Ieee 1493

IEEE Guide for the Evaluation of
Solvents Used for Cleaning Electrical

Cables and Accessories
IEEE Power Engineering Society

Sponsored by the
Insulated Conductors Committee
--`,,`,``,,``,,`,`,,``,`,,,,,`,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
IEEE
3 Park Avenue IEEE Std 1493™-2006
New York, NY 10016-5997, USA
6 June 2007
Copyright The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc.

Provided by IHS under license with IEEE Licensee=Hatch Limited/5911476001, User=Olivares, Cristian
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Not for Resale, 01/31/2008 12:11:38 MST
--`,,`,``,,``,,`,`,,``,`,,,,,`,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

IEEE Std 1493TM-2006
--`,,`,``,,``,,`,`,,``,`,,,,,`,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
Sponsor
Insulated Conductors Committee
of the
IEEE Power Engineering Society
Approved 6 December 2006

IEEE-SA Standards Board

Abstract: Test procedures for evaluating the physical characteristics of cable cleaning solvents
and their compatibility with extruded dielectric cable components and cable accessories (joints
and terminations) are provided in this guide. Compatibility is established by placing component
samples in contact with the cleaning solvent for a short period and then measuring the physical or
electrical properties of the component. The measured values are compared with values for
samples that have not been in contact with the cleaner. Suggested performance values are
provided. This guide also provides suggested procedures for evaluating the cleaning
effectiveness of cable cleaning solvents. These comparative test procedures do not provide
absolute performance values.
Keywords: cable accessories, cleaning effectiveness, compatibility, extruded dielectric cable
--`,,`,``,,``,,`,`,,``,`,,,,,`,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
_________________________
The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc.

3 Park Avenue, New York, NY 10016-5997, USA
Copyright © 2007 by the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc.

All rights reserved. Published 6 June 2007. Printed in the United States of America.
IEEE is a registered trademark in the U.S. Patent & Trademark Office, owned by the Institute of Electrical and Electronics
Engineers, Incorporated.
Print: ISBN 0-7381-5312-5 SH95612

PDF: ISBN 0-7381-5313-3 SS95612
No part of this publication may be reproduced in any form, in an electronic retrieval system or otherwise, without the prior
written permission of the publisher.

IEEE Standards documents are developed within the IEEE Societies and the Standards Coordinating Committees of
the IEEE Standards Association (IEEE-SA) Standards Board. The IEEE develops its standards through a consensus
development process, approved by the American National Standards Institute, which brings together volunteers
representing varied viewpoints and interests to achieve the final product. Volunteers are not necessarily members of the
Institute and serve without compensation. While the IEEE administers the process and establishes rules to promote
fairness in the consensus development process, the IEEE does not independently evaluate, test, or verify the accuracy
of any of the information contained in its standards.
Use of an IEEE Standard is wholly voluntary. The IEEE disclaims liability for any personal injury, property or other
damage, of any nature whatsoever, whether special, indirect, consequential, or compensatory, directly or indirectly
resulting from the publication, use of, or reliance upon this, or any other IEEE Standard document.
The IEEE does not warrant or represent the accuracy or content of the material contained herein, and expressly
disclaims any express or implied warranty, including any implied warranty of merchantability or fitness for a specific
purpose, or that the use of the material contained herein is free from patent infringement. IEEE Standards documents
are supplied “AS IS.”
The existence of an IEEE Standard does not imply that there are no other ways to produce, test, measure, purchase,
market, or provide other goods and services related to the scope of the IEEE Standard. Furthermore, the viewpoint
expressed at the time a standard is approved and issued is subject to change brought about through developments in the
state of the art and comments received from users of the standard. Every IEEE Standard is subjected to review at least
every five years for revision or reaffirmation. When a document is more than five years old and has not been
--`,,`,``,,``,,`,`,,``,`,,,,,`,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
reaffirmed, it is reasonable to conclude that its contents, although still of some value, do not wholly reflect the present
state of the art. Users are cautioned to check to determine that they have the latest edition of any IEEE Standard.
In publishing and making this document available, the IEEE is not suggesting or rendering professional or other
services for, or on behalf of, any person or entity. Nor is the IEEE undertaking to perform any duty owed by any other
person or entity to another. Any person utilizing this, and any other IEEE Standards document, should rely upon the
advice of a competent professional in determining the exercise of reasonable care in any given circumstances.
Interpretations: Occasionally questions may arise regarding the meaning of portions of standards as they relate to
specific applications. When the need for interpretations is brought to the attention of IEEE, the Institute will initiate
action to prepare appropriate responses. Since IEEE Standards represent a consensus of concerned interests, it is
important to ensure that any interpretation has also received the concurrence of a balance of interests. For this reason,
IEEE and the members of its societies and Standards Coordinating Committees are not able to provide an instant
response to interpretation requests except in those cases where the matter has previously received formal consideration.
At lectures, symposia, seminars, or educational courses, an individual presenting information on IEEE standards shall
make it clear that his or her views should be considered the personal views of that individual rather than the formal
position, explanation, or interpretation of the IEEE.
Comments for revision of IEEE Standards are welcome from any interested party, regardless of membership affiliation
with IEEE. Suggestions for changes in documents should be in the form of a proposed change of text, together with
appropriate supporting comments. Comments on standards and requests for interpretations should be addressed to:
Secretary, IEEE-SA Standards Board

445 Hoes Lane
Piscataway, NJ 08854
USA
NOTE—Attention is called to the possibility that implementation of this standard may require use of subject matter
covered by patent rights. By publication of this standard, no position is taken with respect to the existence or validity of
any patent rights in connection therewith. The IEEE shall not be responsible for identifying patents for which a license
may be required by an IEEE standard or for conducting inquiries into the legal validity or scope of those patents that
are brought to its attention.
Authorization to photocopy portions of any individual standard for internal or personal use is granted by the Institute of
Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc., provided that the appropriate fee is paid to Copyright Clearance Center. To
arrange for payment of licensing fee, please contact Copyright Clearance Center, Customer Service, 222 Rosewood
Drive, Danvers, MA 01923 USA; +1 978 750 8400. Permission to photocopy portions of any individual standard for
educational classroom use can also be obtained through the Copyright Clearance Center.

Introduction
This introduction is not part of IEEE Std 1493-2006, IEEE Guide for the Evaluation of Solvents Used for
Cleaning Electrical Cables and Accessories.
This guide provides test methods and general evaluation criteria used to judge the efficacy of electrical
cable cleaning solvents proposed as replacements for environmentally harmful and soon to be unavailable
chlorinated hydrocarbons such as trichloroethane. The conformance of a product to the proposed
requirements for replacement solvents suggests the product should be acceptable for use as an electrical
cable cleaning solvent.
Solvents have been used by the electrical industry for numerous applications for many years. Most
applications require the solvent meet special requirements such as fast evaporation rate, high dielectric
strength, and compatibility with semiconductive polymeric materials. For several decades, one family of
solvents has been universally used by the electric industry for nearly all of its applications. This family of
chemicals is referred to as chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs), which are a unique class of compounds. One CFC
compound, trichloroethane, proved to be ideal for electrical cable cleaning by the electric industry because
it has a very high flash point, high dielectric strength, evaporates quickly, and cleans effectively.
Trichloroethane and most other members of the CFC family have been slated for a production and use
phase-out because of concern over the depletion of the ozone layer in the upper atmosphere. Production of
trichloroethane in the United States was halted on January 1, 1996. It has been heavily studied and well
documented that CFCs rise to the upper atmosphere and react with upper level ozone, which causes the
concentration of ozone to be substantially reduced. Reduced levels of upper level ozone are projected to
allow higher levels of ultraviolet radiation to reach the earth's surface, which is theorized to cause higher
incidence of skin cancer in humans and reduced crop yields.
Because of the phase-out of trichloroethane, the electric industry has been put in the situation of seeking
substitute materials to meet its solvent needs. Trichloroethane had reached the status of a cleaning solvent
that "just worked" as confirmed over the many years that it was used. However, industry-wide specification
or evaluation criteria were never written for this product and the many applications where it was used.
This guide provides evaluation categories, test methods, and reasonable acceptance criteria that can be used
by the electric industry to evaluate the numerous and diverse lot of chemicals being proposed as
replacements for trichloroethane for use as electrical cable and accessory cleaning solvents.
The work of preparing this guide was carried out by Working Group B9W of the Accessories
Subcommittee of the Insulated Conductors Committee of the IEEE Power Engineering Society. The
original chair of this Working Group, Mr. Gene Weitz, was responsible for the development of this guide.
Before the guide could be finalized, both Mr. Weitz and the vice chair, Mr. Peterson, resigned from the
Working Group due to changes in their business focus. Unfortunately, the names of the Working Group
members were lost during that transition.
The current chair and vice chair assisted with the development of this guide but are careful to note that
much credit for pushing the guide through the rigorous development process belongs to Mr. Weitz and
Mr. Peterson.
iv
--`,,`,``,,``,,`,`,,``,`,,,,,`,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
Copyright © 2007 IEEE. All rights reserved.

Notice to users
Errata
Errata, if any, for this and all other guides can be accessed at the following URL: http://
standards.ieee.org/reading/ieee/updates/errata/index.html. Users are encouraged to check this URL for
errata periodically.
Interpretations
Current interpretations can be accessed at the following URL: http://standards.ieee.org/reading/ieee/interp/
index.html.
Patents
Attention is called to the possibility that implementation of this guide may require use of subject matter
covered by patent rights. By publication of this guide, no position is taken with respect to the existence or
validity of any patent rights in connection therewith. The IEEE shall not be responsible for identifying
patents or patent applications for which a license may be required to implement an IEEE guide or for
conducting inquiries into the legal validity or scope of those patents that are brought to its attention.
Participants
At the time this guide was completed, the B9W Working Group had the following membership:
Rick Hartlein, Chair

Tom Champion, Vice Chair
Michael Bayer Robert Keefe Bill Taylor

Vern Buchholz Glenn Luzzi Milan Uzelac
John Cancelosi Joseph McAuliffe Jim Washburn
John Fee Tim Robeson Carl Wenzel
Bob Fulcomer Frank Stepniak Carl Zuidema
The following members of the balloting committee voted on this guide. Balloters may have voted for
approval, disapproval, or abstention.
Kenneth Bow Ajit Gwal Gary Michel

Kraig Bader Robert Gear Shantanu Nandi
A. James Braun John Hans Neal Parker
Kent Brown Jeffrey Hartenberger Michael Pehosh
John Cancelosi Edward Horgan Jr. Serge Pelissou
John Cooper Stan Howell Paul Pilitteri
Matthew Davis Robert Keefe James Ruggieri
John Densley Gael R Kennedy Michael Smalley
Guru Dutt Dhingra Robert Konnik Joseph Snow
Gary Engmann Gregory Luri Carl Wall
Marcel Fortin Glenn Luzzi Daniel Ward
Robert Fulcomer Eric Marsden John Ware
John Merando

--`,,`,``,,``,,`,`,,``,`,,,,,`,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

When the IEEE-SA Standards Board approved this guide on 6 December 2006, it had the following
membership:
Steve M. Mills, Chair
Richard H. Hulett, Vice Chair
Don Wright, Past Chair
Judith Gorman, Secretary
Mark D. Bowman Raymond Hapeman Glenn Parsons

Dennis B. Brophy William B. Hopf Ronald C. Petersen
Joseph Bruder Lowell G. Johnson Gary S. Robinson
Richard Cox Herman Koch Frank Stone
Bob Davis Joseph L. Koepfinger* Malcolm V. Thaden
Julian Forster* David J. Law Richard L. Townsend
Joanna N. Guenin Daleep C. Mohla Joe D. Watson
Mark S. Halpin Paul Nikolich Howard L. Wolfman
T. W. Olsen
*Member Emeritus
Also included are the following nonvoting IEEE-SA Standards Board liaisons:
Satish K. Aggarwal, NRC Representative

Richard DeBlasio, DOE Representative
Alan H. Cookson, NIST Representative
--`,,`,``,,``,,`,`,,``,`,,,,,`,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
Michelle Turner
IEEE Standards Program Manager, Document Development
Matthew J. Ceglia
IEEE Standards Program Manager, Technical Program Development IEEE Standards Project Editor
vi

Contents
1. Scope .......................................................................................................................................................... 1
2. Normative references.................................................................................................................................. 2
--`,,`,``,,``,,`,`,,``,`,,,,,`,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
3. Definitions, acronyms, and abbreviations .................................................................................................. 3
3.1 Definitions ........................................................................................................................................... 3

3.2 Acronyms and abbreviations ............................................................................................................... 3
4. General ....................................................................................................................................................... 3
5. Safety.......................................................................................................................................................... 3
6. Regulatory status ........................................................................................................................................ 4
6.1 Flash point ........................................................................................................................................... 5

6.2 Evaporation rate................................................................................................................................... 6
6.3 Dielectric strength................................................................................................................................ 8
6.4 Percent nonvolatile residue.................................................................................................................. 8
7. Compatibility tests...................................................................................................................................... 8
7.1 Insulation compatibility, tensile, and elongation ............................................................................... 10

7.2 Insulation compatibility, volume swell.............................................................................................. 11
7.3 Cable insulation shield compatibility, volume resistivity .................................................................. 12
7.4 Cable accessory compatibility, insulation shield resistance .............................................................. 13
8. Electrical test ............................................................................................................................................ 15
8.1 Sample preparation ............................................................................................................................ 15

8.2 Test procedure ................................................................................................................................... 15
9. Cleaning effectiveness.............................................................................................................................. 15
9.1 Qualitative method ............................................................................................................................ 16

9.2 Quantitative method .......................................................................................................................... 16
10. Conclusion.............................................................................................................................................. 18
vii
--`,,`,``,,``,,`,`,,``,`,,,,,`,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

1. Scope
This guide serves two primary purposes. The first is to outline many of the issues associated with using a
solvent as an electric cable cleaner. The second is to provide a variety of tests that can be used for
evaluating the performance of solvents intended for cleaning electric cables or cable accessories used by
electric utilities.
Tests for assessing the compatibility of a cleaning solvent with various cable and cable accessory
components and tests for assessing cleaning effectiveness are included within this guide. Although many
--`,,`,``,,``,,`,`,,``,`,,,,,`,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
materials are used in cable systems, this guide covers only the basic cable and cable accessory components
with a focus on electric power cables. The guide may be applied to materials outside the scope of this
document at the user’s discretion.
The compatibility tests include suggested or target acceptance criteria to help assure that the solvent does
not harm the component it is intended to clean. As this document is a guide, these values are not
requirements. They are only provided as guidelines and are based either on industry standard requirements
for materials or on the best judgment and experience of the working group members who prepared the
document. They will be modified by the P1493 Working Group as additional data become available. The
cleaning effectiveness tests are comparative tests with no specific performance requirements.
Throughout this guide, the terms “solvent” and “cleaner” are both used to describe the chemical intended
for use as a cable cleaner.
1
IEEE Std 1493-2006
IEEE Guide for the Evaluation of Solvents Used for Cleaning Electrical Cables and Accessories
2. Normative references
The following referenced documents are indispensable for the application of this document. For the dated
references, only the edition cited applies. For undated references, the latest edition of the referenced
document (including any amendments or corrigenda) applies.
29 CFR 1910.106. OSHA criteria used to classify flammable or combustible liquids.1
ASTM D56-02a, Standard Test Method for Flash Point by Tag Closed Cup Tester.2
ASTM D93-02a, Standard Test Methods for Flash Methods for Flash Point by Pensky–Martens Closed Cup
Tester.
ASTM D412-98a (2002), Standard Test Methods for Vulcanized Rubber and Thermoplastic Elastomers—
Tension.
ASTM D471-98e1, Standard Test Method for Rubber Property—Effect of Liquids.

--`,,`,``,,``,,`,`,,``,`,,,,,`,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
ASTM D638-03 Standard Test Method for Tensile Properties of Plastics.
ASTM D877-02e1, Standard Test Method for Dielectric Breakdown Voltage of Insulating Liquids Using
Disk Electrodes.
ASTM D3182-89 (2001), Standard Practice for Rubber—Materials, Equipment, and Procedures for Mixing
Standard Compounds and Preparing Standard Vulcanized Sheets.
ASTM D3183-02, Standard Practice for Rubber—Preparation of Pieces for Test Purposes from Products.
ASTM D3278 (Test Method B), Standard Test Methods for Flash Point of Liquids by Small Scale Closed-
Cup Apparatus.
ASTM D4265, Standard Guide for Evaluating Stain Removal Performance in Home Laundering.
ASTM D4488, Testing Cleaning Performance of Products Intended for Use on Resilient Flooring and
Washable Walls.
ASTM D2369-04, Standard Test Method for Volatile Content of Coatings.
ASTM F711-02, Standard Specification for Fiberglass-Reinforced Plastic (FRP) Rod and Tube Used in
Live Line Tools.
ICEA S-94-649-2004, Standard for Concentric Neutral Cables Rated 5 Through 46 kV.3
ICEA S-97-682-2004, Standard for Utility Shielded Power Cables Rated 5 Through 4 kV.
IEEE Std 592TM-1990, IEEE Standard for Exposed Semiconducting Shields on High-Voltage Cable Joints
and Separable Insulated Connectors (withdrawn).4
MSDS, OSHA Form 20, Material Safety Data Sheet.5
1
CFR publications are available from the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, P.O. Box 37082,
Washington, DC 20013-7082, USA (http://www.access.gpo.gov/).
2
ASTM publications are available from the American Society for Testing and Materials, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, West Conshohocken,
PA 19428-2959, USA (http://www.astm.org/).
3
ICEA publications are available from ICEA, P.O. Box 20048, Minneapolis, MN 55420, USA (http://www.icea.org/).
4
IEEE Std 592-1990 has been withdrawn; however, copies can be obtained from Global Engineering, 15 Inverness Way East,
Englewood, CO 80112-5704, USA, tel. (303) 792-2181 (http://global.ihs.com/).
2
IEEE Std 1493-2006
3. Definitions, acronyms, and abbreviations
3.1 Definitions
For the purposes of this guide, the following terms and definitions apply. The Authoritative Dictionary of
IEEE Standards Terms, Seventh Edition,6 should be referenced for terms not defined in this clause.
3.1.1 room temperature and humidity: 20 ± 5 ºC, 50 ± 10% relative humidity.
3.2 Acronyms and abbreviations
CFC chlorinated fluorocarbon

EPDM ethylene propylene diene rubber of type M as defined by ASTM D1418
EPA Environmental Protection Agency
EPR ethylene propylene rubber
EVA ethyl vinyl acetate
MSDS material safety data sheet
OSHA Occupational Safety and Health Administration
VOC volatile organic compound
4. General
Most cleaning solvents proposed as replacements for the chlorinated fluorocarbon (CFC) solvents are very
different from CFCs. The alternative solvents have flash points versus no flash point, dry very slowly
versus extremely fast, may be conductive versus nonconductive, and may be incompatible with sensitive
electrical polymeric components versus proven compatibility. In addition, the proposed materials are
extremely diverse. Therefore, it is very important that all appropriate characteristics of the solvent be
evaluated prior to its use as a replacement for trichloroethane. Because of the vast differences of the
proposed alternatives to trichloroethane, it is also important to consider, and perhaps alter, field practices
for the use of the new solvents to ensure safe and effective results.
5. Safety
Worker safety and health issues regarding the use of cable cleaning solvents should be thoroughly analyzed
by someone skilled in industrial hygiene evaluations. The product properties alone do not fully define the
potential safety hazards. How the product is used is equally important. The industrial hygienist will
evaluate the data on the solvent’s material safety data sheet [MSDS-Occupational Safety and Health
Administration (OSHA) Form 20]7 and the potential hazards and their relationship to the actual work
practices for using these solvents.
Many users do not want to change their existing work practices in order to use a new cleaning solvent. An
evaluation of existing work practices should be made to ensure worker health will not be adversely affected
by changing to a different cleaning solvent. Some work practices important to the safety and health
evaluation are as follows:
a) Anticipated amount of solvent used per unit time (e.g., 100 mL/8 h).
b) Location of work (e.g., manhole, bucket truck, and switchgear cubicle).
--`,,`,``,,``,,`,`,,``,`,,,,,`,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
5
MSDS OSHA Form 20 is available from the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, 1615 H Street NW, Washington, D.C. 20062-2000, USA
(http://www.uschamber.com).
6
IEEE publications are available from the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc., 445 Hoes Lane, Piscataway, NJ
08854, USA (http://standards.ieee.org/).
7
Information on references can be found in Clause 2.
3
IEEE Std 1493-2006
c) Volume and type of working space.

d) Ventilation (i.e., 1 m/s wind and 2 air exchanges/h).
e) Typical safety equipment worn by workers (i.e. goggles, safety glasses, and latex gloves).
f) Anticipated level of direct contact of solvent with skin and clothing.
g) Is a torch or heat gun to be used? If so, how much time will have elapsed after using the solvent
before the torch or heat gun is used?
Some solvent properties important to the safety and health evaluation are as follows:
⎯ Thermal decomposition products (when heat shrink accessories are used).
⎯ Evaporation rate.
⎯ Flash point.
⎯ Flammability limits.
⎯ Chemical composition.
⎯ Presence of carcinogens.
⎯ Inhalation exposure limits, respiratory equipment required, and emergency medical treatment.
⎯ Skin/eye contact exposure limits and emergency medical treatment.
⎯ Vapor density. (Vapor density data are given as a comparison with air, with air density equal to
1. Materials with vapor density greater than 1 are heavier than air and tend to accumulate in
low-lying areas.)
⎯ Volatile organic compound (VOC) content.
After analyzing all relevant information, the industrial hygienist will decide on a course of action. If
insufficient data are available regarding the potential for worker exposure, monitoring with a gas analyzer
or gas monitoring badge may be necessary. Once the actual exposure levels are determined, the industrial
hygienist can assist in assessing the various options for using the solvents safely.
6. Regulatory status
The regulatory status of a product can be just as important as the safety aspect of a product. Regulatory data
on a product can often be found on the MSDS but not always. It is recommended that a trained person
evaluate the product from a regulatory standpoint to make sure the use of the product complies with
applicable regulations, including disposal. Items such as the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
Phase I and Phase II lists of banned or phased-out chlorofluorocarbons should be consulted, as should the
solvent’s applicability to various VOC regulations. VOC regulations vary widely from region to region.
Approval by the safety, industrial hygiene, and/or other related departments regarding regulatory status
should be obtained prior to moving to the next level of evaluation.
Intrinsic properties
Four intrinsic solvent properties are deemed to be of importance when the solvent is used as a cable
cleaner. Two of these properties, flash point and evaporation rate, are properties that are often provided in
the product MSDS. For these properties, specific ASTM test procedures are provided.
Two additional properties, dielectric strength and percent non-volatile residue, are not as likely to be
included on the MSDS. Therefore, the test procedures described for these properties are based on ASTM
procedures but do not necessarily follow them precisely. The procedures are sometimes modified to make
the test more applicable for cable cleaning solvents or to simplify the procedure.
4
--`,,`,``,,``,,`,`,,``,`,,,,,`,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
IEEE Std 1493-2006
6.1 Flash point
The flash point of a material is the lowest temperature at which the liquid phase gives off enough vapors to
ignite (flash and burn) when exposed to an external ignition source. Flash point is one of several properties
that must be considered in assessing the overall flammability hazard of a cable cleaning solvent. Flash point
is used in U.S. Department of Transportation and U.S. Department of Labor (OSHA) regulations to define
flammable and combustible materials. This classification helps determine product labeling and transport as
well as handling and disposal.
Table 1 provides OSHA criteria (29 CFR 1910.106) used to classify flammable or combustible liquids.
Table 1 —OSHA classifications for flammable or combustible liquids
Classification Flash point
Class IA flammable liquid Below 23 °C (and boiling point below 38 °C)
Class IB flammable liquid Below 23 °C (and boiling point at or above 38 °C)
Class IC flammable liquid At or above 23 °C and below 38 °C
Class II combustible liquid At or above 38 °C and below 60 °C
Class IIIA combustible liquid At or above 60 °C and below 93 °C
Class IIIB combustible liquid At or above 93 °C
6.1.1 Test method(s)
The flash point of a cable cleaning solvent can be measured in several ways. However, regulatory agencies
only accept flash point information determined by one of three closed-cup methods. Flash points
determined by open-cup methods are not accepted by the regulatory agencies and are not recommended to
be used for the evaluation of cable cleaning solvents.
The three acceptable closed-cup standard test methods for flash point are as follows:
a) Flash Point by Tag Closed Tester (ASTM D56-02a).
b) Flash Point by Pensky–Martens Closed Tester (ASTM D93-02a).
c) Flash Point of Liquids by Setaflash Closed-Cup Apparatus (ASTM D3278 [Test Method B]).
These test methods are essentially similar when used to evaluate low viscosity materials such as cable
cleaning solvents and can be summarized as follows: The cleaning solvent sample is placed in the cup of
the tester and, with the lid closed, heated at a slow, constant rate. A small flame of specified size is directed
into the cup at regular intervals. The flash point is recorded at the lowest temperature at which application
of the test flame causes the vapor above the sample to ignite.
Each type of closed-cup tester has a specified range of flash point temperatures as shown in Table 2, which
may restrict use with certain cleaning solvents. Also, the reproducibility of the test methods should be
noted when comparing results obtained by different operators working in different laboratories.
Table 2 —Flash point range and reproducibility by test method
Closed-cup test method Flash point range °C Reproducibility °C
ASTM D56-02a (Tag) (Flash points below 93 °C)
Below 13 °C 3.3 °C
13–59 °C 2.2 °C
60–93 °C 3.3 °C
ASTM D93-02a (Pensky–Martens) (Flash points below 370 °C)
104°C and under 3.5 °C
above 104°C 8.5 °C
ASTM D3278 (Setaflash) (Flash points 0–110 °C)
0–110 °C 3.5 °C
5
--`,,`,``,,``,,`,`,,``,`,,,,,`,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
IEEE Std 1493-2006
6.1.2 Acceptance criteria
Cleaning solvents with flash points of 60.5 °C or higher are recommended because they are the least
regulated and offer the highest safety margin for the utility craftsman. Because they generally offer faster
evaporation rates, products with flash points close to, but not below, 37.8 °C may be used as long as they
are properly packaged. Fast evaporating, nonflammable solvents may be best for sensitive electrical
components or where flammable solvents cannot be tolerated.
6.2 Evaporation rate
The rate at which a product dries or evaporates makes a difference in how quickly a craftsman can move on
to the next assembly step once the cleaning step is completed. Trichloroethane and other CFC solvents
evaporate extremely quickly. Typically, a thin film of trichloroethane completely evaporates in a few
seconds. In contrast, a thin film of potential replacement solvents may evaporate in a matter of seconds or
in several hours. Evaporation rate is one primary difference between replacement solvents and the CFC
materials. Evaporation rate is often measured in relation to a control solvent, such as n-butyl acetate.
Several orders of magnitude variation exist in the evaporation rate of common industrial solvents.
Consequently, this property should be evaluated carefully.
Replacement electrical cleaning solvents have widely varying vapor pressures, from 10 Pa to 100 kPa at
20 °C. Vapor pressure is a physical property that is normally listed on the MSDS. The vapor pressure of a
solvent can be used as a rough corollary to the solvent’s evaporation rate. Generally, the higher the vapor
pressure, the faster a solvent evaporates. For a comparison, water has a vapor pressure of 2.4 kPa at 20 °C.
Evaporation rate is also dependent on environmental conditions and can vary significantly over normal
ambient working temperatures, which indicates a broad acceptable range for evaporation rates. The primary
consideration in a cleaning solvent’s evaporation rate is the adoption of an appropriate cleaner use method.
Although field operations prefer faster evaporating cleaning solvents that do not slow operations down or
add procedures, safety and environmental considerations may dictate the opposite to minimize inhalation
exposure or conform to VOC release regulations. These considerations are summarized in Table 3.
Table 3 —Alternative solvent evaporation rate considerations

Faster evaporating solvents Slower evaporating solvents
Advantages Disadvantages Advantages Disadvantages
Quick drying for fast Faster formation of airborne Slower formation of Slower operations need
operations concentrations airborne concentrations drying steps
Minimizes contact time More flammable Less combustible Excess use must be
with polymer materials lower flashpoint higher flashpoints avoided to prevent longer
(unless halogenated) contact
Often regulated as hazardous Lower vapor pressure may
waste (ignitability or chemical exempt or lessen VOC
content) regulations
May be subject to VOC
regulations and restrictions
Can cool surface and cause
moisture condensation
More may be required in hot
environments
--`,,`,``,,``,,`,`,,``,`,,,,,`,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
6.2.1 Test procedure
The recommended test method for establishing the evaporation rate is a comparative weight-loss procedure
over a fixed period of time at a fixed temperature. An absolute evaporation rate is very difficult to measure
because solvent evaporation depends on variables not easily controlled, including solvent density, ambient
6
IEEE Std 1493-2006
temperature, evaporative cooling, air movement, and relative humidity. Rather than an absolute number, a
relative evaporation rate range should be determined from a simple comparative-weight-loss test procedure.
At room temperature, 5 g to 10 g of the test cleaner should be weighed into a small weighting tin providing
an evaporative cleaner surface area of 20 cm2 to 30 cm2. An initial weight should be taken, accurate to
±1 mg. Fast evaporating solvents can evaporate at rates of 1000 to 7000 mg/h. Slow solvents can be as slow
as 1 mg/h.
For faster evaporating solvents (rates greater than 1000 mg/h), a weight should be taken every 30 min until
at least 50% of the solvent has evaporated. Then the average weight loss per hour should be calculated
based on the total weight loss and the total time.
For slower drying solvents (rates of 100 mg/h to 1000 mg/h), the weighing time interval should be
extended to 2 h readings and the total time should be extended to allow evaporation of at least 50% of the
weight of the sample. Then the average weight loss per hour should be calculated based on the total weight
loss and the total time.
For very slow evaporating solvents (rates less than 100 mg/h), the reading time interval can be extended to
24 h and the test can be terminated after 5 days if 50% of the solvent has not evaporated. Then the average
weight loss per hour should be calculated based on the total weight loss and the total time.
Because the environmental conditions cannot be controlled, a comparison solvent (recommended is n-

butyl acetate) should be evaporated at the same time and at the same environmental conditions. The ratio of
the weight loss of the test solvent to n-butyl acetate as a “relative rate to n-butyl acetate = 1” should be
determined. For example, if the test solvent averaged a weight loss of 1350 mg/h and n-butyl acetate
averaged 305 mg/h under the same conditions, the relative rate of the test solvent to n-butyl acetate =1 is
1350/305 or 4.4.
This simple approach can provide a reasonable perspective on the evaporation rate of a solvent. The results
should be regarded as a range because inherent variation occurs in such testing from laboratory
environment to laboratory environment. Table 4 provides typical data for fast-evaporating, medium-
--`,,`,``,,``,,`,`,,``,`,,,,,`,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
evaporating, and slow-evaporating pure solvents.
Table 4 —Typical solvent evaporation rates relative to n-butyl acetate

Characteristic Solvent Relative rate range
(n-butyl acetate = 1)
Fast-evaporating Acetone 10 to 14
Isopropanol 2 to 4
n-Hexane 9 to 16
Trichloroethane 4 to 8
Medium-evaporating Diacetone alcohol 0.1 to 0.3
Xylene 0.5 to 0.8
Water 0.3 to 0.6
Slow-evaporating Petroleum solvent 0.05 to 0.1
(flash point = 60 °C) 0.005 to 0.01
Petroleum solvent 0.2 to 0.4
(flash point = 100 °C)
d-Limonene
No specific evaporation rates are recommended. Individual circumstances will dictate an evaporation rate
best for the application based on the compromises discussed above. Evaporation rates are often provided in
comparative terms, which indicates how rapidly the solvent evaporates in comparison with diethyl ether or
butyl acetate.
7
IEEE Std 1493-2006
6.3 Dielectric strength
The dielectric strength of a cleaning solvent indicates its relative conductivity or nonconductivity. Materials
that have high dielectric strength are less likely to cause tracking or other undesirable electrical effects once
a cleaned component is energized. Generally speaking, most products should not be used on energized
equipment because of their combustibility, even though many of them are classified as nonconductive.
The test method recommended for evaluating the dielectric strength of cable cleaners is ASTM D877-02e1,
Procedure B. In this procedure, a nonconductive cup is fitted with two identical electrodes (with sharp
edges) mounted at least 12.7 mm from the inside of the cup, exactly opposite of one another with a spacing
of 2.54 mm. The electrodes must be composed of brass, have a diameter of 25.4 mm ± 2%, and be at least
3.18 mm thick. The prepared cup should be filled with the proposed cleaning solvent such that the liquid is
no more than 20.3 mm above the electrodes. The cup and liquid should then be allowed to stand for more
than 2 min but no more than 3 min before applying voltage. Alternating current voltage should be applied
across the electrodes starting from zero, rising at 3 kV/s ± 5% until breakdown occurs. Record the
breakdown level. Make one breakdown on each of five successive fillings of the test cup. The mean of the
five breakdowns may be reported as the breakdown voltage, provided the range criteria of ASTM D877-
02e1 is met.
For typical cable cleaning applications, the dielectric strength should be greater than or equal to 10 000 V
when tested according to ASTM D877-02e1.
6.4 Percent nonvolatile residue
The material left behind after all volatiles have evaporated from an electrical cleaning solvent is called the
“nonvolatile” residue. The amount of residue can be measured as a weight percent of the original cleaning
solvent weight. Low levels or “no” residue is appropriate for most electrical cleaning. Residues can
interfere with electrical contact or affect electrical components. A residue can provide an unknown layer of
material to promote electrical tracking or interfere with adhesion. Users are advised to remove as much of
the solvent as possible to minimize any remaining residue.
6.4.1 Test method
A modified ASTM D2369-04 test procedure is recommended. In this procedure, 10 g (+0.5 g / –0.0 g) of
solvent are placed in an open, glass container that is placed in a controlled temperature oven. The sample is
held at 70 °C ± 5 °C until it reaches a constant weight. At that time, the percent nonvolatile residue is
measured by dividing the final weight by the initial weight after the weight of the container is subtracted
from the weight of both measurements.
For residue-sensitive cleaning applications, nonvolatile residue is recommended to be less than 0.01% by
weight (less than 100 ppm by weight).
7. Compatibility tests
Cable cleaning solvents can potentially be used on a wide variety of different materials used in the
manufacture of cable and cable accessories. It is impractical to require that a cleaner be tested for
compatibility on each and every material with which it may come in contact. However, to provide some
confidence that the cleaning solvent does not impair the performance of the materials it is intended to clean,
several different compatibility tests should be conducted on a reasonable number of different cable and
cable accessory components.
8
--`,,`,``,,``,,`,`,,``,`,,,,,`,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

IEEE Std 1493-2006
Two physical tests are required to evaluate the compatibility of cleaning solvents with insulating materials:
⎯ Tensile and elongation.

⎯ Volume swell.
Ideally, all materials should be tested to assure that a cleaning solvent does not adversely affect the
performance of these materials. However, as mentioned, this situation is impractical. Instead, the following
insulating materials should be considered when evaluating a cleaning solvent for a wide variety of material
applications. The test specimens can be taken from a finished product or from slabs of material:
a) Crosslinked polyethylene cable insulation.

b) Tree retardant crosslinked polyethylene cable insulation.
c) Semi-crystalline ethylene propylene rubber (EPR)/ethylene propylene diene rubber of type M
(EPDM) cable insulation.
d) Amorphous EPR/EPDM cable insulation.
e) Silicone rubber used for cable termination sheds.
f) EPDM rubber used for cable termination sheds.
g) EPDM rubber used for premolded cable accessory insulation.
h) EPDM rubber used for heat shrink cable accessory insulation.
i) Silicone rubber used for cold shrink cable accessory insulation.
This list is not intended to be exhaustive nor is it intended to be the minimum number of materials that
should be evaluated. Solvent suppliers and users will need to establish the materials that they believe are
the best materials to be tested with a given solvent.
In addition to insulating materials, cables and cable accessories often employ conductive material layers on
both the inside and the outside of the component to help control electrical stresses. These materials, often
called semiconducting materials, must maintain a certain level of conductivity to perform properly.
Two electrical tests are suggested to help assure that cleaning solvents do not compromise the conductivity
of semiconducting materials:
⎯ Volume resistivity.
⎯ Resistance.
As with insulating materials, all materials that may come in contact with a cleaning solvent should be tested
to assure that the solvent does not adversely affect the performance of these materials. However, as
mentioned, this situation is impractical. Instead, the following insulating materials should be considered
when evaluating a cleaning solvent for a wide variety of material applications. The test materials can be
taken from a finished product, or samples of material can be taken from molded slabs of material.
--`,,`,``,,``,,`,`,,``,`,,,,,`,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
a) Ethyl vinyl acetate (EVA) cable insulation shields.

b) EPR cable insulation shields.
c) EPDM rubber used as a premolded cable accessory insulation shield.
9
IEEE Std 1493-2006
Once again, this list is not intended to be exhaustive nor is it intended to be the minimum number of
materials that should be evaluated. Cleaning solvent suppliers and users will need to establish the materials
that they believe are the best materials to be tested with a given solvent.
7.1 Insulation compatibility, tensile, and elongation
The first compatibility test is tensile strength and elongation. It is conducted on samples of material cut
from finished products or molded slabs. The test is patterned after ASTM D471-98e1and ASTM D638-03
with some modifications to make the procedure generally consistent for the wide variety of materials that
may be tested.
This test is conducted on dumbbell samples of specimens of the insulation material that are to be cleaned.
Compatibility tests of cleaners with polymeric materials should be performed with an exposure time of
1 min ± 5 s. The recommended procedure involves immersing the test specimen in the cleaning solvent at
room temperature. The specimen should then be removed and wiped with a clean, dry, lint-free towel or
cloth to remove excess solvent and allowed to remain at room temperature until the required test is
performed.
--`,,`,``,,``,,`,`,,``,`,,,,,`,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
7.1.2 Tensile and elongation test
Fifteen dumbbell specimens should be prepared from slabs of cable insulation material. Materials should be
conditioned at room temperature for at least 24 h prior to preparation and testing. Typically, the dumbbell
samples are die cut directly from an extruded cable after external coverings and the insulation shield are
removed. Twelve specimens are to be immersed in the cleaner, and three specimens are to remain
nonimmersed (control specimens).
The tensile and elongation test should be conducted on immersed samples as follows:
⎯ 3 specimens, 15 min to 30 min after immersion.

⎯ 3 specimens, 24 h ± 1 h after immersion (optional).
⎯ 3 specimens, 48 h ± 1 h after immersion (optional).
⎯ 3 specimens, 96 h ± 1 h after immersion.
⎯ 3 nonimmersed (control) specimens tested any time after the dumbbell samples are prepared.
The samples should be cut using an ASTM C or D die per ASTM D412-98a. They should be pulled at a
rate of 500 mm/min ± 50 mm/min. Elongation should be established using a 25 mm gauge length.
7.1.3 Acceptance criteria—tensile strength and elongation
The suggested tensile strength and elongation values are provided in Table 5. The average of the immersed
specimen values are referenced to the average of the control specimen values. The data collected on the
samples tested or 24 h and 48 h after immersion can be used to show changes in physical properties with
time.
10
IEEE Std 1493-2006
Table 5 —Acceptance criteria—tensile strength and elongation

Time after immersion Tensile strength Elongation
(% retention) (% deviation)
15–30 min 80 ±20
24 h Optional Optional
48 h Optional Optional
96 h 90 ±10
7.2 Insulation compatibility, volume swell
Another method of assuring that the cleaning solvent has not adversely affected the cable insulation is to
measure the percent swell (volumetric swell), which will give an indication of the extent of physical
absorption of the solvent into the material or the extraction of plasticizers (if any).
This test procedure is based on ASTM D471-98e1. Test specimens can be prepared from either platens or
from finished products by cutting and/or buffing using either ASTM D3182-89 or ASTM D3183-02.
Because solvents used as cleaners for cables and cable accessories are available using a number of
formulations, some of which are soluble in water, the liquid displacement methods for determining
dimensional change are not recommended. In addition, measurement of displacement in the solvent can be
difficult because of the high evaporation rates preferred in cleaning solvents. For these reasons, the
dimensional change method described in Clause 12 of ASTM D471-98e1 is not suggested.
Equipment
⎯ Glass weighing bottle with ground glass lid
--`,,`,``,,``,,`,`,,``,`,,,,,`,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
⎯ Dish suitable for immersion of specimens
⎯ Analytical balance readable to 0.001 g
⎯ Paper towels or other means to blot the specimens
⎯ Stop watch
⎯ Tongs or forceps
Procedure
Three specimens, preferably flat sheets of the material to be tested, properly cured if appropriate,
measuring approximately 75 mm × 25 mm × 2 mm (3 in × 1 in × 0.080 in) should be prepared. The
specimens should be conditioned (held) at room temperature and humidity for at least 24 h before testing.
Three specimens are to be immersed in the cleaner and measured for volume swell.
⎯ Ensure that each specimen is clean and dry and weighed to the nearest 0.001 g.
⎯ Immerse the three specimens for 1 min ± 5 s in the test liquid, and start the timer.
⎯ At the end of the prescribed time, remove the specimen and blot (wipe only if necessary) all
surfaces dry with a clean towel.
⎯ Immediately place the specimen into a previously tared weighing bottle and cap with the lid.
⎯ Weigh the specimen and bottle to the nearest 0.001 g.
11
IEEE Std 1493-2006
⎯ Determine the net weight gain of the specimen by subtracting the tare weight of the bottle and
lid from the total weight of the bottle with the swollen specimen.
⎯ Determine the percent volume swell by the following formulas:
% Volume Swell = (SGs × Wtg) /(Wti × SGl) × 100
Wtg = WtF – Wttare – Wti
where
Wti is the initial specimen weight.
Wtg is the net weight gain of specimen.
WtF is the final weight of swollen specimen and bottle.
Wttare is the tare weight of bottle and lid.
SGs is the density (or specific gravity) of the specimen.
SGl is the density (or specific gravity) of the liquid.
NOTE—The density may be determined using any convenient, accepted laboratory procedure. This information is
often available on the material MSDS.8
The average percent volume swell after immersion should not be more than ±10%.
7.3 Cable insulation shield compatibility, volume resistivity
The first test is designed to help assure that the cleaning solvent does not have an adverse affect on the
conductance of a cable or accessory insulation shield. The second test is designed to assure that the
cleaning solvent does not adversely affect the tracking resistance of an insulating surface.
7.3.1 Volume resistivity of cable insulation shield
The volume resistivity test provides an indication of the cleaning solvent’s effect on the electrical
conductivity of the cable insulation shield. The test is conducted by immersing samples of cable with the
insulation shield intact, but all outer coverings are removed. After immersion, the volume resistivity of the
insulation shield is measured using either the two- or four-electrode method. The measuring procedure is
patterned after procedures outlined in ANSI/ICEA S-94-649-2004 or S-97-682-2004.
Cable manufacturers use two basic types of insulation shield material. One is an EVA-based compound,
--`,,`,``,,``,,`,`,,``,`,,,,,`,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
and the other is an EPR-based compound. If cleaners are intended for use on both types of material, they
should be tested on both materials.
Compatibility of cleaners with cable insulation shield materials should be performed with an exposure time
of 1 min ± 5 s. The recommended procedure involves immersing the test specimen in the cleaning solvent
at room temperature. The specimen should then be removed and wiped with a clean, dry, lint-free towel or
cloth to remove excess solvent and be allowed to remain at room temperature until the required test is
conducted.
8
Notes in text, tables, and figures are given for information only and do not contain requirements needed to implement the guide.
12
IEEE Std 1493-2006
Prepare four samples of cable with the insulation shield intact but with the outer coverings removed. The
samples should be approximately 30 cm long. The resistance of each specimen should be measured as
follows:
⎯ 2 specimens, tested 15 min to 30 min after immersion, 24 h ± 1 h after immersion, 48 h ± 1 h

after immersion, and 96 h ± 1 h after immersion (all measurements on the same sample set).
⎯ 2 non-immersed control specimens, measured after the last immersed sample is measured.
After immersion, lightly remove any remaining solvent using a clean, lint-free towel or cloth, then apply
two concentric electrodes to the cable insulation shield. They can be made with a tightly wrapped wire or
wire braid. For best results, a concentric strip of silver paint should be applied to the accessory before the
wire or braid is applied. The width of the silver strips should be 60 mm to 65 mm. The distance between the
inside of the two electrodes should be approximately 20 cm.
The resistance of the insulation shield between the electrodes is then measured using a current supply, an
ammeter, and a voltmeter. Current is passed between the two electrodes at a power of between 10 mW and
100 mW. The voltage and current values are recorded. The measurement should be made with the samples
at room temperature.
The resistance of the sample is calculated from
R = V/I (3)
where V is the voltage across the electrodes and I is the current between the electrodes.
The volume resistivity ρ is calculated from
ρ = (π/4)· R (D2 – d2)/L (4)
where D is the diameter over the insulation shield in centimeters, d is the the diameter over the insulation in
centimeters, and L is the length between the electrodes in centimeters. The resulting value for ρ is in ohm
centimeters.
The volume resistivity of any sample should be less than 50 kΩ/cm and should not change from the average
value measured for the control specimens by more than ±20% at 96 h. The measurements made on
specimens tested at 24 h and 48 h can be used to show the change in volume resistivity over time, if
desired.
7.4 Cable accessory compatibility, insulation shield resistance
The insulation shield resistance test provides an indication of the cleaning solvent’s effect on the electrical
conductivity of the cable accessory insulation shield. The test is conducted by immersing samples of the
accessory in the cleaner. After immersion, the volume resistivity of the insulation shield is measured using
the two-electrode method.
The test is performed in accordance with the requirements defined in IEEE Std 592. The procedure for the
shield resistance test defined in 4.2 of IEEE Std 592 is followed, with the exception that the air oven-aged
samples defined in item 2b) are replaced by samples that have been immersed in the solvent under
--`,,`,``,,``,,`,`,,``,`,,,,,`,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
evaluation and the measurement is only required at room temperature.
13
IEEE Std 1493-2006
7.4.1 Sample preparation
Samples can be prepared from either a separable insulated connector elbow or a joint. Resistance of the
semiconducting shield is measured using the voltmeter-ammeter method with a two-electrode
configuration. Two concentric electrodes are applied to the accessory insulation shield. They can be made
with a tightly wrapped wire or wire braid. For best results, silver paint can be applied before the electrodes
are applied.
One electrode is installed near the cable entrance. On the elbow, the other electrode is installed at the
farthest shield extremity. On joints, the other electrode is at the physical center of the insulation shield.
Electrodes in both configurations are circumferential to provide a uniform current distribution. Two control
samples are prepared that will not be exposed to the cleaning solvent, and two test samples are prepared for
each cleaning solvent to be evaluated.
Prepare four samples of specimen to be evaluated with the insulation shield intact. The resistance should be
measured as follows:
⎯ 2 specimens, tested 15 min to 30 min after immersion, 24 h ± 1 h after immersion, 48 h ± 1 h

after immersion, and 96 h ± 1 h after immersion (all measurements on the same sample set).
⎯ 2 non-immersed control specimens, measured after the last immersed sample is measured.
After immersion, lightly remove any remaining solvent using a clean, lint-free towel or cloth and install
two concentric electrodes to the insulation shield. They can be made with a tightly wrapped wire or wire
braid. For best results, a concentric strip of silver paint should be applied to the accessory before the wire or
braid is applied. The width of the silver strips should be 60 mm to 65 mm. The distance between the inside
of the two electrodes will be dictated by the size of the test specimens.
The resistance of the insulation shield between the electrodes is then measured using a current supply, an
ammeter, and a voltmeter. The voltage and current values are recorded. The measurement should be made
with the samples at room temperature.
a) For a separable insulated connector, the current connections shall be made on the shield at the
cable entrance and at the farthest shield extremity, using a circumferential connection at both
locations to give a uniform current distribution.
b) For a joint, the current connections shall be made on the shield at the cable entrance and at the
physical center of the shield, using a circumferential connection at both points to give a uniform
current distribution.
Current is adjusted to achieve 1.0 mA ± 0.2 mA through the test sample. (The power requirement was
removed.) Voltage is measured between the electrodes. The resistance of the sample is calculated from
R = V/I
where V is the voltage across the electrodes and I is the current between the electrodes.
The shield resistance measured between the electrodes at 96 h should be less than 5 kΩ and should not
change from the average value measured for the control specimens by more than ±20% at 96 h. The
measurements made on specimens tested at 24 h and 48 h can be used to show the change in resistance over
time, if desired.
14
--`,,`,``,,``,,`,`,,``,`,,,,,`,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

IEEE Std 1493-2006
8. Electrical test
This test is intended to assess whether residual solvent affects the tracking characteristics of a cable
insulation surface and thus the interface between a cable and a cable accessory, such as a termination or
joint. The test is patterned after ASTM F711-02.
8.1 Sample preparation
The samples should consist of actual cables with the insulation material exposed. The cable diameter over
the insulation surface should be between 2.3 cm and 5.0 cm (0.9 in and 2.0 in). All samples selected to
represent a cable type should be taken from the same length of cable.
8.2 Test procedure
Ten, 60 cm long specimens of each cable type should be prepared by removing all coverings such that the
cable insulation surface is exposed. Five specimens should be exposed to the cleaning solvent, and five
specimens should remain unexposed (control specimens).
The exposed specimens should be totally immersed in the cleaning solvent, one at a time, for 1 min ± 5 s.
After immersion, lightly remove any remaining solvent using a clean, lint-free towel or cloth.
To conduct the test, apply two spring-type or similar electrodes around the cable circumference using a
30 cm ± 0.5 cm spacing between the inside edges of the electrodes. See Figure 1. Apply dc voltage across
the electrodes. Measure dc leakage current at applied voltage levels of 5 kV, 10 kV, 15 kV, and 20 kV.
Leakage should be measured with a sensitivity of 1 μA.
For exposed samples, the leakage current should be measured within 5 min to 7 min after the sample is
removed from the cleaning solvent. The test should be conducted at room temperature.
AC Power Supply
~ A Ammeter
Cable
Specimen Spring Electrodes
--`,,`,``,,``,,`,`,,``,`,,,,,`,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
Figure 1 —Leakage test setup
9. Cleaning effectiveness
The cleaning of various contaminants from a substrate is the primary function of a cleaner. Because
solvents are used for many diverse applications, no one method of testing best demonstrates the
effectiveness of a specific cleaning solvent. Relative comparisons can be made, however, using some
simple, yet reproducible, techniques.
15
IEEE Std 1493-2006
The test methods used to establish these characteristics are based on generally accepted industry standard
test methods for cleaning effectiveness. However, cleaning effectiveness procedures are not well
established and had to be developed. These methods are based on ASTM methods developed for other
industries but adapted for cable cleaners. It is anticipated that, over time, these procedures will be refined as
more experience with the test methods is developed.
In the case of solvents used for cable cleaning, the typical application involves the removal of dirt, silicone
grease, residue of the semiconducting cable insulation shield, or contaminants. The solvent should rapidly
and effectively remove these materials without leaving a residue of its own. Any residue that is left should
--`,,`,``,,``,,`,`,,``,`,,,,,`,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
be nonconductive and hydrophobic. It is recommended that a test be designed to evaluate the cleaning
solvent’s performance for the user’s specific application. In general, the test should be one that is easily
reproduced and that minimizes the number of test variables.
Cable manufacturers use two basic types of insulation shield material. One is an EVA-based compound,
and the other is an EPR-based compound. If cleaners are intended for use on both types, they should be
tested on both types.
Two different tests are suggested to establish cleaning effectiveness. One is qualitative, and one is
quantitative. Both of these tests have these salient features: (1) a reference cleaning surface, (2) specified
amount of solvent, (3) defined method and force of application, and (4) relative and quantitative means of
performance comparison.
9.1 Qualitative method
This method provides a relative comparison among several solvents and is based on ASTM D4265. This
method offers the advantage of low cost with limited equipment requirements and provides a relative
performance comparison between solvents tested. It is intended to be similar to the procedure performed
during the routine splicing or termination of a cable.
The test is conducted by wiping a cloth saturated with a cleaning solvent across a sample of cable
insulation shield material. The test samples may consist of segments of cable with all layers removed down
to the insulation shield or insulation shield material that is stripped from the cable and placed onto a flat
surface for testing.
To evaluate a cleaner, a clean, lint-free, white cloth should be saturated with the cleaning solvent. The cloth
should be wiped longitudinally down a 20 cm length of the cable insulation shield surface. The wiping
action should be repeated three times using a constant and reproducible downward force.
The process should be repeated twice. Each time a new, saturated cloth and a new cable segment should be
used.
Cleaning effectiveness is judged based on a relative visual comparison of the transfer of black insulation
shield onto the surface of the white cloth. The degree of cloth darkening can be compared by placing a
white reference cloth side-by-side with the set of cloths from the test. Results can be documented with
pictures to provide a permanent record of the comparison.
9.2 Quantitative method
This method provides numeric results and is based on ASTM D4489. As long as the test method is
faithfully repeated, comparisons can be made between solvents tested at different times.
16
IEEE Std 1493-2006
9.2.1 Test apparatus
The test apparatus consists of a presser foot with a 6.5 cm2 (1 in2) surface area attached to a pusher rod. The
presser foot is weighted, which results in a total downward force on the presser foot of 70 g/cm2 (1 lb/in2).
The other end of the pusher rod is connected to a motor-driven rotary cam. Rotation of the cam results in
10 cm (4 in) of horizontal travel in the presser foot. The cam rotates at 60 revolutions per min, which
results in 60 back and forth strokes of the presser foot per minute. A counting device should be connected
to the cam in order to track the number of revolutions. The presser foot and the backing plate should be
constructed of a material that is nonreactive with any potential solvents to be evaluated. Figure 2 provides a
diagram of a test apparatus that has proved acceptable. The cam can be driven with a timing motor, from
the shaft of a variable speed drill, or from a similar source.
--`,,`,``,,``,,`,`,,``,`,,,,,`,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
Figure 2 —Cleaning effectiveness test setup
9.2.2 Sample preparation
Samples of strippable cable insulation shield are to be removed from the surface of a cable. All samples
should be removed from a cable segment taken from a single reel. The shield should be cut into strips
2.5 cm by 15.2 cm (1 in wide by 6 in long). The strips should be mounted to a flat backing plate with the
smooth surface of the shield (side facing cable insulation) facing upward.
The cloth used in the test should be 100% white cotton washed in distilled water to remove any bleach or
residue of chemical treatment. A fabric of approximately 59 threads/cm (150 threads per in) is preferred.
The cloth should be cut into 5 cm × 5 cm (2 in × 2 in) squares (swatches).
Mount the cloth swatch on the presser foot of the test apparatus. Cotton balls or gauze can be used as a
backing to provide a material for absorbing and distributing the solvent under test. The backing material
should be distributed across the presser foot to provide a smooth contact surface. A single 2.5 cm (1 in)
diameter cotton ball or 26 cm2 (4 in2) of gauze folded into a 2.5 cm (1 in) square will provide sufficient
backing for the cotton cloth.
Place 1 cm3 of solvent on the cloth covering the presser foot. Immediately lower the presser foot onto the
strip of cable insulation shield and operate the pusher arm to apply 30 back and forth wipes across the
17
IEEE Std 1493-2006
material surface. Lift the presser foot from the surface, and remove the cotton cloth and backing. Discard
the backing material. Allow the cotton cloth to dry. Repeat the process with each solvent to be evaluated.
Prepare a reference sample by taking a swatch of cloth and applying it to the presser foot, as previously
described for the solvent samples. However, do not apply a solvent to this sample. Place the presser foot on
the strip of cable insulation shield, apply the specified force, and operate the pusher rod for the required
number of back and forth wipes. The reference sample represents the ability of a dry cloth to remove
insulation shield material.
The more effective a cleaning solvent, the greater the amount of black cable insulation shield transferred to
the cotton cloth. Consequently, the darker the cotton cloth becomes.
Place the cloth swatches representing each cleaning solvent evaluated on a flat, white, non-glare
background along with the reference swatch of cloth that was not exposed to any solvents. Also include a
swatch of pristine cotton cloth, which has not been in contact with the cable insulation shield. Measure the
color and intensity of each swatch with a photoelectric colorimeter. Measurements should be performed
using either the CIE L*a*b* system or the CIE L*C*H color system, where
L* is the lightness variable.

a* and b* are the chromaticity coordinates (Cartesian coordinate system).
C* is the chroma.
H is the hue angle (cylindrical coordinate system).
CIE is the Commission Internationale de l’Eclairage color measurement scheme defined in
1931 that is based on the tristimulus values X, Y, and Z. Color has three dimensions in
this system. Chromaticity includes hue and chroma (saturation), specified by two
chromaticity coordinates. A lightness factor expressed as a percentage based on a perfect
reflectance of 100% defines the third coordinate.
Perform three measurements on each swatch within the 6.5 cm2 (1 in2) area under the presser foot that
contacted the cable insulation shield. Average these measurements. Calculate the magnitude of the color
change using one of the following formulas:
ΔE *ab = (ΔL *)2 + (Δa *)2 + (Δb *)2 (5)
or
ΔH * = (ΔE *ab )2 − (ΔL *)2 − (ΔC *)2 (6)
Currently, no established acceptance criteria exist. The magnitude of the color change will be an indication
of the cleaning efficiency of the solvent on the cable insulation shield. The test should be repeated for each
type of insulation shield material on which the solvent will be applied.
10. Conclusion
By following the evaluation criteria proposed in this guide, users should have reasonable assurance that a
given cleaning solvent is compatible with the device(s) to be cleaned. The data provided will also give
some indication of the cleaning ability of the solvent. Over time, those who perform this test are
encouraged to share their results and testing experiences with the IEEE P1493 Working Group so that
necessary improvements can be made in future editions.
18
--`,,`,``,,``,,`,`,,``,`,,,,,`,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---


Ieee 1493

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Ieee 1493

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

IEEE Guide for the Evaluation of

Solvents Used for Cleaning Electrical

IEEE Power Engineering Society

Copyright The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc.

Copyright The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc.

Approved 6 December 2006

Copyright The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc.

Keywords: cable accessories, cleaning effectiveness, compatibility, extruded dielectric cable

The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc.

Copyright © 2007 by the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc.

Print: ISBN 0-7381-5312-5 SH95612

Copyright The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc.

Secretary, IEEE-SA Standards Board

Copyright The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc.

Copyright © 2007 IEEE. All rights reserved.

Rick Hartlein, Chair

Michael Bayer Robert Keefe Bill Taylor

Kenneth Bow Ajit Gwal Gary Michel

Copyright © 2007 IEEE. All rights reserved.

Copyright The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc.

Mark D. Bowman Raymond Hapeman Glenn Parsons

Satish K. Aggarwal, NRC Representative

Copyright The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc.

3. Definitions, acronyms, and abbreviations .................................................................................................. 3

3.1 Definitions ........................................................................................................................................... 3

6. Regulatory status ........................................................................................................................................ 4

6.1 Flash point ........................................................................................................................................... 5

7.1 Insulation compatibility, tensile, and elongation ............................................................................... 10

8. Electrical test ............................................................................................................................................ 15

8.1 Sample preparation ............................................................................................................................ 15

9.1 Qualitative method ............................................................................................................................ 16

Copyright The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc.

29 CFR 1910.106. OSHA criteria used to classify flammable or combustible liquids.1

ASTM D471-98e1, Standard Test Method for Rubber Property—Effect of Liquids.

ASTM D638-03 Standard Test Method for Tensile Properties of Plastics.

ASTM D2369-04, Standard Test Method for Volatile Content of Coatings.

MSDS, OSHA Form 20, Material Safety Data Sheet.5

3. Definitions, acronyms, and abbreviations

3.1.1 room temperature and humidity: 20 ± 5 ºC, 50 ± 10% relative humidity.

3.2 Acronyms and abbreviations

CFC chlorinated fluorocarbon

c) Volume and type of working space.

6.1 Flash point

6.1.1 Test method(s)

6.1.2 Acceptance criteria

6.2 Evaporation rate

Table 3 —Alternative solvent evaporation rate considerations

6.2.1 Test procedure

Because the environmental conditions cannot be controlled, a comparison solvent (recommended is n-

Table 4 —Typical solvent evaporation rates relative to n-butyl acetate

6.2.2 Acceptance criteria

6.3 Dielectric strength

6.3.1 Acceptance criteria

6.4 Percent nonvolatile residue

6.4.1 Test method

6.4.2 Acceptance criteria

Copyright © 2007 IEEE. All rights reserved.

⎯ Tensile and elongation.

a) Crosslinked polyethylene cable insulation.

a) Ethyl vinyl acetate (EVA) cable insulation shields.

7.1 Insulation compatibility, tensile, and elongation

7.1.1 Test procedure

7.1.2 Tensile and elongation test

ΔE ab = (ΔL )2 + (Δa )2 + (Δb )2 (5)

ΔH * = (ΔE ab )2 − (ΔL )2 − (ΔC *)2 (6)