AD0865988

UNCLASSIFIED
AD NUMBER
AD865988
NEW LIMITATION CHANGE

TO
Approved for public release, distribution
unlimited
FROM
Distribution authorized to U.S. Gov't.
agencies and their contractors;
Administrative/Operational Use; JAN 1970.
Other requests shall be referred to Army
Aviation Materiel Labs., Fort Eustis, VA.
AUTHORITY
USAAMRDL ltr, 30 Jul 1971
THIS PAGE IS UNCLASSIFIED

A-D
USAAVLABS TECHNICAL REPORT 69-90
INVESTIGATION OF
CH-54A ELECTROSTATIC CHARGING
AND OF
ACTIVE ELECTROSTATIC DISCHARGER CAPABILITIES
By
Michael C.Becher
January 1970
U.S.ARMY AVIATION MATERIEL LABORATORIES

FORT EUSTIS, VIRGINIA
CONTRACT DAAJ02-69-C-0102
DYNASCIENCES CORPORATION
SCIENTIFIC SYSTEMS DIVISION
BLUE BELL, PENNSYLVANIA
This document is subject toseca

tiport controls, and teach treaymitta t
to foreIgn governments or fore-ign
"'atlol1 _ay be sade only with
ptor approval of US Army Aviation
Materiel tLaboratorites' tort Lustis.
VirgnlA 23,04.
I2
DISCLAIMERS
The findings in this report are not to be construed as an official Depart-

ment of the Army position unless so designated by other authorized
documents.
When Government drawings, specifications, or other data are used for

any purpose other than in connection with a definitely related Government
procurement operation, the United States Government thereby incurs no
responsibility nor any obligation whatsoever; and the fact that the Govern-
ment may have formulated, furnished, or in any way supplied the said
drawings, specifications, or other data is not to be regarded by impli-
cation or otherwise as in any manner licensing the holder or any other
person or corporation or conveying any rights or permission, to manu-
facture, use, or sell any patented invention that may in any way be
related thereto.
DISPOSITION INSTRUCTIONS
Destroy this report when no longer needed. Do not return it to the

I originator.
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
| HFA'CQUARTERS US ARMY AVIATION MATE IlEL LABORATOR!ES
FORT EUSTIS, VIRGINIA 2:604
This report was prepared by the Dynasciences Corporation, Scientific

Systems Division, under Contract DAAJ02-69-C-0102. The effort was
undertaken at the request of the CH-54A Project Manager's Office.
The basic objectives of the effort were to determine the maximum
charging current levels that might be experienced by a CH-54A and
to determine the capability of the Dynasciences D-04 and D-15 active
electrostatic dischargers to compensate for them.
The results of the test program show that the CH-54 operating in a
sand and dust environment will generate charging currents greatly
in excess of the discharging capability of the tested systems. It
can be seen that a substantial amount of research and development
effort must yet be accomplished to solve the overall problem. For
the short-term solution to the CH-54A problem, it appears that the
use of dual high-voltage units of a slightly refined design will
suffice. Such an installation would be capable of discharging approx-
imately 200 microamperes, which will satisfactorily discharge the
aircraft in a large percentage of its operating conditions.
The conclusions and recommendations contained in this report are con-

curred in by th.s command.
Project IX163203D332
Contract DAAJ02-69-C-0102
USAAVIABS Technical Report 69-90
January 1970
INVESTIGATION OF
CH-54A ELECTROSTATIC CHARGING
AND OF
ACTIVE ELECTROSTATIC DISCHARGER CAPABILITIES
Final Report
By
Michael C. Becher
Prepared by
Dynasciences Corporation
Scientific Systems Division
Blue Bell, Pennsylvania
for
U. S. ARMY AVIATION MATERIEL LABORATORIES
FORT EUSTIS, VIRGINIA
This document is subject to special export controls,

and each transmittal to foreign governments or foreign
nationals may be made only with prior approval of U.S.
Army Aviation Materiel Laboratories, Fort Eustis,
Virginia 23604.
SUMMARY
A test program was conducted at Yuma Proving Ground, Arizona,

to obtain in-flight measurements of electrostatic charging
rates experienced by a CH-54A helicopter operating in a dusty
environment and to evaluate active electrostatic discharger
systems as solution techniques. This report presents data
obtained during this program and reviews these data along
with those from previous work on the same aircraft type.
This report concludes that an extremely high and possibly
lethal charge level is present on the CH-54A in the opera-
tional hookup situation, that an active discharger system
capable of discharging 200 microamperes is required to
dissipate this charge, and that, while presently available
equipment does not meet this requirement, repackaging of
present hardware offers a probable solution.
iii '
FOREWORD
The flight test program reported herein was conducted by the

Scientific Systems Division of Dynasciences Corporation under
the sponsorship of the United States Army Aviation Materiel
LaboratorieS, Contract DAAJ02-69-C-0102, Project IX163203D332.
Mr. S. Blair Poteate, Jr., was the Army Project Engineer;
Mr. Michael C. Becher was the Scientific Systems Division
Project Engineer, assisted by Mr. Warren M. Exmore.
The author gratefully acknowledges the active participation
of Mr. Poteate in the planning, installation, and flight
phases of the program.
Mr. Ronald Spicer was present at the test site in the capacity
of observer for an interested agency, the United States Army
Electronics Command. The author is indebted to Mr. Spicer
for his considerable contributions to the engineering and
fabrication work on the exciter/multiplier fixture and for
his photographic record of the aircraft hovering in a dust
cloud.
The assistance of Mr. Joseph Dupnik, observer for Sikorsky
Aircraft, in the installation phase of the program is acknowl-
edged and appreciated.
v
1ABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
SUMMY . . . . .. i
FOREWORD .... . . . . . . . . , . . • v
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS. . . . . . . . . . .viii

LIST OF TABLES . ...... . *.. . xii
INTRODUCTION. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
DISCUSSION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
Test Program. . . . . . . . 4
Test Results . . . . . . • • 5
Test Problems . . . . . . .0 . . . . 30
CONCLUSIONS . . . . .... . . . . . 36
RECOMMENDATIONS. . . . . . . . ..... 37
LITERATURE CITED . ....... ... .. 38
SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY. ........ .. . 39
APPENDIXES
I. Description of Tests .... . 41
II. Graphs of Data . . . ....... 75
III. Problems Associated With Electrostatically

Charged Helicopters . ........ 81
IV. Basic Considerations for the Statistical

Analysis of Test Data ..... . . 85
DISTRIBUTIONT ... ... . . . . . . . . 88
vii
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS
Figure Pae
1 Chart Recording of Natural Charging Current

Experienced by CH-54A Hovering Over Dusty
Terrain (Aircraft Gross Weight Approximately
29,000 Pounds) . . . . . . . . A
2 CH-54A Test Aircraft Hovering in Dust Cloud
(Phillips Drop Zone, Yuma Proving Ground,
Arizona). . . . . . . . . . . . .
3 CH-54A Test Aircraft Emerging From Dust Cloud

(Phillips Drop Zone, Yuma Proving Ground,
Arizona). . . . . . . . ..... 12
4 CH-54A Test Aircraft and Dust Cloud (Phillips
Drop Zone, Yuma Proving Ground, Arizona) . . 13
5 CH-54A Test Aircraft and Dust Cloud (Phillips

Drop Zone, Yuma Proving Ground, Arizona) . . 14
6 Cumulative Probability Distribution of
Natural Charging Current Experienced by
CH-54A, Based Upon Data in Table I (Curve A)
and Worst-Case Calculations From Data in
Table I (Curve B). . . . . . . . . 18
7 Discharging Capability Test Chart Recording
Showing Relative Magnitudes of Drop Line and
Probe Currents ........... 26
Probe Currents. . . . . . . . . . . 27
Probe Currents. .... . . .... 29
10 Aircraft Voltage Chart Recording Showing Arc-
Over Resulting From Breakdown of Drop Line
Insulation . . . . . . o o 32
11 Surface-Point-to-Surface-Point and Surface-
Point-to-Good-Ground Impedances Existing in
Dusty Terrain . . . . . . . . .o. 35
viii
Figure a
12 Test Equipment: Instrumentation Rack,

Electrometer Voltmeter, and Recorder Prior
to Installation in CH-54A Cockpit. . . . . 42
13 Test Equipment: Detail of Lower Section of

Instrumentation Rack Showing Static Discharger
Test Set (TS-17M), AC-to-DC Converter, and
Part of Hicroammeter Bank . . . . . . . 43
14 Test Equipment: Detail of Recorder and

Electrometer Voltmeter Mounted on Top of
Instrumentation Rack . . . . . . .. . 44
15 Current and Voltage Polarity Convention. . . 46
16 Tie-in With CH-54A Test Aircraft Electrical

System . . . . . . . . . . . .. . 47
17 ESD Component Locations on CH-54A Test Air-

craft . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
18 Mounting Location for ESD Sensor Unit . . . 49
19 Preparation for Mounting of ESD Sensor Unit

in Place of Landing Lights. . . . . . . 50
20 Detail of Mounting Bracket for ESD Sensor

Unit Located in Place of Landing Lights
(Front View). . . . . . . . . . . .51
21 Detail of Mounting Bracket for ESD Sensor Unit

Located in Place of Landing Lights (Rear
View) . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52
22 ESD Sensor Unit Test Installation (Side View) 53
23 ESD Sensor Unit Test Installation (Front

View) . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
24 Detail of Section of Exciter/Multiplier Mount-

ing Fixture With Exciter Unit Installed. . . 55
25 Exciter/Multiplier Mounting Fixture, With

Exciter Units Installed, Situated on Test Air-
craft at Fuselage Station 726 . . . . . . 56
ix
. .. . .. .. . .. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
FigurePa
26 Detail of Exciter/Multiplier Mounting Fixture
Installation and Wiring Harness Tie-in to
Negative Exciter Unit (Fuselage Station 726) 57
27 Completed Exciter/Multiplier Test Installation
at Fuselage Station 726. . . . . . . . 58
28 Detail of Exciter/Multiplier Mounting Fixture

Installation, Negative Multiplier and Gasket
Installation, and Wiring Harness Tie-in to
Negative Exciter Unit (Fuselage Station 726) 59
29 Detail of Outboard End of Negative Multiplier
Unit Showing Diecharge Probe (Station 726) 60
30 Completed Exciter/Multiplier Test Installation
at Fuselage Station 726. . . . . . . . 61
31 Installation of ESD Exciters and Multipliers

at Fuselage Station 704. .*. . . . . 62
32 Detail of Exciter/Multiplier Test Installa-

tion at Fuselage Station 704 . .. . .. 63
33 Completed Exciter/Multiplier Installation on

Tail Cone of CH-54A Test Aircraft at Fuselage
Station 704 . . . . . . . . . . . 64
34 Idealized Parallel-Plate Capacitor .... 65
35 CH-54A Test Configuration for Aircraft/Ground

Capacitance Measurements . . . . . . . 68
36 CH-54A Test Configuration for Natural Charging

Current Measurements. . . . . . . . . 69
37 CH-54A Test Configuration for Measurement of
ESD System Discharging Capability . . . . 71
38 Data Collection Form Used During Discharging

Capability Test . . . . . . . .. 73
59 CH-54A Test Configuration for Measurement of

Aircraft Potential With ESD System in
Operatica o . . . . . . . . . . 74
x
Figure Pate
40 Discharging Capability Test Data, . . . . 76
41 Discharging Capability Test Data. . . . . 77
44 Discharging Capability Test Data . . . . . 80
45 Personnel Shock Hazard Levels ...... 83
xi
LIST OF TABLES
Table
I Observations of Natural ChargiLg Current . . 8
II Observations of Natural Charging Current . . 9
III Aircraft/Ground Capacitance Measurements . . 20
IV Discharging Capability Test Data . .. . 21
V Discharging Capability Test Data . . . . . 23
VI Discharging Capability Test Data . . . . . 24
VII Discharging Capability Test Data .. . . . 25
VIII Discharging Capability Test Data . . . . . 28
xii
INTRODUCTION
Reports from operations in Southeast Asia indicate that a

serious problem exists relative to electrostatic charge
accumulation on heavy-lift helicopters and resultant person-
nel shocks.
CH-54 helicopters are experiencing a high incidence of

electrostatic charging, most frequently when the aircraft is
hovering in dusty areas while sling loads are being attached.
The electrical shock received by hookup men is sufficient to
knock them ff their feet when they touch the helicopter's
cargo hook. Another frequently reported complaint is that
the hookup personnel receive severe hand injuries as a result
of electrostatic discharge: the edges and tips of their
fingers and nails are split.
In January 1969, USAMC responded to an ENSURE requirement for

a static discharge system to be used on the CH-54A helicopter,
AMC directed that a test program be conducted to define the
capabilities of the specified device, a Granger Associates
passive discharger (P-STAT) system. In addition, AMC wanted
to evaluate the feasibility of the Dynasciences Corporation
active electrostatic discharger (ESD) system as a solution
to electric charging of the CH-54A aircraft.
AMC required the following information:
1. A definition of the problem, in terms of potential

shock hazards from electrically charged CH-54A
aircraft.
2. An evaluation of the performance of each proposed

solution relative to an unprotected aircraft.
3. An evaluation of the performance of the two proposed

solutions relative to each other; that is, the
passive discharger versus the active discharger.
To satisfy these requirements, a test program was carried out
at Lakehurst Naval Air Station, New Jersey, during February
and March 1969.
That test program showed that the CH-54A helicopter would

develop what has been defined as a lethal electrostatic charge
under conditions wherein the natural charging rate exceeded
6 microamperes. It also demonstrated clearly and conclusively
the feasibility of the active ESD system for use in dis-
charging the CH-54A helicopter, when charging currents
1
experienced are within the operating range of the system. In
addition, the test results showed that the passive discharger
can offer no benefit under those conditions of most serious
concern; namely, charging 2 environments in which the rate
exceeds 10 microamperes.
While the Lakehurst tests provided a first step in studying

and solving the problem of electrostatic charging of the
CH-54A, they by no means constituted a complete program, for
the following reasons:
1. The great bulk of the testing was carried out using
artificial charge inducement. Whereas the test
results clearly indicated the relation of shock
hazard to the level of charging current, they did
not indicate what levels of charging current are
likely to be encountered during typical operations
under natural charging conditions. The natural
charging current at Lakehurst was minimal: about
I microampere throughout the entire 6-week program.
2. The technique of artificial charging employed at
Lakehurst was not a valid simulation of the natural
charging environment for testing an active ESD
system.
3. The Lakehurst test program did not define the
operating limits of the ESD system.
The ESD maintained the aircraft's stored energy far below the
hazardous level and the level at which the P-STATS operated,
while it experienced charging at rates within the operating
range of the particular system used. Two different ESD models
were tested: the D-04, rated at 50 microamperes maximum dis-
charge, and the D-15, rated at 150 microamperes maximum dis-
charge. But the purpose of the evaluation of the ESD system
at Lakehurst was to determine its feasibility as a solution
to the problem of static charge accumulation on the CH-54A;
it was not intended that this program define the operating
limits of either the D-04 or the D-15 system, nor did it
provide for optimization of the ESD component locations on
the aircraft.
An optimized multiplier location is of great importance, but

such a location was not established during the first test
program. However, the data from that test series indicated
that the D-04 system could be completely optimized on the
CH-54A helicopter; that is, it could be made to provide a net
discharge of nearly 50 microamperes. It appeared that,
2
V.,<
through proper location of the multiplier units, the D-15

could be set up to provide a net discharging capability of
nearly 100 microamperes on this aircraft without a need to
resort to more sophisticated and experimental optimization
techniques.
A second program was instituted by USAAVLABS, in response to
a request from the CH-54 Project Manager, to take up where
the first tests ended:
1. Test the helicopter in high-natural-charging-rate
environment to determine what charging currents it
can experience in an operational situation.
2. Define the best aircraft location for the ESD multi-
plier and determine the discharging capability of
each system on the CH-54A.
This program was conducted at Yuma Proving Ground, Arizona,
during the period June 12 through June 21, 1969. The follow-
ing is a detailed report on that program.
3
DISCUSSION
TEST PROGRAM
Problem Definition Tests
Two types of tests were performed to define the electrostatic
charge problem on the CH-54A aircraft. Some information
regarding the nature of this problem is presented in Appendix
III.
The first tests were performed to measure the charging current

levels experienced by the CH-54 performing normal cargo hookup
operations (approach and hover) in a dusty environment. Basi-
cally, these tests involved a measurement of the natural
charging rate while the helicopter was hovering. It had been
intended to measure the voltage levels and compute the energy
levels accumulated as well. However, the loss of some of the
test instrumentation while enroute to the test site prevented
the accumulation of aircraft potential data needed for calcu-
lation of energy levels.
The aircraft-to-ground capacitance was also measured during
this test program. While this information had been obtained
during the earlier test series at Lakehurst, 2 the accumulation
of this data did not involve much in the way of time or effort
and was repeated at Yuma for correlation with the tests at
Lakehurst.
The instrumentation and procedures employed for the problem
definition tests are described in Appendix I.
ESD Evaluation
This phase of the program had two goals:
1. To determine where to locate the ESD exciters and multi-
pliers on the CH-54A helicopter in order to effect maximum
discharging efficiency in a standing hover.
2. To determine the maximum net discharging capability of
each of the ESD systems tested.
In general, the multiplier units should be situated in the
area of maximum rotor downwash in such a way that there are
no parts of the helicopter directly downwind of the discharge
probes.
4
The optimization test series consisted of measurements of ESD
system discharging capability conducted with different
f
exciter/multiplier component locations. The purpose of the
discharging capability tests is to obtain data regarding the
efficiency of the high-voltage multipliers as dischargers.
The overall efficiency of the system is dependent upon opti-
mization of the multiplier location for maximum discharge with
minimum recirculation.
The instrumentation and test procedures for this phase of the
program are described in Appendix I.
TEST RESULTS
Problem Definition Tests

It was the intent oZ these tests to determine the most severe
charging current conditions which might be encountered by the
CH-54A in a somewhat typical adverse environment, more specif-
ically to measure the charging current generated with the
aircraft operating in the dense sand and dust cloud generated
by an approach and hover over sandy terrain.
Inspection of the test site, designated Phillips Drop Zone,
prior to the initiation of the tests revealed that a surface
crust had been formed by recent rainfall. A jeep was driven
over the area in a crisscross pattern, in order to break up
the crust and provide a surface which was generally loose and
sandy.
On the first flight into the test site, grounding of the air-
craft and instrumentation was accomplished by means of a drop
line, of approximately 100 feet in length, with a metal weight
secured to the end which touched the ground. As the aircraft
descended to an altitude of approximately 100 feet, the drop
line made contact with earth ground and maintained ground
contact as the aircraft flared and hovered.
The instrumentation was set up such that the drop line current
could be both visually observed on microammeters and perma-
nently recorded by means of a strip chart recorder. However,
upon entry into the test conditions, it was observed that the
recorder was inoperative and no alternative means was immedi-
ately available to tabulate the charging currents experienced.
During the course of this test, which lasted approximately 2
to 3 minutes and involved a flare and hover at about 20 feet,
very high charging currents were experienced. The magnitude
of the charging currents was observed by Army and contractor
5
personnel in the aircraft to vary between extremes of approx-
imately 100 and 325 microamperes. The charging current
appeared to have a center value on the order of 200 micro-
amperes.
For subsequent flights into the dusty area, the test procedure
was modified in an attempt to achieve a better electrical
connection between the aircraft and earth ground.
The metal weight at the end of the drop line was eliminated.
Before any measurements could be made, the aircraft was
landed at the test site. A stainless steel rod was driven
into the ground, and a bucket of water was dumped in the
immediate area (within a radius of about I foot of the rod)
to wet the ground adjacent to the rod. The drop line was
attached to the rod. The helicopter was then raised to a 15-
to 40-foot hover while the drop line current was recorded.
During these tests, the recorder was intermittently operative,
but data was manually tabulated as a backup. Results of
natural charging current measurements made during these test
series are presented in Figure 1 and in Tables I and II.
Figiue I is a chart recording of the natural charging current,

showing its magnitude and variation with time. On this record,
a high reading in excess of 150 microamperes is followed about
five seconds later by a low reading of approximately 25.
While the magnitude of the charging current in Figure 1 is
considerably lower than that experienced during the first
flight test over the dusty terrain, the variation with time is
typical of experience throughout the test program.
Table I contains a series of natural charging current observa-
tions made while the test aircraft was hovering with no load
over dust (same test run which yielded the chart recording in
Figure 1). The charging current readings in Table II were
made while the test aircraft was carrying a 6000-pound load
and hovering over dust.
The high and average charging current readings obtained during
succeeding flights over the dusty test site were consistently
lower than dring earlier ones. The data in Tables I and II
illustrate this point. There appear to be two reasonable
explanations for this reduction in charging current.
Experience in similar flight test programs has indicated that,
in a given environment, the charging current is greater for a
heavier aircraft. 3 However, the Yuma test runs yielding the
data in Tables I and II contradicted earlier experience,
6
r 1- II; j I~.a
0il
(4
c' r-i
I itt
o4
0 :3
U, C
4.~~ 4 4. 4--
7qC
tot
TABLE I. OBSERVATIONS OF NATURAL CHARGING CLRENT
'N 'N IN
(uA) (aA) (gA)
1. 190 12. 35 23. 125
2. 220 13. 34 24. 150
3. 120 14. 38 25. 125
4. 110 15. 40 26. 75
5. 100 16. 48 27. 70
6. 75 17. 55 28. 75
7. 60 18. 60 29. 85
8. 70 19. 80 30. 80
9. 25 20. 90 31. 100
10. 35 21. 100 32, 97
11. 25 22. 100
Remarks: Readings were recorded continuously in the sequence
shown, at approximately 4- to 5-second intervals.
The test helicopter was hovering with no load
(gross weight approximately 29,000 pounds) over
dust (Phillips Drop Zone).
8
TABLE i1. OBSERVATIONS OF NATURAL CHARGING CURRENT
IN IN IN
(gA) (gA) . A)
1. 30 16. 70 31. 40
2. 40 17. 100 32. 35
3. 50 18. 125 33. 50
4. 60 19. 150 34. 60
5. 80 20. 100 35. 70
6. 100 21. 75 36. 80
7. 75 22. 100 37. 20
8. 50 23. 100 38. 12
9. 20 24. 125 39. 8
10. 25 25. 100 40. 15
i. 40 26. 75 41. 60
12. 60 27. 70 42. 80
13. 60 28. 25 43. 70
14. 80 29. 30 44. 60
15. 70 30. 35 45. 50
Remarks: Readings were recorded continuously in the sequence

shown, at approximately 4- to 5-second intervals.
The test helicopter was hovering with load (gross
weight approximately 35,000 pounds) over dust
(Phillips Drop Zone).
9
leading to the conclusion that the environment was not the
same for both runs; that is, the repeated flying and hovering
over the same area tended to dissipate the dust to some
extent.
This concl ision appears sound in view of the considerable

dust cloud development that was experienced (see Figures 2
through 5). The loosely packed sand and dust was disturbed
by the rotor downwash, picked up by the air recirculating
through the rotor system, and formed into a dense dust cloud.
The cloud was so dense, in fact, that the aircraft was barely
visible from any point outside the dust cloud. The photograph
sequence in Figures 2 through 5 shows the helicopter almost
indiscernible as it hovered over the dusty area (Figure 2),
slightly more visible as it began to emerge (Figure 3), and
then standing out quite clearly against the background of the
dust cloud it had developed (Figures 4 and 5). The dust cloud
extended about 100 feet into the air, and it continued to rise
above the test site after the helicopter had flown back to
Laguna Army Airfield and landed (some 3 or 4 minutes after
leaving the area).
A second explanation relates to the test procedures used. It
is possibli that merely lifting the helicopter to a given
hover altitude over loose sand and dust produces a lower
charging current than does an approach, flare and hover over
that same terrain. On the basis of prior tests conducted by
AVLABS, it appears likely that the higher downwash velocities
experienced during the flare and transition to hover produce
a higher-density dust cloud which can subsequently be main-
tained by the normal hover downwash velocities.
Since the purpose of measuring charging current was to
determine what charging currents the CH-54 will experience in
an operational situation, the data contained in Tables I and
II were subjected to statistical analysis to more clearly
define the problem and the requirements for a solution. Using
the methods outlined in Appendix IV, these data were analyzed
to arrive at a decision regarding the probability of experi-
encing a charging current of any given magnitude.
The data points are assumed to be random samples from an

infinite population. It is easy to realize that the popula-
tion is infinite. It can also be asserted with some confidence
that the observations constitute random samples, in that no
bias (other than the selection of a dusty environment rather
than a random environment) was deliberately introduced to the
data-taking. For instance, no considerations based upon the
values of the test data entered into decisions as to when to
begin or end data-taking during a particular run.
10
to
'rqr
bO 0
4, ON
r4 C
4Q
.tH 0
LI
~*r4
1P
U-q
* 44
4J
0Obo
I bOO0
41
U N
4-
C3
4
*-t r 0
Ln -rl N
I 4*
r 12
O
4. O.,
HP4
4
U
)-
F4
:-.P4
r4
Fri
I.
13
0 bD
-Y
4- 4
~4
.tr40
0)0
'LI.I
The data set in Table I will be considered first. The sample
mean R is
omitted determined
from as followsof (the
the calculations the units--microamperes--are
statistical parameters):
- 190 + 220 +... + 97 (l)

32
= 84.12 (2)
The sample variance s2 is given by
2 22
2 (190-84.12) + (220-84.12) + + (97-84.12)2
31
s 2 = 2029.79 (4)
The sample standard deviation s is therefore
s = 45.05 (5)
The 98-percent confidence interval for the population mean

is given by
84.12 - t901031 45 0 84-12 + t.01 ,3 1 45005 (6)
84.12 - 2.46(7.96) _ < 84.12 + 2.46(7.96) (7)
64.53 _ .:< 103.71 (8)
It can be asserted that, if the test that produced the data of

Table I is repeated many times, the sample mean of the test
data will fall within the interval shown above 98 percent of
the time. Going one step further, it can be stated that, 99
15
percent of the time, the charging current will average 103.71
microamperes or less.
The 98-percent confidence interval for the population standard

deviation a can be determined from the following:
31(2029.79) < a,2 < 31(2029.79) (9)

X2.01,31 .99,31
62,923.49 < 0.2 < 62,923.49 (10)

52.17 15.67
34.73 < a-_ 63.37 (11)
The same parameters can be determined from the data set con-
tained in Table II.
30 + 40 + ... + 50
45 (12)
= 62.89 (13)
2 2 2
S= (30-62.89) + (40-62.89)
44 + .. + (50-62.89)2 (14)
s2 = 1042.78 (15)
s = 32.29 (16)
The 98-percent confidence intervals on the population mean and

standard deviation are determined as follows:
62.89 - t.0 1 ,4 4 (L 29 ) p :5 62.89 + t. 01 ,44 (3 9 ) (17)
16
62.89 - 2.39(4.81) ; ! 62.89 + 2.39(4.81) (18)
51.39 S ± 574.39 (19)
44(1042.78) <.2 < (20)

X2
_ a2_ 44(1042.78) (0
.01,44 .99,44
45,882.32 < _2 < 45,882.32 (21)

68.63 25.22
25.86 :5 42.65 (22)
It is of interest to examine the statistically worst case;

that is, the combination of highest a with greatest a. Based
upon the data in Table I and the calculations from those data,
it can be concluded that there is a 99 percent confidence
level on p±i103.71; in other words, if the measurements of
charging current are repeated a large number of times under
similar circumstances, 99 percent of the time the absolute
magnitude of the average charging current will be less than
or equal to 103.71 microamperes. There is also a level of
confidence of 99 percent on a56 3.37, using the Table I assump-
tions. When charging current measurements are repeated a
large number of times, the square root of the sample variance--
the estimate of the standard deviation--will exceed 63.37 only
1 percent of the time.
If a normal distribution for a population having these param-
eters is constructed, statements can be made regarding the
probability of a current reading of any value, and a level of
confidence can be assigned to such statements. The probability
associated with statements based upon this worst-case distribu-
tion would be the product of the probabilities associated with
the worst-case values of 1L and a- that is,
(.99) x (.99) = .98 (23)
Figure 6 illustrates the probability of a charging current of

equal to or less than x i versus xi . Curve A is plotted on the
17
AI
.E44
r4 Cd P
0 r
00
:3 r4
0 r4
0.0G
21
rA I
0 J4
A 9 0
o ri 1
co
0 c
0 co
18
basis of the R and s of the data set in Table 1. Curve B
utilizes the worst-case values of t and a calculated from the
Table I data.
Therefore, based upon Curve B in Figure 6, it can be stated

with a probability or level of confidence of 98 percent that
the charging rate experienced by the CH-54 helicopter in a
high-charging environment such as that encountered at Yuma
will be less than or equal to 200 microamperes 94 percent of
the time. The CH-54 will experience charging rates of 185
microamperes or less 90 percent of the time.
This conclusion is based upon some reasonable assumptions,

and, naturally, its scope is limited to dust-charging situa-
tions such as those experienced when the data were taken. In
addition, the test runs which resulted in the data used for
these calculations did not include the flare approach. It is
possible that, had this procedure been employed, somewhat
higher sample means may have been realized.
These considerations are germane to placing the foregoing

statistical analysis in proper perspective, but they do not
limit its usefulness. The conclusions presented are based
upon the worst case, not only from a statistical point of view,
but from an operational one. The flight crew expressed the
opinion that such environments as were experienced at Yuma
constituted the operational external hookup situation in
Southeast Asia about 50 percent of the time.
The aircraft/ground capacitance measurements are presented in
Table III. The zero-altitude figure represents the capacitance
measured when the aircraft was sitting on a paved ramp, with
the rounding wire probes, located in the vicinity of the
landing gear, in contact with the ramp. In the ideal case--a
perfect ground connection--this capacitance would be infinite.
It is to be noted that the data points at hovering altitudes

are lower, by a factor of 2, than those recorded at Lakehurst. 2
ESD Evaluation
The discharging capability test data recorded with the exciter/

multiplier mounting fixture located at fuselage station 726
are presented in Table IV. The maximum gross discharge current
for the positive multiplier was 130 microamperes, with a net
discharging capability of 65 microamperes. The negative multi-
plier gross discharge was limited to 108 microamperes; the net
discharge was 60 microamperes.
19
TABLE III. AIRCRAFT/GROUND CAPACITANCE NFJASUREENTS
Altitude Capacitance
(feet) (microfarads)
0 2660
10 370
20 300
30 300
40 260
20
TABLE IV. DISCHARGING CAPABILITY TEST DATA
Discharging
Ip IDL IR Efficiency
(A) (gA) (gA) M%
+ 12 + 12 0 100
+ 18 + 20 - 100
+ 30 + 30 0 100
+ 40 + 38 2 95
+ 50 + 42 8 84
+ 72 + 50 22 69
+ 80 + 50 30 63
+ 55 25 69
+ 100 + 50 50 50
+ 56 44 56
+ 120 + 58 62 48
+ 62 58 52
+ 130 + 65 65 50
- 22 - 22 0 100
- 30 - 30 0 100
- 50 - 44 6 88
- 60 - 48 12 80
- 80 - 38 42 48
- 51 29 64
- i00 - 40 60 40
- 108 - 60 48 56
Remarks: ESD Model D-15

E/M Location - Fuselage station 726
Aircraft gross weight - Approximately 29,000 pounds
IN - Negligible
Date - June 18, 1969
21.
When the exciters and multipliers were moved rearward to
fuselage station 748, the capability of the system decreased
sharply (see Table V), indicating that this location was too
far back on the tail cone to provide a sufficiently strong
wind force to the discharged ions. While the probe current
from the positive unit reached 164 microamperes during this
test run, the net discharge at that point was only 52 micro-
amperes. The negative unit discharged a maximum net of 30
microamperes. It is apparent that the positive unit was
influenced somewhat by the tail rotor, while the negative
unit, shielded from the tail rotor airstream by the fuselage,
wis more susceptible to the ambient wind. This is indicated
by the fact that drop line current readings of both 16 and 29
microamperes corresponded to a probe current of 30 micro-
amperes. It is further indicated by diszcrepancies in the net
discharge current readings, with a net of 30 microamperes
corresponding to a gross of 96 microamperes and a net of 20
microamperes corresponding to a gross of 104 microamperes.
When the exciter/multiplier components were moved forward to
fuselage station 7Mt, the test results (see Table VI) were
similar to those previously obtained at station 726. The
maximum gross discharge from the positive units was 116 micro-
amperes, with a net of 60 microamperes. From the negative
side, a maximum gross of 92 microamperes was recorded, and a
maximum net discharge of about 50 microamperes was achieved.
Table VII and Figures 7 and 8 show the discharging capability
test results with the same ESD component location but with the
aircraft about 6000 pounds heavier. This increased the down-
wash wind force exerted on the dischared ions and resulted
in a maximum net discharge cu-rrent of 80 micrraiperes from the
positive units. The output of the negoLiqe units also
increased to 65 microamperes net.
During the period when the aircraft was outfitted with the
6000-pound load, it was observed to charge at a rate of 8 to
10 microamperes, even while hovering over the ramp area. It
appears quite likely that this was chiefly the result of engine
rather than triboelectric charging, since there was no notice-
able dust recirculation during the test and the charging
current was a more-or-less constant 8 to 10 microamperes. Th.
chart recordings (Figures 7 and 8) illustrate the magnitude of
this charging current; namely, the magnitude of IDL when 1p
is zero.
When the D-04 multipliers were installed at flselage station
704 on a "light" aircraft, the data recorded in Table VIII and
Figure 9 were taken. Here, with less current being drawn
22
TABLE V. DISCHARGING CAPABILITY TEST DATA
Discharging
IP IDL IR Efficiency
(LtA) (pA) M%
+ 10 + 5 5 50
+ 20 + 12 8 60
+ 30 + 27 3 90
+ 40 + 34 6 85
+ 50 + 38 12 76
+ 60 + 38 22 64
+ 80 + 42 38 53
+ 100 + 43 57 43
+ 120 + 52 68 43
+ 164 + 52 112 32
- 20 - 10 10 50
- 30 - 16 14 53
- 29 1 97
- 40 - 15 25 38
- 50 - 25 25 50
- 80 - 15 65 19
- 96 - 30 66 31
-104 - 20 84 19

IN - Negligible
23
TABLE VI. DISCHARGING CAPABILITY TEST DATA
Discharging
Ip IDL IR Efficiency
._QA) (AA) (AA) M%
110 + 10 0 100
+ 16 + 16 0 100
+ 19-20 + 18-20 0.5 97
+ 28 + 26 2 93
+ 37 + 27-33 7 81
+ 50 + 39 11 78
+ 60 + 22 38 37
80 + 48 32 40
+ 84 + 42-50 38 55
+ 100 + 43 52 48
+ 116 + 60 56 52
16 - 13-16 1.5 91
24 - 24 0 100
30 - 16-30 7 77
40 - 25-32 11.5 71
50 - 30-36 17 66
- 35-41 12 76
60 - 40 20 67
80 - 48 32 60
- 50 30 63
92 - 40-48 48 48

Aircraft ross weight - Approximately 29,000 pounds
IN - Negligible
24
TABLE VII. DISCHARGING CAPABILITY TEST DATA
I Discharging
'p IDL 'DL-IN IR Efficiency
(gA) (MA) (g±A) (gA) (%)
+ 30 + 32-35 + 22-25 6.5 78
+ 40-43 + 30-33 - 100
+ 40 + 38 + 28 12 70
+ 46 + 36 4 90
+ 80 + 62 + 52 28 65
+ 75-80 + 65-70 12.5 84
+ 130 + 72 + 62 68 48
+ 90 + 80 50 62
- 30 - 26 - 36 - 100
- 50 - 36-40 - 46-50 2 96
- 38-40 - 48-50 1 98
- 80 - 48 - 58 22 73
- 50 - 60 20 75
- 102 - 50-55 - 60-65 39.5 61

- 55 - 65 37 64

(including 6000-pound load)
'N - 1.0 pA (positive)
25
boO
Ix f I 4
0i $4
i~ii ~ bI
'I I p
- M,
0 00 0
H 140
26P
$4J
jlji i t II
U:L, 1 ri~
00
00 0
01
It-
0 0
0 004 W
7 27
TABLE VIII. DISCHARGING CAPABILITY TEST DATA
Discharging
IP IDL IR Efficiency
(AA) (gA) (k.A) (%)
+ 10 + 10 0 100
+ 20 + 20 0 100
+ 30 + 30 0 100
+ 40 + 36 4 90
+ 50 + 40 10 80
- 10 - 10 0 100
- 20 - 20 0 100
- 30 - 28 2 93
- 40 - 36 4 90
- 50 - 40 10 80

I N - Negligible
28
t VA
16 A ECOER MARK 11 I~ \~Tt 1 T w~
S~pA
0 t
60A
IPL 0
+50P
-6 OjAA
1P0 0OE WVV4 EM4 LOAIO TAIN 0

AIRCAAVT~G_4fl 4 I--2,00PUD
~ ~ JUE 0 1
DATE -:
Figure~ 7
9. DIcagn CpbltTetArRcodn
Shwn4eatv5antueAfDopLn n
Proe Crrets
OE
-429EmLOAIN-TTO 0
through the interconnecting lines, the positive and negative
units performed in much the same manner, each being capable
of discharging a net of 40 microamperes from a gross of 50.
It is to be noted that the probe current trace lags the drop
line current trace in Figures 7 through 9. The probe current
actually leads the drop line current somewhat, because of the
procedure used; namely, adjusting the probe current as the
independent variable. However, the presence of a long-time-
constant circuit in the ESD probe current line results in the
apparent contradiction in these chart records. This circuit
does not affect the steady-state probe current recordings.
TEST PROBLEMS
Recorder
During the first day of data-taking, problems were experienced
with the Clevite-Brush Mark II recorder unit. The unit was
equipped with an interlock to prevent pen recording when the
access door to the chart section was open. During the flight
test, the vibration experienced by the recorder caused a
failure in this interlock, and it was impossible during the
first day of testing to activate the pen and achieve a chart
record. This failure in the recorder unit was repaired, and,
from the second day of flight testing to the completion, the
problem did not appear again.
Meters
After the recorder malfunction had been eliminated, early set-
up problems were encountered with the Keithley Model 610
Electrometer Voltmeter (EVM). These became apparent in a
I
noncorrelation between current readings on the EVM and those
on the instrumentation test panel. At that time, the EVM was
removed from the test setup and the panel meters were wired
in series with the test set meter as a check. Early readings
indicated a fairly close correlation between the panel meters
and the meter on the test set. However, there was no correla-
tion at higher ranges; that is to say, the test set readings
were approximately half those on the panel meters.
It appears most reasonable to accept the panel meter readings JI
for three reasons:
1. Good correlation was achieved between the four panel

meters of different ranges. All four were zero-center
meters, and the ranges were 25, 50, 100, and 500 micro-
amperes.
30
2. The panel meters were set up for this function. The test
set meter was not checked out for this function.
3. A good correlation was later achieved between the EVM

and the panel meters. The EVM problems evidently resulted
from a faulty first installation; when the installation
was torn down and the EW was checked against the panel
meters, the correlation was good, and the discrepancy did
not repeat itself in subsequent flight tests.
Voltage Measurements
The high-voltage divider--designed to provide a signal equal

to one-tenth of the aircraft-to-ground voltage as an input to
the EVM--was misplaced by a commercial airline enroute to
Yuma. However, the loss of this device did not seriously
reduce the value of the data obtained.
On the basis of the data obtained thus far, it can definitely

be asserted that the CH-54A accumulates an extremely high
charge. However, without the aircraft voltage measurements,
it is not possible to say exactly how high. The stored
energy is on the order of several joules, but it is not
possible to say for certain whether it is 3 joules or 10. In
any event, it is an academic point; the severe shock level is
100 millijoules, and the lethal level is 1 joule. The charging
current measurements recorded at Yuma combined with the V/I
curves developed at Lakehurst show that the lethal level was
surpassed by a considerable margin.
One series of aircraft voltage measurements was attempted.
As was illustrated earlier, the aircraft charged at about 10

microamperes while hovering over the ramp and carrying the
6000-pound load. Since this level of charging current was well
within the ESD operating range, it was likely that the ESD
could maintain the aircraft voltage at a level below the 30-KV
maximum for the EVM probe. In that case, the high-voltage
divider would not be required. The ESD system was operated
under these conditions, and the aircraft-to-ground potential
was recorded, as shown in Figure 10.
However, the chart recording is inconclusive as to the opera-

tion of the ESD. Instead, it points out a breakdown in the
test setup. The spike change in the aircraft voltage from
about 11.25 to 5.5 kilovolts (see Figure 10) was apparently
the result of an arc-over from the drop line to the aircraft.
As noted earlier, the high-vo' rage drop line (RG 8/U) intended
for use with the divider unit is not used when that device
was lost. It was replaced by - lighter (16 AWG) line, which
did not lend itself to voltage measurement.
31
00
bo0
4H
r.A
bD
32
Grounding
Prior to the first flight test, it was decided that the

lighter-gauge drop line with a conductive weight on the end
would be used to achieve a quick ground connection and to
facilitate the measurement of natural charging current during
flare and transition to hover.
It became apparent, however, that the aircraft was not

properly grounded by this device. When the aircraft was
connected to the ground in that manner, the ESD sensor was
activated and showed an external field present, which should
not have been present if the aircraft and ground were at equal
potentials. Subsequent to this observation, an investigation
was undertaken to determine what resistance was present
between the drop line and the ground. A screwdriver blade
about 6 to 8 inches long was imbedded in the ground outside
the hangar at Laguna Army Airfield and connected electrically
to the electrometer voltmeter using the impedance range. The
other terminal of the impedance meter was connected to the
drop line with weight. The weight was dropped on the ground,
and the impedance between the buried screwdriver blade and the
drop line with weight was determined to be on the order of
2.5 x 109 ohms. The weight was then scraped on the ground,
and the impedance was observed to drop by about an order of
magnitude. Then, two screwdriver blades were buried in the
ground about 8 to 12 feet apart; the impedance between them
was 400 kilohms. The underlying theory behind these measure-
ments is that, if there is a good ground and two conductors
are in contact with the good ground and separated by some
distance laterally on the surface of the ground, a low imped-
ance will be measured between these conductors. Apparently
the two screwdrivers during the last part of this test were
making a considerably better round than was the weight under
any of the test conditions prior to that.
As a result of these tests, it was decided to use a grounded

stake (a stainless steel rod approximately 4 feet in length,
which was driven into the ground in the dust area to within
approximately a foot of its full length) and to wet the ground
in the area of this stake. The ground connection, however,
was still apparently not good enough.
In the future, it is recommended that the test site ground be

measured in a similar way as with the screwdrivers, but using
grounded stakes in place of screwdrivers.
This series of impedance measurements has some important

implications in terms of the feasibility of the direct ground-
ing method for achieving safe external cargo hookup operating
33
conditions. There is apparently a considerable resistance,R 1
(see Figure 11), between any two points on the surface ground
and also between any point on the surface ground and good
ground, R 2 or R 3 . If an aircraft is electrostatically charged,
it has & potential with respect to good ground; and, if a
drop line is connected from any surface ground point A to the
aircraft, the potential is equalized between point A and the
aircraft. However, no charge equalization occurs between a
man standing at point B and the aircraft, because a consider-
able impedance exists, as much as 2.5 x 109 ohms, between the
man and point A, which is at the same potential as the air-
craft. Therefore, even if a good connection is maintained
between the aircraft and point A, the man at point B can
receive a severe shock when he comes in contact with the hook.
The grounding line does not necessarily provide a direct shunt
for the man at point B; it provides a shunt to point A or
possibly to good ground, in which case the man is shunted by
the drop line in series with either R 1 or R 3 .
ESD Output
The test installation suffered from the fact that supply and
signal lead lengths were excessive for the wire gauge employed.
The result of this situation was appreciable line losses and
subsequent reduction of system output (gross discharge current).
The test data indicate a consistently lower gross capability

for the negative units than for the positive. This indicates
that the input impedance of the negative exciter/multiplier
components was lower than that of the positive. In a
production-type installation, considerable latitude in this
area _s permissible, because even low input impedances are
quite high compared to the series line impedance. But when
the line resistapce is increased, normal unit-to-unit varia-
tions in parameters become quite noticeable
The negative multiplier is always a more efficient discharger,

because a higher voltage (and, thereby, a higher electrostatic
field between the discharge probe and the aircraft) is required
to support a given positive current than is required for a
negative current of the same magnitude.
This phenomenon tended to offset the effects of the low input

impedance of the iegative exciter/multiplier components. As
a result, the negative discharge capability of the ESD as
measured at Yuma oas not much less than that of the positive.
34
' I
A Rl B
SURFACE "GROUND"
R2 R3
-J17DD GROUND
Figure 11. Surface-Point-to-Surface-Point and Surface-

Point-to-Good-Ground Impedances Existing in
Dusty Terrain.
35
IlJ-
I
CONCLUSIONS
Analysis of the results of the Yuma flight test program, in

the light of earlier test information and the present state
of the art, leads to the following conclusions:
1. In dusty environments, charging currents on the CH-54A

can be expected to exceed 300 microamperes on occasioa.
Charging rates appro ahing 200 microamperes can be sus-
tained for considerable periods of time.
2. Based on the da i from this test program and the data

from the Lakehurst tests which describe the voltage-
current characteristics of the CH-54A, it is concluded
that the unprotected aircraft will accumulate voltage
and energy levels which are considered hazardous to
personnel and equipment when operating in conditions
similar to those experienced during this test program.
3. A discharger system for the CH-54A helicopter should have
a minimum net discharging capacity of 200 microamperes.
4. The equipment tested does not have a 200-microampere
capability.
5. With the aircraft gross weight roughly 29,000 pounds, the
D-15 ESD system achieved discharge currents of approxi-
mately 130 microamperes gross and 65 microamperes net.
When the gross weight of the aircraft was increased to
about 35,000 pounds, the maximum net discharge current
increased to approximately 80 microamperes.
6. Based on the discharging capability test data from this

program and from the Lakehurst tests with the exciter!
multiplier bracket located at fuselage station 644, it
is concluded that the multipliers could be mounted at
fuselage station 726 and as much as 3 or 4 feet forward
of that point without appreciable deterioration of the
discharging efficiency. This means that two multiplier
units could be installed on the same side of the aircraft
and separated sufficiently far to preclude interaction.
36
RECOMENDATI ONS
Based upon the conclusions presented on the preceding page,

the following recommendations are offered to provide the most
expedient means to a final solution for the CH-54 electro-
static charging problem:
1. The Dynasciences Model D-15 active ESD system should be

modified to increase its net discharging capability to
200 microamperes. Specifically, the multiplier unit
should be repackaged to reduce recirculation and to
provide a minimum net discharging capacity of 00 micro-
amperes; the present system should be expanded to include
two sets of exciter/multiplier components of each polarity.
2. A permanent installation should be designed and fabricated

for the D-15 ESD system on the CH-54A helicopter. This
installation should be executed on one aircraft in the
United States, so that the modified ESD system can be
flight tested in a high-charging environment.
3. After obtaining satisfactory results from the first test

installation, the Army should consider a retrofit program
to outfit all CH-54 helicopters with ESD systems.
37
.9 ]
LITERATURE CITED
1. PASSIVE NULL FIELD DISCHARGERS FOR CH-54 AIRCRAFT,

ENSURE Item No. 265, U.S. Army Vietnam, Long Binh,
Republic. of Vietnam (Unclassified).
2. Becher, Michael C., CH-54A STATIC DISCHARGE TEST PROGRAM;

EVALUATION OF DYNASCIENCES ACTIVE ESD AND GRANGER PASSIVE
P-STAT DISCHARGERS, Dynasciences Corporation (Scientific
Systems Division), DCR-299, 16 April 1969.
3. Rogers, M. E., INTERIM REPORT REVIEWING THE PRESENT

POSITION ON HELICOPTER STATIC ELECTRIFICATION HAZARDS,
Technical Report 67292, Royal Aircraft Establishment,
Ministry of Technology, Farnborough, Hants, United Kingdom,
November 1967 (Restricted).
4. de la Cierva, Juan, EVALUATION OF A HELICOPTER-FUSELAGE-

MOUNTED DYNANIC-NEUTRALIZER STATIC ELECTRICITY DISCHARGING
SYSTEM, Kellett Aircraft Corporation, TRECOM Technical
Report 62-93, U.S. Army Transportation Research Command
(USAAVLABS), Fort Eustis, Virginia, December 1962.
5. Hayt, William H., Jr., ENGINEERING ELECTROMAGNETICS, New

York, Toronto, London, McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc=,
1958, pp. 112-115.
6. Newman, M. M., and Robb, J. D., INVESTIGATION OF MINIMURM

CORONA TYPE CURRENTS FOR IGNITION OF AIRCRAFT FUEL VAPORS,
Lightning and Transients Research Institute, NASA Tech-
nical Note D-440, National Aeronautics and Space Adminis-
tration, Washington, D. C., June 1960, p. 4.
7. Freund, John E., MATHEMATICAL STATISTICS, Englewood Cliffs,

New Jersey, Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1962, pp. 227-235.
38
SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY
1. Becher, Michael C., FLIGHT TEST EVALUATION OF DYNASCIENCES

ACTIVE ESD SYSTE14S AND GRANGER P-STAT PASSIVE DISCHARGERS
ON THE CH-54A HELICOPTER, Dynasciences Corporation
(Scientific Systems Division), DCR-298, 10 April 1969
(Internal).
2. Wilson, Paul B., Jr., ANTI-STATIC TECHNIQUES INVESTIGA-

TION, Dynasciences Corporation (Scientific Systems
Division), Technical Report AFAL-TR-66-87, Air Force
Avionics Laboratory, Research and Technology Division,
Air Force Systems Command, Wright-Patterson Air Force
Base, Ohio, July 1965.
3. de la Cierva, Juan, Heller, David L., and Wilson, Paul B.,

Jr., INVESTIGATION OF AN ELECTROMAGNETIC INTERFERENCE-
FREE ACTIVE STATIC DISCHARGING TECHNIQUE FOR FIXED AND
ROTARY WING AIRCRAFT, Dynasciences Corporation (Scientific
Systems Division), Technical Documentary Report No. AL-
TDR-64-35, Air Force Avionics Laboratory, Research and
Technology Division, Air Force Systems Command, Wright-
Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio, August 1964.
4. de la Cierva, Juan, Egea, L., Fraser, David B., and

Perlmutter, A. A., A HIGH-PERFORMANCE ELECTROSTATIC
DISCHARGER FOR HELICOPTERS, Dynasciences Corporation
(Scientific Systems Division), TRECOM Technical Report
63-43, U.S. Army Transportation Research Command (USAAV-
LABS), Fort Eustis, Virginia, December 1963.
I
5. de la Cierva, Juan, HELICOPTER STATIC ELECTRICITY DIS-
CHARGING DEVICE, Kellett Aircraft Corporation, TRECOM
Technical Report 62-33, U.S. Army Transportation Research
Command (USAAVLABS), Fort Eustis, Virginia, December 1962.
6. de la Cierva, Juan, Goland, Leonard, and Perlmutter, A. A.,

PROPOSAL FOR A STATIC ELECTRICITY DICCHARGE DEVICE FOR
HELICOPTERS, Kellett Aircraft Corporation, Report No.
195X80-1, 7 November 1960.
7. Poteate, S. Blair, Jr., ACCUMULATION AND DTSSIPATION OF

STATIC ELECTRICITY IN HELICOPTERS, Journal of the American
Helicopter Society, Volume 7, No. 2, April 1962, pp. 3-9.
8. Rogers, M. E., and Minihan, Elsie B., INTERIM REPORT ON

INVESTIGATION OF STATIC BUILDUP ON HELICOPTERS WITH
39
I______
PARTICULAR REFERENCE TO WHIRLWIND MK. lOS, Technical
Report 66152, Royal Aircraft Establishment, Ministry of
Aviation, Farnborough, Hants, United Kingdom, May 1966.
9. Rogers, M. E., and Minihan, Elsie B., EVALUATION OF AN

ACTIVE HIGH VOLTAGE STATIC DISCHARGE SYSTEM INSTALLED
IN A WHIRLWIND TEN, Technical Report 68132, Royal Aircraft
Establishment, Ministry of Technology, Farnborough, Hants,
United Kingdom, May 1968.
40
APPENDIX I
DESCRIPTION OF TESTS
GENERAL
The CH-54 program involved basically two general groups of

tests: the first was aimed at establishing the magnitude of
the problem, and the second was designed to evaluate the per-
formance of the active discharger systems.
Only one helicopter, CH-54A #18456, was involved in the test

program at Yuma. The measurements were made while the air-
craft was hovering at altitudes normally encountered during
external cargo hookup operations; that is, up to 40 feet.
Most of the tests were conducted with the CH-54A carrying no
load, with a gross weight of approximately 29,000 pounds.
Some measurements were made while the aircraft was carrying a
load of about 6000 pounds, hooked up in a multipoint configu-
ration; that is, with a gross weight of approximately 35,000
pounds.
A conductive drop line, or tether, was used to provide elec-

trical connection between the hovering aircraft and the earth
ground. The aircraft was outfitted with a bank of four micro-
amneters of various ranges, which could be used to read the
drop line current. The microammeters were situated on an
instrumentation rack specially designed to fit in the CH-54
c6ckpit. This rack (see Figures 12 and 13) had previously
been used during the Lakehurst test series.
A Clevite-Brush Mark II direct-writing two-channel recorder

was installed on the top of the instrumentation rack in the
helicopter, as shown in Figure 14. One recorder channel was
used to record the ESD probe current analog supplied by a
Dynasciences Model TS-17M Test Set, which was also located on
the aircraft instrumentation rack (see Figures 12 and 13) to
permit control and calibration of the ESD. The other channel
was used to transcribe the output signal of a Keithley Model
610 Electrometer Voltmeter (EVM), which was used to measure
the natural charging current and the aircraft voltage. This
was installed next to the recorder on the top of the instru-
mentation rack, as pictured in Figure 14.
The polarity convention for charging current established

during earlier work has been maintained in this report. There-
fore, a positive charging cur ent is one which results in a
positively charged helicopter In keeping with this convention,
41
ItlI
Figure 12. Test Equipment: Instrumentation Rack,

Electrometer Voltmeter, and Recorder Prior
to Installation in CH-54A Cockpit.
42
Figure 13. Test Equipment: Detail of Lower Section of
Instrumentation Rack Showing Static Discharger
Test Set (TS-17M), AC-to-DC Converter, and
Part of Microanimeter Bank.
43
0
4J3
(4-0
0 E
440
0
4J1
4-)
P44
the polarities of parameters directly measured or inferred
from direct measurements during this test program are illus-
trated in Figure 15. The arrows indicate the direction of
positive clrrent flow. It is seen that a positive natural
charging current IN causes a positive random discharge
current IDRo When the ESD system is operated, a positive
natural charging current results in a positive probe current
Ip. In later sections of this report which detail specific
test procedures, it will be shown that a positive drop line
current IDL corresponds to either a positive ESD probe
current or a negative natural charging current.
T4- in to the aircraft electrical system was accomplished in

t orward section of the cockpit at the panels marked AC
PK. 3US and DC PRI PUS (see Figure 16). 4 circuit breaker
rated at 2 amperes was used in the l!5V/40OHz line to the ESD
test set. A 5-ampere breaker was installed in the 28-VDC line
to the test set. Breakers rated at 7 and 35 amperes were put
in the inverter control and main lines, respectively.
The ESD sensor was installed in a bracket located in the area

of the landing lights on the access door at the front of the
cockpit (see Figures 17 through 23). The ESD exciters and
multipliers were installed in the same specially designed
mounting bracket used at Lakehurst and strapped on to the tail
cone near fuselage station 726, as shown in Figures 17 and 24
through 30. During the test, the bracket with the exciters
and multipliers was moved to station 748 and finally to sta-
tion 704 (Figures 31 through 33). The positive exciter and
multiplier were always situated on the left (tail rotor) side
of the tail cone.
The aircraft hovering altitude was estimated by the flight
engineer.
AIRCRAFT/GROUND CAPACITANCE MEASUPENENT
The aircraft and thL earth form the two plates of a capacitor,
the value of which is a measure of the ability of the aircraft
to store charge. The \,alue of the aircraft/ground capacitance
is primarily a function of the hovering altitude of the air-
craft.
The capacitance of any c ipacitor is a function of the distance

betvnen the plates. This is explained by considering an
idealized parallel-plate capacitor (see Figure 34). The
capacitor is formed by two parallel plates of identical area
45
j°
+
VA
EARTH GROUND
Figure 15. Current and Voltage Polarity Convention.
46
4)
41
$4
b0
rq
47
mo-
m 1 U)
N, wj
W U) 44
t= x o
0 C0
w -01A 40
41
00
4)
0)-
A SO
U) r4
48
0
4.4
- 0
r4
49
0
00
4J.
944
0 0
Cq
r4
50
&a 0
*rI 0)
o
44
bD0
0) r4
0) 0
AAC1
51
~Dr4
Ea
to
bO
p.
b0
452
*1*
-4
Pcd
53H
4-3
0
$L4
4-3
4-i
bD
0r
4)
54
4Jr
r4)
-Ha)
ca
-1
0)
111W
554-
VI
Figure 25. Exciter/Multiplier Mounting Fixture, With

Exciter Units Installed, Situated on Test
Aircraft at Fuselage Station 726.
56
,I
1 4-)
Mri
r-4t
-4)4
to 0)
Pz4
57r
0
-P
r4
r4
4-c.
V)- .
<.A7 Ut-4
4- 0
0.
L4
458C
r4 4
id or$ W
Cr40
4J 0P
or4-)~
H'r4 0
rI4Jry) $
'r4
594
$4
*r4*
4J N
Zo
o r44
4.0
44
00
244
$4 0
( 4-)
~ 4 I ~r4
M44
If t0 0
60 r
C*4
4J
*-A
4-3
4-3U
lp r4
PA )
4r-4
cv,
61
0)-
I I I
IC4-3
62 C
0
4Ji
4-)
4)
10)
r4
r4) 4
b-O
T4)
0)
63
Figure 33. Completed Exciter/Multiplier Installation on
Tail Cone of CH-54A Teat Aircraft at Fuselage
Station 704.*
64
L
CONDUCTOR SURFACE OF AREA S
UNIFORM SURFACE
CHARGE DENSITY
+Ps
CONDUCTOR SURFACE OF AREA S
Figure 34. Idealized Parallel-Plate Capacitor.
65
S, which are separated by a distance x. The intra-plate
medium has a permitivity, or inductive capacity, of r. The
potential difference V between the lower and upper plates is
lower
V E-dL (the scalar product of two vectors)
-upper (24)
V= P- dL (25)
V P (26)
where ps is the surface charge density on the plates.
The electric field and charge distribution are assumed to be

almost uniform at all points not adjacent to the edges, and
this latter region is assumed to contribute only a small per-
centage of the total capacitance. Therefore, the total charge
Q on the capacitor is
Q= PsS (27)
The capacitance is
C = Q/V (28)
C - PsS(29)
C
C = CS/x (30)
66
Relating this back to the situation of a hovering helicopter,
equation (30) states that the capacitance will decrease as
the hovering altitude x increases.
The capacitance test situation is illustrated in Figure 35.

The aircraft/ground capacitance CA can be determined in
much the same manner as can that of any other capacitor in
the picofarad range; that is, through the use of an impedance
bridge. Because of the relationship shown in equation (30),
it is desirable to plot the capacitance as a function of alti-
tude. The bridge is located on the aircraft, and a ground
connection is made through the drop line. However, as indi-
cated in Figure 35, the bridge measures the parallel sum of
the aircraft/ground capacitance and a spurious capacitance
CS between the aircraft and the drop line. A second measure-
ment, made with the drop line disconnected from ground,
isolates CS. Subtracting CS from the total capacitance yields
the desired CA reading.
NATURAL CHARGING CURRENT TEST

The test setup used to measure natural charging current is
illustrated in Figure 36. The charge is shown entering the
aircraft at the rotor blades, at a rate 1 N. This is the
principal mode of triboelectric charging. The aircraft is
shorted to ground through a microammeter, by means of the
drop line. The microammeter reads the drop line current,
IDL. Since the aircraft-to-ground voltage VA is zero, IDL
is equal to IN, the natural charging current. With reference
to the polarity convention discussed above, a positive value
of IDL corresponds to a negative value of IN -
DISCHARGING CAPABILITY TEST
The purpose of the discharging capability test is to obtain
data regarding the efficiency of the high-voltage multipliers
as dischargers.
For this test, the system is operated in an open-loop mode.
In fact, a test plate is placed over the sensor head so that
it does not read the aircraft charge. Instead, an input
signal, which is generated at the ESD test set, is applied to
the test plate. This input signal is varied to control the
output; namely, the probe current from the multiplier. As
was the case during the natural charging current measurements,
the aircraft is shorted to ground through a microammeter (see
67
i IMPEDANCE
BRIDGE
II
Cs
CA
EARTH GROUND
Figure 35. CH-54A Configuration for Aircraft/Ground

Capacitance Measurements.
68
I IN
VA=O
EARTH GROUND
Figure 36. CH-54A Test Configuration for Natural

Charging Measurements.
69
Figure 37). The drop line current is equal to the sum of the
ESD discharge current 'DE and the natural charging current
IN - With the polarities indicated in Figure 37,
IDL = IDE - IN (31)
It is generally advisable to conduct this test when the

natural charging current is small because higher currents
tend to vary considerably over short periods of time due to
changes in ambient wind, aircraft attitude, etc. The charging
rate experienced by a helicopter hovering over a paved ramp
at an altitude of about 25 feet is sufficiently small that ft
may be neglected in considering this test setup. Therefore,
'DL 'DE (32)
The ESD output is the probe current Ip. Ideally, and opti-
mally, Ip = IDE. But, when there is recirculation,
'P = 'DE + I R
Therefore,
R P IDE (34)
By substituting,
IR = IP - IDL (35)
Both Ip and IDL are measured during the test. The technique
is to adjust the input signal for discrete values of Ip and
read IDL. In terms of the polarity convention, a positive
value of IDL corresponds to a positive value of IDE.
70
iIP
EARTH GROUND
Figure 37. CH-54A Test Configuration for Measurement of

ESD System Discharging Capability.
71
A sample of the data collection form used at Yuma to facili-
tate recording of the necessary readings is shown in Figure
38.
TEST OF ESD OPERATION UNDER NATURAL CHARGING CONDITIONS
Figure 39 pictures the testing of the ESD in a natural

charging situation. The charge is shown entering the heli-
copter at the rotor blades at a rate IN . The natural charging
current is determined in the manner described above and illus-
trated in Figure 36. The ESD operates to discharge the air-
craft at the same rate, so that the probe current Ip is
equal in magnitude to IN (neglecting any possible recircula-
tion). A small residual charge QA remains on the aircraft
to provide a driving force for the discharger output.
The magnitude of QA can be inferred from the aircraft-to-
ground potential VA which is measured on the EVM. The ESD
test set, located in the aircraft cockpit, provides a readout
of IP.
72
DISCHARGING CAPABILITY TEST DATA SHEET
Lin !R.I Dlscharging

Probe Drop Line Reciculatior Efficiency
(Microamperes) (Microamperes) (Microamperes) (Percent)
ESD Model
E/M Location
Date
Remarks
Figure 38. Data Collection Form Used During

Discharging Capability Tests.
73
-i-
VA
EVM
EARTH GROUND
Figure 39. CH-54A Test Configuration for Measurement of

Aircraft Potential With ESD System in Operation.
74
APPENDIX II
GRAPHS OF DATA
Figures 40 through 44 are plots of the discharging capability

test data for the ESD systems under various conditions of
exciter/multiplier location, as indicated.
With one exception, the natural charging current has been

ignored in plotting these curves. The reason for this is the
fact that the natural charging current of a "light" CH-54A
hovering over a paved ramp is minimal; that is, on the same
order as the readability of the instrumentation used.
However, the data used in plotting Figure 43 were recorded

while the aircraft was carrying the 6000-pound load and, as
a consequence, experiencing a significant natural charging
current. This curve is plotted on the basis of a 10-micro-
ampere positive natural charging current.
75
IDE
+ 100-
-100 -50 +0+0
'P
ESO MODEL D-15

E /M LOCATION - STA. 726
6/18/69
Figure 40.* Discharging Capability Test Data.
76
IDE
+ 50-
-100 -50 +0+0
00 'P
0- 00
-5
or0-
ESD MODEL D-15

E/M ILOCATION-STA. 748
6/43/69
Figure 4. Discharging Capability Test Data.
77
IDE
+tO
-100 -50 +0+0
0 'P
ESD MODEL D-15

E/M LOCATION-STA. 704
6/19 /69
Figure 4+2. Discharging Capability Test Data.
78
'bE
+ 100-
'P
ESD MODEL D-15

-100- ElM LOCATION -STA.704
6/20/69
AIRCRAFT CARRYING LOAD
Figure 43. Discharging Capability Test Data.
79
DE
t
+100-
+50-
-100 -50 +50 -100 I
-50
-100-
E SD MODEL D-04
E/M LOCATION - STA.704
6 /20 /69
Figure 44, Discharging Capability Test Data.
80
APPENDIX III
PROBLENS ASSOCIATED WITH
ELECTROSTATICALLY CHARGED HELICOPTERS
GENERAL
Helicopters in flight can accumulate a sizable electrostatic
charge. Experience has indicated three main problem areas
associated with electrostatically charged helicopters. Field
personnel performing underslung cargo operations with electro-
statically charged aircraft have been subjected to severe
electrical shocks while attaching cargo slings to helicopter
cargo hooks. The danger of exploding fuel and munitions
cargo due to spark contact during external hookup operations
has also been a major source of concern. In addition, elec-
trostatic charge on aircraft can result in radio frequency
interference (RFI) on communications and navigation systems.
TRIBOELECTRIC EFFECTS
The primary cause of helicopter chargin is triboelectric

transfer between the aircraft and the air through which it
moves. Triboelectric charging is generated by bringing two
dissimilar substances into contact; in this case, the sub-
stances are particles of air, dust, sand, snow, or rain in
moving contact with the helicopter rotor blades. The rate of
charge influx (natural charging current) is determined by the
number and types of charges impinging upon the aircraft,
which, in turn, are related to ambient conditions, such as
weather and terrain, and the size and geometry of the heli-
copter. The polarity of charge that accumulates on the air-
craft is determined by the relative dielectric constants of
the aircraft and the particles impinging upon it.
AIRCRAFT CAPACITANCE
A finite capacitance exists between a hovering helicopter and
ground. The value of this aircraft-to-ground capacitance is
dependent upon the aircraft shape, size, and proximity to
ground for altitudes of less than about 25 feet. This capac-
itance is, by definition, a measure of the aircraft's ability
to store electric charge.
AIRCRAFT POTENTIAL
In the process of storing charge, the helicopter develops a

voltage with respect to ground. This voltage V is related
81
to the aircraft-to-ground capacitance C and the total charge
on the aircraft Q by the classical formula V = Q/C. Because
the aircraft has a potential with respect to its surroundings,
corona discharge will take place from the helicopter when the
breakdown field of the air is exceeded. A steady-state con-
dition will be reached, wherein the corona discharge current
is equal to the natural charging current. The steady-state
residual aircraft voltage will be that required Zo support
corona discharge at a rate equal to that of charge influx.
This is typically on the order of 30,000 to 200,000 volts,
depending upon the particular helicopter type and the ambient
natural charging rates.
STORED ENERGY
When a helicopter is charged, energy is stored thereon. The

formula E = CV2 expresses the relationship between the air-
craft capacitance and voltage and the total energy available
for discharge when the aircraft is grounded.
PROBLEM ANALYSIS
The causes of the problems associated with charged aircraft
are apparent from the preceding paragraphs.
Shock Hazard
The release of energy stored on the aircraft is the cause of

the shock or spark hazards.
Any discussion of personnel shock hazard must make a distinc-
tion between electrostatic shock hazard and the shock hazard
associated with an AC or DC power source. In the case of
shock from electrostatic discharge, the determinant for the
severity of the shock is the amount of energy discharged (see
Figure 45); whereas, when the shock is associated with a power
source, the measure of the shock's intensity lies in the
amount of current forced through the body (see Figure 45).
Electrostatic discharge, of itself, is dangerous at a level
of about 1 joule. However, it is somewhat below this level
that the energy transfer to the body causes muscle spasms and
the resultant sensation of being physically thrown. The
energy transfer becomes uncomfortable at a much lower level,
10 millijoules on the average; the resultant shock is con-
sidered to be severe at a level of 100 millijoules. The
severity of personal injury at any given energy level is a
function of individual health. General statements r lating
danger to average energy levels are widely accepted. The
82
a E
z 0
I- r 0
.4 4
WW3
Wo~ ~ - --
W Ad
04
Cl7', WI 0 0
00 > 0
C)
ocz H
o U)
0n
w 0
04
00
z 4
ow
oW
1W
83
threshold of sensitivity, that is, the energy level at which
electrostatic discharge is just noticeable, averages about
5 millijoules. (These averae figures are based upon results
of tests performed by Dynasciences in August 1968.) This
threshold varies depending upon circumstances; it is somewhat
lower for a person standing in water or on a grounded metal
plate and higher for an individual standing on concrete or
wood.
Energy levels of 0.64 to 0.88 millijoule will ignite aviation
fuels under conditions of most ideal temperature and air mix-
ture for combustion. 6 However, for the conditions under which
these substances are encountered while sling loading, permis-
sible energy levels are considerably higher.
The severity of a shock from a power source, as ind.icated
above, is dependent upon the amount of current forced through
the body.
The threshold of sensitivity for shock of this nature is 5
milliamperes. Any amount of current over 10 milliamperes is
capable of producing a painful to severe shock; at values as
low as 20 milliamperes, breathing becomes labored, finally
ceasing completely at about 75 milliamperes. Currents between
100 and 200 milliamperes are lethal. As the current approaches
100 milliamperes, it causes ventricular fibrillation of the
heart; that is, an uncoordinated twitching of the ventricle
walls. Above 200 milliamperes, the muscular contractions are
so severe that the heart is forcibly clamped during the shock,
and the victim's chances for survival are good. Currents
above 5 amperes are fatal because of the heating due to the
power, I2R, dissipated in the body.
Interference
High electrostatic charge can also generate RFI. Uncontrolled

electrostatic discharge, or corona, due to a high aircraft
potential will occur from any relatively sharp edge or point
on the aircraft. The voltage required to initiate corona is
proportional to the radius of the edge or point at which
corona occurs. Antennas are frequently among the first parts
of the aircraft to go into corona. This is one of the causes
of the familiar "static" on associated radio equipment.
84
APPENDIX IV
BASIC CONSIDERATIONS FOR
TBE STATISTICAL ANALYSIS OF TEST DATA
PARAMETERS OF A SAMPLE
Given a set of data (a sample), any quantity which can be
determined on the basis of the sample values xl, x2, . x n
is called a statistic. The sample mean is, therefore, a
statistic. This is a value assumed by the random variable i,
where
n x.
(36)
Another important statistic is the sample variance, which is

the most widely used measure 9f the variability of a sample.
This is a value assumbed by s', where
(xi -
S2 i n=l (37)
n-l
Its positive square root s is called the sample standard
deviation.
PARAMETERS OF A NORMAL POPULATION
The distributions of R and s are referred to as sampling

distributions. If the data points are random samples from a
normal population--an infinite population of the form
N(xi; I, a,)--the independent random variables, whose values
constitute the random sample, have identical normal distribu-
tions with the population mean It and the population variance
U . If R is the mean of a random sample of size n from the
normal population N(x; p, a2), then the sampling distribution
of R is the normal distribution N(R; IL, a2/n). In addition, a
theorum of applied statistics states that, if s2 is the vari-
ance of a random sample of size n from the normal population
N(x; p., a2), then (n-l)s 2 /o 2 has a chi-square distribution with
n-l degrees of freedom.
85
USE OF SAMPLE PARAMETERS IN DECISIONS ABOUT A POPULATION
Through the process of statistical inference, it is possible

to arrive at conclusions or decisions concerning the param-
eters of a population on the basis of information contained
in samples. For instance, I, the mean of a population, can
be estimated on the basis of the sample mean :. Likewise,
the population variance ; can be estimated from R and the
sample variance s 2 .
The most useful estimates are those of intervals and, more

specifically, confidence intervals for the parameters of the
population. Basically, the idea of a confidence interval is
the assertion, with a certain stated probability, that the
value of the random variable falls within a stated interval.
For a random sample of size n from a normal population,

(R-yXA)/s has a t distribution with n-i degrees of freedom.
Therefore, it can be asserted with a probability of 1-a that
this random variable will assume a value between -ta/2 , n-i
and +ta/2, n-l. Making use of this characteristic, it is
possible to construct a 1-a confidence interval for I when a
is unknown. For a given sample, a degree of confidence of
i-a can be assigned to
-ta/2, n-i < (R-, ta/ 2 , n-i (38)
or
- ta/ 2 , n-l s < :x + t4/ 2 , n- n (39)
Given a random sample of size n from a normal population, a

1-a co~fidence interval for T2 may be obtained by using
(n-l)sZ /o, which has a chi-square distribution with n-i
degrees of freedom. It can thus be asserted with a probabil-
ity of 1-a that this random variable assumes a value between
X I-a/2, n-i and X 2 a/2, n-i or with a degree of confidence of
1-a that for a given sample
X2 < (n-l)s2 < 2

n- a/2 , n-i (40)
86
or
(n-l)s 2 < a2 < (n-l)s 2 (41)

X2 a/2, n-I X 1 - a/2 , n-i
This 1-a confidence interval for a2 may be converted into a

i-a confidence interval for c by taking square roots. 7
87
UNCLASSIFIED
&cunty ClassifaCZ1,
DOCUMENT CONTROL DATA - R & D
,S-urty ,I...,fllrtlon *ffle, body of sbetracl and Indexing annotation must be entered when the oeraoll tsport I cl.aifedI)
rf
I. ORIGINtATING ACTIVITY (CorpoNrt author) 120. RrPORT SECURITY CLASSIFICATION
Dynasciences Corporation/Scientific Systems Unclassified
Division 7. GROUP
Blue Bell, Pennsylvania 19422
REPORT TITLE
INVESTIGATION OF CH-54A ELECTROSTATIC CHARGING AND OF ACTIVE

ELECTROSTATIC DISCHARGER CAPABILITIES
4 OESCR|IPT&VE 140TES(rypeel reprt ad Inctlo dato.)

SFinal Report
S. AU THOR13) (First name. micdlo Initial, lilt name)
Michael C. Becher
6. REPORT DATE
1 7b. NO. OF RFS
7a, TOTAL NO. OF PAGE$
January 1970 98 7
k. CONTRACT OR GRANT NO, be. ORIGINATOR'S REPORT NUI."DERIS)
DAAJ02-69-C-0102 DCR-304
b. PROJECT NO.
1X163203D332 USAAVLABS Technical Report 69-90

Sb.
9. OTHER REPORT NOIS) (A.ny other nubr
this report) that moy be assflned
d. DCR- 304
10. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT
This document is subject to special export controls, and each transmittal to foreign
governments or foreign nationals may be made only with prior approval of U. S.
Army Aviation Materiel Laboratories, Fort Eustis, Virginia 4-3604.
It. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES 112. SPONSORING MILITARY A. TIVITY
Department of the Army
U.S.o Army Aviation Materiel Lab.
Fort Eustis, %Arginia 23604
13.'ARSTRACT
A test program was conducted at Yuma Proving Ground, Arizona,

to obtain in-flight m, asurements of electrostatic charging
rates experienced by a CH-54A helicopter operating in a dusty
environment and to evaluate active electrostatic discharger
systems as solution techniques. This report presents data
obtained during this program and reviews these data along with
those from previous work on the same aircraft type. This
report concludes that an extremely high and possibly lethal
charge level is present on the CH-54A in the operational
hookup situation, that an active discharger system capable of
discharging 200 microamperes is required to dissipate this
charge, and that, while presently available equipment does
not meet this requirement, repackaging of present hardware
offers a probable solution.
o 14 1PLACESO 0 POeM I47S. I JAN $4. WHICH IS

,P
,,or ,, oUOLT, Pon ARMY USs. Unclassified
SNcu'rity ClasmlficaUon
r ___
Unclassified
Security Classiflcation
14. LINK A LINK | LINK C
XY WORDS ,, I
ROLE WY ROLM WT ROLM WT
Electrostatic
Static
Charges, Static
Charge
Electrostatic Dischargers
Electrical Charges
P-Stats
ESD
Triboelectric Charging
Atmospheric Electricity
CH-54
Null Field Dischargers (NFD)
Wicks (Electrostatic)
Probes (Discharge)
Active Dischargers
Active Electrostatic Discharge Systems
Potentials, Electostatic
Precipitation Static
Lightning Discharge
Shock
External Cargo Hookup Operations
Energy, Potential
Capacitance
Natural Charging
Artificial Charging
Earth Field
Electrostatic Field
Dust
Engine Charging
Unclassified
Secrity Classification I- 2

AD0865988

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

AD0865988

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

AD0865988

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

UNCLASSIFIED

NEW LIMITATION CHANGE

USAAMRDL ltr, 30 Jul 1971

THIS PAGE IS UNCLASSIFIED

USAAVLABS TECHNICAL REPORT 69-90

U.S.ARMY AVIATION MATERIEL LABORATORIES

This document is subject toseca

The findings in this report are not to be construed as an official Depart-

When Government drawings, specifications, or other data are used for

Destroy this report when no longer needed. Do not return it to the

This report was prepared by the Dynasciences Corporation, Scientific

The conclusions and recommendations contained in this report are con-

This document is subject to special export controls,

A test program was conducted at Yuma Proving Ground, Arizona,

The flight test program reported herein was conducted by the

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS. . . . . . . . . . .viii

LITERATURE CITED . ....... ... .. 38

SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY. ........ .. . 39

III. Problems Associated With Electrostatically

IV. Basic Considerations for the Statistical

DISTRIBUTIONT ... ... . . . . . . . . 88

1 Chart Recording of Natural Charging Current

3 CH-54A Test Aircraft Emerging From Dust Cloud

5 CH-54A Test Aircraft and Dust Cloud (Phillips

12 Test Equipment: Instrumentation Rack,

13 Test Equipment: Detail of Lower Section of

14 Test Equipment: Detail of Recorder and

15 Current and Voltage Polarity Convention. . . 46

16 Tie-in With CH-54A Test Aircraft Electrical

17 ESD Component Locations on CH-54A Test Air-

18 Mounting Location for ESD Sensor Unit . . . 49

19 Preparation for Mounting of ESD Sensor Unit

20 Detail of Mounting Bracket for ESD Sensor

21 Detail of Mounting Bracket for ESD Sensor Unit

22 ESD Sensor Unit Test Installation (Side View) 53

23 ESD Sensor Unit Test Installation (Front

24 Detail of Section of Exciter/Multiplier Mount-

25 Exciter/Multiplier Mounting Fixture, With

28 Detail of Exciter/Multiplier Mounting Fixture

31 Installation of ESD Exciters and Multipliers

32 Detail of Exciter/Multiplier Test Installa-

33 Completed Exciter/Multiplier Installation on

34 Idealized Parallel-Plate Capacitor .... 65

35 CH-54A Test Configuration for Aircraft/Ground

36 CH-54A Test Configuration for Natural Charging

38 Data Collection Form Used During Discharging

59 CH-54A Test Configuration for Measurement of

41 Discharging Capability Test Data. . . . . 77

42 Discharging Capability Test Data. . . . . 78

43 Discharging Capability Test Data. . . . . 79

44 Discharging Capability Test Data . . . . . 80

45 Personnel Shock Hazard Levels ...... 83

II Observations of Natural Charging Current . . 9

III Aircraft/Ground Capacitance Measurements . . 20

IV Discharging Capability Test Data . .. . 21

V Discharging Capability Test Data . . . . . 23

VI Discharging Capability Test Data . . . . . 24

VII Discharging Capability Test Data .. . . . 25

VIII Discharging Capability Test Data . . . . . 28