IEEE Transactions on Dielectrics and Electrical Insulation Vol. 13, No.

1; February 2006

139

Changes Proposed for the IEC 60093 Standard Concerning

Measurements of the Volume and Surface Resistivities of
Electrical Insulating Materials
Michal Lisowski and Ryszard Kacprzyk
Wroclaw University of Technology, Institute of Electrical Engineering Fundamentals,
Wybrzeze Wyspianskiego 27, 50-370 Wroclaw, Poland

ABSTRACT
The IEC 60093 Standard, prepared by the International Electrotechnical Commission
in 1980, sets up methods of measurements, determination and calculation of volume and
surface resistivities of solid dielectrics. The document contains some editorial mistakes
as well as content-related inaccuracies that require revisions. Besides corrections of
obvious editorial mistakes it is suggested to introduce some content-related
improvements. The most important remarks given in the paper are associated with the
following problems: 1) shunting of the current meter by the resistance between
guarding and guarded electrodes; 2) significant influence of the electrodes made of
conducting rubber on volume resistivity measurement results; 3) errors associated with
application of simplified expressions for resistivitiy calculations (volume resistivity for
tubular samples, surface resistivity for samples with circular electrodes); 4) increase of
the effective surface of the measuring electrode (margin width determination and
consideration). Finally, proposals of alterations of particular clauses of the standard,
supplemented with appropriate justifications, were given in the paper.
Index Terms Dielectric materials, resistivity measurement, electrodes, standardization.

1 INTRODUCTION
Measurements of the volume and surface resistivities for
high resistivity dielectrics are considered as the most
difficult ones. The results of measurements can be
influenced by many factors like applied voltage and
polarisation electrification time, type and geometry of
applied electrodes, temperature and relative humidity
during the measurement and conditioning periods, noises
and disturbances as well as surface and space charge stored
in the sample before the measurement [1-5].
The IEC 60093 Standard Methods of test for volume
resistivity and surface resistivity of solid electrical
insulating materials [6] was approved in 1980 by the
International Electrotechnical Commission. The standard
covers measurement procedures for the determination of
volume and surface resistance and calculations for the
determination of volume and surface resistivity of solid
insulating materials. The standard has a special meaning
from the point of view of comparison of measurement
results obtained for solid dielectrics in different
laboratories. Therefore, contents of the standard should not
have any mistakes and the particular notations should be
fully mistakes and the particular notations should be fully
justified. It is not in the standard in its current version.
However, the standard contains a lot of editorial (not
included in the paper) as well as content-related mistakes,
which can finally lead to a serious inaccuracy within the

measurements of resistance and appropriate resistivities

determination. Authors propose some alterations associated
with the mentioned remarks.

2 REMARKS
2.1 STANDARD SECTION 2.1
According to the definition given in a section 2.1 of the
standard IEC 60093, the volume resistance is: The quotient
of a direct voltage applied between two electrodes placed on
two faces of a specimen, and the steady state current between
the electrodes, excluding current along the surface, and
neglecting possible polarisation phenomena at the
electrodes.
Under the cited phrase the following note is added:
Unless otherwise specified, the volume resistance is
determined after 1 min of electrification.
The last sentence introduce important information but
contradictory to the definition of volume resistance given
earlier. It is suggested that the mentioned note be preceded
with the following:
Note 1. If the steady state current is reached for the
electrification time longer than 1 min, volume resistance and
appropriate resistivity should be determined from the
transient current value or given as a function of time.
The current note in the section 2.1 should be Note 2.

Manuscript received on 8 February 2005, in final form 17 May 2005.

1070-9878/06/$20.00 2006 IEEE

140

M. Lisowski and R. Kacprzyk: Changes Proposed for the IEC 60093 Standard Concerning Measurements of the Volume

2.2 STANDARD SECTION 5.3

The internal resistances of commonly used current meters
(picoammeters) are different from zero and have finite values
RA (Figure 1). Value of the resistance RA depends on the
range of applied picoammeter (its feedback and amplification
coefficients as well as on the value of applied standard
resistor) and may be as high as 1 G or even higher. The
resistance RA may be shunted by the leakage resistance RiA
between the guarded terminal of the meter and the guard
system of the whole measuring circuit. The shunting
resistance RiA is composed of the two components: surface
resistance appearing between electrodes 1 and 2 (Figure 1)
and the leakage resistance of the concentric cable, connecting
guarded electrode (1) to the current meter (picoammeter).

2
Iv

U
pA

The mentioned electrodes seem to be very useful and

comfortable. On the other hand investigations of the volume
resistivity carried out (in the Electrotechnical Institute,
Division of Electrotechnology and Material Science in
Wroclaw, Poland) with application of electrodes made of
conducting rubber gave results much higher in comparison to
that obtained for silver-evaporated electrodes [1]. An
example of the appropriate results are given in Table 1. The
results were obtained for plane-parallel samples with
thickness h = 1 mm and guarded electrode diameter
d1 = 50 mm. Average values given in the table were
calculated for three samples made of the same material and
type of electrodes. All the measurements were performed
using Keithley 6517A Electrometer/High Resistance Meter,
in the air with controlled conditions (the temperature 20 C,
relative humidity 50 %). The measurements consisted of two
stages. In the first stage volume resistance of samples was
measured with application of Keithley Model 8009 test cell,
equipped with conducting rubber electrodes. In the second
stage, silver electrodes were deposited (vacuum-evaporated)
on the surfaces of samples used previously in the
measurements within the first stage, and finally resistance
measurements repeated in the same test cell. Electrifying
voltage and time was the same in each stage of
measurements and equal 1000 V and 600 s respectively.

R iA
RA
Figure 1. Scheme of the circuit for the measurement of volume
resistance in the three-electrode system. Electrodes: 1, guarded; 2,
guard; 3, unguarded. U is the supply voltage and Iv the volume
current.

Section 5.3 of the Standard contains (the second paragraph

from the section end) the remark:
Errors in current measurements may result from the fact that
the current-measuring device is shunted by the resistance
between the guarded terminal and the guard system. This
resistance should be at least 10 and preferably 100 times
that of the current-measuring device. ...:
This way the cited remark allows accepting errors of
current measurements (originating from the shunting
phenomenon) on the level of 10 %. Such acceptation may
finally lead to a serious increase of the total inaccuracy of the
resistance measurement. The suggestion of the authors is to
omit the words:
at least 10 and preferably
in the sentence cited above.

2.3 STANDARD SECTION 7.7

Application of electrodes made of conducting rubber is
described in the mentioned section. Their main advantages,
like the fast process of the electrode assembling and
disassembling, were emphasised. Keithley Model 8009 or
Agilent (Hewlett-Packard) Model 16008B test cells for the
investigation of surface and volume resistance are also
equipped with electrodes covered with conducting rubber.

Table 1. Average values of volume resistivity measured with

application of electrodes made of conducting rubber vr and
evaporated silver vs.

Material

Polylac
ABS
Polyamide

Electrodes
Conducting
Silver
rubber (cell
evaporated
Keithley
model 8009)
vr (cm)
vs (cm)
5,810

16

7,31015

Error
v (%)

16

100

1,91015

300

2,910

The error associated with influence of the electrode

material, calculated from the expression:

v =

vr vs
100 (%)
vs

(1)

was generally at the level of tens to hundreds of percent. The

results confirmed that the measurements with such electrodes
could be used for the rough estimation of the material
resistivity only. The results obtained [1] were confirmed by
analogous remark contained in the Note 1 close 6.1.10 of the
ASTM D 257-99 standard [7].
Considering the above the authors suggest addition (on
page 19 in the clause 7.7 of the standard) of the following
note:
Results of resistivity measurements obtained with application
of electrodes made of conducting rubber are always higher

IEEE Transactions on Dielectrics and Electrical Insulation Vol. 13, No. 1; February 2006

(few tents-few hundreds %) in comparison to that obtained

for metallic electrodes.

2.4 STANDARD SECTION 11.1

According to the IEC 60093 standard, clause 11.1, volume
resistivity should be calculated from the expression:

v = Rv A h

where (l1 + g) has been taken to be approximately equal to

(l1 + Bg). The value of the relative error v as a function of
the sample thickness h is shown in Figure 3.
a)

50
45
D1

40

(2)

where Rv = volume resistance, h = sample thickness,

A = effective surface area of the measuring electrode
(guarded electrode). In the IEC 60093 standard the effective
surface for tubular samples (Figure 2.) is determined by the
expression (Appendix B of the standard):

A = (d o h )(l1 + g )

141

=1

mm

35

v , %

30
25

D 1=

2m

20
15
10

mm
D1 = 5

D 1 = 10 mm
D 1 = 25 mm

(3)

h , mm

where do = external diameter of the sample; l1 = length of the

guarded electrode, g = width of the gap between the guarded
and guard electrodes.

b)

10
9

=
D1

m
1m

8
7

v , %

6
5
4

D 1=

m
2m

3
2
D1 = 5 mm

D1 = 10 mm

0
0,0

0,2

0,4

0,6

0,8

1,0

h , mm

Figure 2. Electrode system for the measurements of volume

resistance of tubular samples. Electrodes: 1, guarded; 2 and 2,
guards; 3, unguarded.

It is generally known, that the volume resistivity in the

case of tubular samples is given by the relation [1]:
2 (l1 + Bg )
v = Rv
do
ln
d o 2h

(4)

where B is the factor determining increase of guarded

electrode spreading margin given by the expression (12).
Assuming the true values calculated from the expression (4)
and the approximated values calculated from the expression
(2) an approximate relative error of the form in equation (1)
may be derived:

v =

do h
do
ln
1
2h
d o 2h

(5)

Figure 3. The calculated relative error in the volume resistivity v

for tubular samples in case of application of the expression (2) with
effective surface of the guarded electrode determined from the
expression (3) as a function of the sample thickness h - (a), and an
expansion of the dependence for h 1 mm - (b). D1 = do - 2h is
internal diameter of the sample.

In the case when the internal diameter of the sample

D1 = do 2h is small, the calculation error, associated with
application of the approximated expression (2), may be
significant (see Figure 3). Therefore the authors propose to
add, at the end of the clause 11.1 of the standard, the
following note:
For tubular samples the above expression is simplified and
for small inner electrode diameter the volume resistivity
calculations may be burdened with significant inaccuracy. In
such situations application of the following relation is
recommended:
2(l1 + Bg )
v = Rv
do
ln
d o 2h

142

M. Lisowski and R. Kacprzyk: Changes Proposed for the IEC 60093 Standard Concerning Measurements of the Volume

2.5 STANDARD SECTION 11.2

According to the section 11.2 of the standard IEC 60093
the surface resistivity should be determined from the
expression, which after necessary improvements has the
following form:

s = Rs p g

(6)

where Rs is the surface resistance and p is the effective

perimeter of the guard electrode, for circular electrodes given
by the expression (Appendix B of the standard):

p = (d 1 + g )

s = Rs

(7)

where d1 is the diameter of the guarded electrode.

It is generally known, that for coplanar and concentric
circular electrodes (Figure 4) the surface resistivity may be
determined from the expression [1]:

s = Rs

Because of the value of the additional error which may

appear when the resistivity is calculated (especially in the
case of wider gaps g) the authors suggest adding the
following at the end of clause 11.2:
The formula given above is simplified and for circular
electrodes with wider gaps g and small diameters of the
guarded electrode d1 calculations can be burdened with a
serious error. In such a situation application of the following
expression is recommended:

2
ln (d 2 d1 )

(8)

where d1 and d2 are diameters of the inner and outer

electrodes respectively.

2
ln (d 2 d1 )

For a better illustration of the problem, supplementing of

the standard with the following example is recommended:
s = Rs p / g , where
Application of the formula

p = (d1 + g ) , leads to the surface resistivity calculation

error 3 % for the gap width g = 10 mm and a diameter of the
guarded electrode d1 = 25 mm, and 1 % for the same gap
width and d1 = 50 mm.

2.6 STANDARD SECTION APPENDIX B1

One of elements necessary for the calculation of volume
resistivity is the effective surface area of the guarded
electrode A. The surface A is always larger then the
geometrical surface of the electrode. The mentioned relation
is associated with the edge effect, which appears also in case
of three-electrode systems. An example is shown in Figure 6.

Electrode No 1
Figure 4. Electrodes system for the measurements of surface
resistance on parallel-plate samples. Electrodes: 1, guarded;
2, unguarded; 3, guard.

Dependencies of the relative errors s of the surface

resistivity calculations performed with application of the
expressions (6) and (8) on the gap width g = d2 - d1 were
shown in Figure 5. The error for the gap width g = 10 mm
(recommended) may be as high as 3 % for the guarded
electrode diameter d1 = 25 mm and 1 % for d1 = 50 mm.
8
7
6
5

s, %

=
d1

25

4
3
d 1=

m
50

Figure 6. Distribution of the electric field lines in the volume of a

dielectric sample equipped with a three-electrode system.

In the IEC 60093 standard it was assumed that the guarded

electrode fringing effectively extends by g/2. In reality the
edge effect is not so large and the effective margin width is
smaller than g/2. The similar assumption for the influence of
the edge effect was made (Table 1) in the ASTM D 257-99
standard [7]. However in the Appendix X2 of the same
standard it was stated that the width of the spreading margin
should be taken as smaller than g/2 and could be estimated
from the expression:

g 2

(9)

where

0
0

10

g, mm

12

14

16

18

20

Figure 5. Relative error s of the surface resistivity calculated

according to the expression given in clause 11.2 of the
IEC 60093 standard and the accurate formulae (8).

2h
g
lncosh

4 h

(10)

IEEE Transactions on Dielectrics and Electrical Insulation Vol. 13, No. 1; February 2006

Correction of the gap width g may be also written as:

143

1,0
0,9

g (1 2 g ) = Bg

(11)

0,8
0,7

where

B =1

0,6

4 h
g
lncosh

g
4 h

(12)

0,5
0,4
0,3

is the factor determining increase of the guarded electrode

spreading margin. Determination of the effective width of the
spreading margin given by the expression (9) is necessary for
the calculation of the effective surface of the guarded electrode.
It is worth emphasizing that the expressions (9) and (10),
given in the ASTM 257-99 standard [7] were suggested by
Endicott [8] for the measurements of electrical permittivity and
not for resistivity measurements. The access to the original
derivation of the formula cited by Endicott (W.G. Ammey,
Ph.D. Thesis, Johns Hopkins University, 1947) is very limited.
Relationship (12) is graphically illustrated in Figure 7 as a
function B = f(g/h). It is seen that for thick samples with h >> g
value of the factor B 1 ( 0). For very thin samples with
h << g the value of B 0. In the case of dielectric foil with
thickness h < 100 m, assuming g = 1 mm (what means
h < 0.1g) value of the factor B will be smaller than 0.1.
Therefore, assuming B = 1 in the case of samples made of thin
dielectric foils will lead to a substantial error when calculating
the effective surface of the guarded electrode A and finally in the
determination of the volume resistivity or electrical permittivity.
It is worth emphasizing that assumption = 0 (B = 1) leads to
a situation in which the value describes simultaneously the
value of the effective surface determination relative error

0,2
0,1
0,0
0

10

g/h
Figure 7. Dependence of the B factor on the g/h ratio (gap
width/sample thickness).

18
16
14
12
10

A, %

g = 2 mm, d1 = 25 mm
8

g = 1 mm, d1 = 25 mm i g = 2 mm, d1 = 50 mm

g = 1 mm, d1 = 50 mm

4
2
0
0

10

h/g

A =

AB =1 AB 1
100
AB =1

(% )

(13)

where AB=1 and AB1 are effective areas of the guarded electrode
for B = 1 (as assumed in the current version of the standard IEC
60093), and B 1 determined from expression (12),
respectively.
In case of circular electrodes, as it was shown in Figure 4, the
effective
surface
area
of
guarded
electrode
2
2
AB=1 = (d1 + g ) 4 , and AB 1 = (d 1 + Bg ) 4 . Assuming
g << d1, the mentioned relative error A in case of the round
guarded electrode can be determined from the expression:

8h
g
A =
lncosh
100
d1
4 h

(% )

Figure 8. Dependence of the relative error of the effective surface

determination of guarded electrode A when B = 1 is assumed.

Please note, that for samples with thickness lower than the
gap width g, errors of the A determination may exceed the value
of 1 % and in case of thin samples (dielectric foils) the error
may be as high as 16 %. The above suggests that in case of thin
samples (for which h << g) equipped with thin evaporated
metallic electrodes the effective surface of the guarded electrode
A should be calculated for the parameter B = 0 and not for B = 1.
In order to check the expression (12) some attempts to derive
it were undertaken by the authors. The following expression was
obtained [9] determining value of the B factor:
B = 2 (H + 1)

(14)

In order to illustrate the values of errors caused by the

assumption = 0 (B = 1) some calculations with application of
the expression (9) were carried out for d1 = 25 mm and 50 mm
and for gap widths g = 1 mm and 2 mm. The appropriate
characteristics A = f(g/h) are shown in Figure 8.

(15)

where H parameter satisfies the following equation:

g h = (H 1 H ) + 2lnH

(16)

The expressions (15) (obtained by the authors [9]) and (12)

(given in the ASTM D257-99 standard) are different.
Calculation of the B value from the expression (15) is
complicated because of its implicit character. The expression

144

M. Lisowski and R. Kacprzyk: Changes Proposed for the IEC 60093 Standard Concerning Measurements of the Volume

(16) is graphically illustrated in Figure 9. Comparison of

B = f(g/h) dependencies calculated from expressions (12) solid
line, and (15) (with H values taken from dependence shown in
Figure 9) discrete points, is shown in Figure 10. It was found
that the differences between the mentioned dependencies were
relatively small. Therefore, application of the expression (12)
(given in the ASTM D257-99 standard) for the determination of
the B value is fully justified.
26
24
22
20

3 CONCLUSIONS
The IEC 60093 standard, set up in 1980, is a document of
a special meaning from the point of view of correct
measurements and determinations of volume and surface
resistivitiy for insulating materials investigated in different
laboratories. The standard contains some editorial mistakes
as well as content-related inaccuracies and they may give
results burdened with serious inaccuracies. Alteration of the
standard should be carried out according to the suggestions
given in this paper. The editorial mistakes should be also
eliminated.

18
16

ACKNOWLEDGMENT

14

H 12

The work presented in this paper was supported by grant

from the Ministry of Science and Information Technologies
in Poland under contract No 8 T10A 054 21.

10
8
6
4
2
0
0

10

g /h

Figure 9. Graphical illustration of the expression (16).

Expressions given in the clause B1 of the Appendix B in

the discussed standard do not take a factor B into
consideration. The authors suggest to supplement the
mentioned expressions with the factor B and to change the
text of clause B1 into the following form:
a) Circular electrodes (Fig. 2, p. 37) A = (d1 + Bg ) 2 4
b) Rectangular electrodes
A = (a + Bg )(b + Bg )
c) Square electrodes
A = (a + Bg ) 2
d) Tubular electrodes (Fig. 3, p. 38) A = (d o + h)(l1 + Bg ) .
The authors also suggest supplementing the text of clause
B1 with the sentence:
Value of the B factor is determined by the expression:
4h
g
B =1
lncosh

g
4 h
Graphical form of the expression is given in Figure B1
and inserting Figure 7 as the Figure B1.
1,0

0,8

0,6

B
0,4

0,2

0,0
0

10

g/h

Figure 10. Comparison of B=f(g/h) dependencies. Expression

(12), solid line; expression (15), discrete points.

REFERENCES
[1] M. Lisowski, Measurements of electrical resistivity and
permittivity of solid dielectrics (in Polish: Pomiary
rezystywnosci i przenikalnosci elektrycznej dielektrykow
stalych), Wroclaw University of Technology Press, Wroclaw,
2004.
[2] M. Lisowski, G. Galik and A. Lachowski, Influence of the
electric charge on the reliability of the PTFE of volume and
surface resistivity measurements, Intern. Conf. Advances in
Processing, Testing and Applications of Dielectric Materials
APTADM2001,
Wroclaw,
Poland,
Przeglad
Elektrotechniczny, pp. 259-262, 2001.
[3] M. Lisowski and R. Kacprzyk, Uncertainty evaluation
problems in measurements of volume and surface resistivities,
Proceedings of the IMEKO-TC7 Symposium Measurement
Science of the Information Era, Cracow, Poland, pp. 82-87,
2002.
[4] M. Lisowski, R. Kacprzyk, E. Motyl and P. Galezki, Space
charge influence on the results of volume resistivity
measurements in solid dielectrics, Proc. XVII IMEKO World
Congress Metrology in the 3rd Millennium, Dubrovnik,
Croatia, pp. 837-840, 2003.
[5] A. Darie, Improving the repeatability of ultra-high resistance
and resistivity measurement, Keithley White Paper 6517A.
[6] IEC 60093, Methods of test for volume resistivity and surface
resistivity of solid electrical insulating materials, 1980.
[7] ASTM D 257-99, Standard test methods for dc resistance or
conductance of insulating materials, 1999.
[8] H. S. Endicott, Guard-gap correction for guarded electrode
measurements and exact equations for the two-fluid method of
measuring permittivity and loss, J. Testing and Evaluation,
Vol. 4, No. 3, pp. 188195, 1976.
[9] M. Lisowski and A. Skopec, Effective area of the guarded
electrode in calculations of volume resistivity and electrical
permittivity (unpublished).
The paper is based on presentation at the 2nd International Conference on
Advances in Processing, Testing and Application of Dielectric Materials,
APTADM2004, Wroclaw, 15-17 September 2004 (Scientific Papers of the
Institute of Electrical Engineering Fundamentals of the Wroclaw University
of Technology, 2004, No. 40, Conferences No. 15, pp. 147-152)

IEEE Transactions on Dielectrics and Electrical Insulation Vol. 13, No. 1; February 2006

Michal Lisowski was born in Poland in

1943. He received the M.Sc., Ph.D., and
D.Sc. degrees in electrical engineering
from the Wroclaw University of
Technology in 1968, 1975, and 1990,
respectively. His current re In order to
illustrate the values of errors caused by
the assumption = 0 (B = 1) some calculations with
application of the expression (9) were carried out for
d1 = 25 mm and 50 mm and for gap widths g = 1 mm and
2 mm. The appropriate characteristics A = f(g/h) are shown
in Figure 8.search interests are focused on electrical
metrology and electrical insulation engineering. He has been
a Professor in the Department of Electrical Engineering,
Wroclaw University of Technology. Since 1995 he has also
joined the Electrotechnical Institute, Division of
Electrotechnology and Materials Science, Wroclaw, as a
Chief of Measurements and Diagnostics Laboratory. He has
been generally engaged in precise measurements as well as
in calibration of electrical equipment. He specialises in
measuring systems for high temperature superconductivity
and dielectric materials investigations.

145

Ryszard Kacprzyk was born in Poland in

1948. He received the M.Sc. degree in
solid state technology at the Faculty of
Electronics of Warsaw University of
Technology in 1973. The Ph.D. degree he
received at the Institute of Electrical
Engineering Fundamentals of Wroclaw
University of Technology in 1979. He has
been an Associate Professor at the same Institute since 1980.
He is a specialist in electrostatic metrology. He has also been
engaged in measuring systems and devices for dielectric
materials investigations, in applied electrostatics, and
generally in electromagnetic materials research.