AIRCRAFT
ELECTRICAL WIRE TYPES
associated
with
AIRCRAFT
ELECTRICAL
FIRES
An
aviation safety
article
by
http://alexpaterson.net/aviation/wire_types.htm
Last
Updated: 22 July 2012
MASTER
INDEX
of articles written, posted
online, or recommended by Alex Paterson
INTRODUCTION
This article provides a list of electrical wire types most
commonly used in jet transport aircraft. The articles lists both the
positive and negative characteristics of each wire type and the
aircraft that these wires have been installed in. It needs to be
understood that the article is by necessity incomplete because
aircraft manufacturers and airlines have historically given scant
regard to the potential dangers posed by different wire types when
installing them in their aircraft and therefore have not kept
accurate records of what types of wire have been installed in the
same. The complacency within the
aviation industry
towards the dangers posed by electrical wire is endemic and is best
summed up by the comment of United States Federal Aviation Authority
(FAA) deputy head, Tom McSweeny, who is reported to have said before
a Congressional Committee in 19-- that "wire is wire". (more on Mr
McSweeny's alleged comment below)
NOTE: This is a draft web page only,
setup for discussion between contributors. It undoubtedly contains
omissions, and possibly some mistakes.
Readers
are invited to agree with, disagree with, seek clarification about or
put their point of view about any of the issues discussed in the
article.
Alex Paterson (May 2007)
AIRCRAFT
WIRE
TABLE
The following table relates to
general purpose
aircraft electrical wire. It is important to understand that all transport jet and turboprop aircraft
have a mixture of the following different wire types installed in
them. The wire types listed in the table relate to the predominant
type of wire used in each aircraft. It would appear that even aircraft
manufacturers themselves are not completely sure as to what wire is
installed in individual aircraft as their attitude towards electrical
wire in the past has been that "wire is wire".
Table Colour code:
DANGEROUS WIRE |
SAFETY UNKNOWN |
PROBABLY SAFE |
SAFE WIRE |
NOTE: Wire is listed in the
table by date of
introduction into aircraft, with the oldest wire typed listed at the
top.
WIRE TYPE
|
DESCRIPTION
|
AIRCRAFT INSTALLED IN
(some) |
PVC/Nylon
(Polyvinyl-Chloride)
Introduced 1950s
Specification No: 5086 |
Fails Far
25
- Weight 6.8 lbs. per
1,000 ft
(Heaviest and thickest)
- Rated temperature low: 105°C
- Flammable - burns
readily creating copious amounts of thick, toxic smoke rendering it
virtually impossible for pilots to see their flight instruments or
breathe. (e.g. Valujet 592)
- Insulation when
burning turns to hydrochloric acid when exposed to water.
- Outgasses onto electrical & electronic contacts
- Soft - Susceptible to
chafing
- Susceptible to aging in that it dries out and becomes brittle.
- Banned by US Air
Force.
- US Air Force had 800
autopilot anomalies due to defective PVC in a 6 month study in --?
- Still used as general
purpose replacement wire.
- Implicated in Valujet
Flight 592 DC9 which crashed into the Florida Everglades on 11 May 1996
Dangerous Wire
|
Installed in
- Early DC-9s up until
1979
(e.g. Valujet 592)
- Early B727s up until
1976
- Early B737s up until
1976
Still used as general purpose
replacement wire by sections
of the aviation industry. |
Kynar
Introduced in 1964
Specification number:
|
Fails Far
25
- Thickness: 15 microns
- Weight 5.5 lbs per
1,000 ft.
- Rated Temperature:
150°C
(fails temperature spec)
- Poor fluid
resistance
- No longer used
|
Installed in
- DC9s from 1970 until
1976
|
Kapton
(complex aromatic
polyamide)
Manufactured by Dupont
Chemical Co.
Introduced 1966
Specification Numbers:
- 81381/11
- BMS 13-51
(Boeing)
|
Fails Far
25
- Thickness: 8.4 microns (Very thin)
- Weight: 4.6 lbs per
1,000 ft (Very light weight)
- Rated temperature:
200°C
- 'Explodes' and burns fiercely at flash-over during an arc
tracking event
due to the production of free hydrogen, severely damaging adjacent
wires and igniting surrounding structure. (i.e. behaves like detonator
fuse.) 1
- High ignition
temperature to start burning (usually associated with an electrical
short circuit of 5000°C), but when it does finally ignite it burns very
fiercely (explodes) creating virtually no smoke.
- Fumes are clear and
fairly benign.
- Susceptible to wet
and dry Arc Tracking.
- Susceptible to aging in that it dries out forming hairline cracks
which can lead to micro current leakage (i.e. electrical 'ticking'
faults ) which in turn can eventually culminate in an explosive arc
tracking event. (i.e. short circuit) 1
- Stiffness (straight
line memory) makes it prone to vibration chafing, (rubbing) and
stressed by bending.
- Abrasive to other
wires. (due to its hardness)
- Hygroscopic (i.e. absorbs water ) rendering it susceptible
to wet arc tracking.
- Installation
difficulties (difficult to strip and mark)
- Banned by
* US Air Force
* US Navy
* Canadian military
* Boeing in 1992
* Bombardier?
VERY DANGEROUS WIRE
|
Installed in
- Airbus A310 (all)
- Airbus A320
(currently) 2
- Airbus A330
(currently)
- Airbus A340
(currently)
- B727 (after 1979, EB)
- B737 (after 1979 to
1990)
- B747-400 (some from
1989 - 1991)
- B757 (up until 1990)
- B767 (up until 1991)
- BAe 146 (unconfirmed
reports)
- DC-10
- MD-8x (all)
- MD-11 (up until early
1992)
- A300 -600 (with
Teflon top-coat)
- L-1011 Tristar
- Concorde SST
- B-707 (but not
according to EB)
- Dassault Mercure
- CL 600 Series (but not
RJ/CL604 or Global Express (Challenger)
- Shorts SD-330
- Gulfstream G-II, G-III
- HS125-700
- Bell 212, 214
- Sikorsky S-61, S-70B,
S-76
- Westland 606
- Plus 31 military
types such as P-3, C130, F-14, F-18, Hawkeye, etc
Still used by AIRBUS
in A319, A320, A330, A340
until about 2005
(see footnote 2 below) |
Teflon
(Polytetrafluoroethylene
- PTFE)
Introduced in 1969
Specification Numbers:
|
Fails Far
25
- Thickness: 10 microns
- Weight 5.43 lbs/1,000
ft.
- Rated temperature:
200°C
- Longitudinal
splitting problem due to manufacturing process.
- Susceptible to
cold-flow (creeping of conductor).
- Type of insulation
found as ignition source on Apollo 13
- Type of insulation
found split in TWA 800-fuel tank wires [Fuel Quantity Indicating
System] (FQIS)
- Banned by major
manufacturers in 1983
|
Installed in
|
Poly-X
(alkane-imide)
an Aliphatic polyimide
Manufactured by Raychem
Introduced in 1970
Specification Numbers:
|
Fails Far
25
- The first exotic
blend of insulation (due to oil embargo)
- Thickness: 10 microns
- Weight: 4.7 lbs. per
1,000 ft (Light weight)
- Rated temperature:
150°C
- Susceptible to
solvents
- Susceptible to radial
cracking.
Projected service life 60,000 hrs/but circumferential cracks found
after just 2000 hrs by US Navy.
- Susceptible to
premature aging. Banned by US Navy in 1978 due to premature aging of
insulation after 4000 hrs
- Brittle. Due to
brittleness, 1" bare spots not uncommon.
- Susceptible to
chafing.
- Fails FAR 25
(airworthiness testing standards)
- Caused 323 USN F-14s
to be re-wired
- Banned by US Navy.
- Implicated by Edward
Block (and others) in the downing of TWA Flt 800 in 1996. 4
- No longer used in
civilian aircraft.
Dangerous
Wire
|
Installed in
- Early 747s (e.g. TWA
800)
- Early DC-10s
|
Stilan
Introduced 1972
Specification Numbers:
|
Fails Far
25
- Thickness: 10 microns
- Weight 4.7 lbs. per
1,000 ft (Light weight)
- Rated Temperature:
150°C
- Insulation breaks
down in hydraulic and de-icing fluid
- Microscopic crazing
problem seen under microscope
- Cracks under stress
- Found to arc over
- Susceptible to
spurious signal generation (EMI
hazard)
- Absorbs water (i.e. hygroscopic)
- No longer used
|
Installed in
- B-747s built in
mid-to-late 1970s
- DC-10s built in
mid-to-late 1970s
|
Tefzel
(ETFE)
Introduced 1972
Specification numbers
|
Fails Far
25
- Rated temperature
150°C
- Soft at rated
temperature
- Used as general
installation wire but should never be mixed in
bundle with other wire types due to its softness.
|
Installed in
Arcturus
Tefzel was found in
Swiss Air flight SR111's Inflight Entertainment System (IFEN) which was
suspected as being the cause of the inflight fire and subsequent crash
of the aircraft off Nova Scotia in November 1998. |
Cross Linked Tefzel
(XL-ETFE)
Manufactured by Judd
Wire and Raychem.
Known by some sections
of the aviation industry as "Spec 55" wire. Apparently the name "Spec
55" has been trademarked by Raychem.
Introduced 1977
Specification
numbers
- MIL-W-22759/34
- Spec 55
- Spec 55A
- BMS 13-48 (Boeing)
|
Fails Far
25
- Thickness: 10 microns
- Weight: 5.0 lbs/1000'
(light weight)
- Rated temperature:
150°C
- Wet arc
tracks
- Flammable
producing copious amount of Dense toxic smoke (96%+
density) when it burns rendering it virtually impossible for flight
crew to see their flight instruments.
- NASA states will fail
flammability requirements in 30% oxygen.
- Toxicity
- the worst of all wires, banned for manned aerospace use by major
manufacturer. (Grumman Corporation banned it in 1982 and NASA followed
suit in 1983 due to its toxicity)
- Soft
at rated temperature
- Loses mechanical
strength properties at rated temperature
- Fails FAR 25
(airworthiness standards test)
- Projected life 50,000
hrs
- Notch
propagation
problems
Dangerous Wire
|
Installed in
- B737 (currently)
- B747 (currently)
- B757 (currently)
- B767 (currently)
- B777 (currently)
- BAe146
- Airbus A320
- Airbus A330
- Airbus A340
Still used by BOEING in
B737, B747, B757, B767, B777
and Airbus |
TKT Boeing
(Teflon/Kapton/Teflon)
Introduced 1992
Boeing Specification No:
- MIL-W-22759
- BMS 13-60 (Boeing)
Tufflite brand
manufactured by Tensolite
http://www.tensolite.com
|
Passes FAR
25
- Weight: 5.0 lbs. per
1,000 ft (Light weight)
- Arc-track resistant
- Abrasion resistant
- Superb insulation
protection
- High heat tolerance
- Resists smoking when
burning (less than 2% density)
- Displays all the
positive aspects of Kapton (i.e. lightweight, resistance to burning, no
fumes when burning etc) without any of Kapton's negatives.
- No known problems
SAFE WIRE
|
Installed in
- B737s built after 1992
- B757s built after 1992
- Reported by some LAMEs to be partly installed in some B747-400 aircraft manufactured between 1989 - 1999.
NOTE: Airbus Industries
now use their own version of TKT (See
below) |
KKF BAe
Two layers of Kapton within a FEP laquer topcoat.
Installed within the pressure cabin of BAe 146 aircraft.
Note: Source of info:
BAe Statement dated 7 July 1999
|
FAR 25 attributes unknown
Undoubtedly safer than Kapton if only because it reduces
Kaptons propensity to dry out and form cracks.
Resistance to Arc
Tracking unknown. |
Installed in
Source: BAe Statement 7 July 1999
|
KT BAe
Single layer of Kapton overlaid by single wrap of PTFE
(i.e. Teflon)
Installed outside the pressure cabin of BAe 146 aircraft.
Note: Source of info:
BAe Statement dated 7 July 1999 |
FAR 25 attributes unknown
Undoubtedly safer than Kapton if
only because it reduces Kapton's propensity to dry out and form cracks. However, similar to Airbus' KTT (see below)
which according to the America's foremost independent aircraft wire
expert, Edward Block, "this type of wire is just Kapton with a cosmetic
coating of Teflon which is used for marking purposes only and does
little to reduce Kapton's propensity to explosively arc track".
Safety Unknown
|
Installed in
Source: BAe Statement 7 July 1999
|
KTT Airbus
Kapton with two very thin outer
layers of Teflon.
Called by Airbus
Polimide/PTFE/PTFE
Airbus Specification No:
|
FAR 25 attributes unknown
Undoubtedly safer than Kapton, but Airbus refuses to
disclose performance attributes or specifications of this wire to
independent researchers.
According to specifications available, this wire is made
up of 25µm Kapton, sandwiched between two layers of 2.5µm FEP.
Safety Unknown
|
Used by Airbus to replace Kapton as a general purpose
wire.
Installed in Airbus FBW aircraft up until mid 2006 when
it was replaced by Airbus' TKT specification EN2267-008 listed below.
See footnote 3 below. |
TKT Airbus
Called by Airbus
PTFE/Polimide/PTFE
Note: PTFE/Polimide/PTFE is just
another name for TKT as
Teflon is a PTFE and
Kapton is a Polimide
Airbus Specification No:
|
Probably meets FAR 25
Airbus refuses to fully disclose the performance
attributes or specifications of this wire to independent researchers.
- No known specifications released by Airbus although
suspected to be very similar to Boeing's TKT wire listed above.
- Allegedly has a much thicker outer layer of PTFE
(i.e. Teflon) than the KTT wire used earlier by Airbus. (see below)
Probably Safe
|
Reportedly now installed in Airbus Aircraft as from mid
2006 as a general purpose wire.
|
Sources:
- Edward Block (IASA) Edward
B. Block is
an international expert on aviation and wiring, specialising in
aircraft crash investigations.
- Captain
John Sampson (IASA) Is a practicing airline pilot with
extensive
experience in civil airline operations, helicopter piloting and
military aviation. Was editor of Aviation Safety Week for a
period of time in the mid 2000s.
- Michael Murphy. Aviation
safety auditor from Canada.
- Patrick Price (deceased)
Ex-employee of Boeing Corporation tasked with investigating aircraft
electrical wiring issues.
NOTES
FAR
25 comprises
clauses mandating aircraft design safety rules. However, there are no
specific clauses within FAR 25 pertaining to the flammability, toxicity
or smoke visibility criteria of electrical wire insulation. That said, FAR Section 601 mandates a general statement that;
FAR 25-601: "The airplane may not have design
features or details that experience has shown to be hazardous or
unreliable. The suitability of each questionable design detail and part
must be established by tests."
Source: http://www.flightsimaviation.com/data/FARS/part_25-601.html
As argued in this document the suitability of aircraft electrical
wire insulation materials are "questionable", yet they have never been
the subject of a comprehensive formal testing program and as such are
in breach of FAR 25-601.
Only
Boeing's TKT wire has no known problems and meets FAR 25
requirements. Airbus' version of TKT probably meets FAR 25
requirements.
No
specific standards spelt out by aircraft regulatory authorities such
as US FAA or European JAR regarding aircraft electrical wire.
Specifically no standards defined or any requirement to test wire
for:
- Propensity of wire to wet
or dry arc track.
- Propensity of wire to burn.
- the density of smoke and
toxicity of fumes when wire burns.
Modern
jet transport aircraft are required by law (FAA 25 & JAR 25) to
ensure all safety of flight items and aircraft
systems have
adequate backup systems installed in the event of a failure of the
main system, (and that includes aircraft electrical systems), yet no
thought was given to the failure of the aircraft wiring system
itself.
Wire
is deemed by most in the aviation industry (i.e. aircraft
manufacturers, pilots, airline management and regulatory authorities)
as an "install and forget" item. This attitude is best summed up by
the comment of United States Federal Aviation Authority (FAA) deputy
head, Tom McSweeny, who is reported to have said before a
Congressional Committee that "Wire is wire". This attitude ignores
the fact that:
- Modern jet transport
aircraft contain literally hundreds of kilometers of wire.
- Wire is often damaged
during manufacture and/or installation.
- Wire is often incorrectly
installed in aircraft. (i.e. incorrectly routed near hot equipment
and/or bundled together with other incompatible wire types such as soft
wire laying adjacent hard wire etc)
- Wire (both the wire and its
insulation) deteriorates with age. With regard to the insulation, it
dries out, becomes brittle forming cracks exposing the conductor (i.e.
wire) . Wire itself, oxidises especially associated with the widespread
electrolysis that occurs in aircraft leading to poor contacts and the
generation of local hot spots in the wire which has the potential to
melt the surrounding insulation material.
- All wire deteriorates in
service due to environmental factors such as:
- extremes of heat
& cold experienced by aircraft on the ground and in the air.
(i.e. wire can experience plus +200°C down to minus -70°C),
- water damage, (hydrolysis and the fact that some wire types exhibit hygroscopic tendencies)
- salt damage associated
with marine environments. (all aircraft operate into
airfields adjacent marine environments at least some time in their
operational lives)
- contamination by
aircraft fluids such as fuel, oil, hydraulic fluid, deicing fluid,
cleaning chemicals, toilet residue, galley spillage etc.
- inflight vibration
causing chafing of wires rubbing against other wires or the structure
of the aircraft. This is especially a problem with hard wire such as
Kapton laying adjacent a soft wire like Tefzel.
- All wire products
display differing properties with regard to aging, but practically all
wire insulation material dries out, goes hard and then develops
hairline fractures which allow the ingress of water and other aviation
fluids leading to micro-discharges of current through the cracks to
surrounding wires or the aircraft structure. ('ticking' faults)
- All aircraft use their
airframe as their electrical earth return pathway resulting in
significant constraints in the operation of protection devices such as
circuit breakers located in the cockpit. (see separate paper on this
issue)
According to Ed Block: "Only TKT
wire insulation (BMS 13-60) meets FAR 25
Standards."
RECOMMENDATIONS
The aviation industry as a
whole needs to
acknowledge that the shortcomings associated with different
electrical wire types are a serious issue and potentially very
dangerous as evidenced by the information presented in this paper.
The notion held by many with in the aviation industry that "wire is
just wire" is irresponsible.
Practical steps that the
industry should take
to begin to address the situation include:
- Aviation regulatory
authorities need to specify rigorous performance standards for
electrical wire so that they conform to FAR 25 in that "insulation
material is not used that is hazardous, unreliable, or contributes
smoke/fire". Any promulgated standards for electrical wire would need
to be rigorously enforced.
- Acknowledge that Kapton
wire is a particularly dangerous hazard to aircraft and insist upon its
its removal from aircraft where practical. (this statement acknowledges
the fact that the complete removal of Kapton wire will be in many cases
an impossibility)
- Insist that electronic 'Fly
by Wire' (FBW) aircraft be fitted with a completely separate 'virgin'
emergency electrical bus to allow pilots to remove all
electrical current from all 'normal' electrical wire circuits in the
event of an electrical fire. For more on this subject see 'Virgin Electrical Bus'
GLOSSARY
- Aging
is the deterioration of wiring insulation with the passage of time. To
certain extent aging is a natural process associated with the
propensity of most materials to breakdown into their constituent parts
over time. (e.g. rust) Most electrical insulation compounds tend to dry
out over time, become brittle and crack. Aging of wiring insulation is
exacerbated by aircraft vibration causing chaffing (see below) and
exposure to a whole raft of chemicals within the aircraft such as
hydraulic fluid, engine oil, toilet chemicals, salt spray and moisture
etc. Fluorination and other treatments (such as top-coating) may
accelerate the aging process.
- Arc
tracking is the process by which electrical conductance can
occur through and along the insulating coating, rather than just the
wire conductor. This is made possible by the formation of carbon along
cracks within the insulation material and because carbon is an
electrical conductor, once formed the carbon track tends to grow
associated with the localised heat that is generated along the track by
the electricity leaking through it. The heat generated by the current
flow leakage causes a chemical breakdown of the insulating material
adjacent to the carbon track, forming more carbon along the track. In
other words once initiated the formation of a carbon track becomes self
propagating and therefore continues to grow with the passage of time.
In other words, once started, arc tracking is capable of self
propagation through the virtual instant creation of its own
combustion-induced carbon char leading to a massive leakage of
electrical current through the carbon track so formed and the damage of
adjacent wires in the same wire-bundle. This process is called
'flash-over'. (see next)
The initiator of arc tracking can be a flaw in the insulation caused by
imprint labeling, radial cracking, chafing between wires or contact
between a wire conductor and the airframe, hygroscopic absorption of
water, salt and other contaminants or an electrical short circuit. It
can also be precipitated by undetected shorting damage in inaccessible
areas or by use of inappropriate types of insulation in SWAMP areas
(severe weather and moisture-prone areas such as wheel-wells).
NOTE: See also 'Ticking Faults' listed below.
- Flash-over
is the self propagation and catastrophic escalation of an arc tracking
event through the instant creation of a major carbon char pathway
associated with the heat that is generated during the initial arc track
event (i.e. carbon is produced when the insulation material starts to
burn) The resulting escalation of the arc track event associated with
flashover can be explosive (especially with Kapton wire) and the naked
flames can cause damage to adjacent wire-bundles and thermal-acoustic
insulation within the airframe. (e.g. Mylar) Vertical wire runs are
more susceptible to flash-over (because naked flames naturally rise
vertically). However flash-over can also occur horizontally or, less
explosively, in a downward vertical sense. Unlike a straight electrical
short, the conductor's temperature itself may not rise high enough to
trip the circuit protective device (CPD) meaning the arcing phenomena
may not necessarily cause a thermal circuit-breaker to trip. The arc
tracking phenomenon is based upon the ability of the conductive carbon
char to heat adjacent wiring and self-propagate, particularly along a
wire bundle more so than an individual wire. Note that the phenomena
induced in the presence of significant moisture is called "Wet Arc
Propagation" (as against "Dry Arc Propagation"). Wet arcing is more
likely to produce the flash-over end-result.
-
Chafing occurs when wires vibrate and rub
against each other (or the structure of the aircraft) causing the
insulation layer surrounding the wire to be rubbed away exposing the
electrical. The vibration causing the chafing is usually the cumulative
effect of the high-frequency vibration which naturally occurs in flight
associated with aerodynamic and engine vibrations. The tendency for
wire to chaff is exacerbated by insufficient tensioning, insufficient
offset or the tightening of a wire against an airframe component
(especially around corners). Over-tensioning of wires and/or
insufficient support intervals can lead to "strumming" of wires
(causing them to contact other surfaces). Scraping caused by pulling
wire through narrow areas during installation can cause a similar
effect to chafing.
- Cold-flow
(creeping of the conductor) is any permanent deformation due to
pressure or mechanical force, without the aid of heat softening.
- EMI:
Electromagnetic Interference. Wiring that is unshielded is susceptible
to strong electromagnetic fields stemming from systems and modules that
are natural emitters such as GPS, DME (Distant Measuring Equipment),
radios, weather radars, radar altimeters etc (plus cell-phones and
Gameboys etc)
- FBW:
Fly By Wire. In conventional aircraft, flight control is actuated by
pushrods and cables to hydraulic actuators driving the primary control
surfaces (i.e. ailerons, rudders, spoilers, canards, elevons and
elevators). In FBW aircraft the physical connections of cables and
pushrods are replaced by proportionate computer-generated digitized
signals.
- Fluid resistance:
Resistance to a wide range of commonly used solvents, fluids and
lubricants used in aircraft.
- Hydrolysis:
(noun) the chemical reaction of a substance with water, usually
resulting in decomposition of the said substance. (Source: Oxford
Dictionary)
- Hygroscopic:
(adjective): A hygroscopic substance is one that tends to absorb
moisture from the air (Source: Oxford Dictionary)
- Notch
Propagation: The tendency of a wire insulation to propagate a
crack through to the conductor with on going bending cycles. Usual
requirement is expressed as an acceptable limit. e.g. The wire shall
not propagate a crack to the conductor following a minimum of ten bend
cycles of the v-notched area.
- Outgasses:
Some insulation materials are volatile. In many critical aerospace and
semiconductor applications, low-outgassing materials must be specified
in order to prevent contamination in high vacuum environments.
Outgassing occurs when a material is placed into a vacuum (very low
atmospheric pressure) environment, subjected to heat, and some of the
material's constituents are volatilized (evaporated or "outgassed").
Outgassing is related to conductor temperatures (i.e. load carrying
capabilities).
- Radial
cracking: This can occur around a wire's circumference and
expose the conductor and cause 'ticking faults'. (see below) Causes of
radial cracking can be natural deterioration, insufficient bend radii
or damage at installation. Over significant stretches of wire runs, the
cause will normally be the degradations due to aging, coupled with
top-coat flaking. This latter phenomenon is the natural breakdown of a
shellac-like substance applied to protect aromatic polyamide (i.e.
Kapton types) in particular from hygroscopic activity. Radial cracking
can be initiators of ticking faults.
- Rated
temperature: The maximum temperature at which a given
insulation or jacket may be safely maintained during continuous use,
without incurring any thermally-induced deterioration. Rated
temperature of a wiring insulation/conductor gage may not remain
constant for the life of an installation due to the aging process.
- 'Ticking' faults.
This is an intermediate process of wiring insulation breakdown where
sufficient conductor exposure (perhaps due to radial cracking) coupled
with the early phase of outer carbon charring allows "arcing in
miniature" (i.e. "ticking") to occur. Think of it as sparkling along
the outer sheath. Once sufficiently advanced, this process will have
built up a sufficient carbon char for full-blown self-propagating
arc-tracking to occur. If wetted (by say a galley or toilet leak or
ramp moisture ingress), the condition may allow an earlier 'flash-over'
event.
FOOTNOTES
1.
Kapton Arc Tracking and
Flashover: According to Dr Armin Bruning of the
Lectromechanical
Design Company of Dulles, Virginia USA - a company which has been
contracted by the US Navy amongst others to investigate Kapton arc
tracking - the reason Kapton explodes during an arc tracking event
and 'flashover' is because "the arc will cause a temperature of 5000
degrees Celsius ... and in this condition carbon is vaporized and
free hydrogen is liberated."
Source: email from Armin M. Bruning Lectromechanical Design Co to
Alex Paterson dated 5 May 2001
It would appear that
encapsulating Kapton
between layers of Teflon [i.e. Teflon - Kapton - Teflon
(TKT)] prevents the Kapton layer from drying out and cracking, as
well suppressing the production of hydrogen during a short circuit,
rendering the Teflon coated Kapton (i.e. TKT) relatively benign from
an arc tracking point of view.
___________________________
2.
Airbus Industries
began using a hybrid version of Kapton comprising Kapton coated with
Teflon (TK) made by Dupont in some parts of its Fly by Wire aircraft
in the late 1990s. However, according to the America's foremost
independent aircraft wire expert, Edward Block, this type of wire is
"just Kapton with a cosmetic coating of Teflon which is used for
marking purposes only and does little to reduce Kapton's propensity
to explosively arc track".
However, see note 3 below.
___________________________
3.
As of mid 2006 Airbus
Industries have started to install their own version of
Boeing's
TKT in their new Airbus aircraft. This wire is designated
Airbus Specification No: EN2267-008. This wire would
almost
certainly be much safer than bare Kapton, but Airbus Industries
refuses to disclose the performance attributes of this wire so it is
difficult to determine for certain how safe this wire actually is.
See main wire table above for more details about this wire.
___________________________
4.
Source: Assertion made by Edward Block in 'Aerospace Testing
International' magazine dated June 2009 on page 39.
RELATED
WEBSITES:
RETURN
TO SITE
INDEX
ABOUT
ALEX PATERSON
Alex
PATERSON is an Australian airline pilot by profession. He writes
articles and advises on issues pertaining to aviation, politics,
sociology, the environment, sustainable farming, history, computers,
natural health therapies and
spirituality.
He can
be contacted
at:
Photograph
of Alex Paterson
RETURN
TO THE
BEGINNING