Journal of

ELECTROSTATICS
ELSEVIER Journal of Electrostatics 37 (19961 53 65

Corona charging of practical materials for charge decay measurements

John N. Chubb*
John Chubb Instrumentation, Unit 30, Lansdown Industrial Estate, Gloucester Road, Cheltenham GL51 8PL, UK

Received 13 September 1995; accepted after revision 12 December 1995

Abstract Experimental measurements are reported on the quantity of charge received and the associated initial surface voltage for a variety of materials. For a number of materials the surface voltage increases roughly in proportion to the charge received and the effective capacitance for this charge remains fairly steady. For fabrics with embedded conductive threads the initial surface voltage increases towards a plateau value and this may range from around 200 V up to perhaps 1500 V. The capacitance for the received charge increases roughly in proportion to the charge received.
Keywords: Corona charging; Charge decay measurement; Surface potential; Surface charge;

Fabric charging; triboelectrification

1. Introduction The work described here is concerned with an investigation of the basic features associated with the measurement of the self-dissipation of electrostatic charge by materials. Self-dissipation of static electricity on materials and practical surfaces is appropriately measured by creating a patch of charge on the surface and observing without contact how quickly the voltage created by the deposited charge decays as the charge migrates away. Studies [1-I have shown that the ability of a variety of materials to dissipate static charge generated on their surface by rubbing (tribocharging) correlates fairly well with the dissipation of corona deposited charge on the same sample areas. Results were also reported which showed that there was no relationship between these values and

* Tel: + 44(0)1242573347; Fax: + 44(0)1242251388. 0304-3886/96/$15.00 ~ 1996 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved SSDI 0 3 0 4 - 3 8 8 6 ( 9 5 ) 0 0 0 5 9 - 3

54

3..N. Chubb/dournal of Electrostatics 3 7 (1996) 53-65

......................... i ....................... i............................ i ..........

i i 100

V..........

+....................... !................................ i ............................... !

.

10

1.0

........................................................................................................................................................ +............ .......................... i i, ~ . + +

o+
.......................................................................................................................................... i + + :; ~ + ++ . . . . . . . . .

.,

+
+

J+ +. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ! +

+
0.I

o+
i ........

~+
.....................

i 10 5 106 107 108

I
1010

i
10 II 1012 1013

109

Resistivity (oluns ~1" I ):

+

plastics
fabric

paper fabrie+c, onduetors

Fig. 1. Decay time vs resistivity. Decay for 5 kV & 9 kV 0.02 s corona.

the surface resistivity of the samples [1]. A more extended graph of the non-relationship between the decay time for corona deposited charge and surface resistivity is shown in Fig. 1. This work supported the proposition that charge decay rather than resistivity should be used to assess the performance of materials for static control or for the static risk they may present [1]. Conductive threads are embedded in fabrics to provide control of static. Measurements [1] had indicated that long charge decay times could still be observed with such materials. This applies when the charge is deposited as a local patch in a time (20 ms) short compared to decay times so that the size of the sample is not relevant. The aim of the present work was to examine what happens when corona charge is deposited on materials in terms of the charge received by the surface, the initial voltage achieved and the decay time. Measurements have been made on a number of fabrics with embedded conductive fibres and on a variety of other materials to provide comparative information.

2. Experimental arrangement The general arrangement for experimental study of the self-dissipation of static charge using corona deposited charge is shown in Fig. 2. The cluster of corona discharge points which is used to deposit the patch of charge on the test surface is

J.N. Chubb/Journal of Electrostatics 37 (1996) 53-65

.'=l~lm=t=r

55

Mo~
PI

Cluster Of Corona Discharge Points

1 Fig. 2. Arrangement for measurement of charge decay.

~eplate

carried on a movable plate which is moved away quickly (within 20 ms) after charge deposition so that the voltage of the charged surface can be measured by the fast response fieldmeter above the plate [2, 3]. A JCI 155 Charge Decay Test Unit [2] was operated under software control to deposit corona charge on to the surface of various sample materials. Software control provided opportunity to set the voltage of the corona discharge and its duration. The software also provided opportunity to measure the average initial voltage developed by the charge deposited and to record and analyse the form of the charge decay
curves.

The quantity of charge received by the samples was measured by mounting the samples between two conducting clamping plates which were insulated from earth. The sample surface was exposed through apertures a bit larger than the size of the test aperture of the JCI 155 and aligned with this aperture. The arrangements are shown in Fig. 3. The charge received by the sample surface and communicated to the mounting plates was measured from the voltage developed across a capacitor to earth (30-230 nF) using a sensitive electrostatic voltmeter (a JCI 111 electrostatic fieldmeter with a JCI 156 voltmeter adaptor). The measurement capacitance was made sufficiently large that the voltage of the sample only increased a few volts for even the largest quantities of charge received. Tests with no sample present showed that there was no direct current flow linkage to the charge measurement plates. The very low rate of decay of the voltmeter reading after transfer of a finite charge showed that charge leakage was negligible. Sample surfaces were mounted in two ways: (a) so there was no nearby earthed surface behind the samples and these were freely supported by the clamping plates - 'open backing', and (b) with a thin brass foil behind the surface with this connected to the back mounting plate - 'earthed backing'.

56

J.N. Chubb/Journal of Electrostatics 37 (1996) 53-65

JCI 155

electrostatic voltmeter
for charge measurement

fieldmeter insulation

corona

discharge points

moving plate with

earth top shielding

insulation

sample I
. . . 45mm . ,

meta/l
clamping

plates

shielding
box

Fig. 3. Arrangement for charge measurement with JCI 155.

Measurements were made with negative corona with the corona voltage in the range 5-9 kV. The corona duration was usually 0.02 s but some measurements were made with durations up to 0.5 s. As in the studies reported at York [1] checks were made as to whether exposure to corona had damaged the surface. This was done by starting measurements at say 5 kV, moving up to 9 kV and then returning to 5 kV. The procedure for each test was to remove the earth connection from the charge measurement plates just before charge was deposited by operation of the JCI 155. The reading of the electrostatic voltmeter was taken visually. In all tests the reading of the electrostatic voltmeter increased immediately at charge deposition up to a value which then remained steady. This applied equally for materials having short and long charge decay times, with and without embedded conductive fibres. The reading of the electrostatic voltmeter, the value of the measurement capacitance and the values of peak surface voltage, decay time, corona charging voltage and duration as observed from the JCI 155 using the software DECAY18 were transferred into a spreadsheet program (Lotus123 or MSWORKS). This was used to calculate values of charge received, effective capacitance, etc., and for graphical display of results.

J.N. Chubb/Journalof Electrostatics37 (1996) 53-65 3. Materials studied IEC samples Alpha RCAS 1206 Hotel 3M-1620 Dissip Verde India 3M-1900 Shielding HH1 10 m m grid HH2 20 m m grid HH3 dark grey fabric HH4 9 x 10 m m grid Photocopying paper B T T G samples with embedded conductive threads 1 100% polyester Carbon core circular cross section 4 100% Nylon Carbon skin 5 100% polyester One carbon stripe filament edge 8 100% polyester Carbon core (cusped triangle section) 9 100% cotton Carbon core (cusped triangle section) 10 70% cotton/30% polyester Carbon core (cusped triangle section) 12 67% polyester/33% cotton Stainless steel (1%) 13 67% polyester/33% cotton Stainless steel (1.5%)

57

5 m m grid 5 m m grid 3x4 m m grid 5 m m grid 10 m m grid 10 m m grid 5 m m grid 5 m m grid

Fabrics 5, 8, 9 and 10 were commercial fabrics with some finishing. The remainder were special fabrics scoured to remove finishing.

4. Results 4.1. Quantity of charge received

The variation of the quantity of charge received by sample surfaces as a function of corona voltage for a duration of 20 ms is shown in Fig. 4. There are two interesting points from the observations in Fig. 4: first, that the quantity of charge received by m a n y materials is much less than that received by a metal surface. This is particularly noticeable for paper where the quantity of charge may be only about 5% that for a metal surface. ~ Second, for the case of HH1 and HH2, fabrics with embedded conductive fibres, the quantity of charge received may perhaps exceed that of a metal surface at the higher corona voltages.

Subsequent studies have indicated that the reduced quantity of charge received is due to a jump in voltage of the material surface during charge deposition by capacitive coupling from the high voltage pulse applied to the corona discharge electrode. This was observed by a fast response fieldmeterbehind the test surface. Low fractions of charge compared to a metal surface hence arise with materials showing a low effective 'capacitance'.

58

J.N, Chubb/Journal of Electrostatics 37 (1996) 53-65

8O0
.9

7O0 6O0

,a O~

.500
O

400
qJ t~ 0J

3O0 2OO 100

.)

~ 4000

| 5000

L |, 6000 7000 Corona voltage CO): paper

o HH4

'~ 8000
HH1 Alpha

'9000

il0"000

* ~etal
* HHZ

*
o

Fig. 4. Charge vs corona voltage.

At deposition of charge the reading of the electrostatic voltmeter used for charge measurement rises essentially instantaneously (within the response time of the fieldmeter of the electrostatic voltmeter) to a value which then stays steady. The reading does not rise or fall away as the surface voltage of the sample decays due to charge migration. This behaviour is not as would be expected for the simple model of charge being deposited on the sample surface and progressively migrating outwards. It is thought that the initial fast rise may be due to lateral polarisation of the layer of material so that there is no change at subsequent progressive charge migration and neutralisation. The present measurements show that previous assumptions about charge received by surfaces from a corona discharge [1] were not quantitatively correct.

4.2. Initial peak voltage

The variation of initial peak surface voltage with the quantity of charge received by the materials is shown in Figs. 5-7. These graphs show: - The voltage of paper, a 'pink poly' type film and a metallised film increased reasonably in proportion to the quantity of charge received. As shown in Fig. 7 the dependence was different between these materials. - The surface voltage of the fabrics with embedded conductive fibres initially rose rapidly with the quantity of charge received but then tended to plateau out.

J.N. Chubb/Journal of Electrostatics 37 (1996) 53-65

59

1'100
o,

1Z00 1000

ea

0 IO U

800

.o

,oot
0 100 zoo 300
Received

IU

400 500 6 0 s u r f a c e charge (nO): HHI

o HH3

700

8EIO

paper
HH4

* HHZ
a Alpha

Fig. 5. Peak surface voltage vs charge. Corona voltages 4-9 kV; duration 0.02 s.

The relative performance of the fabrics may be ranked in order of plateau voltage level: Plateau (V) Grid structure (mm)

HH4 HH3 BTTG BTTG HH2 HH1 BTTG BTTG BTTG

5 9

12 4 13

1400 950 600 600 500 400 330 300 200

9 10 9 34 10 20 10 5 5 5

One carbon stripe on 100% Nylon Carbon core cusped 100% cotton

1% St St 30% poly/70% cotton Carbon skin 100% Nylon 1.5% St St 67% poly/33% cotton

The plateau voltages do not vary in a simple relation to the spacing of the conductive fibres. H H 4 with a 9 x 10 mm grid has a higher plateau voltage than HH2 with a 20 mm grid.

60 700
- 6 0 0

3.N. Chubb/3ournal of Electrostatics 37 (1996) 53-65

500
#a

"d 400

OJ

100-

00

1 0

. Z00

. . 300 400 Charge received o

BTTG 5 BTTG 13

6+ 500 (nC): + 0

..... 700

BTTG 4 BTTG 1Z

BTTG 9

Fig. 6. Charge and voltage for BTTG samples. Peak voltage

open backing.

500 45O
oo
o

400

n~

_o3o(
O

2'50

zoo
1.50

lOO
50
Z 'o

' 40

. . 6 'o 80 . . I00 . 1Z0 Received surface c h a r g e (nC):

14 0

paper HH4

HHI
HH3

* HHZ = Rlpba

Fig. 7. Peak surface voltage vs charge. Corona voltages 4~9 EV; duration 0.02 s.

J.N. Chubb/Journal of Electrostatics 37 (1996) 53-65

61

0.6
0.5
o .

0.4

~
(J

0.:3
o -g,

o.z

0.I

15o%

'

'

6b

'

18o

Received surface charge (nC):

Alpha Paper (open) o Hotel Paper * v India Paper

(earth)

Fig. 8. Charge and voltage studies. Capacitance vs quantity of charge.

4.3. Effective capacitance for deposited charge

The quantity of deposited charge required to achieve a certain average surface voltage may be considered as equivalent to a 'capacitance' for the deposited charge. This 'capacitance' varies with quantity of charge received for various materials as shown in Figs. 8 and 9. These graphs show: - The capacitance for Alpha and India samples remains fairly independent of the quantity of charge. - For paper with open backing the capacitance tends to fall with increasing charge. - For fabrics with embedded conductive fibres the capacitance tends to increase in proportion to the quantity of charge received. The constant of proportionality varies with the material.

4.4. Summa~ results with decay time values

Table 1 summarises the values of received charge, initial voltage, effective capacitance of the received charge and the values of decay time constants measured (the time from peak voltage to 1/e of this value). Corona charging was for 0.02 s and the samples were with open backing. Table 2 summarises the values of charge, initial voltage, capacitance and decay time for a number of fabric samples with embedded conducting threads. The HH samples

62 3.0
o.

J.N. Chubb/Journal of Electrostatics 37 (1996) 53-65

Z.5
~ Z.O

.1

,~ ,~

1.o o.s
O.E

----4

1OO

ZOO

300 400 Charge received I1TIG 4 IlTTG IZ o BTTG 5 IITTG 13

SOO (nC) : *

600

71~O

800

ItTTG 9

Fig. 9. Charge and voltage for BTTG samples. Capacitance - open backing.

Table 1 Corona Charge (nC) 36.6 121 103 339 10.5 26.1 Initial voltage (V) 132 459 43.8 172 73.2 220 Capacitance (nF) 0.277 0.263 1.913 1.352 0.143 0.119 Decay time (s) 0.516 0.503 6.51 8.12 0.120 0.080 Temp. (C '~) 22 22 23 23 21 21 RH (%) 40 40 46 46 52 52

Alpha India Paper

5 kV 9 kV 5 kV 9 kV 5 kV 9 kV

were as used in the IEC 'round robin' testing. The other samples were supplied by BTTG. The tests were with 0.02 s corona charging and open backing for the samples. Table 3 summarises the results of measurements for a number of the IEC samples with open and earthed sample backing. There is no common pattern to the influence of an earthed metal backing on the charge received, the initial voltage and the decay time. With India an earthed backing makes little difference to the charge, initial voltage or charge decay time. With HH1 there is not much influence on charge received but an increase in initial voltage and a 10 increase in decay time. With Hotel the earthed backing increases the quantity of charge received, the initial voltage, the capacitance and the decay time. With paper the

J.N. Chubb/Journal of Electrostatics 37 (1996) 53-65 Table 2 Corona voltage

HHI HH2 HH3 HH4 BTTG1 BTTG4 BTTG5 BTTG8 BTTG9 5 kV 9 kV 5 kV 9 kV 5 kV 9 kV 5 kV 9 kV 9 kV 5 kV 9 kV 5 kV 9 kV 5 kV 5 kV 9 kV

63

Charge
[nC) 80.3 716 89.7 556 45 402 20.1 125 122 117 743 124 561 50.6 27.6 388.7 23 411.7 20.7 423 27.6 434.7

Initial voltage
(V) 341 459 464 549 623 1003 801 1267 1384 213 318 461 577 676 244 560 54 297 189 344 105 210

Capacitance
(nF) 0.235 1.56 0.194 1.013 0.072 0.401 0.025 0.098 0.088 0.551 2.336 0.269 0.973 0.075 0.113 0.694 0.427 1.386 0.109 1.23 0.263 2.07

Decay time
(s) 7.26 7.6 63.2 62.4 8.50 12.7 147 174 18602 1.8 2.1 27.7 35.8 192 0.211 0.244 0.223 0.253 0.083 0.079 0.071 0.065

Temp.
(:C) 21 21 24 24 22 22 21 21 24 26 29 24 26 22 22 21 21

RH (%) 52 52 39 39 40 40 57 57 63 54 40 63 54 59 59 50 50

B T T G I 0 5 kV 9 kV B T T G I 2 5 kV 9 kV BTTGI3 5 kV 9 kV

amount of charge received is much higher and the initial surface voltage tends to plateau out. Decay times shown above for materials of the same designation as tested previously I-1] show some differences in values. This is probably partly differences in environmental conditions and partly variations between samples - as for instance between India (054) and India (056) in Table 3. 2

5. Conclusions The quantity of charge received by materials from a corona discharge varies appreciably between materials. For paper the quantity may be as small as 5% of that
2 Recent studies have confirmed that there can be quite large variations between the IEC samples of the same designation.

64
Table 3 Charge

J.~L Chubb/Journal of Electrostatics 37 (1996) 53-65

Initial voltage

Capacitance

Decay time

Temp.

RH

(nC)
Open HH1 HH4 Paper Hotel India (054) India (056) 5 kV 9 kV 5 kV 5 kV 9 kV 5 kV 9 kV 5 kV 9 kV 5 kV 9 kV 71.3 667 20.7 253 10.4 140.3 602.6 138 565.8 Earth 80.5 678.5 34.5 34.5 595.7 52.9 280.6 581.9 664.7

(V)
Open 260 399 632 78.7 355 79.5 320 60 217 Earth 277 479 564 52.5 73.9 300 1052 345 253

(nF)
Open 0.274 1.67 0.033 3.215 0.029 1.765 1.883 2.3 2.607 Earth 0.29 1.42 0.061 1.402 8.061 0.176 0.267 1.687 2.627

(st
Open 1.22 1.20 76.4 0.094 0.13 35.7 42.1 0.877 1.29 Earth 9.73 12.4 986

(C)

(%)

25 25 25

56 56 56 56 56 56 56 56 56 56 56

0.198 25 0.292 25 4.83 9.2 46.8 1.35 25 25 25 25 25 25

received by a metal surface. For fabrics with embedded conductive fibres the quantities are comparable to that received by a metal surface - and possibly a bit higher at high corona voltages. The corona charge received by the surface appears essentially immediately on the charge measurement circuit as a stable value - showing neither an increase or decrease during the time of charge decay. For materials other than fabrics with embedded conductive fibres the initial surface voltage increases approximately in proportion to the charge received. For fabrics with embedded conductors the surface voltage increases to a plateau with a value which is different between fabrics. Plateau voltage values are measured from about 200 V to 1400V. The plateau voltage does not relate simply to the grid spacing of the embedded conductive fibres. It seems plausible that the behaviour of fabrics with embedded conductive fibres might relate to the occurrence of corona at the fibres during the charge deposition time. The lower values of 'initial voltage' observed would be too low for corona as they are below the Paschen curve minimum for air. However higher local electric fields would occur during the corona pulse period which may be sufficient for corona and so might generate countercharge which could be trapped in the fabric structure. If this occurs then the concept of a 'capacitance' for the charge deposited is not really applicable. For a 'shielding bag' type material (IEC sample India) an earthed backing over the test area of the sample had little effect on the charge received, the capacitance or the decay time. For other samples an earthed backing increased capacitance and decay time constant values. (BTTG samples were not examined with an earthed backing.)

J.N. Chubb/Journal of Electrostatics 37 (1996) 53-65

65

The risk of problems due to static electricity from materials should be judged first from the self-dissipation charge decay time constant. For manual charge generation no problems will arise if this decay time is below s. If the time is longer than s then it seems plausible that problems may be avoided if the m a x i m u m surface voltage is constrained to a level suitably below the hazard threshold level. The maximum average surface voltage of fabrics may be restricted by embedded conductive threads. However, m a x i m u m voltage levels have been noted from about 200 to 1400 V. It is not yet clear which parameters of the fabric construction determine the level of the m a x i m u m voltage so there would be a need to establish this plateau level if this is to be used as a means for risk control. The range of plateau voltage observed shows opportunity for avoidance of risks of ignition - so long as no threads become electrically isolated. Because of the lower hazard threshold voltage for semiconductor devices risks may still arise - and opportunities for control are limited by the minimum breakdown voltage of the Paschen curve. The present paper has raised a number of questions about what happens to charge deposited on material surfaces. It needs to be established whether the same surface voltage versus charge relationships apply for tribocharging as for corona charging.

References
[1] J.N. Chubb, Dependence of charge decay characteristics on charging parameters, Int. Electrostatics Conf., Inst. Phys., York (3-5 April 1995), loP Conf. Series 143, p. 103. [2] J.N. Chubb, Instrumentation and standards for testing static control materials,IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl., 26 (1990) 1182. [3] British Standard BS 7506, Methods for Measurements in Electrostatics, Part 2 (1995).