1, Fmax, E1, and Emax, as well as the force versus time curve.5.2.3 To impart damage in a specimen for subsequent damage tolerance tests, such as Test Method D7137/D7137M.5.3 The properties obtained using this test method can provide guidance in regard to the anticipated damage resistance capability of composite structures of similar material, thickness, stacking sequence, and so forth. However, it must be understood that the damage resistance of a composite structure is highly dependent upon several factors, including geometry, thickness, stiffness, mass, support conditions, and so forth. Significant differences in the relationships between impact force/energy and the resultant damage state can result due to differences in these parameters. For example, properties obtained using this test method would more likely reflect the damage resistance characteristics of an unstiffened monolithic skin or web than that of a skin attached to substructure which resists out-of-plane deformation. Similarly, test specimen properties would be expected to be similar to those of a panel with equivalent length and width dimensions, in comparison to those of a panel significantly larger than the test specimen, which tends to divert a greater proportion of the impact energy into elastic deformation.5.4 The standard impactor geometry has a blunt, hemispherical striker tip. Historically, for the standard laminate configuration and impact energy, this impactor geometry has generated a larger amount of internal damage for a given amount of external damage, when compared with that observed for similar impacts using sharp striker tips. Alternative impactors may be appropriate depending upon the damage resistance characteristics being examined. For example, the use of sharp striker tip geometries may be appropriate for certain damage visibility and penetration resistance assessments.5.5 The standard test utilizes a constant impact energy normalized by specimen thickness, as defined in 11.7.1. Some testing organizations may desire to use this test method in conjunction with D7137/D7137M to assess the compressive residual strength of specimens containing a specific damage state, such as a defined dent depth, damage geometry, and so forth. In this case, the testing organization should subject several specimens, or a large panel, to multiple low velocity impacts at various impact energy levels using this test method. A relationship between impact energy and the desired damage parameter can then be developed. Subsequent drop weight impact and compressive residual strength tests can then be performed using specimens impacted at an interpolated energy level that is expected to produce the desired damage state.1.1 This test method determines the damage resistance of multidirectional polymer matrix composite laminated plates subjected to a drop-weight impact event. The composite material forms are limited to continuous-fiber reinforced polymer matrix composites, with the range of acceptable test laminates and thicknesses defined in 8.2.1.1.1 Instructions for modifying these procedures to determine damage resistance properties of sandwich constructions are provided in Practice D7766/D7766M.1.2 A flat, rectangular composite plate is subjected to an out-of-plane, concentrated impact using a drop-weight device with a hemispherical impactor. The potential energy of the drop-weight, as defined by the mass and drop height of the impactor, is specified prior to test. Equipment and procedures are provided for optional measurement of contact force and velocity during the impact event. The damage resistance is quantified in terms of the resulting size and type of damage in the specimen.1.3 The test method may be used to screen materials for damage resistance, or to inflict damage into a specimen for subsequent damage tolerance testing. When the impacted plate is tested in accordance with Test Method D7137/D7137M, the overall test sequence is commonly referred to as the Compression After Impact (CAI) method. Quasi-static indentation per Test Method D6264/D6264M may be used as an alternate method of creating damage from an out-of-plane force and measuring damage resistance properties.1.4 The damage resistance properties generated by this test method are highly dependent upon several factors, which include specimen geometry, layup, impactor geometry, impactor mass, impact force, impact energy, and boundary conditions. Thus, results are generally not scalable to other configurations, and are particular to the combination of geometric and physical conditions tested.1.5 Units—The values stated in either SI units or inch-pound units are to be regarded separately as standard. The values stated in each system are not necessarily exact equivalents; therefore, to ensure conformance with the standard, each system shall be used independently of the other, and values from the two systems shall not be combined.1.5.1 Within the text, the inch-pound units are shown in brackets.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： 646元 / 折扣价： 550 元 加购物车

5.1 In using Practice D3960 to measure the volatile organic compound content of waterborne coatings, precision can be poor for low volatile organic compound content air-dry coatings if the volatile organic weight percent is determined indirectly. The present method directly identifies and then quantifies the weight percent of individual volatile organic compounds in air-dry coatings (Note 6). The total volatile organic weight percent can be obtained by adding the individual weight percent values (Note 7).NOTE 6: The present method may be used to speciate solvent-borne air-dry coatings. However, since these normally contain high, and often complex, quantities of solvent, precision tends to be better using other methods contained in Practice D3960, where the volatile fraction is determined by a direct weight loss determination.NOTE 7: Detectable compounds may result from thermal decomposition in a hot injection port or from reaction with the extraction solvent. If it can be shown that a material is a decomposition product, or is the result of a reaction with the extraction solvent, then results for that compound should be discounted from the volatile measured by Test Method D6886.1.1 This test method is for the determination of the weight percent of individual volatile organic compounds in waterborne air-dry coatings (Note 1).1.2 This method may be used for the analysis of coatings containing silanes, siloxanes, and silane-siloxane blends.1.3 This method is not suitable for the analysis of coatings that cure by chemical reaction (this includes two-component coatings and coatings which cure when heated) because the dilution herein required will impede the chemical reaction required for these types of coatings.1.4 Precision statistics for this method have been determined for waterborne coatings in which the volatile organic compound weight percent is below 5 percent. The method has been used successfully with higher organic content waterborne coatings and with solventborne coatings (Note 2).1.5 This method may also be used to measure the exempt volatile organic compound content (for example, acetone, methyl acetate, t-butyl acetate and p-chlorobenzotrifluoride) of waterborne and solvent-borne coatings. Check local regulations for a list of exempt compounds. The methodology is virtually identical to that used in Test Method D6133 which, as written, is specific for only exempt volatile compounds.1.6 Volatile compounds that are present at the 0.005 weight percent level (50 ppm) or greater can be determined. A procedure for doing so is given in Section 9.1.7 Volatile organic compound content of a coating can be calculated using data from Test Method D6886 but requires other data (see Appendix X2.)NOTE 1: Data from this method will not always provide the volatile organic compound content of a paint film equivalent to EPA Method 24. Some compounds and some semi-volatile compounds may be considered volatile using the GC conditions specified but will not fully volatilize during the one hour at 110°C conditions of EPA Method 24. Some or all of these materials remain in the paint film and therefore are not considered volatile organic compounds according to EPA Method 24. In addition, some compounds may decompose at the high inlet temperature of the GC. However, note the EPA Method 24 has poor precision and accuracy at low levels of volatile organic compounds.NOTE 2: This method measures volatile organic compound weight of air-dry coatings directly as opposed to other methods in Practice D3960 which measure the volatile organic compound weight percent indirectly. A direct measurement of the weight percent particularly in low volatile organic compound content waterborne coatings, generally gives better precision. California Polytechnic State University carried out an extensive study for the California Air Resources Board comparing the precision of the direct method with the indirect method (CARB Standard Agreement No. 04.329) Detailed results of this study may be found at http://www.arb.ca.gov/coatings/arch/Final_Report_6_11_09.pdf. This study may be used to decide if the present method or other methods in Practice D3960 are preferred for a specific coating.1.8 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard. No other units of measurement are included in this standard.1.9 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.1.10 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

定价： 646元 / 折扣价： 550 元 加购物车

This specification covers ultra-high molecular weight polyethylene (UHMWPE) powder blended with alphatocopherol (vitamin E) intended for use in surgical implants. The requirements apply to alphatocopherol-containing UHMWPE in two forms. One is virgin polymer powder blended with alpha-tocopherol prior to consolidation. The second is any form fabricated from this blended, alpha-tocopherol-containing powder from which a finished product is subsequently produced. This specification does not apply to finished or semi-finished products that are doped with vitamin E after consolidation, nor to the packaged and sterilized finished implant, nor to UHMWPE materials extensively crosslinked by gamma and electron beam sources of ionizing radiation. Required material characteristics including composition, foreign matter, morphology, and mechanical characteristics are addressed by this specification.1.1 This specification covers ultra-high molecular weight polyethylene (UHMWPE) powder blended with alpha-tocopherol (Vitamin E) intended for use in surgical implants.1.2 The requirements of this specification apply to alpha-tocopherol-containing UHMWPE in two forms. One is virgin polymer powder blended with alpha-tocopherol prior to consolidation (Section 4). The second is any form fabricated from this blended, alpha-tocopherol-containing powder from which a finished product is subsequently produced (Section 5). This specification does not apply to finished or semi-finished products that are doped with Vitamin E after consolidation.1.3 Aside from blending with alpha-tocopherol, the provisions of Specifications F648 and D4020 apply. Special requirements detailed in this specification are added to describe powders containing alpha-tocopherol that will be used in surgical implants. This specification addresses material characteristics and does not apply to the packaged and sterilized finished implant. This specification also does not apply to UHMWPE materials extensively crosslinked by gamma and electron beam sources of ionizing radiation.1.4 The following precautionary caveat pertains only to the fabricated forms portion, Section 5, of this specification. This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.1.5 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

定价： 515元 / 折扣价： 438 元 加购物车

CSA Preface This is the first edition of CAN/CSA-ISO 19901-5, Petroleum and natural gas industries - Specific requirements for offshore structures - Part 5: Weight control during engineering and construction, which is an adoption without modification o

定价： 1320元 / 折扣价： 1122 元

5.1 This test method is specifically directed at the spray painting of automobile car and light duty truck bodies. The general principles are applicable to the painting of other automotive parts.5.2 This test method may also be used to measure transfer efficiency in full-sized painting facilities simulating production conditions and operations.1.1 This test method covers procedures for determination of the transfer efficiency (using a weight method) under production conditions for in-plant spray application of automotive paints as outlined in Section 18 of EPA 450/3-88-018.1.2 The transfer efficiency is calculated from the weight of the paint solids sprayed and that deposited on the painted part. The recommended approach involves painting the part directly. Also described is an alternative approach for painting parts covered with aluminum foil.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. Specific hazard statements are given in 10.1.8.1.1.5 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

定价： 590元 / 折扣价： 502 元 加购物车

5.1 These tests determine the optimum water content and maximum density (unit weight) to be used for molding soil-cement specimens in accordance with Test Methods D559/D559M and D560/D560M.NOTE 1: Since these tests are used in conjunction with Test Methods D559/D559M and D560/D560M and the criteria referenced therein, the test differs in several aspects from Test Method D698. There are three main differences between this standard and Test Method D698. Firstly, this standard allows a maximum particle size of 3/4-in. [19.0 mm] for a 4-in. [101.6-mm] mold while Test Method D698 allows a maximum particle size of 3/8-in. [9.5-mm] for the same size mold. Secondly, this standard permits the material leftover after the water content specimen has been obtained to be mixed with the rest of the sample and reused for the next determination. Test Method D698 does not permit the material to be reused. Thirdly, this standard allows the material that is retained on the 3/4-in. [19.0-mm] and passing the 3-in. [75-mm] to be discarded (scalping technique) and replaced with an equal mass of material that passes the 3/4-in. [19.0-mm] sieve and is retained on the No.4 [4.75-mm] sieve. Test Method D698 does not permit the scalp and replacement technique.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. Agencies 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.1.1 These test methods cover the determination of the relationship between the water content and the density of soil-cement mixtures when compacted before cement hydration as prescribed.1.2 A 0.0333-ft3 [944-cm3] mold and a 5.50-lbf [24.5-N or mass of 2.5-kg] rammer dropped from a height of 12.0 in. [30.5 cm] are used and two methods, depending on soil gradation, are covered, as follows:  SectionsTest Method A, using soil material passing a No. 4 [4.75-mm] sieve. This method shall be used when 100 % of the soil sample passes the No. 4 [4.75-mm] sieve   8Test Method B, using soil material passing a 3/4-in. [19.0-mm] sieve. This method shall be used when part of the soil sample is retained on the No. 4 [4.75-mm] sieve. This test method may be used only on materials with 30 % or less retained on the 3/4-in. [19.0-mm] sieve   91.3 Units—The values stated in inch-pound units or SI units are to be regarded separately as standard. The values stated in each system may not be exact equivalents; therefore, each system shall be used independently of the other. Combining values from the two systems may result in nonconformance with the standard.1.3.1 The gravitational system of inch-pound units is used when dealing with inch-pound units. In this system, the pound (lbf) represents a unit of force (weight), while the unit for mass is slugs. The slug unit is not given, unless dynamic (F=ma) calculations are involved.1.3.2 It is common practice in the engineering/construction profession to concurrently use pounds to represent both a unit of mass (lbm) and of force (lbf). This implicitly combines two separate systems of units; that is, the absolute system and the gravitational system. It is scientifically undesirable to combine the use of two separate sets of inch-pound units within a single standard. This standard includes the gravitational system of inch-pound units and does not use/present the slug unit for mass. However, the use of balances or scales recording pounds of mass (lbm) or recording density in lbm/ft3 shall not be regarded as nonconformance with this standard.1.4 All observed and calculated values shall conform to the guidelines for significant digits and rounding established in Practice D6026.1.4.1 The procedures used to specify how data are collected/recorded and calculated in this standard are regarded as the industry standard. In addition, they are representative of the significant digits that should generally be retained. The procedures used do not consider material variation, purpose for obtaining the data, special purpose studies, or any considerations for the user’s objectives; and it is common practice to increase or reduce significant digits of reported data to be commensurate with these considerations. It is beyond the scope of this standard to consider significant digits used in analysis methods for the engineering design.1.5 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.1.6 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

定价： 590元 / 折扣价： 502 元 加购物车

5.1 Weight loss from a sealant after application in a building joint can be detrimental to long term sealant durability. A sealant's service life will be shortened if it contains components, critical to its durability, that are volatilized by high environmental temperatures. Also, development of cracks and chalking lessens a sealant's service life.5.2 The test described herein measures weight loss, cracking, and chalking. The amount of weight lost during the heat aging period and any cracking or chalking helps predict premature sealant failure. However, a sealant developing no cracks or chalking, or low weight loss in this test, does not necessarily ensure good durability.1.1 This test method covers a laboratory procedure for determining the effects of heat aging on weight loss, cracking and chalking of elastomeric joint sealants (single and multicomponent) for use in building construction.1.2 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as the standard. The values given in parentheses are for information only.1.3 The committee having jurisdiction for this specification is not aware of any similar ISO standard.1.4 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.1.5 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

定价： 515元 / 折扣价： 438 元 加购物车

4.1 Published literature shows that the yield of radiolytic reactions that occur during radiation treatment increases with radiation dose level. Measurement of the products of these reactions can be used as an internal dosimeter.4.2 Trans-vinylene unsaturations are formed during ionization treatment by abstraction of a hydrogen molecule, and to a lesser extent by the recombination of two adjacent alkyl free radicals that reside on the same chain.4.3 Previous work generated calibration curves of trans-vinylene absorption area as a function of absorbed radiation dose, yielding a linear relationship for both gamma- and electron beam-irradiated polyethylene.4.4 This data can be used to determine received dose as a function of position, assuming a calibration curve (TVI versus radiation dose level) is known for the particular material and radiation conditions used, and can be used to determine uniformity of dose level in irradiated polyethylene.1.1 This test method describes the measurement of the number of trans-vinylene groups in ultra-high molecular weight polyethylene (UHMWPE) intended for use in medical implants. The material is analyzed by infrared spectroscopy.1.2 This test method is based on Guide F2102.1.3 The applicability of the infrared method has been demonstrated in other literature reports. This particular method, using the intensity (area) of the C-H absorption centered at 1370 cm-1 to normalize for the sample’s thickness, will be validated by an Interlaboratory Study (ILS) conducted according to Practice E691.1.4 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard. No other units of measurement are included in this standard.1.5 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.1.6 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

定价： 590元 / 折扣价： 502 元 加购物车

5.1 For many cohesionless, free-draining soils, the maximum index density/unit weight is one of the key components in evaluating the state of compactness of a given soil mass that is either naturally occurring or placed during construction.5.1.1 Relative density and percent compaction are commonly used for evaluating the state of compactness of a given soil mass. Density/unit weight index is also sometimes used. See Section 3 for descriptions of terms.5.2 It is generally recognized that either relative density or percent compaction is a good indicator of the state of compactness of a given soil mass. However, the engineering properties, such as strength, compressibility, and permeability of a given soil, compacted by various methods to a given state of compactness can vary considerably. Therefore, considerable engineering judgment must be used in relating the engineering properties of soil to the state of compactness.5.3 An absolute maximum density/unit weight is not necessarily obtained by these test methods.NOTE 2: In addition, there are published data to indicate that these test methods have a high degree of variability.4 However, the variability can be greatly reduced by careful calibration of equipment, including the vibrating table, and careful attention to proper test procedure and technique.NOTE 3: 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. Agencies that meet the criteria of Practice D3740, generally, are 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 ensure reliable results. Reliable results depend on many factors; Practice D3740 provides a means of evaluating some of those factors.5.4 The double amplitude of vertical vibration has been found to have a significant effect on the density obtained.4 For a particular vibrating table and mold assembly, the maximum index density/unit weight of a given material may be obtained at a double amplitude of vibration other than the double amplitude of 0.013 ± 0.002 in. (0.33 ± 0.05 mm) at a frequency of 60 Hz or 0.019 ± 0.003 in. (0.48 ± 0.08 mm) at 50 Hz required in this method; that is, dry density/unit weight may initially increase with increasing double amplitude of vibration, reach a peak, and then decrease with further increases in double amplitude of vibration. Furthermore, the relationship between the peak density/unit weight and optimum double amplitude of vibration (double amplitude of vibration where peak density/unit weight occurrs) can vary with various soil types and gradations.5.5 The use of the standard molds (6.1.1) has been found to be satisfactory for most soils requiring maximum index-density/unit weight testing. Special molds (6.1.2) shall only be used when the test results are to be applied in conjunction with design or special studies and there is not enough soil to use the standard molds. Such test results should be applied with caution as maximum index densities/unit weights obtained with the special molds may not agree with those that would be obtained using the standard molds.1.1 These test methods cover the determination of the maximum-index dry density/unit weight of cohesionless, free-draining soils using a vertically vibrating table. The adjective “dry before density or unit weight is omitted in the title and remaining portions of this standard to be consistent with the applicable definition given in Section 3 on Terminology.1.2 Systems of Units: 1.2.1 The testing apparatus described in this standard has been developed and manufactured using values in the gravimetric or inch-pound system. Therefore, test apparatus dimensions and mass given in inch-pound units are regarded as the standard.1.2.2 It is common practice in the engineering profession to concurrently use pounds to represent both a unit of mass (lbm) and a unit of force (lbf). This implicitly combines two separate systems of units; that is, the absolute system and the gravitational system. It is scientifically undesirable to combine the use of two separate sets of inch-pound units within a single standard. This standard has been written using the gravitational system of units when dealing with the inch-pound system. In this system, the pound (lbf) represents a unit of force (weight). However, balances or scales measure mass; and weight must be calculated. In the inch-pound system, it is common to assume that 1 lbf is equal to 1 lbm. While reporting density is not regarded as nonconformance with this standard, unit weights should be calculated and reported since the results may be used to determine force or stress.1.2.3 The terms density and unit weight are often used interchangeably. Density is mass per unit volume whereas unit weight is force per unit volume. In this standard density is given only in SI units. After the density has been determined, the unit weight is calculated in SI or inch-pound units, or both.1.3 Four alternative methods are provided to determine the maximum index density/unit weight, as follows:1.3.1 Method 1A—Using oven-dried soil and an electromagnetic, vertically vibrating table.1.3.2 Method 1B—Using wet soil and an electromagnetic, vertically vibrating table.1.3.3 Method 2A—Using oven-dried soil and an eccentric or cam-driven, vertically vibrating table.1.3.4 Method 2B—Using wet soil and an eccentric or cam-driven vertically vibrating table.1.4 The method to be used should be specified by the individual assigning the test.1.4.1 The type of table to be used (Method 1 or 2) is likely to be decided based upon available equipment.NOTE 1: There is evidence to show that electromagnetic tables yield slightly higher values of maximum index density/unit weight than the eccentric or cam-driven tables.1.4.2 It is recommended that both the dry and wet methods (Methods 1A and 1B or 2A and 2B) be performed when beginning a new job or encountering a change in soil types, as the wet method can yield significantly higher values of maximum index density/unit weight for some soils. Such a higher maximum index density, when considered along with the minimum index density/unit weight, Test Methods D4254, will be found to significantly affect the value of the relative density (3.2.8) calculated for a soil encountered in the field. While the dry method is often preferred because results can usually be obtained more quickly, as a general rule the wet method should be used if it is established that it produces maximum index densities/unit weights that would significantly affect the use/application of the value of relative density.1.5 These test methods are applicable to soils that may contain up to 15 %, by dry mass, of soil particles passing a No. 200 (75-μm) sieve, provided they still have cohesionless, free-draining characteristics (nominal sieve dimensions are in accordance with Specification E11). Further, these test methods are applicable to soils in which 100 %, by dry mass, of soil particles pass a 3-in. (75-mm) sieve.1.5.1 Soils, for the purpose of these test methods, shall be regarded as naturally occurring cohesionless soils, processed particles, or composites or mixtures of natural soils, or mixtures of natural and processed particles, provided they are free draining.1.6 These test methods will typically produce a higher maximum dry density/unit weight for cohesionless, free-draining soils than that obtained by impact compaction in which a well-defined moisture-density relationship is not apparent. However, for some soils containing between 5 and 15 % fines, the use of impact compaction (Test Methods D698 or D1557) may be useful in evaluating what is an appropriate maximum index density/unit weight.1.7 These test methods will typically produce a lower maximum dry density/unit weight than that obtained by vibrating hammer using Test Method D7382.1.8 For many types of free-draining, cohesionless soils, these test methods cause a moderate amount of degradation (particle breakdown) of the soil. When degradation occurs, typically there is an increase in the maximum index density/unit weight obtained, and comparable test results may not be obtained when different size molds are used to test a given soil.1.9 All observed and calculated values shall conform to the guidelines for significant digits and rounding established in Practice D6026.1.9.1 For purposes of comparing a measured or calculated value(s) to specified limits, the measured or calculated value(s) shall be rounded to the nearest decimal or significant digits in the specified limits.1.9.2 The procedures used to specify how data are collected/recorded or calculated, in this standard are regarded as the industry standard. In addition, they are representative of the significant digits that generally should be retained. The procedures used do not consider material variation, purpose for obtaining the data, special purpose studies, or any considerations for the user’s objectives; and it is common practice to increase or reduce significant digits of reported data to be commensurate with these considerations. It is beyond the scope of this standard to consider significant digits used in analysis methods for engineering design.1.10 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.1.11 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

定价： 646元 / 折扣价： 550 元 加购物车