PFANF8 (2002) 2:41-49 © ASM International

Analysis of High Contact Resistance in Silver

Impregnated Graphite (SIG) Contacts
B. Vamsi Krishna and R.K. Sidhu

(Submitted 8 November 2001; in revised form 8 February 2002)

Silver impregnated graphite (SIG) contacts are used in high safety applications of railway signaling,
traffic signaling, and numerous other applications due to high silver content that eliminates the risk of
welding in the presence of graphite. High contact resistance (>200 mΩ Ω) was observed in SIG contacts in a
railway signaling operation after a few thousand operations of the relay. The high contact resistance was
discovered to be a result of loose dust/foreign particles residing between the two contacts. Silver had been
preferentially removed from the contacting surfaces during switching operations by an abrading effect of
the dust/foreign particles, leaving only graphite on the contact area. Wear was accentuated by the presence
of porosity and low hardness of the contacts, leading to improper interaction between the mating surfaces.

Keywords: SIG, contact materials, contact resistance, failure analysis, contamination

Introduction content, hardness, ash content, distribution of silver

In electrical control systems, circuit breakers, and
relays there are many types of contacts that either
“make or break” electrical circuits or transfer contacts.
The contacts are essential parts of sensitive relays,
and their satisfactory operation depends on the mat-
erials of manufacture. Common contact materials
such as copper, silver, and metals of high melting
points frequently suffer from excessive wear, welding,
overheating, formation of high resistance films, and
material transfer.
Silver impregnated graphite relay contacts com-
bine the best properties of silver (electrical/thermal
conductivity) and graphite (refractory nature) into
a composite material. Distinctive features of the SIG
material include its hard fusing characteristic, better
conduction of heat and electricity, and easy brazing.
Graphitic carbon has high heat of vaporization and
appreciably low material transfer in the localized
high temperature spots developed during mating of
contacts. Additionally, due to a high percentage of
silver, the desired electrical properties are retained
with practically no risk of welding. This combination
of properties makes these contacts suitable for high
safety applications such as railway signaling, traffic
signaling, and numerous other applications.
Silver impregnated graphite contacts are generally
tested for dimensions, crushing strength, silver
in the graphite matrix, contact resistance, X-ray
mapping of the silver, microstructure, life test,
surface finish, and bulk density. The quality as-
surance of electrical contacts is often treated as an
evaluation of “components in great quantity” and
tested with statistical methods. This may be reason-
able for the registration of fabrication defects, but
consideration is also required for systematic failures
related to specific materials, environmental influ-
ences during processing, application, and so forth.
Failures caused by environmental influence occur
late in the lifetime of the contact or component and
may not be detected by early evaluations. Addition-
ally, contamination on the surface of contacts can
have a deleterious effect on the contact and switching
properties and may, in extreme cases, lead to early
failure of the devices.
Background
In railway signaling, the contact resistance of SIG
contacts must not exceed 200 mΩ after operational
testing of the relay. No maintenance is expected
during the service life of the relay. However, the
contact resistance of the SIG contacts in this study
was observed to increase within a shorter period (a
much smaller number of operations) than projected.
The contact resistance between silver and the SIG
contact, with contact pressure of 28–48 gm between

B. Vamsi Krishna and R.K. Sidhu, Materials Science & Technology Division, Thapar Centre for Industrial Research and Development,
Thapar Technology Campus, P.B. No. 68, Bhadson Road, Patiala – 147 001, Punjab, India. Contact e-mail: vamsi23@yahoo.com;
rksidhu1@yahoo.com.

Practical Failure Analysis Volume 2(2) April 2002 41

 Analysis of High Contact Resistance in Silver Impregnated Graphite
the contact and the spring, was measured after
complete assembly and final relay setting. The con-
tact resistance was observed to cross the specified
Fig. 1 Details of silver impregnated graphite contacts: (top)
schematic diagram, (bottom) identification marks
a b
Fig. 2 Stereomicrographs (5×) of the SIG contacts in as-received condition: (a) failed/used contacts, (b) M1 contacts, (c) M2 contacts
Table 1 Specified Properties of Silver Impregnated Graphite Contacts in Relays
Sl. No. Property
1 Specific resistance of graphite block
2 Ash content
3 Silver content
4 Hardness, HV
5 Contact resistance
6 Microstructure
7 Silver coating
42 Volume 2(2) April 2002
(continued)
limit of 200 mΩ after approximately half of the
specified number of operations.
The contacts were machined from high quality
electrographite blocks with specific resistance of
< 2 × 10–4 Ω-cm and ash content not exceeding
1.5%, per IRS-S76-85 (Indian Railway Stand-
ard).[1] These specified properties for SIG contacts
are presented in Table 1. The machined graphite
blocks were then vacuum impregnated with high
purity silver to a silver content of 53 to 60%. The
backside of the contacts was electroplated with silver
(50 to 60 µm) to increase the solderability of the
contacts with the relay springs. A schematic diagram
of the SIG relay contact is shown in Fig. 1.
The contacts were procured from two different
manufacturers, designated M1 and M2. The manu-
facturing process for the contacts was identical with
both manufacturers and met the specifications of
IRS-S76-85. However, to distinguish between the
manufacturers, an identification mark (two vertical
grooves for M1 and one horizontal groove for M2)
was provided on the nonworking surface of the
contacts (Fig. 1).
c
Specified Value[1]
<2 × 10–4 Ω-cm
<1.5%
53–60%
22 min
<200 mΩ for 10 lac operations
Uniform distribution of silver throughout the
volume of the contact free from cracks, seams,
chipped-off surfaces, inclusion of foreign
materials, seams of carbon unimpregnated
with silver, globules of silves
50–60 µm
Practical Failure Analysis
Material Characterization and
Analysis
Initial Observations
The SIG contacts in as-received condition are
shown in Fig. 2 a-c. The working surface of all the
contacts was observed to be rough with numerous
scratches (Fig. 3–5). The small and light scratches
could be from handling. However, the rough surface
and few cracks at the edges are attributed to high
porosity, chipped surfaces (Fig. 5b and c) and deep
identification markings on the vertical side of the
contact (Fig. 4b and c). The deep identification marks
were observed to interfere with the working area of
the contacts from M1. Most of the contacts that
failed or experienced high contact resistance were
from lots of M1. The number of SIG contacts with
high contact resistance was lower in the case of M2,
where the identification mark was on the same
surface but in a horizontal direction. The horizontal
grooving did not interfere with the working surface
of the SIG contact, as opposed to the vertical grooves
of M1 (Fig. 6).
Microscopic Examination
The contacts were examined in as-received con-
dition with an optical microscope at various mag-
nifications to record the surface features. The mi-
crographs of failed/used contacts (Fig. 7) clearly
indicate selective removal of silver from the working
surface. The wear tracks in the contact spot were
abrasive in nature. The noncontact area revealed
relatively high silver content (Fig. 8); however, pores
and chipped areas were present in the non-contact

a b c

Fig. 3 Stereomicrographs of the failed/used contacts showing the contact spot and working surface: (a) 10×, (b) 25×, (c) 25×

a b c

Fig. 4 Stereomicrographs of the M1 contacts showing the working surface: (a) 12.5×, (b) 25×a(c) 25×)

a b c

Fig. 5 Stereomicrographs of the M2 contacts showing the working surface: (a) 10×, (b) 25×, (c) 25×

Practical Failure Analysis Volume 2(2) April 2002 43

 Analysis of High Contact Resistance in Silver Impregnated Graphite
a b
Fig. 6 Optical micrograph showing the identification marks
(grooves) on the contacts: (a) M1, (b) M2. Note there is
no evidence of interference on the surface of the M2
contacts.
a b
Fig. 7 Optical micrographs of failed/used contacts showing
contact spot: (a) 100×, (b) 200×
a b
Fig. 8 Optical micrographs of failed/used contacts showing
noncontact area: (a) 100×, (b) 200×
a b
Fig. 9 Optical micrographs of M1 contacts showing working
surface in as-received condition: (a) 100×, (b) 200×.
Note the dark chipped-off areas.
a b
Fig. 10 Optical micrographs of M2 contacts showing working
surface in as-received condition: (a) 100×, (b) 200×
44 Volume 2(2) April 2002
(continued)
areas demonstrating that neither the porosity nor
the chipping was caused by operations.
Micrographs of the M1 SIG contacts in as-
received condition demonstrate that the distribution
of silver in the graphite matrix was not uniform (Fig.
9). Porosity and surface roughness (due to chipped
surfaces) were high. The microstructural features of
the M2 contacts were identical to those of the M1
contacts (Fig. 10).
Low magnification stereomicrographs of the
contact spots on failed/used contacts (Fig. 11)
revealed deep and straight wear marks. The features
of the wear marks indicate that they are due to abra-
sive type wear.
SEM Examination
The fresh and failed contacts were further observed
by scanning electron microscopy (SEM) (Fig. 12
and 13) for surface details to aid in tracing the origin
of the wear problem. The wear marks on the contact
spot were deep (Fig. 12b), suggesting the preferential
a b
Fig. 11 Stereomicrographs of failed/used contacts showing the
contact spot and working surface (25×): (a) Contact 1,
(b) Contact 2
a b
Fig. 12 SEM micrographs of failed/used contact spot showing
the wear marks: (a) 500×, (b) 1500×
a b
Fig. 13 SEM micrographs of used/failed contact: (a) foreign
particles 1000×, (b) noncontact area 1500×
Practical Failure Analysis
removal of silver which left pores or pits on the
working surface. These pits led to deposition of loose
particles of graphite and other dust on the working
surface that may have produced improper contact
between the mating surfaces. The presence of
embedded dust/foreign particles in the contact areas
supports this observation (Fig. 13a). The noncontact
area typically contained higher silver levels than the
contact spot (Fig. 13b).
Scanning electron microscopy of the fresh contacts
(M1 and M2) in as-received condition exposed big
pores (not filled with silver) on the working surface
a b
Fig. 14 SEM micrographs of M1 contacts in as-received condition: (a) 500× (note the islands without silver), (b) 2500×, (c) 5000×.
Note the embedded foreign particles—left pore.
a b
a
b
Fig. 16 EDS analysis of the particles and their respective SEM
micrographs: (a) 2500×, (b) 1000×
Practical Failure Analysis
of the contact (Fig. 14 and 15). The M1 contacts
revealed islands of graphite without silver on the
working surface (Fig. 14a) and foreign particles in
the pores (Fig. 14c, left pore). The working surface
of the M2 contacts was identical in nature (Fig. 15).
The SEM also highlighted various dust/foreign
particles on the working surface of the contacts.
Energy dispersive spectroscopic (EDS) analysis of
these particles showed various compounds of Si, Mg,
Cl, S, and Na. The EDS spectra and corresponding
SEM photographs of the particles are shown in Fig.
16 and 17. The presence of chlorine in the particles
c
Fig. 15 SEM micrographs of M2 contacts in as-received
condition: (a) 500× (note the bright particles
composed of Cl—refer to EDS analysis in
Fig. 17b), (b) 3500×
a
b
Fig. 17 EDS analysis of the particles on the working surface of
the contacts: (a) particle in Fig. 17(a), 500×, (b) bright
particles in Fig. 15(a)
Volume 2(2) April 2002 45
 Analysis of High Contact Resistance in Silver Impregnated Graphite
or on the working surface could be from a human
touch during handling of the contacts or contami-
nated air or processing. These particles may have
led to improper contact between mating surfaces
and some of the particles may have originated from
the plastic enclosures used for relay units.
Polished Surface Inspection
The working surfaces of the contacts were polished
directly on 1 µm polishing cloth and the micro-
structure was reexamined. The roughness of the
surface was reduced by removal of some scratches
and loosely adhering particles or scales, but the
a b
Fig. 18 Optical micrographs of the polished surface of M1
contacts: (a) longitudinal section, (b) transverse section
a b
Fig. 20 Optical micrographs of the polished surface of failed/used contacts: (a) 100×, (b) 200×, (c) 400×
a b
Fig. 21 SEM micrographs of the polished contacts, failed/used
contacts, 1500× : (a) longitudinal section, (b) transverse
section
46 Volume 2(2) April 2002
(continued)
polished microstructure of the contacts was similar
to that in as-received condition (Fig. 18 and 19).
The polished surface of the failed/used contacts
clearly contained big pores and embedded particles
(Fig. 20). The presence of embedded particles after
polishing indicates that they were embedded in the
working surface during contact operations. No major
difference was observed in the distribution of silver
in the graphite matrix either in the transverse section
(normal to the working surface) or the working sec-
tion (parallel to the working surface).
Scanning electron microscopy of the polished
working surface of the contacts (Fig. 21–23) also
a b
Fig. 19 Optical micrographs of the polished surface of M2
contacts: (a) longitudinal section, (b) transverse section
c
a b
Fig. 22 SEM micrographs of the polished contacts, M1 contacts,
1500× : (a) longitudinal section, (b) transverse section
Practical Failure Analysis
revealed porosity (isolated and interconnected) and
embedded particles in the working surface. The back-
scattered electron images of the contact surfaces show
the distribution of silver in the graphite matrix, and
it is evident from the micrographs (Fig. 24) that
there was no observable difference in the silver
distribution.
was lower than the specified hardness. This lower
hardness on the working surface of the contact may
have been due to the presence of pores, material
removal, and increased chipping of the surface.
The chipping is attributed to the pores and inter-
ference of dust/foreign particles between the mating
contacts.

Chemical Composition
The silver, ash, and carbon contents of the SIG Table 2 Chemical Analysis of Silver
(Table 2) were determined by the procedure speci- Impregnated Graphite Contacts
fied in IRS-S76-85. The silver content of the M2
contacts (54%) was slightly above the minimum Sl. No. Parameter Specified M1 M2 Failed/used
specified value (53%) while the silver content of the 1 Silver 53–60 wt.% 52.58 54.0 51.23
failed M1 contacts (52.58%) was below the specified 2 Carbon … 47.0 45.50 48.27
value. The ash and carbon contents of the SIGs were 3 Ash <1.5 wt.% 0.42 0.50 0.50
within the specified limits. The low silver content
of the failed or used contact may have contributed Table 3 Hardness of Silver Impregnated
to the preferential removal of silver from the working Graphite Contacts
surface during switching operation.
Contact Hardness
Hardness Testing Category Section Measured, HV0.5 Specified
The hardness of the SIG contacts was measured M1 Longitudinal 25.93 ± 1.7
by a Vickers diamond indenter at 500 gm load Transverse 24.97 ± 1.2
(Table 3). The hardness of the fresh contacts (M1 M2 Longitudinal 25.44 ± 1.5 >22.00
and M2) was in the range of 25–26 HV0.5 and Transverse 25.33 ± 1.5
found to meet the specification. However, the Failed/used Longitudinal 20.40 ± 1.6
hardness of the failed/used contacts (19–20 HV0.5) Transverse 19.20 ± 1.1

a b c

Fig. 23 SEM micrographs of the polished contacts, M2 contacts, (a) transverse section 500×, (b) longitudinal section 1500× ,
(c) transverse section 1500×

a b c

Fig. 24 Back-scattered images of the contact working surface (100×): (a) failed/used contact, (b) M1 contact, (c) M2 contact

Practical Failure Analysis Volume 2(2) April 2002 47

 Analysis of High Contact Resistance in Silver Impregnated Graphite
Discussion
Surface contamination seriously influences the
reliability of electrical contacts, and evidence shows
that failure of electrical equipment is frequently
associated with this problem. Widely varying con-
ditions prevail in practice. Deviations from ideal
conditions are caused by
• fabrication operations, such as brazing the contact
onto the backing, coining of the contact surface,
or cleaning processes required for the product,
• external effects, such as surface films from lub-
ricants, insulating material residues, or contami-
nation from the surrounding air, and/or
• operational effects, such as change in the topo-
graphy of the switching surfaces and the depletion
of contact material
A surface deposit is defined as a substance present
on the surface of the contacts that possesses prop-
erties different from those of the contact material.[2]
Depending on the time of origin and chemical com-
position, surface deposits can be grouped as follows:
• surface impurities arising from the manufacturing
process,
• direct foreign matter (e.g., dust, particles of plastic)
deposited on the contact during assembly, storage
and/or shipment,
• products of chemical reaction (e.g., oxides,
chlorides, sulphides) formed during operation by
reaction of impurity or contact materials with the
surrounding atmosphere,
• organic deposits formed initially by absorption of
noxious substances from the surrounding at-
mosphere and then, depending on the operating
conditions, undergoing secondary polymerization
or carbonization
Each of these groups has been the subject of extensive
investigation[3–6] that dealt with metal, metal/metal
oxide, and other metallic alloys contacts. Neither
basic research nor work on the service performance
of SIG contacts is readily available, but it is well
known that the application of SEM in conjunction
with EDS/EDX is an invaluable method of assessing
the condition of contact surfaces.
Silver impregnated graphite contact material used
in any safety application must give highly reliable
48 Volume 2(2) April 2002
(continued)
contact performance—a low and constant contact
resistance, a high number of make/break operations,
and adequate resistance to contact welding at the
making currents. The satisfactory function of relays
or other components equipped with SIG contacts
is often considerably affected by the formation of
surface deposits.
In this study, the deep vertical identification marks
on the M1 contacts interfered with the working area
of the contacts by an extension of small cracks from
the tip of the groove. These cracks increased in size
during the switching operations and generated
chipped surfaces. The initial switching operations
may have produced some loose particles from the
edges of these grooves. These are the in situ particles
that became embedded along with other dust/
foreign particles on the contact surface during
switching.
When the hardness of dust/foreign particles is
higher than the contact material, the particle may
indent the contact surface during the make/break
cycle. As the number of switching operations in-
creases, cracks propagate from the indentation
because of the repeated impact on the dust particles.
The low hardness of the contacts accentuated the
contact deterioration.
An abrading effect of the dust/foreign particles
also produced wear on the contact surfaces. The silver,
which is softer than the graphite, was preferentially
removed (worn) during switching operations,
increasing the graphite concentration in the contact
area. The wear of the contact was accentuated by
the decrease in hardness caused by presence of
porosity, and the locally severe wear caused uneven
contact between the mating surfaces. The culmi-
nation of all of these processes produced improper
surface contact between the two mating areas that
increased the contact resistance of the SIG beyond
the acceptable level.
During production or soldering of the component,
flux can get on the contact surface directly through
capillary action or as a splash, indirectly by gas phase
transport, and/or by precipitation from the drying
residue from a cleanser. Even when thin film solders
or fluxes are used, surface deposition may lead to an
inadmissibly high increase in contact resistance. In
the majority of cases surface contamination, particu-
lar contamination from fluxes, may be critical with
Practical Failure Analysis
regard to the risk of early contact failures or high
contact resistance. The elements detected in the
present case may also have originated from flux resi-
dues or solders. To avoid this occurrence, the contact
assembly must be cleaned after soldering before
assembling into the actual relays and, to remove
packaging residues, before final setting of the relays.
Conclusions
The high contact resistance of the SIG contacts
in railway signaling relays was due to loose dust/
foreign particles on the contact surfaces. These par-
ticles deteriorated the working surfaces and affected
proper contact between the mating contact pair. The
vertical identification marks, low hardness, and poro-
sity accentuated the process of contact surface de-
gradation. The source of the foreign particles was a
contaminated environment during assembly and/or
operation.
Even small insulating particles such as dust may
increase contact resistance. Large values of loads can
reduce contact resistance; however, damage to the
working surface from indentations will increase with
increasing contact pressure and may cause the resis-
tance of the contacts to increase during operation.
Increasing the current across the contact surface may
also accelerate foreign particle indentation. There-
fore, the approach to eliminate the influence of dust
on an electric contact by increasing load or electric
current is harmful. Alternative ways of eliminating
dust influence, such as reducing the size of the par-
Practical Failure Analysis
ticles by using filtering or shielding devices and
cleaning the surface with special tools, may be
successful.
This analysis clearly indicates that utmost care has
to be taken during assembly and component in-
spection to avoid damage by deposition of dust/
foreign particles and flux on contact surfaces.
Acknowledgments
The cooperation and help rendered by the staff
of Materials Science & Technology Division, Thapar
Centre for Industrial Research and Development
(TCIRD), during the investigation is greatly ack-
nowledged by the authors. Authors are also thankful
to the director of TCIRD for permission to publish
the work.
References
1. Anon.: IRS-S67-85, Indian Railways Standard Specification
for Silver Impregnated Graphite Contacts for Railway Signaling
Relays, Department of Railways, New Delhi, India, Jan
2001, pp. 1–20.
2. A. Keil: Ruhender: 4. Seminar Kontakt-verhalten und
Schalten, (in German), 1977.
3. G. Weik and K. Herz: Beitrage zur elektronemikrosko-pischen
Direktabbildung von Oberflachen, Verlag R. A. Remy, (in
German), 1983, 16, pp. 193–8.
4. C.L. Meyer: 4. Seminar Kontakt-verhalten und Schalten, (in
German), 1977.
5. L. Horn and A. Merl: 7. Internationale Tagung uber elektrische
Kontakte, Paris, 1974, pp. 73–9.
6. H. Ulbricht: Feinwerktechnik und Mebtechnik, (in German),
1980, 1, pp. 21–7.
Volume 2(2) April 2002 49