IEEE Transactions on Electrical Insulation Vol.

EI-20 No.2. Apri1

1985

275

BUBBLE GROWTH FOLLOWING A LOCALIZED ELECTRICAL DISCHARGE AND ITS RELATIONSHIP TO THE BREAKDOWN OF TRIGGERED SPARK GAPS IN LIQUIDS
P. K. Watson Xerox Corp. Webster, NY W. G. Chadband and W. Y. Mak University of Salford Salford, U.K.

ABSTRACT
In order to investigate the mechanism of breakdown of the liquid-filled, triggered spark gap, a flash-illuminated, shadowgraph optical system has been used to photograph the pre-breakdown events in a triggered gap. Photographs indicate that in all cases the trigger spark is followed by the growth of a hemispherical bubble, or vapor cavity, and this bubble appears to be the precursor of the main gap breakdown. A theoretical investigation shows that the expansion and collapse of the cavity in the low-viscosity limit, follows a simple hydrodynamic model. We find that only about 1% of the circuit energy is transferred to kinetic energy of the liquid surrounding the expanding cavity. The time required for an expanding bubble to fill

a 1 mm gap is of the same order as the breakdown time lag It is concluded that the bubble for the triggered gap. generated by the trigger spark clears the gap of liquid, leaving a low-density gas or vapor between the electrodes, so that the actual process of electrical breakdown takes place through the low strength gas, not through the liquid. In the case of longer gaps, of 2 mm and above, the bubble may have time to expand across the entire gap and it is suggested that an electrohydrodynamic instability may cause the bubble surface to breakup into streamers, which cross

the gap and cause breakdown.

INTRODUCTION
Maksiejewski and Calderwood [1] were the first to show that a liquid dielectric, electrically stressed below breakdown, can be caused to flash over by firing an auxilliary gap, or trigger, set in one of the main electrodes. This device constitutes a liquid-filled version of the triggered spark gap, or Trigatron. Gzowski, Liwo and Piatkowska [2] using a different electrode configuration, confirmed the earlier results. More recently, Maksiejewski has made measurements of
in triggered the statistical distribution of time pered thestarktgasticalistwoributionsof timb lagsinantheri paper spark gaps and this work is described in another

In the course of earlier experiments in this series

[4], regions of low optical density were recorded by the optical system and it was noted that these regions retained a remarkably hemispherical shape during their growth and collapse. Chadband and Calderwood [4] suggested that the images might represent a heat pulse from the initiating spark -- just as shock waves are observed following the initiating event. In this case a graph of radius of the wave front versus square root of time would give a value for the thermal diffusivity. Although graphs of radius vs. Y are reasonably linear, the de-

in this conference

proceedings [3].

rived values for thermal diffusivity are several orders of magnitude too large for this model to be tenable.

The purpose of the present work was to investigate the mechanism of breakdown of these liquid-filled triggered spark gaps, and for this study a flash-illuminated, shadowgraph optical system was used to photograph pre-breakdown events in triggered gaps filled with

wthtrnsoreroil. hexneanand with ransformer t

hexane

The alternative explanation is that the shadowgraph images represent an expanding and collapsing bubble. Rayleigh [5] was the first to analyze the dynamics of a cavity in a fluid, and it was shown by Chadbamd, Calderwood and Watson [6] that Rayleigh's model accurately fits the observed motion in the collapse phase of ~these events.
t_

~~ " 1_; ~ j 9x,>f,jf_ss ~ ~ ~

,._.5s

I EEE

2IEEE Tr-nsacti3ns on Electrical Insulation Vol. EI-20 No.2. April 1985

Vapor bubbles follow quickly on the growth of a partial discharge in liquids and a number of authors have used electric sparks to produce bubbles for cavitation studies, but have concerned themselves primarily with the collapse of the cavity [7-10]. The electrical energies used to produce the bubbles have varied widely: Kozyrev [9] used an 84 J discharge; Jones &, Edwards [7] used energies as low as 11 mJ; many authors neglect to state the energy used.

EXPERIMENTAL STUDIES
The experimental techniques used in this investiga1 record prebreakdown phenomena in dielectric liquids, and this technique is well suited to investigate the

system shown in in Figs. was and 2. The by Chadband to 1 developed photographic tion are shown Fig.

ii
Fig. 3a. Flash photographs of bubble growth and collapse in hexane. Zero field in main gap 2 mm gap. 5 mJ energy in trigger circuit. In the first two frames a shock wave can be seen propagating from the trigger spark. Photographs correspond to delay times 0.6, 1.1, 20, 57, 84, 101, 109, 110, 283, 500, 900 and 9500 v's.

events which follow an initiating spark in insulating fluids. Experimentally it is found that there is considerable scatter between tests, and in order to improve the statistics of the measurement a double-flash system has been developed. The double-flash method allows photographs to be taken of the pre-breakdown event at two instants separated by an accurately known time delay, so that the velocity and the corresponding
radii of the cavity wall can be measured more accurately than by combining observations from separate events.

II4-I4ITI4

-~4.[DII-DLRGEI
Fig. 3b:

Fig. 1: The shadowgraph opticaZ system, and trigger

sequence for the multiple flash experiment

collapse in transformer oil. Zero field in main gap.

2 mm gap. 20 mJ energy in trigger circuit.

Flash photograph of bubble growth and

Fig. 2 shows the discharge circuit, the trigger electrode used to generate the initiating spark, and the location of the trigger with respect to the main gap. The energy stored in the capacitor is shared with the trigger spark gap when the switch S is fired at time t=0. This also initiates the triggering sequence shown in Fig. 1. The first observation is made when the first flash is triggered at time T1; the second flash is pulsed after a further delay AT. The flash exposure time is 0.3 u's.
M//////2eM
AIN ELECTRODE

Photographs correspond to delay times 2.1, 21, 73,

122, 140, 220, 380, 530, 1300 and 5000 lis.
Zero Field in Main Gap
and contraction are shown in Fig. 3. The events in Fig. 3a show the expansion and contraction of vapor bubbles in n-hexane following an initiating spark of 5 mJ (that is, the initial energy stored in the cir-

Typical single-flash photographs of bubble expansion

TEST LIQUID

|
y02

t 7 7;tig;79GLASS TRIGGER ELECTRODE HV 1

cuit capacitor is 5 mJ -- the actual energy delivered to the bubble is an order of magnitude less than this, A corresponding series of photoas will be shown). graphs for transformer oil are shown in Fig. 3b, for a trigger circuit energy of 20 mJ. In these experiments there was no field applied to the main gap, so the vapor bubbles expanded and contracted without being perturbed by an external field.

>1 ///////1 bi-dt 2mmTO SECOND ELECTRODE

Fig. 2: Test cell, showing position of electrodes and coaxial trigger. The second electrode is located 2 mm from the main electrode and is grounded.

It is seen from the photographs in Fig. 3 that the bubbles retain an approximately hemispherical form during the growth phase, despite the proximity of the second electrode. The collapse, however, is strongly

dependent on bubble shape, and is therefore more strongly influenced by the second electrode; by reducing the gap the influence of the second electrode on the
collapse is made more pronounced.
It is observed that

Watson et al.: Bubble qrowth after breakdown of triggered spark gaps in liquids the effect of the second electrode becomes noticeable if the maximum bubble growth exceeds half the gap length. When an ideal, spherical bubble collapses, the pressure in the bubble rises to a sufficiently high value to stop the collapse, and the expansion begins again. In the collapse of these non-ideal bubbles the collapse ends in an erruption of secondary bubbles, and in transformer oil one observes vortex rings propagating from the

277

`
...

collapse region.

In the case of n-hexane, measurements have been made of cavity radius vs. time for circuit energies of 6 .3, 12.5, 25, 50 and 100 mJ during both the expansion and collapse phases of the bubble. In the course of the investigation several hundred events have been photographed and analyzed. These results are shown in Fig. 4.
BUBBLE GROWTH AND COLLAPSE IN n -HEXANE
K;' ~~

-..

~CIRCUIT
8

ENERGY mJ
K25

+ 6.25mJ
1'

-~~~

-.

~~~~

)K*

_ 10
0.5
V

I100
1

Fig. 6:

e g t +T++ +++ ++ +
100 200

A\ h a
300 400
ps

1voZtage

protruding 0.3 mm into the gap, and a steady of -23 kV applied to the opposing electrode

Flash photographs of bubble growth coZZapse in transformer oil with trigger probe

and

BubbZe Growth in an AppZied Electric Field

Fig. 4: Bubble radius vs. time for several discharge energies in hexane
Fig. 5 shows a plot of bubble radius R vs. time, derived from a series of 100 mJ discharges in n-hexane, and photographed with the double-flash technique. In this Figure, pairs of points corresponding to single events are joined by straight lines, the slopes of which indicates the cavity wall velocity U over the observed time interval. There is considerable scatter in the radius vs. time plot, particularly in the collapse phase, but in spite of this, the basic form of the relationship can be seen, and its approximate symmetry about the point of maximum growth is apparent.
20 In a limited number of experiments in transformer oil, a field was applied to the main gap in order to study the effect of an applied field on bubble growth and collapse. It was found that the field had a small but significant effect on the expansion of the bubbles for an applied field of 15 kV/mm. Clearly, when breakdown of the main gap occurs the bubble must undergo a major perturbation, and further work is needed to examine the effect of fields close to breakdown of the main gap. In a different experimental arrangement the trigger probe was allowed to protrude from the electrode into the main gap by 15% of the 2 mm gap width. The electrode was grounded, a constant negative voltage of up to -25 kV was applied to the opposing electrode, and positive pulses of 10 kV amplitude and 5 mJ energy were applied to the probe. Typical results are shown in Fig. 6. Analysis of these photographs indicates that the bubble expansion is affected by the applied field, and the maximum bubble radius is about 30% greater than without the field. It was also noted that the bubble was able to collapse in a more orderly manner than without the field; there was no eruption of secondary bubbles, and no evidence of vortex rings, as seen in Fig. 3.
THEORY

N/
2
a:

L5N>
'\

o\\
l0 OOmJ,

.0
/

0.S5/

/l ' ,' 1I,

,-

NX

\\

25

u\ \
\\

\ \

12

~~~~~~~6
200 100 2300
s

400

In these experiments a bubble is generated by an initiating spark which delivers energy to a localized region in a fluid, creating a high-pressure bubble which then expands rapidly. Some of the energy from the high-temperature spark channel must go to heating and vaporizing the liquid and into heating the electrodes -a surprisingly small fraction of the energy goes into kinetic energy of liquid motion, as will be shown. 5 TlME(~s )In the process of expanding, the bubble must do work against the ambient pressure, and energy is also lost

Fig. 5: Bubble radius vs. time in hexane, derived from doubZe flash experirents

bubble does not stop when the internal pressure equals the ambient pressure, but continues until the kinetic

to viscous processes in the liquid.

Expansion of the

26,

IEEE Transactions on Electrical

Insulation Vol. EI-20

No.2, April

1985

energy of the system approaches zero (at this point in a typical event the internal pressure of the cavity is about one tenth of ambient). Thus when the bubble is fully expanded the internal pressure is very low and the external pressure causes the bubble to contract. The purpose of this theoretical study is to provide a simple hydrodynamic model for the analysis of these phenomena.

experimental results for several discharge energies in n-hexane, together with the derived values for kinetic energy. These kinetic energies are calculated for the hemispherical case (i.e. half the energy given by Eq. 1).
Table I

Using this model we can calculate the kinetic energy of the liquid surrounding the cavity. Table 1 shows data for cavity radius and velocity at 25 ps from the

The Early Stage of Bubble Expansion

We may suppose that energy from the initiating spark is transferred to kinetic energy of the motion in a time short compared to the observation time. There are then two interesting cases to consider in the low viscosity limit: during the early stage of the expansion we can ignore the work done against ambient pressure and the bubble approximates a constant kinetic energy system; in the other limit we take account of the work done against the external pressure and find the conditions under which expansion ceases and contraction begins.
In the first of these two situations we look for an equation of motion of the cavity wall corresponding to constant kinetic energy. For an incompressible fluid, UR -u(r)r2; hence the kinetic energy of the fluid surrounding a spherical cavity is given by,
Comparison Between Circuit Energy and Kinetic Energy

(DataderivedfromFigure4)
Circuit Energy (mJ) Cavity Radius at 25psec (mm) Wall Velocity at 25tLsec (n/sec) K.E. = TpU2R3 (mj)

1.1.05
0.90

100

25 12.5 6.3 0.95.08 0.77.07 0.65.05

18.01

13.01
0.30

11.51
0.13

8.51.5
.05

,,0
E = 0.5p R

uf(r) 47rr2dr

= 2

rpU2R3

(1)

where R is the cavity radius, U=dR/dt and p is the fluid density. If the kinetic energy of the system is constant, Eo, then (dR/dt)2 = E/(2rrpR3).

R(t) = 5 (2 2Trp

Eo

0.5

02 0.4 hlo [ t l+ Ro t 0.4

L

(2)

We note that the inaccuracies in radius and velocity are between 5 and 10% so that the resulting inaccuracy in energy is at least 25%: this problem is addressed in the following section. In spite of this inaccuracy one sees that in all cases the kinetic energy of the cavity is about 1% of the circuit energy used to generate the trigger spark. We presume that the excess energy is distributed partly in circuit losses, partly in thermal loss to the electrodes, and partly in heating the liquid surrounding the bubble in the latent heat required to vaporize the liquid. Energy is also lost in work done against ambient pressure, and it is this energy loss which determines the maximum size of the bubble. Surface tension effects are very small and can be neglected.

BubbZe Expansion Against Ambient Pressure

As a bubble expands it does work against the external pressure P. Thus we can write the energy balance equation for a system with initial kinetic energy Eo.

=
en I-

2tpU2R3

+ 4

3 3pa(

,6ptuRearranging this equation we obtain an expression relating velocity, radius and energy.

U2

/2rpR

~2 3
U2

(4)

2/

4 20.4 TIME,(Ps )

Fig. 7:

tQ.4 Bubble radius vs. t04 for n-hexarze, 50 mJ n-hexane, ?us rgy circuit energy

rig.t7: enbbbZe
frmFg

for paes prc losotte 2 4datina tthe eai phvsetb Them in.5ae isaleat-sqare thetoheformslo fnFg.7it is evidTen ths lathsqate dxansIon evapotro bubbls Fing-hxaetapproximatealy fola-eaeapoiaeyfl simple model.si
o
are in Fig 7

To test the predictions of E

It

from

Fiur

inta

itt

data.

of lows thi

by an accurately known time delay. Thus one photograph yields the velocity and position coordinates of a data point. This avoids errors due to scatter between events such as occur in separate measurements of radius and time.) The slope of the line shown in Fig. 8 is proportional to E0/2Trp so that the initial energy of the expanding cavity is about 1 .3 mJ . This i s higher than the corresponding values in Table 1 because it includes the work. It confirms our estimate that only about 1% of the circuit energy is transferred to the bubble.

We have used this equation to replot the data, shown in Fig. 5, in the form vs. 1/R3. This plot, shown in Fig. 8, makes use of the double-flash method of measurement. (In this experiment, it will be recalled, one records two positions of the cavity wall separated

PV/

Watson et al.:

Bubble growth after breakdown of triggered spark gaps in liquids

279

^ Expansion
0 Contraction

2_

(0E
E

hemispherical shape, and it is the collapse from this non-ideal form that needs to be considered. Naud6 and Ellis [8] have pointed out that the spherical shape of a collapsing bubble is unstable, in that a small initial perturbation of the spherical shape will grow to be very large as the cavity collapses. This effect has been analyzed by Chapman and Plesset [11], who show that for a prolate spheroid the velocity of collapse on the axis of symmetry is much less than in the plane of symmetry. Our results are consistent with this model, in that low on-axis velocities are observed in bubble collapse.

The solution to this integration is given by Rayleigh: 0.5 T(5/6)T(1/2) = 0.91 R

|

integration of Eq. 5 gives the time for bubble collapse.

Returning to the case of the

spherical

bubble, the

0~~~0 a
-I .O

[6Pa aa

T(4/3)

[ L6m P)

Where r(n) is the gamma function. By symmetry T is also the time for bubble expansion, so the lifetime of a bubble is of order 2 Rm(p/Pa)05.
This equation can also be expressed in terms of the energy of the cavity by making use of the identity Eo=(4/3) TRm 3Pa. Hence, bubble lifetime is given by:
2-

100

200

300

/R ,cm-3

400

500

600

700

Fig. 8: A comparison between bubbZe expansion and coZZapse in the form (velocity) ' versus (Radius)3. There is a very marked difference in scatter between the expansion and the contractzon data.
The intercept on the axis at U=O gives the maximum radius of the bubble. For the case shown 1/IR3160 cm-3 so that for the 100 mJ discharge Rm=l.84 mm. The intercept on the axis at 1/R3=0 should pass through the point U2=_ (2/3)PJ1p. Substituting for an ambient pressure of 1 atmosphere and density p=0.65 g/cm3 gives the intercept U =-lxlO6 cm2/s2. The line in Fig. 8 is drawn through this point.

1.2EO1/3p 1/2 P-5/6 a

(7)

Checking this equation against the data of Figs. 4 and 5, we find that the energy dependence predicted by the model is approximately followed. However, bubble lifetimes are longer than the predicted values by about 50%. Part of the reason for this discrepancy may be associated with the departure from ideal hemispherical
shape of the bubble, and part with residual gas in the bubble, as this would extend the expansion and contraction times. The gas is probably generated by the trigger spark, causing high-temperature thermal decomposition of the liquid,

Breakdown Time Lags in Triggered Spark Gaps

Recent

measurements have been

reported by

Bubble Collapse

Maksiejewski on breakdown time lags for triggered spark

The expansion of a vapor bubble ceases when the kinetic energy of the system passes through zero, at which point the internal pressure is far below ambient; the bubble is then fully expanded (R=Rm) and the external pressure Pa causes the bubble to collapse.
Following Rayleigh [5] we equate the work done by the external pressure, (4rPaJ3) (RJf-rR3) to the kinetic energy of the fluid (Eq. 1) and hence derive the equation for velocity as a function of position:
U2R3
2P

gaps in 2,2,4 trimethylpentane [3]. These results show that the time lags depend on the voltage applied to the main gap and on whether the trigger electrode is in the anode or in the cathode of the main gap. The following table summarizes Maksiejewski's results for a main gap length of lmm and a trigger energy of approximately 1 joule.
We use these data to test the hypothesis that the major portion of the breakdown time lag is associated with the time required for the bubble, generated by the trigger spark, to expand across the gap and thus replace the high-strength liquid with a relatively low-strength vapor. We have shown experimentally and theoretically that bubbles expand as tu*4, and that a bubble generated by a circuit energy of 100 mJ can expand to a radius of 1 mm in a time of about 10 vs. We note that this is typical of Maksiejewski's breakdown time lags in the applied voltage range 26 to 36 kV, and is therefore consistent with our hypothesis.

3p

(R3 -R 3) 3
m

Substituting for Eo=('4/3 R3mPa we recover Eq. 3. Thus the collapse results should coincide with the expansion data when plotted in the form u2 vs. 1/3 As one sees from Fig. 8, however, the scatter in the collapse data is an order of magnitude greater than in expansion and the on-axis velocity is lower. We believe that this scatter is due to departure of the ful ly expanded bubble from the ideal, hemispherical form. We have already noted that the presenceof the electrodes causes the expanding bubble to depart from its ideal,

,_.

>

t - -31- =,t_

Nm.?. Cn. .ET-_

C

. p.1

19RE5

Table 2
BreakdownTime LagsforTriggeredSparkGaps
[Datafrom Maksiejewski(3)J

REFERENCES
[1]
J. L. Maksiejewski and J. H. Calderwood, "A Triggered Spark Gap in Liquid Dielectrics", Nature 220 p 905 (1968, and J. Electrostatics 7 p 145 (1979).

Applied Voltage

Average Time Lag

[2)
18[Lsec
10

0.

Gzowski, J. Liwo, and J. Piatkowska Phenomens

vn

MlainGap
20k V 26 32 36 42

(a)Triggerin(Catho)de
23psec
14

(b)TriggerinAnode
[3]

de Conduction dans les liquides isolantes. Editions de C.N.R.S. France p 41 (1970).

10 3

[4]

J. L. Maksiejewski, "Time Lags of Triggered Spark Gaps in Liquid Hydrocarbons", Proc. 8th Int Conf on Dielectric Liquids p 260 (1984). W. G. Chadbnad & J. H. Calderwood, "A Study of Localized Discharges in Dielectric Liquids", Proc 7th Int Conf on Dielectric Liquids p 261 (1981).

However, this cannot be the explanation for breakdown at very short times: for example in the case of the 42 kV, 1 mm gap, breakdown occurs in 3 vis; but in this time the bubble cannot have expanded further than 0.6 mm, because radius scales with t0.4. In this case, we suspect, the bubble-liquid interface may have undergone an EHD instability which causes the interface to break up into streamers which cross the gap and cause breakdown [12].

[5]

Rayleigh, Lord, "On the Pressure Developed in a Liquid During the Collapse of a Spherical Cavity" Phil Mag 34 p 94 (1917) and Scientific Papers VI p 504, Dover Publications NY 1964.
W. G.

[6]

p 353 (1982).

"AStudy of the Effects of a Localized Discharge in Dielectric Liquids" J. Electrostatics 12,

Chadband, J. H. Calderwood and P. K. Watson

[7]

CONCLUSIONS
The trigger spark in a liquid-filled triggered spark gap generates a high-pressure vapor bubble which expands rapidly. The bubble expansion should theoretically approximate the relationship R(t)ct0O' and this growth law is experimentally verified. Results depart from this simple relationship as work is done against the ambient pressure, and the growth of the bubble can be calculated on the assumption that the kinetic energy of the bubble is expended in doing work against the ambient pressure; this leads to a maximum size which depends on the initial kinetic energy and the ambient pressure. The kinetic energy of the expanding bubble is only about 1% of the energy stored in the trigger circuit capacitor, so that the major part of the circuit energy is dissipated in circuit losses, and in thermal losses.
These observations of bubble expansion explain in part the operation of the liquid-filled triggered spark gap (or Liquid Trigatron) of Maksiejewski and Calderwood [1]. Time lags to breakdown, following the trigger discharge, are about 10 is, for 1 mm gaps in hexane and triggering energies of about 1 J. It is clear that with such large trigger energies, the growing bubble can completely clear the gap of liquid in the duration of the time lag, leaving a low density gas or vapor between the electrodes. Thus, the actual process of electrical breakdown takes place in the low strength vapor, and the major portion of the time lag is the time required to clear the gap of liquid. At lower trigger energies (or for larger gaps) the bubble cannot grow sufficiently to clear the gap of liquid. In this case it seems probable that an EHD instabi lity grows and causes the surface of the bubble to break up into streamers which then cross the gap and cause breakdown. There is evidence of a similar form of breakdown mechanism in other cases of liquid breakdown [12]. [8]

I. R. Jones and D. H. Edwards, "An Experimental Study of the Forces Generated by the Collapse of Transient Cavities in Water", J Fluid Mechanics 7 p 596 (1959).
C. F. Naude and A. T. Ellis, "On the Mechanism of Cavitation Damage by Nonhemispherical Bubbles Collapsing in Contact with a Solid Boundary", J. Basic Eng. Trans ASME 83 p 648 (1961). N. D. Shutler and R. B. Mesler, "A Photographic Study of the Dynamics of Bubbles Collapsing Near Solid Boundaries", J. Basic Eng. Trans ASME 87 p 511 (1965).

[9]

[10] S. P. Kozyrev, "Collapse of Cavities Formed by Electrical Discharges in Liquids", Sov. Physics Doklady 13 p 1168 (1969). [11] R. B. Chapman and M. S. Plesset, "The Collapse of a Nearly Spherical Cavity in a Liquid", Trans ASME 94D 142 (1972).

[12] P. K. Watson, Effect in the Dielectrics", Liquids p 361

"Electrostatic and Hydrodynamic Electrical Breakdown of Liquid Proc 8th Tnt Conf on Dielectric

(1984).

Conference on Conduction and Breakdown in DieZectric Liquids, Pavia, ItaZy, from 24-27 1984.
Manuscript
was received 10

This p

erwas presented at tel

8th International

December 1984.