Cold performance equivalence test Sample Clauses

A cold performance equivalence test clause defines the requirement for equipment or systems to demonstrate that they perform to specified standards under low-temperature or 'cold' conditions. In practice, this clause typically mandates that the product undergo testing in a controlled environment simulating cold weather to verify that its functionality, efficiency, or safety is not compromised. The core purpose of this clause is to ensure reliability and suitability of the equipment for use in cold climates, thereby reducing the risk of failure or underperformance in such environments.
Cold performance equivalence test. A comparison of the cold performance of the replacement brake lining assembly and the original brake lining assembly shall be made by comparing the results of testing to the following method. 2.1.1.1. Make a minimum of six brake applications at spaced increments of pedal effort or line pressure up to wheel lock or, alternatively, up to a mean fully developed deceleration of 6 m/s2 or up to the allowed maximum pedal force for the category of vehicle in question from an initial speed as given in the table below: Vehicle category Test speed in km/h M1 70 45 N1 65 50 The initial brake temperature at the start of each application shall be 100°C. 2.1.1.2. Note and plot pedal force or line pressure and mean fully developed deceleration for each application, and determine the pedal force or line pressure required to achieve (if possible) a mean fully developed deceleration of 5 m/s2 for front axle brakes and 3 m/s2 for rear axle brakes. If these values cannot be achieved with the maximum allowed pedal force determine alternatively the pedal force or line pressure required to achieve maximum deceleration. 2.1.1.3. The replacement brake lining assembly shall be considered to show similar performance characteristics to the original brake lining assembly if the achieved mean fully developed decelerations at the same control force or line pressure in the upper two thirds of the generated curve are within 15 per cent of those obtained with the original brake lining assembly.
View SourceView Similar (9)
Cold performance equivalence test. A comparison of the cold performance of the replacement brake lining assembly or the replacement drum brake lining and the original brake lining assembly or the original drum brake lining shall be made by comparing the results of the Type-0 test as described in paragraph 2.2.1.1. 2.2.2.1. The Type-0 test as prescribed in paragraph 2. 2.1.1. shall be performed with one set of the original brake lining assembly or the original drum brake lining. 2.2.2.2. The replacement brake lining assembly or the replacement drum brake lining shall be considered to show similar performance characteristics to the original brake lining assembly or the original drum brake lining if the achieved mean fully developed decelerations at the same line pressure in the upper two thirds of the generated curve are within 15 per cent of those obtained with the original brake lining assembly or the original drum brake lining.
View SourceView Similar (5)
Cold performance equivalence test. A comparison of the cold performance of the replacement brake lining assembly and the original brake lining assembly shall be made by comparing the results of testing to the following method. 2.2.3.1. From the initial speed of 80 km/h for M1 and N1 and 60 km/h for M2 and with brake temperature  100 C at the start of each application make a minimum of six brake applications at spaced intervals of line pressure up to a mean fully developed deceleration of 6 m/s2. 2.2.3.2. Note and plot line pressure and mean fully developed deceleration for each application, and determine line pressure required to achieve 5 m/s2. 2.2.3.3. The replacement brake lining assembly shall be considered to show similar performance characteristics to the original brake lining assembly if the achieved mean fully developed decelerations at the same control force or line pressure in the upper two thirds of the generated curve are within 15 per cent of those obtained with the original brake lining assembly.
View SourceView Similar (5)
Cold performance equivalence test. A comparison of the cold performance of the replacement brake lining assembly or the replacement drum brake lining and the original brake lining assembly or the original drum brake lining shall be made by comparing the results of testing to the following method. 1.2.2.1.1. Make a minimum of six brake applications at spaced increments of pedal force or line pressure up to wheel lock or, alternatively, up to a mean fully developed deceleration of
View SourceView Similar (4)
Cold performance equivalence test. A comparison of the cold performance of the replacement brake lining assembly or the replacement drum brake lining and the original brake lining assembly or the original drum brake lining shall be made by comparing the results of testing to the following method. 1.2.2.1.1. Make a minimum of six brake applications at spaced increments of pedal force or line pressure up to wheel lock or, alternatively, up to a mean fully developed deceleration of 3.5 m/s2 or up to the maximum allowed pedal force or up to the maximum line pressure from an initial speed of 45 km/h and with a brake temperature  100 C at the start of each application. 1.2.2.1.2. Note and plot pedal force or line pressure and mean fully developed deceleration for each application, and determine the pedal force or line pressure required to achieve (if possible) a mean fully developed deceleration of 3 m/s2. If this value cannot be achieved determine alternatively the pedal force or line pressure required to achieve maximum deceleration. 1.2.2.1.3. The replacement brake lining assembly or the replacement drum brake lining shall be considered to show similar performance characteristics to the original brake lining assembly or the original drum brake lining if the achieved mean fully developed decelerations at the same control force or line pressure in the upper two thirds of the generated curve are within 15 per cent of those obtained with the original brake lining assembly or the original drum brake lining.
View SourceView Similar (2)
Cold performance equivalence test. A comparison of the cold performance of the replacement brake lining assembly and the original brake lining assembly shall be made by comparing the results of the Type-0 test as described in paragraph 3.1. 3.3.1. The Type-0 test as prescribed in paragraph 3.1. shall be performed with one set of the original brake lining assembly. 3.3.2. The replacement brake lining assembly shall be considered to show similar performance characteristics to the original brake lining assembly if the achieved mean fully developed decelerations at the same line pressure or application force in the upper two thirds of the generated curve are within 15 per cent of those obtained with the original brake lining assembly. Annex 6 - REQUIREMENTS FOR REPLACEMENT BRAKE LINING ASSEMBLIES AND DRUM BRAKE LININGS FOR VEHICLES OF CATEGORIES O3 AND O4 1. Test conditions
View SourceView Similar (2)
Cold performance equivalence test. A comparison of the cold performance of the replacement brake lining assembly and the original brake lining assembly shall be made by comparing the results of the Type-O test as described in paragraph 3.1. 3.3.1. The Type-O test as prescribed in paragraph 3.1. shall be performed with one set of the original brake lining assembly. 3.3.2. The replacement brake lining assembly shall be considered to show similar performance characteristics to the original brake lining assembly if the achieved mean fully developed decelerations at the same line pressure or application force in the upper two thirds of the generated curve are within 15 per cent of those obtained with the original brake lining assembly. REQUIREMENTS FOR REPLACEMENT BRAKE LINING ASSEMBLIES AND DRUM BRAKE LININGS FOR VEHICLES OF CATEGORIES O3 AND O4 1. Test conditions
View Source
Cold performance equivalence test. A comparison of the cold performance of the replacement brake lining assembly and the original brake lining assembly shall be made by comparing the results of the Type-0 test as described in paragraph 3.1. 3.3.1. The Type-0 test as prescribed in paragraph 3.1. shall be performed with one set of the original brake lining assembly. 3.3.2. The replacement brake lining assembly shall be considered to show similar performance characteristics to the original brake lining assembly if the achieved mean fully developed decelerations at the same line pressure or application force in the upper two thirds of the generated curve are within 15 per cent of those obtained with the original brake lining assembly. Annex 6 Requirements for replacement brake lining assemblies and drum brake linings for vehicles of categories O3 and O4 1. Test conditions The tests prescribed in this annex may be carried out alternatively on a test vehicle or on an inertia dynamometer or on a rolling road test bench under the same conditions as mentioned in Regulation 13, Annex 11, Appendix 2, paragraphs 3.1. to 3.4. Brake linings submitted for test shall be fitted to the relevant brakes and, until a fixed burnishing procedure is established, shall be burnished to the manufacturer’s instructions in agreement with the technical service.
View Source

Related to Cold performance equivalence test

  • CONTRACTOR PERFORMANCE AUDIT The Contractor shall allow the Authorized User to assess Contractor’s performance by providing any materials requested in the Authorized User Agreement (e.g., page load times, response times, uptime, and fail over time). The Authorized User may perform this Contractor performance audit with a third party at its discretion, at the Authorized User’s expense. The Contractor shall perform an independent audit of its Data Centers, at least annually, at Contractor expense. The Contractor will provide a data owner facing audit report upon request by the Authorized User. The Contractor shall identify any confidential, trade secret, or proprietary information in accordance with Appendix B, Section 9(a), Confidential/Trade Secret Materials.

  • Ongoing Performance Measures The Department intends to use performance-reporting tools in order to measure the performance of Contractor(s). These tools will include the Contractor Performance Survey (Exhibit G), to be completed by Customers on a quarterly basis. Such measures will allow the Department to better track Vendor performance through the term of the Contract(s) and ensure that Contractor(s) consistently provide quality services to the State and its Customers. The Department reserves the right to modify the Contractor Performance Survey document and introduce additional performance-reporting tools as they are developed, including online tools (e.g. tools within MFMP or on the Department's website).

  • Monitoring of Contract Performance The Contractor shall comply with the monitoring arrangements set out in the Monitoring Requirements Schedule including, but not limited to, providing such data and information as the Contractor may be required to produce under the Contract.

  • Portfolio Expense and Performance Data The Trust shall provide such data regarding each Portfolio’s expense ratios and investment performance as the Company shall reasonably request, to facilitate the registration and sale of the Variable Contracts. Without limiting the generality of the forgoing, the Trust shall provide the following Portfolio expense and performance data on a timely basis to facilitate the Company’s preparation of its annually updated registration statement for the Variable Contracts (and as otherwise reasonably requested by the Company), but in no event later than 10 calendar days after the close of each Portfolio’s fiscal year: (a) The gross “Annual Portfolio Company Expenses” for each Portfolio calculated in accordance with Item 3 of Form N-1A, before any expense reimbursements or fee waiver arrangements (and in accordance with (i) Instruction 16 to Item 4 of Form N-4, and (ii) Instruction 4(a) to Item 4 of Form N-6); (b) The net “Annual Portfolio Company Expenses” (aka “Total Annual Fund Operating Expenses”) for each Portfolio calculated in accordance with Item 3 of Form N-1A, that include any expense reimbursements or fee waiver arrangements (and in accordance with (i) Instruction 17 to Item 4 of Form N-4, (ii) Instruction 4 to Item 17 of Form N-4, (iii) Instruction 4(b) to Item 4 of Form N-6, and (iv) Instruction 4 to Item 18 of Form N-6), and the period for which the expense reimbursements or fee waiver arrangement is expected to continue and whether it can be terminated by the Portfolio (or Fund); and (c) The “Average Annual Total Returns” for each Portfolio (before taxes) as calculated pursuant to Item 4(b)(2)(iii) of Form N-1A (for the 1, 5, and 10 year periods, and in accordance with (i) Instruction 7 to Item 17 of Form N-4, and (ii) Instruction 7 to Item 18 of Form N-6).

  • Annual Performance Evaluation On either a fiscal year or calendar year basis, (consistently applied from year to year), the Bank shall conduct an annual evaluation of Executive’s performance. The annual performance evaluation proceedings shall be included in the minutes of the Board meeting that next follows such annual performance review.