Effect of insulator profile on aging performance of silicone rubber insulators in salt-fog
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The paper presents the results of the study on the influence of insulator profile on the aging performance of silicone rubber (SIR) insulators in salt-fog. Experiments have been conducted on various two-shed arrangements at 35 V/mm average stress and 0.25 S/m salt-fog conductivity level. The work is also extended to include commercial 15 kV class insulators with different profiles. Shed spacing, shed diameter, alternate shed design and shed shape are the parameters investigated in this study. The low frequency harmonics of the leakage current, early aging period (EAP), and equivalent salt deposit density (ESDD), are used to evaluate the aging performance of different designs. Insulator profile is shown to greatly influence the aging performance of SIR insulators. Shed shape proves to be the most important parameter to be considered in designing non-ceramic insulators profiles. Also, as the shed spacing decreases, the performance of SIR insulators improves. Simulation results using FEMLAB show that the electric field on insulators is below the corona onset at both dry and wet conditions. Dry band arcing is therefore the main electrical cause for aging in distribution class insulators and it is possible to improve the pollution performance of SIR insulators using appropriate profiles as suggested in this work
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".