iTeh StandardsiTeh Standards
EURUSD
Your shopping cart is empty.
ASTM

ASTM E680-79(2018)

(Test Method)

Standard Test Method for Drop Weight Impact Sensitivity of Solid-Phase Hazardous Materials

Standard Test Method for Drop Weight Impact Sensitivity of Solid-Phase Hazardous Materials

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
4.1 This test method does not require an overall rigid standardization of the apparatus. Samples are tested either unconfined or confined in confinement cups. For confined tests, some of the important cup parameters, such as cup material, cup wall thickness, and fit between the cup and the striking pin, are standardized. Data generated from unconfined and confined tests will not, in general, exhibit the same relative scale of sensitivities, and must be identified as confined or unconfined data and compared separately.  
4.2 This test method applies to all testing where the intent is to establish a relative sensitivity scale for hazardous materials. It is not intended to prohibit testing process-thickness samples nor prohibit the use of other than standard tool masses and striking diameters to generate data for special purposes or for in-house comparisons. In addition, the test method is not intended to restrict the generation of results at other than the H50 point as may be desirable for hazard analysis techniques.  
4.3 The normalized data will serve as a measure of the relative sensitivities of hazardous materials at the 50 % probability of reaction level. The normalized H50 values can also be used in conjunction with additional data relating to other probability of reaction levels (not a part of this test method) to assess hazards associated with the manufacture, transportation, storage, and use of hazardous materials.
SCOPE
1.1 This test method2, 3 is designed to determine the relative sensitivities of solid-phase hazardous materials to drop weight impact stimulus. For liquid-phase materials refer to Test Method D2540.  
1.2 This standard may involve hazardous materials, operations, and equipment. 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.  
1.3 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.

General Information

Status
Published
Publication Date
14-Nov-2018
ICS
13.300 - Protection against dangerous goods
Technical Committee
E27 - Hazard Potential of Chemicals
Drafting Committee
E27.02 - Thermal Stability and Condensed Phases
Current Stage
Ref Project

Relations

Referred By
ASTM D3332-99(2016) - Standard Test Methods for Mechanical-Shock Fragility of Products, Using Shock Machines
Effective Date
15-Nov-2018
Referred By
ASTM D5276-19 - Standard Test Method for Drop Test of Loaded Containers by Free Fall
Effective Date
15-Nov-2018
Referred By
ASTM E1445-08(2015) - Standard Terminology Relating to Hazard Potential of Chemicals
Effective Date
15-Nov-2018
Referred By
ASTM E1981-22 - Standard Guide for Assessing Thermal Stability of Materials by Methods of Accelerating Rate Calorimetry
Effective Date
15-Nov-2018

Buy Standard

ASTM E680-79(2018) - Standard Test Method for Drop Weight Impact Sensitivity of Solid-Phase Hazardous MaterialsASTM E680-79(2018) - Standard Test Method for Drop Weight Impact Sensitivity of Solid-Phase Hazardous Materials
PreviousNext
Standard
ASTM E680-79(2018) - Standard Test Method for Drop Weight Impact Sensitivity of Solid-Phase Hazardous Materials
English language
8 pages
sale 15% off
Preview
sale 15% off
Preview

Standards Content (Sample)

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.
Designation:E680 −79 (Reapproved 2018)
Standard Test Method for
Drop Weight Impact Sensitivity of Solid-Phase Hazardous
1
Materials
This standard is issued under the fixed designation E680; the number immediately following the designation indicates the year of
original adoption or, in the case of revision, the year of last revision. A number in parentheses indicates the year of last reapproval. A
superscript epsilon (´) indicates an editorial change since the last revision or reapproval.
INTRODUCTION
This test method is one of several test methods being developed by ASTM Committee E27 on
Hazard Potential of Chemicals. This test method is to be used in conjunction with other tests to
characterize the hazard potential of chemicals.
1. Scope D2540 Test Method for Drop-Weight Sensitivity of Liquid
5
2, 3
Monopropellants (Withdrawn 2003)
1.1 This test method is designed to determine the relative
sensitivities of solid-phase hazardous materials to drop weight
3. Summary of Test Method
impact stimulus. For liquid-phase materials refer to Test
Method D2540. 3.1 Restrictions are placed upon the ranges of impact tool
masses and striking surface diameters that may be used, and a
1.2 This standard may involve hazardous materials,
6
standard sample thickness is prescribed for all tests. In
operations, and equipment. This standard does not purport to
addition, procedures for sample preparation and treatment, as
address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its
well as procedures for detecting reactions through the use of
use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to
the human senses, are outlined.
establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental prac-
tices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations
3.2 Drop-weight impact tests are to be performed using the
7, 8
prior to use.
well-known Bruceton up-and-down method.
1.3 This international standard was developed in accor-
3.3 Outlined is a method for normalizing data generated on
dance with internationally recognized principles on standard-
different impact apparatus.
ization established in the Decision on Principles for the
Development of International Standards, Guides and Recom-
4. Significance and Use
mendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical
4.1 This test method does not require an overall rigid
Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.
standardization of the apparatus. Samples are tested either
unconfinedorconfinedinconfinementcups.Forconfinedtests,
2. Referenced Documents
some of the important cup parameters, such as cup material,
4
2.1 ASTM Standards:
cupwallthickness,andfitbetweenthecupandthestrikingpin,
arestandardized.Datageneratedfromunconfinedandconfined
tests will not, in general, exhibit the same relative scale of
1
This test method is under the jurisdiction ofASTM Committee E27 on Hazard
Potential of Chemicals and is the direct responsibility of Subcommittee E27.02 on
Thermal Stability and Condensed Phases.
5
Current edition approved Nov. 15, 2018. Published December 2018. Originally The last approved version of this historical standard is referenced on
ɛ1
approved in 1979. Last previous edition approved in 2011 as E680 – 79 (2011) . www.astm.org.
6
DOI: 10.1520/E0680-79R18. Becker, K. R., and Watson, R. W., “A Critique for Drop Weight Impact
2
This test method is a modification of and contains concepts proposed by Testing,” Proceedings of the Conference on the Standardization of Safety and
Hercules, Inc. personnel at Allegheny Ballistics Laboratory. The method was Performance Tests for Energetic Materials, Vol 1, September 1977, pp. 415–430.
outlined by personnel of Pittsburgh Mining and Safety Research Center, U.S. Publication ARLCD-SP-77004, U.S. Army Armament Research and Development
Bureau of Mines, Pittsburgh, Pa. For additional information see Footnote 3. Command, Dover, N.J.
3 7
Smith, D., and Richardson, R. H., “Interpretation of Impact Sensitivity Test Dixon, W. J., and Massey, F. J. Jr., Introduction to Statistical Analysis,
Data,” Pyrodynamics, PYDYA, Vol 6, 1968, pp. 159–178. McGraw-Hill Book Co., Inc., 1957, pp. 319–327.
4 8
For referenced ASTM standards, visit the ASTM website, www.astm.org, or Statistical Research Group, Princeton University, “Statistical Analysis for a
contact ASTM Customer Service at service@astm.org. For Annual Book of ASTM New Procedure in Sensitivity Experiments,” AMP Report No. 101.1R, SRG-P, No.
Standards volume information, refer to the standard’s Document Summary page on 40, Submitted to Applied Mathematics Panel, National Defense Research
the ASTM website. Committee, July 1944, p. 58.
Copyright © ASTM International, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, PO Box C70
...

Questions, Comments and Discussion

Ask us and Technical Secretary will try to provide an answer. You can facilitate discussion about the standard in here.

This May Also Interest You

ASTM
ASTM E681-09(2023)(Test Method)
Standard Test Method for Concentration Limits of Flammability of Chemicals (Vapors and Gases)

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 The LFL and UFL of gases and vapors define the range of flammable concentrations in air.  
5.2 This method measures the LFL and UFL for upward (and partially outward) flame propagation. The limits for downward flame propagation are narrower.  
5.3 Limits of flammability may be used to determine guidelines for the safe handling of volatile chemicals. They are used particularly in assessing ventilation requirements for the handling of gases and vapors. NFPA 69 provides guidance for the practical use of flammability limit data, including the appropriate safety margins to use.  
5.4 As discussed in Brandes and Ural,4 there is a fundamental difference between the ASTM and European methods for flammability determination. The ASTM methods aim to produce the best representation of flammability parameters, and rely upon the safety margins imposed by the application standards, such as NFPA 69. On the other hand, European test methods aim to result in a conservative representation of flammability parameters. For example, in this standard, LFL is the calculated average of the lowest go and highest no-go concentrations while the European test methods report the LFL as the minimum of the five highest no-go concentrations.
Note 2: For hydrocarbons, the break point between nonflammability and flammability occurs over a narrow concentration range at the lower flammability limit, but the break point is less distinct at the upper limit. For materials found to be non-reproducible per 13.1.1 that are likely to have large quenching distances and may be difficult to ignite, such as ammonia and certain halogenated hydrocarbon, the lower and upper limits of these materials may both be less distinct. That is, a wider range exists between flammable and nonflammable concentrations (see Annex A1).
SCOPE
1.1 This test method covers the determination of the lower and upper concentration limits of flammability of chemicals having sufficient vapor pressure to form flammable mixtures in air at atmospheric pressure at the test temperature. This test method may be used to determine these limits in the presence of inert dilution gases. No oxidant stronger than air should be used.  
Note 1: The lower flammability limit (LFL) and upper flammability limit (UFL) are sometimes referred to as the lower explosive limit (LEL) and the upper explosive limit (UEL), respectively. However, since the terms LEL and UEL are also used to denote concentrations other than the limits defined in this test method, one must examine the definitions closely when LEL and UEL values are reported or used.  
1.2 This test method is based on electrical ignition and visual observations of flame propagation. Users may experience problems if the flames are difficult to observe (for example, irregular propagation or insufficient luminescence in the visible spectrum), if the test material requires large ignition energy, or if the material has large quenching distances.  
1.3 Annex A1 provides a modified test method for materials (such as certain amines, halogenated materials, and the like) with large quenching distances which may be difficult to ignite.  
1.4 In other situations where strong ignition sources (such as direct flame ignition) is considered credible, the use of a test method employing higher energy ignition source in a sufficiently large pressure chamber (analogous, for example, to the methods in Test Method E2079 for measuring limiting oxygen concentration) may be more appropriate. In this case, expert advice may be necessary.  
1.5 The flammability limits depend on the test temperature and pressure. This test method is limited to an initial pressure of the local ambient or less, with a practical lower pressure limit of approximately 13 kPa (100 mm Hg). The maximum practical operating temperature of this equipment is approximately 150 °C.  
1.6 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard. No other units of measuremen...

  • Standard
    12 pages
    English language
    sale 15% off
ASTM
ASTM E1445-08(2015)(Terminology)
Standard Terminology Relating to Hazard Potential of Chemicals

SCOPE
1.1 This standard is a compilation of terminology used in the area of hazard potential of chemicals. Terms that are generally understood or adequately defined in other readily available sources are not included.  
1.2 Although some of these definitions are general in nature, many must be used in the context of the standards in which they appear. The pertinent standard number is given in parentheses after the definition.  
1.3 In the interest of common understanding and standardization, consistent word usage is encouraged to help eliminate the major barrier to effective technical communication.

  • Standard
    4 pages
    English language
    sale 15% off
ASTM
ASTM E681-09(2023)(Test Method)
Standard Test Method for Concentration Limits of Flammability of Chemicals (Vapors and Gases)

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 The LFL and UFL of gases and vapors define the range of flammable concentrations in air.  
5.2 This method measures the LFL and UFL for upward (and partially outward) flame propagation. The limits for downward flame propagation are narrower.  
5.3 Limits of flammability may be used to determine guidelines for the safe handling of volatile chemicals. They are used particularly in assessing ventilation requirements for the handling of gases and vapors. NFPA 69 provides guidance for the practical use of flammability limit data, including the appropriate safety margins to use.  
5.4 As discussed in Brandes and Ural,4 there is a fundamental difference between the ASTM and European methods for flammability determination. The ASTM methods aim to produce the best representation of flammability parameters, and rely upon the safety margins imposed by the application standards, such as NFPA 69. On the other hand, European test methods aim to result in a conservative representation of flammability parameters. For example, in this standard, LFL is the calculated average of the lowest go and highest no-go concentrations while the European test methods report the LFL as the minimum of the five highest no-go concentrations.
Note 2: For hydrocarbons, the break point between nonflammability and flammability occurs over a narrow concentration range at the lower flammability limit, but the break point is less distinct at the upper limit. For materials found to be non-reproducible per 13.1.1 that are likely to have large quenching distances and may be difficult to ignite, such as ammonia and certain halogenated hydrocarbon, the lower and upper limits of these materials may both be less distinct. That is, a wider range exists between flammable and nonflammable concentrations (see Annex A1).
SCOPE
1.1 This test method covers the determination of the lower and upper concentration limits of flammability of chemicals having sufficient vapor pressure to form flammable mixtures in air at atmospheric pressure at the test temperature. This test method may be used to determine these limits in the presence of inert dilution gases. No oxidant stronger than air should be used.  
Note 1: The lower flammability limit (LFL) and upper flammability limit (UFL) are sometimes referred to as the lower explosive limit (LEL) and the upper explosive limit (UEL), respectively. However, since the terms LEL and UEL are also used to denote concentrations other than the limits defined in this test method, one must examine the definitions closely when LEL and UEL values are reported or used.  
1.2 This test method is based on electrical ignition and visual observations of flame propagation. Users may experience problems if the flames are difficult to observe (for example, irregular propagation or insufficient luminescence in the visible spectrum), if the test material requires large ignition energy, or if the material has large quenching distances.  
1.3 Annex A1 provides a modified test method for materials (such as certain amines, halogenated materials, and the like) with large quenching distances which may be difficult to ignite.  
1.4 In other situations where strong ignition sources (such as direct flame ignition) is considered credible, the use of a test method employing higher energy ignition source in a sufficiently large pressure chamber (analogous, for example, to the methods in Test Method E2079 for measuring limiting oxygen concentration) may be more appropriate. In this case, expert advice may be necessary.  
1.5 The flammability limits depend on the test temperature and pressure. This test method is limited to an initial pressure of the local ambient or less, with a practical lower pressure limit of approximately 13 kPa (100 mm Hg). The maximum practical operating temperature of this equipment is approximately 150 °C.  
1.6 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard. No other units of measuremen...

  • Standard
    12 pages
    English language
    sale 15% off
ASTM
ASTM E1382-97(2023)(Test Method)
Standard Test Methods for Determining Average Grain Size Using Semiautomatic and Automatic Image Analysis

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 These test methods cover procedures for determining the mean grain size, and the distribution of grain intercept lengths or grain areas, for polycrystalline metals and nonmetallic materials with equiaxed or deformed grain shapes, with uniform or duplex grain size distributions, and for single phase or multiphase grain structures.  
5.2 The measurements are performed using semiautomatic digitizing tablet image analyzers or automatic image analyzers. These devices relieve much of the tedium associated with manual measurements, thus permitting collection of a larger amount of data and more extensive sampling which will produce better statistical definition of the grain size than by manual methods.  
5.3 The precision and relative accuracy of the test results depend on the representativeness of the specimen or specimens, quality of specimen preparation, clarity of the grain boundaries (etch technique and etchant used), the number of grains measured or the measurement area, errors in detecting grain boundaries or grain interiors, errors due to detecting other features (carbides, inclusions, twin boundaries, and so forth), the representativeness of the fields measured, and programming errors.  
5.4 Results from these test methods may be used to qualify material for shipment in accordance with guidelines agreed upon between purchaser and manufacturer, to compare different manufacturing processes or process variations, or to provide data for structure-property-behavior studies.
SCOPE
1.1 These test methods are used to determine grain size from measurements of grain intercept lengths, intercept counts, intersection counts, grain boundary length, and grain areas.  
1.2 These measurements are made with a semiautomatic digitizing tablet or by automatic image analysis using an image of the grain structure produced by a microscope.  
1.3 These test methods are applicable to any type of grain structure or grain size distribution as long as the grain boundaries can be clearly delineated by etching and subsequent image processing, if necessary.  
1.4 These test methods are applicable to measurement of other grain-like microstructures, such as cell structures.  
1.5 This standard deals only with the recommended test methods and nothing in it should be construed as defining or establishing limits of acceptability or fitness for purpose of the materials tested.  
1.6 The sections appear in the following order:    
Section  
Section  
Scope  
1  
Referenced Documents  
2  
Terminology  
3  
Definitions  
3.1  
Definitions of Terms Specific to This Standard  
3.2  
Symbols  
3.3  
Summary of Test Method  
4  
Significance and Use  
5  
Interferences  
6  
Apparatus  
7  
Sampling  
8  
Test Specimens  
9  
Specimen Preparation  
10  
Calibration  
11  
Procedure:  
Semiautomatic Digitizing Tablet  
12  
Intercept Lengths  
12.3  
Intercept and Intersection Counts  
12.4  
Grain Counts  
12.5  
Grain Areas  
12.6  
ALA Grain Size  
12.6.1  
Two-Phase Grain Structures  
12.7  
Procedure:  
Automatic Image Analysis  
13  
Grain Boundary Length  
13.5  
Intersection Counts  
13.6  
Mean Chord (Intercept) Length/Field  
13.7.2  
Individual Chord (Intercept) Lengths  
13.7.4  
Grain Counts  
13.8  
Mean Grain Area/Field  
13.9  
Individual Grain Areas  
13.9.4  
ALA Grain Size  
13.9.8  
Two-Phase Grain Structures  
13.10  
Calculation of Results  
14  
Test Report  
15  
Precision and Bias  
16  
Grain Size of Non-Equiaxed Grain Structure Specimens  
Annex A1  
Examples of Proper and Improper Grain Boundary Delineation  
Annex A2  
1.7 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental pra...

  • Standard
    24 pages
    English language
    sale 15% off
ASTM
ASTM G125-00(2023)(Test Method)
Standard Test Method for Measuring Liquid and Solid Material Fire Limits in Gaseous Oxidants

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 This test method provides for measuring of the minimum conditions of a range of parameters (concentration of oxidant in a flowing mixture of oxidant and diluent, pressure, temperature) that will just support sustained propagation of combustion. For materials that exhibit flaming combustion, this is a flammability limit similar to the lower flammability limit, upper flammability limit, and minimum oxidant for combustion of gases (1).4 However, unlike flammability limits for gases, in two-phase systems, the concept of upper and lower flame limits is not meaningful. However, limits can typically be determined for variations in other parameters such as the minimum oxidant for combustion (the oxidant index), the pressure limit, the temperature limit, and others. Measurement and use of these data are analogous to the measurement and use of the corresponding data for gaseous systems. That is, the limits apply to systems likely to experience complete propagations (equilibrium combustion). Successful ignition and combustion below the measured limits at other conditions or of a transient nature are not precluded below the threshold. Flammability limits measured at one set of conditions are not necessarily the lowest thresholds at which combustion can occur. Therefore direct correlation of these data with the burning characteristics under actual use conditions is not implied.
SCOPE
1.1 This test method covers a procedure for measuring the threshold-limit conditions to allow equilibrium of combustion of materials in various oxidant gases under specific test conditions of pressure, temperature, flow condition, fire-propagation directions, and various other geometrical features of common systems.  
1.2 This test method is patterned after Test Method D2863-95 and incorporates its procedure for measuring the limit as a function of oxidant concentration for the most commonly used test conditions. Sections 8, 9, 10, 11, 13, and  for the basic oxidant limit (oxygen index) procedure are quoted directly from Test Method D2863-95. Oxygen index data reported in accordance with Test Method D2863-95 are acceptable substitutes for data collected with this standard under similar conditions.  
1.3 This test method has been found applicable to testing and ranking various forms of materials. It has also found limited usefulness for surmising the prospect that materials will prove “oxygen compatible” in actual systems. However, its results do not necessarily apply to any condition that does not faithfully reproduce the conditions during test. The fire limit is a measurement of a behavioral property and not a physical property. Uses of these data are addressed in Guides G63 and G94.  
Note 1: Although this test method has been found applicable for testing a range of materials in a range of oxidants with a range of diluents, the accuracy has not been determined for many of these combinations and conditions of specimen geometry, outside those of the basic procedure as applied to plastics.
Note 2: Test Method D2863-95 has been revised and the revised Test Method has been issued as D2863-97. The major changes involve sample dimensions, burning criteria and the method for determining the oxygen index. The aim of the revisions was to align Test Method D2863 with ISO 4589-2. Six laboratories conducted comparison round robin testing on self-supporting plastics and cellular materials using D2863-95 and D2863-97. The results indicate that there is no difference between the means provided y the two methods at the 95 % confidence level. No comparison tests were conducted on thin films. The majority of ASTM Committee G4 favors maintaining the D2863-95 as the backbone of G125 until comprehensive comparison data become available.  
1.4 One very specific set of test conditions for measuring the fire limits of metals in oxygen has been codified in Test Method G124. Test Method G124 measures the minimum pressure limit in oxygen fo...

  • Standard
    9 pages
    English language
    sale 15% off
ASTM
ASTM E1191-03A(2023)e1(Guide)
Standard Guide for Conducting Life-Cycle Toxicity Tests with Saltwater Mysids

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 Protection of a species requires prevention of unacceptable effects on the number, weight, health, and uses of the individuals of that species. A life-cycle toxicity test is conducted to determine what changes in the numbers and weights of individuals of the test species result from effects of the test material on survival, growth, and reproduction. Information might also be obtained on effects of the material on the health and uses of the species.  
5.2 Results of life-cycle tests with mysids might be used to predict long-term effects likely to occur on mysids in field situations as a result of exposure under comparable conditions.  
5.3 Results of life-cycle tests with mysids might be used to compare the chronic sensitivities of different species and the chronic toxicities of different materials, and also to study the effects of various environmental factors on results of such tests.  
5.4 Results of life-cycle tests with mysids might be an important consideration when assessing the hazards of materials to aquatic organisms (see Guide E1023) or when deriving water quality criteria for aquatic organisms (1).4  
5.5 Results of a life-cycle test with mysids might be useful for predicting the results of chronic tests on the same test material with the same species in another water or with another species in the same or a different water (2). Most such predictions take into account results of acute toxicity tests, and so the usefulness of the results from a life-cycle test with mysids is greatly increased by also reporting the results of an acute toxicity test (see Guide E729) conducted under the same conditions.  
5.6 Results of life-cycle tests with mysids might be useful for studying the biological availability of, and structure-activity relationships between, test materials.  
5.7 Results of life-cycle tests with mysids might be useful for predicting population effects on the same species in another water or with another species in the same or a different...
SCOPE
1.1 This guide describes procedures for obtaining laboratory data concerning the adverse effects of a test material added to dilution water, but not to food, on certain species of saltwater mysids during continuous exposure from immediately after birth until after the beginning of reproduction using the flow-through technique. These procedures will probably be useful for conducting life-cycle toxicity tests with other species of mysids, although modifications might be necessary.  
1.2 Other modifications of these procedures might be justified by special needs or circumstances. Although using appropriate procedures is more important than following prescribed procedures, results of tests conducted using unusual procedures are not likely to be comparable to results of many other tests. Comparison of results obtained using modified and unmodified versions of these procedures might provide useful information on new concepts and procedures for conducting life-cycle toxicity tests with saltwater mysids.  
1.3 These procedures are applicable to all chemicals, either individually or in formulations, commercial products, or known mixtures, that can be measured accurately at the necessary concentrations in water. With appropriate modifications, these procedures can be used to conduct tests on temperature, dissolved oxygen, and pH and on such materials as aqueous effluents (see also Guide E1192), leachates, oils, particulate matter, sediments, and surface waters.  
1.4 This guide is arranged as follows:    
Section  
Referenced Documents  
2  
Terminology  
3  
Summary of Guide  
4  
Significance and Use  
5  
Hazards  
7  
Apparatus  
6  
Facilities  
6.1  
Construction Materials  
6.2  
Metering System  
6.3  
Test Chambers  
6.4  
Cleaning  
6.5  
Acceptability  
6.6  
Dilution Water  
8  
Requirements  
8.1  
Source  
8.2  
Treatment  
8.3  
Characterizat...

  • Guide
    17 pages
    English language
    sale 15% off
ASTM
ASTM F1687-22(Guide)
Standard Guide for Terminology and Indices to Describe Oiling Conditions on Shorelines and Other Terrain

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
4.1 In order to ensure data consistency, it is important to use standardized terminology and definitions in describing oiling conditions (1)3. This guide provides a template for that purpose.  
4.2 Data on oiling conditions at a shoreline are needed to provide an accurate perspective of the nature and scale of the oiling problem and to facilitate spill-response planning and decision making. Data on oiling conditions would be used in assessing the need for cleanup actions, selecting the most appropriate response technique(s), determining priorities for cleanup, and evaluating the endpoint of cleanup activities.(2-3)  
4.3 Mechanisms by which data are collected can vary (see Guide F1686). They can include aerial video surveys or ground-level assessment surveys. The composition and responsibility of the survey team will depend on the response organization and objectives. The magnitude and type of data sets collected can likewise vary with the nature of the spill and operational needs.  
4.4 Consistent data sets (observations and measurements) on shoreline oiling conditions are essential within any one spill in order to compare the data between different sites or observers, and to compare the data against existing benchmarks or criteria that have been developed to rate the nature or severity of the oiling. To the extent possible, consistency is also desirable between different spills, in order to benefit from previous experiences and cleanup decisions.  
4.5 It is recognized that some modifications may be appropriate based on local or regional geographic conditions or upon the specific character of the stranded oil.
SCOPE
1.1 This guide covers the standardized terminology and types of observational data and indices appropriate to describe the quantity, nature, and distribution of oil and physical oiling conditions on shorelines that have been contaminated by an oil spill.  
1.2 This guide does not address the mechanisms and field procedures by which the necessary data are gathered; nor does it address terminology used to describe the cultural resource or ecological character of oiled shorelines, spill monitoring, or cleanup techniques.  
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, 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.

  • Guide
    7 pages
    English language
    sale 15% off
  • Guide
    7 pages
    English language
    sale 15% off
ASTM
ASTM F1686-22(Guide)
Standard Guide for Surveys to Document and Assess Oiling Conditions

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
3.1 Systematic surveys provide data on shoreline, lakeshore, river bank or other terrain’s character and oiling conditions from which informed planning and operational decisions can be developed with respect to cleanup (1-4).3 In particular, the data are used by decision makers to determine which oiled areas require treatment and to develop end-point criteria for use as targets for the field operations.  
3.2 Surveys may include one or more of four components or phases, as listed below. The scale of an affected area plus quantity and availability of pre-spill information will influence the selection of survey components and its level of detail.  
3.2.1 The aerial reconnaissance survey phase provides a perspective on the overall extent and general nature of the oiling conditions. This information is used in conjunction with environmental, resource, and cultural sensitivity data to guide shoreline protection, recovery of mobile oil, and to facilitate the more detailed response planning and priorities of the response operations.  
3.2.2 The aerial video survey(s) phase provides systematic audio and video documentation of the extent and type of oiling conditions, physical character, and logistics information, such as access and staging data.  
3.2.3 The ground assessment survey(s) phase provides the necessary information and data to develop appropriate response recommendations. A field team(s) collects detailed information on oil conditions, the physical and ecological character of oiled areas, and resources or cultural features that may affect or be affected by the timing or implementation of response activities.  
3.2.4 The post-treatment inspection ground survey or monitoring phase provides the necessary information and data to ensure a segment, that is part of the response program, has been treated to the approved end-point criterion. (5)  
3.3 In order to ensure data consistency, it is important to use standardized terminology and definitions in describing oi...
SCOPE
1.1 This guide covers field procedures by which data can be collected in a systematic manner to document and assess the oiling conditions on shorelines, river banks, and lake shores (shores and substrates) plus dry land habitats (terrain).  
1.2 This guide does not address the terminology that is used to define and describe terrain oiling conditions, the ecological character of oiled terrain, or the cultural or other resources that can be present.  
1.3 The guide is applicable to marine coasts (including estuaries) and to freshwater environments (rivers and lakes) and to dry land habitats. In alignment with Guide F2204:  
1.3.1 For the purpose of this guide, marine and estuarine shorelines, river banks, and lake shores will be collectively referred to as shorelines, shores, or shore-zones.  
1.3.2 Shore types include a range of impermeable (bedrock, ice, and manmade structures), permeable (flats, beaches, and manmade), and coastal wetland (marshes, mangroves) habitats.  
1.4 Other non-shoreline, inland habitats include wetlands (pond, fen, bog, swamp, tundra, and shrub) and drier terrains (grassland, desert, forests), and will be collectively referred to as either wetlands or terrains, respectively.  
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 Barr...

  • Guide
    9 pages
    English language
    sale 15% off
  • Guide
    9 pages
    English language
    sale 15% off
ASTM
ASTM E2664-22(Practice)
Standard Practice for Methanol Wall Wash of Marine Vessels Handling Polyester Grade Monoethylene Glycol

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
4.1 The methanol wall wash practice is performed to determine the cleanliness and suitability of cargo tanks or compartments on a marine vessel prior to loading polyester grade monoethylene glycol. Polyester grade monoethylene glycol has very high quality requirements and must be handled with care, as it is adversely affected by oxygen, hydrocarbons, water, and chloride. It is especially susceptible to aromatic contamination, which degrades UV transmittance. Possible sources of contamination are the prior cargoes and cleaning agents. The methanol wall wash procedure provides a representative sampling of the impurities and contamination present on the sides of the cargo tank.
SCOPE
1.1 This practice covers the methanol wall wash procedure for cargo tanks of marine vessels handling polyester grade monoethylene glycol.  
1.2 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use. For specific hazard statements, see Section 7.  
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.

  • Standard
    3 pages
    English language
    sale 15% off
  • Standard
    3 pages
    English language
    sale 15% off
ASTM
ASTM F1011-22(Guide)
Standard Guide for Developing a Hazardous Materials Training Curriculum for Initial Response Personnel

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
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.
SCOPE
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.

  • Guide
    5 pages
    English language
    sale 15% off
  • Guide
    5 pages
    English language
    sale 15% off