High Voltage Insulator Mechanical Load

Limitations and Load Resistance Factor Design

A. C. Baker, Life Senior Member, IEEE

Abstract. This paper discusses the current practice for selecting II. INTRODUCTION
high voltage insulators and the changes needed to accommodate
Load Resistance Factor Design. Conversion of insulator rated
strength, defined according to ANSI C29 Standards, to damage
limit strength to provide the service limit resistance required by
H igh-voltage insulators for electrically insulating and
mechanically supporting energized conductors on
transmission and distribution line structures are selected on the
LRFD is discussed. Specific values of service limit resistance and basis of their rated strength. Line loading and strength
strength factors for different types of high voltage insulators are
regulations governing insulator selection differ around the
presented for further consideration by those responsible for
revising current line loading and strength regulations and world and this paper is limited to selecting insulators to satisfy
insulator standards. the requirements of the National Electric Safety Code (NESC)
and American National Standards Institute (ANSI) high
Index Terms – Allowed stress design, ceramic insulators, damage voltage insulator product standards [1], [2]. Current NESC
limit, load resistance factor design, non-ceramic insulators, practice is to limit district maximum design line loads defined
service limit resistance, strength limit resistance. in the code to an allowable percentage of rated strength for a
particular insulator as defined in the ANSI C29 series of
I. NOMENCLATURE
insulator standards
Damage limit (RDL). Strength of a component below ultimate
This practice is similar to an allowed stress design (ASD) for
corresponding to a defined limit of permanent damage or
a strength limit resistance in which all loads are considered to
deformation.
be equally probable without variation, and the ultimate
Rated strength (R). Strength rating of a component based on
resistance to these loads is divided by an assigned safety
compliance with a given standard.
factor to obtain a specified safety margin. Real loads and
Service limit resistance. Limit of a component’s resistance to a
resistances though are variable not single-valued and, if an
load without permanent damage or deformation being
assessment of risk is desired, this variability must be taken
initiated.
into account. Risk of failure is considered for load resistance
Strength limit resistance. Limit of the ability of a component
factor design (LRFD) which requires an evaluation of the
to resist a load and remain in service.
expected variation in service loads and service limit
Combined Mechanical and Electrical Rating (M&E). The
resistances along with appropriate factors to obtain a desired
mechanical load at which a ceramic suspension type insulator
margin of safety [3].
fails to perform its function, either electrically or
Other than insulators, the current NESC already requires
mechanically, when voltage and mechanical stress are applied
many line components to be selected on the basis of LRFD.
simultaneously.
Consideration of the requirements for these other components
Specified Mechanical Load (SML). A rating for suspension
can aid in the development of recommendations for loading
type non-ceramic insulators that has to be verified during a
limits needed to include the selection of insulators according
tensile load test. It forms the tensile loading basis for selection
to LRFD in the regulations.
of non-ceramic (composite) suspension type insulators.
In the following a brief review of current practice for
Specified Cantilever Load (SCL). A rating for post type non-
selecting insulators, and the differing requirements regarding
ceramic insulators that has to be verified during a cantilever
ASD and LRFD, shows that the current practice based on
load test. It forms the cantilever loading basis for the selection
strength limit resistance must be changed to one based on
of non-ceramic post type insulators .
service limit resistance for insulators to accommodate LRFD.
Specified Tensile Load (STL). The tensile load a post type non-
The mechanical strength value assigned by a manufacturer
ceramic insulator can withstand for one minute without
for a particular insulator is qualified as meeting a rating
failure.
according to ANSI C29 insulator standards by conducting and
Manuscript submitted August 19, 2011 for presentation at the panel session meeting specified test requirements. Mechanical rating
“Mechanical Load Limits for High Voltage Insulators” at the IEEE PES T&D qualification tests are ultimate strength tests and so are related
Conference and Exposition, Orlando, FL, May 7-10, 2012. to a strength limit resistance.
A. C. Baker is with K-Line Insulators USA Inc., Rochester, NY USA 14624
e-mail: tbaker@k-line.net

978-1-4673-1935-5/12/$31.00 ©2012 IEEE

 Determination of a service limit resistance for a particular accordance with the applicable product standard, though based
type of insulator, in terms of its rated strength, requires a on ultimate strength tests, are not a guaranteed minimum.
consideration of the load at which irreversible damage is
initiated for that insulator. It is common to refer to a service
limit resistance for insulators as the damage limit of the 1
insulator. Also, allowable variations in strength for insulators
Safety margin
minimally meeting a particular C29 standard must be Probabilty
considered to develop appropriate strength factors for the of
selection of insulators according to LRFD. Occurance

III. CURRENT PRACTICE

Four combined ice and wind NESC loading districts (heavy,

medium, light, and warm island loading) are defined in the L R
Load (L) or Resistance (R)
current code, which requires that the calculated maximum
Fig. 1 Allowed stress design.
district loads, without factors, supported by the insulators be
limited to the allowable percentages of rated strength, without A more reliable safety margin compared to ASD can be
factors, given in Table I. obtained by evaluating insulator strength variation and
TABLE I determining the stress at which irreversible damage to an
ALLOWED PERCENTAGE OF INSULATOR STRENGTH RATING insulator starts to occur. The determination of this damage
Insulator Type Strength Safety limit allows for a conversion from a strength limit resistance
ANSI Std No. percent Rating Factor design to a service limit resistance design for high voltage
Ceramic
Suspension
insulators.
C29.2 50% Combined M&E 2.0
Line Post 40% Cantilever 2.5 IV. LOAD RESISTANCE FACTOR DESIGN
C29.7 50% Tension/ Compression 2.0
Station Cap & 40% Cantilever 2.5 ASD can be represented as in (2) where Resistance refers to
Pin 40% Tension/Compression/ torsion 2.0 the ability of a material to withstand the determined loads.
C29.8
Station Post 40% Cantilever 2.5
C29.9 50% Tension/Compression/ torsion 2.0 ≥∑ (2)
Non-ceramic
Suspensions
C29.12 & 29.13 50% Specified Mechanical Load (SML) 2.0 Safety Factors listed in Table I are based on experience, but
Line Post 40% Specified Cantilever Load (SCL) 2.5 are arbitrary. A conservatively chosen safety factor can lead to
C29.17 & 29.18 50% Specified Tension Load (STL) 2.0 relatively failure-free service, as has been the general
Station Post 40% All strength ratings 2.5
Planned new std.
experience for high voltage insulators, but cost efficiencies are
difficult to access because the possible levels of over-design
In ANSI standards ceramic insulators are those for which the can’t be determined [4].
dielectric material is either wet-process porcelain or thermally- Load Resistance Factor Design was developed in an effort
toughened soda-lime silicate glass, and non-ceramic (also to include an estimate of risk of failure for structures and
called composite) insulators are those which have a fiberglass foundations. For comparison, it can be expressed in a similar
rod core that transfers the conductor load between metal end fashion as for ASD as in (3) and shown in Fig. 2 where the
fittings and an external elastomeric outer housing that load and resistance are represented by unique values with
provides protection of the core from the elements and leakage respective factors γ and φ [3].
distance to resist the effects of atmospheric pollution.
Line load and the resistance to it, or insulator allowed load, ) ≥∑ ) (3)
are single-valued and this is an example of allowed stress
design as depicted in Fig. 1. Here the probability of
occurrence of the design load and the resistance are both taken
to be equal to one. The difference between the resistance and
load value is the safety margin which yields a safety factor as
given in (1) and listed in Table 1.
Load Resistance
Safety Factor = Rated Strength / Maximum Design Load (1) factor factor
ϒ>1 φ<1
Safety margins for ASD are not assured in practice since Load Factored Factored Resistance
insulators have strengths which are variable due to material Fig. 2. Load resistance factor design
and processing variations. Also rated strengths defined in The load factor is chosen to account for service loading
variability and the resistances factor accounts for the
2
variabbility in the service
s limit resistance of thhe material orr 1
compponent supporrting the serv vice load. The
T differencee L R
0.9
betweeen the factored resistance and the factorred load is an n

Cumulative distribution
0.8
indicaation of the riskk of failure. 0.7
Loads and resistaances are often n normally distrributed and thee 0.6
LRFD D method in such
s cases is better
b expresseed as shown in n 0.5
Fig. 3 where norm mal probability density curvees representing g 0.4
load aand resistance are shown. The upper portiion of the load d 0.3
curvee is shown heere overlappin ng the lower portion
p of thee 0.2
servicce limit resistaance curve indiicating a regio on of failure. Itt 0.1
may be for some cases that th here is no reggion of failuree 0
suggeesting an ineffficient design because
b even for
f the highestt 0 2 4 6 8 10 12
2 14 16
load, regardless of o its improb bability of occurring,
o thee Load (LL) or Resistancee (R)
resisttance would no ot be exceeded.
Fig. 4.. Cumulative distrributions for Fig. 33.

Load
L Duuctile materialss like metal fitttings exhibit a well-defined
d,
and sometimes oobservable, seervice limit bby yielding in n
respoonse to loccal stress aas depicted in Fig. 5. 5
Resistance
R
X
Brittle Ultimate
material stress
=4 = 8.5 Regiion of
σ=1 σ = 1.5 faiilure X

Stress
Ductile
Yieeld material
streess
Fig 3. PProbability density
y functions for norrmally distributed loads and Proportional
resistannces. limit

Cauution with thiss representation n is required because

b a high
h Strain
degreee of certainty y in the variattions in load and resistancee
is impplied, and may y not be the case. In generaal, as shown in n
Fig. 33, the variation (standard deeviation σ) forr the load and d Ceram mic and non--ceramic insullator dielectricc materials are
resisttance probabillity densities will be diffeerent. For thiss
exammple the mean and standard deviation
d ( , σ)
σ for the load d
and resistance weere chosen to be (4, 1) and a (8.5, 1.5))
respectively.
Varriations for thee load and resisstance are diffeerent here, and
d stresss, the initial daamage may prropagate quickkly or over time
the riisk of failure is evaluated by
y reference to thet cumulativee
distribbutions for thee load and ressistance probab bility densitiess
as shoown in Fig. 4. For this examp ple, if a 5% excclusion limit iss
applieed to the reesistance, or service limit strength, thee
probaability of occurrrence for the load exceedin ng this value iss
aboutt 2.5%.
Coonversion of a strength limit resistance to a service limitt
resisttance for a line
l componen nt to accomm modate LRFD D
requirres a consideration of the sttrength charactteristics of thee
particcular componen nt materials
ANCE
V. RESISTA
Seervice limit resistance for a line componen nt refers to thee
compponent’s function under serrvice condition ns. Permanentt
deforrmation, or somme other irreveersible damage, indicates thatt
a servvice limit has been
b reached. The strength liimit is reached
d cerammic insulatorss, of the typpe with a reesin reinforced
whenn a componen nt is unable to t continue in n service; forr
exammple, when a co omponent fractu ures.
Fig. 5.. Brittle and ductille material stress–sstrain comparison..
brittlle and exhibit abrupt failure at the strengthh limit. Service
limit s for such maaterials dependds on the streess, usually no ot
obserrvable, at w which some iirreversible daamage in the
dieleectric is initiateed. While abruppt failure doesnn’t occur at thiis
at noormal service stresses and culminate in strength limiit
failurre [5].
Seervice limit rresistances forr ceramic annd non-ceramic
insullators to accom mmodate LRF FD must be deetermined with h
consiideration of the markeddly different material and
consttruction detailss between them m.
VI. INS
SULATOR DA
AMAGE LIMIITS
C eramic insulattors have lonng been selectted on a rated d
strenngth basis, quallified by sample ultimate streength tests, and
convversion of this strength limitt resistance to a service limiit
resisttance to accoommodate LR RFD is complicated by the
limiteed data availabble to establishh a load at whhich irreversible
damaage is initiateed (the damaage limit), forr this type of o
insullator. Howeveer, the long-term perform mance of non n-
fiberg
rglass core m mechanical sttrength membber, has been n
extennsively studieed, and the ddamage limit concept welll
estabblished, becausse it was initiially assumed that long-term m
3
performance was a function of the creep of the core. This
subject was discussed in detail in [5] where it was concluded M&E
based on static time-load tests that irreversible damage can be min. rating
initiated for ceramic insulators at about 70% of average req'mt
ultimate strength and for non-ceramic insulators at about 65%
of average ultimate strength.
ANSI C29 standards are voluntary, but it is common for 11.5%
insulators to be specified and procured in accordance with units below 1.2 σ10
them. To accommodate LRFD and insulator specification, the rating
damage limit loading for insulators should be related to the
insulator rated strength and the allowed strength variation as
defined in the applicable ANSI C29 standard. -4.0 -2.0 0.0 2.0 4.0
Number of standard deviations
VII. INSULATOR STRENGTH RATING above and below test average
AND LOAD LIMIT RECOMMENDATIONS
Fig. 6. Probability density function indicating minimum acceptance
requirement for M&E tests in ANSI C29.2.
Insulator rated strength is not a guaranteed minimum and
has meaning only in the context of the standard defining the
Ceramic line post and apparatus type high voltage insulators
rating. Each ANSI C29 standard requires that a specified
typically have lot sizes much smaller than for suspensions, and
number of samples, randomly selected from a lot of insulators
a small sample of three units is specified for ultimate strength
offered for acceptance, be subjected to an ultimate strength
tests. The average strength of the samples must be at least
test to qualify the lot as meeting a particular mechanical
equal to the rated value, but the only other allowed variation
strength rating.
requirement is that no individual sample value can be less than
For ceramic insulators the rating is based on the sample
85% of rating [2c] - [2e].
average strength combined with allowed variations in test
Extracting statistically valid conclusions for such a small
results, while for non-ceramic insulators the test specified is a
sample is problematic, but by definition about half the
withstand test at the rated value. General recommendations
insulators in a minimally acceptable lot could have strengths
regarding insulator loading limitations must be based on the
less than rating. The possible low strength value for units, on a
minimum requirements of the applicable standard.
- 4σ basis, in such a lot could be expressed as in (5) by setting
A. Ceramic Insulators
the constant c equal to zero.
Requirements for ceramic suspension insulators given in
The possible low strength estimate for ceramic insulators
ANSI C29.2 are that 10 samples randomly selected from a lot
minimally meeting the requirements of ANSI C29 Standards
offered for acceptance be subjected to a combined mechanical
can be obtained from (5) provided the coefficient of variation
and electrical (M&E) test. The test average () and the for the manufacturing process is known. Typically for ceramic
manufacturing process historical standard deviation (S) must insulator manufacturer the process coefficient of variation is in
satisfy (4) [2b]. the 5% to 15% range [6]. Assignment of resistance factors
must include some allowance for this variation, however,
≥ & + 1.2 (4)
process variation limits can’t be included in ANSI C29
Also the test standard deviation for the ten samples (σ10) must standards because specifying commercial terms and conditions
be less than 1.72 S. is prohibited [7]. Relating the damage limit to (5) is one
Assuming that the historical standard deviation and the possible method to obtain the service limit resistance required
standard deviation for the sample tests are equal, the minimum for LRFD.
strength distribution satisfying this standard is shown in Fig. 6. Damage limits (RDL) equal to 70% of the value given in (5)
As shown in Fig. 6 about 11.5% of the insulators in such a for ceramic insulators as a percent of their rated strength for
lot could have strengths less than the rated M&E value and different coefficients of variation are given in Table II and Fig.
still meet the minimum requirement in ANSI C29.2. The 7 [8].
TABLE II
possible low strength value on a - 4 σ basis for units in such a DAMAGE LIMITS (RDL) FOR CERAMIC INSULATORS
lot is AS A PERCENT OF RATED STRENGTH (R)
= (5) ANSI Std Constant RDL for coefficient of variation v
No. c 5% 10% 15%
where the constant c is equal to 1.2 and v is the coefficient of C29.2 1.2 .60 R .48 R .34 R
variation (σ /) for the manufacturing process that produced
the insulator lot.
C29.7
C29.8
0
0 }.56 R .42 R .28 R
C29.9 0

4
 R DL as a percent of R in C29 Standards 1 permitted stress. The permitted stress is the strength multiplied
by the strength (resistance) factors given in Section 26. This
0.8 can be expressed as in (6) and (7) provided the symbol < is
c=4 understood to mean must withstand, i.e., the particular
component can not suffer irreversible damage at the permitted
0.6 c =3 stress.
c = 1.2 (Loads) (Load Factors) < Permitted Stress (6)
0.4
c=0
Permitted Stress = (Withstand Strength) (Strength Factors) (7)
0.2
Considering Grade B construction requirements for line
components, other than high voltage insulators, load factors
0 from Section 25 of the code are summarized in Table IV and
0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 strength factors for crossarms and braces made from different
Coefficient of variation, v materials taken from Section 26 of the code are summarized in
Fig. 7. Damage limits as a percent of rated strength for ceramic insulators for Table V [1].
manufacturing processes with a coefficients of variation in the range 0-15%.
TABLE IV
As shown in Fig. 7, the effect of v on RDL is reduced as the LOAD FACTORS FOR GRADE B CONSTRUCTION
FOR STRUCTURES, CROSSARMS, SUPPORT HARDWARE,
constant c is increased suggesting changes that should be
GUYS, FOUNDATIONS, AND ANCHORS*
considered when the standards are revised. Load Grade B
B. Non-ceramic Insulators Classification Load Factors
Non-ceramic insulators are qualified as meeting strength Combined ice & wind district loading (Rule 250B)
Vertical loads 1.50
ratings by ultimate strength withstand tests and this precludes Transverse loads -Wind 2.50
a statistically based loading limit recommendation. However, -Wire tension 1.65
the damage limit concept is well established for this type of Longitudinal loads -In general 1.10
-At deadends 1.65
insulator
Extreme wind loading (Rule 250C ) 1.00
As discussed in [5], fiberglass resin-reinforced rods, which Extreme ice with concurrent wind loading (Rule 250D) 1.00
provided the means for supporting mechanical loads for non- *Taken from Table 253-1 NESC C2-2012 [1].
ceramic insulators, are made up of unidirectional glass fibers
TABLE V
and a resin reinforcement usually made by a pultrusion STRENGTH FACTORS FOR CROSSARMS AND BRACES
process. Initially it was assumed that creep was the controlling FOR GRADE B CONSTRUCTION1
phenomenon with regard to long term performance, but Grade B Strength Factors Permitted
experiment and experience has demonstrated that if the load is Rule Rule 250C & Stress
Material 250B Loads2 250D Loads3 Strength4
kept below that point at which fiber breakage is initiated, the Metal 1.0 1.0 WS
delayed failure phenomenon disappears. Damage limits for Pre-stressed concrete 1.0 1.0 WS
non-ceramic insulators of the type included in the ANSI C29 Reinforced concrete 0.65 0.75 WS
Wood 0.65 0.75 DSF
series of product standards based on not initiating fiber Fiber-reinforced polymer 1.0 1.0 5% LEL
fracture are given in Table III as a percent of the specified Other material 0.65 0.75 WS
1
mechanical load (SML) or specified cantilever load (SCL) as 2
Taken from Section 26 and Table 261-1, NESC C2-2012 [1]
defined in [2f]. District loads (heavy, medium, light, and warm island loading)
3
Extreme wind loads and Extreme ice with wind loads
4
WS=Withstand strength, DSF=Designated fiber stress, 5% LEL=5% lower
TABLE III
exclusion level.
DAMAGE LIMITS (RDL) FOR NON-CERAMIC INSULATORS
AS A PERCENT OF RATED STRENGTH (R).
ANSI Std Type Damage Limit, RDL The withstand strength in Table V is a service limit
C 29.12 Transmission Suspension 0.68 Specified Mechanical Load resistance as required by LRFD and the strength factors are
C 29.13 Distribution Suspension “ lower for more variable strength material (e.g. wood compared
C 29 17 Transmission Line Post 0.55 Specified Cantilever Load
C 29.18 Distribution Line Post “ to metal).
Applying LRFD for the selection of high voltage insulators
VIII. RESISTANCE FACTORS could be accommodated by defining the withstand strength of
an insulator to be given by the damage limit as given in Table
Strength (resistance) requirements for supporting structures, II or III, and assigning a strength reduction factors dependent
foundations, crossarms, braces support hardware, and guy on the dielectric material and insulator type.
anchors, but not insulators, based on LRFD are given in The difficulty of including an allowance for process
Section 26 of the current edition of the NESC [1]. variation for ceramic insulators, though it could be reduced if
The requirements are that the line components must the constant (c) is increased in future revisions of the
withstand the appropriate loads multiplied by the load factors standards, requires a strength factor based on a cautious
given in Section 25 of the code without exceeding the assumption for the coefficient of variation in Table II. A lower
5
strength factor for ceramic posts as compared to suspensions is
justified by the higher allowed strength variation for post
insulators compared to suspensions in C29 standards.
As an aid in the effort to include requirements for selecting
insulators to be compatible with LRFD in future editions of
the NESC, service limit resistances and factors for insulators
given in Table VI, based upon an assumed 10% maximum
coefficient of variation for ceramic insulators, are offered for
discussion and consideration.
TABLE VI
POSSIBLE SERVICE LIMIT STRENGTHS AND FACTORS
FOR HIGH VOLTAGE INSULATORS
Insulator Strength Service Limit Strength
Type Rating Resistance Factor
Ceramic
Suspension M&E rating 0.5 M&E 1.0
Posts (Line & Station) Cantilever rating 0.5 Cantilever 0.8
Non-ceramic
Suspension SML .7 SML 1.0
Posts (Line & Station) SCL .5 SCL 1.0
Combined loading conditions, especially important for
properly applying non-ceramic post type insulators, are not
considered in Table VI. This subject must be addressed before
LRFD can be fully adopted for the selection of high voltage
insulators.
IX. CONCLUSIONS
Current practice for selecting high voltage insulators to meet
the requirements of the NESC is an example of Allowed Stress
Design. Many line components, other than insulators,
according to the current NESC are selected based on Load
Resistance Factor Design.
Selection of insulators to accommodate LRFD requires that
a method be provided to convert the strength limit resistance,
corresponding to the rated strength according to the ANSI C29
series of standards, to a service limit resistance. The damage
limit of an insulator as described in [5] and [8] can be
considered a service limit resistance for insulators.
General recommendation for insulator loading limits must
be based on the minimum strengths allowed according to the
ANSI C29 series of insulator standards.
Strength factors for insulators required for LRFD must
account for different characteristics of ceramic and non-
ceramic insulators and for the variations in strength allowed
by ANSI C29 standards.
Service limit resistances and strength factors for high
voltage insulators to assist in the effort to add insulators to the
list of line components selected according to LRFD are
presented for further discussion. Combined loading
limitations, not considered here, must be addressed and
included in Table VI before LRFD can be fully implemented
for insulators.
The reader should take note that the above discussion
concerns only new insulators. Past practices for the selection
of insulators were conservative, but considering the variability
in the quality of insulators that are in service today and the
knowledge that many have lost strength over time, this
conservatism was well warranted.
X. REFERENCES
[1] ANSI C2 National Electrical Safety Code, ANSI Standard C2-2012,
August 2011. IEEE, 3 Park Ave. New , NY 10016-5997.
[2] ANSI C29 High voltage insulator standards, American National
Standard for-
(a) Electrical power insulators – Test methods C29.1-1988 (R2009)
(b) Wet process porcelain and toughened glass Suspension type C29.2-
1992 (R2009).
(c) Wet-process porcelain insulators – high voltage Line Post type
C29.7-1996 (R2010).
(d) Wet-process insulators – Apparatus Cap & Pin type C29.8-1985
(R2010)
(e) Wet-process porcelain insulators – Apparatus Post type C29.9-1983
(R2010).
(f) Composite insulators – Test methods C29.11 under revision.
(g) Insulators –composite - Suspension type C29.12-1997 (R2002).
(h) Insulators - composite - Distribution Deadend type C29.13-2000.
(i) Insulators – composite - Line Post type C29.17-2002.
(j) Insulators – composite - Distribution Line Post type C29.18-2003.
Published by the National Electrical Manufacturers Association, Roslyn,
VA. Available at: nema.org/stds.
[3] Load and Resistance Factor Design (LRFD) for Highway Bridge
Substructures, Publication No. FHWA H1-98-032, Federal Highway
Administration, May 2001.
[4] CIGRE SC22-03, “Study and conclusions from the results of the inquiry
on insulators: information on damages”, Electra No. 78, Oct. 1981.
[5] A.C. Baker, R.A. Bernstorf, E.A. Cherney, R. Christman, R.S. Gorur,
R.J. Hill, Z. Lodi, S. Marra, D.G. Powell, A.E. Schwalm, D.H.
Shaffner, G.A. Stewart, and J. Varner, “ High voltage insulators
mechanical load limits – Part I Overhead line load and strength
requirements,” To be published in IEEE Trans on Power Delivery.
[6] E.A. Cherney, “Failures of porcelain line post insulators on the Ontario
Hydro distribution system,” Canadian Electrical Association Spring
Meeting, Montreal, Canada March 1988.
[7] Standardization Policies and Procedures of the National Electrical
Manufacturers Association, NEMA, Roslyn, VA July 7, 2008.
[8] A.C. Baker, R.A. Bernstorf, E.A. Cherney, R. Christman, R.S. Gorur,
R.J. Hill, Z. Lodi, S. Marra, D.G. Powell, A.E. Schwalm, D.H. Shaffner,
G.A. Stewart, and J. Varner, “High voltage insulators mechanical load
limits – Part II Standards and recommendations,” To be published in
IEEE Trans on Power Delivery.
6