Sunteți pe pagina 1din 17

06.03.

2020 Review of External Insulation for EHV & UHV Bushings | INMR

Friday, March 6, 2020     

 ARTICLES BY CATEGORY  BUYER’S GUIDE LABORATORY GUIDE CONTACT US 


ADVERTISE + 

Subscribe

Your Email

PLEASE SIGN ME UP

Bushings   Technical Article  

Review of External Insulation for


EHV & UHV Bushings
 February 29, 2020  17 min read

  

A number of alternatives are available these days when it comes to


external insulation of EHV & UHV bushings, including: a porcelain
housing, which, if needed can be coated with RTV to improve
pollution performance; a hybrid housing consisting of a porcelain
core support with an HTM housing; or a composite housing. This
edited contribution to INMR by Paolo Cardano and A. Pastore of GE
Grid Solutions in Italy in co-operation with consultant Alberto Pigini,
examines comparative performance of these insulation alternatives

https://www.inmr.com/review-external-insulation-ehv-uhv-bushings/?utm_source=INMR+WEEKLY+TECHNICAL+REVIEW&utm_campaign=836… 1/18
06.03.2020 Review of External Insulation for EHV & UHV Bushings | INMR

based on design aspects and requirements and in light of tests


performed at laboratories worldwide.

Electrical Performance  
In regard to electrical performance, the di erent insulation options
for EHV & UHV bushings can be grouped into two main categories:

• HTM (hydrophobicity transfer material) insulators such as RTV


silicone coated porcelain, hybrid solutions and composite solutions;
• non-HTM solutions, namely uncoated porcelain insulators.

          
Overvoltage Performance

The most critical condition for external bushing insulation from the
overvoltage point of view, although not commonly known, is
represented by tests with Switching Impulses (SI) of positive
polarity under rain. Examples of such test set-ups are shown in Fig.
1.

Fig. 1: Examples of overvoltage test set-ups.


CLICK TO ENLARGE

Flashovers under switching impulses develop mainly in air, unless


the distance between sheds of the insulators being used is too
small. Fig. 2 summarizes some test results obtained over the years.
Due to the arc occurring mainly in air, testing found no signi cant

https://www.inmr.com/review-external-insulation-ehv-uhv-bushings/?utm_source=INMR+WEEKLY+TECHNICAL+REVIEW&utm_campaign=836… 2/18
06.03.2020 Review of External Insulation for EHV & UHV Bushings | INMR

di erence between HTM and non-HTM insulation. Based on such


broad test experience, design indications have been derived for
internal product standardization from the switching performance
point of view and bushing arcing distances have therefore been
standardized based on SI level.

Fig. 2: Successful withstand test voltage versus bushing arcing


distance.
CLICK TO ENLARGE

Pollution Performance
Performance Under AC Voltage

IEC 60815 TS Parts 2 & 3 o er guidelines for selection of insulators


from the pollution point of view in AC. Basically, the same Uni ed
Speci c Creepage Distances (USCD) are indicated for non-HTM (e.g.
ceramic) and HTM (e.g. composite) insulators, thereby making any
deviations the responsibility of those who write the speci cation.
Moreover, speci cations generally assume that the same USCD is
applicable to cap & pin insulators or station insulators having
average diameter equal to or lower than 300 mm and indicating a
correction of USCD only for large station insulator diameters.

https://www.inmr.com/review-external-insulation-ehv-uhv-bushings/?utm_source=INMR+WEEKLY+TECHNICAL+REVIEW&utm_campaign=836… 3/18
06.03.2020 Review of External Insulation for EHV & UHV Bushings | INMR

Fig. 3: Reference USCD as function of pollution classes for HTM and


non HTM insulators.
CLICK TO ENLARGE

Applicability of the above indications in the case of non-HTM


porcelain insulator housings was veri ed by performing ad hoc
tests at a HV laboratory using Procedure B of the solid layer
method. Fig. 4 provides results for the insulator housings shown in
Fig. 5. These results were then compared with those following the
indications as per IEC 60815 TS. A discrepancy can be noted,
indicating that station insulators may require USCD higher than
what is indicated in the standard, something that may need to be
considered during its next revision. The same indications, namely a
higher USCD is necessary for station insulators than for cap & pin
insulators, were also found during related salt fog testing
conducted in Italy and Mexico.

Fig. 4: Results of tests with solid layer method at HV


laboratory on porcelain insulator housings from Fig. 5.
Comparison with curve derived from cap & pin insulator data,
corrected for in uence of diameter in uence, as indicated in
IEC 60815 TS.
CLICK TO ENLARGE

https://www.inmr.com/review-external-insulation-ehv-uhv-bushings/?utm_source=INMR+WEEKLY+TECHNICAL+REVIEW&utm_campaign=836… 4/18
06.03.2020 Review of External Insulation for EHV & UHV Bushings | INMR

Fig. 5: Porcelain housings tested at laboratory in Czech Republic.


CLICK TO ENLARGE

Tests to verify pollution performance of HTM insulators, i.e.


composite housings, were carried out at a laboratory in Sweden.
Given absence of a standardized test in this case, the salt fog
method with quick ashover procedure was used. This allowed
obtaining an indication of insulator performance after many
surface ashovers, thereby conditioning the insulators and leading
to an estimate of pollution performance that is closer to what might
actually be encountered during long-term service (see Fig. 6).

Fig. 6: Salt fog pollution laboratory testing on composite housings.


CLICK TO ENLARGE

At a salinity of 80 g/l, a USCD of 37 mm/kV was estimated, i.e. about


65% of the value estimated for ceramic housings based on a
conservative estimate and considering that ceramic insulators may
actually require higher USCD than in IEC 60815.

Performance Under DC Voltage


Guidelines for selecting insulators from the pollution point of view
in DC are proposed in IEC 60815 TS Part 4, which gives design
curves for both non-HTM and HTM insulators with reference to
solid layer and salt fog parameters (shown in Fig. 7). As the case for
AC, these curves are again assumed to be applicable both to cap &
pin insulators and to station insulators with average diameter equal
to or lower than 300 mm, with correction factors to be applied only
for insulators of larger diameter.

https://www.inmr.com/review-external-insulation-ehv-uhv-bushings/?utm_source=INMR+WEEKLY+TECHNICAL+REVIEW&utm_campaign=836… 5/18
06.03.2020 Review of External Insulation for EHV & UHV Bushings | INMR

Fig. 7: IEC Design curves (from IEC 60815 Part 4).


CLICK TO ENLARGE

Fig. 8 compares the performance of line insulators and station


insulators for the non-HTM case (i.e. ceramic insulators) using data
from a past CIGRE paper and based on tests carried out in Italy and
Germany. These indicate that direct application of line insulator
data to station insulators has to be made with caution.

https://www.inmr.com/review-external-insulation-ehv-uhv-bushings/?utm_source=INMR+WEEKLY+TECHNICAL+REVIEW&utm_campaign=836… 6/18
06.03.2020 Review of External Insulation for EHV & UHV Bushings | INMR

Fig. 8: Withstand salinity as function speci c creepage


distance (USCD).
For station insulators, reference is made to maximum
insulator diameter.
CLICK TO ENLARGE

More recently, additional tests were made to compare


experimental results with indications as per IEC 60815 Part 4 with
special attention to HTM insulators. Again, in the absence of
standardized testing methods, the quick ashover procedure was
used for salt fog and the so-called ‘rapid procedure’ for solid layer.
Experimental results of salt fog and solid layer pollution tests
performed on composite housings of large diameter from di erent
manufacturers (see Fig. 9 for an example) showed that results are
in uenced largely by insulator characteristics, as shown in Fig. 10.
This however con rms need for a USCD much lower than for
porcelain insulators, especially at relatively high contamination
levels, with the ratio of USCD for composite versus ceramic
insulators being less than 65%. Comparison of test results with IEC
speci cations therefore suggests that, in general, the IEC approach
may be conservative in the case of HTM insulators.

https://www.inmr.com/review-external-insulation-ehv-uhv-bushings/?utm_source=INMR+WEEKLY+TECHNICAL+REVIEW&utm_campaign=836… 7/18
06.03.2020 Review of External Insulation for EHV & UHV Bushings | INMR

Fig. 9: Insulator under test in Germany.


CLICK TO ENLARGE

Fig. 10: USCD as function of pollution severity.


Blue area: Range of experimental results for
composite insulators. Red & green lines: Design
curve suggested in IEC 60815 Parts 2 & 3
respectively for composite and porcelain
insulators.
CLICK TO ENLARGE

Fig. 11 shows that dependence of USCD on insulator diameter is


much lower for HTM insulators than for ceramic insulators. This
means the former o er greater advantage, especially for the larger
diameter insulators typically required for UHV AC and DC
applications.

https://www.inmr.com/review-external-insulation-ehv-uhv-bushings/?utm_source=INMR+WEEKLY+TECHNICAL+REVIEW&utm_campaign=836… 8/18
06.03.2020 Review of External Insulation for EHV & UHV Bushings | INMR

Fig. 11: In uence of insulator diameter on USCD. Tests at SES of 80


kg/m3.
Blue area: Range of experimental results for composite insulators.
Red & green lines: Design curve suggested in IEC 60815 Parts 2 & 3
respectively for composite and porcelain insulators.
CLICK TO ENLARGE

Design Indications  
The above ndings indicate that, looking only to withstand
requirement under pollution, HTM insulators (and hybrid ones as
well) could potentially be used with USCDs much lower than
normally applied for porcelain, even if the nal USCD selected for
design must take into account the need to comply with long-term
performance requirements (i.e. an ageing limitation). The
advantages of HTM solutions in terms of pollution performance,
especially for large diameter insulators required for the upper
range of EHV and UHV, and the possibility with composite
insulators to use e cient creepage factors higher than for ceramic
equivalents, make the HTM solution (i.e. composite and hybrid
insulators) the best candidate for AC applications in harsh
environments. This also applies in general for DC applications (i.e.
cases where performance under pollution conditions dominates
design. Moreover, in the case of DC, hybrid insulator solutions are
typically not used since the bushings are frequently placed at
angles close to horizontal and a porcelain core is too heavy.

Icing Performance      
                                                                         
For some environments, insulator design must comply with
expected performance under icing and sometimes under heavy ice
conditions, i.e. with the insulator practically short-circuited by ice

https://www.inmr.com/review-external-insulation-ehv-uhv-bushings/?utm_source=INMR+WEEKLY+TECHNICAL+REVIEW&utm_campaign=836… 9/18
06.03.2020 Review of External Insulation for EHV & UHV Bushings | INMR

(i.e. the most critical case). Tests on HTM and non-HTM insulators
were performed at three laboratories, with set-ups shown in Fig 11.
Performance of HTM and non-HTM insulation was similar in spite of
some possible initial advantage for non-HTM insulators during the
initial phase of ice formation. Once an ice coating has formed,
however, ice dominates insulation performance and fully masks
insulator characteristics. Based on experience, a software tool for
statistical design of insulators under heavy ice conditions has been
developed. As example, Fig. 12 outlines maximum allowable stress
for vertical insulators per m of arcing distance in the withstand
condition versus ice thickness.

Fig. 11: Insulators tested under heavy icing conditions.


CLICK TO ENLARGE

Fig. 12: Vertical insulator. Maximum allowable stress per m as


function of ice thickness (water conductivity 30 µS/cm). DC voltage.
Comparison of calculations with experimental results.
CLICK TO ENLARGE

https://www.inmr.com/review-external-insulation-ehv-uhv-bushings/?utm_source=INMR+WEEKLY+TECHNICAL+REVIEW&utm_campaign=83… 10/18
06.03.2020 Review of External Insulation for EHV & UHV Bushings | INMR

Much higher stresses can be allowed for inclined samples, as in


applications such as wall bushings. Fig. 13 shows examples of
calculations and comparison of experimental results for insulators
inclined as per in-service conditions, where in uence of insulator
diameter is shown as well.

Fig. 13: Comparison of experimental withstand voltage with computed


one for ice thickness of 42 mm. Ew values are given as function of
insulator external diameter D.
CLICK TO ENLARGE

Seismic Performance      
Earthquakes can be disastrous to the integrity of electrical grids
and many studies have been carried out and are still in progress to
limit these consequences. Bushings mounted on frames (i.e.
transformers, reactors, GIS, walls) that amplify ground motion and
being thin, high and heavy, are subject to even higher mechanical
stresses than other grid components, especially in the EHV (420-
550 kV) and UHV (≥800 kV) voltage ranges. As such, the critical
components of a bushing are its condenser core and airside
insulator. The rst links mainly to insulation technology. Oil
impregnated paper (OIP) insulation with condenser core made of
paper impregnated with a uid and all the components that
hermetically contain the oil becomes more critical than solid resin
impregnated paper (RIP) or resin impregnated synthetic (RIS)
technologies, where no uid is present. Second, since OIP
technology was the rst to have been developed, it is more
traditionally associated with use of porcelain insulators. By
contrast, the other ‘newer’ technologies are more frequently
connected with use of HTM-composite insulators. Porcelain is
heavy, rigid and fragile – all characteristics that are negative in
https://www.inmr.com/review-external-insulation-ehv-uhv-bushings/?utm_source=INMR+WEEKLY+TECHNICAL+REVIEW&utm_campaign=83… 11/18
06.03.2020 Review of External Insulation for EHV & UHV Bushings | INMR

terms of seismic withstand. Nonetheless, EHV and UHV bushings


are typically OIP insulated and still equipped with porcelain
insulators due mainly to the fact that utilities that use such
bushings mostly favour traditional porcelain. Therefore, these must
be carefully optimized for seismic performance by employing only
highest quality materials (e.g. extra high strength porcelain,
reinforced anges, optimized cementing between porcelain and
ange) as well as extensive use of FEM analyses along with
subsequent seismic testing to verify simulation results.

Fortunately, UHV bushings are normally installed vertically – a


condition that helps seismic withstand compared to the inclined
position, where relevant dead load plays an important role in
considerably increasing seismic stresses (see Fig. 14b). A
mechanically optimized OIP UHV bushing (800-1100 kV) can
normally withstand seismic acceleration of up to 0.3 g,
corresponding to a medium level in IEC’s seismic standard where
the lowest level is 0.2 g and the highest is 0.5 g (g being the earth’s
acceleration of 9.81 m/s2). EHV OIP bushings can withstand a level
of up to 0.5 g if placed vertically. In order to increase seismic
withstand, both UHV and EHV bushings should ideally be equipped
with composite insulators. In all of the above cases, a hybrid
insulator solution would not help in terms of increasing seismic
performance due to presence of the heavy porcelain core.

Fig. 14: Bushings under seismic testing.


CLICK TO ENLARGE

https://www.inmr.com/review-external-insulation-ehv-uhv-bushings/?utm_source=INMR+WEEKLY+TECHNICAL+REVIEW&utm_campaign=83… 12/18
06.03.2020 Review of External Insulation for EHV & UHV Bushings | INMR

Solid insulation bushings equipped with composite insulators are


seismically stronger because, in addition to their solid condenser
core:

• the ller between core and insulator is normally dry (i.e.


polyurethane foams or high viscosity gels) which act as damper
between core and insulator, thereby increasing overall bushing
damping;

• a composite insulator is light, elastic and with good mechanical


performance, which can be further increased by changing the
winding angle of the berglass used in its hollow tube (see Fig. 15).
While the standard winding angle is normally about 35 to 40° (with
respect to insulator axis) this angle can be reduced thus increasing
material properties by up to 50%;

Fig. 15: Damage limit of berglass as function of winding angle.


CLICK TO ENLARGE

• the bushing is lighter and consequently seismic acceleration


generates a lower force (F = m x a);

• the insulator, in conjunction with ller, is an elastic system and


therefore overall damping is lower. This reduces seismic response
by decreasing maximum acceleration applied to the bushing;

https://www.inmr.com/review-external-insulation-ehv-uhv-bushings/?utm_source=INMR+WEEKLY+TECHNICAL+REVIEW&utm_campaign=83… 13/18
06.03.2020 Review of External Insulation for EHV & UHV Bushings | INMR

• on the other hand, these classes of bushings, generally in the EHV


range (420-550 kV), are frequently tested in an inclined position
(see Fig. 14) where seismic stress is higher due to the dead load.

Dry bushings in the EHV range equipped with composite insulators


can withstand the highest seismic level of 0.5 g, even in an inclined
position and up to the worst angle of 45° (see Fig. 14a).

A nal aspect to consider relates to direct moulding, a process that


consists of moulding silicone sheds directly onto the bushing’s
condenser core. This eliminates need for a composite insulator as
well as the ller needed for the gap between insulator and
berglass tube. This kind of bushing is structurally less strong and
generally made only up to the HV range of 170 kV. Therefore, their
mass is relatively small and seismic forces are not so high.

Safety Aspects
From the safety point of view, porcelain insulators, even if still the
main type used worldwide, are critical due to risk of explosion in
the event of internal ashover that comes into contact with the
body. The thermal shock from the arc generates a dangerous
explosion with projection of sharp chunks of porcelain all around
and possible serious injury to persons and damage to nearby
equipment. This is one of the reasons why porcelain insulators are
progressively being substituted with composite insulators that do
not su er this type of violent phenomenon. In case of internal arc,
the composite insulator breaks but does not explode. This is
another positive characteristic for such insulation, in addition to the
pollution and seismic performance advantages outlined above. A
hybrid insulator solution is not used when focused on the safety
aspect since the drawbacks of porcelain in terms of explosion risk
do not change.

One of the latest developments in OIP bushings, traditionally


equipped only with porcelain, has been to o er them in the EHV
range with composite insulators instead. This avoids the possible
drawbacks of porcelain while maintaining known, reliable OIP
technology and is a compromise being considered by more and
more utilities in recent years. For example, to demonstrate the
explosion proof capability of such bushings, Italian TSO Terna
recently introduced the internal arc test, typically used for years in
the case of current transformers. The goal is to verify that when a
420 kV bushing is run with a current of 63 kA for half a second
there is no projection of solid parts outside a radius of 2 m from
https://www.inmr.com/review-external-insulation-ehv-uhv-bushings/?utm_source=INMR+WEEKLY+TECHNICAL+REVIEW&utm_campaign=83… 14/18
06.03.2020 Review of External Insulation for EHV & UHV Bushings | INMR

the bushing’s airside axis. This test has been carried out with
success for 420 kV class transformer bushings using both insulating
technologies, OIP and RIP (see Fig. 16).

Another important safety aspect relates to the possibility to reduce


risk of re not only of the bushing in case of ashover but also of
the transformer itself. An OIP bushing contains a ammable uid
that can burn in case of internal arc. Due to its structure, if a
component such as an insulator breaks following ashover, it loses
its tightness can allow transformer oil to exit through it, leading to
possible worst case burning of the transformer. Use of dry type
bushings reduces such risk because the bushing, being a single-
piece, acts as a cap on the transformer. Even in case of internal
damage, spill of transformer oil is avoided reducing re risk.

Fig. 16: Internal arc test on RIP bushing rated 420


kV. Bushing was run with current of 63 kA for 500
ms.
CLICK TO ENLARGE

Conclusions   
This article analyzed behaviour of non-HTM (porcelain) and HTM
(composite and hybrid) insulators from di erent points of view. In
terms of wet switching impulses performance, there is no
appreciable di erence because the ashover happens mainly in air
following the water ow. IEC Standards specify the same USCD for
HTM and non HTM insulators, cap & pin and station types,
introducing only a correction factor for average diameters larger
than 300 mm. Tests carried out in AC at di erent laboratories using
the solid layer as well as salt fog methods demonstrate to the
https://www.inmr.com/review-external-insulation-ehv-uhv-bushings/?utm_source=INMR+WEEKLY+TECHNICAL+REVIEW&utm_campaign=83… 15/18
06.03.2020 Review of External Insulation for EHV & UHV Bushings | INMR

contrary that performance of HTM insulators is signi catively better


than for porcelain and that line insulators require a USCD lower
than necessary for station insulators. This should be considered in
the next IEC Standard revision.

For DC voltages the IEC Standard con rms the same concept.
Again, experimental results using salt fog and solid layer methods
demonstrate that the behaviour of HTM insulators is remarkably
better than non-HTM insulators. This phenomenon becomes more
pronounced with larger diameters and in this case cap & pin types
behave better than station insulators.

Under icing conditions, especially when the ice layer becomes thick,
behaviour in AC and DC of HTM and non-HTM insulators is basically
the same because conduction phenomena are dominated by ice,
thereby completely masking insulator surface.

Seismic withstand is critical for all bushings, especially in the UHV


range. OIP insulation and porcelain are typically the main type used
and all components must be optimized to realize a bushing that is
seismically resistant. Dry bushings equipped with composite
insulators have superior behaviour under seismic stresses as well
as in terms of safety. Composite insulators do not explode in case
of internal ashover whereas non-HTM insulators, both porcelain
and hybrids, have risk of explosion. Moreover, dry bushings help to
contain transformer oil and therefore help decrease risk of re
compared to OIP bushings.

References

[1] IEC 60815 TS Part 2 – Selection and dimensioning of high-voltage


insulators intended for use in polluted conditions – Ceramic and glass
insulators for a.c. systems.

[2] IEC 60815 TS Part 3 – Selection and dimensioning of high-voltage


insulators intended for use in polluted conditions – Polymer insulators
for a.c. systems.

[3] A. Pigini and al., “Disconnector design from the pollution point of
view”, paper submitted for publication.

[4] P. Lambeth e C. De Tourreil, “Electrical performance measurements


of arti cially and naturally aged polymeric insulators”, International
conference on overhead line design and construction: Theory and
practice, London, 1988.

https://www.inmr.com/review-external-insulation-ehv-uhv-bushings/?utm_source=INMR+WEEKLY+TECHNICAL+REVIEW&utm_campaign=83… 16/18
06.03.2020 Review of External Insulation for EHV & UHV Bushings | INMR

[5] G. Pirovano, P. Omodeo Gianolo, A. Pigini, “Assessment of the


pollution performance of composite insulators”, ISH 2013

[6]  IEC 60815 TS Part 4 – Selection and dimensioning of high-voltage


insulators intended for use in polluted conditions – Insulators for d.c.
systems.

[7] R. Cortina, G. Marrone, A. Pigini, L. Thione, W. Petrusch, M. P. Verma


“Study of the dielectric strength of external insulation of HVDC systems
and application to design and testing” Cigre general session 1984, paper
33.12.

[8]  CIGRE WG C4303, “Arti cial Pollution Test for Polymer Insulators.
Results of Round Robin Test”, CIGRE Brochure 555-2013, 2013.

[9] G. Testin, M. Boutlendj, P. Cardano, A. Pastore, M. Saravolac, M.


Sehovac, A. Pigini “Methodologies for pollution tests on composite
housings”, Cigre General Session 2016, Paper A3-115.

[10] A. Pigini, “Design and testing of polymeric insulators to verify the


pollution performance under DC voltage”, INMR World Congress 2015.

[11] P. Cardano, M. Nosilati, E. Stella, V. Girlando, G. Testin, M. Saravolac,


A. Pigini, A. Dariani, S. Yuan, “Station insulation performance under
heavy icing conditions”, Cigre General Session 2016, Paper B3-304.

[12] A. Pigini, R. Cortina, M. Marzinotto, G. Lagrotteria, “Line insulator


performance in presence of ice and snow”, ISH 2017

[13] P. Cardano, G. Testin, V. Fogliani, A. Pastore, M. Sehovac,


“Development of UHV bushings for extremely severe seismic
conditions”, INMR World Congress 2017.

[14] G. Testin, P. Cardano, M. Sehovac, M. Boutlendj, A. Pigini, “HV & UHV


bushings design optimization from safety point of view”, INMR World
Congress 2013.

  

← Longitudinal Loading: Fact Versus Myth (Video)

IEEE PES 2020 T&D Conference in Chicago →

https://www.inmr.com/review-external-insulation-ehv-uhv-bushings/?utm_source=INMR+WEEKLY+TECHNICAL+REVIEW&utm_campaign=83… 17/18

S-ar putea să vă placă și