Comparison of parameters in the formation of corrosive sulphide deposition on copper conductors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Copper is a catalyst that promotes the formation of corrosive sulphur but it is also corroded by the latter. Corrosive sulfur in oil has been identified as the cause of recent failures in power transformers and shunt reactors. The most common reason of such failures is arcing between adjacent disks or conductors of windings due to the formation of copper sulphide deposition on cellulosic insulating paper. Synergetic effects with temperature, time and oxygen are recognized to play a role in the formation of corrosive sulphur. Which of these factors has the most impact on copper sulphide deposition? To address this concern, a quantitative laboratory technique has been developed. It is shown that by using a series of laboratory experiments in accordance with ASTM D 1275 B, it is possible to investigate this problem and to map the influence of these parameters by manipulating some variables such as oxygen, temperature and time on the copper samples. The obtained results show that temperature is the most influential parameter in the formation of corrosive sulphur. The process is accelerated when both temperature and time act conjointly.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".