All Technical Articles
HardwareReliabilityMaterials

Salt Mist, IP66, and the Coating Spec

By Engineering — Hardware · April 19, 2026 · 5 min read

The first conformal coat passed lab spray tests and failed in service. The second passed in service and failed thermal cycling. The third one stuck.

A vehicle deck is not a chemistry lab. It is salt mist plus diesel residue plus brake dust plus thermal cycling, and a coating that passes one of those tests on a bench can fail the combined exposure in months. We learned this the slow way.

The three iterations

v1 — acrylic conformal

Passed salt-spray (ASTM B117) in the lab. In service, brake dust adhered to the surface and trapped moisture. Boards started showing leakage current within four months.

v2 — urethane conformal

Survived the brake-dust problem and the salt-mist problem. Failed thermal cycling at the connector joint over the first 30-day hot-route sailing — coating cracked, moisture wicked.

v3 — parylene + selective urethane

Conformal parylene under selective urethane at connector boundaries. Survived 14 months of pilot operation with zero coating-attributable failures.

Lab spec is a starting point, not an answer. Coating spec is set by field data, with iteration cycles measured in months.

Sources

  • ASTM B117 — standard practice for operating salt-spray (fog) apparatus.
  • IEC 60068-2-11 and IEC 60068-2-52 — environmental testing: salt mist and cyclic salt-mist tests.
  • IPC-CC-830 — qualification and performance of electrical insulating conformal coatings.
  • IEC 60945 — general requirements for shipborne marine equipment (environmental and durability).
  • [VERIFY: 14-month coating service-life results are RoRoSafe pilot-operation data, not third-party qualified.]
Frequently asked

Questions, answered

Why did the conformal coating spec change twice?+

Because a vehicle deck is salt mist plus diesel residue plus brake dust plus thermal cycling, and a coating passing one bench test can fail the combined exposure in months. v1 acrylic passed salt-spray but trapped brake dust and leaked within four months; v2 urethane cracked at connector joints under thermal cycling; v3 parylene with selective urethane survived 14 months with zero coating failures.

Why isn't a lab salt-spray pass enough to qualify a coating?+

Because lab tests isolate single stressors. The acrylic v1 coating passed ASTM B117 salt-spray cleanly, then failed in service when brake dust adhered and trapped moisture — an interaction the lab test never reproduced. Coating spec is set by field data, with iteration cycles measured in months.

What coating finally worked for marine deck service?+

Conformal parylene under selective urethane at the connector boundaries. It survived 14 months of pilot operation with zero coating-attributable failures, after the earlier acrylic and urethane revisions each failed a different combined-exposure mode in service.

Related reading

Continue the thread