2012 International Conference on Computing, Electronics and Electrical Technologies [ICCEET]

Design and Evaluation of Different Types of

Insulators Using PDE Tool Box
Ch.v.sivakumar #1, Dr.Basavaraja.B #2
#
Department of Electrical & Electronics Engineering
1
BVSR Engineering college, Ongole, Andhra Pradesh, India.
2
GITAM University, Hyderabad. Andhra Pradesh, India.
1
[email protected], 2 [email protected]

Abstract: This paper presents the analysis of potential and electric Similarly, for high voltage insulators, during the first
distribution characteristics of outdoor polymer insulator. Silicone three quarters of the 20th century, the only material of choice
rubber provides an alternative to porcelain and glass regarding to for an outdoor high voltage insulator was porcelain. Natural
high voltage (HV) insulators and it has been widely used by power occurring resins and gums that were available within the
utilities since 1980’s owing to their superior contaminant early part of the 20th century were shellac. Later, in 1907,
performances. Failure of outdoor high voltage (HV) insulator often
rubber is created by Dr Baekland synthetic phenol
involves the solid air interface insulation. As result, knowledge of
the field distribution around high voltage (HV) insulators is very formaldehyde. These two early polymer materials had good
important to determine the electric field stress occurring on the indoor properties, but being organic, with a carbon backbone
insulator surface, particularly on the air side of the interface. Thus, in its chain, had a very poor track resistance. Later, during
concerning to this matter, this project would analyze the electric 1930s and 1940s, newer synthetic resins were developed and
field distribution of energized silicone rubber high voltage (HV) some of the earliest polymer insulators were made of butyl
insulator. And the simulation results of electric field and potential and acrylic materials. However, while they enjoy some
distributions along surface of silicone rubber polymer insulators commercial success, they quickly become obsolete because
under clean and contamination conditions. For comparative of high cost, limited manufacturing, versatility and most
purposes, the analysis is based on two conditions, which are silicon
importantly, inadequate performance for high voltage
rubber insulators with clean surfaces and silicon rubber insulators
with effect of water droplets on the insulator surface. Finite application in outdoor environments The development and
element method (FEM) is adopted for this work. The electric field application of cycloaliphatic epoxy helped to address the
distribution computation is accomplished using MAT LAB-PDE resin deficiency but did not able to address the coefficient of
TOOL software that performs two dimensions finite element thermal expansion problem at the fiberglass rod or housing
method. The objective of this work is to comparison of both the interface. Compounding materials to correct this
alternative shed and straight shed type insulators under the effect compatibility problem resulted in depolymerization of the
of contamination on potential and electric field distributions along molded sheds in warm, humid environments which led to
the insulator surface when water droplets exist on the insulator electromechanical failure Structure of a polymer insulator is
surface
shown in Fig. 1. The basic design of a polymer insulator is as
Key Words: Silicon rubber Insulator, Finite Element method, follows; fiber reinforced plastic (FRP) core, attached with
Electricfielddistribution, Potential distribution. two metal fittings, is used as the load bearing structure. The
presence of dirt and moisture in combination with electrical
I. INTRODUCTION stress results in the occurrence of local discharges causing
Silicon rubber composite insulators, which are now the material deterioration such as tracking and erosion. In
extensively accepted, did not come out until 1970s, and order to protect the FRP core from various environmental
Germany is the first country developing and using this kind stresses, such as ultraviolet, acid, ozone etc., and to provide a
of insulator. Compared to conventional porcelain and glass leakage distance With in a limited insulator length under
insulators, composite insulators such as silicon rubber contaminated and wet conditions, weather sheds are installed
insulator offer more advantages in its application. For further outside the FRP core. Silicone rubber is mainly used for
information, this chapter would mainly discussed issue that polymer insulators or composite insulators as housing
related to silicon rubber insulator. The experience of outdoor material.
insulator goes back to the introduction of telegraphic lines, in
the 19th century. Service experience and product
development with high voltage insulators made from glass
and porcelain materials have been gathered over more than
hundreds years. Porcelain and glass insulators completely
dominated the market until the introduction of polymeric
alternatives. The first polymeric insulator (epoxy) was made
in United State of America in 1959, but it suffered from
severe tracking and erosion. Fig.1 Structure of a polymer insulator

978-1-4673-0212-8/12/$31.00 ©2012 IEEE 332

 The early development of modern polymeric insulators ε is material dielectric constant (   0 r ) and
can be illustrated by the work of the German manufacturer
Rosenthal, later called Hoechst Ceram Tec. Their development 0 is free space dielectric constant (8.854×10−12F/m)
started in 1964 and prototypes for field installation were r is relative dielectric constant of dielectric material
offered in 1967. However, it took until middle of the 1970s
before a number of manufacturer offered commercial products placing equation(1) into equation(2) Poisson equation is
of the first generation polymeric transmission line insulator [6] obtained.
as given in Table .1 First generation commercial polymeric (V )    (3)
transmission line insulator Without space charge  =0, poissions equation becomes
TABLE -1 Laplace equation
POLYMERIC TRANSMISSION LINE INSULATOR
 (V )  0 (4)
COMPANY HOUSING YEAR COUNTRY
MATERIAL B. FEM analysis of the electric field distribution:
Ceraver EPR* 1975 France
Ohio Brass EPR 1976 USA
Rosenthal SIR* 1976 Germany
The finite element method is one of numerical analysis
Sediver EPR 1977 USA methods based on the variation approach and has been
TDL CE* 1977 England Widely used in electric and magnetic field analysis since the
Lapp EPR 1980 USA late 1970s. Supposing that the domain under consideration
Reliable SIR 1983 USA does not contain any space and surface charges, two-
dimensional functional F(u) in the Cartesian system of
* Ethylene propylene rubber coordinates can be formed as follows[2]:
* Silicon rubber
* Cycloaliphatic epoxy
1   du   du  
2 2

F u  
2 D   dx 
     
y  dxdy (5)
dy  
x
II. DIMENSIONS OF DIFFERENT TYPES OF
  
INSULATORS:
Where x and  y are x- and y-components of dielectric
constant in the Cartesian system of coordinates and u is the
electric potential. In case of isotropic permittivity
distribution (   x   y ) Equation (5) can be rewritten ass

1  du   du  
2 2

F u         y   dxdy (6)
2 D  dx   dy  


If the effect of dielectric loss on the electric field

a) Straight shed b) Alternate shed Distribution is considered, the complex functional F(u)
should be taken into account as
Fig.2.Basic Model Insulator

 du  2  du  2 
F(U)    0   j .tg       dxdy
III. PROBLEM SOLUTION EQUATION 1 (7)
2D  dx   dy  
A. Electric field and potential distributions calculation

One simple way for electric field calculation is to where  is angular frequency  0 is the permittivity of
calculate electric potential distribution. Then, electric field
distribution is directly obtained by minus gradient of electric free space (8.85 ×10-12 F/m), tg is tangent of the
potential distribution. In electrostatic field problem, electric dielectric loss angle, and u is the complex potential. Inside
field distribution can be written as follows [1]: each sub domain De a linear variation of the electric potential
E  V (1)
is assumed.
From Maxwell’s equation
E   /  (2) ue ( x, y)   e1   e2 x   e3 y ; (e  1,2,3,.....ne) (8)
Where  is resistivity  / m ,

333
 Where ue ( x, y) is the electric potential of any
arbitrary point inside each sub-domain De, αe1, αe2 and αe3
represent the computational coefficients for a triangle
element e, ne is the total number of triangle elements. The
calculation of the electric potential at every knot in the total
network composed of many triangle elements was carried out
by minimizing the functional F(u), that is,

F (u i )
 0; i  1,2,...np (9)
u i
a) Straight sheds b) Alternated sheds
Where np stands for the total number of knots in the
network then a compact matrix expression Fig 3. Two dimension of the two type polymer insulators for
FEM analysis
s {u }  {T }
ji i j i, j  1,2,3....np (10)
The whole problem domains in Fig. 5 are fictitiously

s  the matrix of coefficients is, {u } is the

divided into small triangular areas called
Where ji i domain.Thepotentials, which were unknown throughout the
problem domain, were approximated in each of these
vector of unknown potentials at the knots and {T j } is the elements n terms of the potential in their vertices called
vector of free terms. After (10) is successfully formed, the nodes. Details of Finite Element discretization are found in
unknown potentials can be accordingly solved. [5]. The most common form of approximation solution for
the voltage within an element is a polynomial approximation.
IV. IMPLEMENTATION OF FEM PDE Tool in MATLAB is used for finite element
discretization. The results of FEM discretization for clean
There are several methods for solving partial and contamination conditions illustrate in Fig. 4
differential equation such as Laplace’s and Poisson equation.
The most widely used methods are Finite Difference Method
(FDM), Finite Element Method (FEM), Boundary Element
Method (BEM) and Charge Simulation Method (CSM). In
contrast to other methods, the Finite Element Method (FEM)
takes into accounts for the no homogeneity of the solution
region. Also, the systematic generality of the methods makes
it a versatile tool for a wide range of problems. The
following topics in this chapter would describe briefly on the
concept of Finite Element Method (FEM)
Straight sheds polymer insulator was selected to
simulate electric field and potential distributions in this
study. The basic design of a polymer insulator is as follows;
A fiber reinforced plastic (FRP) core having relative
dielectric constant of 7.1, attached with two metal fittings, is
used as the load bearing structure. Weather sheds made of
HTV silicone rubber having relative dielectric constant of a)Straight sheds b) Alternated Sheds
4.3 are installed outside the FRP core. Surrounding of the
Fig4. Finite element discretization results
insulator is air having relative dielectric constant 1.0. A 15
kV voltage source directly applies to the lower electrode V. SIMULATION RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
while the upper electrode connected to ground. Two
dimensions of the alternate sheds polymer insulators for In this study, clean and contamination conditions are
FEM analysis are shown in Fig. 3 The most common form of simulated using FEM via PDE Tool in MATLAB. Potential
approximation solution for the voltage within an element is Distribution results are shown in Fig. 5(c) and electric field
polynomial approximation. PDE Tool in MATLAB issued distribution are shown in Fig. 5(d).Comparison of potential
for finite element discretization. The obtaining results are and electric field distribution along surface of the two type
1,653 nodes and 3,180 elements for straight sheds type polymer insulators are shown in Fig.5 and Fig. 6,
insulator and 2,086 nodes and 4,030 elements for respectively. Although nonlinear potential distribution along
alternate sheds type insulator, respectively. The leakage distance of the two type specimens, no significant
obtaining results are shown in Fig.4 different can be seen on the straight sheds specimen

334
comparing with the alternate shed specimen, as shown in
Fig. 9 In spite of clean condition, electric field distribution
on the straight sheds specimen is slightly higher than the
alternate sheds specimen as shown in Fig 9. Contamination
condition is simulated by place 12 water droplets on the two
type insulator surfaces as shown in Fig. 7a and Fig. 8a. The
simulation results of electric field and potential distributions
are illustrated in Fig. 7(c) and Fig.8(c), respectively.
Comparison of potential and electric field distribution along
surface of the two type polymer insulators are shown in Fig.
9. In case of contamination condition, although nonlinear
potential distribution along leakage distance of the two type
specimens, no significant different can be seen on the
straight sheds specimen comparing with the alternate shed
specimen, as shown in Fig.7.
Fig5. (c) Potential distribution under clean condition
The Results on Electric field and potential distributions
for a straight sheds insulator as shown in blow Figs.

Fig5. (d). Electric field distribution under clean condition

Fig5. (a). Straight Sheds Insulator The Results on Electric field and potential distributions
for a Alternate sheds insulator as shown in blow Figs.

Fig5. (b). Finite element discretization results Fig6. (a). Alternated sheds insulator

335
 Fig6. (b). Finite Element Discretization Fig7. (b). Finite Element Discretization

Fig6. (c). Potentital Distribution under clean Contamination Fig7. (c). Potentital Distribution with contamination

Fig6. (d). Electric Field Distribution under clean Fig7. (d). Electric Field Distribution under Contamination
Contamination
The Results on Electric field and potential distributions
The Results on Electric field and potential distributions
for a Alternate sheds insulator under contamination as shown
for a Straight sheds insulator under contamination as shown
in blow Figs.
in blow Figs.

Fig7. (a). Straight Sheds insulator with Contamination Fig8. (a). Alternated shed insulator with Contamination

336
 REFERENCES

[1]. B.marungsri,W.onchantuek,andA.onsivilai “Electric Filed and

Potential Distribution along Surface of Silicon Rubber
Polymer Insulators Using Finite Element Method”
International Journal of Electrical and Electronics
Engineering 3:10 2009.
[2]. B. Marungsri, W. Onchantuek, A. Oonsivilai and
T.Kulworawanichpong “Analysis of electric Field and
Potential Distributions along Surface of Silicone Rubber
Insulators under contamination Conditions Using Finite
Element Method” World Academy of Science, Engineering
Fig8. (b). Finite element discretization results and Technology .
[3]. CIGRE TF33.04.07, “Natural and Artificial Ageing and
Pollution Testing of Polymer Insulators”,CIGRE Pub. 142,
June 1999.
[4]. R. S. Gorur, E. A. Cherney and R. Hackam, “A Comparative
Study of Polymer Insulating Materials under Salt Fog Test”,
IEEE Trans. On Electrical Insulation, Vol. EI – 21, No. 2,
April 1986, pp. 175.
[5]. M. C. Arklove and J. C. G. Wheeler, “Salt – Fog Testing of
Composite Insulators”, 7th Int. Conf. on Dielctric Material,
Measurements and Applications, Conf. Pub. No. 430,
September 1996, pp. 296 – 302.
[6]. B. Marungsri, H. Shinokubo, R. Matsuoka and S.Kumagai,
“Effect of Specimen Configuration on Deterioration of
Silicone Rubber for Polymer Insulators in Salt Fog Ageing
Test”, IEEE Trans. on DEI, Vol.13, No. 1 , February 2006,
Fig8. (c). Potentital Distribution under contamination pp. 129 – 138.

AUTHOR’S BIOGRAPHY
1
Ch.V.Siva Kumar received the B.Tech in
Electrical and Electronics Engineering from
Acharya Nagarjuna University Guntur in 2008
and M.Tech in Power electronics and Power
systems from K.L.University Guntur in 2011. His
research interests include Power Systems, Finite Element method
and High Voltage Engineering.
E-mail: [email protected]
2
Dr.Basavaraja Banakara was born in
1970.He is IEEE Member since 2005. Fellow of
Fig.9 Comparison of Potential Distribution under IE(I). Presently he is an Executive member for
contamination condition ISTE Andhra Pradesh Section. He obtained his
The Fig.9 shows the comparison of straight shed & alternate B.Tech (EEE) degree from Gulbarga University
shed with different environments conditions like water, dust and M.Tech from Karnataka University, India
and it gives the information that potential distribution of the and he did his Doctoral program at National
Institute of Technology, Warangal, India. He worked as a Lecturer,
straight shed insulator is large than that of alternate shed type
Associate Professor, Professor, Principal and director at different
insulator Institutes/Universities. Presently he is working has a Vice Principal
VI. CONCLUSION and HOD of EEE in GITAM. University. His areas of interest
In this paper, electric field and potential distributions on include power electronics and drives, High voltage Engineering and
Straight sheds & Alternate shed silicone rubber polymer EMTP applications.
insulators under clean and various contamination conditions E-mail: [email protected]
were investigated by using FEM Considering a silicon rubber
surface with water droplets & dust as contamination on the
surface of the silicon rubber. And concluded that potential
distribution of the straight shed insulator is large than that of
alternate shed type insulator. This situation is has potential to
initiate sport discharges and possible flashover within
operating conditions.

337