定价： 553元 / 折扣价： 471 元 加购物车

定价： 689元 / 折扣价： 586 元 加购物车

定价： 156元 / 折扣价： 133 元 加购物车

5.1 This test method for the chemical analysis of nickel and nickel alloys is primarily intended to test material for compliance with specifications such as those under jurisdiction of ASTM committee B02. It may also be used to test compliance with other specifications that are compatible with the test method.5.2 It is assumed that all who use this method will be trained analysts capable of performing common laboratory procedures skillfully and safely, and that the work will be performed in a properly equipped laboratory.5.3 This is a performance-based method that relies more on the demonstrated quality of the test result than on strict adherence to specific procedural steps. It is expected that laboratories using this method will prepare their own work instructions. These work instructions will include detailed operating instructions for the specific laboratory, the specific reference materials employed, and performance acceptance criteria. It is also expected that, when applicable, each laboratory will participate in proficiency test programs, such as described in Practice E2027, and that the results from the participating laboratory will be satisfactory.1.1 This test method describes the inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometric analysis of nickel and nickel allys, as specified by Committee B02, and having chemical compositions within the following limits:Element Application Range (Mass Fraction %)Aluminum 0. 01–6.00Boron 0. 01–0.10Carbon 0. 01–0.15Chromium 0. 01–33.00Copper 0.01–35.00Cobalt 0. 01–20.00Iron 0.05–50.00Magnesium 0. 01–0.020Molybdenum 0. 01–30.0Niobium 0. 01–6.0Nickel 25.00–100.0Phosphorous 0.001–0.025Silicon 0.01–1.50Sulfur 0.0001–0.01Titanium 0.0001–6.0Tungsten 0.01–5.0Vanadium 0.0005–1.01.2 The following elements may be determined using this method.Element Quantification Range (μg/g)Antimony 0.5–50Bismuth 0.1–11Gallium 2.9–54Lead 0.4–21Silver 1–35Tin 2.2–97Thallium 0.5–3.01.3 This method has only been interlaboratory tested for the elements and ranges specified. It may be possible to extend this method to other elements or different composition ranges provided that method validation that includes evaluation of method sensitivity, precision, and bias as described in this document is performed. Additionally, the validation study must evaluate the acceptability of sample preparation methodology using reference materials and/or spike recoveries. The user is cautioned to carefully evaluate the validation data as to the intended purpose of the analytical results. Guide E2857 provides additional guidance on method validation.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. Specific safety hazard statements are given in Section 9.

定价： 590元 / 折扣价： 502 元 加购物车

4.1 The properties included in this standard are those required to control the visual quality, usable area, thickness, hardness, and stiffness.1.1 This classification covers the determination of commercially available natural muscovite block mica and is intended to be independent of the basic color of the mica or its source.1.2 Muscovite mica is characterized by having an optical axial angle between 50 and 75° (see Appendix X1); and has a weight loss when heated for 5 min at 600°C not exceeding 0.2 % (based on the weight after drying at 120°C).1.3 The visual system of classifying the quality of natural muscovite mica covered by this specification is based upon relative amounts of visible foreign inclusions such as air bubbles, stains, and spots in combination with relative amounts and types of waviness, as well as other physical properties. In this system, a perfectly clear, transparent, flat specimen of mica is the visual standard of perfection. Increasing amounts of visual defects lower the visual quality, and a total of 13 levels of visual quality are covered by this standard. This method of classification, generally known as the Bengal India System, is purely qualitative and is entirely dependent on personal opinion and judgment.1.4 The standards for visual quality classification that are covered in this classification are the best commercially available concept of the various qualities and their relative positions. Variations in the methods of using and applying these standards from those herein defined are specified by the purchaser, or defined by agreement between the supplier and the purchaser.1.5 Standard size classifications are defined, based upon available usable rectangular areas and the minimum dimensions of the rectangles that the pieces will yield. Precautions to be taken in making thickness measurements are also described.1.6 This standard covers the following two definite forms of commercial preparation:1.6.1 Form 1—Full-trimmed natural block mica, 0.007 in. (0.178 mm) minimum thickness.1.6.2 Form 2—Partially-trimmed natural block mica, 0.007 in. minimum thickness.1.7 The basic color of mica, such as white, ruby, light green, dark green, brownish green, and rum, as well as other colors, and the method of controlling the color and other problems associated with the basic color, are not a part of this classification.1.8 The values stated in inch-pound units are to be regarded as standard. The values given in parentheses are mathematical conversions to SI units that are provided for information only and are not considered standard.1.9 Section 5 is technically identical to procedures specified in ISO 67-1981.1.10 Section 6 differs somewhat in procedure from ISO 5972-1978, but data obtained by either is expected to be identical.1.11 Section 7 is technically identical to procedures specified in ISO 2185-1972.1.12 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

定价： 590元 / 折扣价： 502 元 加购物车

定价： 156元 / 折扣价： 133 元 加购物车

The understanding and management of the interrelationship between human health, ecological condition, socio-cultural values, and economic well-being of the community and the high-value asset is essential to timely and acceptable restoration. This standard guide is designed to help responsible party(ies) with the identification and integration of affected stakeholders and with the establishment of a process to identify and resolve key issues essential to a satisfactory restoration. The standard guide is presented herein as a “framework” to help ensure that all the restoration planning process components (that is, human health, ecological condition, socio-cultural values and economic well-being) are considered. The framework is designed to allow a user to determine which components of the process are applicable to the restoration problem being addressed, and to establish the level of analytical detail necessary for each component. It provides general guidance to help with the selection of approaches and methods for specific analysis of each of the major restoration planning components (that is, human health, ecological condition, socio-cultural values, and economic well-being). By actively involving affected stakeholders in the restoration decision-making process, it will help the user to orient the process to prioritize and consider the most important issues of those who’s lives are most directly impacted by the consequences of the event and resulting restoration. This not only greatly increases the chances of a successful and acceptable restoration, but will also help promote public trust in the responsible party’s ability to rapidly restore the high-value asset(s).1.1 To ensure a publicly acceptable and timely restoration of an asset contaminated as a result of a natural or man-made disaster, including a terrorist event, it is essential to have a pre-planned strategy developed and tailored at the community level and facilitated by the government which advocates the support and involvement of the affected community during such a crisis period. This pre-planned strategy for restoration will need to be seamlessly incorporated into the overall emergency management process within the community. This guide presents a framework (that is, strategy) for involving the public in a stakeholder-focused, consensus-based event restoration process, for those situations where such involvement is essential to move a stalled (due to stakeholder issues) restoration process forward. This framework is designed to be an event-specific, community-specific process to help prioritize and consider actions necessary to optimize the restoration of an asset contaminated as the result of a disaster. 1.2 This guide is intended to describe a highly flexible restoration planning process, and therefore does not specify or recommend a specific course of action for this activity. 1.3 This guide is intended to assist in the implementation of a restoration planning process allowing a holistic assessment and balancing of the impacts associated with human health, ecology, socio-cultural values, and economic implications. It is intended to be used in alignment with current Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) guidance and other guides and agency procedures and requirements to address specific stakeholder issues and concerns. 1.4 After completing the immediate response and stabilization phase of a disaster that required Federal assistance through establishment of a Joint Field Office (JFO) in accordance with the National Response Plan, mitigation and recovery activities will need to be planned and initiated to address the significant long-term impacts for any contaminated assets in the affected area. This guide provides a process that can be used by the JFO to gain stakeholder consensus on the restoration of these assets. 1.5 The user should consult other restoration-related standards, regulations, and sources for specific methods in the utilization of predictive models or other analysis tools that may be required under a restoration planning assessment. 1.6 Although the implementation of a restoration planning process is intended for use after a disaster occurs, it needs to be an integral part of a community’s pre-event planning activities and incorporated into appropriate community response plans. Identifying the important assets of a community and key stakeholders associated with each respective asset, before an event occurs through a process such as Community Asset Mapping, will help ensure a more efficient restoration process following an actual contamination of the asset in a disastrous event. 1.7 Since restoration planning as proposed in this guide follows a plan established prior to the event, it is important to coordinate asset restoration plans with event preplanning on how to minimize damages to significant assets from uncertain, low-probability, but potentially costly natural and man-made disasters. What will be required for asset restoration will be in part dependent on what measures have been taken to protect those same assets before the extreme event occurs. Guide E2506 provides a three-step protocol for formulating and evaluating risk mitigation strategies for constructed facilities. Assets identified for risk mitigation in the application of Guide E2506 prior to a disaster will likely be assets that the restoration stakeholders using this guide will want to consider restoring in the recovery phase following a disaster. 1.8 This standard guide 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 guide to establish appropriate safety and health practices and to determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.

定价： 0元 / 折扣价： 0 元

2.1 Nonvolatile matter determination is useful as a quality control test, when used in conjunction with other tests, to assure specification compliance.1.1 This test method covers the determination of nonvolatile matter (total solids) in a water-emulsion, organic solvent-based liquid and paste floor polishes, and polymer-emulsion-type floor polishes.1.2 This test method recognizes that the products may contain material that will slowly volatilize or change chemically with a resulting change in weight of the nonvolatile matter. Therefore, since drying to constant weight is impractical, specific drying times have been selected.1.3 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as the standard. The values given in parentheses are for information only.1.4 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.1.5 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

定价： 515元 / 折扣价： 438 元 加购物车

定价： 1638元 / 折扣价： 1393 元

4.1 The allocation of limited resources (for example, time, money, regulatory oversight, qualified professionals) to any one petroleum release site necessarily influences corrective action decisions at other sites. This has spurred the search for innovative approaches to corrective action decision making, which still ensures that human health and the environment are protected.4.2 The RBCA process presented in this guide is a consistent, streamlined decision process for selecting corrective actions at petroleum release sites. Advantages of the RBCA approach are as follows:4.2.1 Decisions are based on reducing the risk of adverse human or environmental impacts,4.2.2 Site assessment activities are focussed on collecting only that information that is necessary to making risk-based corrective action decisions,4.2.3 Limited resources are focussed on those sites that pose the greatest risk to human health and the environment at any time,4.2.4 The remedial action achieves an acceptable degree of exposure and risk reduction,4.2.5 Compliance can be evaluated relative to site-specific standards applied at site-specific point(s) of compliance,4.2.6 Higher quality, and in some cases faster, cleanups than are currently realized, and4.2.7 A documentation and demonstration that the remedial action is protective of human health, safety, and the environment.4.3 Risk assessment is a developing science. The scientific approach used to develop the RBSL and SSTL may vary by state and user due to regulatory requirements and the use of alternative scientifically based methods.4.4 Activities described in this guide should be conducted by a person familiar with current risk and exposure assessment methodologies.4.5 In order to properly apply the RBCA process, the user should avoid the following:4.5.1 Use of Tier 1 RBSLs as mandated remediation standards rather than screening levels,4.5.2 Restriction of the RBCA process to Tier 1 evaluation only and not allowing Tier 2 or Tier 3 analyses,4.5.3 Placing arbitrary time constraints on the corrective action process; for example, requiring that Tiers 1, 2, and 3 be completed within 30-day time periods that do not reflect the actual urgency of and risks posed by the site,4.5.4 Use of the RBCA process only when active remediation is not technically feasible, rather than a process that is applicable during all phases of corrective action,4.5.5 Requiring the user to achieve technology-based remedial limits (for example, asymptotic levels) prior to requesting the approval for the RBSL or SSTL,4.5.6 The use of predictive modelling that is not supported by available data or knowledge of site conditions,4.5.7 Dictating that corrective action goals can only be achieved through source removal and treatment actions, thereby restricting the use of exposure reduction options, such as engineering and institutional controls,4.5.8 The use of unjustified or inappropriate exposure factors,4.5.9 The use of unjustified or inappropriate toxicity parameters,4.5.10 Neglecting aesthetic and other criteria when determining RBSLs or SSTLs,4.5.11 Not considering the effects of additivity when screening multiple chemicals,4.5.12 Not evaluating options for engineering or institutional controls, exposure point(s), compliance point(s), and carcinogenic risk levels before submitting remedial action plans,4.5.13 Not maintaining engineering or institutional controls, and4.5.14 Requiring continuing monitoring or remedial action at sites that have achieved the RBSL or SSTL.1.1 This is a guide to risk-based corrective action (RBCA), which is a consistent decision-making process for the assessment and response to a petroleum release, based on the protection of human health and the environment. Sites with petroleum release vary greatly in terms of complexity, physical and chemical characteristics, and in the risk that they may pose to human health and the environment. The RBCA process recognizes this diversity, and uses a tiered approach where corrective action activities are tailored to site-specific conditions and risks. While the RBCA process is not limited to a particular class of compounds, this guide emphasizes the application of RBCA to petroleum product releases through the use of the examples. Ecological risk assessment, as discussed in this guide, is a qualitative evaluation of the actual or potential impacts to environmental (nonhuman) receptors. There may be circumstances under which a more detailed ecological risk assessment is necessary (see Ref (1).21.2 The decision process described in this guide integrates risk and exposure assessment practices, as suggested by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), with site assessment activities and remedial measure selection to ensure that the chosen action is protective of human health and the environment. The following general sequence of events is prescribed in RBCA, once the process is triggered by the suspicion or confirmation of petroleum release:1.2.1 Performance of a site assessment;1.2.2 Classification of the site by the urgency of initial response;1.2.3 Implementation of an initial response action appropriate for the selected site classification;1.2.4 Comparison of concentrations of chemical(s) of concern at the site with Tier 1 Risk Based Screening Levels (RBSLs) given in a look-up table;1.2.5 Deciding whether further tier evaluation is warranted, if implementation of interim remedial action is warranted or if RBSLs may be applied as remediation target levels;1.2.6 Collection of additional site-specific information as necessary, if further tier evaluation is warranted;1.2.7 Development of site-specific target levels (SSTLs) and point(s) of compliance (Tier 2 evaluation);1.2.8 Comparison of the concentrations of chemical(s) of concern at the site with the Tier 2 evaluation SSTL at the determined point(s) of compliance or source area(s);1.2.9 Deciding whether further tier evaluation is warranted, if implementation of interim remedial action is warranted, or if Tier 2 SSTLs may be applied as remediation target levels;1.2.10 Collection of additional site-specific information as necessary, if further tier evaluation is warranted;1.2.11 Development of SSTL and point(s) of compliance (Tier 3 evaluation);1.2.12 Comparison of the concentrations of chemical(s) of concern at the site at the determined point(s) of compliance or source area(s) with the Tier 3 evaluation SSTL; and1.2.13 Development of a remedial action plan to achieve the SSTL, as applicable.1.3 The guide is organized as follows:1.3.1 Section 2 lists referenced documents,1.3.2 Section 3 defines terminology used in this guide,1.3.3 Section 4 describes the significance and use of this guide,1.3.4 Section 5 is a summary of the tiered approach,1.3.5 Section 6 presents the RBCA procedures in a step-by-step process,1.3.6 Appendix X1 details physical/chemical and toxicological characteristics of petroleum products,1.3.7 Appendix X2 discusses the derivation of a Tier 1 RBSL Look-Up Table and provides an example,1.3.8 Appendix X3 describes the uses of predictive modeling relative to the RBCA process,1.3.9 Appendix X4 discusses considerations for institutional controls, and1.3.10 Appendix X5 provides examples of RBCA applications.1.4 This guide describes an approach for RBCA. It is intended to compliment but not supersede federal, state, and local regulations. Federal, state, or local agency approval may be required to implement the processes outlined in this guide.1.5 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard. No other units of measurement are included in this standard.1.6 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.

定价： 0元 / 折扣价： 0 元

This specification covers natural or manufactured aggregate for use in job-mixed base and finish-coat full thickness Portland cement, Portland cement-lime and modified Portland cement plasters. Aggregate subjected to five cycles of the soundness test shall show a loss, when weighed in accordance with the grading of a sampling complying with the limitations set forth. The fineness modulus, friable particles, light constituents, organic impurities, material soundness, and sieve analysis of the aggregate shall be tested to meet the requirements prescribed.1.1 This specification covers natural or manufactured aggregate for use in job-mixed base and finish-coat full thickness portland cement-based plasters.1.2 The values stated in inch-pound units are to be regarded as standard. The values given in parentheses are mathematical conversions to SI units that are provided for information only and are not considered standard.1.3 The text of this specification references notes and footnotes that provide explanatory material. These notes and footnotes (excluding those in tables and figures) shall not be considered as requirements of the specification.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： 515元 / 折扣价： 438 元 加购物车

Scaffolds may be composed of purely mineral or ceramic materials, or they may be composed of a composite material with its main phase being a mineral or ceramic. Scaffolds may be porous or non-porous, mechanically rigid or compliant, and degradable or non-degradable. The scaffold may or may not have undergone a surface treatment.1.1 This guidance document covers the chemical, physical, biological, and mechanical characterization requirements for biocompatible mineral- and ceramic-based scaffolds used solely as device or to manufacture tissue-engineered medical products (TEMPs). In this guide, the pure device or the TEMPs product will be referred to as scaffold.1.2 The test methods contained herein provide guidance on the characterization of the bulk physical, chemical, mechanical, and surface properties of a scaffold construct. These properties may be important for the performance of the scaffold, especially if they affect cell behavior, adhesion, proliferation and differentiation. In addition, these properties may affect the delivery of bioactive agents, the biocompatibility and the bioactivity of the final product.1.3 This document may be used as guidance in the selection of test methods for the comprehensive characterization of a raw materials, granules, pre-shaped blocks, or an original equipment manufacture (OEM) specification. This guide may also be used to characterize the scaffold component of a finished medical product.1.4 While a variety of materials can be used to manufacture such scaffolds, the composition of the final scaffold shall contain mineral or ceramic components as its main ingredients.1.5 This guide assumes that the scaffold is homogeneous in nature. Chemical or physical inhomogeneity or mechanical anisotropy of the scaffold shall be declared in the manufacturer’s material and scaffold specification.1.6 This guide addresses neither the biocompatibility of the scaffold, nor the characterization or release profiles of any biomolecules, cells, drugs, or bioactive agents that are used in combination with the scaffold.1.7 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard. No other units of measurement are included in this standard.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 and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.

定价： 0元 / 折扣价： 0 元

4.1 For criticality control of nuclear fuel in dry storage and transportation, the most commonly used neutron absorber materials are borated stainless steel alloys, borated aluminum alloys, and boron carbide aluminum alloy composites. The boron used in these neutron absorber materials may be natural or enriched in the nuclide 10B. The boron is usually incorporated either as an intermetallic phase (for example, AlB2, TiB2, CrB2, etc.) in an aluminum alloy or stainless steel, or as a stable chemical compound particulate such as boron carbide (B4C), typically in an aluminum MMC or cermet.4.2 While other neutron absorbers continue to be investigated, 10B has been most widely used in these applications, and it is the only thermal neutron absorber addressed in this standard.4.3 In service, many neutron absorber materials are inaccessible and not amenable to a surveillance program. These neutron absorber materials are often expected to perform over an extended period.4.4 Qualification and acceptance procedures demonstrate that the neutron absorber material has the necessary characteristics to perform its design functions during the service lifetime.4.5 The criticality control function of neutron absorber materials in dry cask storage systems and transportation packagings is only significant in the presence of a moderator, such as during loading of fuel under water, or water ingress resulting from hypothetical accident conditions.4.6 The expected users of this standard include designers, neutron absorber material suppliers and purchasers, government agencies, consultants and utility owners. Typical use of the practice is to summarize practices which provide input for design specification, material qualification, and production acceptance. Adherence to this standard does not guarantee regulatory approval; a government regulatory authority may require different tests or additional tests, and may impose limits or restrictions on the use of a neutron absorber material.1.1 This practice provides procedures for qualification and acceptance of neutron absorber materials used to provide criticality control by absorbing thermal neutrons in systems designed for nuclear fuel storage, transportation, or both.1.2 This practice is limited to neutron absorber materials consisting of metal alloys, metal matrix composites (MMCs), and cermets, clad or unclad, containing the neutron absorber boron-10 (10B).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： 515元 / 折扣价： 438 元 加购物车

3.1 In accordance with Specification D2227, shipments of TSR10 and TSR20 must meet a minimum initial Wallace plasticity (Po) of 30 to be accepted. However, even with this minimum restriction, the uncured viscoelastic or “processability” properties are allowed to vary greatly. This variation in properties can significantly affect the quality and efficiency of a factory operation.3.2 Bales of TSR10 or TSR20 which are lower in their uncured elastic quality (“soft” rubber) in some cases may impart better processing properties to tire innerliners, cushion gums, and sidewalls. “Soft” bales sometimes impart better building tack, better mold flow, and lower extrusion die swell with better dimensional stability. Also, these “soft” rubber bales may dissolve faster in solvents for adhesion dipping.3.3 Bales of TSR10 or TSR20 that are higher in their uncured elastic quality (“hard” rubber) in some cases generate greater shearing during the initial stages of a factory mix, which result in a faster breakdown and a shorter mix cycle.3.4 Therefore, in a factory operation, sometimes segregating TSR10 or TSR20 shipments into “soft” and “hard” categories can improve the efficiency and quality of a factory operation.1.1 This practice covers the sorting of natural rubber bales of TSR10 or TSR20 in the factory according to their predicted processing performance based on differences in viscoelastic properties.1.2 This practice determines which bales should be used in factory compounds which benefit from using “soft” natural rubber versus which work better with “hard” natural rubber.1.3 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

定价： 515元 / 折扣价： 438 元 加购物车

4.1 This practice is designed to permit users of sample survey data to judge the trustworthiness of results from such surveys. Practice E105 provides a statement of principles for guidance of ASTM technical committees and others in the preparation of a sampling plan for a specific material. Guide E1402 describes the principal types of sampling designs. Practice E122 aids in deciding on the required sample size.4.2 Section 5 gives extended definitions of the concepts basic to survey sampling and the user should verify that such concepts were indeed used and understood by those who conducted the survey. What was the frame? How large (exactly) was the quantity N? How was the parameter θ estimated and its standard error calculated? If replicate subsamples were not used, why not? Adequate answers should be given for all questions. There are many acceptable answers to the last question.4.3 If the sample design was relatively simple, such as simple random or stratified, then fully valid estimates of sampling variance are easily available. If a more complex design was used then methods such as discussed in Ref (1)3 or in Guide E1402 may be acceptable. Use of replicate subsamples is the most straightforward way to estimate sampling variances when the survey design is complex.4.4 Once the survey procedures that were used satisfy Section 5, see if any increase in sample size is needed. The calculations for making it objectively are described in Section 6.4.5 Refer to Section 7 to guide in the interpretation of the uncertainty in the reported value of the parameter estimate, θ^, that is, the value of its standard error, se(θ^). The quantity se(θ^) should be reviewed to verify that the risks it entails are commensurate with the size of the sample.4.6 When the audit subsample shows that there was reasonable conformity with prescribed procedures and when the known instances of departures from the survey plan can be shown to have no appreciable effect on the estimate, the value of θ^ is appropriate for use.AbstractThis practice presents rules for accepting or rejecting evidence based on a sample. Statistical evidence for this practice is in the form of an estimate of a proportion, an average, a total, or other numerical characteristic of a finite population or lot. This practice is an estimate of the result which would have been obtained by investigating the entire lot or population under the same rules and with the same care as was used for the sample. One purpose of this practice is to describe straightforward sample selection and data calculation procedures so that courts, commissions, etc. will be able to verify whether such procedures have been applied.1.1 This practice presents rules for accepting or rejecting evidence based on a sample. Statistical evidence for this practice is in the form of an estimate of a proportion, an average, a total, or other numerical characteristic of a finite population or lot. It is an estimate of the result which would have been obtained by investigating the entire lot or population under the same rules and with the same care as was used for the sample.1.2 One purpose of this practice is to describe straightforward sample selection and data calculation procedures so that courts, commissions, etc. will be able to verify whether such procedures have been applied. The methods may not give least uncertainty at least cost, they should however furnish a reasonable estimate with calculable uncertainty.1.3 This practice is primarily intended for one-of-a-kind studies. Repetitive surveys allow estimates of sampling uncertainties to be pooled; the emphasis of this practice is on estimation of sampling uncertainty from the sample itself. The parameter of interest for this practice is effectively a constant. Thus, the principal inference is a simple point estimate to be used as if it were the unknown constant, rather than, for example, a forecast or prediction interval or distribution devised to match a random quantity of interest.1.4 A system of units is not specified 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