1、Designation: D 4417 03Standard Test Methods forField Measurement of Surface Profile of Blast CleanedSteel1This standard is issued under the fixed designation D 4417; the number immediately following the designation indicates the year oforiginal adoption or, in the case of revision, the year of last
2、revision. A number in parentheses indicates the year of last reapproval. Asuperscript epsilon (e) indicates an editorial change since the last revision or reapproval.This standard has been approved for use by agencies of the Department of Defense.1. Scope1.1 These test methods cover the description
3、of techniquesfor measuring the profile of abrasive blast cleaned surfaces inthe laboratory, field, or in the fabricating shop. There areadditional techniques suitable for laboratory use not covered bythese test methods.1.2 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as thestandard. The values g
4、iven in parentheses are for informationonly.1.3 This standard does not purport to address all of thesafety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is theresponsibility of whoever uses this standard to consult andestablish appropriate safety and health practices and deter-mine the applicability
5、 of regulatory limitations prior to use.2. Summary of Test Method2.1 The methods are:2.1.1 Method AThe blasted surface is visually comparedto standards prepared with various surface profile depths andthe range determined.2.1.2 Method BThe depth of profile is measured using afine pointed probe at a n
6、umber of locations and the arithmeticmean determined.2.1.3 Method CAcomposite plastic tape is impressed intothe blast cleaned surface forming a reverse image of the profile,and the maximum peak to valley distance measured with amicrometer.3. Significance and Use3.1 The height of surface profile has
7、been shown to be afactor in the performance of various coatings applied to steel.For this reason, surface profile should be measured prior tocoating application to ensure that it meets that specified. Theinstruments described are readily portable and sufficientlysturdy for use in the field.NOTE 1Opt
8、ical microscope methods serve as a referee method forsurface profile measurement. Profile depth designations are based on theconcept of mean maximum profile ( h max); this value is determined byaveraging a given number (usually 20) of the highest peak to lowest valleymeasurements made in the field o
9、f view of a standard measuringmicroscope. This is done because of evidence that coatings performancein any one small area is primarily influenced by the highest surfacefeatures in that area and not by the average roughness.24. Apparatus4.1 Method AAprofile comparator consisting of a numberof areas (
10、each approximately one square inch in size), usuallyside by side, with a different profile or anchor pattern depth.Each area is marked giving the nominal profile depth in mils ormicrometres. Typical comparator surfaces are prepared withsteel shot, steel grit, or sand or other nonmetallic abrasive,si
11、nce the appearance of the profile created by these abrasivesmay differ. The comparator areas are used with or withoutmagnification of 5 to 10 power.4.2 Method BA dial gage3depth micrometer fitted with apointed probe. The probe is machined at a 60 angle with anominal radius of 50 m. The base of the i
12、nstrument rests onthe tops of the peaks of the surface profile while the springloaded tip projects into the valleys.4.3 Method CA special tape4containing a compressiblefoam attached to a noncompressible uniform plastic film. Aburnishing tool is used to impress the foam face of the tape intothe surfa
13、ce to create a reverse replica of the profile that ismeasured using a spring-loaded micrometer.1These test methods are under the jurisdiction of ASTM Committee D01 onPaint and Related Coatings, Materials, and Applications and are the directresponsibility of Subcommittee D01.46 on Industrial Protecti
14、ve Coatings.Current edition approved May 10, 2003. Published June 2003. Originallyapproved in 1984. Last previous edition approved in 1999 as D 4417 93 (1999).2John D. Keane, Joseph A. Bruno, Jr., Raymond E. F. Weaver, “Surface Profilefor Anti-Corrosion Paints,” Oct. 25, 1976, Steel Structures Paint
15、ing Council, 4400Fifth Ave., Pittsburgh, PA 15213.3The sole source of supply of suitable depth micrometers known to thecommittee at this time is the surface profile gage, Model 123, Elcometer Instru-ments, Ltd., Edge Lane, Droylston, Manchester M35 6UB, United Kingdom,England. If you are aware of al
16、ternative suppliers, please proved this information toASTM International Headquarters. Your comments will receive careful consider-ation at a meeting of the responsible technical committee,1which you may attend.4The sole source of supply of suitable replica tape, Press-O-Film, known to thecommittee
17、at this time is Testex. 8 Fox Lane, Newark, DE 19711. If you are awareof alternative suppliers, please proved this information to ASTM InternationalHeadquarters. Your comments will receive careful consideration at a meeting of theresponsible technical committee,1which you may attend1Copyright ASTM I
18、nternational, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, PO Box C700, West Conshohocken, PA 19428-2959, United States.5. Test Specimens5.1 Use any metal surface that, after blast cleaning, is free ofloose surface interference material, dirt, dust, and abrasiveresidue.6. Procedure6.1 Method A:6.1.1 Select the comparator
19、 standard appropriate for theabrasive used for blast cleaning.6.1.2 Place the comparator standard directly on the surfaceto be measured and compare the roughness of the preparedsurface with the roughness on the comparator segments. Thiscan be done with the unaided eye, under 5 to 10 powermagnificati
20、on, or by touch. When using magnification, themagnifier should be brought into intimate contact with thestandard, and the depth of focus must be sufficient for thestandard and surface to be in focus simultaneously.6.1.3 Select the comparator segment that most closelyapproximates the roughness of the
21、 surface being evaluated or,if necessary, the two segments to which it is intermediate.6.1.4 Evaluate the roughness at a sufficient number oflocations to characterize the surface as specified or agreed uponbetween the interested parties. Report the range of results fromall locations as the surface p
22、rofile.6.2 Method B:6.2.1 Prior to use set the gage to zero by placing it on a pieceof plate float glass. Hold the gage by its base and press firmlyagainst the glass. Adjust the instrument to zero.6.2.2 To take readings, hold the gage firmly against theprepared substrate. Do not drag the instrument
23、across thesurface between readings, or the spring-loaded tip may becomerounded leading to false readings.6.2.3 Measure the profile at a sufficient number of locationsto characterize the surface, as specified or agreed upon betweenthe interested parties. At each location make ten readings anddetermin
24、e the mean. Then determine the mean for all thelocations and report it as the profile of the surface.6.3 Method C:6.3.1 Select the correct tape range for the profile to bemeasured: coarse, 0 to 50 m (0 to 2 mils) and extra coarse, 40to 115 m (1.5 to 4.5 mils).6.3.2 Remove the wax paper backing and p
25、lace the tape onthe prepared surface with the foam side down, that is, put thedull side down.6.3.3 Hold the tape firmly on the surface and rub the circularcut-out portion (approximately 6.5 mm (38 in.) diameter) withthe burnishing tool until a uniform gray color appears.6.3.4 Remove the tape and pla
26、ce it between the anvils of aspring-loaded micrometer. Measure the thickness of the tape(compressed foam and non-compressible plastic film com-bined). Subtract the thickness of the noncompressible plasticfilm to obtain the surface profile.6.3.5 Measure the profile at a sufficient number of locations
27、to characterize the surface, as specified or agreed upon betweenthe interested parties.At each location make three readings anddetermine the mean. Then determine the mean for all thelocations and report it as the profile of the surface.7. Report7.1 Report the range and the appropriate average (mean
28、ormode) of the determinations, the number of locations mea-sured, and the approximate total area covered.8. Precision and Bias8.1 Test Method A:8.1.1 ApplicabilityBased on measurements of profiles onsurfaces of 8 steel panels, each blast cleaned with 1 of 8different abrasives to a white metal degree
29、 of cleaning, havingknown ratings of profile height ranging from 37 m (1.5 mils)to 135 m (5.4 mils), the correlation coefficient for TestMethod A was found to be 0.75 and the coefficient ofdetermination was found to be 0.54.8.1.2 PrecisionIn an interlaboratory study of Test MethodA in which 2 operat
30、ors each running 2 tests on separate days ineach of 6 laboratories tested 8 surfaces with a broad range ofprofile characteristics and levels, the intralaboratory coefficientof variation was found to be 20 % with 141 df and theinterlaboratory coefficient was found to be 19 % with 40 df,after rejectin
31、g 3 results for one time because the range betweenrepeats differed significantly from all other ranges. Based onthese coefficients, the following criteria should be used forjudging, at the 95 % confidence level, the acceptability ofresults:8.1.2.1 RepeatabilityTwo results, each the mean of fourrepli
32、cates, obtained by the same operator should be consideredsuspect if they differ by more than 56 %.8.1.2.2 ReproducibilityTwo results, each the mean of fourreplicates, obtained by operators in different laboratoriesshould be considered suspect if they differ by more than 54 %.8.2 Test Method B:8.2.1
33、ApplicabilityBased on measurements of profiles onsurfaces of 8 steel panels, each blast cleaned with 1 of 8different abrasives to a white metal degree of cleaning, havingknown ratings of profile height ranging from 1.5 mils (37 m)to 5.4 mils (135 m), the correlation coefficient for TestMethod B was
34、found to be 0.99 and the coefficient ofdetermination was found to be 0.93.8.2.2 PrecisionIn an interlaboratory study of Test MethodB in which 2 operators, each running 2 tests on separate days,in each of 5 laboratories tested 8 surfaces with a broad range ofprofile characteristics and levels, the in
35、tralaboratory coefficientof variation was found to be 19 % with 113 df and theinterlaboratory coefficient was found to be 28 % with 32 df,after rejecting 3 results for one time because the range betweenrepeats differed significantly from all other ranges. Based onthese coefficients, the following cr
36、iteria should be used forjudging, at the 95 % confidence level, the acceptability ofresults:8.2.2.1 RepeatabilityTwo results, each the mean of fourreplicates, obtained by the same operator should be consideredsuspect if they differ by more than 54 %.8.2.2.2 ReproducibilityTwo results, each the mean
37、of fourreplicates, obtained by operators in different laboratoriesshould be considered suspect if they differ by more than 79 %.8.3 Method C (X-Coarse Tape):D44170328.3.1 ApplicabilityBased on measurements of profiles onsurfaces of 8 steel panels, each blast cleaned with 1 of 8different abrasives to
38、 a white metal degree of cleaning, havingknown ratings of profile height ranging from 37 m (1.5 mils)to 135 m (5.4 mils), the correlation coefficient for TestMethod C (X-Coarse Tape) was found to be 0.96 and thecoefficient of determination was found to be 0.93.8.3.2 PrecisionIn an interlaboratory st
39、udy of Test MethodC (X-Coarse Tape) in which 2 operators each running 2 tests onseparate days in each of 6 laboratories tested 8 surfaces with abroad range of profile characteristics and levels, the intralabo-ratory coefficient of variation was found to be 9 % with 120 dfand the interlaboratory coef
40、ficient 13 % with 32 df. Based onthese coefficients, the following criteria should be used forjudging, at the 95 % confidence level, the acceptability ofresults:8.3.2.1 RepeatabilityTwo results, each the mean of fourreplicates, obtained by the same operator should be consideredsuspect if they differ
41、 by more than 25 %.8.3.2.2 ReproducibilityTwo results, each the mean of fourreplicates, obtained by operators in different laboratoriesshould be considered suspect if they differ by more than 37 %.8.4 Test Method C (Coarse Tape):8.4.1 ApplicabilityBased on measurements of profiles onsurfaces of 6 st
42、eel panels, each blast cleaned with 1 of 6different abrasives to a white metal degree of cleaning, havingknown ratings of profile height ranging from 37 m (1.5 mils) to 57 m (2.3 mils), the correlation coefficient for TestMethod C (Coarse Tape) was found to be 0.48 and thecoefficient of determinatio
43、n was found to be 0.23.8.4.2 PrecisionIn an interlaboratory study of Test MethodC (Coarse Tape) in which 2 operators each running 2 tests onseparate days in each of 5 laboratories tested 6 surfaces with abroad range of profile characteristics and levels, the intralabo-ratory coefficient of variation
44、 was found to be 11 % with 90 dfand the interlaboratory coefficient 11 % with 24 df. Based onthese coefficients, the following criteria should be used forjudging, at the 95 % confidence level, the acceptability ofresults:8.4.2.1 RepeatabilityTwo results, each the mean of fourreplicates, obtained by
45、the same operator should be consideredsuspect if they differ by more than 30 %.8.4.2.2 ReproducibilityTwo results, each the mean of fourreplicates, obtained by operators in different laboratoriesshould be considered suspect if they differ by more than 28 %.8.5 Test Method C (“Paint” Grade Tape):8.5.
46、1 ApplicabilityBased on measurement of profiles ofsurfaces of 5 steel panels, each blast cleaned with one of fivedifferent abrasives to a white metal degree of cleaning havingknown (stylus surface roughness measured) ratings of profileheight ranging from 1.5 mils to 3.0 mils, the correlationcoeffici
47、ent for Test Method C (“Paint” Grade tape) was foundto be 0.92 and the coefficient of determination was found to be0.85.8.5.2 PrecisionIn an interlaboratory study of Test MethodC (“Paint” Grade tape) in which operators in each of 7laboratories tested 5 surfaces with a broad range of profilecharacter
48、istics and levels, the intralaboratory coefficient ofvariation was found to be 9 % with 150 df and the interlabo-ratory coefficient 10 % with 25 df. Based on these coefficients,the following criteria should be used for judging, at the 95 %confidence level, the acceptability of results.8.5.2.1 Repeat
49、abilityTwo results, each the mean of 4replicates, obtained by the same operator, should be consideredsuspect (2 standard deviations) if they differ by more than18 %.8.5.2.2 ReproducibilityTwo results, each the mean of 4replicates, obtained by operators in different laboratories,should be considered suspect (2 standard deviations) if theydiffer by more than 22 %.8.6 BiasSince there is no accepted reference materialsuitable for determining the bias for the procedure in these testmethods for measuring surface profile, bias cannot be deter-mined.NOT
