1.1 本试验方法涵盖了通过干砂/橡胶轮试验测定金属材料耐刮擦磨损性的实验室程序。本试验方法的目的是产生数据，在规定的一组条件下，对材料的耐刮擦磨损性进行重复排序。 1.2 对于规定的特定试验程序，磨损试验结果报告为体积损失（单位:立方毫米）。耐磨性较高的材料体积损耗较低。 注1: 为了实现实验室之间的一致性，本试验方法的目的是要求磨损引起的体积损失仅以公制单位报告为立方毫米。1. 毫米 3. = 6.102 × 10 −5. 在里面 3. . 1.3 本试验方法包括五种推荐程序，适用于试验材料的特定耐磨性或厚度。 1.3.1 程序A- 这是一个相对严峻的测试，将金属材料从低耐磨性到极端耐磨性，在很大的体积损失范围内进行排名。它在中等至极端耐磨性的材料排名中特别有用。 1.3.2 程序B- 程序A的短期变化。它可用于高耐磨性材料，但在中低耐磨性材料的排名中特别有用。当程序A得出的体积损失值超过100 mm时，应使用程序B 3. . 1.3.3 程序C- 用于薄涂层的程序A的短期变化。 1.3.4 程序D- 这是程序a的较轻负载变化，特别适用于低耐磨性材料的排序。它还用于对特定通用类型的材料或程序a开发的体积损失率非常接近的材料进行排序。 1.3.5 程序E- 程序B的短期变化，有助于中等或低耐磨性材料的排序。 1.4 本标准无意解决与其使用相关的安全问题（如有）。本标准的用户有责任在使用前制定适当的安全和健康实践，并确定监管限制的适用性。 ====意义和用途====== 5.1 任何系统中磨料磨损的严重程度取决于磨料颗粒的大小、形状和硬度、颗粒施加的应力大小以及磨料颗粒的接触频率。在本实践中，这些条件被标准化，以形成均匀的磨损条件，即刮伤磨损 ( 1. 和 3. ) . 实践的价值在于预测各种建筑材料在研磨环境中的相对排名。由于本规程并不试图复制所有工艺条件（磨料尺寸、形状、压力、冲击或腐蚀元素），因此不应使用本规程来预测特定环境中给定材料的确切电阻。 其价值在于预测材料的排序，其相对优度顺序与研磨环境中的相似。然而，可以将从特定磨料环境中寿命未知的试验材料获得的体积损失数据与从相同环境中寿命已知的材料获得的试验数据进行比较。如果磨损是导致材料劣化的主要因素，则比较将提供未知材料价值的一般指示。

1.1 This test method covers laboratory procedures for determining the resistance of metallic materials to scratching abrasion by means of the dry sand/rubber wheel test. It is the intent of this test method to produce data that will reproducibly rank materials in their resistance to scratching abrasion under a specified set of conditions. 1.2 Abrasion test results are reported as volume loss in cubic millimetres for the particular test procedure specified. Materials of higher abrasion resistance will have a lower volume loss. Note 1: In order to attain uniformity among laboratories, it is the intent of this test method to require that volume loss due to abrasion be reported only in the metric system as cubic millimetres. 1 mm 3 = 6.102 × 10 −5 in 3 . 1.3 This test method covers five recommended procedures which are appropriate for specific degrees of wear resistance or thicknesses of the test material. 1.3.1 Procedure A— This is a relatively severe test which will rank metallic materials on a wide volume loss scale from low to extreme abrasion resistance. It is particularly useful in ranking materials of medium to extreme abrasion resistance. 1.3.2 Procedure B— A short-term variation of Procedure A. It may be used for highly abrasive resistant materials but is particularly useful in the ranking of medium- and low-abrasive-resistant materials. Procedure B should be used when the volume–loss values developed by Procedure A exceeds 100 mm 3 . 1.3.3 Procedure C— A short-term variation of Procedure A for use on thin coatings. 1.3.4 Procedure D— This is a lighter load variation of Procedure A which is particularly useful in ranking materials of low-abrasion resistance. It is also used in ranking materials of a specific generic type or materials which would be very close in the volume loss rates as developed by Procedure A. 1.3.5 Procedure E— A short-term variation of Procedure B that is useful in the ranking of materials with medium- or low-abrasion resistance. 1.4 This standard does not purport to address the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use. ====== Significance And Use ====== 5.1 The severity of abrasive wear in any system will depend upon the abrasive particle size, shape, and hardness, the magnitude of the stress imposed by the particle, and the frequency of contact of the abrasive particle. In this practice these conditions are standardized to develop a uniform condition of wear which has been referred to as scratching abrasion ( 1 and 3 ) . The value of the practice lies in predicting the relative ranking of various materials of construction in an abrasive environment. Since the practice does not attempt to duplicate all of the process conditions (abrasive size, shape, pressure, impact, or corrosive elements), it should not be used to predict the exact resistance of a given material in a specific environment. Its value lies in predicting the ranking of materials in a similar relative order of merit as would occur in an abrasive environment. Volume loss data obtained from test materials whose lives are unknown in a specific abrasive environment may, however, be compared with test data obtained from a material whose life is known in the same environment. The comparison will provide a general indication of the worth of the unknown materials if abrasion is the predominant factor causing deterioration of the materials.