English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Zendy Open

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Insights

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Zendy Tools

Zendy Plus

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Results of tests of drum-type RAM packages employing conventional clamp-ring closures have caused concern over the DOT 6M Specification Package. To clarify these issues, a series of tests were performed to determine the response of the clamp-ring closure to the regulatory Hypothetical Accident Condition (9m) drop tests, for packages at maximum allowable weight. Three enhanced closure designs were also tested: the Clamshell, plywood disk reinforcement, and J-Clip. The results of the tests showed that the standard closure was unable to retain the top for both Center-of-Gravity-Over-Corner and Shallow Angle cases, for the standard package, at its maximum allowed weight. Similar results were found for packages dropped from a reduced height. The Clamshell design provided the best performance of the enhanced closures. It was concluded that the closure ring design employed on the 6M is inadequate to retain the top during the regulatory test sequence, for packages at the maximum allowed weight. For large heavy packages, the Center-of-Gravity- Over-Corner case is more challenging than the Shallow Angle case. The Clamshell design securely retained the top for all HAC test cases, and prevented formation of any opening which could compromise fire test performance.

Drop Tests for the 6M Specification Package Closure Investigation