定价： 689元 / 折扣价： 586 元

定价： 468元 / 折扣价： 398 元 加购物车

定价： 260元 / 折扣价： 221 元 加购物车

定价： 260元 / 折扣价： 221 元 加购物车

5.1 Test Methods A, B, and C provide a means of evaluating the tensile modulus of geogrids and geotextiles for applications involving small-strain cyclic loading. The test methods allow for the determination of cyclic tensile modulus at different levels of prescribed or permanent strain, thereby accounting for possible changes in cyclic tensile modulus with increasing permanent strain in the material. These test methods shall be used for research testing and to define properties for use in specific design methods.5.2 In cases of dispute arising from differences in reported test results when using these test methods for acceptance testing of commercial shipments, the purchaser and supplier should conduct comparative tests to determine if there is a statistical bias between their laboratories. Competent statistical assistance is recommended for the investigation of bias. As a minimum, the two parties should take a group of test specimens which are as homogeneous as possible and which are from a lot of material of the type in question. The test specimens should then be randomly assigned in equal numbers to each laboratory for testing. The average results from the two laboratories should be compared using Student’s t-test for unpaired data and an acceptable probability level chosen by the two parties before the testing began. If a bias is found, either its cause shall be found and corrected or the purchaser and supplier shall agree to interpret future test results in light of the known bias.5.3 All geogrids can be tested by Test Method A or B. Some modification of techniques may be necessary for a given geogrid depending upon its physical makeup. Special adaptations may be necessary with strong geogrids, multiple-layered geogrids, or geogrids that tend to slip in the clamps or those which tend to be damaged by the clamps.5.4 Most geotextiles can be tested by Test Method C. Some modification of clamping techniques may be necessary for a given geotextile depending upon its structure. Special clamping adaptations may be necessary with strong geotextiles or geotextiles made from glass fibers to prevent them from slipping in the clamps or being damaged as a result of being gripped in the clamps.5.5 These test methods are applicable for testing geotextiles either dry or wet. It is used with a constant rate of extension type tension apparatus.5.6 These test methods may not be suited for geogrids and geotextiles that exhibit strengths approximately 100 kN/m (600 lbf/in.) due to clamping and equipment limitations. In those cases, 100-mm (4-in.) width specimens may be substituted for 200-mm (8-in.) width specimens.1.1 These test methods cover the determination of small-strain tensile properties of geogrids and geotextiles by subjecting wide-width specimens to cyclic tensile loading.1.2 These test methods (A, B, and C) allow for the determination of small-strain cyclic tensile modulus by the measurement of cyclic tensile load and elongation.1.3 This test method is intended to provide properties for design. The test method was developed for mechanistic-empirical pavement design methods requiring input of the reinforcement tensile modulus. The use of cyclic modulus from this test method for other applications involving cyclic loading should be evaluated on a case-by-case basis.1.4 Three test methods (A, B, and C) are provided to determine small-strain cyclic tensile modulus on geogrids and geotextiles.1.4.1 Test Method A—Testing a relatively wide specimen of geogrid in cyclic tension in kN/m (lbf/ft).1.4.2 Test Method B—Testing multiple layers of a relatively wide specimen of geogrid in cyclic tension in kN/m (lbf/ft).1.4.3 Test Method C—Testing a relatively wide specimen of geotextile in cyclic tension in kN/m (lbf/ft).1.5 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard. The values given in parentheses are provided for information only and are not considered standard.1.6 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.1.7 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

定价： 590元 / 折扣价： 502 元 加购物车

The test procedures and associated analysis techniques described in this method can be used to determine complex shear modulus and permanent shear strain of asphalt mixtures. The shear frequency sweep test at constant height can be used to determine the complex shear modulus of a mixture. The repeated shear test at constant height can be used to determine permanent shear strain under repeated loading.Note 4—The complex shear modulus is used to characterize the shear behavior of the mixture, and the permanent shear strain relates to pavement rutting.1.1 This standard provides performance-related test procedures for the determination of stiffness complex shear modulus and permanent shear strain of asphalt mixtures using the Superpave Shear Tester (SST). This standard is applicable to the testing and analysis of modified and unmodified asphalt mixtures.1.2 This standard is applicable to specimens prepared in a laboratory or cored from a pavement for post-construction analysis. It is intended for use with specimens having the following minimum dimensions:

定价： 0元 / 折扣价： 0 元

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

定价： 843元 / 折扣价： 717 元 加购物车

4.1 This test method offers an alternate procedure to Test Method C336 for determining the annealing and strain points of glass. It is particularly recommended for glasses not adaptable to flame working. Also fewer corrections are necessary in data reduction.1.1 This test method covers the determination of the annealing point and the strain point of a glass by measuring the rate of midpoint viscous bending of a simply loaded glass beam.2 However, at temperatures corresponding to the annealing and strain points, the viscosity of glass is highly time-dependent. Hence, any viscosities that might be derived or inferred from measurements by this procedure cannot be assumed to represent equilibrium structural conditions.1.2 The annealing and strain points shall be obtained following a specified procedure after direct calibration of the apparatus using beams of standard glasses having known annealing and strain points such as those supplied and certified by the National Institute of Standards and Technology.31.3 This test method, as an alternative to Test Method C336 is particularly well suited for glasses that for one reason or another are not adaptable for flame working. It also has the advantages that thermal expansion and effective length corrections, common to the fiber elongation method, are eliminated.1.4 The values stated in metric units are to be regarded as the standard. The values given in parentheses are for information only.1.5 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.1.6 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

定价： 590元 / 折扣价： 502 元 加购物车

5.1 Residual strain measurements are an aid in the design and fabrication of MEMS devices. The value for residual strain can be used in Young's modulus calculations.1.1 This test method covers a procedure for measuring the compressive residual strain in thin films. It applies only to films, such as found in microelectromechanical systems (MEMS) materials, which can be imaged using an optical interferometer, also called an interferometric microscope. Measurements from fixed-fixed beams that are touching the underlying layer are not accepted.1.2 This test method uses a non-contact optical interferometric microscope with the capability of obtaining topographical 3-D data sets. It is performed in the laboratory.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： 0元 / 折扣价： 0 元

5.1 Strain gradient values are an aid in the design and fabrication of MEMS devices.1.1 This test method covers a procedure for measuring the strain gradient in thin, reflecting films. It applies only to films, such as found in microelectromechanical systems (MEMS) materials, which can be imaged using an optical interferometer, also called an interferometric microscope. Measurements from cantilevers that are touching the underlying layer are not accepted.1.2 This test method uses a non-contact optical interferometric microscope with the capability of obtaining topographical 3-D data sets. It is performed in the laboratory.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： 0元 / 折扣价： 0 元

5.1 Interlaminar delamination growth can be a critical failure mode in laminated CMC structures. Knowledge of the resistance to interlaminar delamination growth of a laminated CMC is essential for material development and selection, and for CMC component design. (See (1-8)3 which give GIc values of 20 J/m2 to 800 J/m2 for different CMC and carbon-carbon composite systems at ambient temperatures.)5.2 Conducting this test produces multiple values of GIc which are traditionally plotted against the delamination length at which that value was measured (see Fig. 2). The specific data of value to the test requestor will depend on the end use that motivated testing.5.2.1 The first increment of growth, initiated from a pre-implanted insert or machined notch, is sometimes described as the non-precracked (NPC) toughness. NPC toughness may be of interest, as it can represent manufacturing or processing defects, such as foreign object debris in a laminate or an error during machining.5.2.2 The next increment of growth, initiated from the sharp crack tip assumed to be present after the first increment, is sometimes defined as the precracked (PC) toughness. PC toughness may be of interest, as it is more representative of the resistance to delamination growth from a naturally occurring or damage-induced delamination.5.2.3 The remaining increments of growth, collectively forming an R-curve, provide information on how GIc evolves as the delamination advances. In unidirectional tape laminates, the R-curve is often increasing due to bridging of nested fibers across the delamination plane, artificially increasing GIc. For 2-D woven laminates for which there is little interply nesting, the R-curve may be flat.5.2.4 The increments of growth in which the R-curve is flat, and GIc has reached a steady state value defined as GIR, may be of interest and may also useful in design and analysis.5.3 This test method for measurement of GIc of CMC materials can serve the following purposes:5.3.1 To establish quantitatively the effect of CMC material variables (fiber interface coatings, matrix structure and porosity, fiber architecture, processing and environmental variables, conditioning/exposure treatments, etc.) on GIc and the interlaminar crack growth and damage mechanisms of a particular CMC material;5.3.2 To determine if a CMC material shows R-curve behavior where GIc changes with crack extension or reaches a stable value at a given amount of delamination growth. Fig. 2 shows R-curve behavior for a SiC-SiC composite (1);5.3.3 To develop delamination failure criteria and design allowables for CMC damage tolerance, durability or reliability analyses, and life prediction;NOTE 3: Test data can only reliably be used for this purpose if there is confidence that the test is yielding a material property and not a structural, geometry-dependent, property.5.3.4 To compare quantitatively the relative values of GIc for different CMC materials with different constituents and material properties, reinforcement architectures, processing parameters, or environmental exposure conditions; and5.3.5 To compare quantitatively the values of GIc obtained from different batches of a specific CMC material, to perform lot acceptance quality control, to use as a material screening criterion, or to assess batch variability.1.1 This test method describes the experimental methods and procedures for the determination of the critical mode I interlaminar strain energy release rate of continuous fiber- reinforced ceramic matrix composite (CMC) materials in terms of GIc. This property is also sometimes described as the mode I fracture toughness or the mode I fracture resistance.1.2 This test method applies primarily to ceramic matrix composite materials with a 2-D laminate structure, consisting of lay-ups of continuous ceramic fibers, in unidirectional tape or 2-D woven fabric architectures, within a brittle ceramic matrix.1.3 This test method determines the elastic strain energy released per unit of new surface area created as a delamination grows at the interlaminar interface between two lamina or plies. The term delamination is used in this test method to specifically refer to this type of growth, while the term crack is a more general term that can also refer to matrix cracking, intralaminar delamination growth, or fiber fracture.1.4 This test method uses a double cantilever beam (DCB) specimen to determine the critical mode I interlaminar strain energy release rate (GIc). A DCB test method has been standardized for polymer matrix composites (PMCs) under Test Method D5528. This test method addresses a similar procedure, but with modifications to account for the different physical properties, reinforcement architectures, stress-strain response, and failure mechanisms of CMCs compared to PMCs.1.5 This test is written for ambient temperature and atmospheric test conditions, but the test method can also be used for elevated temperature or environmental exposure testing with the use of an appropriate environmental test chamber, measurement equipment for controlling and measuring the chamber temperature, humidity, and atmosphere, high temperature gripping fixtures, and modified equipment for measuring delamination growth.1.6 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard. No other units of measurement are included in this standard.1.6.1 Values expressed in this test method are in accordance with the International System of Units (SI) and IEEE/ASTM SI 10.1.7 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use. Specific hazard statements are given in Section 8.1.8 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

定价： 843元 / 折扣价： 717 元 加购物车

5.1 Understanding the mechanical properties of frozen soils is of primary importance to frozen ground engineering. Data from strain rate controlled compression tests are necessary for the design of most foundation elements embedded in, or bearing on frozen ground. They make it possible to predict the time-dependent settlements of piles and shallow foundations under service loads, and to estimate their short and long-term bearing capacity. Such tests also provide quantitative parameters for the stability analysis of underground structures that are created for permanent or semi-permanent use.5.2 It must be recognized that the structure of frozen soil in situ and its behavior under load may differ significantly from that of an artificially prepared specimen in the laboratory. This is mainly due to the fact that natural permafrost ground may contain ice in many different forms and sizes, in addition to the pore ice contained in a small laboratory specimen. These large ground-ice inclusions (such as ice lenses, a dominant horizontal, lens-shaped body of ice of any dimensions) will considerably affect the time-dependent behavior of full-scale engineering structures.5.3 In order to obtain reliable results, high-quality intact representative permafrost samples are required for compression strength tests. The quality of the sample depends on the type of frozen soil sampled, the in situ thermal condition at the time of sampling, the sampling method, and the transportation and storage procedures prior to testing. The best testing program can be ruined by poor-quality samples. In addition, one must always keep in mind that the application of laboratory results to practical problems requires much caution and engineering judgment.NOTE 1: 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 This test method covers the determination of the strength behavior of cylindrical specimens of frozen soil, subjected to uniaxial compression under controlled rates of strain. It specifies the apparatus, instrumentation, and procedures for determining the stress-strain-time, or strength versus strain rate relationships for frozen soils under deviatoric creep conditions.1.2 Values stated in SI units are to be regarded as the standard.1.3 All observed and calculated values shall conform to the guidelines for significant digits and rounding established in Practice D6026.1.3.1 For the purposes of comparing measured or calculated value(s) with specified limits, the measured or calculated value(s) shall be rounded to the nearest decimal or significant digits in the specified limits.1.3.2 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 analytical methods for engineering design.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

4.1 Materials scientists and engineers are making increased use of statistical analyses in interpreting S-N and ε-N fatigue data. Statistical analysis applies when the given data can be reasonably assumed to be a random sample of (or representation of) some specific defined population or universe of material of interest (under specific test conditions), and it is desired either to characterize the material or to predict the performance of future random samples of the material (under similar test conditions), or both. 1.1 This guide covers only S-N and ε-N relationships that may be reasonably approximated by a straight line (on appropriate coordinates) for a specific interval of stress or strain. It presents elementary procedures that presently reflect good practice in modeling and analysis. However, because the actual S-N or ε-N relationship is approximated by a straight line only within a specific interval of stress or strain, and because the actual fatigue life distribution is unknown, it is not recommended that (a) the S-N or ε-N curve be extrapolated outside the interval of testing, or (b) the fatigue life at a specific stress or strain amplitude be estimated below approximately the fifth percentile (P ≃ 0.05). As alternative fatigue models and statistical analyses are continually being developed, later revisions of this guide may subsequently present analyses that permit more complete interpretation of S-N and ε-N data. 1.2 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： 0元 / 折扣价： 0 元

4.1 This test method obtains the force and velocity induced in a pile during an axial impact event (see Figs. 1 and 2). Force and velocity are typically derived from measured strain and acceleration. The Engineer may analyze the acquired data using engineering principles and judgment to evaluate the integrity of the pile, the performance of the impact system, and the maximum compressive and tensile stresses occurring in the pile.FIG. 2 Typical Arrangement for High-Strain Dynamic Testing of a Deep Foundation4.2 If sufficient axial movement occurs during the impact event, and after assessing the resulting dynamic soil response along the side and bottom of the pile, the Engineer may analyze the results of a high-strain dynamic test to estimate the ultimate axial static compression capacity (see Note 1). Factors that may affect the axial static capacity estimated from dynamic tests include, but are not limited to the:(1) pile installation equipment and procedures,(2) elapsed time since initial installation,(3) pile material properties and dimensions,(4) type, density, strength, stratification, and saturation of the soil, or rock, or both adjacent to and beneath the pile,(5) quality or type of dynamic test data,(6) foundation settlement,(7) analysis method, and(8) engineering judgment and experience.If the Engineer does not have adequate previous experience with these factors, and with the analysis of dynamic test data, then a static load test carried out according to Test Method D1143/D1143M should be used to verify estimates of static capacity and its distribution along the pile length. Test Method D1143/D1143M provides a direct and more reliable measurement of static capacity.NOTE 1: The analysis of a dynamic test will under predict the ultimate axial static compression capacity if the pile movement during the impact event is too small. The Engineer should determine how the size and shape of the pile, and the properties of the soil or rock beneath and adjacent to the pile, affect the amount of movement required to fully mobilize the static capacity. A permanent net penetration of as little as 2 mm per impact may indicate that sufficient movement has occurred during the impact event to fully mobilize the capacity. However, high displacement driven piles may require greater movement to avoid under predicting the static capacity, and cast-in-place piles often require a larger cumulative permanent net penetration for a series of test blows to fully mobilize the capacity. Static capacity may also decrease or increase over time after the pile installation, and both static and dynamic tests represent the capacity at the time of the respective test. Correlations between measured ultimate axial static compression capacity and dynamic test estimates generally improve when using dynamic restrike tests that account for soil strength changes with time (see 6.8).NOTE 2: Although interpretation of the dynamic test analysis may provide an estimate of the pile's tension (uplift) capacity, users of this standard are cautioned to interpret conservatively the side resistance estimated from analysis of a single dynamic measurement location, and to avoid tension capacity estimates altogether for piles with less than 10 m embedded length. (Additional transducers embedded near the pile toe may also help improve tension capacity estimates.) If the Engineer does not have adequate previous experience for the specific site and pile type with the analysis of dynamic test data for tension capacity, then a static load test carried out according to Test Method D3689 should be used to verify tension capacity estimates. Test Method D3689 provides a direct and more reliable measurement of static tension capacity.NOTE 3: The quality of the result produced by this test method 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 test method 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 This dynamic test method covers the procedure for applying an axial impact force with a pile driving hammer or a large drop weight that will cause a relatively high strain at the top of an individual vertical or inclined deep foundation unit, and for measuring the subsequent force and velocity response of that deep foundation unit. While in this standard force and velocity are referenced as “measured,” they are typically derived from measured strain and acceleration values. High-strain dynamic testing applies to any deep foundation unit, also referred to herein as a “pile,” which functions in a manner similar to a driven pile or a cast-in-place pile regardless of the method of installation, and which conforms with the requirements of this test method.1.2 This standard provides minimum requirements for dynamic testing of deep foundations. Plans, specifications, or provisions (or combinations thereof) prepared by a qualified engineer may provide additional requirements and procedures as needed to satisfy the objectives of a particular test program. The engineer in responsible charge of the foundation design, referred to herein as the “Engineer”, shall approve any deviations, deletions, or additions to the requirements of this standard.1.3 The proper conduct and evaluation of high-strain dynamic tests requires special knowledge and experience. A qualified engineer should directly supervise the acquisition of field data and the interpretation of the test results so as to predict the actual performance and adequacy of deep foundations used in the constructed foundation. A qualified engineer shall approve the apparatus used for applying the impact force, driving appurtenances, test rigging, hoist equipment, support frames, templates, and test procedures.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 the standard. The word “shall” indicates a mandatory provision, and the word “should” indicates a recommended or advisory provision. Imperative sentences indicate mandatory provisions.1.5 Units—The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard. No other units of measurement are included in this standard. Reporting of test results in units other than SI shall not be regarded as nonconformance with this test method.1.6 All observed and calculated values shall conform to the guidelines for significant digits and rounding established in Practice D6026.1.6.1 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 commensurate with these considerations. It is beyond the scope of this standard to consider significant digits used in analysis methods for engineering design.1.7 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use. For a specific precautionary statement, see Note 4.1.8 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

定价： 590元 / 折扣价： 502 元 加购物车

5.1 This test method is intended to determine if a joint that is subjected to a mechanically induced cut will resist tear propagation during normal joint movement.NOTE 1: A sealant with a high resistance to tear propagation may perform better than a sealant with a low resistance to tear propagation.1.1 This test method evaluates the impact of an induced tear on a sealant specimen that is dimensioned, cured according to the guidelines in Test Method C719 and then subjected to a constant strain. It is effective in differentiating between sealants that are used in dynamic joints subject to abrasion, punctures, tears, or combination thereof.1.2 Since this test method is for the evaluation of tear propagation, an adhesive failure to the substrates provides no usable data regarding tear propagation. This would be considered a failed test and that data would be discarded, or at least separated from the other data from specimens that did not experience an adhesive failure.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 standard is similar in concept to European Technical Approval Guidelines (ETAG) 002, Part 1, Section 5.1.4.6.4—Resistance To Tearing.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