Attachment_6_Environmental_Test_Plan_for_Impact_Sensor_FMU137A.pdf

Attachment VI: ETP for Impact Sensor. For Reference Purposes Only i

Environmental Test Plan

For

Impact Sensor, FMU-137/A

AGM-86, Air Launched Cruise Missile

Aging & Surveillance Program

December 3, 2008

Prepared By

For

498th MSUG

7339 Sentry Blvd

Tinker AFB, OK 73145 i

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Section Page

I. ITEM DEFINITION

1.1 Physical Description

1.2 Theory of Operation

II. AGE SENSITIVITY ITEM ANALYSIS SUMMARY

III. TEST METHODS

3.1 Test Methods for each ASIA Parameter

3.1.1 Corrosion (Various Components)

3.1.2 Oxidation of Electrical Contact Area (Mass and Contact)

3.1.3 Metallic Adherence of Contact to Mass

3.1.4 Plastic Cartridge Embrittlement

3.1.5 Spring Fatigue and Relaxation

3.1.6 Moisture Ingress to Connector

3.1.7 Connector Pin Base Metal Diffusion

3.1.8 Interference with Motion of Mass

3.2 Test Methods and Environments

3.2.1 Test Methods for Switch Assembly

3.2.1.1 Measurement of Closed Contact Resistance

3.2.1.2 High Potential Test

3.2.1.3 Shock Testing

IV. TEST EQUIPMENT AND FACILITIES REQUIREMENTS

V. AGING & SURVEILLANCE STORAGE ENVIRONMENTS

VI. A&S TEST REQUIREMENTS

6.1 Test Classifications

6.2 Test Types

6.2.1 Baseline “A” Tests

6.2.2 Interval “B” Tests

6.2.3 Comprehensive “C” Tests

6.3 Test Sequence

6.4 Test Data Categorization

VII. MEASUREMENTS LIST

ii

LIST OF TABLES

Tables Page

Table 1. Recommended Parameters for Impact Sensor Monitoring Table 2. Equipment Required for Testing the Impact Sensor Table 3. Recommended A&S Tests to be Accomplished Table 4. Sample Size and Test Schedule Table 5. Measurements List

LIST OF FIGURES

Figures Page

Figure 1. Impact Sensor Physical Interface Diagram Figure 2. ALCM Impact Sensor Electrical Interface Diagram Figure 3. Temperature Variances for MOB 1 and MOB 2 Figure 4. Humidity Variances for MOB 1 and MOB 2 Figure 5. Recommended Test Sequence

I. ITEM DEFINITION

1.1 Physical Description

The FMU-137A Impact Sensor is defined on Envelope Drawing 232-30030, The Boeing Company and detailed by Consolidated Controls Corporation (CCC) Drawing 76965.

The source for all impact sensors was CCC, as a sub-vendor to Boeing. (Note: Eaton Industries acquired CCC in 1986, and Eaton Industries was subsequently acquired by VACCO in 2000.)

The impact sensor assembly consists of four major components: 3 impact sensors and an impact sensor cable assembly. Each sensor has mounting holes drilled in its housing so that it can be physically attached to the air vehicle via screws, washers and nuts. The cable assembly includes a mating connector to meet the physical and electrical interface requirements of the Warhead Arming Device.

The cable assembly is approximately 39.1 inches in length, with the sensors installed at 11.5, 14.3 and 39.3 inches away from the connector. Total weight of the impact sensor assembly is approximately 3.16 ounces.

In their normally closed condition, the series sensors shall provide continuity between pins F and B. Figures 1 and 2 show the physical and electrical interfaces.

IMPACT

SENSOR

S3

IMPACT

SENSOR

S1

IMPACT

SENSOR

S2

INPUT

RETURN

WARHEAD

ARMING

DEVICE

J3P1

Figure 1. Impact Sensor Physical Interface Diagram

Figure 2. ALCM Impact Sensor Electrical Interface Diagram

B

F

GND

P1

S1

N/CN/C

N/C

S2 S3

1.2 Theory of Operation

The AGM-86B, Air Launched Cruise Missile employs three targeting options:

1) Air Burst with Ground Backup

2) Air Burst Only

3) Ground Burst Only

These options define the method for applying the final A4/B4 warhead fuzing signal (i.e., Air Burst implies inertial fuzing while Ground Burst implies impact Fuzing). The Warhead Arming Device (WAD) circuitry includes a capacitor bank and transistor based “trigger circuit” which is designed to provide the A4/B4 signal upon missile impact with the ground.

The impact sensor acts as a mechanical sensor that opens at air vehicle impact. In static state, under 100 Gs, the impact sensor assembly electrically isolates the WAD trigger circuit from providing premature outputs by preventing the capacitor bank from discharging, effectively locking out the A4/B4 impact signal. The three sensors are in series, therefore if any one opens the capacitor bank discharges providing the A4/B4 signal to the warhead. Thus, the trigger circuit is considered “live” during free flight.

The three sensors are oriented in different directions relative to the centerline of the air vehicle to account for the various angles of attack that can be employed during mission planning and flight profile construction.

Each sensor consists of a G sensitive switch. The spring-loaded switch is specified to not function at g levels below 100 G (safety considerations), and must function between 100 and 200 G. In operational conditions, the open circuit must be achieved within 20 microseconds after the impact of the shock wave and must remain open for at least 40 microseconds to meet the Impact Sensor specification requirement.

II. AGE SENSITIVITY ITEM ANALYSIS SUMMARY

The Age Sensitivity Item Analysis (ASIA) on the Air Launched Cruise Missile (ALCM) Impact Sensor Assembly has concluded that the sensor is age sensitive and that its inclusion in the ALCM A&S program is appropriate. The details concerning all ASIA findings and recommendations are documented in the ALCM Impact Sensor ASIA Report, dated 8 October 2008. The Impact Sensor is one of three ALCM hardware components included in the Nuclear Weapon Sub-System (NWSS) that provide the electrical interface with the warhead for arming and fuzing control.

The materials analysis found evidence of four major aging concerns in the impact sensor switches. These were deformation of the switch contact surface, diffusion of copper through the gold plating of the contact surfaces, fretting wear of the contact surfaces, and contamination inside the cartridge body of the switches. These mechanisms, coupled with other known aging mechanisms in this type hardware, have led to the identification of 12 critical parameters and 20 non-critical parameters for the impact sensor. Of these, 20 critical and ` non-critical parameters were recommended for inclusion in the ETP and TRD development efforts. The delineation between critical and non-critical parameters can be found in the Impact Sensor ASIA Report.

Table 1 summarizes the conclusions of the ASIA study and identifies the critical and non-critical aging mechanisms that should be considered for inclusion in the A&S program for this component.

Identifier Name Aging Mechanism Critical Non-Critical

Cartridge Embrittlement

Contact

Metallic adherence of contact to mass

Oxidation of electrical contact area, change in electrical response

Oxidation of electrical contact area, interference with motion of mass

Corrosion, resistivity change Corrosion, interference with motion of mass

Mass

Oxidation of electrical contact area, change in electrical response

Oxidation of electrical contact area, interference with motion of mass

Corrosion, resistivity change Corrosion, interference with motion of mass

Spring

Fatigue, reduced spring constant Fatigue, broken spring Relaxation, reduced spring constant Corrosion, reduced spring constant Corrosion, interference with motion of mass

Baseplate Corrosion, resistivity change Corrosion, interference with motion of mass

Connector P1

Corrosion, resistive path Corrosion, fail open Moisture ingress, resistive path Base material diffusion

Table 1. Recommended Parameters for Impact Sensor Monitoring

Aging & Surveillance testing on the impact sensor is required to provide the data necessary for analysis and life predictions relative to the noted age sensitivities.

Methods of testing for each of these aging mechanisms are discussed in Section III.

III. TEST METHODS

Section 3.1 describes test methods recommended for the A&S program for the impact sensor that would require disassembly, and therefore, destruction of the impact sensor.

Program constraints limit ALCM A&S testing to non-destructive test types. Therefore, only test methods and test environments that are non-destructive in nature are fully documented for use in the development of the Test Requirements Documents. Section

3.1 documents non-destructive test methods suitable for characterizing the individual ASIA parameters noted in Section II.

3.1 Test Methods for each ASIA Parameter

The following paragraphs discuss methods of testing for each of the aging mechanisms identified in the ASIA and noted in Table 1. Where applicable, alternative methods of testing are discussed and recommendations are made.

3.1.1 Corrosion (Various Components)

Visual inspection will reveal corrosion of the various impact sensor components (contact, mass, spring, baseplate, connector). Magnification (approximately 30X) should be used to aid the inspection. The ASIA identifies specific locations of gold plating wear on the mass and contact where corrosion would be expected to occur in the presence of moisture. The impact sensor must be destructively disassembled in order to inspect these components.

The impact sensor has no established disassembly or assembly procedures. Disassembly of the impact sensor to visually monitor contamination and corrosion on the subcomponents would be considered a destructive test resulting in the loss of a serviceable asset. Therefore, impact sensors will not be disassembled/destroyed. This precludes using visual inspections as a means to identify corrosion on several internal components (contact, mass, spring, baseplate, connector).

3.1.2 Oxidation of Electrical Contact Area (Mass and Contact)

A black, powdery deposit may be found at the electrical contacts. This deposit is believed to be an oxidation product of copper that has been exposed to the atmosphere, either through wear of the gold plating or by diffusion of copper through the gold plating.

Magnification (approximately 30X or greater) should be used to aid the inspection. In severe cases, the black deposits may have moved throughout the cartridge assembly, making it readily apparent without the aid of magnification.

The impact sensor has no established disassembly and assembly procedures.

Disassembly of the impact sensor to visually monitor the wear and oxidation phenomenon would be considered a destructive test resulting in the loss of a serviceable asset. Therefore, impact sensors will not be disassembled/destroyed. This precludes using a microscope to identify oxidation of the electrical contact area.

3.1.3 Metallic Adherence of Contact to Mass

Fretting was identified as an aging mechanism at the load point between the mass and the contact. One of the fretting characteristics is metal-to-metal bonding of surface asperities, which then break away when a sufficient g-load is applied to the impact sensor mass. These bonding points can be seen only at higher magnification

The impact sensor has no established disassembly or assembly procedures. Disassembly of the impact sensor to visually monitor fretting would be considered a destructive test resulting in the loss of a serviceable asset. Therefore, impact sensors will not be disassembled/destroyed. This precludes using a microscope to detect metallic adherence (bond points) of the contact to the mass.

3.1.4 Plastic Cartridge Embrittlement

Visual inspection of the cartridge can be used to identify cracks in the plastic cartridge, which indicate that the material has become embrittled.

The impact sensor has no established disassembly or assembly procedures. Disassembly of the impact sensor to identify cracks in the plastic would be considered a destructive test resulting in the loss of a serviceable asset. Therefore, impact sensors will not be disassembled/destroyed. This precludes the use of visual inspections to identify plastic cartridge embrittlement.

3.1.5 Spring Fatigue and Relaxation

There are various mechanisms by which the spring constant could be affected, which will reduce the load applied to the electrical contact and will reduce the g-level at which the impact sensor switches. One indication of aging-related change to the spring properties is a change in the free length. A more accurate indication can be achieved through use of a spring gauge to measure the spring force. If changes in the spring properties are detected, micro-hardness measurements may be useful to characterize possible changes in the material properties.

The impact sensor has no established disassembly or assembly procedures. Disassembly of the impact sensor to use a spring gauge to measure the spring force would be considered a destructive test resulting in the loss of a serviceable asset. Therefore, impact sensors will not be disassembled/destroyed. This precludes the use of a spring gauge to check for indications of spring fatigue and relaxation.

3.1.6 Moisture Ingress to Connector

Visual inspection of the connector assembly (after removal of the backshell components) should reveal any moisture that may be present, or may reveal evidence of moisture, or may reveal corrosion that has resulted from prior presence of moisture.

3.1.7 Connector Pin Base Metal Diffusion

The connector pins are made from a copper alloy and have a gold plating applied.

Copper can diffuse through the gold and oxidize when exposed at the surface. If sufficient copper in the base metal of the connector pins were to diffuse to the surface (through the gold plating), black deposits (oxides) should be apparent with a visual inspection.

3.1.8 Interference with Motion of Mass

Interference with motion of mass at any point between the mass and the plastic cartridge was identified as an aging mechanism. One of the characteristics is metal-to-plastic adhesion. The mass and plastic cartridge break away from each other when a sufficient g-load is applied to the impact sensor mass. These bonding points can be seen only at higher magnification.

The impact sensor has no established disassembly or assembly procedures. Disassembly of the impact sensor to visually monitor for debris that might cause interference with the motion of the mass would be considered a destructive test resulting in the loss of a serviceable asset. This precludes impact sensors from being disassembled/destroyed to visually inspect for debris between the mass and cartridge.

3.2 Test Methods and Environments

This section provides recommended A&S test methods based on the testing requirements identified in Section 3.1 above. The impact sensor is a sealed unit (i.e., it was not designed to be disassembled), so most of the detailed inspection of internal components for aging effects requires that the sensor be destructively disassembled. However, since there are a limited number of impact sensors in spares inventory, only a limited number can be allowed to be destroyed for A&S purposes. Thus, described below are non-destructive tests that can be performed at the sensor assembly-level, as well as more detailed tests that require destruction of the sensor.

3.2.1 Test Methods for Switch Assembly

The following test methods address all of the critical parameters from Table 1 and will not damage the impact sensor, allowing it to be placed back into service. These non-destructive tests may provide indications of possible aging effects of internal components, and thus may be beneficial for screening of samples to select candidates for destructive disassembly and more detailed inspection.

3.2.1.1 Measurement of Closed Contact Resistance

The closed contact resistance measurement can be used to characterize aging effects associated with corrosion; diffusion of copper through the gold plating resulting in oxidation at the contact surface; and (to a lesser degree) wear of the gold plating. In addition, gross failure of the electrical connections through the external connector and internal soldered wires can be detected.

When a switch contact is closed, the measured resistance should be near zero. The impact sensor specification requires that the resistance measured through pins B and F be less than 2.0 ohms. A milliohmmeter with a 4-wire test lead (to eliminate effects of the test lead) should be used to make this measurement, since the measured resistance will be very low.

An analysis of the impact sensor trigger circuit in the Arm/Disarm Device (A/DD) indicates that an impact sensor total resistance of more than 100 ohms would be required to initiate a premature A4/B4 fuzing signal. Thus, an A&S failure criteria of 2.0 ohms should provide sufficient margin for surveillance purposes.

3.2.1.2 High Potential Test

The high-potential test can detect cracking of the plastic cartridge or breakdown of other insulating materials.

A high-potential (“high-pot”) test is recommended to verify the integrity of the various plastic insulating materials (cartridge body, wire insulation, insulator between sensor solder contacts, and epoxy potting. This is accomplished by applying a voltage (high potential) to appropriate pins of the external connector, then measuring leakage current through the impact sensor housing.

The specification states that the insulation resistance between mutually insulated connector pins and the housing should be 100 megohms or greater at 500 volts DC. Also, the insulation shall withstand 1500 volts ACrms, 60 Hz with less than 1.0 milliampere leakage current.

3.2.1.3 Shock Testing

The ASIA identified fretting wear at the electrical contacts as the driving factor for several of the aging mechanisms. One of the fretting characteristics is metal-to-metal bonding of surface asperities. In the case of the impact sensor, such a bond can increase the g-level at which the impact sensor opens. In a similar situation, interference with motion of mass at any point between the mass and the interior wall of the plastic cartridge was identified as another aging mechanism. Interference such as this can also increase the g-level at which the impact sensor opens. In the first case, after the bond is broken, the contacts will touch on the fractured asperities which will tend to decrease the g-force at which the sensor opens subsequently. In the second case, the mass and plastic cartridge will break away from each other when a sufficient g-load is applied to the impact sensor mass, thus dislodging the debris from between the mass and cartridge.

Thus, it is suggested that the A&S program collect several cycles of shock test data for dedicated A&S samples in order to characterize the suspected physical phenomena and perhaps develop methods to use this data to extrapolate service life predictions.

A test cycle of three shock tests is recommended for each of the dedicated A&S samples.

If the physical mechanisms postulated above are correct, and assuming that the impact sensor has not recently been subjected to impacts greater than 100-g, the first shock test result should be slightly higher than “expected.” The second test should be slightly lower than “expected.” The third test should provide results that are comparable with the second test, which may be useful to verify consistency of the test methods. If a “higher than expected” g-load is found, the sample would be a good candidate for further destructive evaluation.

For the field-returned A&S samples, a test cycle of three shock tests is again recommended. However, the procedure used to remove the impact sensors from the missile (grinding away the fasteners) will subject them to a high g-load. In this case, the multiple shock tests will provide data that may be useful to evaluate test variability.

IV. TEST EQUIPMENT AND FACILITIES REQUIREMENTS

The following table presents a list of equipment and facilities required for testing the impact sensor per the test methods described in Section 3.2

Equipment Item Suggested Mfg. and P/N or

Description Used For

Microscope (adjustable zoom to at least 30X), with camera mount

Nikon, Zeiss, Bausch & Lomb;

with camera adapters for 35 mm SLR camera

Visual inspection

Light for microscope halogen light and fiber optic light ring; Sunnex, Leica, or other Visual inspection

Photography system SLR, Polaroid, and digital cameras with MP4 photography stand

Visual inspection

Shock tester Avex Electronics SM-105-MP (same as currently used at OO- ALC for Service STAR)

Shock testing

MTS-8 Aging & Surveillance Test Set GFE Multiple requirements

Table 2. Equipment Required for Testing the Impact Sensor

V. AGING & SURVEILLANCE STORAGE ENVIRONMENTS

Aging storage environments should be representative of the actual operational aging storage environments experienced by the components deployed to the field. Dedicated A&S component samples will be maintained in the storage environment, and will periodically be removed for testing to gather parametric data necessary to characterize the aging mechanisms. The total number of samples recommended for the A&S program is specified in Section 6.3.

Recommended parameters for temperature and humidity variation need to be developed based on climatic data for typical storage environments, but should include the extremes of summer months in hot weather storage locations, the extremes of winter months in cold weather storage locations, and the extremes of humidity for typical storage locations.

The simulated storage environment should reflect the temperature and humidity variation experienced by the component when the missiles are stored in igloos at various environmental locations (both hot and cold). The weather stations at operational bases (referred to as MOB 1 and MOB 2) were contacted and, as a result of our discussions, they provided historical data on actual site temperature and humidity variations. MOB 1 provided the information detailed to the daily variations, while MOB 2 provided monthly averages, highs, and lows. Plots of the temperature and humidity comparisons for the MOBs are shown below.

Figure 3. Temperature Variances for MOB 1 and MOB 2

Temperature Comparison

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

MOB 1

MOB 2

Figure 4. Humidity Variances for MOB 1 and MOB 2

The recommended temperature storage environment for the impact sensors is 3 months at 70F 5F, 3 months at 100F 5F, 3 months at 70F 5F, and 3 months at 0F 5F. The fall and spring temperature averages for both MOBs are close enough that the recommended cycle is a close approximation for both. The winter months at MOB 1 are much colder than MOB 2; therefore, the recommended variations over the winter months follows MOB 1 averages. Similarly, the summer averages at MOB 2 are much higher than MOB 1, and the recommended variation follows MOB 2 averages

The recommended humidity storage environment for the impact sensors is 3 months at 50% RH, 3 months at 80% RH, 3 months at 50% RH, and 3 months at uncontrolled RH.

These levels account for the variances between the MOBs and the limitations imposed by artificial environmental controls.

Humidity Comparison

J a n

F e b

M a r

A p r

M a y

J u n

J u l

A u g

S e p

O c t

N o v

D e c

Month

R e la ti v e H u m id it y

MOB 2

MOB 1

VI. A&S TEST REQUIREMENTS

6.1 Test Classifications

Three environmental levels are generally applied to long-term laboratory test programs for nuclear weapon components. Those include “ambient,” “hard,” and “destructive” test levels. The ambient level determines whether the aging environment (i.e., storage and periodic maintenance) affects the performance characteristics of the hardware. The hard environment includes the application of vibration, shock, and/or temperature excursions to determine if the hardware is capable of performing in a flight environment after being subjected to the aging environment. The destructive environment is required to capture parametric data not available through non-destructive means. Given program constraints, the ALCM A&S Program will not include tests that fall under the “destructive” test level.

In the event an age-out problem is detected, the multi-level test approach used for ALCM will allow a comparison to help determine if the problem is due to aging alone, or if it is caused by the interactive effect of aging and the service environment.

6.2 Test Types

The test classifications (ambient, hard, and destructive) are further characterized by definition of the types of tests conducted within the classification. Five specific test types have been defined for the ALCM A&S Program. Baseline “A” Tests and Interval “B” Tests comprise the ambient classification, while three Comprehensive “C” Tests (C1, C2, and C3) fall within the hard and destructive environment classifications.

6.2.1 Baseline “A” Tests

These tests are non-damaging tests that establish the health of each parameter of interest.

In as much as the ALCM A&S Program development was started well after the production lines were shut down and the hardware delivered to the Air Force, it is impossible to capture data at true time t0 (typically referred to as zero-time data).

Therefore, the baseline should be established by testing a relatively large number of samples in the first test year.

6.2.2 Interval “B” Tests

These tests are non-damaging tests which are made on dedicated A&S samples. These dedicated samples should be stored in a controlled environment that emulates the aging environment of the operational fleet, as recommended in Section V. A comparison of the cumulative “B” test data from year to year with the previously established baseline will determine if the aging environment is causing degradation.

6.2.3 Comprehensive “C” Tests

Comprehensive tests include pre-environment tests (C1), tests during environment (C2), and post-environment tests (C3). Comprehensive tests are designed to include the baseline parameters as well as functional performance parameters.

6.3 Test Sequence

The following table shows the recommended A&S tests to be accomplished for this component, where each “sample” refers to an impact sensor assembly (which includes three impact sensor components). In all cases, baseline “A” tests are required to establish a point of reference for comparison of future test results. Interval “B” tests are required to monitor aging of dedicated A&S storage environment samples. The “C” tests are conducted using impact sensor samples that have been returned from the field, along with dedicated A&S samples that are stored at elevated temperature.

For the impact sensor, the only “C2” applied environment test is the shock test.

A&S Test Method Aging Mechanism A B C1 C2 C3

Non-Destructive Tests

Closed Contact Resistance Test See 3.2.1.1 High Potential Test See 3.2.1.2 Shock Testing See 3.2.1.3

Table 3. Recommended A&S Tests to be Accomplished

Figure 5 illustrates the recommended test sequence and also indicates the total number of samples to be included in each test cycle. The first step will be a visual inspection of the impact sensor assembly to look for externally visible corrosion and possible handling damage. The non-destructive impact sensor assembly level tests (closed contact resistance, high potential test, and shock testing) are then to be conducted on each A&S sample. Based on the results of these non-destructive tests, one field-returned sample and one dedicated A&S sample selected from the high storage temperature group is to be selected for the destructive tests. Each impact sensor assembly includes 3 impact sensor sub-components.

Figure 5. Recommended Test Sequence

The types and quantities of impact sensor assembly samples recommended for the A&S program are presented in the following table along with the recommended test schedule for impact sensor assembly samples for the first 10 test cycles (10 years). In subsequent

OVERALL

VISUAL

INSPECTION

NON-

DESTRUCTIVE

TESTS

2 DEDICATED A&S SAMPLES

4 FIELD-RETURNED SAMPLES

2 DEDICATED A&S SAMPLES

4 FIELD-RETURNED SAMPLES

years, an additional four field-returned samples will be required throughout the life of the A&S program.

Sample Size Test Cycle

Dedicated A&S

Samples

Contingency Spares

Field Returned Samples

Total Number Samples

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

GROUP 1:

2 ea

2 A B B B

GROUP 2:

2 ea

2 A B B B

GROUP 3:

2 ea

2 A B B B

10 ea 10 A 4 ea 4 C 4 ea 4 C 4 ea 4 C 4 ea 4 C 4 ea 4 C 4 ea 4 C 4 ea 4 C 4 ea 4 C 4 ea 4 C 4 ea 4 C

6 10 40 56

Table 4. Sample Size and Test Schedule

6.4 Test Data Categorization

During the first test year, the Dedicated and Contingency Spare test samples will be tested under the C1 test profiles. The data captured will be stored as data type A. This will serve as a baseline data set for the hardware stored in ambient conditions. During subsequent test years on the Dedicated Samples, the C1 tests will be reapplied and the data will be stored as data type B. This will allow comparison between the initial baseline tests under ambient conditions and aging effects on the identical hardware using the identical test conditions (A data compared to B data collected over time). The field return samples will be subjected to C1, C2 and C3 tests to allow a comparison between hardware in the ambient storage environment and the field environments (A/B data compared to C1 data), as well as monitoring the aging conditions of the fielded hardware over time (C2 and C3 data collected and analyzed over time).

VII. MEASUREMENTS LIST

Measurement Description

Stimulus (S)

Measure (M)

Units of

Measure Data

Format

A B C1 C2 C3 Critical Para-meter

Non- Critical Para-meter Limits Remarks

Non-Destructive Tests

Closed contact resistance, impact sensor loop (pins B-F)

M mΩ XXXX 2000 mΩ max.

High Potential Test, insulation resistance

S VDC XXX 500 VDC

M MegΩ X.XX 1 Meg minimum

High Potential Test, leakage current

S VACrms XXXX 1500 VAC 60 Hz.

M mA X.XX 1.0 mA max. at 1500 VACrms

Shock Testing (3 cycles) S, M g * *

* Testing to be accomplished and documented per existing methods (Service STAR testing), for each of the 3 cycles

Table 5. Measurements List