Prediction of DC flashover voltage of cap‐and‐pin polluted insulator
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of this work is to estimate the flashover voltage of cap‐and‐pin insulator using a novel improvement of the pollution resistance evaluation. In cap‐and‐pin suspension insulators, local arcing starts around the pin where the dry bands first appear due to the evaporation of the conductive layer. In appropriate conditions, a unique dominant arc starting from the pin propagates toward the cap resulting in a complete flashover. Since the highest current density is concentrated around the arc root during propagation, the pollution layer residual resistance variation, with respect to the arc position, is non‐linear. Thus an original three‐dimensional model, which depicts a real insulator using COMSOL Multiphysics TM to evaluate the residual resistance, is developed. This model takes into consideration the actual geometry of the insulator and the current restriction at the arc root for a specific arc radius. A novel mathematical model for calculating the residual resistance of this polluted insulator was elaborated for all possible arc radii. The mathematical model and the 3D simulation results are in satisfactory agreement. To evaluate the flashover voltage, a new approach based on Saddle Point Finding Method is proposed. The new approach and model have been validated using experimental results of previous studies.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it