Wissenschaftliche Artikel der BAM
Filtern
Dokumenttyp
Sprache
- Englisch (5)
Schlagworte
- Regulation (5) (entfernen)
Organisationseinheit der BAM
Several attempts have been made in the past to develop a European harmonized testing and assessment method for façades before the European commission decided to publish a call for tender on the topic. A project consortium from five countries (Sweden, UK, France, Germany and Hungary) applied to the call for tender and was contracted to develop a European approach to assess the fire performance of façades. 24 sub-contractors and 14 stakeholder entities were part of the project. The objective of the European project was to address a request from the Standing Committee of Construction (SCC) to provide EC Member States regulators with a means to regulate the fire performance of façade systems based on a European Approach agreed by SCC. The initial stages of this Project were focused on establishing a Register of the regulatory requirements in all Member States in relation to the fire Performance of façade systems, and to identify those Member States who have regulatory requirements for the fire performance façade systems which go beyond the current EN 13501 (reaction to fire and fire resistance) classification systems and to collate the details of these additional requirements. After having confirmed the regulatory needs a testing and classification methodology based on BS 8414 and DIN 4102-20 was developed to address the identified key performance and classification characteristics.
This paper is a short overview of results the two-year development work, which Final Report published by the European Commission in 2018.
Identifying nanomaterials (NMs) according to European Union Legislation is challenging, as there is an enormous variety of materials, with different physico-chemical properties. The NanoDefiner Framework and its Decision Support Flow Scheme (DSFS) allow choosing the optimal method to measure the particle size distribution by matching the material properties and the performance of the particular measurement techniques. The DSFS leads to a reliable and economic decision whether a material is an NM or not based on scientific criteria and respecting regulatory requirements. The DSFS starts beyond regulatory requirements by identifying non-NMs by a proxy Approach based on their volume-specific surface area. In a second step, it identifies NMs. The DSFS is tested on real-world materials and is implemented in an e-tool. The DSFS is compared with a decision flowchart of the European Commission’s (EC) Joint Research Centre (JRC), which rigorously follows the explicit criteria of the EC NM definition with the focus on identifying NMs, and non-NMs are identified by exclusion. The two approaches build on the same scientific basis and measurement methods, but start from opposite ends: the JRC Flowchart starts by identifying NMs, whereas the NanoDefiner Framework first identifies non-NMs.
The VSSA approach has the important advantage over classifying, imaging and counting techniques that it does not involve dispersion protocols. Further, the BET technique as the basis for VSSA determination it is in widespread use, generates low costs and is specified for many commercial materials. Finally, the same equipment allows for a deeper analysis by full isotherm evaluation.
The present deliverable assesses all NanoDefine powders, supplemented by further real-world materials (in total 26 powders), and quantitatively compares the relationship between the median size (by Electron Microscopy – considered as benchmark for the EC nanomaterial definition) vs. the size derived from VSSA. The VSSA method mitigates the challenges of EM to assess the thickness of platelets, but worked as well on fibbers and particles of irregular shapes. A screening strategy is proposed. If applied to the further data from real-world materials as validation set, this screening does achieve a correct classification, leaving only borderline materials for tier 2 assessment.
Reliable nanomaterial classification of powders using the volume-specific surface area method
(2017)
The volume-specific surface area (VSSA) of a particulate material is one of two apparently very different metrics recommended by the European Commission for a definition of "nanomaterial" for regulatory purposes: specifically, the VSSA metric may classify nanomaterials and non-nanomaterials differently than the median size in number metrics, depending on the chemical composition, size, polydispersity, shape, porosity, and aggregation of the particles in the powder.
Here we evaluate the extent of agreement between classification by electron microscopy (EM) and classification by VSSA on a large set of diverse particulate substances that represent all the anticipated challenges except mixtures of different substances. EM and VSSA are determined in multiple labs to assess also the level of reproducibility. Based on the results obtained on highly characterized benchmark materials from the
NanoDefine EU FP7 project, we derive a tiered screening strategy for the purpose of implementing the definition of nanomaterials. We finally apply the Screening strategy to further industrial materials, which were classified correctly and left only borderline cases for EM.
On platelet-shaped nanomaterials, VSSA is essential to prevent false-negative classification by EM. On porous materials, approaches involving extended Adsorption isotherms prevent false positive classification by VSSA. We find no false negatives by VSSA, neither in Tier 1 nor in Tier 2, despite real-world industrial polydispersity and diverse composition, shape, and coatings. The VSSA screening strategy is recommended for inclusion in a technical guidance for the implementation of the definition.
In this paper, we identify the strategic motives of German manufacturing companies in the electrical engineering and machinery industry to be involved in standards development organizations. First, we present the general motives for the formation of strategic alliances and relate them to specific standardization motives. Then, we identify pursuing specific company interests, solving technical problems, knowledge seeking, influencing regulation, and facilitating market access as motives to standardize by means of factor analysis. In a second step, we test hypotheses on the relationship between the importance of strategic motives and firm level variables, e.g. R&D intensity, innovation activities, and firm size. The results reveal that firms in electric engineering and machinery have a particularly strong interest in ensuring industry-friendly design of regulations, which can be achieved by standards. Moreover, the results confirm that small firms also from these two sectors are active in standardization alliances to access knowledge from other involved stakeholders.