定价： 481元 / 折扣价： 409 元

定价： 481元 / 折扣价： 409 元

定价： 481元 / 折扣价： 409 元 加购物车

定价： 260元 / 折扣价： 221 元 加购物车

1.1 This test method covers the determination of a relative measure of penetration resistance of glazing materials subject to a specific mechanized test. The test simulates a specific attack scenario involving repeated impacts from a chisel-nosed weapon applied either in conjunction with a directed application of heat (Method A), or without directed application of heat (Method B). The resulting number of impacts required to achieve a perforation is used to evaluate the degree of penetration resistance provided by the sample. 1.2 This test method may be specified to implement either Method A or Method B, or both. 1.3 The values stated in inch-pound 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

5.1 Before proceeding with these test methods, reference should be made to the specification of the material being tested. Any test specimen preparation, conditioning, dimensions, and testing parameters covered in the materials specification shall take precedence over those mentioned in these test methods. If there is no material specification, then the default conditions apply.5.2 The pendulum impact test indicates the energy to break standard test specimens of specified size under stipulated parameters of specimen mounting, notching, and pendulum velocity-at-impact.5.3 The energy lost by the pendulum during the breakage of the specimen is the sum of the following:5.3.1 Energy to initiate fracture of the specimen;5.3.2 Energy to propagate the fracture across the specimen;5.3.3 Energy to throw the free end (or ends) of the broken specimen (“toss correction”);5.3.4 Energy to bend the specimen;5.3.5 Energy to produce vibration in the pendulum arm;5.3.6 Energy to produce vibration or horizontal movement of the machine frame or base;5.3.7 Energy to overcome friction in the pendulum bearing and in the indicating mechanism, and to overcome windage (pendulum air drag);5.3.8 Energy to indent or deform plastically the specimen at the line of impact; and5.3.9 Energy to overcome the friction caused by the rubbing of the striker (or other part of the pendulum) over the face of the bent specimen.5.4 For relatively brittle materials, for which fracture propagation energy is small in comparison with the fracture initiation energy, the indicated impact energy absorbed is, for all practical purposes, the sum of factors 5.3.1 and 5.3.3. The toss correction (see 5.3.3) may represent a very large fraction of the total energy absorbed when testing relatively dense and brittle materials. Test Method C shall be used for materials that have an Izod impact resistance of less than 27 J/m (0.5 ft·lbf/in.). (See Appendix X4 for optional units.) The toss correction obtained in Test Method C is only an approximation of the toss error, since the rotational and rectilinear velocities may not be the same during the re-toss of the specimen as for the original toss, and because stored stresses in the specimen may have been released as kinetic energy during the specimen fracture.5.5 For tough, ductile, fiber filled, or cloth-laminated materials, the fracture propagation energy (see 5.3.2) may be large compared to the fracture initiation energy (see 5.3.1). When testing these materials, factors (see 5.3.2, 5.3.5, and 5.3.9) can become quite significant, even when the specimen is accurately machined and positioned and the machine is in good condition with adequate capacity. (See Note 7.) Bending (see 5.3.4) and indentation losses (see 5.3.8) may be appreciable when testing soft materials.NOTE 7: Although the frame and base of the machine should be sufficiently rigid and massive to handle the energies of tough specimens without motion or excessive vibration, the design must ensure that the center of percussion be at the center of strike. Locating the striker precisely at the center of percussion reduces vibration of the pendulum arm when used with brittle specimens. However, some losses due to pendulum arm vibration, the amount varying with the design of the pendulum, will occur with tough specimens, even when the striker is properly positioned.5.6 In a well-designed machine of sufficient rigidity and mass, the losses due to factors 5.3.6 and 5.3.7 should be very small. Vibrational losses (see 5.3.6) can be quite large when wide specimens of tough materials are tested in machines of insufficient mass, not securely fastened to a heavy base.5.7 With some materials, a critical width of specimen may be found below which specimens will appear ductile, as evidenced by considerable drawing or necking down in the region behind the notch and by a relatively high-energy absorption, and above which they will appear brittle as evidenced by little or no drawing down or necking and by a relatively low-energy absorption. Since these methods permit a variation in the width of the specimens, and since the width dictates, for many materials, whether a brittle, low-energy break or a ductile, high energy break will occur, it is necessary that the width be stated in the specification covering that material and that the width be reported along with the impact resistance. In view of the preceding, one should not make comparisons between data from specimens having widths that differ by more than a few mils.5.8 The type of failure for each specimen shall be recorded as one of the four categories listed as follows:C = Complete Break—A break where the specimen separates into two or more pieces.H = Hinge Break—An incomplete break, such that one part of the specimen cannot support itself above the horizontal when the other part is held vertically (less than 90° included angle).P = Partial Break—An incomplete break that does not meet the definition for a hinge break but has fractured at least 90 % of the distance between the vertex of the notch and the opposite side.NB = Non-Break—An incomplete break where the fracture extends less than 90 % of the distance between the vertex of the notch and the opposite side.For tough materials, the pendulum may not have the energy necessary to complete the breaking of the extreme fibers and toss the broken piece or pieces. Results obtained from “non-break” specimens shall be considered a departure from standard and shall not be reported as a standard result. Impact resistance cannot be directly compared for any two materials that experience different types of failure as defined in the test method by this code. Averages reported must likewise be derived from specimens contained within a single failure category. This letter code shall suffix the reported impact identifying the types of failure associated with the reported value. If more than one type of failure is observed for a sample material, then the report will indicate the average impact resistance for each type of failure, followed by the percent of the specimens failing in that manner and suffixed by the letter code.5.9 The value of the impact methods lies mainly in the areas of quality control and materials specification. If two groups of specimens of supposedly the same material show significantly different energy absorptions, types of breaks, critical widths, or critical temperatures, it may be assumed that they were made of different materials or were exposed to different processing or conditioning environments. The fact that a material shows twice the energy absorption of another under these conditions of test does not indicate that this same relationship will exist under another set of test conditions. The order of toughness may even be reversed under different testing conditions.NOTE 8: A documented discrepancy exists between manual and digital impact testers, primarily with thermoset materials, including phenolics, having an impact value of less than 54 J/m (1 ft-lb/in.). Comparing data on the same material, tested on both manual and digital impact testers, may show the data from the digital tester to be significantly lower than data from a manual tester. In such cases a correlation study may be necessary to properly define the true relationship between the instruments.1.1 These test methods cover the determination of the resistance of plastics to “standardized” (see Note 1) pendulum-type hammers, mounted in “standardized” machines, in breaking standard specimens with one pendulum swing (see Note 2). The standard tests for these test methods require specimens made with a milled notch (see Note 3). In Test Methods A, C, and D, the notch produces a stress concentration that increases the probability of a brittle, rather than a ductile, fracture. In Test Method E, the impact resistance is obtained by reversing the notched specimen 180° in the clamping vise. The results of all test methods are reported in terms of energy absorbed per unit of specimen width or per unit of cross-sectional area under the notch. (See Note 4.)NOTE 1: The machines with their pendulum-type hammers have been “standardized” in that they must comply with certain requirements, including a fixed height of hammer fall that results in a substantially fixed velocity of the hammer at the moment of impact. However, hammers of different initial energies (produced by varying their effective weights) are recommended for use with specimens of different impact resistance. Moreover, manufacturers of the equipment are permitted to use different lengths and constructions of pendulums with possible differences in pendulum rigidities resulting. (See Section 5.) Be aware that other differences in machine design may exist. The specimens are “standardized” in that they are required to have one fixed length, one fixed depth, and one particular design of milled notch. The width of the specimens is permitted to vary between limits.NOTE 2: Results generated using pendulums that utilize a load cell to record the impact force and thus impact energy, may not be equivalent to results that are generated using manually or digitally encoded testers that measure the energy remaining in the pendulum after impact.NOTE 3: The notch in the Izod specimen serves to concentrate the stress, minimize plastic deformation, and direct the fracture to the part of the specimen behind the notch. Scatter in energy-to-break is thus reduced. However, because of differences in the elastic and viscoelastic properties of plastics, response to a given notch varies among materials. A measure of a plastic's “notch sensitivity” may be obtained with Test Method D by comparing the energies to break specimens having different radii at the base of the notch.NOTE 4: Caution must be exercised in interpreting the results of these standard test methods. The following testing parameters may affect test results significantly:Method of fabrication, including but not limited to processingtechnology, molding conditions, mold design, and thermaltreatments;Method of notching;Speed of notching tool;Design of notching apparatus;Quality of the notch;Time between notching and test;Test specimen thickness,Test specimen width under notch, andEnvironmental conditioning.1.2 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard. The values given in parentheses are for information only.1.3 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.NOTE 5: These test methods resemble ISO 180:1993 in regard to title only. The contents are significantly different.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

4.1 The Schob Type rebound pendulum is designed to measure the percentage resilience of a rubber compound as an indication of hysteretic energy loss that can also be defined by the relationship between storage modulus and loss modulus. The percent rebound measured is inversely proportional to the hysteretic loss. 4.1.1 Percentage resilience or rebound resilience are commonly used in quality control testing of polymers and compounding chemicals. 4.1.2 Rebound resilience is determined by a freely falling pendulum hammer that is dropped from a given height that impacts a test specimen and imparts to it a certain amount of energy. A portion of that energy is returned by the specimen to the pendulum and may be measured by the extent to which the pendulum rebounds, whereby the restoring force is determined by gravity. 4.1.2.1 Since the energy of the pendulum is proportional to the vertical component of the displacement of the pendulum, it may be expressed as 1 – cos (of the angle of displacement) and percentage rebound resilience. RB, commonly called percentage rebound, is determined from the equation: 4.1.2.2 The rebound resilience may be calculated as: where: h   =   apex height of the rebound, and H   =   initial height. 4.1.2.3 The rebound resilience may also be determined by the measurement of the angle of rebound α. From the rebound angle α, the rebound resilience in percent is obtained according to the following formula: 1.1 This test method covers a means of determining the resilience of rubber, within a range of impact strain and strain rate, by means of the impacting and measuring apparatus conforming to the requirements described in this test method. 1.2 This test method is applicable to thermoset rubbers and thermoplastic elastomers, the hardness of which, at the specified test temperatures, lies between 30 and 85 IRHD (see Test Method D1415) or A/30 and A/85 (see Test Method D2240). It may also be applicable to some polyester, polyether foam, and plastic foam materials. 1.3 All materials, instruments, or equipment used for the determination of mass, force, or dimension shall have traceability to the National Institute for Standards and Technology, or other internationally recognized organization parallel in nature. 1.4 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as 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： 515元 / 折扣价： 438 元 加购物车

5.1 This test method for the determination of tearing strength by the falling pendulum type apparatus is used in the trade for the acceptance testing of commercial shipments of fabrics, but caution is advised since technicians may fail to get good agreement between results on certain fabrics. Comparative tests as directed in 5.1.1 may be needed.5.1.1 In case of a 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 conduct comparative tests to determine if there is a statistical bias between their laboratories. Statistical assistance is recommended for the investigation of bias. As a minimum, the two parties should take a group of test specimens that are as homogeneous as possible and that are from a lot of fabric 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 appropriate statistical analysis and an acceptable probability level chosen by the two parties before the testing began. If a bias is found, either its cause must be found and corrected or the purchaser and the supplier must agree to interpret future test results with consideration to the known bias.5.2 Microprocessor systems for automatic collection of data can provide economical and reliable results when properly calibrated. See Test Methods D2261 and D5587.1.1 This test method covers the determination of the force required to propagate a single-rip tear starting from a cut in a fabric and using a falling-pendulum (Elmendorf-Type) apparatus.1.2 This test method applies to most fabrics including woven, layered blankets, napped pile, blanket, and air bag fabrics, provided the fabric does not tear in the direction crosswise to the direction of the force application during the test. The fabrics may be untreated, heavily sized, coated, resin-treated, or otherwise treated. Instructions are provided for testing specimens with, or without, wetting.1.3 This test method is suitable only for the warp direction tests of warp-knit fabrics. It is not suited for the course direction of warp knit fabrics or either direction of most other knitted fabrics.1.4 The values stated in either SI units or U.S. customary units are to be regarded as standard, but must be used independently of each other. The U.S. customary units may be approximate.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 This test method is of value in ranking relative tearing resistance of various plastic films and thin sheeting of comparable thickness. Experience has shown the test to have its best reliability on relatively less extensible films and sheeting. Variable elongation and oblique tearing effects on the more extensible films preclude its use as a precise production-control tool for these types of plastics. This test method should be used for specification acceptance testing only after it has been demonstrated that the data for the particular material are acceptably reproducible. This test method should be used for service evaluation only after its usefulness for the particular application has been demonstrated with a number of different films.4.2 This test method has been widely used as one index of the tearing resistance of plastic film and thin sheeting used in packaging applications. While it is not always be possible to correlate film tearing data with its other mechanical or toughness properties, the apparatus of this test method provides a controlled means for tearing specimens at straining rates approximating some of those found in actual packaging service.4.3 Due to orientation during their manufacture, plastic films and sheeting frequently show marked anisotropy in their resistance to tearing. This is further complicated by the fact that some films elongate greatly during tearing, even at the relatively rapid rates of loading encountered in this test method. The degree of this elongation is dependent in turn on film orientation and the inherent mechanical properties of the polymer from which it is made. These factors make tear resistance of some films reproducible between sets of specimens to ±5 % of the mean value, while others potentially show no better reproducibility than ±50 %.4.4 Data obtained by this test method may supplement that from Test Method D1004, wherein the specimen is strained at a rate of 50 mm (2 in.) per minute. However, specimen geometry and testing speed of the two test methods are dissimilar. The rate of tearing in this test method, while varying as a function of resistance to tear, is in the range from 7.6 to 46 m (300 to 1800 in.)/min.4.5 There is not a direct, linear relationship between tearing force and specimen thickness. Data from this test method are expressed as tearing force in millinewtons (or grams-force, if desired), with specimen thickness also reported. But sets of data from specimens of dissimilar thickness are usually not comparable. Therefore, only data at the same thickness is compared.4.6 For many materials, there may be a specification that requires the use of this test method, but with some procedural modifications that take precedence when adhering to the specification. Therefore, it is advisable to refer to that material specification before using this test method. Table 1 of Classification System D4000 lists the ASTM materials standards that currently exist.1.1 This test method2 covers the determination of the average force to propagate tearing through a specified length of plastic film or nonrigid sheeting after the tear has been started, using an Elmendorf-type tearing tester. Two specimens are cited, a rectangular type, and one with a constant radius testing length. The latter shall be the preferred or referee specimen.1.2 Because of (1) difficulties in selecting uniformly identical specimens, (2) the varying degree of orientation in some plastic films, and (3) the difficulty found in testing highly extensible or highly oriented materials, or both, the reproducibility of the test results may be variable and, in some cases, not good or misleading. Provisions are made in the test method to address oblique directional tearing which may be found with some materials.1.3 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard. The values given in parentheses are for information only.1.4 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use. Specific precautionary statements are given in 13.1.NOTE 1: Film has been arbitrarily defined as sheeting having nominal thickness not greater than 0.25 mm (0.010 in.).NOTE 2: This standard is equivalent to ISO 6383-2.1.5 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 Like other techniques to measure toughness, this test method provides a means to determine parameters of a material at strain rates closer to some end-use applications than provided by low-speed uniaxial tensile tests. Dynamic tensile behavior of a film is important, particularly when the film is used as a packaging material. The same uncertainties about correlations with thickness that apply to other impact tests also apply to this test (see section 3.4 of Test Methods D1709). Hence, no provision for rationalizing to unit thickness is provided. Also, no provision is made for testing at non-ambient temperatures.5.2 This test method includes two procedures, similar except with regard to sample size: Procedure A for 60-mm diameter and Procedure B for 89-mm diameter (commonly called the “Spencer”). The data have not been shown relatable to each other.5.3 Several impact test methods are used for film. It is sometimes desirable to know the relationships among test results derived by different methods. A study was conducted in which four films made from two resins (polypropylene and linear low-density polyethylene), with two film thicknesses for each resin, were impacted using Test Methods D1709 (Method A), Test Method D3420 (Procedures A and B), and Test Method D4272. The test results are shown in Appendix X1. Differences in results between Test Methods D1709 and D4272 are expected since Test Methods D1709 represents failure initiated energy while Test Method D4272 is initiation plus completion energy. Some films have shown consistency when the initiation energy was the same as the total energy. This statement and the test data also appear in the significance and appendixes sections of Test Methods of D1709 and D4272.1.1 This test method covers the determination of resistance of film to impact-puncture penetration. Knowledge of how the impact energy is absorbed by the specimen while it is deforming under the impact loading, and the behavior of the specimen after yielding, is not provided by this test. No provision is made for nonambient temperatures in this test method.1.2 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as 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. Specific hazards statements are given in Section 7.NOTE 1: There is no known ISO equivalent to this standard.1.4 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

定价： 590元 / 折扣价： 502 元 加购物车

4.1 This test method provides a measure of a frictional property, microtexture of surfaces, either in the field or in the laboratory.4.2 This test method may be used to determine the relative effects of various polishing processes on materials or material combinations.4.3 The values measured in accordance with this method do not necessarily agree or directly correlate with those obtained utilizing other methods of determining friction properties or skid resistance.NOTE 1: BPN and polish values from similar types of surfaces will not be numerically equal, primarily because of the differences in slide length and surface shape. Theoretical correction of the polish values to obtain numerical equality, either by mathematical manipulation or by use of special measuring scales, is not recommended.1.1 This test method covers the procedure for measuring surface frictional properties using the British pendulum skid resistance tester. A method for calibration of the tester is included in Annex A1.1.2 The British pendulum tester is a dynamic pendulum impact-type tester used to measure the energy loss when a rubber slider edge is propelled over a test surface. The tester is suited for laboratory as well as field tests on flat surfaces, and for polish value measurements on curved laboratory specimens from accelerated polishing wheel tests.1.3 The values measured, BPN = British pendulum (tester) number for flat surfaces and polish values for accelerated polishing wheel specimens, represent the frictional properties obtained with the apparatus and the procedures stated herein and do not necessarily agree or correlate with other slipperiness measuring equipment.1.4 The values stated in SI 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 The pendulum damping test has been found to have good sensitivity in detecting differences in coating hardness, where hardness is defined as resistance to deformation.5.2 The two procedures given in these test methods embody the principle that the amplitude of oscillation of a pendulum touching a surface decreases more rapidly the softer the surface. However, these test methods differ in respect to pendulum dimensions, and period and amplitude of oscillation.5.3 In general, the damping time of the König pendulum is approximately half that of the Persoz pendulum.5.4 The Persoz pendulum has a greater degree of discrimination than the König for measuring the hardness of soft coatings, but it may not be as suitable for testing hard, slippery films because of its tendency to skid on surfaces with a low coefficient of friction.5.5 The interaction between the pendulum and the paint film is complex, depending on both elastic and viscoelastic properties, and it may not be possible to establish a precise relationship between the two types of pendulum tests.1.1 These test methods cover the use of pendulum damping testers in the determination of hardness of organic coatings that have been applied to acceptably plane rigid surfaces, such as a metal or glass panel.1.2 Two test methods based on different pendulum types are covered as follows:1.2.1 Test Method A—König Pendulum Hardness Test.1.2.2 Test Method B—Persoz Pendulum Hardness Test.1.3 This standard is similar in content (but not technically equivalent) to ISO 1522.1.4 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard. No other units of measurement are included in this standard.1.5 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.1.6 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

定价： 590元 / 折扣价： 502 元 加购物车