See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/312111667

Tracking and erosion properties evaluation of polymeric insulating materials

Conference Paper · September 2016

DOI: 10.1109/ICHVE.2016.7800616

CITATIONS READS

7 975

5 authors, including:

Delun Meng
Hitachi Energy Reaearch
4 PUBLICATIONS   24 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Delun Meng on 14 April 2021.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Tracking and Erosion Properties Evaluation of
Polymeric Insulating Materials

Delun Meng, Boveri-Yibo Zhang, Jiansheng Chen Seung-Chul Lee, Jong-Yun Lim
ABB Corporate Research ABB Ltd.
Beijing, China Cheonan, Korea
delun.meng@cn.abb.com, boveri-yibo.zhang@cn.abb.com

Abstract-With excellent electrical properties, low weight and
easy processing, polymeric materials were widely used as
external insulating materials for indoor and outdoor electrical
applications. However, with the presence of humidity and
contamination in the operation environment, surface tracking
may happen to polymeric insulating materials which influences
the long term reliability of the insulation and equipment, and
may even lead to a fire hazard. Therefore, resistance of tracking
and erosion of polymeric insulation materials is a very critical
property which has been attracted more and more attention in
recent years. This study attempts to evaluate the tracking and
erosion resistance performances of different polymeric materials.
For this purpose, tracking and erosion resistance was determined
in accordance with IEC 60587 by inclined-plane method in this
work, using constant tracking voltage. End-point criterion A was
applied, meanwhile track distances of end-point B was also
measured. Test tolerance time, maximum currents, erosion
depth, length of track from the lower electrode and the leakage
currents on the surface of the specimens was recorded and
analyzed. Five kinds of commercialized polymeric insulation
materials were evaluated and compared. SMC, BMC, GPO3 and
glass fiber reinforced PPA were evaluated with AC 2.5kV and
3.5kV. HTV silicone rubber was tested with AC 2.5kV, 3.5kV and
4.5 kV. The experimental results indicated that tracking and
erosion resistance of different polymeric insulating materials
were successfully evaluated and ranked by inclined-plane
tracking and erosion test, and the ranking of resistance should be
HTV-1, BMC, SMC, HTV-2, GPO3 and glass fiber reinforced
PPA. Besides, the influence factors of the dry-band arcing and
leakage current on the materials surface during the test were also
discussed.
Keywords—tracking and erosion; inclined-plane; polymeric
insulation;
materials is a very critical property and has attracted more and
more attention in recent years.
In order to evaluate and compares the tracking and erosion
resistance performance under AC stress, five kinds of
commercialized polymeric insulating materials were tested in
accordance with a material testing standard IEC 60587 [7], All
the experiments were conducted by means of constant tracking
voltage method. End-point criterion A was applied, meanwhile
track distances of end-point B was also measured. Test
tolerance time, maximum currents, erosion depth, length of
track from the lower electrode and the leakage currents (LC) on
the surface of the specimens was recorded and analyzed. The
experimental results indicated that performances of different
polymeric insulating materials were successfully evaluated and
ranked by inclined-plane tracking and erosion test.
II. EXPERIMENTAL
A. Test Specimen Preparation
Five types of commercial grade polymeric insulating
materials were selected to perform the evaluation test and
analysis: SMC (sheet molding compound), BMC (bulk
molding compound), GPO3 (Unsaturated polyester (UPR)
glass mat), glass fiber reinforced Polyphthalamide (PPA) and
ATH (aluminum hydroxide) filled HTV (high temperature
vulcanizing) silicone rubber (SIR). Table I shows the
composition of the samples. Flat specimens with a size of
50mm × 120mm × 6mm were prepared and drilled according
to IEC 60587.
TABLE I. COMPOSITION OF THE TESTED SAMPLES

Composition
I. INTRODUCTION Material
Matrix Filler1 Fllier2
Polymeric materials were widely used as external or SMC UPR 30 wt.% ATH. 45 wt.% GF. 25 wt.%
internal insulating materials for electrical application because
BMC UPR 30 wt.% ATH. 55 wt.% GF. 15 wt.%
of their excellent electrical properties, low weight and easy Glass mat. 30
processing technique [1-6]. However, with the presence of GPO3 UPR 35 wt.% ATH. 35 wt.%
wt.%
humidity and contamination in the operation environment, PPA PPA 70 wt.% N.A. GF. 30 wt.%
surface tracking may happen to polymeric insulating materials HTV-1 HTV SIR --a -- --
which influences the long term reliability of the insulation and HTV-2 HTV SIR -- -- --
equipment, and may even lead to a fire hazard. Therefore, a.
No data for the content
resistance of tracking and erosion of polymeric insulation
978-1-5090-0496-6/16/$31.00 ©2016 IEEE
 The specimens were washed with isopropyl alcohol and TABLE II. TEST TOLERANCE TIME
then rinsed with distilled water. None of the specimens was Tolerance time (minute)
Sample Voltage
abraded. All the specimens were marked on both edges 25mm NO.1 NO.2 NO.3 NO.4 NO.5
above the lower electrode to follow the criterion B [7]. 2.5 kV 360 360 360 360 360
BMC
3.5 kV 360 360 360 360 360
2.5 kV 360 360 360 360 360
B. Experimental Setup SMC
3.5 kV 230 360 360 360 360
A commercially available inclined plane tracker equipment 2.5 kV 360 360 360 360 360
GPO3
(Xi’an Jiaotong University) was employed to carry out the 3.5 kV 18 46 59 112 177
2.5 kV 13 8 10 7 11
incline method test under AC voltage in accordance with IEC PPA
3.5 kV 1 2 3 2 1
60578. Fig. 1 shows the schematic diagram of the tracker used 2.5 kV 360 360 360 360 360
in this study. Five specimens were tested simultaneously. The HTV-1 3.5 kV 360 360 360 360 360
LC on the surface of the specimens can be recorded by a Data 4.5 kV 360 360 360 360 360
Acquisition System. New electrodes manufactured by same 2.5 kV 360 360 360 360 360
supplier were used for the samples in every round test to avoid HTV-2 3.5 kV 360 105 184 107 358
4.5 kV 360 360 124 360 360
the memory effect form the past tests reported previously [8].
0.1wt. % NH4Cl in de-ionized water was used as contaminant
with 0.02wt. % Triton X-100 as non-ionic wetting agent. As flame retardant ATH is being widely used to fill the
insulating materials to improve the tracking and erosion
C. Characterization Method resistance. High level of ATH prolongs the time to track and
Constant voltage method with end point criteria A was endothermic dehydration of ATH cools the surface, thereby
applied to conduced the evaluation. That means the voltage prevent rapid rise in temperature [10-12]. The UPR based
was maintained between the upper and lower electrodes insulating materials SMC, BMC and GPO3 performed
constantly for 6 hours only if the leakage current through the satisfactory at 2.5kV, but showed significant difference
specimen exceeded 60mA over 2s or when a specimen shows a performance in 3.5kV test, which should be mainly contributed
hole due to intensive erosion or the specimen ignites. All the by the ATH filler. It can be observed that the ranking of
samples were tested under AV 2.5kV and 3.5kV separately. In tracking and erosion resistance was in agreement with the
addition, the two kinds of HTV silicone rubber samples were proportion (see Table I) of ATH in UPR based materials: BMC
assessed with AC 4.5 kV. with highest ATH content showed the best performance.

The time recorded from the test voltage applied to the
failure was as the tolerance time. Maximum current in the test
duration, maximum erosion depth, length of the track form the
lower electrode and the LC was measured and recorded.
III. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
A. Test Tolerance Time
As mentioned, if the test tolerance time is shorter than
360minutes means the piece of sample is failure. The summary
of the test tolerance time is shown in Table II. It can be seen
that, all the PPA specimens were failure in 2.5kV and 3.5kV
test in very short time. The possible reason is the aromatic
compounds in the PPA matrix contain inherently mobile
electronic structure which tends to form free radicals easily,
particularly in the presence of oxygen, and hence conductive
chars [9]. Relatively high water absorption rate of PPA is also a
positive factor for tracking occurring.
ATH filled silicone rubber sample HTV-1 passed all the
test voltage level – 2.5kV, 3.5kV, 4.5kV. Meanwhile the
samples of HTV-2 passed 2.5kV test, but failed the test at the
3.5kV and 4.5kV voltage level. Interestingly, the results of
3.5kV test voltage had more failure than that in 4.5kV test. It is
well known that tracking is develop from continuous dry band
arcing due to the flow of leakage current on the specimen
surface under wet contaminant. In the incline tracking and
erosion test, arc occurs between droplets or water regions cross
the dry band, and the arc roots usually located at edge of
droplet and dry region are the main cause of erosion. In 4.5kV
test, the arc has higher energy and thus the arc is less stable and
vibrated vigorously, which resulted in the arc not focus on
certain point or path on the surface of the samples. The
difference of trace after arc ablation can be seen in Fig. 3 and
Fig. 4 obviously. On the other hand, in 4.5kV test, the flow rate
of the contaminant is 0.6ml/min comparing to 0.3ml/min in
3.5kV test, therefore, the water layer on the surface of 4.5kV
test is larger and thicker than that of 3.5kV test. This would
lead to the unstable arc root, and meanwhile larger wetted
regions give the possibility for the arc to appear “averagely” on
the whole hydrophobic surface of the HTV samples. This
unusual phenomena (arc tend to move all over the samples
surface) was also reported previously [8].

B. Maximum Current in the Test Duration

Fig. 1. Schematic diagram of test setup
Progressive degradation of the surface of insulating
material by local discharges to form conducting or partially
conducting paths due to the surface contamination under
electrical stress [7]. The maximum currents flows in the
conducting paths (track) were measured and shown in Table III.
 Although in the present study the endpoint criterion A is a
factor combine with currents value and its duration, it can be
observed that the maximum currents of the samples was in
agreement with the performance level on the tracking and
erosion resistance generally.

C. Maximum Erosion Depth

The maximum permitted depth of erosion is not a criterion
for the endpoint in the testing standard IEC 60587, instead, the
specimen should not be pounced due to the intensive erosion or
ignite. However, a limited value for erosion depth is essential
in practical application.
Fig. 2. Photograph of HTV-2 subjected to 3.5kV test In the present work, the erosion depth was measured after
scraping away decomposed insulation and debris on the surface
of the samples after tested. The maximum depth measured for
every specimen was recorded. No obvious relation was found
between maximum erosion depth and final performance of the
insulation materials, as it is observed from Table IV ad Table II.
Glass reinforced PPA failed in very short time (within
15minutes at 2.5kV test and 3minutes at 2.5kV test) with
maximum erosion depth less than 1mm, see Fig. 5 and Fig. 6.
Meanwhile, in 3.5kV test the NO.5 specimen of HTV-1 and the
NO. 5 specimen of SMC was observed satisfactory with the
maximum erosion depth larger than 5mm.

D. Length of the Track

Fig. 3. Photograph of HTV-2 subjected to 3.5kV test The length of track from the lower electrode was measured

TABLE IV. MAXIMUM EROSION DEPTH

Sample Voltage Maximum erosion depth (mm)

NO.1 NO.2 NO.3 NO.4 NO.5
2.5 kV 0.33 0.19 0.00 0.23 0.11
BMC
3.5 kV 0.44 0.33 0.45 0.40 0.26
2.5 kV 0.12 0.34 0.28 0.00 0.74
SMC
3.5 kV 2.51 0.39 3.02 0.54 5.06
2.5 kV 0.95 0.05 0.75 0.51 0.14
GPO3
3.5 kV 0.91 0.98 1.63 2.05 2.07
2.5 kV 0.84 0.77 0.86 0.98 0.69
PPA
3.5 kV 0.67 0.62 0.81 0.42 0.68
2.5 kV 0.39 0.12 0.20 0.16 0.14
HTV-1 3.5 kV 0.39 0.54 0.59 0.27 5.61
Fig. 4. Photograph of HTV-2 subjected 4.5kV test 4.5 kV 0.63 0.58 0.22 0.48 0.46
2.5 kV 2.63 0.37 0.21 0.43 2.64
HTV-2 3.5 kV 0.49 5.65 4.48 6.00 5.51
TABLE III. MAXIMUM CURRENT 4.5 kV 0.51 0.74 1.55 0.42 0.71

Sample Voltage Maximum current Imax (mA)

NO.1 NO.2 NO.3 NO.4 NO.5
2.5 kV 33 31 29 31 43
BMC
3.5 kV 54 62 55 46 68
2.5 kV 29 30 34 24 44
SMC
3.5 kV 155 61 66 40 68
2.5 kV 27 35 35 41 25
GPO3
3.5 kV 174 167 179 172 194
2.5 kV 115 100 102 111 122
PPA
3.5 kV 169 144 188 144 160
2.5 kV 44 33 33 43 59
HTV-1 3.5 kV 90 58 69 82 66
4.5 kV 76 151 118 94 114
2.5 kV 62 62 49 82 63
HTV-2 3.5 kV 85 115 110 137 136
4.5 kV 104 100 163 110 120
Fig. 5. Photograph of PPA subjected 2.5kV test

Fig. 6. Photograph of PPA subjected 3.5kV test
after subjected the test rather than constant visual supervision
as end-point criterion B required. It is observed from test
results that if the specimens cannot pass criteria A, the length
exceed 25mm above the lower electrode accordingly.
Meanwhile, if the specimens pass criteria A, not all the length
were shorter than 25mm, which means not all the specimens
can pass criterion B.
E. Leakage Current
In this paper, leakage current was continuously monitored
for each of the five specimens through the whole test duration.
An overcurrent delay relay operates when 60 mA ± 6 mA or
more has persisted in the high-voltage circuit for 2 s to 3 s,
while other channel continuous to work. Two peak points were
collected per second and stored by the program. The typical
leakage current trend of the passed samples at different test
voltage were shown in Fig. 7. It can be observed that
magnitude of leakage current is larger in higher voltage. Fig. 8
shows the typical leakage current trend of the failed samples in
voltage level of 3.5 kV and 4.5k
2.5 kV
3.5 kV
4.5 kV
Fig. 7. Typical LC trend of passed HTV-2 specimen at different voltage
3.5 kV
4.5 kV
Fig. 8. Typical LC trend of failed HTV-2 specimen at different voltage
View publication stats
IV. CONCLUSION
Experimental results on tracking and erosion resistance
characteristics of five kinds of commercialized polymeric
insulating materials have been presented and analyzed in detail
in present paper. The main conclusions can be summarized as
follow:
1) The positive factor of ATH for UPR based insulating
materials in resistance of tracking and erosion was observed.
BMC with 55 wt.% ATH content showed the best resistance of
tracking and erosion.
2) Higher test voltage and increased flow rate of the
contaminant may lead the arc tend to move all over the
hydrophobic sample surface.
3) No obvious relation was found between maximum
erosion depth and tracking and erosion resistance of the
insulation materials. However, it was suggested that a limited
value for erosion depth is essential in practical application.
4) In this present work, the ranking of resistance to tracking
and erosion should be HTV-1, BMC, SMC, HTV-2, GPO3 and
glass fiber reinforced PPA.
REFERENCES
[1] R. Hackam, “Outdoor HV composite polymeric insulators,” IEEE Trans.
Dielectr. Electr. Insul., vol. 6, pp.557-585, October 1999.
[2] F. Zhang, J. Zhao, L. Wang, Z. Guan, “Experimental investigation
onoutdoor insulation for DC transmission line at high altitudes,”
IEEETrans.Power Delivery, vol.25, pp.351-357, January 2010.
[3] P. Charalampidis, M. Albano, H. Griffiths, A. Haddad, R.T. Waters,
“Silicone rubber insulators for polluted environments,” IEEE Trans.
Dielectr.Electr. Insul., vol. 21, pp.740-757, April 2014.
[4] B. X. Du, H. Xu, “Effects of thermal conductivity on DC resistance
toerosion of silicone rubber BN nanocomposites,” IEEE Trans.
Dielectr.Electr. Insul., vol. 21, pp. 511-518, April 2014.
[5] Dan S., Li Y., and Li W., “Electric Field Calculation and Analysis of
35kV Composite Bushing.” (2010).
[6] Orgeas L., and Dumont P., “Sheet Molding Compounds.” In: Wiley
Encyclopedia of Composites; 2012.
[7] Electrical Insulating Materials Used under Severe Ambient Conditions
Test Methods for Evaluating Resistance to Tracking and Erosion, IEC
60587 International Standard, 3rd ed., 2007.
[8] A. Krivda, L.E. Schmidt, X. Kornmann, H. Hillborg; H. Ghorbani, H. A.
Ghorbandaeipour and M. Eriksson, “Inclined-Plane Tracking and
Erosion Test According to the IEC 60587 Standard,” Annual Report
Conference on Electrical Insulation and Dielectric Phenomena, pp. 263-
267, CEIDP 2008.
[9] Billings, M. J., A. Smith, and Roger Wilkins, "Tracking in Polymeric
Insulation." IEEE Transactions on Electrical Insulation (1967): 131-137.
[10] Kumagai, Seiji, and Noboru Yoshimura, "Tracking and erosion of HTV
silicone rubber and suppression mechanism of ATH." IEEE
Transactions on Dielectrics and Electrical Insulation 8.2 (2001): 203-
211.
[11] Vasudev, N., et al. "Effect of ATH filler content on the performance of
silicone rubber by inclined plane tracking and erosion test method."
Properties and Applications of Dielectric Materials (ICPADM), 2012
IEEE 10th International Conference on the IEEE, 2012:1-4.
[12] Schmidt, L. E., et al. "Tracking and erosion resistance of high
temperature vulcanizing ATH-free silicone rubber." IEEE Transactions
on Dielectrics and Electrical Insulation 17.2 (2010): 533-540.