5.1 This test is intended to assess the mechanical integrity, failure modes, and practical adhesion strength of a specific hard ceramic coating on a given metal or ceramic substrate. The test method does not measure the fundamental “adhesion strength” of the bond between the coating and the substrate. Rather, the test method gives a quantitative engineering measurement of the practical (extrinsic) adhesion strength and damage resistance of the coating-substrate system as a function of applied normal force. The adhesion strength and damage modes depend on the complex interaction of the coating-substrate properties (hardness, fracture strength, modulus of elasticity, damage mechanisms, microstructure, flaw population, surface roughness, and so forth) and the test parameters (stylus properties and geometry, loading rate, displacement rate, and so forth).5.2 The test method as described herein is not appropriate for polymer coatings, ductile metal coatings, very thin (<0.1 μm) ceramic coatings, or very thick (>30 μm) ceramic coatings.NOTE 2: Under narrow circumstances, the test may be used for ceramic coatings on polymer substrates with due consideration of the differences in elastic modulus, ductility, and strength between the two types of materials. Commonly, the low comparative modulus of the polymer substrate means that the ceramic coating will generally tend to fail in bending (through-thickness adhesive failure) before cohesive failure in the coating itself.5.3 The quantitative coating adhesion scratch test is a simple, practical, and rapid test. However, reliable and reproducible test results require careful control of the test system configuration and testing parameters, detailed analysis of the coating damage features, and appropriate characterization of the properties and morphology of the coating and the substrate of the test specimens.5.4 The coating adhesion test has direct application across the full range of coating development, engineering, and production efforts. Measurements of the damage mechanisms in a coating as a function of applied normal forces are useful to understand material-process-property relations; quantify and qualify the mechanical response of coating-substrate systems; assess coating durability; measure production quality; and support failure analysis.5.5 This test method is applicable to a wide range of hard ceramic coating compositions (carbides, nitrides, oxides, diamond, and diamond-like carbon) applied by physical vapor deposition, chemical vapor deposition, and direct oxidation methods to metal and ceramic substrates.5.6 Ceramic coatings can be crystalline or amorphous, but commonly have high relative density with limited porosity (<5 %). Porous coatings can be tested, but the effects of porosity on the damage mechanisms in the coating must be carefully considered.5.7 The test method, as defined with the 200 μm radius Rockwell diamond stylus, is commonly used for ceramic coating thicknesses in the range of 0.10 to 30 μm. Thinner coatings may require a smaller diameter stylus and lower normal forces for reliable results. Thicker coatings may require larger diameter stylus and higher normal forces. Any variations in stylus size and geometry and designated normal force ranges shall be reported.5.8 Specimens commonly have a flat planar surface for testing, but cylinder geometries can also be tested if they are properly fixtured and aligned and the scratch direction is along the long axis of the specimen. The physical size of the test specimen is determined primarily by the capabilities and limits of the test equipment stage and fixturing.5.9 The test is commonly conducted under unlubricated conditions and at room temperature. However, it is feasible and possible to modify the test equipment and test conditions to conduct the test with lubrication or at elevated temperatures.5.10 Coated specimens can be tested after high temperature, oxidative, or corrosive exposure to assess the retained properties and durability (short-term and long-term) of the coating. Any specimen conditioning or environmental exposure shall be fully documented in the test report, describing in detail the exposure conditions (temperature, atmosphere, pressures, chemistry, humidity, and so forth), the length of time, and resulting changes in coating morphology, composition, and microstructure.1.1 This test method covers the determination of the practical adhesion strength and mechanical failure modes of hard (Vickers Hardness HV = 5 GPa or higher), thin (≤30 μm) ceramic coatings on metal and ceramic substrates at ambient temperatures. These ceramic coatings are commonly used for wear/abrasion resistance, oxidation protection, and functional (optical, magnetic, electronic, biological) performance improvement.1.2 In the test method, a diamond stylus of defined geometry (Rockwell C, a conical diamond indenter with an included angle of 120° and a spherical tip radius of 200 μm) is drawn across the flat surface of a coated test specimen at a constant speed and a defined normal force (constant or progressively increasing) for a defined distance. The damage along the scratch track is microscopically assessed as a function of the applied force. Specific levels of progressive damage are associated with increasing normal stylus forces. The force level(s) which produce a specific type/level of damage in the coating are defined as a critical scratch load(s). The test method also describes the use of tangential force and acoustic emission signals as secondary test data to identify different coating damage levels.1.3 Applicability to Coatings—This test method is applicable to a wide range of hard ceramic coating compositions: carbides, nitrides, oxides, diamond, and diamond-like carbon on ceramic and metal substrates. The test method, as defined with the 200 μm radius diamond stylus, is commonly used for coating thicknesses in the range of 0.1 to 30 μm. Test specimens generally have a planar surface for testing, but cylinder geometries can also be tested with an appropriate fixture.1.4 Principal Limitations: 1.4.1 The test method does not measure the fundamental adhesion strength of the bond between the coating and the substrate. Rather, the test method gives an engineering measurement of the practical (extrinsic) adhesion strength of a coating-substrate system, which depends on the complex interaction of the test parameters (stylus properties and geometry, loading rate, displacement rate, and so forth) and the coating-substrate properties (hardness, fracture strength, modulus of elasticity, damage mechanisms, microstructure, flaw population, surface roughness, and so forth).1.4.2 The defined test method is not directly applicable to metal or polymeric coatings which fail in a ductile, plastic manner, because plastic deformation mechanisms are very different than the brittle damage modes and features observed in hard ceramic coatings. The test method may be applicable to hard metal coatings which fail in a brittle mode with appropriate changes in test parameters and damage analysis procedures and criteria.1.4.3 The test method, as defined with the Rockwell C diamond stylus and specific normal force and rate parameters, is not recommended for very thin (<0.1 μm) or thicker coatings (>30 μm). Such coatings may require different stylus geometries, loading rates, and ranges of applied normal force for usable, accurate, repeatable results.1.4.4 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard. No other units of measurement are included in this standard. Test data values in SI units (newtons (N) for force and millimetres (mm) for displacement) are to be considered as standard and are in accordance with IEEE/ASTM SI 10.1.5 Organization—The test method is organized into the following sections:  Section 1 Purpose and Description 1.1 Applicability 1.3 Principal Limitations 1.4 Organization 1.5Referenced Documents 2 ASTM Standards 2.1 Other Standards and References 2.2Terminology 3Summary of Test Method 4 5Test Methodology and Experimental Control 6 Test Overview 6.1 Test Modes 6.2 Primary and Supplementary Measurements 6.3 Critical Scratch Load Damage Criteria and Scratch Atlas 6.4 Experimental Factors and Variables 6.5Interferences 7 Material and Specimen Related 7.2 Test Method Related 7.3Apparatus 8 General Description 8.1 Stylus and Stylus Mounting 8.2 Mechanical Stage and Displacement Control 8.3 Test Frame and Force Application System 8.4 Force and Displacement Sensors 8.5 Optical Analysis and Measurement 8.6 Data Acquisition and Recording 8.7 Acoustic Emission (Optional) 8.8 Coating Adhesion Reference Specimens (Optional) 8.9 Coating Surface Profilometry (Optional) 8.10 Data Analysis and Output Software (Optional) 8.11Test Specimens 9 Specimen Requirements 9.1 Specimen Characterization 9.2 Specimen Size 9.3 Specimen Flatness and Level 9.4 Polishing (Optional) 9.5 Specimen Exposure Conditioning (Optional) 9.6 Specimen Cleaning 9.7 Specimen Handling and Storage 9.8Calibration 10 System Calibration 10.1 Reference Specimens 10.2Test Procedure 11 Calibration 11.1 Test Mode Selection 11.2 Test Planning 11.3 Stylus Inspection and Cleaning 11.4 Environmental Conditions 11.5 System Setup and Check 11.6 Test Specimen Mounting 11.7 Conducting the Test 11.8 Specimen Count 11.9 Invalid and Censored Data 11.10 Scratch Damage Assessment 11.11Calculations 12Report 13 Test Identification 13.2 Specimen Information 13.3 Test Equipment and Procedure Information 13.4 Test Data and Statistics 13.5Precision and Bias 14Keywords 15Rockwell Diamond Indenter Specifications Annex A1Alignment and Calibration Annex A2Repeatability and Reproducibility Studies Annex A3Coating Damage Criteria and Scratch Atlas Appendix X1Experimental Variables in Scratch Adhesion Testing Appendix X2Bibliography  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： 843元 / 折扣价： 717 元 加购物车

5.1 The manufacturing of textile products uses seam engineering to determine the best combination of sewing thread, stitch type, seam type, and stitch density to construct the end use structure. These four seam engineering variables contribute to a textile product being able to achieve the maximum sewn seam strength performance and structural integrity when cut pieces of fabric are joined together.5.1.1 It is known that for some textile structures the seam engineering variables are selected to meet a “one time performance requirement.” This means that following the “single incident” during which the maximum performance potential or capability of the textile structure has been met, it is expected to be discarded and replaced with another “new” unit. For example: an inflatable restraint in an automobile. Once deployed, it must be replaced; it cannot be re-used. Likewise, there are other textile structures, intended to be used multiple times, while also being subjected to various care and maintenance regimens.5.1.2 This test method enables the fabric producer of woven fabrics, the textile producer, and other users of the test method to determine which seam engineering choices can be made relative to: sewing thread tex size; seam type; stitch type; and stitch density to determine the potential outcomes that can occur when a particular woven fabric is used:(a) What is the maximum force at which sewn seam strength failure will enable products made with this fabric to be repaired?(b) What is the highest seam efficiency percentage attained?(c) What is the maximum force at which the sewn seam strength results in seam slippage that can cause yarn slippage, yarn displacement and fabric failure?5.1.2.1 The maximum force at which sewn seam strength or the highest seam efficiency retained demonstrate failure of the stitching without causing the displacement of one or more fabric yarns from their original position mean that the product can be repaired. When the failure results in displacement of yarns, the textile product will need to be replaced.5.1.3 The procedures used in this test method represent two primary seam engineering techniques identified in Practice D6193 and used to manufacture products made of woven textile fabrics.5.1.4 In case of dispute arising from differences in reported test results when using this test method for acceptance testing of commercial shipments, the purchaser and the supplier should perform 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 from the same lot of fabric to be evaluated, which utilize a like seam assembly (or standard seam assembly). The test specimens should then be randomly assigned in equal numbers to each laboratory for testing. If a bias is found, either its cause must be determined and corrected, or the purchaser and supplier must agree to interpret future test results in light of the known bias.5.2 This test method can be used to determine the sewn seam strength and sewn seam efficiency of critical sewn seam assemblies with each fabric. Because sewn seam strength and sewn seam efficiency varies with each fabric, both of the standard seam assemblies, noted in Table 1, should be used when comparing the seam strength of different fabrics. Table 1 lists the default seam assembly specifications to be used for fabrics made with low, medium and high density yarn counts. If a determination cannot be made as to which seam is the best suited for a particular fabric, all should be evaluated.5.3 Seams prepared for this test method should be made by competent factory sewing operators familiar with the potential for damage to the integrity of the sewn seam when stitching is improperly done.5.3.1 If competent factory sewing operators are not accessible, a laboratory technician familiar with the potential for damage of an improperly sewn seam may prepare the seamed test specimens. It is imperative for purchaser/supplier to understand the impact an improperly sewn seam will have on test results.5.4 This test method is applicable whenever a determination of sewn seam strength is required. The breaking force of the seam and fabric will permit estimation of seam efficiency. This test method can be used as an aid for estimating seam strength for any given fabric.5.5 Seam engineering techniques for specific fabric types can also be determined by utilizing this test method.5.6 This test method can be used to determine when the sewn seam is affected by seam slippage. While the ultimate consequence of this phenomenon is rupture, seam slippage greater than either the values stated in customer specifications, or as agreed upon by purchaser/supplier may severely reduce the integrity such that the product cannot be used for its intended purpose.1.1 This test method measures the sewn seam strength in woven fabrics by applying a force perpendicular to the sewn seams.1.1.1 The axis perpendicular to the sewn seam can represent either the warp yarn axis or filling yarn axis, the same axis tested when using grab Test Method D5034.1.1.1.1 This test method is applicable to sewn seams obtained from a previously sewn article or seams sewn with fabric samples using one of two specific seam assemblies as shown in Table 1.NOTE 1: When the performance of a woven textile structure requires data to indicate the maximum seam strength that will result in the failure of fabric on either side of seam, the standard seam can be changed to use the Lapped seam type construction with two or more rows of stitching: Lsc-2; Lsc-3; Lsc-4; and the maximum number of stitches per inch that can be used. (See Practice D6193.)1.2 This test method is used when the maximum breaking force measurement to rupture of a woven fabric sewn seam is required.1.2.1 This test method is used when the seam efficiency measurement of a woven fabric sewn seam is required.1.2.2 This test method is used to identify the sewn seam strength threshold at which the failure of the stitching occurs, without damage to the fabric, so that the textile product can be repaired.1.2.3 This test method is used to identify the force at which seam strength results in slippage and displacement of warp yarns, filling yarns, or any combination of these yarns.1.3 This test method does not predict actual wear performance of a seam.1.4 The values stated in either SI units or inch-pound 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 non-conformance with the 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： 646元 / 折扣价： 550 元 加购物车

4.1 Creep data that are obtained over a relatively short period of time in this test method can provide a measure of an adhesive bond's ability to withstand static loading in shear over a relatively long period of time. Creep measurements are made over a range of expected service conditions, including level of stress, temperature, relative humidity, and duration of load. Creep rate, creep strain, and creep modulus are calculated at the various service conditions.4.2 Creep data can be used to (1) predict performance of an adhesive under long-term loading, (2) characterize an adhesive, (3) compare adhesives with each other and against specifications, and (4) design structural members fabricated with an adhesive.4.3 Time-to-failure data provide a measure of the ultimate load-carrying ability of an adhesive bond as a function of time at various levels of stress, temperature, and relative humidity.4.4 With proper caution, time-to-failure data derived from relatively short loading periods can be extrapolated to estimate the useful service life of an adhesive at working levels of static stress. This property may also be used with creep data to accomplish purposes listed in 4.2.4.5 This test method is a research tool intended for development or evaluation of new adhesives and new product designs. The researcher may select from suggested tests those that are appropriate. However, creep and time-to-failure tests are nonroutine and can be time-consuming and expensive, so tests must be selected with care.4.6 The apparatus and procedures may be suitable for measuring creep properties of adhesives on substrates other than wood, such as metal, plastic, and glass, but such considerations are not within the scope of this test method.1.1 This test method covers the determination of time-dependent properties of structural adhesives in wood-to-wood bonds when specimens are subjected to shearing stresses at various levels of static load, constant temperature, and relative humidity. Apparatus and procedures are provided for direct measurement of time-dependent shear deformation (creep) and time to failure of adhesive bonds under static load. Guidelines for selecting test conditions, methods for calculating creep rate, creep strain, creep modulus, and extrapolation of time to failure, are given along with methods of presenting these data.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 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 guide suggests a simple means of evaluating the extent of any failure of a structural sealant in an installed structural sealant glazing system.5.2 A qualified authority should specify the criteria described in Sections 8 and 9 and should interpret the results and judge their significance for the structural sealant glazing system.5.3 The evaluation program measures deflection of loaded lites and does not measure directly any structural sealant failure. Consequently, the qualified authority interpreting the data should also evaluate the source of any increased deflection that is measured. Increased deflection may be due to structural sealant adhesive or cohesive failure, but may also be due to a decrease in sealant modulus, a change in sealant joint dimensions, or other nonfailure mechanisms. Selective destructive sampling of areas with increased deflections can assist in this evaluation.1.1 This guide covers a screening approach to detect failure (adhesive or cohesive) of a structural sealant in a structural sealant-glazed window, curtain wall, or other similar system. Presently, only a silicone-sealant that is specifically formulated, tested, and marketed as a structural glazing sealant is allowed for structural sealant glazing.1.2 The values stated in either acceptable metric units or in other units shall be regarded separately as the standard. The values stated in each system may not be exact equivalents; therefore, each system must be used independently of the other, without combining values in any way.1.3 There are no ISO standards similar or equivalent to this ASTM 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： 590元 / 折扣价： 502 元 加购物车

5.1 This guide is intended as a guideline for fluid analysis programs and serves as an initial justification for selecting fluid tests and sampling frequencies. Plant operating experience along with the review and benchmarking of similar applications is required to ensure that lessons learned are implemented.5.2 Selection of proper fluid tests for assessing in-service component condition may have both safety and economic implications. Some failure modes may cause component disintegration, increasing the safety hazard. Thus, any fluid test that can predict such conditions should be included in the condition-monitoring program. Conversely, to maintain a sustainable and successful fluid-monitoring program, the scope of the fluid tests and their frequency should be carefully balanced between the associated risks versus expected program cost savings and benefits.5.3 The failure modes monitored may be similar from one application to the next, but the risk and consequences of failure may differ.5.4 This analysis can be used to determine which in-service lubricant analysis tests would be of highest value and which would be ineffective for the failure modes of interest. This information can also be used to determine the best monitoring strategy for a suite of failure modes and how often assessment is needed to manage the risk of failure.1.1 This guide describes a methodology to select tests to be used for in-service lubricant analysis. The selection of fluid tests for monitoring failure mode progression in industrial applications applies the principles of failure mode and effect analysis (FMEA).1.2 Although typical FMEA addresses all possible product failure modes, the focus of this guide is not intended to address failures that have a very high probability of unsafe operation as these should immediately be addressed by other means.1.3 This guide is limited to components selected for condition-monitoring programs by providing a methodology to choose fluid tests associated with specific failure modes for the purpose of identifying their earliest developing stage and monitoring fault progression. The scope of this guide is also focused on those failure modes and their consequences that can effectively be detected and monitored by fluid analysis techniques.1.4 This guide pertains to a process to be used to ensure an appropriate amount of condition monitoring is performed with the objective of improving equipment reliability, reducing maintenance costs, and enhancing fluid analysis monitoring of industrial machinery. This guide can also be used to select the monitoring frequencies needed to make the failure determinations and provide an assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of a current condition-monitoring program.1.5 This guide does not eliminate the programmatic requirements for appropriate assembly, operational, and maintenance practices.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

5.1 This guide is intended as a guideline for justification of oil test selection for monitoring rolling element ball type bearing conditions in industrial applications. Continuous benchmarking against similar applications is required to ensure lessons learned are continuously implemented.5.2 Selection of oil tests for the purpose of detecting rolling element ball type bearing failure modes requires good understanding of equipment design, operating requirements and surrounding conditions. Specifically, detailed knowledge is required on bearing design configuration, dimensional tolerances, load directions, design limitations, lubrication mechanisms, lubricant characteristics, and metallurgy of lubricated surfaces including bearing cages. Equipment criticality and accessibility as well as application of other monitoring techniques (for example, vibration, ultrasound or thermal images) are also critical information in this analysis process. In addition, detailed knowledge on the lubricating oil is paramount.5.3 To properly apply the FMEA methodology users must understand the changes the system may encounter during all operating modes, their impact on design functions and available monitoring techniques capable of detecting these changes. To assist this approach, Section 6 will provide extensive descriptions on the rolling element ball type bearing failure modes, their causes and effects.5.4 It is recognized that in most industrial applications vibration monitoring is the primary condition monitoring technique applied to detect failure modes, causes and effects in rolling element ball type bearings—while oil analysis is primarily used to monitor the lubricating oil properties. In the recent years, however, there is a trend toward using oil analysis in order to provide earlier detection of some failures of rolling element ball type bearings. This is particularly applicable to complex dynamic systems such as compressors, gearboxes and some gas turbines where obtaining vibration spectra and their analysis may be more difficult.1.1 This guide approaches oil analysis from a failure standpoint and includes both the rolling element ball type bearing wear and fluid deterioration in industrial application.1.2 This guide pertains to improving equipment reliability, reducing maintenance costs and enhancing the condition-based maintenance program primarily for industrial machinery by applying analytical methodology to oil analysis program for the purpose of detecting specific failure modes.1.3 This guide reinforces requirements for appropriate assembly, operation within the original design envelope as well as the need for condition-based and time-based maintenance.1.4 This guide covers the principles of Failure Mode and Effect Analysis (FMEA) as described in Guide D7874 and its relationship to rolling element ball type bearing wear in industrial application and its fluid deterioration.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

4.1 The extent of cracking or pitting of bituminous films is a measure of the extent of deterioration due to weathering. Failure due to cracking is more accurately determined electrically than visually.4.2 Failure determined by this test method will depend not only on the characteristics of the bituminous material and the extent of weathering, but also on the film thickness, and the amount and type of mineral filler present.4.3 Tests on a similar material of known weathering characteristics (a control) exposed at the same time as the test material is strongly recommended as a check on the validity of the test results.1.1 This test method covers the use of a spark-generating apparatus for determination of failure due to cracking of bituminous materials undergoing accelerated or outdoor weathering on electrically conductive backings.1.2 The values stated in either SI units or inch-pound 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 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

The data obtained by this test method are useful for establishing pressure, or hoop stress where applicable, versus failure-time relationships, under independently controlled internal and external environments that simulate actual anticipated product end-use conditions, from which the design basis (DB) for piping products or materials, or both, can be determined. (Refer to Test Method D2837 and Practice D2992, and Appendix X1 of this test method.)Note 3—Reference to design basis (DB) in this test method refers to the hydrostatic design basis (HDB) for material in straight hollow cylindrical shapes where hoop stress can be easily calculated, or is based on applied pressure design basis (PDB) for complex-shaped products or systems where complex stress fields seriously prohibit the use of hoop stress.In order to characterize plastics as piping products, it is necessary to establish the stress-to-rupture-time, or pressure-to-rupture-time relationships over two or more logarithmic decades of time (hours) within controlled environmental parameters. Because of the nature of the test and specimens employed, no single line can adequately represent the data. Therefore, the confidence limits should be established.Results obtained at one set of environmental conditions should not be used for other conditions, except that higher temperature data can be used for a design basis assignment for lower application temperatures, provided that it can be demonstrated that the application conditions present a less stringent environment. The design basis should be determined for each specific plastic material and each different set of environmental constraints. Design and processing can significantly affect the long-term performance of piping products, and therefore should be taken into consideration during any evaluation (see Appendix X2).Specimens used must be representative of the piping product or material under evaluation (see Appendix X2).1.1 This test method covers the determination of the time-to-failure of plastic piping products under constant internal pressure and flow.1.2 This test method provides a method of characterizing plastics in the form of pipe, components, and systems under any reasonable combination of internal and external temperatures and environments, under the procedures described.1.3 This test method can be used to characterize the tested plastic materials or products, or both, on the basis of pressure-, or stress-rupture data developed under the conditions prescribed.1.4 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.1.5 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 and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.

定价： 0元 / 折扣价： 0 元

5.1 These test methods are intended to determine the ultimate failure load of a ceramic femoral knee component. This information can be used for evaluation of different ceramic component designs or different ceramic materials, or for series production control.5.2 Although the test methodology described attempts to identify physiologically relevant intraoperative and in vivo loading conditions, the interpretation of results is limited to an in vitro comparison between ceramic femoral component designs and materials regarding their static ultimate failure load under the stated test conditions.1.1 The test methods included in this standard cover two procedures for static burst testing of a ceramic femoral component used in total knee replacement (TKR). The two procedures are used to determine the static ultimate failure load of a ceramic femoral knee component. Both procedures are simulating in vivo loading conditions. One of the procedures additionally simulates intraoperative loading conditions. The standard applies to cruciate retaining (CR) femoral components which cover both the medial and lateral condyles and the patellar surface of the femur. These test methods may require modifications to accommodate other femoral component designs.1.2 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard. No other units of measurement are included in this standard.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： 646元 / 折扣价： 550 元 加购物车

The data obtained by this test method are useful for establishing stress versus failure-time relationships in a controlled environment. The long-term strength (LTS) is determined primarily for materials used in molding applications. The LTS categorized in accordance with Table 1 of ASTM D2837 is known as the SDB (strength design basis).Note 1—These SDB values will be published in PPI TR-4 for materials used in molding applications only.The test method can also be used on an experimental basis for pipe-grade materials as an indicator of stress-rupture performance. The long-term strength or SDB values obtained by this test method are not intended to replace the HDB determined for pressure pipe tested in accordance with Test Method D1598.In order to determine how plastics will perform in pipe fitting applications, it is necessary to establish the stress-failure time relationships over four or more decades of time (hours) in a controlled environment. Because of the nature of the test and specimens employed, no single line can adequately represent the data, and therefore the confidence limits should be established.Note 2—Some materials may exhibit a nonlinear relationship between log-stress and log-failure time, usually at short failure-times. In such cases, the 105 - hour stress value computed on the basis of short-term test data may be significantly different than the value obtained when a distribution of data points in accordance with Test Method D2837 is evaluated. However, these data may still be useful for quality control or other applications, provided correlation with long-term data has been established.1.1 This test method covers the requirements to determine the time-to-failure of thermoplastic resins for piping applications by uniaxial loading of a grooved tensile test specimen. This grooved tensile specimen achieves a multi-axial stress condition, which mimics the stress condition found in pressurized solid-wall plastic pipe. The ratio of the stress in the axial direction to the transverse direction approximates that for a pressurized solid-wall pipe specimen.1.2 It is intended that the data generated on these specimens be analyzed according to the methodology set forth in Test Method D2837 to generate a long-term strength design value for the material.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 and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.

定价： 0元 / 折扣价： 0 元

4.1 An estimate of wood failure is one of the principal means for determining the quality of an adhesively bonded wood joint.4.2 When evaluated after a water soaking, water soaking and drying, or boiling and drying, the percentage of estimated wood failure is an important criterion for qualifying adhesives for use in plywood, laminated structural timber, adhesively bonded wood products and for daily quality control of the processes for manufacturing various adhesively bonded wood products including but not limited to plywood and laminated timbers. Standards that use the percentage of wood failure are included in Section 2.4.3 In plywood manufactured from North American softwood species, the percentage of wood failure of Test Method D906 specimens, tested wet after either a vacuum-pressure soak-dry or boil-dry treatment, correlates with the percentage of panels that delaminate in outdoor exposure without protection.74.4 Similar correlations for other products have not been published.1.1 This practice provides procedures for estimating the percentage of wood failure that occurs in plywood-shear, block-shear, finger joint test specimens, or any other bondline involving wood.1.2 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as the standard. The values in parentheses are provided 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 These test methods provide a rapid means of evaluating tendencies for package failure when the package is exposed to a pressure differential. Pressure differentials may occur during processes such as sterilization and transportation.5.2 These test methods are frequently used to quickly evaluate packages during the manufacturing process and at various stages of the package's life cycle.5.3 If correlations between pieces of test equipment are to be made, it is important that all parameters of the test method be exactly the same. Typical parameters may include, but are not limited to, package size, material, seal configuration, test equipment, rate of air flow into the package, sensitivity (machine response to pressure drop), and position of test article (see Fig. 1).FIG. 1 Open Package Test Positions5.4 These test methods do not necessarily provide correlation with actual package seal strength as typically measured using Test Method F88 (or equivalent).1.1 These test methods explain the procedure for determining the ability of packages to withstand internal pressurization.1.2 The burst test increasingly pressurizes the package until the package fails.1.3 The creep test maintains a specified pressure for a specified time or until the package fails.1.4 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 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 The laboratory fatigue life determined by this standard for beam specimens has been used to estimate the fatigue life of asphalt mixture pavement layers under repeated traffic loading. Although the field performance of asphalt mixtures is impacted by many factors (traffic variation, loading rate, and wander; climate variation; rest periods between loads; aging; etc.), it has been more accurately predicted when laboratory properties are known along with an estimate of the strain level induced at the layer depth by the traffic wheel load traveling over the pavement.NOTE 2: The quality of the results produced by this standard are dependent on the competence of the personnel performing the procedure and the capability, calibration, and maintenance of the equipment used. Agencies that meet the criteria of Specification D3666 are generally considered capable of competent and objective testing, sampling, inspection, etc. Users of this standard are cautioned that compliance with Specification D3666 alone does not completely ensure reliable results. Reliable results depend on many factors; following the suggestions of Specification D3666 or some similar acceptable guideline provides a means of evaluating and controlling some of those factors.1.1 This test method provides a procedure for determining a fatigue curve that is developed using three or more strain levels. The resulting data can be used in the fatigue models for mechanistic-empirical pavement design (that is, Pavement ME). Failure points are determined for estimating the fatigue life of 380 mm long by 50 mm thick by 63 mm in breadth (width) asphalt mixture beam (rectangular prism) specimens sawed from laboratory or field-compacted asphalt mixture, which are subjected to repeated flexural bending.1.2 The largest nominal maximum aggregate size (NMAS) recommended for beams 50 mm thick is 19 mm. Beams made with an NMAS greater than 19 mm might significantly interfere with the material response, thereby affecting the repeatability of the test.1.3 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.1.4 Units—The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard. No other units of measurement are included in this standard, with the exception of degrees (°) where angle is specified in accordance with IEEE/ASTM SI 10.1.5 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： 646元 / 折扣价： 550 元 加购物车

5.1 This standard is intended as a guideline for the justification of oil test selection for monitoring plain bearing conditions. One should employ a continuous benchmarking against similar applications to ensure lessons learned are continuously being implemented.5.2 Selection of oil tests for the purpose of detecting plain bearing failure modes requires good understanding of equipment design, operating requirements, and surrounding conditions. Specifically, detailed knowledge is required of bearing design configuration, dimensional tolerances, load directions, design limitations, lubrication mechanisms, lubricant characteristics, and metallurgy of lubricated surfaces. Equipment criticality and accessibility as well as application of other monitoring techniques (for example, vibration, ultrasound, or thermal images) are also critical information in this analysis process. In addition, detailed knowledge of the lubricating oil is paramount.5.3 To properly apply the FMEA methodology, users must understand the changes encountered in the system during all operating modes, their impact on design functions, and available monitoring techniques capable of detecting these changes. To demonstrate this approach, Section 6 will provide extensive descriptions of the plain bearing failure modes, their causes, and effects.1.1 This guide covers an oil test selection process for plain bearing applications by applying the principles of Failure Mode and Effect Analysis (FMEA) as described in Guide D7874.1.2 This guide approaches oil analysis from a failure standpoint and includes both the bearing wear and fluid deterioration.1.3 This guide pertains to improving equipment reliability, reducing maintenance costs, and enhancing the condition-based maintenance program primarily for industrial machinery by applying analytical methodology to an oil analysis program for the purpose of determining the detection capability of specific failure modes.1.4 This guide reinforces the requirements for appropriate assembly and operation within the original design envelope, as well as the need for condition-based and time-based maintenance.1.5 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard. No other units of measurement are included in this standard.1.6 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.1.7 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

定价： 590元 / 折扣价： 502 元 加购物车

4.1 This practice provides a simple means of classifying failure modes for adhesively bonded FRP joints.4.2 Each failure mode classification is based solely on a visual observation of the failure surface without the aid of a microscope or other means to magnify the surface.4.3 Except for the line-drawing representations given, this practice does not contain descriptions of failure modes possible when using adhesion promoters. However, similar analogies to the failure modes described herein can be made.4.4 This practice does not address the acceptability of any specific failure mode.1.1 This practice covers the method of classifying, identifying, and characterizing the failure modes in adhesively bonded fiber-reinforced-plastic (FRP) joints. The FRP used in developing this practice consists of glass fibers in a thermoset-polyester-resin matrix, commonly referred to as sheet-molding compound, or SMC.1.2 One objective of this practice is to present comprehensive definitions of possible failure modes to serve as a guide for contracts, drawings, product specifications, and product performance.NOTE 1: Figures 2 through 11 referred to in the practice are contained in the ASTM adjunct, Color Photographs of Failure Modes.2Fig. 2—Side-by Side Comparison of Failure ModesFig. 3—Adhesive FailureFig. 4—Cohesive FailureFig. 5—Thin-Layer Cohesive FailureFig. 6—Fiber-Tear FailureFig. 7—Light-Fiber-Tear FailureFig. 8—Stock-Break FailureFig. 9—Mixed Failure—40 % Fiber-Tear Failure, 60 % Light-Fiber-Tear FiberFig. 10—Mixed Failure—32 % Adhesive Failure, 68 % Fiber-Tear FailureFig. 11—Mixed Failure—20 % Adhesive Failure, 60 % Light-Fiber-Tear Failure, 20 % Fiber-Tear FailureNOTE 2: This practice may be used to describe the failure modes generated from testing, using procedures such as Test Methods D3163, D3164, D3165, D3807, D5041, D5868, and SAE J1525.1.3 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as the 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