5.1 This test method is part of an overall suite of related test methods that provide repeatable measures of robotic system mobility and remote operator proficiency. This continuous pitch/roll ramp terrain specifically challenges robotic system locomotion, suspension systems to maintain traction, rollover tendencies, self-righting in complex terrain (if necessary), chassis shape variability (if available), and remote situational awareness by the operator. As such, it can be used to represent modest outdoor terrain complexity or indoor debris within confined areas.5.2 The overall size of the terrain apparatus can vary to provide different constraints depending on the typical obstacle spacing of the intended deployment environment. For example, the terrain with containment walls can be sized to represent repeatable complexity within bus, train, or plane aisles; dwellings with hallways and doorways; relatively open parking lots with spaces between cars; or unobstructed terrains.5.3 The test apparatuses are low cost and easy to fabricate so they can be widely replicated. The procedure is also simple to conduct. This eases comparisons across various testing locations and dates to determine best-in-class systems and operators.5.4 Evaluation—This test method can be used in a controlled environment to measure baseline capabilities. It can also be embedded into operational training scenarios to measure degradation due to uncontrolled variables in lighting, weather, radio communications, GPS accuracy, etc.5.5 Procurement—This test method can be used to identify inherent capability trade-offs in systems, make informed purchasing decisions, and verify performance during acceptance testing. This aligns requirement specifications and user expectations with existing capability limits.5.6 Training—This test method can be used to focus operator training as a repeatable practice task or as an embedded task within training scenarios. The resulting measures of remote operator proficiency enable tracking of perishable skills over time, along with comparisons of performance across squads, regions, or national averages.5.7 Innovation—This test method can be used to inspire technical innovation, demonstrate break-through capabilities, and measure the reliability of systems performing specific tasks within an overall mission sequence. Combining or sequencing multiple test methods can guide manufacturers toward implementing the combinations of capabilities necessary to perform essential mission tasks.1.1 This test method is intended for remotely operated ground robots operating in complex, unstructured, and often hazardous environments. It specifies the apparatuses, procedures, and performance metrics necessary to measure the capability of a robot to traverse complex terrains in the form of continuous pitch/roll ramps. This test method is one of several related mobility tests that can be used to evaluate overall system capabilities.1.2 The robotic system includes a remote operator in control of all functionality, so an onboard camera and remote operator display are typically required. Assistive features or autonomous behaviors that improve the effectiveness or efficiency of the overall system are encouraged.1.3 Different user communities can set their own thresholds of acceptable performance within this test method for various mission requirements.1.4 Performing Location—This test method may be performed anywhere the specified apparatuses and environmental conditions can be implemented.1.5 Units—The International System of Units (SI Units) and U.S. Customary Units (Imperial Units) are used throughout this document. They are not mathematical conversions. Rather, they are approximate equivalents in each system of units to enable use of readily available materials in different countries. This avoids excessive purchasing and fabrication costs. The differences between the stated dimensions in each system of units are insignificant for the purposes of comparing test method results, so each system of units is separately considered standard within this test method.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

1.1 This guide covers recommendations for the use of chemical dispersants to assist in the control of oil spills. This guide is written with the goal of minimizing the environmental impacts of oil spills; this goal is the basis upon which recommendations are made. Aesthetic and socioeconomic factors are not considered, although these and other factors are often important in spill response. 1.2 Each on-scene coordinator has available several means of control or cleanup of spilled oil. In this guide, use of chemical dispersants is not considered as a last resort after other methods have failed. Chemical dispersants are to be given equal consideration with other spill countermeasures. 1.3 This is a general guide only assuming the oil to be dispersible and the dispersant to be effective, available, applied correctly and in compliance with relevant government regulations. Oil, as used in this guide, includes crude oils and fuel oils (No. 1 through No. 6). Differences between individual dispersants or between different oils or products are not considered. 1.4 This guide covers one type of habitat, salt marshes. Other guides, similar to this one, cover habitats such as rocky shores. The use of dispersants is considered primarily to protect such habitats from impact (or minimize impacts) and also to clean them after the spill takes place. 1.5 This guide applies to marine and estuarine environments, but not to freshwater environments. 1.6 In making dispersant-use decisions, appropriate government authorities should be consulted as required by law. 1.7 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety problems, 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 This test method is part of an overall suite of related test methods that provide repeatable measures of robotic system mobility and remote operator proficiency. This crossing (discontinuous) pitch/roll ramp terrain specifically challenges robotic system locomotion, suspension systems to maintain traction, rollover tendencies, self-righting in complex terrain (if necessary), chassis shape variability (if available), and remote situational awareness by the operator. As such, it can be used to represent modest outdoor terrain complexity or indoor debris within confined areas.5.2 The overall size of the terrain apparatus can vary to provide different constraints depending on the typical obstacle spacing of the intended deployment environment. For example, the terrain with containment walls can be sized to represent repeatable complexity within bus, train, or plane aisles; dwellings with hallways and doorways; relatively open parking lots with spaces between cars; or unobstructed terrains.5.3 The test apparatuses are low cost and easy to fabricate so they can be widely replicated. The procedure is also simple to conduct. This eases comparisons across various testing locations and dates to determine best-in-class systems and operators.5.4 Evaluation—This test method can be used in a controlled environment to measure baseline capabilities. It can also be embedded into operational training scenarios to measure degradation due to uncontrolled variables in lighting, weather, radio communications, GPS accuracy, etc.5.5 Procurement—This test method can be used to identify inherent capability trade-offs in systems, make informed purchasing decisions, and verify performance during acceptance testing. This aligns requirement specifications and user expectations with existing capability limits.5.6 Training—This test method can be used to focus operator training as a repeatable practice task or as an embedded task within training scenarios. The resulting measures of remote operator proficiency enable tracking of perishable skills over time, along with comparisons of performance across squads, regions, or national averages.5.7 Innovation—This test method can be used to inspire technical innovation, demonstrate break-through capabilities, and measure the reliability of systems performing specific tasks within an overall mission sequence. Combining or sequencing multiple test methods can guide manufacturers toward implementing the combinations of capabilities necessary to perform essential mission tasks.1.1 This test method is intended for remotely operated ground robots operating in complex, unstructured, and often hazardous environments. It specifies the apparatuses, procedures, and performance metrics necessary to measure the capability of a robot to traverse complex terrains in the form of crossing (discontinuous) pitch/roll ramps. This test method is one of several related mobility tests that can be used to evaluate overall system capabilities.1.2 The robotic system includes a remote operator in control of all functionality, so an onboard camera and remote operator display are typically required. Assistive features or autonomous behaviors that improve the effectiveness or efficiency of the overall system are encouraged.1.3 Different user communities can set their own thresholds of acceptable performance within this test method for various mission requirements.1.4 Performing Location—This test method may be performed anywhere the specified apparatuses and environmental conditions can be implemented.1.5 Units—The International System of Units (SI Units) and U.S. Customary Units (Imperial Units) are used throughout this document. They are not mathematical conversions. Rather, they are approximate equivalents in each system of units to enable use of readily available materials in different countries. This avoids excessive purchasing and fabrication costs. The differences between the stated dimensions in each system of units are insignificant for the purposes of comparing test method results, so each system of units is separately considered standard within this test method.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

1.1 This guide covers recommendations for the use of chemical dispersants to assist in the control of oil spills. This guide is written with the goal of minimizing the environmental impacts of oil spills; this goal is the basis upon which recommendations are made. Aesthetic and socioeconomic factors are not considered, although these and other factors are often important in spill response. 1.2 Each on-scene coordinator has available several means of control or cleanup of spilled oil. In this guide, use of chemical dispersants is not considered as a last resort after other methods have failed. Chemical dispersants are to be given equal consideration with other spill countermeasures. 1.3 This is a general guide only assuming the oil to be dispersible and the dispersant to be effective, available, applied correctly, and in compliance with relevant government regulations. Oil, as used in this guide, includes crude oils and fuel oils (No. 1 through No. 6). Differences between individual dispersants or between different oils or products are not considered. 1.4 This guide covers one type of habitat, bird environments. Other guides, similar to this one, cover habitats such as rocky shores. The use of dispersants is considered primarily to protect such habitats from impact (or minimize impacts) and also to clean them after the spill takes place. 1.5 This guide applies to marine and estuarine environments but not to freshwater environments. 1.6 In making dispersant-use decisions, appropriate government authorities should be consulted as required by law. 1.7 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety problems, 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 The Miller Number5 is an index of the relative abrasivity of slurries. Its primary purpose is to rank the abrasivity of slurries in terms of the wear of a standard reference material. The wear damage on the standard wear block is worse as the Miller Number gets higher.5.2 The SAR Number is an index of the relative abrasion response of materials as tested in any particular slurry of interest. The SAR Number is a generalized form of the Miller Number applicable to materials other than the reference material used for the Miller Number determination. A major purpose is to rank construction materials for use in a system for pumping and fluid handling equipment for a particular slurry. It can also be used to rank the abrasivity of various slurries against any selected construction material other than the reference material specified for a Miller Number determination. The slurry damage on the specimen of material being tested is worse as the SAR Number gets higher.5.3 Experience has shown that slurries with a Miller Number or a SAR Number of approximately 50 or lower can be pumped with minor abrasive damage to the system. Above a number of 50, precautions must be observed and greater damage from abrasion is to be expected. Accordingly, the Miller Number and the SAR Number provide information about the slurry or the material that may be useful in the selection of pumps and other equipment and to predict the life expectancy of liquid-end parts of the pumps involved.5.4 The SAR Number can be used to determine the most suitable materials for certain slurry systems.1.1 This test method covers a single laboratory procedure that can be used to develop data from which either the relative abrasivity of any slurry (Miller Number) or the response of different materials to the abrasivity of different slurries (SAR Number), can be determined.1.2 The test data obtained by this procedure is used to calculate either a number related to the rate of mass loss of duplicate standard-shaped 27 % chromium iron wear blocks when run for a period of time in the slurry of interest (Miller Number), or to calculate a number related to the rate of mass loss (converted to volume loss) of duplicate standard-shaped wear specimens of any material of interest when run for a period of time in any slurry of interest (SAR Number).1.3 The requirement for a finished flat wearing surface on the test specimen for a SAR Number test may preclude application of the procedure where thin (0.051 mm to 0.127 mm), hard, wear-resistant coatings will not allow for surface finishing. The 6 h total duration of the SAR Number Test may not allow establishment of a consistent rate-of-mass-loss of the unfinished surface.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： 843元 / 折扣价： 717 元 加购物车

5.1 This test method is part of an overall suite of related test methods that provide repeatable measures of robotic system mobility and remote operator proficiency. This symmetric stepfield terrain specifically challenges robotic system locomotion, suspension systems to maintain traction, rollover tendencies, self-righting in complex terrain (if necessary), chassis shape variability (if available), and remote situational awareness by the operator. As such, it can be used to represent modest outdoor terrain complexity or indoor debris within confined areas.5.2 The overall size of the terrain apparatus can vary to provide different constraints depending on the typical obstacle spacing of the intended deployment environment. For example, the terrain with containment walls can be sized to represent repeatable complexity within bus, train, or plane aisles; dwellings with hallways and doorways; relatively open parking lots with spaces between cars; or unobstructed terrains.5.3 The test apparatuses are low cost and easy to fabricate so they can be widely replicated. The procedure is also simple to conduct. This eases comparisons across various testing locations and dates to determine best-in-class systems and operators.5.4 Evaluation—This test method can be used in a controlled environment to measure baseline capabilities. It can also be embedded into operational training scenarios to measure degradation due to uncontrolled variables in lighting, weather, radio communications, GPS accuracy, etc.5.5 Procurement—This test method can be used to identify inherent capability trade-offs in systems, make informed purchasing decisions, and verify performance during acceptance testing. This aligns requirement specifications and user expectations with existing capability limits.5.6 Training—This test method can be used to focus operator training as a repeatable practice task or as an embedded task within training scenarios. The resulting measures of remote operator proficiency enable tracking of perishable skills over time, along with comparisons of performance across squads, regions, or national averages.5.7 Innovation—This test method can be used to inspire technical innovation, demonstrate break-through capabilities, and measure the reliability of systems performing specific tasks within an overall mission sequence. Combining or sequencing multiple test methods can guide manufacturers toward implementing the combinations of capabilities necessary to perform essential mission tasks.1.1 This test method is intended for remotely operated ground robots operating in complex, unstructured, and often hazardous environments. It specifies the apparatuses, procedures, and performance metrics necessary to measure the capability of a robot to traverse complex terrains in the form of symmetric stepfields. This test method is one of several related mobility tests that can be used to evaluate overall system capabilities.1.2 The robotic system includes a remote operator in control of all functionality, so an onboard camera and remote operator display are typically required. Assistive features or autonomous behaviors that improve the effectiveness or efficiency of the overall system are encouraged.1.3 Different user communities can set their own thresholds of acceptable performance within this test method for various mission requirements.1.4 Performing Location—This test method may be performed anywhere the specified apparatuses and environmental conditions can be implemented.1.5 Units—The International System of Units (SI Units) and U.S. Customary Units (Imperial Units) are used throughout this document. They are not mathematical conversions. Rather, they are approximate equivalents in each system of units to enable use of readily available materials in different countries. This avoids excessive purchasing and fabrication costs. The differences between the stated dimensions in each system of units are insignificant for the purposes of comparing test method results, so each system of units is separately considered standard within this test method.1.6 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.1.7 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

定价： 646元 / 折扣价： 550 元 加购物车

4.1 This guide summarizes the typical contents of a course to aid emergency response team training organizations in selecting important subjects for inclusion in existing or new training programs.1.1 This guide covers a format for a hazardous materials spill initial response team training curriculum. This guide is designed to assist trainers of initial response personnel in assessing the content of training curriculum by providing guidelines for subject content against which these curricula may be evaluated. The guide should be tailored by the trainer to fit specific circumstances that are present in the community or industry where a spill may occur.1.2 Sections 5, 6, 7, 8, and 9 of this guide identify those training areas that should be considered in a curriculum. The area of preplanning is listed and this topic should be seriously considered by the user. Training is only a small part of an overall spill response contingency plan. A properly equipped and trained spill response team cannot operate without a previously agreed plan of attack.1.3 Currently the U.S. Code of Federal Regulation 29 CFR 1910.120, 40 CFR 112 Subpart B, 40 CFR 264 Subpart D, 40 CFR 265 Subpart D, and 49 CFR 172 Subpart H specify that producers, handlers, and shippers of hazardous materials shall plan and train for hazardous spill response. Additional training may be required for shipments by vessel (49 CFR 176.13) and highway (49 CFR 177.800). Regardless of the above regulatory requirements, training is essential to a proper response in an emergency.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 A main purpose of using robots in emergency response operations is to enhance the safety and effectiveness of emergency responders operating in hazardous or inaccessible environments. The testing results of the candidate robot shall describe, in a statistically significant way, how reliably the robot is able to traverse the specified types of terrains and thus provide emergency responders sufficiently high levels of confidence to determine the applicability of the robot.5.2 This test method addresses robot performance requirements expressed by emergency responders and representatives from other interested organizations. The performance data captured within this test method are indicative of the testing robot’s capabilities. Having available a roster of successfully tested robots with associated performance data to guide procurement and deployment decisions for emergency responders is consistent with the guideline of “Governments at all levels have a responsibility to develop detailed, robust, all-hazards response plans” as stated in National Response Framework.5.3 The standard apparatus is specified to be easily fabricated to facilitate self-evaluation by robot developers and provide practice tasks for emergency responders to exercise robot actuators, sensors, and operator interfaces. The standard apparatus can also be used to support operator training and establish operator proficiency.5.4 Although the test method was developed first for emergency response robots, it may be applicable to other operational domains.1.1 Purpose: 1.1.1 The purpose of this test method, as a part of a suite of mobility test methods, is to quantitatively evaluate a teleoperated ground robot’s (see Terminology E2521) sustained maneuvering speed on paved surfaces.1.1.2 Robots shall possess a certain set of mobility capabilities, including maneuvering, to suit critical operations such as emergency responses. The environments often pose constraints to robotic mobility to various degrees. Being able to maneuver effectively for extended distances is essential for deployment down-range during emergency responses. This test method specifies apparatuses to standardize this maneuvering task for testing.1.1.3 Emergency response ground robots shall be able to handle many types of obstacles and terrain complexities. The required mobility capabilities include traversing gaps, hurdles, stairs, slopes, various types of floor surfaces or terrains, and confined passageways. Yet additional mobility requirements include sustained speeds and towing capabilities. Standard test methods are required to evaluate whether candidate robots meet these requirements.1.1.4 ASTM Task Group E54.08.01 on Robotics specifies a mobility test suite, which consists of a set of test methods for evaluating these mobility capability requirements. This sustained speed test method is a part of the mobility test suite. The apparatuses associated with the test methods challenge specific robot capabilities in repeatable ways to facilitate comparison of different robot models as well as particular configurations of similar robot models.1.1.5 The test methods quantify elemental mobility capabilities necessary for ground robot intended for emergency response applications. As such, users of this standard can use either the entire suite or a subset based on their particular performance requirements. Users are also allowed to weight particular test methods or particular metrics within a test method differently based on their specific performance requirements. The testing results should collectively represent an emergency response ground robot’s overall mobility performance as required. These performance data can be used to guide procurement specifications and acceptance testing for robots intended for emergency response applications.NOTE 1: Additional test methods within the suite are anticipated to be developed to address additional or advanced robotic mobility capability requirements, including newly identified requirements and even for new application domains.1.2 Performing Location—This test method shall be performed in a testing laboratory or the field where the specified apparatus and environmental conditions are implemented.1.3 Units—The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as the standard. The values given in parentheses are not precise mathematical conversions to inch-pound units. They are close approximate equivalents for the purpose of specifying material dimensions or quantities that are readily available to avoid excessive fabrication costs of test apparatuses while maintaining repeatability and reproducibility of the test method results. These values given in parentheses are provided for information only and are not considered 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

4.1 In a series-connected multijunction PV device, the incident total and spectral irradiance determines which component cell will generate the smallest photocurrent and thus limit the current through the entire series-connected device. This current-limiting behavior also affects the fill factor of the device. Because of this, special techniques are needed to measure the correct I-V characteristics of multijunction devices under the desired reporting conditions (see Test Methods E1036).4.2 These test methods use a numerical parameter called the current balance which is a measure of how well the test conditions replicate the desired reporting conditions. When the current balance deviates from unity by more than 0.03, the uncertainty of the measurement may be increased.4.3 The effects of current limiting in individual component cells can cause problems for I-V curve translations to different temperature and irradiance conditions, such as the translations recommended in Test Methods E1036. For example, if a different component cell becomes the limiting cell as the irradiance is varied, a discontinuity in the current versus irradiance characteristic may be observed. For this reason, it is recommended that I-V characteristics of multijunction devices be measured at temperature and irradiance conditions close to the desired reporting conditions.4.4 Some multijunction devices have more than two terminals which allow electrical connections to each component cell. In these cases, the special techniques for spectral response measurements are not needed because the component cells can be measured individually. However, these I-V techniques are still needed if the device is intended to be operated as a two-terminal device.4.5 Using these test methods, the spectral response is typically measured while the individual component cell under test is illuminated at levels that are less than Eo. Nonlinearity of the spectral response may cause the measured results to differ from the spectral response at the illumination levels of actual use conditions.1.1 These test methods provide special techniques needed to determine the electrical performance and spectral response of two-terminal, multijunction photovoltaic (PV) devices, both cell and modules.1.2 These test methods are modifications and extensions of the procedures for single-junction devices defined by Test Methods E948, E1021, and E1036.1.3 These test methods do not include temperature and irradiance corrections for spectral response and current-voltage (I-V) measurements. Procedures for such corrections are available in Test Methods E948, E1021, and E1036.1.4 These test methods may be applied to cells and modules intended for concentrator applications.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

5.1 This test method corresponds to the requirements as specified by U.S. emergency responders and additional constituents. A robot’s performance in this test is indicative of its capabilities needed in such operations as emergency responses. To have the successfully tested robots available to the emergency operations is consistent with the National Response Framework.5.2 Although these test methods were developed first for emergency response robots, they may be applicable to other operational domains, such as law enforcement and military. They can also be used to ascertain operator proficiencies during training or serve as practice tasks that exercise robot actuators, sensors, and OCUs.5.3 The standard apparatus is specified to be easily assembled to facilitate robotic developers’ self evaluation of the robots and facilitate the emergency responders’ and other users’ proficiency training in applying the robotic tools.5.4 The objective of using robots in emergency response operations is to enhance the emergency responder’s capability of operating in hazardous or hard-to-reach environments. The testing results of the candidate robot shall describe, in a statistically significant way, how reliably the robot is able to traverse the obstacle, thus enabling emergency responders to determine the applicability of the robot.1.1 Purpose: 1.1.1 The purpose of this test method, as a part of a suite of mobility test methods, is to quantitatively evaluate a teleoperated ground robot’s towing capability with the task of grasping loads and traversing a specified route on a flat and paved surface.1.1.2 Robots shall possess a certain set of mobility capabilities, including towing, to suit critical operations such as emergency responses. This capability would be required to perform such emergency response-related tasks as delivering critical supplies, moving victims to safe locations, or transporting suspected packages away from humans.1.1.3 Emergency response ground robots shall be able to handle many types of obstacles and terrains. The required mobility capabilities include traversing gaps, hurdles, stairs, slopes, various types of floor surfaces or terrains, and confined passageways. Yet additional mobility requirements include sustained speeds and towing capabilities. Standard test methods are required to evaluate whether candidate robots meet these requirements.1.1.4 ASTM Task Group E54.08.01 specifies a mobility test suite, which consists of a set of test methods for evaluating these mobility capability requirements. This towing-by-grasping test method is a part of the mobility test suite. The apparatuses associated with the test methods challenge specific robot capabilities in repeatable ways to facilitate comparison of different robot models as well as particular configurations of similar robot models.1.1.5 The test methods quantify elemental mobility capabilities necessary for ground robot emergency response applications. As such, the test suite should be used collectively to represent a ground robot’s overall mobility performance.NOTE 1: Additional test methods within the suite are anticipated to be developed to address additional or advanced robotic mobility capability requirements, including newly identified requirements and even for new application domains.1.2 Performing Location—This test method shall be performed in a testing laboratory or the field where the specified apparatus and environmental conditions are implemented.1.3 Units—The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as the standard. The values given in parentheses are mathematical conversions to inch-pound units that are provided for information only and are not considered 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 test method is designed to produce in-plane shear property data for material specifications, research and development, quality assurance, and structural design and analysis. Factors that influence the shear response and should therefore be reported include the following: material, methods of material preparation and lay-up, specimen stacking sequence and overall thickness, specimen preparation, specimen conditioning, environment of testing, specimen alignment and gripping, speed of testing, time at temperature, void content, and volume percent reinforcement. Properties that may be derived from this test method include the following:5.1.1 In-plane shear stress versus shear strain response,5.1.2 In-plane shear chord modulus of elasticity,5.1.3 Offset shear properties,5.1.4 Maximum in-plane shear stress for a ±45° laminate, and5.1.5 Maximum in-plane engineering shear strain for a ±45° laminate.1.1 This test method determines the in-plane shear response of polymer matrix composite materials reinforced by high-modulus fibers. The composite material form is limited to a continuous-fiber-reinforced composite ±45° laminate capable of being tension tested in the laminate x direction.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 are not exact equivalents; therefore, each system must be used independently of the other. Combining values from the two systems may result in nonconformance with the standard.1.2.1 Within the text, the inch-pound units are shown in brackets.1.3 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.1.4 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

定价： 590元 / 折扣价： 502 元 加购物车

5.1 This test method is used to determine the time to sustained flaming and heat release of materials and composites exposed to a prescribed initial test heat flux in the cone calorimeter apparatus.5.2 Quantitative heat release measurements provide information that can be used to compare wall or ceiling coverings and constructions and for input to fire models.5.3 Heat release measurements provide useful information for product development by giving a quantitative measure of specific changes in fire performance caused by component and composite modifications.5.4 Heat release data obtained by this test method will be inappropriate if the product will not spread flame over its surface under the fire exposure conditions of interest.5.5 Variations in substrates, mounting methods, and adhesives used to laminate composite products will potentially affect the test responses. These variables must be controlled during any comparative experiments.5.6 Test Limitations—The test data are invalid if any of the following occur:5.6.1 Explosive spalling,5.6.2 The specimen swells sufficiently prior to ignition to touch the spark plug or swells up to the plane of the heater base during combustion, or5.6.3 The surface laminate rolls or curls when placed under the radiant heater.5.7 The specimens are subjected to one or more specific sets of laboratory conditions in this procedure. If different test conditions are substituted or the end-use conditions are changed, it is not always possible by or from this test to predict changes in the fire-test-response characteristics measured. The results are therefore valid only for the fire test exposure conditions described in this procedure.1.1 This fire-test-response test method covers determination of the ignitability and heat release rate of composites consisting of a wall covering or ceiling covering, a substrate, and all laminating adhesives, coatings, and finishes. Heat release information cannot be used alone to evaluate the flammability of wall coverings or ceiling coverings. The data are intended to be used for modeling or with other data to evaluate a material.1.2 This test method provides for measurement of the time to sustained flaming, heat release rate, peak and total heat release, and effective heat of combustion at a constant initial test heat flux of 35 kW/m2. Heat release data at different heat fluxes are also obtained by this test method. The specimen is oriented horizontally, and a spark ignition source is used.1.3 The fire-test-response characteristics are determined using the apparatus and procedures described in Test Method E1354.1.4 The tests are conducted on bench-scale specimens combining the components used in the actual installation.1.5 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as the standard. See IEEE/ASTM SI-10.1.6 Fire testing of products and materials is inherently hazardous, and adequate safeguards for personnel and property shall be used in conducting these tests. This test method potentially involves hazardous materials, operations, and equipment.1.7 This standard is used to measure and describe the response of materials, products, or assemblies to heat and flame under controlled conditions, but does not by itself incorporate all factors required for fire hazard or fire risk assessment of the materials, products, or assemblies under actual fire conditions.1.8 Fire testing is inherently hazardous. Adequate safeguards for personnel and property shall be employed in conducting these tests. Specific information about hazard is given in Section 6.1.9 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.1.10 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

定价： 646元 / 折扣价： 550 元 加购物车

4.1 This standard provides a practice for RIQR evaluations of film and non-film imaging systems when exposed through an absorber material. Three alternate data evaluation methods are provided in Section 9. Determining RIQR requires the comparison of at least two radiographs or radiographic processes whereby the relative degree of image quality difference may be determined using the EPS plaque arrangement of Fig. 1 as a relative image quality indicator (RIQI). In conjunction with the RIQI, a specified radiographic technique or method must be established and carefully controlled for each radiographic process. This practice is designed to allow the determination of subtle changes in EPS that may arise to radiographic imaging system performance levels resultant from process improvements/changes or change of equipment attributes. This practice does not address relative unsharpness of a radiographic imaging system as provided in Practice E2002. The common element with any relative comparison is the use of the same RIQI arrangement for both processes under evaluation.4.2 In addition to the standard evaluation method described in Section 9, there may be other techniques/methods in which the basic RIQR arrangement of Fig. 1 might be utilized to perform specialized assessments of relative image quality performance. For example, other radiographic variables can be altered to facilitate evaluations provided these differences are known and documented for both processes. Where multiple radiographic process variables are evaluated, it is incumbent upon the user of this practice to control those normal process attributes to the degree suitable for the application. Specialized RIQR techniques may also be useful with micro focus X-ray, isotope sources of radiation or with the use of non-film radiographic imaging systems. RIQR may also be useful in evaluating imaging systems with alternate materials (RIQI and base plate) such as plastic, copper-nickel, or aluminum. When using any of these specialized applications, the specific method or techniques used shall be as specified and approved by the cognizant engineering organization.1.1 This standard covers a practice whereby industrial radiographic imaging systems or techniques may be comparatively assessed using the concept of relative image quality response (RIQR). Changes within a radiographic technique such as film/detector types, distances, or filtering/collimation can be comparatively assessed using this standard. The RIQR method presented within this practice is based upon the use of equivalent penetrameter sensitivity (EPS) described within Practice E1025 and subsection 5.4 of this practice. Fig. 1 illustrates a relative image quality indicator (RIQI) that has four different plaque thicknesses (0.38 mm, 0.25 mm, 0.20 mm, and 0.13 mm (0.015 in., 0.010 in., 0.008 in., and 0.005 in.)) sequentially positioned (from top to bottom) on an absorber plate of a specified material and thickness. The four plaques contain a total of 14 different arrays of penetrameter-type hole sizes designed to render varied conditions of threshold visibility when exposed to the appropriate radiation. Each “EPS” array consists of 30 identical holes; thus, providing the user with a quantity of threshold sensitivity levels suitable for relative image qualitative response comparisons. There are two standard materials (steel and plastic) specified herein for the RIQI and absorber. For special applications the user may design a non-standard RIQI-absorber configuration; however the RIQI configuration shall be controlled by a drawing similar to Fig. 1. Use of a non-standard RIQI-absorber configuration shall be described in the user’s written technique and approved by the CEO.1.2 This practice is not intended to qualify the performance of a specific radiographic technique nor for assurance that a radiographic technique will detect specific discontinuities in a specimen undergoing radiographic examination.1.3 This practice is not intended to be used to classify or derive performance classification categories for radiographic imaging systems. For example, performance classifications of radiographic film systems may be found within Test Method E1815, and manufacturer characterization of computed radiography (CR) systems may be found in Practice E2446. However, the RIQI and absorber described in this practice are used by Practice E2446 for manufacturer characterization of computed radiography (CR) systems and by Practice E2445 to evaluate performance and to monitor long term stability of CR systems.1.4 These tests are for applications below 4 MeV. When a gamma source or other high energy source is used, these tests may still be used to characterize the system, but may need a modification of the absorber thickness to adjust the available RIQR range as agreed between the user and cognizant engineering organization (CEO). For high-energy X-ray applications (4 MV to 25 MV), Test Method E1735 provides a similar RIQR standard practice.1.5 The values stated in SI are to be regarded as the standard.1.6 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.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 for use by field personnel for the rapid evaluation of the presence of and type of radioactive materials, based on information obtained from available field instrumentation. Guidance is offered for actions which may be taken to better understand the instrument indications for various scenarios, and guidance is offered for personnel protection and consultation with additional appropriate authorities.5.2 This guide does not include policy or procedures for radiation health protection. Such policy and procedures are determined locally by the organization(s) involved (site, city, county, state, federal). The policies and procedures may vary between organizations and may be dependent on the type of radiological incident. Users of this guide should be familiar with the policies of their local organizations.1.1 The objective of this guide is to provide useful information for the interpretation of radiological instrument responses in the event of a radiological incident or emergency.1.2 For the purposes of this guide, a radiological incident or emergency is defined as those events that follow the indication of the presence of radioactive material outside of a Department of Energy (DOE) or Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) defined radiological area. The event may be triggered by a law enforcement officer wearing a radiation pager during the course of his routine duties, a first responder at the scene of an accident wearing a radiation pager, a HAZMAT team responding to the scene of an accident known to involve radioactive material surveying the area, etc.1.3 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard. No other units of measurement are included in this 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 and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.

定价： 0元 / 折扣价： 0 元

5.1 The general design geometry herein defined applies to both a separate adaptor accessory mating two booms of different geometry as well as boom end connectors (see Terminology F818).5.2 Interconnectibility is intended to facilitate mating of oil spill response booms of various sizes, strengths, design, and manufacture.5.3 The use of this general design geometry in no way guarantees the effective performance of the linked boom sections, since each boom's design and the environmental conditions at each incident govern overall performance.AbstractThis specification covers design criteria requirements, design geometry, material characteristics, and desirable features for oil spill response boom connections. These criteria are intended to define minimum mating characteristics and are not intended to be restrictive to a specific configuration. Any material is acceptable for construction of the boom connector provided consideration is given to such factors as weight, mechanical strength, chemical resistance, flexibility, and conditions of the environment in which it is to be used. End connector and cross pin materials shall be corrosion resistant in sea water and such other environments as the intended service may require. If dissimilar metals are used, care shall be used in design to avoid galvanic corrosion. The minimum tensile strength of a boom-to-boom connection shall equal or exceed the minimum fabric tensile strength specified. When the connector is designed as an integral part of the boom, it shall ensure distribution or transfer of the tension member loads from one boom section to the next through or around the end connector in such a manner that the integrity of the joint is not broken. The connector shall be of the hook engagement design. The geometry of single hook engagement end connectors shall be compatible with the requirements specified. Desirable features of the connector design include the following: speed and ease of connection, light weight, connectable in the water, readily cleaned of sand and debris, inherently safe to personnel, and easy to install or replace.1.1 This specification covers design criteria requirements, design geometry, material characteristics, and desirable features for oil spill response boom connections. These criteria are intended to define minimum mating characteristics and are not intended to be restrictive to a specific configuration.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 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