CHAPTER 6

EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURE AND RESULTS

6.1 Specification of samples:

Polymer insulators consist of three components. They are core, weather sheds
and metal fittings. Core is made of FRP rod sheathed with weather sheds and housing
made of silicone (Si) rubber. End fittings are attached to core by crimping polymer (Si)
composite insulator components are shown in fig 6.1. Four (4) insulators are used for
experimental evaluation.

Figure.6.1 Polymer insulator

Polymer(Si) Composite
Insulator type
Insulator
Sectional Length (mm) 886
Dry Arcing Distance (mm) 690
Creepage Distance (mm) 2440
Specific Creepage
25
Distance(mm/kV)
Core Dia (mm) 27
Iron core Dia(mm) 33
Pitch(mm) 46
Pollution Range Medium

Table 6.1.test sample specifications

Tolerance as per IEC standards

IEC 61109[4] is a standard for polymer suspension and tension insulator. Before the test
arrangement, all virgin sample dimensions are measured to confirm with IEC 61109

77
standards. Dimensions are tabulated in table. I. Sample dimensions and their tolerance
values are confirmed with IEC 61109.

Insulator samples were tested in High Voltage Engineering Laboratory in our college
University College of Engineering Kakinada, JNTU Kakinada, Andhra Pradesh .The
leakage current measuring circuit consists of a cascading transformer, High Voltage
bus bar, insulator samples which are to be tested, control panel set up with required
metering.

Specifications of Cascaded transformer:

Number of stages :1

KVA rating : 100 KVA

Voltage generated per unit : 250 kV

Total Voltage generated : 250 kV

6.2 Details of the Insulators samples:

The insulators used are 66 kV samples: 1) 66kV polymer insulator (sample-1)
2) 66kV polymer insulator (sample-2)
3) 66kV polymer insulator (sample-3)
4) 66kV polymer insulator (sample-4)
6.3. Circuit Diagram:
The insulators are tested in the High Voltage Laboratory and in the testing process the
Leakage current corresponding to the applied voltage are noted down until the
breakdown of the insulators occurs.

Figure.6.2 Circuit Diagram for Testing in the HV laboratory showing different equipment
used in the testing of Insulator.

78
 6.4. General Procedure:
The first step of the laboratory procedure was to measure the LC of all the insulators
in the HV laboratory.
 Washing of the insulators was done by keeping the insulators for approximately 5
minutes but not more than 6 minutes, into a container filled with slowly flowing tap
water. The temperature of the water was held constant at about 28 °C.
 The purpose of the washing is to remove loose and soluble dirt over the surface of
insulator in order to better study the effect of the surface material properties on the
Leakage current.
 The pollutants on the surface were removed by gently wiping the insulators by hand.
 The insulators were left to dry for at least one week in the laboratory after the washing.
 First the virgin insulators are tested for leakage current in Dry and wet conditions, the
leakage current is tabulated for every 20 kV.
 Then the insulator is contaminated with Algae contamination then again the leakage
current is noted down.

Figure.6.3 Control Room where the Leakage Current is measured

79
 6.4.1. Procedure for measuring the Leakage current:
Procedure for measuring the leakage current and breakdown voltage in the High
Voltage Laboratory is as follows:
1. Leakage current across the applied voltage is measured using the ammeter, by opening
the ammeter switch and the switch is closed after measuring the Leakage current.
2. Above procedure is repeated for all different values of voltages like 20, 40…180kV and
corresponding leakage currents are noted down.
3. Observe the flash over voltage value clearly accurately without any parallax error, as it
suddenly goes off to zero after breakdown.
4. Tabulate the following reading of voltage and leakage current.
5. The main precaution is that the grounding must be properly given.
6.5. Measurement of leakage current in 66 kV polymer Insulators:

After washing the insulator samples with tap water, kept dry for 24 hours. Then
they are placed in the experimental setup with a ground clearance of approximately one
meter. One end of the insulator was connected to high voltage side and the other to
ground as shown in figure 6.4(a)

Figure 6.4 (a) insulator hanging Figure 6.4(b) Flash over voltage
6.5.1. Without pollution -Dry condition (Healthy sample):

Initially the insulator is tested without any application of pollution to study the
variation of leakage current with respect to applied voltage under dry condition. The
values of the Leakage current i.e., the initial virgin sample are as follows:

80
Table 6.2: Applied Voltage versus Leakage current in dry condition

Applied Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 3 Sample 4

Voltage
Leakage Leakage Leakage Leakage
(kV) Current Current Current Current

(µA) (µA) (µA) (µA)

20 030 032 32.8 29.7

40 091 097 89.5 95.2

60 174 169.2 168.5 152

80 263 265 246 249

100 361 367 354 345

120 450 463 453 436

140 572 569 574 540

160 672 694 675 653

180 792 801 783 775

Dry Condition
900

800

700
Leakage current µA

600

500

400

300

200

100

0
20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180
Applied Voltage kV

sample 1 sample 2 sample 3 sample 4

Figure 6.5 Comparison of samples at Dry Condition

81
6.5.2. Without pollution -Wet condition (Healthy sample):
Table 6.3: Applied Voltage versus Leakage current in wet condition
Applied Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 3 Sample 4
Voltage
Leakage Leakage Leakage Leakage
(kV) Current Current Current Current

(µA) (µA) (µA) (µA)

20 035 037 039 036

40 095 102 097 099

60 180 175 178 169

80 269 270 259 256

100 375 370 369 355

120 459 475 469 485

140 589 602 589 624

160 702 735 713 726

180 815 860 813 862

Wet Condition
1000
900
800
700
Leakage Curret µA

600
500
400
300
200
100
0
20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180
Applied Voltage kV

sample 1 sample 2 sample 3 sample 4

Figure 6.6 Comparison of samples at Wet Condition

82
Initially the insulator is tested without any application of pollution to study the variation
of leakage current with respect to applied voltage under wet condition, fresh water
sprayed upon the insulator at an angle of 450 with no water droplets more than 1mm
above the insulator.

6.5.3. With Pollution (Algae Contamination):

The Green Algae is applied in a small layer upon the every disk of insulator for
all the samples. Then for different voltage ratings the corresponding LC (Leakage
Current) is noted down until Flash Over occurs over the insulator as shown in figure
6.4 (b).
Table 6.4: Applied Voltage versus Leakage current with Algae Contamination.

Applied Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 3 Sample 4

Voltage Leakage
Leakage Leakage Leakage Current
(kV) Current Current
Current (µA)
(µA) (µA)
(µA)

20 039 041 035 036

40 095 105 101 105

60 185 179 183 175

80 275 273 265 269

100 401 382 375 370

120 521 496 483 491

140 621 635 602 609

160 753 769 738 749

180 886 913 875 890

FLV 184 kV 179 kV 172 kV 189 kV

83
 Algae Contamination
1000
900
800
Leakage Curent µA
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180
Applied Voltage kV

sample 1 sample 2 sample 3 sample 4

Figure 6.7 Comparison of samples with Algae Contamination

6.6 Comparison of Results for Individual Samples:

6.6.1 Comparison of Sample 1 results:
In figure 6.8 by comparing the leakage currents of sample1, Algae contamination with
dry condition the leakage current is increased by 10.61% and Algae contamination with
Wet condition the leakage current is increased by 8.02%

Sample 1
1000
900
Leakage Current µA

800
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180
Applied Voltage kV

Dry Condition Wet Condition Algae Contamination

Figure 6.8: Comparison of Sample 1 results

6.6.2 Comparison of Sample 2 results:

In figure 6.9 by comparing the leakage currents of sample 2, Algae contamination with
dry condition the leakage current is increased by 12.27%
84
 Figure 6.9: Comparison of Sample 2 results

Sample 2
1000
900
800
Leakage Current µA

700
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180
Applied Voltage kV

Dry Condition Wet Condition Algae Contamination

Algae contamination with Wet condition the leakage current is increased by 5.79%

6.6.3 Comparison of Sample 3 results:

In figure 6.10 by comparing the leakage currents of sample 3, Algae contamination with
dry condition the leakage current is increased by 10.51% and Algae contamination with
Wet condition the leakage current is increased by 7.09%

Sample 3
1000
900
800
Leakage Current µA

700
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180
Applied Voltage kV

Dry Condition Wet Condition Algae Contamination

Figure 6.10: Comparison of Sample 3 results

85
6.6.4 Comparison of Sample 4 results:
Figure 6.11: Comparison of Sample 4 results

Sample 4
1000
900
800
Leakage Current µA

700
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180
Applied Voltage kV

Dry Condition Wet Condition Algae Contamination

In figure 6.11 by comparing the leakage currents of sample 4, Algae contamination with
dry condition the leakage current is increased by 12.92% and Algae contamination with
Wet condition the leakage current is increased by 3.15%

86
 Analysis and Conclusion
Analysis:
From Field Stress analysis of 66 kV polymer insulator it is observed that the
field stress increases as the voltage across the insulator increases. The maximum stress
observed inside FRP rod at voltage 200 kV is 0.692 kV/mm. It is also observed that the
field stress at its edges at the first shed (shed near to high voltage) is more compared to
other sheds.

From the experimental results it is observed that

 The average maximum value of leakage current in healthy condition in dry
condition is 787.75 µA
 The average maximum value of leakage current in healthy sample in Wet
condition is 837.50 µA
 The average maximum value of leakage current with Algae contamination is
890µA
From this it is observed that when the insulator is contaminated the Leakage
Current increases then the Flash over takes place at faster rates.
The presence of Algae contamination upon the insulator has the effect on the
Leakage current but it is not so much severe compared to salt, cement and urea
contaminations.

Conclusion:
Polymer insulator is subjected to Bio- Degradable contamination (Green Algae)
for few days, the Algae releases fluid which damages the surface of the Polymer
insulator due to which the Leakage Current increased. By cleaning the Algae from the
surface the insulator can regain its own properties and can work as normal insulator.
We observed that during Algae contamination the leakage current is more and by
cleaning the Algae the Leakage current is very less. So we conclude that the presence
of Algae contamination the surface on the insulator has less effect on the performance
of the insulator compared to salt, cement and urea contamination.

87
 References

1. Effect of UV-Rays and Salt Contamination on 33kV Silicon Composite Insulators

by N.Sumathi1,V.S.N.K.Chaitanya2,T.S.Gowtham3
2. Effect of UV Irradiation on the Leakage Current of Polymeric Insulators A.S.
Nekeb, N. Harid, A. Haddad High Voltage Energy system Group, Cardiff
University
3. Flashover Characteristics of Polluted Silicone Rubber Insulators Exposed to
Artificial UV Irradiation Noureddine Harid Department of Electrical Engineering
The Petroleum Institute Abu Dhabi, UAE nharid@pi.ac.ae
4. Effect of UV Radiation on HTV-Silicon Rubber Insulators with Moisture
MUHAMMAD AMIN, MUNIR AHMED UET, Taxila Pakistan prof
aminee@yahoo.com
5. The Effects of Salt Contamination Deposition on HV Insulators Under
Environmental Stresses
6. Experimental investigation of effect of uv radiation on flashover voltage of
polymeric insulators with and without contamination.
7. The effects of pollution and surface discharges on the impulse strength of line
insulation.
8. Effects of UV irradiation on textured silicone rubber material.
9. Determination of long term performance of polymeric insulators for distribution
lines by salt fog method.
10. Electrical performance of distribution insulators with chlorella vulgaris growth on
its surface H.E. Rojas , C.D. Pérez , A.F. León , and L.F. Canto
11. Performance of composite insulators with and without bio contamination.
M.N.Dinesh 1, N.Vasudev 2 , P.V.Vasudevan Nambudri 2 , K.Suryanarayana 2 , K.N.Ravi 3
,V.Krishnan 4
12. Discharge Characteristics of Alga-Contaminated String Insulators in the Tropics F.
COOWAR and P. R. P. HOOLE
13. Effects of Biological Contamination on Insulator Performance Visual appearance
S.M. Gubanski’, M.A.R.M. Fernando’, S.J. Piet?, J. Matula’, A. Kyaruzi’

88
89