Self-Healing Silicones for Outdoor High Voltage Insulation: Mechanism, Applications and Measurements
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper discusses the state of the art in the application of self-healing silicone-based materials for outdoor high-voltage insulation. Both the dynamic behavior of the dimethyl side groups of silicone rubber and the diffusion of a bulk siloxane to maintain low surface energy are respectively reported as intrinsic mechanisms responsible for the self-healing of silicone rubber. Localization, temporality, mobility, and the type of synthesis are the aspects defining the efficiency of the self-healing ability of silicone rubber. In addition, the deterioration of the self-healing ability with filler loaded into silicone rubber insulation housing composites is discussed. Taking the self-healing property into consideration among the other properties of silicone rubber insulators, such as tracking and erosion resistance, can be a useful design practice at the material development stage. Hydrophobicity retention, recovery, and transfer measurements are discussed as useful indicators of the self-healing ability of silicone rubber. Nevertheless, there remains a need to standardize them as design tests at the material development stage. The paper is intended to shed the light on the hydrophobicity recovery, a key material design parameter in the development of silicone rubber outdoor insulating composites, similar to the tracking and erosion resistance.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".