Return to index: [Subject] [Thread] [Date] [Author]

QUERY: Specification Referencing Outdate

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Bill,

Order the annual Index from ASTM (or go down to your local university science 
library).

>From the 1998 Annual Index (Part 00.01):

"D1010 Discontinued 1981; Methods of Testing Asphalt Emulsions for Use as 
Protective Coatings for Metal; Replaced by D2939"

"D2939-97  Test Methods for Emulsified Bitumens Used as Protective Coatings, 
[Published in Part] 04.04"

"D1638  Discontinued 1991; Methods of Testing Urethane Foam Isocyanate Raw 
Materials"

A. Roger Turk, P.E.(Structural)
Tucson, Arizona

Bill Polhemus wrote:

. > I have one right now, though--and I have been through this before--where
. > some of the vital parameters are referenced in their guide specifications
. > and in their data sheets with respect to ASTM standards that are out of
. > date. And I don't mean that they haven't been updated in a long time; I 
. > mean that they have been WITHDRAWN, and the ASTM website tells me that 
. > there is no replacement for the spec.

. > I suppose I can just reference the spec anyway, confident that most of 
. > these products have been around awhile and have been tested to the old 
. > obsolete spec, but I don't want to run the risk of leaving someone out of 
. > the running because they are a newer product or producer, and I don't 
. > want to have to make decisions as to "or equal" during construction phase.

. > I'll give an example:

. > For an epoxy grout product, the stuff I want to use has "Solids Ratio"
. > calculated per ASTM D 1010. According to the search engine at
. > http://www.astm.org/, "D1010 Discontinued 1981 , Replaced By D2939." But
. > when I check the Summary for D2939, it doesn't look like anything
. > approaching what would determine the ratio of Solids in an epoxy adhesive 
. > or grout.

. > Another standard, D1638, is listed as "D1638 Discontinued 1991 , Replaced 
. > By No_Replacement". I can't even find anything as to what the title or 
. > purpose of that standard would be (FWIW, it seems to have been used to
. > determine viscosity).

. > Does anyone have any suggestions?