Test environment

The guarded hot-plate method can be modified to perform dry and wet heat transfer testing (sweating skin model). Some plates contain simulated sweat glands and use a pumping mechanism to deUver water to the plate surface. Thermal comfort properties that can be deterrnined from this test are do, permeabihty index (/ ), and comfort limits. PermeabiUty index indicates moisture—heat permeabiUty through the fabric on a scale of 0 (completely impermeable) to 1 (completely permeable). This parameter indicates the effect of skin moisture on heat loss. Comfort limits are the predicted metaboHc activity levels that may be sustained while maintaining body thermal comfort in the test environment. 

The test shall be hydrostatic, using water, with the following exceptions. If there is a possibility of damage due to freezing or if the operating fluid or piping material would be adversely affected by water, any other suitable hquid may be used. If a flammable hquid is used, its flash point shall not be less than 50°C (120°F), and consideration shall be given to the test environment. 

NOTE Chemical resistance data are for coatings only. Tliin coatings generally are not suitable for substrates such as carbon steel which are corroded significantly (e.g., >20 mils/year) in the test environment. R = recommended LR = limited recommendation NR = no recommendation. 

Similar observations have been made in the United States, where a marked decrease in the rate of rusting has generally been observed after the early stages. For example, in one test, the total corrosion over the first two years was about 0-1 mm but the additional corrosion during the next 10 years was only about 0-06mm. These are slow rates of rusting, however, and it is possible that the rust formed was more protective than usual, because of the relatively non-aggressive test environment. 

In addition to examining pre-exposure effects, the slow strain-rate testing technique has been used increasingly to examine and compare the stress-corrosion susceptibility of aluminium alloys of various compositions, heat treatments and forms. A recent extensive review draws attention to differences in response to the various groups of commonly employed alloys which are summarised in Fig. 8.57. The most effective test environment was found to be 3 Vo NaCl -F 0.3 Vo HjOj. The most useful strain rate depends upon the alloy classification. 

Since the corrosion resistance of anodic films on aluminium is markedly dependent on the efficacy of sealing (provided the film thickness is adequate for the service conditions), tests for sealing quality are frequently employed as an index of potential resistance to corrosion. While it is admitted that an unequivocal evaluation of corrosion behaviour can only be obtained by protracted field tests in service, accelerated corrosion tests under closely controlled conditions can also provide useful information in a shorter time within the limitations of the particular test environment employed. 

When the test is to be made to predict the performance of a material in a particular service, the ideal procedure would be to have the surface of the test-pieces duplicate the surface of the material as it would be used. Here, however, a complication is presented by the fact that materials in service are commonly used in several forms with different conditions of surface. Where the number of materials to be compared is large, it will usually be impractical to test all the conditions of surface treatment of possible interest. The best practical procedure, then, is to choose some condition of surface more or less arbitrarily selected to allow the materials to perform near the upper limits of their ability. If all the materials to be tested are treated in this way, and preferably with uniform surface treatment, the results of the test will indicate the relative abilities of the different materials to resist the test environment when in a satisfactory condition of surface treatment. Then, if it should be considered prudent or desirable to do so, the most promising materials can be subjected to further tests in a variety of surface conditions so that any surface sensitivity can be detected. 

With materials like the stainless steels, which may be either active or passive in a test environment, it is common practice to produce a particular initial level of passivity or activity by some special chemical treatment prior to exposure. With stainless steels this objective may be subsidiary to eliminating surface contamination, such as iron from processing tools, by treatment in a nitric acid solution which might also be expected to achieve substantial passivity incidental to the cleaning action (ASTM A380 1988). 

In studies of the behaviour of materials that may be either active or passive in the test environment, there would seem to be a real advantage in starting with specimens in an activated state to see if they will become passive, and to ascertain how fast they are corroded if they remain active. If passivity should be achieved after such an activated start, the material can be considered to be more reliable in the test environment than would be the case if by chance it managed to retain an originally induced passivity for all, or most of, the test period. It may also be valuable to know how fast the metal will be corroded by the test medium if activity should persist. 

In many cases there will be a need to test metal-coated specimens, e.g. galvanised steel, tin-plated copper, nickel-plated zinc, etc. It will then be necessary to test specimens in the completely coated condition and also with the coating damaged so that the basis metal is exposed. The latter condition will provide the conditions for galvanic action between the coating and the basis metal. With sheet specimens this condition is most readily achieved by leaving cut edges exposed to the test environment. 

Care in designing and conducting the test in no way reduces the need for discrimination on the part of the person using the test data in the selection of a coating for a particular purpose. Test environments must reflect the deteriorating influences of the service for which they are applicable. A coating system cannot reliably be selected for service in a chemical plant on the basis of performance determined in a rural atmosphere. 

Ho SV et al. (1999) The lasagna technology for in situ soil remediation. 2. Large field test. Environ Sci Technol 33 1092-1099. 

Iben lET et al. (1996) Thermal blanket for in-situ remediation of surficial contamination a pilot test. Environ Sci Technol 30 3144-3154. 

Kiparissis Y, Akhtar P, Elodson PV, Brown RS. 2003. Partiton-controlled delivery of toxicants a novel in vivo approach for embryo toxicity testing. Environ Sci Technol 37 2262-2266. 

Kamlet, M. J., Doherty, R. M., Veith, G. D., Taft, R. W., Abraham, M. H. (1986) Solubility properties in polymers and biological media. 7. An analysis toxicant properties that influence inhibition of bioluminescence in Photobacterium phosphoreum (the Microtox test). Environ. Sci. Technol. 20, 690-695. 

Martin, M., J.W. Hunt, B.S. Anderson, S.L. Turpen, and F.H. Palmer. 1989. Experimental evaluation of the mysid Holmesimysis costata as a test organism for effluent toxicity testing. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 8 1003-1012. 

Norberg, TJ. and D.I. Mount. 1985. A new fathead minnow (Pimephales promelas) subchronic toxicity test. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 4 711-718. 

Hansen, D.J., L.R. Goodman, J.C. Moore, and P.K. Higdon. 1983. Effects of the synthetic pyrethroids AC 222, 705, permethrin and fenvalerate on sheepshead minnows in early life stage toxicity tests. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 2 251-258. 

Ingerslev, F., A. Baun, and N. Nyholm. 1998. Aquatic biodegradation behavior of pentachlorophenol assessed through a battery of shake flask die-away tests. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 17 1712-1719. 

MacGregor, J.T., Wehr, C.M. and Gould, D.H. (1980). Clastogen-induced micronuclei in peripheral blood erythrocytes the basis of an improved micronucleus test. Environ. Mutagen. 2 509-514. 

Make sure your schedule allows for adequate rest and study breaks. Skipping sleep is not a good way to find time in your schedule. Not only will you be tired when you study, but you will also be sleep deprived by the time of the test. A sleep-deprived test-taker is more likely to make careless mistakes, lose energy and focus, and become stressed-out by the testing environment. 

Niwa Y, Iwai N (2006) Genotoxicity in cell lines induced by chronic exposure to water-soluble fullerenes using micronucleus test. Environ. Health Prev. Med. 11 292-297. 

Miller BM, Pujadas E, Gocke E. 1995. Evaluation of the micronucleus test in vitro using Chinese hamster cells Results of four chemicals weakly positive in the in vivo micronucleus test. Environ Mol Mutagen 26 240-247. 

---