77.040.99 (Other methods of testing metals) 标准查询与下载

ASTM A1084-15 检测贫双相奥氏体/铁素体不锈钢中有害相的标准试验方法

4.1 Test Method A shall only be used to supplement the results of Test Methods B and C. It shall not be used as a rejection criterion, nor shall it be used as an acceptance criterion. Test Methods B and C are intended to be the procedures giving the acceptance criteria for this standard. 4.2 Test Method A can reveal potentially detrimental phases in the metallographic structure. As the precipitated detrimental phases can be very small, this test demands high proficiency from the metallographer, especially for thinner material. 4.3 The presence of detrimental phases is readily detected by Test Methods B and C provided that a sample of appropriate location and orientation is selected. 4.4 The tests do not determine the precise nature of the detrimental phase but rather the presence or absence to the extent that the normally expected toughness and corrosion resistance of the material are significantly affected. 4.5 This standard covers testing of samples taken from coil, coil- and plate mill plate, sheet, tubing, piping, bar and deformed bar, though some of these products might not be suitable for testing according to Method B (see Test Method B for further details). Other product forms have thus far not been sufficiently tested and documented to be an integral part of this standard, though the standard does not prohibit testing of these product forms according to the three test methods. For these other product forms, this standard gives only limited and non-exhaustive guidance as to interpretation of result and associated acceptance criteria. 4.6 Testing on product forms outside the present scope of this standard shall be agreed between purchaser and supplier. 1.1 The purpose of this test method is to allow detection of the presence of detrimental chromium-containing phases in selected lean duplex stainless steels to the extent that toughness or corrosion resistance is affected significantly. Such phases can form during manufacture and fabrication of lean duplex products. This test method does not necessarily detect losses of toughness nor corrosion resistance attributable to other causes, nor will it identify the exact type of detrimental phases that caused any loss of toughness or corrosion resistance. The test result is a simple pass/fail statement. 1.2 Lean duplex (austenitic-ferritic) stainless steels are typically duplex stainless steels composed of 30 to 708201;% ferrite content with a typical alloy composition having Cr > 178201;% and Mo < 18201;% and with additions of Nickel, Manganese, Nitrogen and controlled low carbon content as well as other alloying elements. This standard test method applies only to those alloys listed in Table 1. Similar test methods for some higher alloyed duplex stainless steels are described in Test Methods A923, but the procedures described in this standard differ significantly for all three methods from the ones described in Test Methods A923. 1.3x0......

Standard Test Method for Detecting Detrimental Phases in Lean Duplex Austenitic/Ferritic Stainless Steels

ASTM E826-14 采用火花原子发射光谱法测试固态同规格金属或金属批同质性的标准实施规程

5.1 The purpose of this practice is to evaluate the homogeneity of a lot of material selected as a candidate for development as a reference material or certified reference material, or for a L/B selected for some other purpose (see Appendix X1 – Appendix X4 for examples). 5.2 This practice is applicable to the testing of samples taken at various stages during production. For example, continuous cast materials, ingots, rolled bars, wire, etc., could be sampled at various stages during the production process and tested. 1.1 This practice is suitable for testing the homogeneity of a metal lot or batch (L/B) in solid form by spark atomic emission spectrometry (Spark-AES). It is compliant with ISO Guide 35—Certification of Reference Materials: General and Statistical Principles. It is primarily intended for use in the development of reference materials but may be used in any other application where a L/B is to be tested for homogeneity. It is designed to provide a combined study of within-unit and between-unit homogeneity of such a L/B. 1.2 This practice is designed primarily to test for elemental homogeneity of a metal L/B by Spark-AES. However, it can be adapted for use with other instrumental techniques such as X-ray fluorescence spectrometry (XRF) or atomic absorption spectrometry (AAS).Note 1—This practice is not limited to elemental analysis or techniques. This practice can be applied to any property that can be measured, for example, the property of hardness as measured by the Rockwell technique. 1.3 The criteria for acceptance of the test specimens must be previously determined. That is, the maximum acceptable level of heterogeneity must be determined on the basis of the intended use of the L/B. 1.4 It is assumed that the analyst is trained in Spark-AES techniques including the specimen preparation procedures needed to make specimens ready for measurements. It is further assumed that the analyst is versed in and has access to computer-based data capture and analysis. The methodology of this practice is best utilized in a computer based spreadsheet. 1.5 This practice can be applied to one or more elements in a specimen provided the signal-to-background ratio is not a limiting factor. 1.6 This practice includes methods to correct for systematic drift of the instrument with time. (Warning—If drift occurs, erroneous conclusions will be obtained from the data analysis.) 1.7 This practice also includes methods to refine estimates of composition and uncertainty through the use of a type standard or multiple calibrants. 1.8 It further provides a means of reducing a nonhomogeneous set to a homogeneous subset. 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 and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.

Standard Practice for Testing Homogeneity of a Metal Lot or Batch in Solid Form by Spark Atomic Emission Spectrometry

ASTM A923-14 测定双联奥氏体/铁素体不锈钢不稳定金属间相的标准试验方法

1.1 The purpose of these test methods is to allow detection of the presence of intermetallic phases in duplex stainless steels to the extent that toughness or corrosion resistance is affected significantly. These test methods will not necessarily detect losses of toughness or corrosion resistance attributable to other causes. 1.2 Duplex (austenitic-ferritic) stainless steels are susceptible to the formation of intermetallic compounds during exposures in the temperature range from approximately 600 to 1750°F (320 to 955°C). The speed of these precipitation reactions is a function of composition and thermal or thermomechanical history of each individual piece. The presence of these phases is detrimental to toughness and corrosion resistance. 1.3 Correct heat treatment of duplex stainless steels can eliminate these detrimental phases. Rapid cooling of the product provides the maximum resistance to formation of detrimental phases by subsequent thermal exposures. 1.4 Compliance with the chemical and mechanical requirements for the applicable product specification does not necessarily indicate the absence of detrimental phases in the product. 1.5 These test methods include the following: 1.5.1 Test Method A—Sodium Hydroxide Etch Test for Classification of Etch Structures of Duplex Stainless Steels (Sections 3 – 7). 1.5.2 Test Method B—Charpy Impact Test for Classification of Structures of Duplex Stainless Steels (Sections 8 – 13). 1.5.3 Test Method C—Ferric Chloride Corrosion Test for Classification of Structures of Duplex Stainless Steels (Sections 14 – 20). 1.6 The presence of detrimental intermetallic phases is readily detected in all three tests, provided that a sample of appropriate location and orientation is selected. Because the occurrence of intermetallic phases is a function of temperature and cooling rate, it is essential that the tests be applied to the region of the material experiencing the conditions most likely to promote the formation of an intermetallic phase. In the case of common heat treatment, this region will be that which cooled most slowly. Except for rapidly cooled material, it may be necessary to sample from a location determined to be the most slowly cooled for the material piece to be characterized. 1.7 The tests do not determine the precise nature of the detrimental phase but rather the presence or absence of an intermetallic phase to the extent that it is detrimental to the toughness and corrosion resistance of the material. 1.8 Examples of the corr......

Standard Test Methods for Detecting Detrimental Intermetallic Phase in Duplex Austenitic/Ferritic Stainless Steels

ASTM E82/E82M-14 测定金属晶体取向的标准试验方法

4.1 The physical properties of metals and other materials are often anisotropic (for example: Young''s modulus will typically vary in different crystallographic directions). As such, it is often desirable or necessary to determine the orientation of a single crystal to ascertain the relation of any pertinent physical properties with respect to different directions in the material. 4.2 This test method can be used commercially as a quality control test in production situations in which a desired orientation, within prescribed limits, is required. 4.3 With the use of an adjustable, fixed holder that can later be mounted on a saw, lathe, or other machine, a single crystal material can be moved to a preferred orientation and subsequently sectioned, ground, or processed otherwise. 4.4 If the grains in a polycrystalline material are large enough, this test method can also be used to determine their orientations and differences in orientation can be documented or mapped or both. 1.1 This test method covers the back-reflection Laue procedure for determining the orientation of a metal crystal. The back-reflection Laue method for determining crystal orientation may be applied to macrograins and micrograins depending on the beam size within polycrystalline aggregates, as well as to single crystals of any size. This test method is described with reference to cubic crystals and other structures such as: hexagonal, tetragonal, or orthorhombic crystals. 1.2 Most natural crystals have well developed external faces, and the orientation of such crystals can usually be determined from inspection. The orientation of a crystal having poorly developed faces or no faces at all (for example, a metal crystal prepared in the laboratory) shall be determined by more elaborate methods. The most convenient and accurate of these involves the use of X-ray diffraction. The “orientation of a metal crystal” is known when the positions in space of the crystallographic axes of the unit cell have been located with reference to the surface geometry of the crystal specimen. This relation between unit cell position and surface geometry is most conveniently expressed by stereographic or gnomonic projection. 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 non-conformance with the standard. 1.4 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.

Standard Test Method for Determining the Orientation of a Metal Crystal

ASTM E340-13 金属和合金宏观腐蚀的标准试验方法

3.1 Applications of Macroetching : 3.1.1 Macroetching is used to reveal the heterogeneity of metals and alloys. Metallographic specimens and chemical analyses will provide the necessary detailed information about specific localities but they cannot give data about variation from one place to another unless an inordinate number of specimens are taken. 3.1.2 Macroetching, on the other hand, will provide information on variations in (1) structure, such as grain size, flow lines, columnar structure, dendrites, etc.; (2) variations in chemical composition as evidenced by segregation, carbide and ferrite banding, coring, inclusions, and depth of carburization or decarburization. The information provided about variations in chemical composition is strictly qualitative but the location of extremes in segregation will be shown. Chemical analyses or other means of determining the chemical composition would have to be performed to determine the extent of variation. Macroetching will also show the presence of discontinuities and voids, such as seams, laps, porosity, flakes, bursts, extrusion rupture, cracks, etc. 3.1.3 Other applications of macroetching in the fabrication of metals are the study of weld structure, definition of weld penetration, dilution of filler metal by base metals, entrapment of flux, porosity, and cracks in weld and heat affected zones, etc. It is also used in the heat-treating shop to determine location of hard or soft spots, tong marks, quenching cracks, case depth in shallow-hardening steels, case depth in carburization of dies, effectiveness of stop-off coatings in carburization, etc. In the machine shop, it can be used for the determination of grinding cracks in tools and dies. 3.1.4 Macroetching is used extensively for quality control in the steel industry, to determine the tone of a heat in billets with respect to inclusions, segregation, and structure. Forge shops, in addition, use macroetching to reveal flow lines in setting up the best forging practice, die design, and metal flow. For an example of the use of macroetching in the steel forging industry see Method E381. Forging shops and foundries also use macroetching to determine the presence of internal faults and surface defects. The copper industry uses macroetching for control of surface porosity in wire bar. In the aluminum industry, macroetching is used to evaluate extrusions as well as the other products such as forgings, sheets, etc. Defects such as coring, cracks, and porthole die welds are identified. 1.1 These test procedures describe the methods of macroetching metals and alloys to reveal their macrostructure. 1.2 The values stated in inch-pound units are to be regarded as standard. The values given in parentheses are mathematical conversions to SI units that are provided for information only and are not considered standard. 1.3 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use. For specific warning statements, see 6.2, 7.1, 8.1.3, 8.2.1, 8.8.3, 8.10.1.1, and 8.13.2.

Standard Test Method for Macroetching Metals and Alloys

ASTM E45-13 测定钢中杂质含量的标准试验方法

4.1 These test methods cover four macroscopic and five microscopic test methods (manual and image analysis) for describing the inclusion content of steel and procedures for expressing test results. 4.2 Inclusions are characterized by size, shape, concentration, and distribution rather than chemical composition. Although compositions are not identified, Microscopic methods place inclusions into one of several composition-related categories (sulfides, oxides, and silicates—the last as a type of oxide). Paragraph 12.2.1 describes a metallographic technique to facilitate inclusion discrimination. Only those inclusions present at the test surface can be detected. 4.3 The macroscopic test methods evaluate larger surface areas than microscopic test methods and because examination is visual or at low magnifications, these methods are best suited for detecting larger inclusions. Macroscopic methods are not suitable for detecting inclusions smaller than about 0.40 mm (1/64 in.) in length and the methods do not discriminate inclusions by type. 4.4 The microscopic test methods are employed to characterize inclusions that form as a result of deoxidation or due to limited solubility in solid steel (indigenous inclusions). As stated in 1.1, these microscopic test methods rate inclusion severities and types based on morphological type, that is, by size, shape, concentration, and distribution, but not specifically by composition. These inclusions are characterized by morphological type, that is, by size, shape, concentration, and distribution, but not specifically by composition. The microscopic methods are not intended for assessing the content of exogenous inclusions (those from entrapped slag or refractories). In case of a dispute whether an inclusion is indigenous or exogenous, microanalytical techniques such as energy dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (EDS) may be used to aid in determining the nature of the inclusion. However, experience and knowledge of the casting process and production materials, such as deoxidation, desulfurization, and inclusion shape control additives as well as refractory and furnace liner compositions must be employed with the microanalytical results to determine if an inclusion is indigenous or exogenous 4.5 Because the inclusion population within a given lot of steel varies with position, the lot must be statistically sampled in order to assess its inclusion content. The degree of sampling must be adequate for the lot size and its specific characteristics. Materials with very low inclusion contents may be more accurately rated by automatic image analysis, which permits more precise microscopic ratings. 4.6 Results of macroscopic and microscopic test methods may be used to qualify material for shipment, but these test methods do not provide guidelines for acceptance or rejection purposes. Qualification criteria for assessing the data developed by these methods can be found in ASTM product standards or may be described by purchaser-producer agreements. By agreements between producer and purchaser, these test methods may be modified to count only certain inclusion types and thicknesses, or only those inclusions above a certain severity level, or both. Also, by agreement, qualitative practices may be used where only the highest severi......

Standard Test Methods for Determining the Inclusion Content of Steel

ASTM E96/E96M-13 材料的水蒸气渗透性的标准试验方法

5.1 The purpose of these tests is to obtain, by means of simple apparatus, reliable values of water vapor transfer through permeable and semipermeable materials, expressed in suitable units. These values are for use in design, manufacture, and marketing. A permeance value obtained under one set of test conditions may not indicate the value under a different set of conditions. For this reason, the test conditions should be selected that most closely approach the conditions of use. While any set of conditions may be used and those conditions reported, standard conditions that have been useful are shown in Appendix X1. 1.1 These test methods cover the determination of water vapor transmission (WVT) of materials through which the passage of water vapor may be of importance, such as paper, plastic films, other sheet materials, fiberboards, gypsum and plaster products, wood products, and plastics. The test methods are limited to specimens not over 11/4 in. [32 mm] in thickness except as provided in Section 9. Two basic methods, the Desiccant Method and the Water Method, are provided for the measurement of permeance, and two variations include service conditions with one side wetted and service conditions with low humidity on one side and high humidity on the other. Agreement should not be expected between results obtained by different methods. The method should be selected that more nearly approaches the conditions of use. 1.2 The values stated in either SI units or inch-pound units are to be regarded separately as standard. The values stated in each system may not be exact equivalents; therefore, each system shall be used independently of the other. Combining values from the two systems may result in non-conformance with the standard. However, derived results can be converted from one system to the other using appropriate conversion factors (see Table 1).TABLE 1 Metric Units and Conversion FactorsA,B Multiply by To Obtain (for the same test condition) WVT 8199;g/h·m2 1.43 8199;8199;grains/h·ft2 8199;grains/h·ft2

Standard Test Methods for Water Vapor Transmission of Materials

ASTM A1084-13 检测精双相奥氏体/铁素体不锈钢有害相的标准试验方法

4.1 Test Method A shall only be used to supplement the results of Test Methods B and C. It shall not be used as a rejection criterion, nor shall it be used as an acceptance criterion. Test Methods B and C are intended to be the procedures giving the acceptance criteria for this standard. 4.2 Test Method A can reveal potentially detrimental phases in the metallographic structure. As the precipitated detrimental phases can be very small, this test demands high proficiency from the metallographer, especially for thinner material. 4.3 The presence of detrimental phases is readily detected by Test Methods B and C provided that a sample of appropriate location and orientation is selected. 4.4 The tests do not determine the precise nature of the detrimental phase but rather the presence or absence to the extent that the normally expected toughness and corrosion resistance of the material are significantly affected. 4.5 This standard covers testing of samples taken from coil, coil- and plate mill plate, sheet, tubing, piping, bar and deformed bar, though some of these products might not be suitable for testing according to Method B (see Test Method B for further details). Other product forms have thus far not been sufficiently tested and documented to be an integral part of this standard, though the standard does not prohibit testing of these product forms according to the three test methods. For these other product forms, this standard gives only limited and non-exhaustive guidance as to interpretation of result and associated acceptance criteria. 4.6 Testing on product forms outside the present scope of this standard shall be agreed between purchaser and supplier. 1.1 The purpose of this test method is to allow detection of the presence of detrimental chromium-containing phases in selected lean duplex stainless steels to the extent that toughness or corrosion resistance is affected significantly. Such phases can form during manufacture and fabrication of lean duplex products. This test method does not necessarily detect losses of toughness nor corrosion resistance attributable to other causes, nor will it identify the exact type of detrimental phases that caused any loss of toughness or corrosion resistance. The test result is a simple pass/fail statement. 1.2 Lean duplex (austenitic-ferritic) stainless steels are typically duplex stainless steels composed of 30-708201;% ferrite content with a typical alloy composition having Cr gt; 178201;% and Mo lt; 18201;% and with additions of Nickel, Manganese, Nitrogen and controlled low carbon content as well as other alloying elements. This standard test method applies only to those alloys listed in Table 1. Similar test methods for some higher alloyed duplex stainless steels are described in ASTM A923, but the procedures described in this standard differ significantly for all three methods from the ones described in A923.TABLE 1 List of the Lean Dup......

Standard Test Method for Detecting Detrimental Phases in Lean Duplex Austenitic/Ferritic Stainless Steels

ASTM E96/E96M-12 材料水蒸气透过性的标准试验方法

5.1 The purpose of these tests is to obtain, by means of simple apparatus, reliable values of water vapor transfer through permeable and semipermeable materials, expressed in suitable units. These values are for use in design, manufacture, and marketing. A permeance value obtained under one set of test conditions may not indicate the value under a different set of conditions. For this reason, the test conditions should be selected that most closely approach the conditions of use. While any set of conditions may be used and those conditions reported, standard conditions that have been useful are shown in Appendix X1. 1.1 These test methods cover the determination of water vapor transmission (WVT) of materials through which the passage of water vapor may be of importance, such as paper, plastic films, other sheet materials, fiberboards, gypsum and plaster products, wood products, and plastics. The test methods are limited to specimens not over 11/4 in. (32 mm) in thickness except as provided in Section 9. Two basic methods, the Desiccant Method and the Water Method, are provided for the measurement of permeance, and two variations include service conditions with one side wetted and service conditions with low humidity on one side and high humidity on the other. Agreement should not be expected between results obtained by different methods. The method should be selected that more nearly approaches the conditions of use. 1.2 The values stated in either SI units or inch-pound units are to be regarded separately as standard. The values stated in each system may not be exact equivalents; therefore, each system shall be used independently of the other. Combining values from the two systems may result in non-conformance with the standard. However, derived results can be converted from one system to the other using appropriate conversion factors (see Table 1).TABLE 1 Metric Units and Conversion FactorsA,B Multiply by To Obtain (for the same test condition) WVT 8199;g/h·m2 1.43

Standard Test Methods for Water Vapor Transmission of Materials

ASTM A912/A912M-11 利用瓦特计-安培计-伏特计法,借助环形样品,测定无定型材料在电源频率下的交流电磁特性的标准试验方法

This test method provides a satisfactory means of determining various ac magnetic properties of amorphous magnetic materials. The procedures described herein are suitable for use by producers and users of magnetic materials for materials specification acceptance and manufacturing control. The procedures described herein may be adapted for use with specimens of other alloys and other toroidal forms.1.1 This test method covers tests for various magnetic properties of amorphous materials at power frequencies [25 to 400 Hz] using a toroidal test transformer. The term “toroidal test transformer” is used to describe the test device, reserving the term “specimen” to refer to the material used in the test. The test specimen consists of toroidally wound flat strip. 1.2 This test method covers the determination of core loss, exciting power, rms and peak exciting current, several types of ac permeability, and related properties under ac magnetization at moderate and high inductions at power frequencies [25 to 70 Hz]. 1.3 With proper instrumentation and specimen preparation, this test method is acceptable for measurements at frequencies from 5 Hz to 100 kHz. Proper instrumentation implies that all test instruments have the required frequency bandwidth. Also see Annex A2. 1.4 This test method also provides procedures for calculating impedance permeability from measured values of rms exciting current and for calculating ac peak permeability from measured peak values of total exciting current at magnetic field strengths up to about 10 Oe [796 A/m]. 1.5 Explanations of symbols and brief definitions appear in the text of this test method. The official symbols and definitions are listed in Terminology A340. 1.6 This test method shall be used in conjunction with Practice A34/A34M. 1.7 The values and equations stated in customary (cgs-emu and inch-pound) units or SI units are to be regarded separately as standard. Within this standard, SI units are shown in brackets. 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 this standard. 1.8 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.

Standard Test Method for Alternating-Current Magnetic Properties of Amorphous Materials at Power Frequencies Using Wattmeter-Ammeter-Voltmeter Method with Toroidal Specimens

ASTM E45-11 测定钢中杂质含量的标准试验方法

These test methods cover four macroscopic and five microscopic test methods (manual and image analysis) for describing the inclusion content of steel and procedures for expressing test results. Inclusions are characterized by size, shape, concentration, and distribution rather than chemical composition. Although compositions are not identified, Microscopic methods place inclusions into one of several composition-related categories (sulfides, oxides, and silicatesthe last as a type of oxide). Paragraph 12.2.1 describes a metallographic technique to facilitate inclusion discrimination. Only those inclusions present at the test surface can be detected. The macroscopic test methods evaluate larger surface areas than microscopic test methods and because examination is visual or at low magnifications, these methods are best suited for detecting larger inclusions. Macroscopic methods are not suitable for detecting inclusions smaller than about 0.40 mm (1/64 in.) in length and the methods do not discriminate inclusions by type. The microscopic test methods are employed to characterize inclusions that form as a result of deoxidation or due to limited solubility in solid steel (indigenous inclusions). As stated in 1.1, these microscopic test methods rate inclusion severities and types based on morphological type, that is, by size, shape, concentration, and distribution, but not specifically by composition. These inclusions are characterized by morphological type, that is, by size, shape, concentration, and distribution, but not specifically by composition. The microscopic methods are not intended for assessing the content of exogenous inclusions (those from entrapped slag or refractories). In case of a dispute whether an inclusion is indigenous or exogenous, microanalytical techniques such as energy dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (EDS) may be used to aid in determining the nature of the inclusion. However, experience and knowledge of the casting process and production materials, such as deoxidation, desulfurization, and inclusion shape control additives as well as refractory and furnace liner compositions must be employed with the microanalytical results to determine if an inclusion is indigenous or exogenous Because the inclusion population within a given lot of steel varies with position, the lot must be statistically sampled in order to assess its inclusion content. The degree of sampling must be adequate for the lot size and its specific characteristics. Materials with very low inclusion contents may be more accurately rated by automatic image analysis, which permits more precise microscopic ratings. Results of macroscopic and microscopic test methods may be used to qualify material for shipment, but these test methods do not provide guidelines for acceptance or rejection purposes. Qualification criteria for assessing the data developed by these methods can be found in ASTM product standards or may be described by purchaser-producer agreements. By agreements between producer and purchaser, this practice may be modified to count only certain inclusion types and thicknesses, or only those inclusions above a certain severity level, or both. Also, by agreement, qualitative practices may be used where only the highest severity ratings for each inclusion type and thickness are defined or the number of fields containing these highest severity ratings are tabulated. These test methods are intended for use on wrought metallic structures. While a minimum level of deformation is not specified, the test methods are not suitable for use on cast structures or on lightly worked structures. Guidelines are provided to rate inclusions in steels treated with rare earth additions or calcium-bearing compounds. When such steels are evaluated, the test report should describe the nature of the inclusions rated according to each inclusion categor......

Standard Test Methods for Determining the Inclusion Content of Steel

ASTM E45-11a 测定钢中杂质含量的标准试验方法

These test methods cover four macroscopic and five microscopic test methods (manual and image analysis) for describing the inclusion content of steel and procedures for expressing test results. Inclusions are characterized by size, shape, concentration, and distribution rather than chemical composition. Although compositions are not identified, Microscopic methods place inclusions into one of several composition-related categories (sulfides, oxides, and silicatesthe last as a type of oxide). Paragraph 12.2.1 describes a metallographic technique to facilitate inclusion discrimination. Only those inclusions present at the test surface can be detected. The macroscopic test methods evaluate larger surface areas than microscopic test methods and because examination is visual or at low magnifications, these methods are best suited for detecting larger inclusions. Macroscopic methods are not suitable for detecting inclusions smaller than about 0.40 mm (1/64 in.) in length and the methods do not discriminate inclusions by type. The microscopic test methods are employed to characterize inclusions that form as a result of deoxidation or due to limited solubility in solid steel (indigenous inclusions). As stated in 1.1, these microscopic test methods rate inclusion severities and types based on morphological type, that is, by size, shape, concentration, and distribution, but not specifically by composition. These inclusions are characterized by morphological type, that is, by size, shape, concentration, and distribution, but not specifically by composition. The microscopic methods are not intended for assessing the content of exogenous inclusions (those from entrapped slag or refractories). In case of a dispute whether an inclusion is indigenous or exogenous, microanalytical techniques such as energy dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (EDS) may be used to aid in determining the nature of the inclusion. However, experience and knowledge of the casting process and production materials, such as deoxidation, desulfurization, and inclusion shape control additives as well as refractory and furnace liner compositions must be employed with the microanalytical results to determine if an inclusion is indigenous or exogenous Because the inclusion population within a given lot of steel varies with position, the lot must be statistically sampled in order to assess its inclusion content. The degree of sampling must be adequate for the lot size and its specific characteristics. Materials with very low inclusion contents may be more accurately rated by automatic image analysis, which permits more precise microscopic ratings. Results of macroscopic and microscopic test methods may be used to qualify material for shipment, but these test methods do not provide guidelines for acceptance or rejection purposes. Qualification criteria for assessing the data developed by these methods can be found in ASTM product standards or may be described by purchaser-producer agreements. By agreements between producer and purchaser, these test methods may be modified to count only certain inclusion types and thicknesses, or only those inclusions above a certain severity level, or both. Also, by agreement, qualitative practices may be used where only the highest severity ratings for each inclusion type and thickness are defined or the number of fields containing these highest severity ratings are tabulated. These test methods are intended for use on wrought metallic structures. While a minimum level of deformation is not specified, the test methods are not suitable for use on cast structures or on lightly worked structures. Guidelines are provided to rate inclusions in steels treated with rare earth additions or calcium-bearing compounds. When such steels are evaluated, the test report should describe the nature of the inclusions rated according to each inclusion ca......

Standard Test Methods for Determining the Inclusion Content of Steel

ASTM E1916-11 混合金属识别的标准指南

Equipment and procedures described in this guide are comparative methods and are intended for identification or segregation, or both, of pieces or lots of metals that were mixed or lost their identity during certain manufacturing operations. It is presumed that all pieces or lots of metal have been previously checked and did meet applicable specifications. The equipment and procedures described in this guide may also be suitable for identifying or segregating, or both, scrap metals.1.1 This guide covers the identification or segregation, or both, of mixed metal lots under plant conditions using trained plant personnel. 1.2 The identification is not intended to have the accuracy and reliability of procedures performed in a laboratory using laboratory equipment under optimum conditions, and performed by trained chemists or technicians. The identification is not intended to establish whether a given piece or lot of metal meets specifications. 1.3 Segregation of certain metal combinations is not always possible with procedures provided in this guide and can be subject to errors. 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.

Standard Guide for Identification of Mixed Lots of Metals

ASTM E3-11 金相试样制备标准指南

Microstructures have a strong influence on the properties and successful application of metals and alloys. Determination and control of microstructure requires the use of metallographic examination. Many specifications contain a requirement regarding microstructure; hence, a major use for metallographic examination is inspection to ensure that the requirement is met. Other major uses for metallographic examination are in failure analysis, and in research and development. Proper choice of specimen location and orientation will minimize the number of specimens required and simplify their interpretation. It is easy to take too few specimens for study, but it is seldom that too many are studied.1.1 The primary objective of metallographic examinations is to reveal the constituents and structure of metals and their alloys by means of a light optical or scanning electron microscope. In special cases, the objective of the examination may require the development of less detail than in other cases but, under nearly all conditions, the proper selection and preparation of the specimen is of major importance. Because of the diversity in available equipment and the wide variety of problems encountered, the following text presents for the guidance of the metallographer only those practices which experience has shown are generally satisfactory; it cannot and does not describe the variations in technique required to solve individual specimen preparation problems. Note 18212;For a more extensive description of various metallographic techniques, refer to Samuels, L. E., Metallographic Polishing by Mechanical Methods, American Society for Metals (ASM) Metals Park, OH, 3rd Ed., 1982; Petzow, G., Metallographic Etching, ASM, 1978; and VanderVoort, G., Metallography: Principles and Practice, McGraw Hill, NY, 2nd Ed., 1999. 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 and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.

Standard Guide for Preparation of Metallographic Specimens

ASTM A1033-10 亚共析碳钢和低合金钢相位变换的定量测量和报告的标准规程

This practice is used to provide steel phase transformation data required for use in numerical models for the prediction of microstructures, properties, and distortion during steel manufacturing, forging, casting, heat treatment, and welding. Alternatively, the practice provides end users of steel and fabricated steel products the phase transformation data required for selecting steel grades for a given application by determining the microstructure resulting from a prescribed thermal cycle. There are available several computer models designed to predict the microstructures, mechanical properties, and distortion of steels as a function of thermal processing cycle. Their use is predicated on the availability of accurate and consistent thermal and transformation strain data. Strain, both thermal and transformation, developed during thermal cycling is the parameter used in predicting both microstructure and properties, and for estimating distortion. It should be noted that these models are undergoing continued development. This process is aimed, among other things, at establishing a direct link between discrete values of strain and specific microstructure constituents in steels. This practice describes a standardized method for measuring strain during a defined thermal cycle. This practice is suitable for providing data for computer models used in the control of steel manufacturing, forging, casting, heat-treating, and welding processes. It is also useful in providing data for the prediction of microstructures and properties to assist in steel alloy selection for end-use applications. This practice is suitable for providing the data needed for the construction of transformation diagrams that depict the microstructures developed during the thermal processing of steels as functions of time and temperature. Such diagrams provide a qualitative assessment of the effects of changes in thermal cycle on steel microstructure. Appendix X2 describes construction of these diagrams. It should be recognized that thermal and transformation strains, which develop in steels during thermal cycling, are sensitive to chemical composition. Thus, anisotropy in chemical composition can result in variability in strain, and can affect the results of strain determinations, especially determination of volumetric strain. Strains determined during cooling are sensitive to the grain size of austenite, which is determined by the heating cycle. The most consistent results are obtained when austenite grain size is maintained between ASTM grain sizes of 5 to 8. Finally, the eutectoid carbon content is defined as 0.8 % for carbon steels. Additions of alloying elements can change this value, along with Ac1 and Ac3 temperatures. Heating cycles need to be employed, as described below, to ensure complete formation of austenite preceding strain measurements during cooling.1.1 This practice covers the determination of hypoeutectoid steel phase transformation behavior by using high-speed dilatometry techniques for measuring linear dimensional change as a function of time and temperature, and reporting the results as linear strain in either a numerical or graphical format. 1.2 The practice is applicable to high-speed dilatometry equipment capable of programmable thermal profiles and with digital data storage and output capability. 1.3 This practice is applicable to the determination of steel phase transformation behavior under both isothermal and continuous cooling conditions. 1.4 This practice includes requirements for obtaining metallographic information to be used as a supplement to the dilatometry measurements. 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 a......

Standard Practice for Quantitative Measurement and Reporting of Hypoeutectoid Carbon and Low-Alloy Steel Phase Transformations

ASTM G113-09 与非金属材料自然和人工风化试验相关的标准术语

This terminology is not intended to supersede the requirements of similar definitions in certain other documents, but is intended to provide a listing of terms that are in current widespread usage, and their context in relation to weathering.1.1 This terminology standard covers terms that relate to the durability testing of Nonmetallic Materials using natural and artificial weathering exposure techniques. 1.2 It is the intent of this terminology standard to include those weathering terms in wide use in ASTM for which standard definitions appear desirable.

Standard Terminology Relating to Natural and Artificial Weathering Tests of Nonmetallic Materials

ASTM F1710-08 应用高质量分辩率辉光放电质谱计测定电子级钛中微量金属杂质的标准试验方法

This test method is intended for application in the semiconductor industry for evaluating the purity of materials (for example, sputtering targets, evaporation sources) used in thin film metallization processes. This test method may be useful in additional applications, not envisioned by the responsible technical committee, as agreed upon between the parties concerned. This test method is intended for use by GDMS analysts in various laboratories for unifying the protocol and parameters for determining trace impurities in pure titanium. The objective is to improve laboratory to laboratory agreement of analysis data. This test method is also directed to the users of GDMS analyses as an aid to understanding the determination method, and the significance and reliability of reported GDMS data. For most metallic species the detection limit for routine analysis is on the order of 0.01 weight ppm. With special precautions detection limits to sub-ppb levels are possible. This test method may be used as a referee method for producers and users of electronic-grade titanium materials.1.1 This test method covers the determination of concentrations of trace metallic impurities in high purity titanium. 1.2 This test method pertains to analysis by magnetic-sector glow discharge mass spectrometer (GDMS). 1.3 The titanium matrix must be 99.9 weight % (3N-grade) pure, or purer, with respect to metallic impurities. There must be no major alloy constituent, for example, aluminum or iron, greater than 1000 weight ppm in concentration. 1.4 This test method does not include all the information needed to complete GDMS analyses. Sophisticated computer-controlled laboratory equipment skillfully used by an experienced operator is required to achieve the required sensitivity. This test method does cover the particular factors (for example, specimen preparation, setting of relative sensitivity factors, determination of sensitivity limits, etc.) known by the responsible technical committee to effect the reliability of high purity titanium analyses. 1.5 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.

Standard Test Method for Trace Metallic Impurities in Electronic Grade Titanium by High Mass-Resolution Glow Discharge Mass Spectrometer

ASTM E826-08(2013) 采用火花原子发射光谱法测试固态同规格金属或金属批同质性的标准实施规程

5.1 The purpose of this practice is to evaluate the homogeneity of a lot of material selected as a candidate for development as a reference material or certified reference material, or for a L/B selected for some other purpose (see Appendix X1-Appendix X4 for examples). 5.2 This practice is applicable to the testing of samples taken at various stages during production. For example, continuous cast materials, ingots, rolled bars, wire, etc., could be sampled at various stages during the production process and tested. 1.1 This practice is suitable for testing the homogeneity of a metal lot or batch (L/B) in solid form by spark atomic emission spectrometry (Spark-AES). It is compliant with ISO Guide 35—Certification of Reference Materials: General and Statistical Principles. It is primarily intended for use in the development of reference materials but may be used in any other application where a L/B is to be tested for homogeneity. It is designed to provide a combined study of within-unit and between-unit homogeneity of such a L/B. 1.2 This practice is designed primarily to test for elemental homogeneity of a metal L/B by Spark-AES. However, it can be adapted for use with other instrumental techniques such as X-ray fluorescence spectrometry (XRF) or atomic absorption spectrometry (AAS).Note 1—This practice is not limited to elemental analysis or techniques. This practice can be applied to any property that can be measured, for example, the property of hardness as measured by the Rockwell technique. 1.3 The criteria for acceptance of the test specimens must be previously determined. That is, the maximum acceptable level of heterogeneity must be determined on the basis of the intended use of the L/B. 1.4 It is assumed that the analyst is trained in Spark-AES techniques including the specimen preparation procedures needed to make specimens ready for measurements. It is further assumed that the analyst is versed in and has access to computer-based data capture and analysis. The methodology of this practice is best utilized in a computer based spreadsheet. 1.5 This practice can be applied to one or more elements in a specimen provided the signal-to-background ratio is not a limiting factor. 1.6 This practice includes methods to correct for systematic drift of the instrument with time. (Warning—If drift occurs, erroneous conclusions will be obtained from the data analysis.) 1.7 This practice also includes methods to refine estimates of composition and uncertainty through the use of a type standard or multiple calibrants.

Standard Practice for Testing Homogeneity of a Metal Lot or Batch in Solid Form by Spark Atomic Emission Spectrometry

ASTM E2283-08 在钢铁和其它微结构特点中非金属内含物的极值分析的标准实施规程

This practice is used to assess the indigenous inclusions or second-phase constituents in metals using extreme value statistics. It is well known that failures of mechanical components, such as gears and bearings, are often caused by the presence of large nonmetallic oxide inclusions. Failure of a component can often be traced to the presence of a large inclusion. Predictions related to component fatigue life are not possible with the evaluations provided by standards such as Test Methods E 45, Practice E 1122, or Practice E 1245. The use of extreme value statistics has been related to component life and inclusion size distributions by several different investigators (3-8). The purpose of this practice is to create a standardized method of performing this analysis. This practice is not suitable for assessing the exogenous inclusions in steels and other metals because of the unpredictable nature of the distribution of exogenous inclusions. Other methods involving complete inspection such as ultrasonics must be used to locate their presence.1.1 This practice describes a methodology to statistically characterize the distribution of the largest indigenous nonmetallic inclusions in steel specimens based upon quantitative metallographic measurements. The practice is not suitable for assessing exogenous inclusions. 1.2 Based upon the statistical analysis, the nonmetallic content of different lots of steels can be compared. 1.3 This practice deals only with the recommended test methods and nothing in it should be construed as defining or establishing limits of acceptability. 1.4 The measured values are stated in SI units. For measurements obtained from light microscopy, linear feature parameters shall be reported as micrometers, and feature areas shall be reported as micrometers. 1.5 The methodology can be extended to other materials and to other microstructural features. 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 and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.

Standard Practice for Extreme Value Analysis of Nonmetallic Inclusions in Steel and Other Microstructural Features

ASTM A923-08 测定双联奥氏体/铁素体不锈钢不稳定金属间相的标准试验方法

1.1 The purpose of these test methods is to allow detection of the presence of intermetallic phases in duplex stainless steels to the extent that toughness or corrosion resistance is affected significantly. These test methods will not necessarily detect losses of toughness or corrosion resistance attributable to other causes. 1.2 Duplex (austenitic-ferritic) stainless steels are susceptible to the formation of intermetallic compounds during exposures in the temperature range from approximately 600 to 1750°F (320 to 955°C). The speed of these precipitation reactions is a function of composition and thermal or thermomechanical history of each individual piece. The presence of these phases is detrimental to toughness and corrosion resistance. 1.3 Correct heat treatment of duplex stainless steels can eliminate these detrimental phases. Rapid cooling of the product provides the maximum resistance to formation of detrimental phases by subsequent thermal exposures. 1.4 Compliance with the chemical and mechanical requirements for the applicable product specification does not necessarily indicate the absence of detrimental phases in the product. 1.5 These test methods include the following: 1.5.1 Test Method A8212;Sodium Hydroxide Etch Test for Classification of Etch Structures of Duplex Stainless Steels (Sections 3-7). 1.5.2 Test Method B8212;Charpy Impact Test for Classification of Structures of Duplex Stainless Steels (Sections 8-13). 1.5.3 Test Method C8212;Ferric Chloride Corrosion Test for Classification of Structures of Duplex Stainless Steels (Sections 14-20). 1.6 The presence of detrimental intermetallic phases is readily detected in all three tests, provided that a sample of appropriate location and orientation is selected. Because the occurrence of intermetallic phases is a function of temperature and cooling rate, it is essential that the tests be applied to the region of the material experiencing the conditions most likely to promote the formation of an intermetallic phase. In the case of common heat treatment, this region will be that which cooled most slowly. Except for rapidly cooled material, it may be necessary to sample from a location determined to be the most slowly cooled for the material piece to be characterized. 1.7 The tests do not determine the precise nature of the detrimental phase but rather the presence or absence of an intermetallic phase to the extent that it is detrimental to the toughness and corrosion resistance of the material. 1.8 Examples of the correlation of thermal exposures, the occurrence of intermetallic phases, and the degradation of toughness and corrosion resistance are given in Appendix X1 and Appendix X2. 1.9 The values stated in either inch-pound or SI units are to be regarded as the standard. The values given in parentheses are for information only. 1.10 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. 3.1 The sodium hydroxide etch test may be used for the acceptance of material but not for rejection. This test method may be used with other evaluation tests to provide a rapid method for identifying those specimens that are free of detrimental intermetallic phases as measured in these other tests.

Standard Test Methods for Detecting Detrimental Intermetallic Phase in Duplex Austenitic/Ferritic Stainless Steels