iTeh StandardsiTeh Standards
EURUSD
Your shopping cart is empty.
ASTM

ASTM E2012-06(2020)

(Guide)

Standard Guide for the Preparation of a Binary Chemical Compatibility Chart

Standard Guide for the Preparation of a Binary Chemical Compatibility Chart

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 Various United States governmental regulations forbid incompatible materials to be transported together and require that chemical reactivity be considered in process hazard and risk analysis. A chemical compatibility chart is one tool to be used to satisfy these regulations. Binary compatibility charts are useful teaching tools in general education, in the chemical plant or laboratory, and for areas and operations where commonly performed tasks might lead to chemical mixtures such as might occur during co-shipment in compartmentalized containers, storage in a common area or compositing waste. Compatibility information is essential during process hazard reviews (for example, HAZOP). These charts may provide guidance to terminal operators on DOT HM-183 that requires that materials on adjacent compartments of multicompartment tank trucks are compatible. They provide documentation that the potential for inadvertent mixing as a potential source of heat and gas evolution from chemical reactions has been considered in sizing relief devices. Compatibility charts serve as check lists for use during process hazard reviews, and the preparation of the chart itself often brings attention to potential hazards that were previously unknown.  
5.2 A binary chart only considers pairs of materials and therefore does not cover all possible combinations of materials in an operation. A common third component, for example, acidic or basic catalysts, may be covered by footnoting the potential for catalysis of a reaction between otherwise compatible materials, but the form of the chart does not ensure this. There may be reactive ternary systems that will escape detection in a binary chart.  
5.3 The AIChE organization Center for Chemical Process Safety (CCPS) has recommended the use of this standard in one of their recent monographs (1).5 This work is currently available for free download from: http://www.osha.gov/SLTC/reactivechemicals/index.html.
SCOPE
1.1 A binary chemical compatibility chart also called inter-reactivity chart, documents the hazards associated with the mixing of pairs of materials. This guide provides an aid for the preparation these charts. It reviews a number of issues that are critical in the preparation of such charts: accurate assessment of chemical compatibility, suitable experimental techniques for gathering compatibility information, incorporation of user-friendliness, and provision for revisions.  
1.2 The uses of chemical compatibility charts are summarized in this standard.  
1.3 This guide also reviews existing public domain compatibility charts, the differences therein, and their advantages and disadvantages.  
1.4 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard. No other units of measurement are included in this standard.  
1.5 This 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
31-Mar-2020
ICS
71.020 - Production in the chemical industry
Technical Committee
E27 - Hazard Potential of Chemicals
Drafting Committee
E27.02 - Thermal Stability and Condensed Phases
Current Stage
Ref Project

Relations

Refers
ASTM E537-20 - Standard Test Method for Thermal Stability of Chemicals by Differential Scanning Calorimetry
Effective Date
01-Feb-2020

Buy Standard

ASTM E2012-06(2020) - Standard Guide for the Preparation of a Binary Chemical Compatibility ChartASTM E2012-06(2020) - Standard Guide for the Preparation of a Binary Chemical Compatibility Chart
PreviousNext
Guide
ASTM E2012-06(2020) - Standard Guide for the Preparation of a Binary Chemical Compatibility Chart
English language
7 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: E2012 − 06 (Reapproved 2020)
Standard Guide for
1
the Preparation of a Binary Chemical Compatibility Chart
This standard is issued under the fixed designation E2012; 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
The purpose of this standard is to provide expert guidance to those interested in the task of
compiling chemical compatibility (inter-reactivity) charts for the purposes of process safety and
reactive chemicals hazard evaluation. This standard does not provide specific answers regarding the
inter-reactivity of specific materials. However, it does provide a detailed framework for developing
charts based on the current best practices of the chemical industry and it directs the user to sources
of reactivity information. It is the E27 Committee’s belief that inter-reactivity charts will be
increasingly used in industry for day-to-day operations, process hazard reviews, employee education,
and emergency response. It is our hope that this standard guide can be useful in that effort.
1. Scope 2. Referenced Documents
2
2.1 ASTM Standards:
1.1 A binary chemical compatibility chart also called inter-
E537 Test Method for Thermal Stability of Chemicals by
reactivity chart, documents the hazards associated with the
Differential Scanning Calorimetry
mixing of pairs of materials. This guide provides an aid for the
E698 Test Method for Kinetic Parameters for Thermally
preparation these charts. It reviews a number of issues that are
Unstable Materials Using Differential Scanning Calorim-
critical in the preparation of such charts: accurate assessment
etry and the Flynn/Wall/Ozawa Method
of chemical compatibility, suitable experimental techniques for
E1231 Practice for Calculation of Hazard Potential Figures
gathering compatibility information, incorporation of user-
of Merit for Thermally Unstable Materials
friendliness, and provision for revisions.
PS168 Proposed Guide for Estimating the Incompatibility of
1.2 The uses of chemical compatibility charts are summa-
Selected Hazardous Wastes Based on Binary Chemical
3
rized in this standard.
Reactions
4
2.2 NFPA Standard:
1.3 This guide also reviews existing public domain compat-
NFPA 491 Guide to Hazardous Chemical Reactions
ibility charts, the differences therein, and their advantages and
disadvantages.
3. Terminology
1.4 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as
3.1 Definitions:
standard. No other units of measurement are included in this
3.1.1 compatibility, adj—the ability of materials to exist in
standard.
contact without specified (usually hazardous) consequences
1.5 This international standard was developed in accor-
under a defined scenario.
dance with internationally recognized principles on standard-
3.1.2 scenario, n—a detailed physical description of the
ization established in the Decision on Principles for the
process whereby a potential inadvertent combination of mate-
Development of International Standards, Guides and Recom-
rials may occur.
mendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical
Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.
2
For referenced ASTM standards, visit the ASTM website, www.astm.org, or
contact ASTM Customer Service at service@astm.org. For Annual Book of ASTM
1
This guide is under the jurisdiction of ASTM Committee E27 on Hazard Standards volume information, refer to the standard’s Document Summary page on
Potential of Chemicals, and is the direct responsibility of Subcommittee E27.02 on the ASTM website.
3
Thermal Stability and Condensed Phases. Withdrawn.ThischartwassubsequentlyadoptedbytheU.S.EPAandiswidely
Current edition approved April 1, 2020. Published April 2020. Originally available by way of the Internet.
4
approved in 1999. Last previous edition approved in 2012 as E2012 – 06 (2012). Available from National Fire Protection Association (NFPA), 1 Batterymarch
DOI: 10.1520/E2012-06R20. Park, Quincy, MA 02169-7471, http://www.nfpa.org.
Copyright © ASTM International, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, PO Box C700, West Conshohocken, PA 19428-2959. United States
1

---------------------- Page: 1 ----------------------
E2012 − 06 (2020)
4. Summary of Guide duplicate entries, a triangular chart is required. If a decision on
compatibility was not by the standard means (as defined by the
4.1 Abinarychemicalcompatibilitychartindicateswhether,
user) or the scenario differs, indicate by footnote the basis for
under a given set of conditions (the
...

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 E2081-22(Guide)
Standard Guide for Risk-Based Corrective Action

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
4.1 The risk-based corrective action (RBCA) process presented in this guide is a consistent, streamlined decision process for selecting corrective actions at chemical release sites.  
4.2 Risk assessment is a developing science. The scientific approach used to develop the RBSL and SSTL may vary by regulatory agency and by user due to regulatory requirements, guidance and use of alternative scientifically-based methods.  
4.3 Activities described in this guide should be conducted by persons familiar with current site characterization techniques, remedial action science and technology, current human health risk and exposure assessment methodologies, toxicology, and current ecological evaluation methodologies.  
4.4 In order to properly apply the RBCA process, the user should AVOID the following:  
4.4.1 Prescribing Tier 1 RBSL or RESC as remedial action standards for all sites rather than screening levels,  
4.4.2 Limiting use of the RBCA process to Tier 1 evaluation only and not continuing with Tier 2 or Tier 3 analyses for sites where further tier evaluation is appropriate,  
4.4.3 Placing arbitrary time constraints on the corrective action process; for example, requiring that Tiers 1, 2, and 3 be completed within time periods that do not reflect the actual urgency of and risks posed by the site,  
4.4.4 Using the RBCA process only when active remedial action is not technically feasible, rather than as a process that is applicable during all phases of corrective action,  
4.4.5 Conducting active remedial action to achieve only technology-based remedial limits (for example, asymptotic levels) prior to determining applicable corrective action goals,  
4.4.6 Using predictive modeling that is not supported by available data or knowledge of site conditions,  
4.4.7 Limiting remedial action options to a single class of remedial actions for all sites (for example Guide E1943),  
4.4.8 Using unjustified or inappropriate exposure factors,  
4.4.9 Using unjustifie...
SCOPE
1.1 This is a guide for conducting risk-based corrective action (RBCA) at chemical release sites based on protecting human health and the environment. The RBCA is a consistent decision-making process for the assessment and response to chemical releases. Chemical release sites vary greatly in terms of complexity, physical and chemical characteristics, and in the risk that they may pose to human health and the environment. The RBCA process recognizes this diversity by using a tiered approach that integrates site assessment and response actions with human health and ecological risk assessment to determine the need for remedial action and to tailor corrective action activities to site-specific conditions and risks. The evaluations and methods used in the RBCA process begin with simple analyses in Tier 1 and move to more complex evaluations in either Tier 2 or Tier 3, as applicable. The process of gathering and evaluating data is conducted in a scaled fashion. Consequently, only the data that are necessary for a particular tier's decision-making are collected at that tier.  
1.2 This guide describes an approach for risk-based corrective action. It is intended to help direct and streamline the corrective action process and to complement but not to supersede federal, state and local regulations. It can be employed at sites where corrective action is being conducted including sites where there may not be a regulatory framework for corrective action, or where the user wishes to conduct corrective action such as sites in voluntary cleanup programs or under Brownfields initiatives. In addition, it can also be used as a unifying framework when several different agency programs affect the site. Furthermore, the user should be aware of the federal, state and local corrective action programs that are applicable for the site and, regardless of the program, federal, state and local agency approvals may be required to implement the proce...

  • Guide
    98 pages
    English language
    sale 15% off
  • Guide
    98 pages
    English language
    sale 15% off
ASTM
ASTM D7294-13(2021)(Guide)
Standard Guide for Collecting Treatment Process Design Data at a Contaminated Site—A Site Contaminated with Chemicals of Interest

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
4.1 This guide allows the decision maker to determine which remedial treatment processes are and are not applicable to remediate an area of soil, surface water, or ground water that contains contaminants of concern.  
4.2 This guide provides the data to make cost comparisons of the remedial treatment processes.  
4.3 Analysis of treatment process design data can often be performed at the site with field instruments and test kits.  
4.4 Tables 1 and 2 are a guide to selecting and obtaining physical and chemical treatment process design data. Data marked with an “X” is needed to evaluate alternatives and select a remedial treatment process. Once the remedial process is selected, the additional data that are needed to design the selected remedial treatment process are marked with an “O.” It may be advisable to also collect the data marked with an “O” during the initial sampling event to minimize sampling trips to the site.  
4.5 Tables 3 and 4 list laboratory and field methods for analyzing this data. More than one analytical method may be listed. The most suitable method must be chosen for each application. (A) This table was developed jointly by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Hazardous, Toxic, and Radioactive Waste Center of Expertise and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Technical Support Project—Engineering Forum. Additional information and methods can be found in 40 CFR 136, EPA SW-846, and Standard Methods for Evaluation of Water and Wastewater, most current edition.(B) Estimated sensitivity and detection ranges are method/kit specific. Detection ranges are estimates. Verify these methods are suitable for the samples at this site. Consult the method or manufacturer's catalogs for details.(C) Spectrometers and meters are instruments that can be used to analyze for many parameters. Kits cost much less, but usually analyze for only one parameter. There are many manufacturers of field test equipment. Verify that the field methods are applicable to the m...
SCOPE
1.1 This guide lists the physical and chemical treatment processes design data needed to evaluate, select, and design treatment processes for remediation of contaminated sites. This data is listed in Tables 1 and 2. Much of these data can be obtained and analyzed at the site with instruments and test kits.    
1.2 It is recommended that this guide be used in conducting environmental site assessments and Remedial Investigations/Feasibility Studies (RI/FS) and selections of remedy in U.S. Code of Federal Regulations 40 CFR 300.430.  
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.

  • Guide
    10 pages
    English language
    sale 15% off
ASTM
ASTM E3240-20(Guide)
Standard Guide for Risk-Based Corrective Action for Contaminated Sediment Sites

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
4.1 This guide provides a consistent and transparent decision-making process for selecting risk-based corrective actions at sediment sites (that is, a Sediment-RBCA). Sediment-RBCA shares the same process as other RBCAs described in E1739, E2081, and E2205/E2205M but with explicit consideration of the constraints on how the available sediment assessment techniques impact decision making. Several factors exist that distinguish sediment sites from upland sites and warrant unique consideration, including background, potential for recontamination, sediment stability, sediment processes, lack of control on exposure and transport, exposure pathways and receptors, and unique site characteristics such as public lands, lack of site control on use and access. The diversity of available assessment techniques for a sediment site is considerably larger than for other media. Guidance on the technical tools themselves are described in other ASTM guides and regulatory guidance manuals.  
4.2 Sediment-RBCA incorporates the same paradigm of planning and scoping, problem formulation, exposure and effects assessments, risk characterization, and uncertainty analysis that is common to ecological and human health risk assessment guidance documents. Irrespective of terminology, both Sediment-RBCA and risk assessment share the same science-based process and share the same goal of informing risk management decisions. The specific approach used to develop risk-based human health and ecological criteria and risk-based management plans may vary from site to site based on jurisdictional requirements, site complexity, TPDs, and best professional judgment regarding the appropriate use of different assessment techniques. Some attributes of Sediment-RBCA are:  
4.2.1 Description of a tiered approach, including process flow charts, to identify critical steps and provide an overview of the entire RBCA process;  
4.2.2 Identification, development, and use of TPDs throughout the Sediment-RBCA process...
SCOPE
1.1 Sediment-RBCA is based on protecting human health and the environment. The guide supplements the RBCA (Guide E2081) and Eco-RBCA (Guide E2205/E2205M) processes and provides a decision-making process for the management of contaminated sediment. Contaminated sediment sites vary greatly in terms of setting, usage, spatial and temporal complexity, and physical and chemical characteristics; and, therefore, they also vary greatly in terms of the risk that they may pose to human health and the environment. The Sediment-RBCA recognizes this diversity by using a tiered approach for gathering and evaluating data to determine the need for additional evaluation or risk management tailored to site-specific conditions and risks.  
1.2 This guide is intended to help direct and streamline the corrective action process and to complement (but not supersede) jurisdiction-specific guidance and regulations. It can be employed where jurisdiction-specific guidance is absent or insufficiently detailed; it can also assist to unify guidance when overlapping jurisdictions apply. It is compatible with a variety of programmatic guidelines for risk assessment and guidance from US Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), Environment Canada, European, US states, that share the underlying risk assessment approach. In all applications, regulatory agencies should be consulted, as appropriate. Sediment-RBCA is not intended to apply to current permitted releases or permit applications.  
1.3 There are numerous TPDs related to the Sediment-RBCA process. Common examples are defining DQOs, identifying relevant receptors, defining toxicity values for risk evaluation, determining target risk levels, specifying the appropriate statistics and sample sizes, determining exposure assumptions, determining when and how to account for cumulative risks and additive effects among chemical(s) of concern, addressing resource protection, along with remedial action cons...

  • Guide
    71 pages
    English language
    sale 15% off
ASTM
ASTM A370-23(Test Method)
Standard Test Methods and Definitions for Mechanical Testing of Steel Products

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
4.1 The primary use of these test methods is testing to determine the specified mechanical properties of steel, stainless steel, and related alloy products for the evaluation of conformance of such products to a material specification under the jurisdiction of ASTM Committee A01 and its subcommittees as designated by a purchaser in a purchase order or contract.  
4.1.1 These test methods may be and are used by other ASTM Committees and other standards writing bodies for the purpose of conformance testing.  
4.1.2 The material condition at the time of testing, sampling frequency, specimen location and orientation, reporting requirements, and other test parameters are contained in the pertinent material specification or in a general requirement specification for the particular product form.  
4.1.3 Some material specifications require the use of additional test methods not described herein; in such cases, the required test method is described in that material specification or by reference to another appropriate test method standard.  
4.2 These test methods are also suitable to be used for testing of steel, stainless steel and related alloy materials for other purposes, such as incoming material acceptance testing by the purchaser or evaluation of components after service exposure.  
4.2.1 As with any mechanical testing, deviations from either specification limits or expected as-manufactured properties can occur for valid reasons besides deficiency of the original as-fabricated product. These reasons include, but are not limited to: subsequent service degradation from environmental exposure (for example, temperature, corrosion); static or cyclic service stress effects, mechanically-induced damage, material inhomogeneity, anisotropic structure, natural aging of select alloys, further processing not included in the specification, sampling limitations, and measuring equipment calibration uncertainty. There is statistical variation in all aspects of mechanical testin...
SCOPE
1.1 These test methods2 cover procedures and definitions for the mechanical testing of steels, stainless steels, and related alloys. The various mechanical tests herein described are used to determine properties required in the product specifications. Variations in testing methods are to be avoided, and standard methods of testing are to be followed to obtain reproducible and comparable results. In those cases in which the testing requirements for certain products are unique or at variance with these general procedures, the product specification testing requirements shall control.  
1.2 The following mechanical tests are described:    
Sections  
Tension  
7 to 14  
Bend  
15  
Hardness  
16  
Brinell  
17  
Rockwell  
18  
Portable  
19  
Impact  
20 to 30  
Keywords  
32  
1.3 Annexes covering details peculiar to certain products are appended to these test methods as follows:    
Annex  
Bar Products  
Annex A1  
Tubular Products  
Annex A2  
Fasteners  
Annex A3  
Round Wire Products  
Annex A4  
Significance of Notched-Bar Impact Testing  
Annex A5  
Converting Percentage Elongation of Round Specimens to
Equivalents for Flat Specimens  
Annex A6    
Testing Multi-Wire Strand  
Annex A7  
Rounding of Test Data  
Annex A8  
Methods for Testing Steel Reinforcing Bars  
Annex A9  
Procedure for Use and Control of Heat-cycle Simulation  
Annex A10  
1.4 The values stated in inch-pound units are to be regarded as standard. The values given in parentheses are mathematical conversions to SI units that are provided for information only and are not considered standard.  
1.5 When these test methods are referenced in a metric product specification, the yield and tensile values may be determined in inch-pound (ksi) units then converted into SI (MPa) units. The elongation determined in inch-pound gauge lengths of 2 in. or 8 in. may be report...

  • Standard
    51 pages
    English language
    sale 15% off
  • Standard
    51 pages
    English language
    sale 15% off
ASTM
ASTM F3565-23(Practice)
Standard Practice for Electrofusion Joining Polyethylene (PE) Pipe and Fittings for Pressure Pipe Service

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
4.1 Using the procedures and apparatus in Sections 8 and 9 and the manufacturer's instructions, pressure-tight joints as strong as the pipe itself can be made between manufacturer-recommended combinations of pipe and fittings. See Specification F1055 for performance requirements of polyethylene electrofusion fittings.
SCOPE
1.1 This practice describes procedures for making joints suitable for pressure service with polyethylene (PE) pipe and fittings by means of electrofusion joining techniques in, but not limited to, a field environment. Other suitable electrofusion joining procedures are available from various sources including fitting manufacturers. This standard does not purport to address all possible electrofusion joining procedures, or to preclude the use of qualified procedures developed by other parties that have been proven to produce reliable electrofusion joints. (Note 1)
Note 1: Reference to the manufacturer in this practice refers to the electrofusion fitting manufacturer.  
1.2 The parameters and procedure are applicable only to joining polyethylene pipe and fittings (Note 2) which are intended for PE fuel gas pipe per Specification D2513 and PE potable water, sewer and industrial pipe manufactured per Specification F714, Specification D3035, Specification F2619, and AWWA C901 and C906.
Note 2: Commercially available materials classified with a thermoplastic pipe material designation code beginning with PE 14, PE 23, PE 24, PE 27, PE 33, PE 34, PE 36, and PE 46, and PE 47 in accordance with Specification D3350 and Terminology F412 are generally acceptable for electrofusion joining using this practice. Consult with the pipe or fitting manufacturer for specific compatibility information.  
1.3 Parts that are within the dimensional tolerances given in present ASTM specifications are required to produce sound joints between polyethylene pipe and fittings when using the joining techniques described in this practice.  
1.4 The values stated in inch-pound units are to be regarded as standard. The values given in parentheses are mathematical conversions to SI units that are provided for information only and are not considered standard.  
1.5 The text of this practice references notes, footnotes, and appendices which provide explanatory material. These notes and footnotes (excluding those in tables and figures) shall not be considered as requirements of the practice.  
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.

  • Standard
    7 pages
    English language
    sale 15% off
ASTM
ASTM D5141-23(Test Method)
Standard Test Method for Determining Filtering Efficiency and Flow Rate of the Filtration Component of a Sediment Retention Device

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 This test method is used to determine the filtering efficiency and flow rate of the filtration component of a sediment retention device, such as a silt fence, a silt barrier, or a silt curtain, for specific soil tested.  
5.2 This test method may be used for the design of the filtration component of a sediment retention device to meet requirements of regulatory agencies in filtering efficiency or flow rate for the specific soil tested.  
5.2.1 The designer can use this test method to determine the spacing between sediment retention devices.  
5.3 This test method is intended for performance evaluation, as the results will depend on the specific soil evaluated. Unless testing with the default soil is desired, it is recommended that the user or representative perform the test to pre-approve products, as sediment retention device manufacturers are not typically equipped to handle or test soil requirements.  
5.4 This test method provides a means of evaluating the filtration component of sediment retention devices with different soils under various conditions that simulate the conditions that exist in a sediment retention device installation. This test method may be used to simulate several storm events on the same sediment retention device specimen. Therefore, the number of times this test is repeated per specimen is dependent upon the user and the site conditions.
SCOPE
1.1 This test method is used to determine the filtering efficiency and the flow rate of the filtration component of a sediment retention device, such as a silt fence, silt barrier, or inlet protector.  
1.1.1 The results are shown as a percentage for filtering efficiency and cubic metres per square metre per minute (m3/m2/min) or gallons per square foot per minute (gal/ft2/min) for flow rate.  
1.1.2 The filtering efficiency indicates the percent of sediment removed from sediment-laden water.  
1.1.3 The flow rate is the average rate of passage of the sediment-laden water through the filtration component of a sediment retention device.  
1.2 This test method requires several specialized pieces of equipment, such as an integrated water sampler and an analytical balance, or a vacuum filtration system. At the client’s discretion, the test soil is either a site-specific soil or a soil that is representative of a target default gradation.  
1.3 The values stated in SI units are the standard, while the inch-pound units are provided for information. The values expressed in each system may not be exact equivalents; therefore, each system must be used independently of the other, without combining values in any way.  
1.4 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.

  • Standard
    5 pages
    English language
    sale 15% off
  • Standard
    5 pages
    English language
    sale 15% off
ASTM
ASTM F2647-07(2023)(Guide)
Standard Guide for Approved Methods of Installing a CVS (Central Vacuum System)

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
4.1 The suggestions of this guide are intended to provide proper installation materials and practices to be used during the installation of a central-vacuum system.
SCOPE
1.1 This guide demonstrates proper methods for installing a central-vacuum system.  
1.2 Appendix X1 contains additional sources of information that may be helpful to the user of this guide.  
1.3 The values stated in inch-pound units are to be regarded as the standard. The values given in parentheses are for information only.  
1.4 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, 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
ASTM
ASTM F2886-17(2023)(Specification)
Standard Specification for Metal Injection Molded Cobalt-28Chromium-6Molybdenum Components for Surgical Implant Applications

ABSTRACT
This specification covers chemical, mechanical, and metallurgical general requirements for metal injection molded (MIM) cobalt-28chromium-6molybddenum components to be used in manufacturing surgical implants. In this specification, the MIM components covered may have been densified beyond their as-sintered density by post-sinter processing. For the chemical requirements, the components supplied in this specification must conform in accordance to the chemical requirements specified herein in Table 1. The product analysis tolerances must also conform to the product tolerances presented in Table 2. The specification also enumerates the mechanical requirements for MIM components wherein the tensile properties of the MIM must conform to the mechanical properties in Table 3. The microstructural requirements and specimen preparation shall be in accordance with Guide E3 and Practice E407.
SCOPE
1.1 This specification covers chemical, mechanical, and metallurgical requirements for metal injection molded (MIM) cobalt-28chromium-6molybdenum components to be used in the manufacture of surgical implants  
1.2 The MIM components covered by this specification may have been densified beyond their as-sintered density by post-sinter processing.  
1.3 Units—The values stated in either SI units or inch-pound units are to be regarded separately as standard. The values stated in each system may not be exact equivalents; therefore, each system shall be used independently of the other. Combining values from the two systems may result in nonconformance with the standard.  
1.4 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.

  • Technical specification
    5 pages
    English language
    sale 15% off
ASTM
ASTM A480/A480M-23a(Specification)
Standard Specification for General Requirements for Flat-Rolled Stainless and Heat-Resisting Steel Plate, Sheet, and Strip

ABSTRACT
This specification covers general requirements for flat-rolled stainless and heat-resisting steel plate, sheet, and strip. The steel shall be made by one of the following processes: electric-arc, electric-induction, or other suitable processes. Heat and product analyses shall conform to the chemical requirements for each of the specific elements. The material shall undergo mechanical tests such as tension test, hardness test, and bend test. Special tests like intergranular corrosion test, permeability test, Charpy impact testing and tests for detrimental intermetallic phases in wrought duplex stainless steels shall be also be performed when required.
SCOPE
1.1 This specification2 covers a group of general requirements that, unless otherwise specified in the purchase order or in an individual specification, shall apply to rolled steel plate, sheet, and strip, under each of the following specifications issued by ASTM: Specifications A240/A240M, A263, A264, A265, A666, A693, A793, and A895.  
1.2 In the case of conflict between a requirement of a product specification and a requirement of this specification, the product specification shall prevail. In the case of conflict between a requirement of the product specification or a requirement of this specification and a more stringent requirement of the purchase order, the purchase order shall prevail. The purchase order requirements shall not take precedence if they, in any way, violate the requirements of the product specification or this specification; for example, by waiving a test requirement or by making a test requirement less stringent.  
1.3 The values stated in either SI units or inch-pound units are to be regarded separately as standard. The SI units are shown in brackets, except that when A480M is specified, Annex A3 shall apply for the dimensional tolerances and not the bracketed SI values in Annex A2. The values stated in each system are not necessarily exact equivalents; therefore, to ensure conformance with the standard, each system shall be used independently of the other, and values from the two systems shall not be combined.  
1.4 This specification and the applicable material specifications are expressed in both inch-pound and SI units. However, unless the order specifies the applicable “M” specification designation [SI units], the material shall be furnished in inch-pound units.  
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.

  • Technical specification
    26 pages
    English language
    sale 15% off
  • Technical specification
    26 pages
    English language
    sale 15% off
ASTM
ASTM E2552-23(Guide)
Standard Guide for Assessing the Environmental and Human Health Impacts of New Compounds for Military Use

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 The purpose of this guide is to provide a logical, tiered approach in the development of environmental health criteria coincident with level and effort in the research, development, testing, and evaluation of new materials for military use. Various levels of uncertainty are associated with data collected from previous stages. Following the recommendation in the guide should reduce the relative uncertainty of the data collected at each developmental stage. At each stage, a general weight of evidence qualifier shall accompany each exposure/effect relationship. They may be simple (for example, low, medium, or high confidence) or sophisticated using a numerical value for each predictor as a multiplier to ascertain relative confidence in each step of risk characterization. The specific method used will depend on the stage of development, quantity and availability of data, variation in the measurement, and general knowledge of the dataset. Since specific formulations, conditions, and use scenarios may not be known until the later stages, exposure estimates can be determined when practical (for example, Engineering and Manufacturing Development; see 6.6). Exposure data can then be used with other toxicological data collected from previous stages in a quantitative risk assessment to determine the relative degree of hazard.  
5.2 Data developed from the use of this guide are designed to be consistent with criteria required in weapons and weapons system development (for example, programmatic environment, safety and occupational health evaluations, environmental assessments/environmental impact statements, toxicity clearances, and technical data sheets).  
5.3 Information shall be evaluated in a flexible manner consistent with the needs of the authorizing program. This requires proper characterization of the current problem. For example, compounds may be ranked relative to the environmental criteria of the prospective alternatives, the replacement compound, and within bo...
SCOPE
1.1 This guide is intended to determine the relative environmental influence of new substances, consistent with the research and development (R&D) level of effort and is intended to be applied in a logical, tiered manner that parallels both the available funding and the stage of research, development, testing, and evaluation. Specifically, conservative assumptions, relationships, and models are recommended early in the research stage, and as the technology is matured, empirical data will be developed and used. Munition constituents are included and may include propellants, oxidizers, explosives, binders, stabilizers, metals, dyes, and other compounds used in the formulation to produce a desired effect. Munition systems range from projectiles, grenades, rockets/missiles, training simulators, to smokes and obscurants. Given the complexity of issues involved in the assessment of environmental fate and effects and the diversity of the systems used, this guide is broad in scope and not intended to address every factor that may be important in an environmental context. Rather, it is intended to reduce uncertainty at minimal cost by considering the most important factors related to human health and environmental impacts of energetic materials. This guide provides an outline for collecting data useful in a relative ranking procedure to provide the systems scientist with a sound basis for prospectively determining a selection of candidates based on environmental and human health criteria. The general principles in this guide are applicable to substances other than energetics if intended to be used in a similar manner with similar exposure profiles.  
1.2 The scope of this guide includes:  
1.2.1 Energetic and other new/novel materials and compositions in all stages of research, development, test and evaluation.  
1.2.2 Environmental assessment, including:
1.2.2.1 Human and ecological effects of the unexploded energetics and ...

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