1965
DOI: 10.2172/4511101
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Quick-Curing Foam Systems.

Abstract: This report was prepared m an account of GoTremment sponsored work. Neither the United Stales, nor the Commission, nor any person acting on behaif of tte CJommlssloffi A. Maltes any wananty or representation, expressed or Implied, with respect to the accuracy, completeness, or asefatoess of the information cont^ned in Ms report, or that the ase of any information, apparatus, method, or process disclosed in this report may not infringe privately owned tights: or B. Mstimes any Eabilittes with respect to the use… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

1999
1999
1999
1999

Publication Types

Select...
1

Relationship

0
1

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 1 publication
(1 citation statement)
references
References 0 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…These included multiple order polynomial (first, second, and third order) and exponential nonlinear regression, and logit analysis. 61 Selection of the most meaningful analysis and curve fit was based upon the dual criteria of high statistical significance and most logical data curve fit. Primary considerations for the most logical curve fit were that the curve exhibit a 0% failure at the zero time point and not exceed 100% failure at any time.…”
Section: Data Analysis and Curve Fit For Percent Failure Versus Implamentioning
confidence: 99%
“…These included multiple order polynomial (first, second, and third order) and exponential nonlinear regression, and logit analysis. 61 Selection of the most meaningful analysis and curve fit was based upon the dual criteria of high statistical significance and most logical data curve fit. Primary considerations for the most logical curve fit were that the curve exhibit a 0% failure at the zero time point and not exceed 100% failure at any time.…”
Section: Data Analysis and Curve Fit For Percent Failure Versus Implamentioning
confidence: 99%