Electrostatic test methods compared

摘要

The purpose of this paper is to demonstrate that electrostatic materials can be evaluated and ranked from highest to lowest in triboelectric generating capacity, that the ranking is a function of the material, and this ranking is not a function of the rubbing material. Three researches participated in this study and all were chosen by Paul Holdstock who first suggested this study be undertaken. Each researcher used the method he was most familiar with. The test methods used were: (1) The NASA Triboelectric tester, (2) The modified Shirley Method 18 Test and, (3) The JCI ad-hoc tribocharging test In addition to the three tribocharging tests, corona charging tests were also done. Triboelectric testing has been a scientific challenge dating back to 1600 when the "amber effect" was recorded by William Gilbert in a treatise entitled "De Magnete." Volumes have been written on this subject since that time. Nearly evern one of the 20 volumes of the EOS/ESD Proceedings has had at least one research paper on this type of testing. I the 1984 EOS/ESD Symposium Proceedings (Gompf, p58) and 1986 EOS/ESD Symposium Proceedings (Gompf, p151) this author discussed two triboelectric devices used at the Kennedy Space Center for the testing of materials. Tirboelectric articles continue to be of importance to the scientific community and appear regularly at the annual EOS/ESD Symposium. In the 1998 Proceedings, Boone said, "Triboelectric test results were weighted more heavily than any of the others, since it was felt that this was the most important performance characteristic of the fabric tested" (Boone, p16). At this time this author knows of no other way to measure both the generating and dissipating capacity of a material except by triboelectric testing (Gompf, MTB 402-85, p4). However, there are questions concerning this technique that need good scientific answers. This paper addresses one of the more important questions. In evaluation of the generating potential of a material, does the second rubbing material have an influence in the "ranking" of generating potential? While it is true that the selected rubbing material does influence the amount of charge generated, this paper suggests that it does not alter the relative position of generating capacity.