View Latest Blog Entries
Testing & Assessment Certification Standard & Regulation Aging Wires & Systems Maintenance & Sustainment Management Conference & Report Protection & Prevention Research Miscellaneous Arcing
Popular Tags
Visual Inspection High Voltage AS50881 MIL-HDBK MIL-HDBK-525 FAR AS4373 Maintenance Electromagnetic Interference (EMI) FAR 25.1707 Wire System Arcing Damage
All Tags in Alphabetical Order
2021 25.1701 25.1703 abrasion AC 33.4-3 AC 43 Accelerated Aging accessibility ADMT Aging Systems AIR6808 AIR7502 Aircraft Power System aircraft safety Aircraft Service Life Extension Program (SLEP) altitude arc damage Arc Damage Modeling Tool Arc Fault (AF) Arc Fault Circuit Breaker (AFCB) Arc Track Resistance Arcing Arcing Damage AS22759 AS22759/87 AS23053 AS29606 AS4373 AS4373 Method 704 AS50881 AS5692 AS6019 AS6324 AS81824 AS83519 AS85049 AS85485 AS85485 Wire Standard ASTM B355 ASTM B470 ASTM D150 ASTM D2671 ASTM D8355 ASTM D876 ASTM F2639 ASTM F2696 ASTM F2799 ASTM F3230 ASTM F3309 ATSRAC Attenuation Automated Wire Testing System (AWTS) Automotive Avionics backshell batteries bend radius Bent Pin Analysis Best of Lectromec Best Practice bonding Cable Cable Bend cable testing Carbon Nanotube (CNT) Certification cfr 25.1717 Chafing Chemical Testing Circuit Breaker circuit design Circuit Protection cleaning clearance Coaxial cable cold bend collision comparative analysis Compliance Component Selection Condition Based Maintenance Conductor Conductor Testing conductors conduit Connector Connector rating connector selection connector testing connectors contacts Corona Corrosion Corrosion Preventing Compound (CPC) corrosion prevention Cracking creepage D-sub data analysis data cables degradat Degradation Delamination Derating design safety development diagnostic Dielectric breakdown dielectric constant Dimensional Life disinfectant Distributed Power System DO-160 dry arc dynamic cut through E-CFR electric aircraft Electrical Aircraft Electrical Component Electrical Power Electrical Testing Electrified Vehicles Electromagnetic Interference (EMI) Electromagnetic Vulnerability (EMV) Electrostatic Discharge EMC EMF EN2235 EN3197 EN3475 EN6059 End of Service Life End of Year Energy Storage engines Environmental Environmental Cycling environmental stress ethernet eVTOL EWIS certification EWIS Component EWIS Design EWIS Failure EWIS sustainment EWIS Thermal Management EZAP FAA FAA AC 25.27 FAA AC 25.981-1C FAA Meeting failure conditions Failure Database Failure Modes and Effects Analysis (FMEA) FAQs FAR FAR 25.1703 FAR 25.1707 FAR 25.1709 Fault fault tree Fixturing Flammability fleet reliability Flex Testing fluid exposure Fluid Immersion Forced Hydrolysis fuel system fuel tank ignition Functional Hazard Assessment functional testing Fundamental Articles Fuse Future Tech galvanic corrosion Glycol Gold Gold plating Green Taxiing Grounding hand sanitizer handbook Harness Design harness protection hazard Hazard Analysis health monitoring heat shrink heat shrink tubing high current high Frequency high speed data cable High Voltage High Voltage Degradation HIRF History Hot Stamping Humidity Variation HV connector HV system ICAs IEC 60851 IEC60172 IEEE immersion insertion loss Inspection installation installation safety Instructions for Continued Airworthiness insulating material insulating tape Insulation insulation breakdown insulation resistance insulation testing interchangeability IPC-D-620 ISO 17025 Certified Lab ISO 9000 J1673 Kapton Laser Marking life limit life limited parts Life prediction life projection Lightning lightning protection liquid nitrogen lithium battery lunar Magnet wire maintainability Maintenance Maintenance costs Mandrel mean free path measurement mechanical stress Mechanical Testing MECSIP MIL-C-38999 MIL-C-85485 MIL-DTL-17 MIL-DTL-23053E MIL-DTL-3885G MIL-DTL-38999 MIL-E-25499 MIL-HDBK MIL-HDBK-1646 MIL-HDBK-217 MIL-HDBK-454 MIL-HDBK-516 MIL-HDBK-522 MIL-HDBK-525 MIL-HDBK-683 MIL-STD-1353 MIL-STD-1560 MIL-STD-1798 MIL-STD-464 MIL-T-7928 MIL-T-7928/5 MIL-T-81490 MIL-W-22759/87 MIL-W-5088 MIL–STD–5088 Military 5088 modeling moon MS3320 NASA NEMA27500 Nickel nickel plating No Fault Found OEM off gassing Outgassing Over current Overheating of Wire Harness Parallel Arcing part selection Partial Discharge partial discharge at altitude Performance physical hazard assessment Physical Testing polyamide polyimdie Polyimide-PTFE Power over Ethernet power system Power systems predictive maintenance Presentation Preventative Maintenance Program Probability of Failure Product Quality PTFE pull through Radiation Red Plague Corrosion Reduction of Hazardous Substances (RoHS) regulations relays Reliability Research Resistance Revision C Rewiring Project Risk Assessment S&T Meeting SAE SAE Committee Sanitizing Fluids Secondary Harness Protection separation Separation Requirements Series Arcing Service Life Extension Severe Wind and Moisture-Prone (SWAMP) Severity of Failure shelf life Shield Shielding Shrinkage signal signal cable Silver silver plated wire silver-plating skin depth skin effect Small aircraft smoke Solid State Circuit Breaker Space Certified Wires Splice standards Storage stored energy superconductor supportability Sustainment System Voltage Temperature Rating Temperature Variation Test methods Test Pricing Testing testing standard Thermal Circuit Breaker Thermal Endurance Thermal Index Thermal Runaway Thermal Shock Thermal Testing tin Tin plated conductors tin plating tin solder tin whiskering tin whiskers top 5 Transient Troubleshooting TWA800 UAVs UL94 USAF validation verification video Visual Inspection voltage voltage differential Voltage Tolerance volume resistivity vw-1 wet arc white paper whitelisting Winding wire Wire Ampacity Wire Bend Wire Certification Wire Comparison wire damage wire failure wire performance wire properties Wire System wire testing Wire Verification wiring components work unit code

Minimum Coaxial Cable Bend Radius


Key Takeaways
  • The acceptable minimum bend radius for coaxial cable (10x cable diameter) has remained unchanged since 1982.
  • Materials and methods employed in cable construction have improved greatly over the years; one should expect cable performance to reflect these improvements.
  • Results from Lectromec attenuation testing suggest that a coaxial cable bent on a mandrel whose radius is only 6x that of the cable diameter performs within the acceptable maximum attenuation standard limitations.

In the testing of coaxial cables, one of the areas that is not well defined, at least from the initial evaluation perspective, is the impact that a bend radius has on the cable performance. Standards such as AS50881 specifically define the coaxial cable minimum bend radius should not be less than 10x the cable diameter. The rationale is to limit signal degradation from factors like conductor and dielectric stress.

The MIL-W-5088 standard was published on March 14, 1951 and established “requirements for the installation of wiring and related accessories for the interconnection of electrical and electronic equipment in aircraft.” The first instance of the 10x bend radius for coax cable came in 1982, and for the last 41 years, after more than a dozen updates, including a transfer of the standard to the SAE (and the renaming as AS50881), this value remains unchanged.

When these standards were created, the materials used in the coax cable construction were far less capable. Since that time materials have advanced, as have manufacturing processes. There are now materials that can better handle the mechanical stress of smaller bend radii.

Alternatively, the ASTM F2639-18 EWIS design standard does provide other guidance. In section, it states that the bend radius for coax cables should be no less than 6x the cable diameter. This divergence between standards is due to nothing more than a lack of recent data. In this article, test data from Lectromec’s lab is provided showing the performance impact of bend radius on coaxial cables signal attenuation.

Test Setup

A M17/128 RG400 coax cable was used for this assessment. This cable has a silver-plated copper conductor, extruded polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) dielectric, a silver-plated braided shield, and an extruded fluorinated ethylene propylene (FEP) jacket. Per the specification sheet, the cable’s maximum attenuation are as follows:

  • 4.5 dB/100ft at 100 MHz
  • 10.5 dB/100ft at 400 MHz
  • 3.2 dB/100ft at 100 MHz
Coaxial attenuation test setup.

In this test setup, the MIL-C-17 coaxial cable was terminated with TNC type connectors and connected to a spectrum analyzer. After normalization, the spectrum analyzer swept across the frequency range from 100 kilohertz to 3.2 gigahertz. The prepared sample on the mandrel is shown in the following figure.


Four different bend radii were evaluated:

  • No significant bend
  • Bend radius of 10x cable diameter
  • Bend radius of 5x cable diameter
  • Bend radius of 3x cable diameter
CoaxAttenuation Graph
Recorded attenuation data from the spectrum analyzer.

The cable was wrapped ten times around the mandrel with a short segment left straight to connect to the test equipment. The results are shown in the following figure.


The lower frequencies in the sweep show greater attenuation at tighter bend radius. The attenuation measurements and their corresponding product values, in dB, are as follows:

Attenuation at Given Frequency
100 MHz 400 MHz 1 GHz
Max Spec Sheet Attenuation
(Scaled to sample length)
0.066 0.106 0.17
No Mandrel 0.066 0.103 0.13
10x 0.063 0.103 0.12
6x 0.063 0.103 0.13
3x 0.074 0.129 0.14

Both the 10x and 6x bend radius performed well within the specified limits. However, a tighter bend of 3x shows values outside the acceptable range in lower frequencies.

There is little difference, if any, between the performance of the cable at 10x or 6x bend radius and that of the cable without a mandrel. This is not to suggest that all coax cables will perform similarly or, as seen here, that a tighter bend radius (3x or less ) would not have any impact, but data like this can be generated to support deviation from industry standards. The AS50881 guidance has been successful for so long that changing a value like the 10x bend radius is difficult. While the guidance is conservative, deviations can be made in specific cases where data is generated to support implementations.

The fact is that data is often something not readily available and the hope is that this showcases there are options and tools available to go beyond the industry standards. As this data becomes more available, it will help maintainers and designers as they consider how they route the cables on their aircraft and what testing they may need to verify the system performance.

Perhaps the M17/128 RG400 cable is unique in its performance under bend conditions, but it is more likely the case that newer constructions can perform better under tighter bend conditions. This testing was carried out on virgin samples, and how the tighter bend radius would impact performance after thermal aging is unclear (at least until Lectromec’s next article on the topic). These factors should be considered before accepting a tighter bend radius for any application.

If you are looking for testing to assess the performance of your cables or for the cables that you are looking to install on your aircraft, contact Lectromec.

Megan Chambellan

Megan Chambellan

Engineer, Lectromec

Megan has been with Lectromec since 2021 and has been a key contributor on projects involving testing of EWIS failure modes, fiber optics, and high voltage EWIS certification testing. Her knowledge and attention to detail ensure consistent delivery of accurate test results from Lectromec’s lab.