Cold performance equivalence test Sample Clauses

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.
Sample 1Sample 2See All (7)
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs
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.
Sample 1Sample 2Sample 3See All (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.
Sample 1See All (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
Sample 1Sample 2Sample 3See All (4)
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. 1. Test conditions
Sample 1
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.
Sample 1
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 M2 50 40 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.
Sample 1
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs
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.
Sample 1
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
Sample 1

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 H), 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.

  • Performance Testing 7.2.1 The Design-Builder shall direct and supervise the tests and, if necessary, the retests of the Plant using Design-Builder’s supervisory personnel and the Air Emissions Tester shall conduct the air emissions test, in each case, in accordance with the testing procedures set forth in Exhibit A (the “Performance Tests”), to demonstrate, at a minimum, compliance with the Performance Guarantee Criteria. Owner is responsible for obtaining Air Emissions Tester and for ensuring Air Emissions Tester’s timely performance. Design-Builder shall cooperate with the Air Emissions Tester to facilitate performance of all air emissions tests. Design-Builder shall not be held responsible for the actions of Owner’s employees and third parties involved in the Performance Testing, including but not limited to Air Emissions Tester. 7.2.2 No later than thirty (30) Days prior to the earlier of the Scheduled Substantial Completion Date or Substantial Completion, Design-Builder shall provide to Owner for review a detailed testing plan for the Performance Tests (other than for air emissions). Owner and Design-Builder shall agree upon a testing plan that shall be consistent with the Performance Test Protocol contained in Exhibit A hereto. After such agreement has been reached, Design-Builder shall notify the Owner five (5) business days prior to the date Design-Builder intends to commence the Performance Tests and shall notify the Owner upon commencement of the Performance Tests. Owner and Independent Engineer each have the right to witness all testing, including the Performance Tests and any equipment testing, whether at the Site or at the Subcontractor’s or equipment supplier’s premises during the course of this Agreement. Notwithstanding the foregoing sentence, Owner shall bear the costs of providing a witness to any such testing and all such witnesses shall comply at all times with Design-Builder’s, Subcontractor’s or equipment supplier’s safety and security procedures and other reasonable requirements, and otherwise conduct themselves in a manner that does not interfere with Design-Builder’s, Subcontractor’s or equipment supplier’s activities or operations. 7.2.3 Design-Builder shall provide to Owner a Performance Test report (excluding results from air emissions testing), including all applicable test data, calculations and certificates indicating the results of the Performance Tests and, within five (5) business days of Owner’s receipt of such results, Owner, Independent Engineer and Design-Builder will jointly inspect such Work and review the results of the Performance Tests to verify that the Performance Guarantee Criteria have been met. If Owner or Independent Engineer reasonably determines that the Performance Guarantee Criteria have not been met, Owner shall notify Design-Builder the reasons why Owner determined that the Performance Guarantee Criteria have not been met and Design-Builder shall promptly take such action or perform such additional work as will achieve the Performance Guarantee Criteria and shall issue to the Owner another notice in accordance with Section 7.2.2; provided however that if the notice relates to a retest, the notice may be provided no less than two (2) business days prior to the Performance Tests. Such procedure shall be repeated as necessary until Owner and Independent Engineer verifies that the Performance Guarantee Criteria have been met. 7.2.4 If Owner, for whatever reason, prevents Design-Builder from demonstrating the Performance Guarantee Criteria within thirty (30) Days of Design-Builder’s notice that the Plant is ready for Performance Testing, then Design-Builder shall be excused from demonstrating compliance with the Performance Guarantee Criteria during such period of time that Design-Builder is prevented from demonstrating compliance with the Performance Guarantee Criteria; provided however that Design-Builder will be deemed to have fulfilled all of its obligations to demonstrate that the Plant meets the Performance Guarantee Criteria should such period of time during which Design-Builder is prevented from demonstrating the Performance Criteria exceed thirty (30) Days or extend beyond the Final Completion Date.

  • 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).

  • Performance Tests Contractor shall perform Performance Tests in accordance with Section 11.2 of the Agreement and Attachment S.

  • 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.

  • Quarterly Contractor Performance Reporting Customers shall complete a Contractor Performance Survey (Exhibit I) for each Contractor on a Quarterly basis. Customers will electronically submit the completed Contractor Performance Survey(s) to the Department Contract Manager no later than the due date indicated in Contract Exhibit D, Section 17, Additional Special Contract Conditions. The completed Contractor Performance Survey(s) will be used by the Department as a performance-reporting tool to measure the performance of Contractors. 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 MyFloridaMarketPlace or on the Department's website).

  • Covenants of Performance Measurement No interference. Registry Operator shall not interfere with measurement Probes, including any form of preferential treatment of the requests for the monitored services. Registry Operator shall respond to the measurement tests described in this Specification as it would to any other request from an Internet user (for DNS and RDDS) or registrar (for EPP). ICANN testing registrar. Registry Operator agrees that ICANN will have a testing registrar used for purposes of measuring the SLRs described above. Registry Operator agrees to not provide any differentiated treatment for the testing registrar other than no billing of the transactions. ICANN shall not use the registrar for registering domain names (or other registry objects) for itself or others, except for the purposes of verifying contractual compliance with the conditions described in this Agreement. PUBLIC INTEREST COMMITMENTS Registry Operator will use only ICANN accredited registrars that are party to the Registrar Accreditation Agreement approved by the ICANN Board of Directors on 27 June 2013 in registering domain names. A list of such registrars shall be maintained by ICANN on ICANN’s website. (Intentionally omitted. Registry Operator has not included commitments, statements of intent or business plans provided for in its application to ICANN for the TLD.) Registry Operator agrees to perform the following specific public interest commitments, which commitments shall be enforceable by ICANN and through the Public Interest Commitment Dispute Resolution Process established by ICANN (posted at xxxx://xxx.xxxxx.xxx/en/resources/registries/picdrp), which may be revised in immaterial respects by ICANN from time to time (the “PICDRP”). Registry Operator shall comply with the PICDRP. Registry Operator agrees to implement and adhere to any remedies ICANN imposes (which may include any reasonable remedy, including for the avoidance of doubt, the termination of the Registry Agreement pursuant to Section 4.3(e) of the Agreement) following a determination by any PICDRP panel and to be bound by any such determination. Registry Operator will include a provision in its Registry-Registrar Agreement that requires Registrars to include in their Registration Agreements a provision prohibiting Registered Name Holders from distributing malware, abusively operating botnets, phishing, piracy, trademark or copyright infringement, fraudulent or deceptive practices, counterfeiting or otherwise engaging in activity contrary to applicable law, and providing (consistent with applicable law and any related procedures) consequences for such activities including suspension of the domain name. Registry Operator will periodically conduct a technical analysis to assess whether domains in the TLD are being used to perpetrate security threats, such as pharming, phishing, malware, and botnets. Registry Operator will maintain statistical reports on the number of security threats identified and the actions taken as a result of the periodic security checks. Registry Operator will maintain these reports for the term of the Agreement unless a shorter period is required by law or approved by ICANN, and will provide them to ICANN upon request. Registry Operator will operate the TLD in a transparent manner consistent with general principles of openness and non-discrimination by establishing, publishing and adhering to clear registration policies.

  • Continuing Performance (a) The obligations under this Agreement continue until satisfied in full and do not merge with any action performed or document executed by any Party for the purposes of performance of this Agreement. (b) Any representation in this Agreement survives the execution of any document for the purposes of, and continues after, performance of this Agreement. (c) Any indemnity given by any Party under this Agreement: (i) constitutes a liability of that Party separate and independent from any other liability of that Party under this Agreement or any other agreement; and (ii) survives and continues after performance of this Agreement.

Draft better contracts in just 5 minutes Get the weekly Law Insider newsletter packed with expert videos, webinars, ebooks, and more!