Independent Testing Laboratories

American Research and Testing Inc. 14934 S. Figueroa Street Gardena, CA 90248 (800) 538-1655 or (310) 538-9709 www.americanresearch.com 

BatteUe Memorial Institute 425 King Avenue Columbus, OH 43201 (614) 424-5214 

Atlas Weathering Services Group South Florida Test Service 17301 Okeechobee Road Miami, Florida 33018 (305) 824-3900 www.atlaswsg.com 

1975 North Ruby Street Melrose Park, IL 60160 (708) 236-5360 www.na.bodycote-mt.com 

Handbook of Plastics Testing and Failure Analysis, Third Edition, by Vishu Shah Copyright 2007 by John Wiley Sons, Inc. 

---

Wea.ther lbillty. One of the more destmctive elements is exposure to sunlight specifically, ultraviolet (uv) light. AH sealants are affected by weathering, but there is much difference in the effect of weathering on different sealants. Most sHicones are stable with respect to uv exposure. Urethanes and polysulfides show effects of uv exposure, but can be formulated with uv absorbers to provide reasonable lifetimes in most appHcations. However, there are exceptions in aH classes of sealants and specifiers must be carehil to look for test data that has proven a specific sealant s durabHity. The source of the test data is also important data from an independent testing laboratory is generaHy apt to be more reHable. 

All aspects of the material s chemical, mechanical and physical properties which are included in the specification should be capable of measurement and certification. For critical duties all material supplied should be fully tested and certified by competent approved, independent test laboratories. All items of plant should be purchased with material certification. Additional certification is required in cases where the fabricator, in manufacturing an item of plant, used techniques such as welding or heat treatment which may affect the corrosion behavior of the construction materials. 

Identification of Expert Reviewers and independent testing laboratory. 

The Tasti Cola people are alarmed at the warning because their quality assurance department has never found any problem with any of their products, and they perform routine sodium tests on a daily basis. They have been told by HHI that an independent testing laboratory, the We Analyze Anything (WAA) laboratory of Chilly Falls, WI, tested the products and have reported the stunning results. Tasti has come to I.O.N.S for yet another independent test to confirm their own results and refute the WAA results. We have agreed to a contract to perform the required tests. We have the original undiluted samples tested by WAA. 

RUBBER WORLD 1867 West Market Street, Akron OH 44313, (216) 864-2122. Each January issue provides an Independent Testing Laboratories Directory. ... 

Not later than 30 months after October 28, 1992, the President shall, after notice and opportunity for comment, establish by rule appropriate criteria, testing protocols, and performance characteristics as are necessary to ensure, to the greatest extent possible and consistent with the purposes and policy of this subchapter, that lead-based paint hazard evaluation and reduction products introduced into commerce after a period specified in the rule are effective for the intended use described by the manufacturer. The rule shall identify the types or classes of products that are subject to such rule. The President, in implementation of the rule, shall, to the maximum extent possible, utilize independent testing laboratories, as appropriate, and consult with such entities and others in developing the rules. The President may delegate the authorities under this subsection to the Environmental Protection Agency or the Secretary of Commerce or such other appropriate agency. 

Notified bodies are independent testing laboratories and/or certification bodies recognized in the European Union to perform tests and issue reports and certificates on conformity. These bodies are generally referred to as notified bodies. Depending on the directive an accredited body may be referred to as a notified body, competent body, certification body, third party, or other (see Notified Bodies and Third Parties in Chapter 4). Test reports and certificates issued by accredited bodies attest to a product s or system s conformity to the relevant standards. These reports and certificates are the basis for mutual recognition of test results and build consumer confidence in a product s conformity. 

Products or materials that are specified for use which meet standard test requirements for fire safety concerns. Standard test conditions are usually set by national or local code requirements and verified through independent testing laboratories (e.g., UL or FM). See also Approved Factory Mutual Labeled Listed Underwriters Laboratories (UL). 

In the eontext of quality assuranee in the production of a product or a structure, independent test laboratories or inspection bodies supervise the manufacturing or construction procedure, perform controls and inspections and examine the manufactured produets using test methods, which are described in standards or guidelines. Table A1.7 of Appendix 1 describes the test procedures and frequencies for third-party control of resin, carbon black batch and geomembranes as part of the in-house QMS of the manufacturers of BAM certified HDPE geomembranes. 

Alpha test is defined as the first functional test of a device and is the responsibility of the manufacturer to define and complete. Alpha tests generally include one or more owner/operator test sites, or include simulated end-user testing completed by the manufacturer or an independent test laboratory. If problems occur during Alpha test(s), the equipment or installation is modified followed by a repeat of the alpha test(s) until test requirements are satisfied. 

In the 1970s, the Navy instituted a policy requiring devices be rescreened on receipt (by the contractor or an independent test laboratory) because there was evidence that Joint Army Navy (JAN) qualified devices (including JANTX, JANTXV discrete component) were not of a quality level to be used in military hardware (DoD directive 4245.7-M Transition from Development to Production, wlrich was signed in 1984 and saw wide implementation by the end of 1986). 

To review the reasons for component rescreening we need to examine test data for the time period involved. In 1981 it was reported that the Naval Weapons Support Center (NWSC) in Crane, Indiana, found part defect rates of 15% for ICs and 17% for discrete semiconductors. In a January 1983 report, one independent test laboratory found reject rates of 16.7% for linear ICs, 8.4% for digital ICs, and 9.2% for CMOS ICs. By October 1984, this same laboratory found defect rates of 5.5% for linear ICs, 3.7% for digital ICs, 8.2% for transistors, and 3.8% for optoelectronics. In 1983, the Defense Electronic Center found semiconductor defect rates of 8% for nonmilitary specification parts, with a less than 1% defect rate for military specification devices. In 1986, a military contractor estimated rescreening failures of 0.9% for ICs and 1.5% for transistors. In 1989, a manufacturer of a special purpose computer workstation for the U.S. Navy reported the following rescreening results IC/semiconductors tested 8312 (127 types of parts) total rejects PIND/DPA 25 (16 PIND failures on hybrid components, 6 electrical failures, 3 mechanical failures—broken leads) reject rate 0.30%. 

When one or more adhesives have been chosen as candidates for a given bonding application, samples should be obtained and joints, representative of intended production, made and tested. Testing will usually be done to measure strength and/or durability. However, testing for physical and working properties may also be desirable. Some test procedures call for equipment not routinely available in all user laboratories. In those cases, the services of an independent testing laboratory should be considered. 

---