Acceptance evaluations

It should be noted that although ASTM A262 1986 provides details of test procedures no information is given on typical corrosion rates or acceptable limits for various heat-treated alloys, which are regarded as outside the province of a specification that describes test procedures. Table 19.4, taken from a paper by Brown, shows the maximum acceptable evaluation test rates specified by the Du Pont Company for various alloys tested by the acid... 

Table 19.4 Maximum acceptable evaluation test rates specified by Du Pont for services where susceptible material would be intergranularly attacked ...

Precision and accuracy With method established perform three runs Perform at least six runs Apply appropriate statistics Evaluate reproducibility of incurred samples in each toxicology species Clearly defined and acceptable Evaluate reproducibility of incurred samples in key studies... 

Level III Model The two simple models require minimum input, the mathematical solution is not complex, and they provide some useful perspective. It is obvious, however, that these models are simplistic and do not provide a realistic representation of the namral environment. The Level IE model (Fig. 10.9) introduces an added level of complexity by considering the rates at which a compound moves between compartments that results in a steady state where the distribution among compartments is not at equilibrium. More data is required and the mathematical solution becomes more complex. The amount of information generated increases and a more comprehensive analysis of the behavior of the compound is provided. While this model can in no way be considered exact in the way it represents chemical behavior, the level of complexity achieved is such that it has become an acceptable evaluative tool. 

Once impacts have been predicted, their relative significance needs to be assessed to evaluate whether the impacts may be considered acceptable. Evaluation methods can be of various types, which can be grouped into two main sets of methods those that assume a common utilitarian ethic with a single evaluation criterion and those that are based on the measurement of personal utilities, including multiple criteria. 

Quantitative risk evaluation for the tunnel and acceptability evaluation... 

There are two elements to acceptance evaluations i) user acceptance, ii) biomechanical injury assessment. Due to the nature of any defence equipment, user acceptance must be imequivocal to ensure that the LCS will be used in an appropriate manner. If iterative assessments have been undertaken, involving appropriate soldier representation, user acceptance issues should have been identified and addressed. Iterative evaluations, since they usually use SMEs, may not pick up all user acceptance issues, so some form of trialling involving junior ranks is recommended. Biomechanical assessments are needed to ensure that the potential for LCS to injme users is mitigated as much as is reasonably practicable and that it is an improvement over previous systems. 

Lack of acceptable evaluation parameters and methods for energy absorptiOTi capability of nanocomposites, such as evaluating indicators, test methods and test conditions... 

Acceptable risk is understood and tolerated because the linked risk/benefit balance is acceptable. To conduct a risk assessment, a scale for F and M (gravity) should be set up to evaluate the risk index to be assigned to the hazards and adverse events identified. Except for special cases, for which there are statistical bases validated, scales are determined empirically. We report an example of determination of these rating scales a scale for F, a scale for M, and a scale for acceptability evaluation. As this is only an example, the numbers have no validated meaning and are useful only to understand in a synthetic way the methodology to be applied (Table 6.7, Table 6.8 and Table 6.9). 

American National Standards Institute, p. 7. ANSI standatds provide standardized ctxies of practice, resting methods, and specifications for every product one can imagine—from childproof aspirin bottles to bricks and mortar. Nationally tecc ized specifications and standards like the ANSI standards or the Underwriters Laboratory Standards allow writers and designers to specify objects and practices that meet safety criteria without having to construct a set of acceptable evaluative criteria of their own. 

---