View Latest Blog Entries
Testing & Assessment Certification Aging Wires & Systems Standard & Regulation Management Conference & Report Maintenance & Sustainment Protection & Prevention Research Arcing Miscellaneous
Popular Tags
Visual Inspection MIL-HDBK MIL-HDBK-525 AS50881 FAR High Voltage FAR 25.1707 Electromagnetic Interference (EMI) Maintenance Wire System Arcing Damage AS4373
All Tags in Alphabetical Order
25.1701 25.1703 Accelerated Aging ADMT Aging Systems Aircraft Power System Aircraft Service Life Extension Program (SLEP) arc damage Arc Fault (AF) Arc Fault Circuit Breaker (AFCB) Arc Track Resistance Arcing Arcing Damage AS22759 AS22759/87 AS4373 AS4373 Method 704 AS50881 AS5692 AS6019 AS83519 AS85485 AS85485 Wire Standard ASTM D150 ASTM F2799 ATSRAC Attenuation Automated Wire Testing System (AWTS) batteries Bent Pin Analysis Best of Lectromec Best Practice bonding Cable cable testing Carbon Nanotube (CNT) Certification Chafing Chemical Testing Circuit Breaker circuit design Circuit Protection Coaxial cable cold bend comparative analysis Compliance Component Selection Condition Based Maintenance Conductor conductors conduit Connector connectors contacts Corona Corrosion Corrosion Preventing Compound (CPC) Cracking D-sub data analysis data cables degradat Degradation Delamination Derating diagnostic dielectric constant Distributed Power System DO-160 dynamic cut through Electrical Aircraft Electrical Component Electrical Testing Electromagnetic Interference (EMI) Electromagnetic Vulnerability (EMV) EMC EMF EN3197 EN3475 EN6059 End of Service Life End of Year Energy Storage engines Environmental Environmental Cycling ethernet EWIS Component EWIS Design EWIS Failure EWIS Thermal Management EZAP FAA AC 25.27 FAA AC 25.981-1C Failure Database Failure Modes and Effects Analysis (FMEA) FAQs FAR FAR 25.1703 FAR 25.1707 FAR 25.1709 fault tree Fixturing Flammability fleet reliability Flex Testing fluid exposure Forced Hydrolysis fuel system fuel tank ignition functional testing Fundamental Articles Future Tech Green Taxiing Grounding Harness Design Hazard Analysis health monitoring heat shrink tubing high current high Frequency high speed data cable High Voltage History Hot Stamping Humidity Variation ICAs IEC60172 IEEE Instructions for Continued Airworthiness Insulation insulation resistance IPC-D-620 ISO 17025 Certified Lab Kapton Laser Marking life limited parts life projection Lightning Maintenance Maintenance costs Mandrel measurement Mechanical Testing MECSIP MIL-C-38999 MIL-C-85485 MIL-DTL-17 MIL-DTL-3885G MIL-DTL-38999 MIL-E-25499 MIL-HDBK MIL-HDBK-1646 MIL-HDBK-217 MIL-HDBK-454 MIL-HDBK-516 MIL-HDBK-522 MIL-HDBK-525 MIL-HDBK-683 MIL-STD-1560 MIL-STD-1798 MIL-STD-464 MIL-T-7928 MIL-T-81490 MIL-W-22759/87 MIL-W-5088 Military 5088 modeling MS3320 NASA NEMA27500 No Fault Found off gassing Outgassing Overheating of Wire Harness Parallel Arcing part selection Performance physical hazard assessment Physical Testing polyimdie Polyimide-PTFE Power over Ethernet Power systems predictive maintenance Presentation Probability of Failure Product Quality Radiation Red Plague Corrosion Reduction of Hazardous Substances (RoHS) regulations relays Reliability Research Resistance Rewiring Project Risk Assessment SAE Secondary Harness Protection Separation Requirements Series Arcing Service Life Extension Severe Wind and Moisture-Prone (SWAMP) Severity of Failure Shield Shielding signal cable silver plated wire smoke Solid State Circuit Breaker Space Certified Wires Splice standards stored energy supportability Sustainment Temperature Rating Temperature Variation Test methods Test Pricing Testing Thermal Circuit Breaker Thermal Endurance Thermal Index Thermal Shock Thermal Testing Tin plated conductors Troubleshooting TWA800 UAVs USAF verification Visual Inspection voltage white paper whitelisting Wire Ampacity Wire Certification Wire Comparison wire damage wire failure wire performance wire properties Wire System wire testing Wire Verification wiring components work unit code

Perspectives on arc fault protection

Arcing Testing & Assessment

Lectromec has published several articles and a white paper on our web site that discuss the hazards of electrical arcing and how they can be mitigated. In order to broaden the discussion, this article will try to give our readers some insight on systems that offer solid state protection, generally called arc fault circuit protection devices.

SAE standards AS5692 (for 115VAC systems) and AS6019 (for 28VDC systems) define the performance requirements of arc fault protection devices. Please note that within each of these performance requirements there are different classifications. Not all devices that are said to be arc fault protection devices work the same way. Below are some of the differences between devices as well as a few issues to be considered before implementation.

Integrated or Discrete Components for Arc Fault Protection

Arc fault protection devices can be standalone devices or can be integrated with power distribution systems that, in addition to detecting electrical shorts, detect arc faults (or other circuit anomalies) via software and rapidly respond and remove power to the circuit. When operating correctly, these devices can significantly reduce the impact and necessary separation distance between wire harnesses and nearby systems (see video). When integrated into circuit breakers, these devices come with an indicator light or colored ring that is visible when the circuit it tripped when an arc fault is detected.

What do AFCDs look for? And what are they able to detect?

The means and technology used to detect an arc fault vary from vendor to vendor, but, in most cases, they will look at the current and voltage signature on the circuit. The following figure shows the voltage and current waveforms for a 20AWG, 115VAC, 400Hz configuration with the wire arcing to a grounded aluminum tube. For a laboratory setup, this is an easy arcing signature to detect; in application, this becomes significantly more complicated due to the variety of electrical signals on the system and variability in the power system quality.

Wire Degradation
Example of arcing waveform.
Looking for arc damage, resistance, or protection testing? Contact Lectromec.

Most arc fault (AF) devices are able to detect parallel arcing, which is the most dramatic failure event. However, there are others factors that need to be considered.

1. Series Arcing

Series arcing is among the more difficult to detect failure conditions. This is because there is often a negligible difference between the normal operational conditions and series arcing. Some AF devices will be able to detect this failure mode, but not all. This should be considered when selecting a device for your application.

2. Arcing Cross-Talk

It is obvious that a circuit protection device should trip when a fault occurs, but it is also important that the device trips only when the fault occurs on the circuit it is protecting. Hence the reason for the cross-talk immunity test. The idea is to setup a system with two circuits: one protected by an AF protection device with a normal load, and one where an arc fault occurs. Wires from these two circuits are then twisted together for a defined length and an arc fault is generated on the second circuit. The objective is to determine if the first circuit (the one protected by the AF device) would trip due to coupling.

Try Before you Apply

There are many factors that should be considered when evaluating AF protection devices and Lectromec plans on covering them in future articles. But remember that arc fault protection is not a one-size-fits-all solution. Before using for a given application, it is recommended that the system performance be verified for your configuration. If you are looking to verify performance of your devices and how they work under operational conditions, please contact Lectromec. Our engineers can help design the test that will help you select the best device for your application.

Michael Traskos

Michael Traskos

President, Lectromec

Michael has been involved in wire degradation and failure assessments for more than a decade. He has worked on dozens of projects assessing the reliability and qualification of EWIS components. In September 2014, Michael was appointed as an FAA DER with a delegated authority covering EWIS certification.