Comparison of Available Silicone Rubber Coatings for High Voltage Applications
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper presents the results of an investigation on evaluating room-temperature-vulcanized (RTV) silicone rubber coatings for high-voltage insulators of substations and overhead transmission lines. It is based on tests conducted for three different available RTVs that are currently used by utilities. The study compared three commercial coatings: RTV-A and RTV-B filled with ATH (aluminum tri-hydrate) as the primary filler, and RTV-C filled with silica. The relative comparison between them is based on their electrical and chemical characteristics. The evaluation employed standard and research-based evaluation methods, including the salt fog test, the inclined plane test, thermo-gravimetric analyses (TGA), thermal conductivity measurement, soaking in water, the mechanical test, and SEM photographs. Results of the inclined plane test showed that the silica-filled coating is not resistive against tracking and erosion compared with ATH-filled coatings. It was observed that filler size is one of the main reasons for better performance of RTV-A compared with RTV-B, whereas both have ATH as the primary filler. The higher thermal conductivity of RTV-A resulted in a very good performance in the salt fog test and the IPT.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".