IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER DELIVERY, VOL. 20, NO.
1, JANUARY 2005
Selection of Station Insulators With Respect to
Ice and Snow—Part II: Methods of Selection and
Options for Mitigation
M. Farzaneh, Chairman and Principal Author (Contributors in Alphabetical Order), T. Baker, A. Bernstorf,
J. T. Burnham, T. Carreira, E. Cherney, W. A. Chisholm, R. Christman, R. Cole, J. Cortinas, C. de Tourreil,
J. F. Drapeau, J. Farzaneh-Dehkordi, S. Fikke, R. Gorur, T. Grisham, I. Gutman, J. Kuffel, A. Phillips, G. Powell,
L. Rolfseng, M. Roy, T. Rozek, D. L. Ruff, A. Schwalm, V. Sklenicka, G. Stewart, R. Sundararajan, M. Szeto,
R. Tay, and J. Zhang
Abstract—In locations exposed to freezing conditions over the
station service life, additional measures for selecting adequate
station insulators at distribution and transmission voltage levels
should be taken. This second part of the paper describes the selec-
tion process and mitigation options, based on the environmental
parameters, as discussed in Part I. These include insulator size,
shape, surface material, surface quality, electric field improve-
ment, and orientation.
Index Terms—Climate, contamination, flashover, fog, high
voltage, ice, insulator coordination, snow, station insulators.
I. INTRODUCTION
M ANY utilities in cold climates experience flashovers on
station insulators, when covered with ice or snow. In
certain conditions, the electrical strength falls below service
voltage wet or polluted flashover strength because of the severity
of the ice or snow deposits, combined with the associated dura-
tion of exposure.
Despite these problems and the considerable efforts made by
a number of industrial and academic researchers [1]–[11], no
international guidelines for the selection of insulators under ice
and snow conditions have yet been established. Meanwhile, a
recent IEEE position paper [12] has recommended guidelines
for insulator icing test methods and procedures.
The main purpose of the present paper, within the framework
of a new IEEE Task Force on Icing Performance of Station Insu-
lators, is to recommend criteria for selecting and/or improving
the electrical performance of station insulators in cold climates.
Part I [13] described the physics and chemistry of important
aspects of insulation flashover under icing conditions. The pri-
mary objective of this second part is to apply this background
to the selection process and to recommend mitigating options.
The selection of the insulators means the recommended type,
profile, and material.
Manuscript received March 1, 2004. Paper no. TPWRD-00111-2004.
The authors are with the IEEE Task Force on Insulator Icing Methods.
Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/TPWRD.2004.839728
0885-8977/$20.00 © 2005 IEEE
271
II. SELECTION OF INSULATORS WITH RESPECT TO
ATMOSPHERIC ICE AND POLLUTION
A. Based on Outdoor Environment Observations
In most affected regions, the number of significant freezing
rain events is limited to fewer than five per year and on-site
monitoring of parameters is necessary to limit travel. Important
parameters that have been studied in field programs include
• the relationship of ice and pollution build-up to wind di-
rection [14];
• the electrical conductivity of freezing rain, based on
0.2-mm samples in tipping bucket rain gauges [15];
• the electrical conductivity of ice samples accreted on ref-
erence cylinders and on exposed insulators [14], [15];
• the dripping water conductivity from field-exposed insu-
lators [1];
• the leakage current across energized insulators under
freezing conditions [16].
These studies have provided important guidance for the devel-
opment of realistic test and calculation methods. The Task Force
encourages further collection of ice samples (ice caps and ici-
cles separately) for dimensions, weight and conductivity anal-
ysis. Comparison between the ice monitoring devices and real
insulators are also very important. This is to extend the industry
knowledge of field exposure conditions.
B. Based on Laboratory Icing Tests
This section is based on the philosophy of a recently issued
CIGRE Review [17]. In this publication, about 400 references
on pollution issues are available and potentially useful for icing,
as there are some similarities between the two.
External insulation should be properly selected and dimen-
sioned for an acceptable risk of flashover. It may be worthwhile
to do a probabilistic, or risk-of-failure, assessment. Presently,
two general approaches (deterministic and probabilistic) exist
for such a purpose. The deterministic approach is used more fre-
quently, but the more complicated probabilistic approach gives
more information.
1) Deterministic Approach: A short description of a deter-
ministic approach for pollution dimensioning can be found in
[17]. In this paper, we apply this approach for dimensioning
272
Fig. 1. Illustration for design based on the deterministic approach [17].
with respect to ice. The deterministic method has been widely
used for the design of many electrical and mechanical com-
ponents, apparatus, and systems. Components are then de-
signed according to material selection and dimensioning (in-
cluding profile). In our case, the insulation level is based on
a worst-case analysis and safety factors to cover unknowns. It
is assumed that there is a definitive maximum of ice conduc-
tivity (dripping water) that may stress the insulator, shown as
the environment “S” curve in Fig. 1. It is also assumed that
the insulation strength can be described by a minimum with-
stand dripping water conductivity below which flashover is not
possible. The minimum insulation withstand dripping water
conductivity is then selected so that it exceeds the maximum
stress by a safety margin which is chosen to cover only un-
certainties in the designer’s evaluation of the strength and the
stress parameters.
Ice stress can be defined by different parameters, e.g., by the
thickness alone, by the electrical conductivity alone or by the
product of conductivity and ice weight per meter of dry arcing
distance [18]. The level of bridging of the insulator sheds by
icicles in this case is assumed to be 100%.
The following problems exist with this approach.
i) The ice severity, insulator withstand voltage and the de-
gree of bridging are all probabilistic values.
ii) The selected margin depends on the judgement of the
design engineer and has, therefore, no statistical signifi-
cance.
iii) Only a single insulator is considered in this approach;
but, in the actual substation design, many such insulators
are connected in parallel.
2) Probabilistic Approach: In the probabilistic approach,
the main parameters are considered as statistical variables,
defined by mean values and dispersions, as opposed to the
deterministic method, where the parameters are assumed to be
constant. Descriptions of this approach for insulator selection
under pollution can be found in [17], [45], [46].
The statistical dimensioning of insulators entails the selec-
tion of the dielectric strength of an insulator, with respect to
the voltage and environmental stresses, to fulfill a specific per-
formance requirement. This is done by evaluating the risk of
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER DELIVERY, VOL. 20, NO. 1, JANUARY 2005
Fig. 2. Illustration for design based on the probabilistic approach.
flashover of the candidate insulation options and selecting those
with an acceptable performance. With reference to Fig. 2, the
risk for flashover can be calculated as follows.
• It is assumed that the insulators are energized at a voltage
with constant amplitude, corresponding to the maximum
continuous operating voltage.
• The variation of the ice environmental stress (conductivity
of the dripping water in this case) at the site of interest
is represented by the probability density function “ ,”
which is expressed in terms of the site severity “ .” These
data normally come from service measurements, or can be
calculated as described in Part I of this paper.
• A cumulative distribution function “ ” describes
the strength of the insulation, that is, the probability for
flashover as a function of the same measure of site severity
“ ,” as was used to describe the ice environmental stress
(conductivity of dripping water in this example). This data
comes from laboratory tests. For a number of insulators
in parallel, (1) below gives the total risk.
• The multiplication of the f and P functions gives the prob-
ability density for flashover of the insulator at the given
site, and the area under this curve expresses the risk for
flashover.
The flashover probability of “m” parallel insulation points
exposed to the same conditions is
(1)
where -flashover probability of a single insulation point.
Fig. 3 illustrates the change in flashover probability associ-
ated with 10, 100, or 1 000 insulators in parallel, using (1) above,
and (7) of Part I of the paper [13]. In this case, the exposure is
expressed as equivalent salt deposit density ( g/cm ) for two
different line-to-ground voltage stresses.
Practical applications of the probabilistic approach for di-
mensioning are described in [45], [46], and with respect to ice
in [47].
C. Based on Mathematical Models
Using mathematical models is one of the useful ways of es-
timating the critical flashover voltage of ice-covered insulators
which then can be converted in flashover probability data, for
example.
FARZANEH et al.: SELECTION OF STATION INSULATORS WITH RESPECT TO ICE AND SNOW—PART II
Fig. 3. Risks of flashover as a function of insulator length.
Fig. 4. Model of flashover on an ice surface.
According to [19]–[21], the arc on an ice surface may be con-
sidered as a local arc in series with a residual ice layer, as is the
case with pollution (Fig. 4).
Therefore, the equation for this circuit model may be ex-
pressed as follows:
(2)
where (in V) and (in A) are the peak values of the applied
voltage and leakage current; and are the arc constants;
(in V) is the arc electrode voltage drop; (in cm) is the length
of the arc; (in ), hereafter called residual resistance, is
the resistance of the part of the ice that is not bridged by the arc.
Under AC conditions, to maintain an arc propagating on a di-
electric surface, (2) and the arc re-ignition conditions expressed
by (3) must be satisfied
(3)
where and are re-ignition constants.
Equations (2) and (3) can be used to calculate the critical
flashover voltage of ice-covered insulators, if the arc constants,
arc reignition constants, and the residual resistance are deter-
mined.
In [19], it was shown that, for an insulator string covered with
a semi-cylindrical ice layer, may be calculated as follows:
(4)
273
where and are the arc length and diameter of the insulator
string, respectively; is the thickness of the ice layer; is the
arc root radius; is the surface conductivity of the ice layer,
and may be expressed as follows:
(5)
It was also found that arc constant , arc reignition constant ,
and arc root radius are influenced by air pressure [22], while
the arc reignition constant is affected by insulator diameter.
Using a triangular ice sample, a short post-type insulator and
a short insulator string, all the parameters were experimentally
determined as follows:
(6)
(7)
(8)
(9)
(10)
(11)
where and are the sea-level pressure (101.3 kPa) and the
pressure at high altitude, respectively; and (in cm) is the in-
sulator diameter.
Thus, with all the necessary parameters determined, the math-
ematical model ((2) and (3)) may be used for predicting the
flashover voltage of ice-covered insulators with different diam-
eters and at various air pressures.
As an application, this model was first applied to a short string
of five IEEE standard insulators covered with 2 cm of ice at the
standard air pressure [21]. These insulators are slightly modi-
fied ANSI Class 52-3 porcelain discs, developed originally to
calibrate clean fog test methods and also used in icing tests. As
shown in Fig. 5, there is good agreement between the flashover
voltage calculated from the mathematical model and the labora-
tory results. In this case the calculated critical flashover voltage
was considered as % obtained during the flashover tests.
Previous experience showed that the model is also suitable
for modeling cold-fog flashover on 6–15 m of leakage distance
[19]. Recent studies at Chicoutimi (UQAC) indicated that the
mathematical model can be extended to extra-high voltage in-
sulation (up to 4 m of dry arcing distance) with good preci-
sion. The flashover voltage obtained by modeling can then be
converted into the flashover probability at maximum operating
voltage (right curve in Fig. 2). The distribution of ice severity is
still needed for the statistical calculation of the risk for flashover.
III. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR INCREASING INSULATOR
RELIABILITY UNDER ICING CONDITIONS
A. New Design
The improvement of electrical performance of insulators
under icing conditions requires specific design modifications
that were not addressed in typical designs for areas of heavy
pollution. One of the main differences resides in the fact that for
274
Fig. 5. Critical flashover voltage of five IEEE standard insulators covered with
ice, as a function of applied water conductivity (at standard air pressure).
moderate to heavy ice accretion, a significant proportion of the
leakage distance is no longer effective because it is bypassed
by the icicles or ice layer. New designs for high-performance
insulators under icing conditions should focus on
• prevention of ice bridging across sheds, through large
shed-to-shed separation, for example using alternating
sheds, creepage extenders, or booster sheds;
• protection of leakage distance, sometimes achieved natu-
rally through a conical shape;
• reduction of total ice accumulation, often through reduced
insulator diameter [23];
• promotion of natural ice shedding through smooth surface
finish or semiconducting glaze;
• promotion of uniform electric field distribution through
well-designed metallic end fittings and grading rings, or
using resistive glaze (RG) insulators.
A recent study undertaken by UQAC and Hydro-Quebec led
to the selection of a new design for station insulators that was
recently installed in a new 735 kV substation [24]–[26], (Fig. 6).
The study revealed that a specific so-called 3ALT shed profile
design could contribute to improve the electrical performance
up to some extent of icing severity. In this work, several 3ALT
profiles were investigated and the flashover performance was
different for different designs. However, for the heaviest ice ac-
cretion, results showed that the influence of the shed profile is
no longer significant.
The effect of semiconducting glaze on porcelain insulators
was then investigated and quite promising results were revealed.
It was observed that the presence of the semiconducting glaze
interacts with the deposition process of the ice along the length
of the insulation. The ice deposits were more fragile and less
cohesive, and there were also a more uniform distribution of
air gaps. The semiconductive glaze also inhibited the forma-
tion and propagation speed of the developing arc to some extent.
The more fragmented deposit alongside with the longer duration
of leakage current during the development of flashover led to a
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER DELIVERY, VOL. 20, NO. 1, JANUARY 2005
Fig. 6. 3ALT shed profile post insulators (a) without ice (b) with ice.
20% improvement of insulation performance under the highest
icing severity investigated. However, more studies would be
needed to confirm this improvement under heavier ice accre-
tions and high icing rate.
B. Mitigation Methods
The probability of flashover for snow- or ice-covered station
insulators is higher than for overhead line insulators under the
same conditions. This is essentially due to the fact that
i) the voltage stress is higher in the case of station post than
line insulators;
ii) the shed spacing of post insulators is generally smaller
than that of line insulators, thus ice bridging is more
likely to happen [27], [28];
iii) the diameter of post insulators is larger, which causes the
leakage resistance under similar icing conditions to be
lower [23];
iv) there are many parallel post insulators concentrated in
relatively small areas subjected to the same conditions,
which significantly raises the probability of flashover
during the same “ice event.”
Increased insulator reliability in ice or snow conditions may
in principle be achieved by increasing the dry arcing distance,
reducing flashover probability due to parallel insulators, or pre-
venting icicle or snow bridging. In few special cases, methods
involving ice or snow melting can be used.
1) Increase of Dry Arcing Distance: For reliable operation
of insulators under ice and snow conditions, the most effective
measure consists in using a sufficiently long dry arcing distance,
selected on the basis of withstand stress, measured with suitable
laboratory test methods, or selected on the basis of service ex-
perience under the worst ice and snow conditions [12]. This so-
lution is economical only in areas with high occurrence of ice
or snow flashovers, but it is not always technically applicable.
2) Reduction of Flashover Probability: Flashover proba-
bility under ice or snow conditions can be reduced by decreasing
FARZANEH et al.: SELECTION OF STATION INSULATORS WITH RESPECT TO ICE AND SNOW—PART II
the number of parallel insulation points in areas with heavy ice
or snow conditions, reducing operating voltage during critical
ice and snow conditions, and making the voltage distribution
along the insulators more uniform.
a) Reduction of Parallel Insulation Points: As fol-
lows from formula (1), at maximum operating voltage under
ice conditions, the flashover probability for one insulator is
%, while the probabilities for 20 and 50 parallel
insulators are respectively % and %,
under the same ice event.
b) Reducing the Operating Voltage: When possible, re-
ducing the operating voltage during critical ice or snow con-
ditions is an effective means for increasing insulator reliability
[29], [30].
In the previous example, in the case of 50 parallel insulators,
reduction of the operation voltage by 5% results in a decrease of
the flashover probability from % (maximum opera-
tion voltage) to %, whereas a 10% voltage reduction
results in a decrease of the flashover probability to %.
c) Making the Voltage Distribution Uniform [30]: A
significant improvement of the electric field strength can be
achieved through a better design of the grading ring [31] on
the voltage end of the insulator or on both ends in the case of
EHV and especially composite insulators. The grading rings
for higher voltages could also partially protect sensitive parts
of insulators from ice accretion. This, however, could be both
positive and negative for the insulator performance and can be
investigated only by ice-covered energized insulators. Also,
semiconducting glaze porcelain insulators [32]–[37], provide
a resistive current of approximately 1 mA. This steady current
makes voltage distribution more uniform, which delays the
initiation of arc. Semi-conducting glaze post insulators showed
the highest withstand voltage under icing conditions among
various insulators, including conventional porcelain and non-
ceramic types [27], [28].
d) Increasing the Surface Impedance: Test results with
silicone coatings on ceramic insulators have shown some im-
provement in performance for certain types of insulators [28],
[38], especially those that have a large sheltered leakage distance.
Some of this improvement actually comes from the better pol-
lution performance, i.e., from the order-of-magnitude increase
in surface impedance when ice is applied to pre-contaminated
surfaces [32]. Generally, the use of silicone coatings has proved
useful for situations with high contamination and moderate ice
accretion [39] but may have limited benefit for conditions leading
to full ice bridging. It is important to test this approach because
silicone coating has proved to be one of the most practical ways
to upgrade existing station apparatus, housings and bushings that
have a history of flashovers during freezing rain events [39].
Polymer insulators also have high surface impedance, and
these have been developed for HV station applications. How-
ever, the projected icing performance of many existing designs
is not favorable. Compared to ceramic posts, ice bridging is
more easily achieved and the ice remains on polymer surfaces
longer during melting. Both factors increase the duration of ex-
posure and risk of flashover.
e) Insulator Washing: The build-up of insulator surface
contamination tends to be linear with duration of exposure with
275
some saturation for longer exposure times. For stations where
pollution monitoring, i.e., ESDD measurements, leakage cur-
rents or discharge activity are monitored, it is possible to identify
trigger levels for high-pressure insulator washing, prior to any
icing events. It is important to use deionized water for this main-
tenance, with a conductivity of less than 20 S/cm, to ensure
that the overall risk is reduced rather than increased. Insulator
washing in freezing conditions with water of conductivity 300
S/cm will virtually guarantee flashovers from the remaining
ice on the insulator surfaces. IEEE Standard 957 [40] describes
appropriate modifications to insulator washing methods for
freezing conditions. Composite insulators could also ben-
efit from winter washing but high-pressure methods that do not
damage the insulators require special development and training.
3) Prevention of Icicle or Snow Insulator Bridging: Glaze
with icicles on vertical insulator assemblies is the most dan-
gerous type of ice, with a high flashover probability [41]–[43].
This is due to the fact that, in this kind of setting, the insulator
shed spaces tend to be bridged by icicles, resulting in the short-
ening of the effective insulator leakage path. This can be pre-
vented by using a special insulator shed design, or booster sheds.
a) Special Insulator Shed Design: For post insulators, it
is possible to use designs with alternating shed diameters. The
difference between the shed diameters, and their spacing, must
be sufficiently large to prevent ice bridging.
b) Booster Sheds: The use of booster sheds [29], [38],
[44] may also prevent ice bridging, and consequently increase
the insulator withstand voltage level in heavy icing conditions.
In designing for how the booster sheds will be attached, one
has to make sure that the glaze on the insulator surface will not
be damaged. According to [29], a 20% increase in withstand
voltage of 110 kV post insulators with 3 booster sheds, and a
40% increase for 400 kV post insulators with 9 booster sheds,
were obtained.
However, booster sheds tend to interfere with natural
washing, so more frequent cleaning or washing of insulators
is necessary. It is also possible to use the booster sheds during
winter periods and remove them during the rest of the year.
4) Ice or Snow Melting: High-powered heat lamps have
been used at two utilities to melt ice on insulators and other
station components. This approach has high operating costs
but has proved to be economic and effective in the case of
substations near waterfalls.
Washing ice-covered insulators under voltage using hot pres-
surized water was tested with good results in laboratory condi-
tions [29]. However, using this method in actual conditions can
be very complex, because wetting unwashed ice-covered insu-
lators can initiate a flashover.
IV. CONCLUSION
This second part of the paper has provided a basis for the
selection process and mitigation options for station insulators,
like bus supports and apparatus housings, and this based on the
environmental parameters discussed in Part I.
Three general methods for the proper selection and dimen-
sioning of insulators under icing conditions were proposed.
These are based on deterministic, probabilistic, and mathemat-
ical model approaches.
276
The idea of the deterministic method is to estimate a with-
stand voltage of the iced insulator within a certain acceptable
margin of safety between this withstand value and the maximum
ice stress. In the probabilistic method, the main parameters are
considered as variables, whereas they are assumed to be con-
stant in the deterministic method. This means that the selection
of the insulator strength with respect to the voltage and envi-
ronmental stresses must meet a specific performance require-
ment. As for the third approach, the mathematical model of-
fers a useful input for the calculation of the flashover voltage,
which then can be used as a part of the deterministic or proba-
bilistic methods. The Task Force encourages further laboratory
and field experiments on flashover data to improve the existing
mathematical models.
Finally, recommendations were made for new design and mit-
igation methods to improve the electrical performance of insu-
lators under ice and snow conditions.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The Chairman would like to thank Dr. W. A. Chisholm
especially for his enthusiasm, dedication, and contributions,
to T. Grisham for helping with IEEE administration and to
Dr. I. Gutman for links to the IEC 60 815 revision process.
REFERENCES
[1] M. Farzaneh and O. T. Melo, “Properties and effect of freezing rain and
winter fog on outline insulators,” Cold Regions Sci. Technol., vol. 19,
pp. 33–46, 1999.
[2] L. Gu et al., “AC flashover characteristics of EHV line insulators for
high altitude contamination regions,” in Proc. Int. Conf. Properties Ap-
plications Dielectric Materials, 1988.
[3] J. S. Forest, “The performance of high voltage insulators in polluted
atmospheres,” in Proc. Conf. Paper IEEE Winter Meeting, New York,
1969.
[4] K. Kannus and K. Lahti, “Electrical behavior of high voltage insulator
strings under rime ice,” in Proc. 9th Int. Workshop Atmospheric Icing of
Structures, Chester, U.K., 2000, p. 8.
[5] T. Fujimura, K. Naito, Y. Hasegawa, and K. Kawaguchi, “Performance
of insulators covered with snow or ice,” IEEE Trans. Power App. Syst.,
vol. PAS-98, no. 5, pp. 1621–1631, Sep./Oct. 1979.
[6] R. Matsuoka, S. Ito, K. Sakanishi, and K. Naito, “Flashover on contam-
inated insulators with different diameters,” IEEE Trans. Electr. Insul.,
vol. 26, no. 6, pp. 1140–1146, Dec. 1991.
[7] I. Gutman, K. Halsan, and D. Hübinette, “Application of ice progressive
stress method for selection of different insulation options,” in Proc. 13th
Int. Symp. High-Voltage Engineering (ISH), Delft, Holland, Aug. 2003.
[8] M. Kawai, “AC flashover test at project UHV on ice-coated insulators,”
IEEE Trans. Power App. Syst., vol. PAS-89, no. 8, pp. 1800–1804,
Nov./Dec. 1970.
[9] M. D. Charneski, G. L. Gaibrois, and B. F. Whitney, “Flashover tests on
artificially iced insulators,” IEEE Trans. Power App. Syst., vol. PAS-101,
no. 8, pp. 2429–2433, Aug. 1982.
[10] H. M. Schneider, “Artificial ice tests on transmission line insulators—A
progress report,” in Proc. IEEE/Power Eng. Soc. Summer Meeting, San
Francisco, CA, 1975, pp. 347–353. Paper A75-491-1.
[11] Z. Vuckovic and Z. Zdravkivic, “Effect of polluted snow and ice accre-
tion on high voltage transmission line insulators,” in Proc. 5th Int. Work-
shop on Atmospheric Icing Structures, Tokyo, Japan, 1990. Paper B4-3.
[12] M. Farzaneh et al., “Insulator icing test methods and procedures,” IEEE
Power Del., vol. 18, no. 4, pp. 1503–1515, Oct. 2003.
[13] M. Farzaneh et al., “Selection of station insulators with respect to ice
and snow—Part I: Technical context and environmental exposure,” IEEE
Trans. Power Del., vol. 20, no. 1, pp. 264–270, Oct. 2004.
[14] S. M. Fikke, J. E. Hanssen, and L. Rolfseng, “Long range transported
pollution and conductivity on atmospheric ice on insulators,” IEEE
Trans. Power Del., vol. 8, no. 3, pp. 1311–1321, Jul. 1993.
[15] M. Farzaneh and O. T. Melo, “Flashover performance of insulators in
the presence of short icicles,” Int. J. Offshore Polar Eng., vol. 4, no. 2,
pp. 112–118, 1994.
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER DELIVERY, VOL. 20, NO. 1, JANUARY 2005
[16] Y. Beauséjour. Caractérization du comportement électrique d’iso-
lateurs 735 kV en milieu naturel. presented at Colloquium
on Icing, ACFAS Conference. [Online]. Available: http://ice-
volt.uqac.uquebec.ca/cigele
[17] Polluted Insulators: A Review of Current Knowledge, Jun. 2000. CIGRE
TF 33.04.01, Tech. Brochure, no. 158.
[18] W. A. Chisholm, J. Kuffel, and M. Farzaneh, “The icing stress product:
A measure for testing and design of outdoor insulators in freezing condi-
tions,” in Proc. 2nd Int. Workshop on High Voltage Engineering, Japan,
2000. session 8.
[19] M. Farzaneh, J. Zhang, and X. Chen, “Modeling of the AC arc discharge
on ice surfaces,” IEEE Trans. Power Del., vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 325–338,
Jan. 1997.
[20] M. Farzaneh, I. Fofana, C. Tavakoli, and X. Chen, “Dynamic modeling
of DC arc discharge on ice surfaces,” IEEE Trans. Dielectr. Electr. Insul.,
vol. 10, no. 3, pp. 463–474, Jun. 2003.
[21] J. Zhang and M. Farzaneh, “Computation of AC critical flashover
voltage of insulators covered with ice,” in Proc. Int. Conf. Power System
Technology, vol. 1, Beijing, China, Aug. 1998, pp. 524–528.
[22] M. Farzaneh, Y. Li, J. Zhang, L. Shu, X. Jiang, W. Sima, and C. Sun,
“Electrical performance of ice-covered insulators at high altitudes,”
IEEE Trans. Dielectr. Electr. Insul., vol. 11, no. 5, pp. 870–880, Oct.
2004.
[23] R. Chaarani, “Étude de l’influence des caractéristiques des isolateurs sur
leurs performances électriques dans des conditions de givrage,” Ph.D.
dissertation, Univ. Quebec Chicoutimi, Chicoutimi, QC, Canada, Apr.
2003.
[24] M. Farzaneh and S. Brettschneider, “Étude de la tension de tenue des
isolateurs de postes en présence de glace atmosphérique en vue d’un
choix approprié de type et configuration d’isolateurs de postes à 735
kV,” in Hydro-Québec, 2001, p. 62.
[25] J. F. Drapeau, “Amélioration de la tenue diélectrique des équipements de
postes sous conditions de verglas—Phase 2—Développement et evalua-
tion de solutions pour la selection d’isolateurs au futur poste Montérégie
(735 kV),”, IREQ internal rep. (confidential), 2002.
[26] M. Farzaneh, J. F. Drapeau, M. Roy, and S. Yokoi, Selection of insulators
for a 735 kV Hydro-Quebec substation with respect to ice accretion, in
IEEE Trans. Power Del. to be submitted.
[27] M. Farzaneh, J.-F. Drapeau, C. Tavakoli, and M. Roy, “Laboratory in-
vestigations and methods for evaluating the flashover performance of
outdoor insulators on a large scale under atmospheric icing conditions,”
in Proc. Int. Workshop Atmospheric Icing Structures, Brno, Czech Re-
public, Jun. 2002.
[28] J.-F. Drapeau, M. Farzaneh, and M. Roy, “An exploratory study of var-
ious solutions for improving ice flashover performance of station post
insulators,” in Proc. Int. Workshop Atmospheric Icing Structures, Brno,
Czech Republic, Jun. 2002.
[29] V. Sklenicka and J. Vokalek, “Insulators in icing conditions: Selection
and measures for reliability increasing,” in Proc. 7th Int. Workshop At-
mospheric Icing Structures, Chicoutimi, QC, Canada, 1996, pp. 72–76.
[30] M. M. Khalifa and R. M. Morris, “Performance of line insulators
under rime ice,” IEEE Trans. Power App. Syst., vol. PAS-86, no. 6, pp.
692–698, Jun. 1968.
[31] D. Wu, K. A. Halsan, and S. M. Fikke, “Artificial ice tests for long insu-
lator strings,” in Proc. 7th Int. Workshop Atmospheric Icing Structures,
Chicoutimi, QC, Canada, 1996, pp. 67–71.
[32] W. A. Chisholm et al., “The cold-fog test,” IEEE Trans. Power Del., vol.
11, no. 4, pp. 1874–1880, Oct. 1996.
[33] W. A. Chisholm, “Effects of Flue-Gas Contamination of Ceramic In-
sulator Performance in Freezing Conditions,”, EPRI Rep. TR-110 296,
1998.
[34] J. F. Drapeau, M. Farzaneh, M. Roy, R. Chaarani, and J. Zhang, “An
experimental study of flashover performance of various post insulators
under icing conditions,” in Proc. Conf. Electrical Insulation and Dielec-
tric Phenomena, vol. 1, Victoria, BC, Canada, 2000, pp. 359–364.
[35] M. Farzaneh, C. Volat, and A. Gakwaya, “Electric field calculation
around ice-covered insulator using boundary element method,” in Proc.
IEEE Int. Symp. Electrical Insulation, Anaheim, CA, Apr. 2000, pp.
349–355.
[36] V. Jaiswal, M. Farzaneh, and D. A. Lowther, “Impulse flashover per-
formance of semi-conducting glazed insulators equipped with booster
sheds under icing conditions,” in Proc. Canadian Conf. Electrical Com-
puter Engineering, Montreal, QC, Canada, May 2003.
[37] V. Jaiswal and M. Farzaneh, “Effects of semi-conducting glaze coating
on the electrical performance of a H.V. station post insulator covered
with ice,” in Proc. 13th Int. Symp. High-Voltage Engineering, Delft, Hol-
land, Aug. 2003.
FARZANEH et al.: SELECTION OF STATION INSULATORS WITH RESPECT TO ICE AND SNOW—PART II
[38] M. Farzaneh, J.-F. Drapeau, J. Zhang, M. J. Roy, and J. Farzaneh,
“Flashover performance of transmission class insulators under icing
conditions,” in Proc. Insulator News Market Report Conf., Marbela,
Spain, Aug. 2003, pp. 315–326.
[39] W. A. Chisholm and J. Kuffel, “Experience with, and life-cycle cost
assessment of, alternative solutions to reduce contamination-related
outages at transmission substations,” in Proc. INMR Conf., Barcelona,
Spain, 2002.
[40] Guide for Insulator Washing. IEEE Std. 957.
[41] M. Farzaneh and J. Kiernicki, “Flashover problems caused by ice
build-up on insulators,” IEEE Electr. Insul. Mag., vol. 11, no. 2, pp.
5–17, Mar./Apr. 1995.
[42] M. Farzaneh and J. F. Drapeau, “AC flashover performance of insulators
covered with artificial ice,” IEEE Trans. Power Del., vol. 10, no. 2, pp.
1038–1051, Apr. 1995.
277
[43] M. Farzaneh and J. Kiernicki, “Flashover performance of IEEE standard
insulators under ice conditions,” IEEE Trans. Power Del., vol. 12, no. 4,
pp. 1602–1613, Oct. 1997.
[44] V. Sklenicka et al., “Influence of conductive ice on electric strength of
HV insulators,” in Proc. Int. Symp. Pollution Performance of Insulators
and Surge Diverters, vol. 1, Madras, Tamilnadu, India, 1983. paper 1.02.
[45] J. S. Barrett and M. A. Green, “A statistical method for evaluating elec-
trical failures,” IEEE Trans. Power Del., vol. 9, no. 3, pp. 1524–1530,
Aug. 1994.
[46] C. S. Engelbrecht, R. Hartings, and J. Lundquist, “On the statistical di-
mensioning of insulators with respect to pollution conditions,” in Proc.
Inst. Elect. Eng., Gen., Transm. Distrib., 2004.
[47] K. Halsan, D. Loudon, and C. Engelbrecht, “Ice and pollution testing on
compact insulator strings in statnett,” in Proc. World Conf. Insulators,
Arrestors Bushings, Marbela, Spain, Nov. 16–19, 2003.