IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER DELIVERY, VOL. 15, NO.

1, JANUARY 2000 355

Performance of Nonceramic Insulators Under

Tropical Field Conditions
M. A. R. M. Fernando, Student Member, IEEE, and S. M. Gubanski, Senior Member, IEEE

Abstract—This paper presents the results of investigations
on the performance of nonceramic insulators in tropical field
conditions. Six different types of 33 kV insulators (silicone rubber,
EPDM composite, porcelain, and RTV coated porcelain) were
installed at six different test sites exposed to marine, industrial,
and clean environments in Sri Lanka and Tanzania. The visual
scrutiny, hydrophobicity class (HC) and surface conductivity
were used for the evaluation of the field performance. The silicone
rubber and RTV coated insulators preserved the hydrophobic
properties although some biological growth was found on them.
The EPDM insulators showed distinct surface changes. At the
same time, damage due to dry-band arcing appeared on the
porcelain insulators exposed to marine pollution.
Index Terms—High voltage polymeric insulator, pollution,
testing.
I. INTRODUCTION
N ONCERAMIC insulators with polymeric housing have
been used as an alternative to traditional porcelain and
glass insulators. A lot of information about their performance
in the field and under laboratory conditions has been collected
around the world over recent years [1]–[13] and overall expe-
riences have been good. The same pertains to RTV coatings
on porcelain insulators. However, if failures have appeared, it
has seemed that material deterioration was the most common
cause. Schneider et al. [1] reported in 1989, based on a survey
of United States utilities, that 64% of the nonceramic insulator
failures originated in material degradation. Similar conclu-
sions were presented in numerous CIGRÉ and IEEE reports
describing world-wide experience [2]–[5]. For example, the
exposure of composite insulators to heavy marine pollution in
the UK [6] has caused surface defects, such as erosion, splits,
cracks, holes, broken rods, etc. Burnham et al. [7] has reported
that EPDM insulators frequently fail under high humidity
conditions in Florida.
Among the currently available data, most information
concerning the performance of nonceramic insulators and RTV
coatings is related to field experiences gained under temperate,
desert and subtropical climatic conditions. On the other hand,
information about performance in tropical climate is rather
limited. In comparison with other environments, the tropics are
characterized by high humidity, rainfall, temperature and sun ir-
radiation. All these factors may significantly influence insulator
Manuscript received April 30, 1998; revised February 12, 1999. This work
was financially supported by SIDA, Sweden.
The authors are with the Chalmers University of Technology, Department
of Electric Power Engineering, Division of High Voltage Technology, 412 96
Göteborg, Sweden.
Publisher Item Identifier S 0885-8977(00)00667-1.
0885–8977/00$10.00 © 2000 IEEE
performance. High humidity makes a polluted insulator surface
conductive. In contrast, heavy rainfall washes the contaminants
away. Intensive UV irradiation and high temperature lead to
a rapid aging of the polymeric housing. Both, high humidity
and elevated temperature also a create favorable environment
for the growth of biological contaminants. It is, therefore,
interesting to see how these conditions affect the performance
of nonceramic insulators and coatings.
Studies have been performed in Sri Lanka and Tanzania
where many flashovers occur in local distribution systems
due to a mutual interaction between climate and pollution.
Different types of 33 kV ceramic and nonceramic insulators
have been installed in 1995, at locations with a relatively
high concentration of industrial and marine pollutants. For
comparison, identical insulators have also been placed in clean
areas. This report is mainly concentrated on the results from
Sri Lanka. Visual observations, hydrophobicity classification
(HC and surface conductivity ( ) were used to evaluate the
performance.
II. DETAILS OF THE INSULATORS
Usually, strings of three or four cap&pin porcelain insula-
tors are used in clean and polluted areas, respectively, on 33
kV distribution lines in Sri Lanka and Tanzania. Different man-
ufacturers were requested to recommend and provide nonce-
ramic and ceramic insulators in order to evaluate their perfor-
mance. There was no information exchange between them prior
to delivery. The parameters of the delivered insulators (insula-
tors #1–6) are given in Table I. These comprised four composite
(three silicone rubber and one EPDM), one RTV coated porce-
lain (sprayed 0.2–0.3 mm thick, dissolved in a low boiling cy-
cloaliphatic hydrocarbon), and one porcelain insulator. Insulator
#7 is the original cap&pin insulator and a string of these insu-
lators is regarded to be a reference in this work. As can be seen
from Table I, the composite insulators have similar creepage dis-
tances. The creepage distances of the porcelain and RTV coated
porcelain insulators (#5 and #6) are shorter. It was argued, how-
ever that these insulators had a good self-washing ability and,
therefore, they should withstand the local conditions well.
III. DESCRIPTION OF THE TEST SITES
Six different sites, exposed to marine and industrial pollu-
tion, as well as a clean environment, were selected for insu-
lator installation—three sites in Sri Lanka and three in Tanzania.
Table II describes the sites in Sri Lanka. The sites in Tanzania
had similar environmental conditions. In Sri Lanka, the first two
sites are located in the Puttalam area (sites I and II), situated
356
TABLE I
INSULATOR PARAMETERS
on the western coast (Indian Ocean) of the island. In this area,
there have been many evidences of increased discharge activity
and flashovers due to high marine and industrial pollution in the
33 kV distribution system belonging to the Ceylon Electricity
Board (CEB). For that reason, CEB has to replace the existing
cap and pin porcelain insulators every two years. The insulators
#1–6 have been installed horizontally at the locations with the
highest contamination risk. It seems that environmental factors
(sun irradiation and rainfall) affect the surfaces of horizontally
installed insulators more uniformly.
For comparison, the third site was located in the Kandy area
(site III), in the central part of Sri Lanka. A low pollution level
is characteristic of this location. The insulators have been verti-
cally hung and they have only been exposed to a high intensity
of rainfall and sun irradiation without being energized. At this
site, the effect of environmental factors on the insulator surface
varied from shed tops to shed bottoms, due to the vertical instal-
lation.
The average weather data for the Puttalam area are: annual
rainfall ∼1300 mm, temperature ∼28 C, and relative humidity
∼81%. On the other hand, the average weather data for Per-
adeniya are annual rainfall ∼1750 mm, temperature ∼27 C, and
relative humidity ∼80%.
IV. EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURE
The insulators were installed in September 1995. Two
months later, in November 1995 (two weeks after the rainy
season ceased), the insulators from sites I and II were removed,
then tested and reinstalled. Their surfaces were carefully
inspected and photographed during the testing. The surface
hydrophobicities were evaluated on the upper and under
sides of the sheds and cores. To simplify the hydrophobicity
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER DELIVERY, VOL. 15, NO. 1, JANUARY 2000
TABLE II
POLLUTION CLASSIFICATION AT THE TEST SITES (ACC. TO IEC 815)
evaluation in the field, the method proposed by the Swedish
Transmission Research Institute (STRI) [14] was used. In
this method, insulator surfaces are sprayed with deionized
water and the resulting water drop pattern is compared to the
reference—pictures of seven characteristic patterns. On this
basis, the hydrophobicity of the surface is classified between
class HC 1, which corresponds to a fully hydrophobic state, and
class HC 7 for a completely hydrophilic surface. In addition,
surface pollution severity is evaluated through measurements
of surface conductivity, and ESDD. For the measurements,
a layer conductivity meter [15] is used and the presented results
are the average values of many measurements (usually 10) on
the top and bottom sheds of the insulators.
In September 1996 (two weeks after sporadic heavy rains),
the insulators were removed again and brought to the labora-
tory for testing. First they were tested as it described above and
later measurements of leakage current (LC) patterns were per-
formed on them. The results of the LC patterns are separately
presented in [16]. The insulators were reinstalled in the field
in November 1996. Since then, the insulators have been tested
twice, in August 1997 (6 weeks after sporadic heavy rains) and
in January 1998 (2 weeks after the rainy season). More informa-
tion on the weather conditions in Puttalam during these periods
is provided in Table III. It seems that the temperature and hu-
midity values are merely high and stable. The rain intensity was
very high during first and last periods.
ESDD measurements at installation sites I and II were re-
peated a few times. The obtained results differed a lot, because
of the washing action of the preceding rains. Usually, the con-
taminants are brought to the installation sites when southwest
(SW) winds prevail, i.e., between April and December. The
highest registered values of pollution, accumulated over a two
month period, were in the range of 500 µg/cm2. During that
time dry and rainy periods appear and flashovers are common.
On the other hand, the northeast (NE) winds during the period
January–March bring less contaminants, but the weather is dry
and, therefore, allows them to accumulate. This accumulation
rate was estimated to be around 50–70 µg/cm2 per month.
At site III, the insulators were tested more often. They were
scrutinized and the hydrophobicity classes were estimated.
Measured ESDD values were very low (lower than 10 µg/cm2).
FERNANDO AND GUBANSKI: PERFORMANCE OF NONCERAMIC INSULATORS UNDER TROPICAL FIELD CONDITIONS 357

V. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION TABLE III

WEATHER CONDITIONS IN PUTTALAM (SITES I AND II) DURING THE
A. Visual Scrutiny TESTING PERIOD

1) Pollution: Two months after installation, the insulators at

site I were already covered with a layer of cement dust (NSDD
∼6 mg/cm2). The layer remained on the insulators despite the
intensive rainfall period which preceded the observations (see
Table III). Twelve and 21 months later, the cement layer was
even thicker, ∼25 mg/cm2 and ∼40 mg/cm2, respectively. Then,
after 26 months, the amount of deposited cement dust decreased
to ∼32 mg/cm2. This could have been a consequence of washing
by a heavy rain and a following period of NE wind. In all the
cases, the contamination layers appeared to be more uniform on
the insulator sheds than on their rods. Usually, higher dust con-
centrations were found on the rods and in the vicinity of the joint
between the rod and upper shed part. The average NSDD level,
obtained from measurements made on the reference insulators
during a two year period, was estimated as 40 mg/cm2. The ce-
ment layers on porcelain (#5) and EPDM (#4) insulators became
partly solidified and were not easily removable (see Fig. 1). On
the other hand, the dust could easily be removed from the sil-
icone rubber and coating surfaces (insulators #1–3 and #6, re-
spectively). This different behavior is directly related to the hy-
drophobicity state on the surfaces (cf. Section V-B). At site II,
the salt pollution layer was not clearly visible.
So far, all the installed nonceramic and coated porcelain in-
sulators at sites I and II have performed well and, according
to CEB’s observations, none of them have flashed over during
the investigation period. Under bad weather conditions at site
II, only intensive dry-band discharge activity was reported on
porcelain insulator #5. At the same time, flashovers were regis-
tered on the strings of 4 reference cap&pin insulators (#7) but
no discharge activity on the nonceramic surfaces.
2) Biological Growth: A number of greenish spots, later
identified as algae, were observed for the first time on the
silicone rubber surfaces at site III in September 1997, i.e., two
years after installation. They covered small areas of about a few
mm2 and were mainly localized to the upper sides of the sheds,
except for the uppermost ones. This observation indicates that Fig. 1. Polluted insulator #5 at site I.
the algae prefer to grow in places which are partially screened
from direct sun irradiation. Algae growth was not found at
the other installation sites. Inspections of silicone rubber
insulators, which have been in service for 20 yrs in Tanzania
[17], revealed a greenish biological growth on them, as well.
The effect is illustrated in Fig. 2. Algae growth on porcelain
and glass insulators was also reported in [18]–[20].
3) Surface Changes: The EPDM surfaces have deteriorated
at locations in Sri Lanka and Tanzania, independently of
whether they were or were not energized. The insulators (#4)
showed distinct signs of discolorations and chalking. These
were more clear at sites II and III. At site II, weak tree-like
erosion paths appeared within 2 months after installation and
Fig. 2. Biological growth on a nonceramic insulator in Tanzania.
became more distinct 12 months later. At the same time, a
discoloration of the rest of the insulator surface also took place.
It is believed that these erosions and discolorations were caused III, where the EPDM insulator surface was exposed to direct
by surface discharges and UV irradiation respectively. After 21 sun irradiation, the discoloration was also strong and expanded
months, the influence of UV irradiation on the material was so with time. This effect is illustrated in Fig. 3. However, at site I
strong that the EPDM surface became completely white. At site no such changes were seen after 12 months, when the cement
358 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER DELIVERY, VOL. 15, NO. 1, JANUARY 2000

layer was cleaned from the surface. The cement dust might
have protected the insulator surface from UV irradiation.
Slight surface discolorations were found on the silicone
rubber insulators (#1–3) at site III after 21 months. The upper
sides of the sheds were darker while the lower sides preserved
their original colors. The top shed was always the darkest. At
the same time, no such color changes were observed on the
RTV coated insulator (#6).
Twenty-one months after installation, the porcelain insulator
(#5) at site 11 showed signs of heavy surface erosion, which
could have been caused by intensive dry-band arcing activity or
flashover. The erosion appeared close to the metal fittings. This
indicates a high probability that a flashover in the insulator can Fig. 3. Surface discoloration on insulator #4 at site III.
take place in the near future.
So far, no significant differences were found between the dis-
coloration behavior of the energized and nonenergized insula- TABLE IV
HC VALUES DURING TESTING
tors, except for the signs of tracking erosion on the EPDM.
Similar results were reported from a long-term study in Sweden
[21]. However, an opposite conclusion was drawn based on in-
vestigations in Australia [22], where the energization of nonce-
ramic insulators under marine pollution significantly influenced
their hydrophobic behavior. These conflicting findings indicate
that it is still difficult to find out which factors, i.e., the environ-
mental or electrical stresses, have the strongest influence on the
degradation of polymeric housings.

B. Hydrophobicity Classification
The evaluation was performed 4 times and the obtained re-
sults are shown in Table IV. They should be correlated with the
information in Table III, where the time that passed between the
end of rainy periods and the tests is indicated. The HC values for
surfaces at sites I and II are the average values for evaluations
performed on every insulator shed (top and bottom) and its core.
The site III values are the average values for the evaluations of
every upper side of the sheds.
The HC values were all equal to 1 for all of the new nonce-
ramic insulators. Two months later, at site I, the HC values on
insulators #1 and #4 changed drastically and were HC 5 and HC
6, respectively. The other insulators (#2, #3, and #6) preserved
good hydrophobic properties. At sites II and III, insulators #1 preserved their hydrophobicities with time, despite the accumu-
and #4 did not show similar variations. All the values were ei- lated cement layers. This effect is shown in Fig. 4. It, therefore,
ther in class 1 or 2. seems that the hydrophobicity state and its recovery may be re-
Twelve months later, insulator #4 lost its hydrophobicity at lated to the type of contaminant. The dependence of recovery on
all investigated sites, both in Sri Lanka and Tanzania. Insulator the contaminant type was also observed in the pollution tests of
#1 improved the hydrophobicity at site I and the other silicone nonceramic insulators with artificial contamination layers [23].
insulators preserved the high hydrophobicities at all the sites. It At site III, significant differences in the HC were found be-
was interesting to notice that insulator #6 also preserved good tween the upper and lower sides of the insulators’ sheds. On
hydrophobicity. EPDM insulator #4, the lower sides of the sheds remained less
Tests at 21 and 26 months, revealed that the surfaces of insu- hydrophilic (HC 5) than those of the upper sides (HC 7). On the
lators #4 at all the sites became completely hydrophilic. At site contrary, the lower sides of the silicone rubber insulators were
II, the insulator #1 became more wettable (HC 5) than the other less hydrophobic than those of the upper sides. At the same time,
silicone rubber ones. A similar tendency was observed in insu- the upper side of the top shed was, during the rainy season, al-
lator #1 at a marine polluted location in Tanzania. Some of the ways less hydrophobic than the rest of the insulator. After the
other insulators (#2 and #6) had higher HC’s before the rainy rainy season, no such difference could be seen. It is possible
season (21 months) than after it (26 months). This was prob- that, due to sun irradiation, the temperature of the upper shed
ably due to the removal of the salt contaminant from the sur- parts increased and, as a consequence, the low molecular weight
faces. At site I, the silicone rubber and RTV coated insulators (LMW) polymer fraction migrated to the surface and restored its
FERNANDO AND GUBANSKI: PERFORMANCE OF NONCERAMIC INSULATORS UNDER TROPICAL FIELD CONDITIONS 359

hydrophobicity faster. During the rainy season, the LMW frac-

tion might have been washed out so that the top sheds were less
hydrophobic.

C. Surface Conductivity
Fig. 5 shows the values obtained at sites I and II during
the third and fourth testing (before and after the rainy season,
see Table III). Before the rainy season, the values at site I
were lower than those at site II, despite a thick cement layer.
On an earlier occasion, it was found that the cement contam-
ination layer contained more salt. It, therefore, seems that the
salt content in the contamination of site I can significantly vary, Fig. 4. HC evaluation on insulator #3 at site I.
depending on the wind direction and its strength. At site II, the
accumulated pollution irregularly varied among the insulators
and did not match with the HC values. For example, the highest
conductivities were measured on the EPDM insulator #4. Insu-
lator #6 also showed high conductivity values. At the same time,
insulator #1, showing similar HC to that of #6, had the lowest
surface conductivity. The hydrophilic porcelain insulator #5 also
exhibited a similar conductivity value to the silicone rubber in-
sulator #2 with HC 3. After the rainy season, the values at both
sites became lower. At site II, the reduction was significant.

VI. CONCLUSIONS
The nonceramic and RTV coated porcelain insulators
installed in 1995 have performed well, without flashovers,
under the marine and industrial pollution conditions in tropical
environments in Sri Lanka and Tanzania. At the same time,
flashovers on the reference cap&pin insulators were reported
from locations with a high concentration of marine pollution.
Signs of intensive dry-band discharges were also found on the
tested porcelain insulator.
Among the nonceramic and RTV coated insulators, only the
EPDM insulators completely lost their surface hydrophobic
properties. Surfaces of these insulators degraded (discoloration)
and showed signs of strong chalking. The silicone rubber hous-
ings and coating, in general, preserved the water-repellent
property, but even here some trends were noticed. The hy-
drophobicity classes of the marine pollution exposed silicone
insulators slightly increased, whereas the insulators installed
under industrial pollution conditions remained at HC 1. It
should also be noticed, that in the location with cement pol-
lution, the contamination layer could be removed easier from
the silicone rubber surfaces. This indicates that the silicone
surfaces can even be more prone to rain or artificial washing.
Algae contaminants can grow on silicone rubber in the
tropics, mainly on partially shedded surfaces. Their role in
insulator performance is, however, not clear yet, and more
studies are necessary to elucidate it.
Taking into account the overall performance of the investi-
gated insulators in Sri Lanka and Tanzania and the fact that
many of the cap&pin insulators normally used in 33 kV distri-
bution system have to be frequently replaced, due to flashover
damage or build-up of solid pollution layers, the use of silicone
nonceramic and RTV coated insulators under the tropical con-
ditions leads, so far, to promising results.
Fig. 5. Surface conductivity values before and after the rainy seasons.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The authors gratefully acknowledge the manufacturers for
supplying the insulators and CEB, Sri Lanka, and TANESCO,
Tanzania for assistance in testing the insulators.
REFERENCES
[1] H. M. Schneider, J. F. Hall, G. Karady, and J. Rendowden, “Nonceramic
insulators for transmission lines,” IEEE Trans. on PD, vol. 4, no. 4, pp.
2214–2219, Oct. 1989.
[2] E. A. Cherney, G. Karady, R. L. Brown, J. L. Nicholls, T. Obeck, and L.
Pargamin, “Application of composite insulators to transmission lines,”
IEEE Trans. on PAS, vol. PAS-102, no. 5, May 1983.
[3] Cigre Committee 22, Subworking Group 03-01, “World wide service
experience with HV composite insulators,” Electra, no. 130, 1989.
[4] J. F. Hall, “History and bibliography of polymeric insulators for outdoor
application,” IEEE Trans. on PD, vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 376–385, Jan. 1993.
[5] G. G. Karady, H. M. Schneider, and F. A. M. Rizk, “Review of CIGRE
and IEEE research into pollution performance of non-ceramic insula-
tors: Field aging effects and laboratory test techniques,” in CIGRE 1994,
Paper no. 33-103.
[6] R. G. Holgate and D. A. Swift, “Composite rod insulators for AC power
lines: Electrical performance of various design at a coastal testing sta-
tion,” IEEE Trans. on PD, vol. 5, no. 4, pp. 1944–1955, 1990.
[7] J. T. Burnham, D. W. Busch, and J. D. Renowden, “FPL’S Christmas
1991 transmission outages,” IEEE Trans. on PD, vol. 8, no. 4, pp.
1874–1881, Oct. 1993.
[8] S. M. Gubanski and R. Hartings, “Swedish research on the application
of composite insulators in outdoor insulation,” IEEE Trans. on EI, vol.
11, no. 5, pp. 24–31, 1995.
[9] D. Thornley and A. Shocket, “25-years experience of outdoor polymeric
insulation,” in Proceedings of the 1996 Power Engineering Society
Transmission and Distribution Conference, New York, 94CH3428-0,
pp. 67–72.
360
[10] M. Akbar, F. M. Zedan, M. A. A. Majeed, and K. Y. Al-Soufi, “Design
of HV transmission lines to combat insulator pollution problems in the
eastern region of Saudi Arabia,” IEEE Trans. on PD, vol. 6, no. 4, pp.
1912–1920, Oct. 1991.
[11] F. Rizk, E. Arabaty A., and E. Sarky A., “Laboratory and field experience
with EHV transmission line insulators in the desert,” IEEE Trans. on
PAS, vol. PAS-94, pp. 1770–1776, Sept.-Oct. 1975.
[12] R. Matsuoka, H. Shinokubo H., K. Kondo, and R. S. Gorur, “Investi-
gations of field energized RTV coated porcelain insulators,” in 1995
Int. Symp. on Electrical Insulating Materials, Tokyo, Japan, 1995, pp.
185–188.
[13] S. Zhaoying and S. Zhiyi, “Service experience with composite outdoor
insulation in China,” Revue-Generale-de-I’Electricite, no. 9, pp. 39–42,
Oct. 1994.
[14] A. Eriksson and D. Wikström, “Influence of the hydrophobicity of out-
door insulators on flashover voltage,” in Nordic Insulation Symposium
(NORD-IS), Vaasa, Finland, June 1994, pp. 39–51.
[15] J. Pilling and L. Bernt, “The problem of determining the layer conduc-
tivity of polluted insulators under service conditions,” in Proc. of 4th
Symp. on HV Eng. (ISH), Athens, Greece, Sept. 1983, Paper no. 46.13.
[16] M. A. R. M. Fernando and S. M. Gubanski, “Analyses of leakage cur-
rent wave forms for field-aged and new composite insulators,” in Annual
Report on CEIDP, vol. 1, Minneapolis, MN, 1997, pp. 3350–3353.
[17] M. A. Mbwana, “Laboratory and field performance of polymeric
composite insulators and RTV coatings,” Lic. thesis, KTH, Stockholm,
Sweden, 1997.
[18] K. Naito, R. Matsuoka, and K. Sakanishi, “Investigation of the insulator
performance of the insulator covered with lichen,” IEEE Trans. on PD,
vol. 5, no. 3, pp. 1634–1640, July 1990.
[19] R. D. McAfee, R. D. Heaton, J. M. King, and A. U. Falster, “A study
of biological contaminants on HV porcelain insulators,” Electric Power
System Research, vol. 42, no. 1, pp. 35–39, July 1997.
[20] F. Coowar and P. R. P. Hoole, “Discharge characteristics of alga-contam-
inated string insulators in the tropics,” Electric Power Systems Research,
vol. 5, no. 3, pp. 215–218, Dec. 1988.
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER DELIVERY, VOL. 15, NO. 1, JANUARY 2000
[21] T. Sörqvist, “Polymeric outdoor insulators—A long-term study,” Ph.D.
thesis, CTH, Gothenburg, Sweden, 1997.
[22] P. D. Blackmore, “Degradation of polymeric outdoor high-voltage in-
sulation: Surface discharge phenomena and condition assessment tech-
niques,” Ph.D. thesis, Queensland University of Technology, Australia,
1997.
[23] J.-M. Fourmigué and M. Noël, “Testing methods for performance pre-
diction of outdoor insulation housing,” in Annual Report on CEIDP, vol.
2, San Francisco, CA, 1996, pp. 451–454.
M. A. R. M. Fernando (S) was born in Colombo/Sri Lanka, on October
10, 1966. He graduated from the University of Peradeniya/Sri Lanka in
1993 and received a Tech. Licentiate from Royal Institute of Technology in
Stockholm/Sweden in 1997. Now he is working toward the completion of the
Ph.D. degree at the Department of Electric Power Engineering at Chalmers
University of Technology in Göteborg, Sweden. His special field of interests
includes problems related to high voltage composite insulators. He is a student
member of IEEE.
S. M. Gubanski (SM) was born in Dzierzoniow/Poland on September 29, 1950.
He received the M.Sc. (high voltage engineering) and Ph.D. (material science)
degrees from the Technical University of Wroclaw/Poland in 1973 and 1976,
respectively. Later he worked as a Research Fellow at the University College of
North Wales, Bangor/UK (1967–1977), a Senior Lecturer at the Technical Uni-
versity of Wroclaw/Poland (1977–1988) and the Federal University of Tech-
nology at Bauchi/Nigeria (1983–1985). Between 1989 and 1996, he was an As-
sociate Professor at the Department of Electric Power Engineering at the Royal
Institute of Technology in Stockholm/Sweden. Now he is a Professor at the De-
partment of Electric Power Engineering at Chalmers University of Technology
in Göteborg, Sweden. He is a senior member of IEEE.