C. Lumb
36-WG11/Capetown/129 November 2002
TC 36 Beijing decisions on Part1 (36/187/CD) Note1: Comment numbers have been added for ease of reference Note 2: For some comments of an editorial or minor technical nature no decision is recorded these matters were left to the discretion of the working group Date :2002-08-30 Comment number
National Committee
Clause/ Sub clause
Paragraph Figure/ Table
Type of comment (General/ Technical/Editorial )
Canada
General
General
ES
General
General
3
PL
General
General
4
UK US
General General
General General
1
2
5
COMMENTS
The document provides general None information and useful guides to the users. Due to the complexity of the subject, it will be a challenge to develop the remaining documents, parts 2 to 5. The applicability and practicality of certain sections of this document to non-ceramic insulators are questionable, for example, the use of a dummy insulator. Measurements on NCI’s give somewhat strange results, as it is never obvious as to how much pollution goes into the water solution and how much remains encapsulated in the insulator surface. Overall, it is a good start. The Spanish National Committee accepts the draft as such without comments The Polish NC has no comments to the document UK supports the CD without comment The US National Committee supports this document as written
Proposed change
Document : 36/187/CD OBSERVATIONS OF THE SECRETARIAT on each comment submitted The comments below are those of the project leader of TC 36 WG 11
The CA NC is thanked for their encouragement. Concerning measuring pollution on NCI's the WG is aware of the problem. This is why site pollution severity measurements are done with glass or porcelain insulators.
1
C. Lumb
Comment number
36-WG11/Capetown/129 November 2002 National Committee
AT
Clause/ Sub clause
Paragraph Figure/ Table
1
Type of comment
COMMENTS
Proposed change
(General/ Technical/Editorial )
Technical .
6
SE
7
SE
We do not understand this. The reference insulator is defined in the draft, there is no need to correct or determine average diameter or form factor for this insulator.
Meeting Discussion The meeting noted that form factor is not used in the draft. 1 General The document is in the text often mentioned as guide. The number of the circulated document indicate it to be a standard. The relevant type should be used in the text. Meeting Discussion The meeting noted that it had previously been agreed to publish the 60815 series as technical specifications.
Meeting Decision The meeting rejected the proposed change Guide should be changed to Technical Accepted. Specification or Standard. Can TC 36 give guidance on whether it will be a TS or Standard ?
1
The text should be editorial changed
Editorial
8
Each category of insulator will be specified in an own part. In the text the categories/parts not necessarily shall be mentioned twice.
Meeting Discussion SE
Page 8, line 10 from bottom: "Determine the necessary creepage distance for a defined 'reference' insulator" shall read: "Determine the necessary creepage distance at actual average diameter or alternatively necessary form factor, for a defined “reference” insulator"
OBSERVATIONS OF THE SECRETARIAT on each comment submitted The comments below are those of the project leader of TC 36 WG 11
1
2nd Technical example of aim
9
Meeting Discussion
The determination is to be clarified.
Meeting Decision To replace the word “guide” with “technical specification” everywhere in the draft. Partly acceptable Suggest demoting "The specific guidelines … for d.c. systems" to note
Meeting Decision Agreed to demote "The specific guidelines … for d.c. systems" to a note Add “…at actual average diameter or We do not understand this. alternatively necessary form factor”… The reference insulator is defined in The text to be: Determine the the draft, there is no need to correct necessary creepage distance at actual or determine average diameter or average diameter or alternatively form factor for this insulator. necessary form factor, for a defined “reference” insulator. Meeting Decision The suggestion was rejected but it was agreed that an Annex on form factor would be useful. The Swedish delegation was asked to provide an Annex on form factor.
2
C. Lumb
Comment number
36-WG11/Capetown/129 November 2002 National Committee
AU
Clause/ Sub clause
Paragraph Figure/ Table
2
Type of comment
COMMENTS
Proposed change
(General/ Technical/Editorial )
General
10
The definitions used should align with those in the project to compile all the definitions in the Standards of TC 36 and its subcommittees and align them with the IEV
OBSERVATIONS OF THE SECRETARIAT on each comment submitted The comments below are those of the project leader of TC 36 WG 11
Agreed that the definitions need to be aligned. However it would be preferable to use these "latest" definitions rather than "older" ones.
Meeting Discussion
AT
11 FR
12
Meeting Decision Agreed that the “latest” definitions should be used. 3.2 Technical Page 9: Please explain – At least 7 See Annex A sheds are necessary. Why? Here it is explained that the pollution measurements are made on subsequent sheds at monthly, 3 monthly etc. intervals. 3.2 Editorial Cancel the last sentence "At least 7 See Annex A sheds are necessary" Here it is explained that the pollution measurements are made on subsequent sheds at monthly, 3 monthly etc. intervals. Meeting Discussion Meeting Decision The meeting noted that Annex B should have been referred to in the The suggestion to cancel the reference to 7 sheds was rejected. observations rather than Annex A. The meeting also noted that 7 sheds are specified in Annex B in order to standardise the test.
DE
3.3
SE
3.3
G
The insulator trunk is also known as “Core of the insulator” (see IEV 50 Part 471-01-03)
Please use the same expression in all IEC Publications
Editorial
Trunk should be replaced by Core. Core is an established tem in the business and in other IEC Publications such as 60168, 60155, 50971 and others.
Change title to: “Insulator Core”
13
14
Title
Not accepted The core is the inner (fibreglass) part of an insulator. The trunk or shank is the part of the insulator between the sheds. IEV needs revising Not accepted The core is the inner (fibreglass) part of an insulator. The trunk or shank is the part of the insulator between the sheds. IEV needs revising
3
C. Lumb
Comment number
36-WG11/Capetown/129 November 2002 National Committee
AT
15
SE
16
DE
Clause/ Sub clause
Paragraph Figure/ Table
Type of comment
COMMENTS
(General/ Technical/Editorial )
Editorial
Page 9: Core is the established term in the business and in other IEC standards as 60168 and others.
Replace “trunk” by core
Not accepted The core is the inner (fibreglass) part of an insulator. The trunk or shank is the part of the insulator between the sheds. IEV needs revising 3.4 1st line Editorial Trunk should be replaced by Core. New text: “Projections from the core of Not accepted an insulator …” The core is the inner (fibreglass) part of an insulator. The trunk or shank is the part of the insulator between the sheds. IEV needs revising Meeting Decision Meeting Discussion The meeting agreed that the core is the inner part of an insulator not The suggested change was rejected. The meeting agreed that the IEV the part between the sheds. The meeting also noted that the current Chapter 471 should be changed to clearly define “core” and “trunk” IEV definition (IEV: 471-01-03) does not distinguish between the trunk and the core. 3.5
G
It would be better to have a uniform definition.
The definition in IEV 50 Part 471 Agreed should therefore if necessary be changed (see document IEC 36/188/DC). Meeting Decision Agreed that the definition in IEV should be changed to align with this new form.
Technical
Page 10: A new term for specific creepage distance of an insulator shall not be introduced.
Replace “Unified specific creepage” Not agreed. distance by Nominal specific creepage Since it has been decided to use distance … for all relevant parts phase to ground rather than phase to phase voltage for specific creepage distance it is necessary to have a new term in order to avoid confusion. "Unified" was used since it unifies testing and line practice.
Meeting Discussion
18
OBSERVATIONS OF THE SECRETARIAT on each comment submitted The comments below are those of the project leader of TC 36 WG 11
3.3. to 3.4
17
AT
Proposed change
3.6
4
C. Lumb
Comment number
36-WG11/Capetown/129 November 2002 National Committee
Clause/ Sub clause
AT
3.6
CH
3.6
Paragraph Figure/ Table
Type of comment
Fr
21 IT
22
Proposed change
(General/ Technical/Editorial )
Technical
19
20
COMMENTS
Page 10: The calculation concept of Replace “highest operation voltage the nominal specific creepage across the insulator” by highest system distance against IEC60815 (1986) voltage Um (phase to phase) shall not be changed, as it would lead to total confusion.
Not agreed. The WG feels very strongly about using the same voltages both in the lab and on the line. There has been great confusion in the past about test voltages or necessary creepage distance. Not agreed. The WG feels very strongly about using the same voltages both in the lab and on the line. There has been great confusion in the past about test voltages or necessary creepage distance.
This definition is based on the phase- We suggest therefore the use of to-ground voltage. On the contrary the phase-to-phase voltage. existing publication 61815 (1986) specifies the phase-to-phase voltage. This may lead to misunderstandings when customers are specifying the minimum specific creepage distance in a future. Meeting Discussion Meeting Decision The meeting noted that the use of a specific creepage based on phase Agreed to retain the definition of unified specific creepage distance to ground insulation would be safer in that a mistake will lead to based on “highest voltage for equipment Um” and to use the term overdesign. phase to earth to align with IEC 60071. The creepage distance shall be based on highest voltage for equipment Agreed to add a note warning of the difference between this definition and that of the current IEC 815. Um. Members also noted that the term “phase to earth” should be used to align with IEC 71. 3.6 Editorial Complete as following : The ratio Not agreed – see IT below between the creepage and the r.m.s. value...... 3.6
Technical
OBSERVATIONS OF THE SECRETARIAT on each comment submitted The comments below are those of the project leader of TC 36 WG 11
1st alignment
Meeting Discussion
Technical
The definition should be of general purpose and applicable to all a.c. and d.c. systems
Suggestion would be to to replace “the Agreed r.m.s. value …..operating voltage” with “the maximum operating voltage (r.m.s. for a.c. system)” Meeting Decision Agreed with this essentially editorial suggestion
5
C. Lumb
Comment number
36-WG11/Capetown/129 November 2002 National Committee
Clause/ Sub clause
AT
3.7
Paragraph Figure/ Table
Type of comment
24
AU
25
3.7
Proposed change
(General/ Technical/Editorial )
Technical
23
SE
COMMENTS
Editorial
OBSERVATIONS OF THE SECRETARIAT on each comment submitted The comments below are those of the project leader of TC 36 WG 11
Page 10: The most fundamental geometric parameter for quantitatively calculating of the resulting surface resistance of the contaminated insulator is the form factor.
This paragraph shall define only form factor according to IEC 60507 definition
Not agreed Form factor is not used in the draft so no definition is needed. Will be further discussed in the WG
This paragraph should define only Form Factor according to IEC 60507 definition. This is the most fundamental geometric parameter for quantitatively calculating the resulting surface resistance of the contaminated insulator. The present cl.3.7 should be changed to 3.8 and so on.
Add definition of Form factor as Cl. 3.7 Not agreed Form factor is not used in the draft so no definition is needed. Will be further discussed in the WG
3.7 shall be changed to 3.8 and so on
Meeting Decision Meeting Discussion The meeting noted that it had previously been agreed to add an Annex Agreed that a definition is not needed for a term that is not used and that the situation can be reviewed by the working group when an Annex on form factor. on form factor is added. 5 General It is considered that the three Thank you approaches for the selection and dimensioning of insulators is welcome and acknowledges both the performance history methods and the more systematic quantitative methods that allow users to adopt an appropriate method commensurate to the level of engineering within an organisation.
6
C. Lumb
Comment number
36-WG11/Capetown/129 November 2002 National Committee
IT
Clause/ Sub clause
5
Paragraph Figure/ Table
Table 1
Type of comment
COMMENTS
Proposed change
(General/ Technical/Editorial )
Technical
26
The approach described in the Table text seems to be of difficult understanding and application.
Suggestion would be to convert the Table in a flow chart.
OBSERVATIONS OF THE SECRETARIAT on each comment submitted The comments below are those of the project leader of TC 36 WG 11
A flow chart was tried and took up too much room resulting in having to split onto several pages. It was preferred to use this tabular form in order to be able to have all three approaches together for comparison.
Meeting Decision Meeting Discussion The meeting noted that CIGRE had tried a flowchart approach and The meeting rejected this suggestion but Italy would refer that matter back to its source to ask for input on how a flow chart could be found it impossible. achieved. SE
5
27
Table 1 Approach B Decisions
Editorial
The type of pollution will not determine the laboratory test but the test method used.
Meeting Discussion
28
CA SE AT
5 6
Last paragraph Tab 2
Editorial Editorial
The “if “ in the sentence should be “of”.
The text is suggested to be changed to: • Type of pollution determines the laboratory test method used. Meeting Decision Agreed to this editorial change Revise to read: “… in the relevant further parts of this publication.”. Page 12, left column: Replace “highest operation voltage across the insulator” by highest system voltage Um (phase to phase)
29 Replace “Overvoltages” by Insulation co-ordination
Agreed
Noted Not agreed This would cause confusion when using the USCD
Not agreed This not simply a matter of insulation co-ordination. If one refers to CIGRE 158, the subject of overvoltages is dealt with in detail.
Meeting Discussion Meeting Decision It was noted that overvoltage is the part of insulation co-ordination that Did not agreed with replacing “highest operation voltage across the was of particular interest to the working group. insulator” by highest system voltage Um (phase to phase). Agreed to replace “Overvoltage” with “Insulation coordination (Um and over voltage)”
7
C. Lumb
Comment number
36-WG11/Capetown/129 November 2002 National Committee
AT
Clause/ Sub clause
6
Paragraph Figure/ Table
Tab 2
Type of comment
COMMENTS
Proposed change
(General/ Technical/Editorial )
Editorial
Page 12, centre column: “Environmental Agreed – but in italics Conditions” column shall include “Animal attacks” (rodents, birds) and “Biological Contamination” (fungus, insects, growth).
30 Replace “Lightning” by Isoceraunic level
Meeting Discussion
SE
6
Table 2
31
Not agreed – there are different lightning parameters (storm days, Ground flash density, etc.) used by different utilities, so a general term is better.
Meeting Decision Agreed to add “animal attacks” and “biological contamination” but in italics because they are not pollution related. Agreed to retain the general term for lightning Technical
Environmental Conditions column shall include “Animal attacks” (rodents, birds etc.) and “Biological Contamination” (fungus, insects, growth).
Add as suggested.
Agreed – but in italics
We still do not see the need for form factor – it is a secondary parameter derived from the profile parameters.
Insulator Parameters column shall include “Form Factor” Meeting Discussion
OBSERVATIONS OF THE SECRETARIAT on each comment submitted The comments below are those of the project leader of TC 36 WG 11
Meeting Decision
Previously agreed to add “animal attacks” and “biological contamination” but in italics. Agreed that there is no need to refer to form factor
8
C. Lumb
Comment number
36-WG11/Capetown/129 November 2002 National Committee
AT
Clause/ Sub clause
6
Paragraph Figure/ Table
Tab 2
Type of comment
COMMENTS
Proposed change
(General/ Technical/Editorial )
Technical
Page 12, right column: “Insulator Parameters” column shall include “ Form Factor, Mechanical requirements
32
Electrical design
OBSERVATIONS OF THE SECRETARIAT on each comment submitted The comments below are those of the project leader of TC 36 WG 11
Partly agreed. We still do not see the need for form factor – it is a secondary parameter derived from the profile parameters. Mechanical/Electrical OK in italics. The WG prefers the more general term.
Replace “Profile” by Shed profile
Meeting Discussion Form factor previously discussed
IT
33
7
13th line
Technical
The warning about the maximum voltage stress across the longitudinal insulation during synchronisation seems to be misleading, causing an insulation overdimensioning. This stress condition would seem to be more properly a temporary overvoltage (TOV) instead of a maximum operating voltage. It would be comparable to TOV of long duration: see for example the statement in the third sentence of indent “Overvoltages”.
Meeting Discussion Noted that: • This is a transient covered by transient protection • That the CB committee 17A (WG 35) is developing a guide • That pollution flashover takes time
Meeting Decision Agreed not to include form factor in the table because it is not referred to elsewhere in the draft. Agreed to add “Mechanical requirements” and “Electrical design” in italics because they are not pollution related. Agreed to retain the term “profile” Suggestion would be to move the Not agreed whole sentence to indent Longitudinal insulation needs to be “Overvoltages”. The text of the indent designed from the start for such should be reworded, accordingly. synchronisation stresses, hence it belongs in this indent.
Meeting Decision The committee suggested the use of the words of the CB committee and left it to the WG to consider.
9
C. Lumb
Comment number
36-WG11/Capetown/129 November 2002 National Committee
SE
34
SE
Clause/ Sub clause
Paragraph Figure/ Table
Type of comment
Overvoltag Editorial e2nd paragraph rd 3 paragraph Editorial Meeting Discussion 3rd paragraph
Proposed change
(General/ Technical/Editorial )
7
8
COMMENTS
Technical
The text is more for education.
The paragraph, “Temporary overvoltages (TOV) and its …” , 3 lines, is suggested to be deleted.
OBSERVATIONS OF THE SECRETARIAT on each comment submitted The comments below are those of the project leader of TC 36 WG 11
Suggest demoting these two paragraphs of this indent to a note
The reference to CIGRÈ should be given in a note. Meeting Decision Agreed to reduce the two paragraphs to a note The salt-fog test is not applicable for polymeric insulators so “salt-fog type” would be unfortunate and would perhaps imply that the use of salt-fog test on Polymerics is acceptable.
Change Salt-fog type to Liquid type
35
Requires discussion “Salt-fog” is a description of a type and mechanism of natural pollution not of a test. This proposal was made in the WG and rejected, however the project leader feels that discussion could be re-opened. The applicability of salt-fog tests to composite insulators is not impossible – especially for hydrophilic insulators
Meeting Discussion Noted that this Clause refers to a type of pollution not to a test. CN
8.1 8.2
Technical
Meeting Decision Agreed to leave it as salt fog.
It is proposed layer conductivity should be regarded as characteristic of type A and type B pollution.
Not agreed While this is true in the lab under controlled wetting conditions, layer conductivity does not give information about solid layer severity in the field. However it can be useful monitoring tool.
36
Meeting Discussion It was noted that layer conductivity is a dynamic parameter in the field. China withdraws comment.
Meeting Decision Agreed to retain types of pollution
10
C. Lumb
Comment number
36-WG11/Capetown/129 November 2002 National Committee
JP
Clause/ Sub clause
8.1.1
Paragraph Figure/ Table
1st paragraph
Type of comment
COMMENTS
Proposed change
It is necessary to show that withstand voltage is different depending on kind of active pollution.
To add the following sentence at the end of description of active pollution. “Since the low solubility salt is not dissolved easily by limited moisture on insulator surface, withstand voltage different from the case of high solubility salts.”
(General/ Technical/Editorial )
Technical
37
JP
Meeting Discussion The working group had discussed this matter and agreed it would raise unnecessary complications if mentioned here. 8.8.1 Editorial Location of the following sentence on description of Type A pollution is not appropriate. “Type A pollution can also arise ….. fog or drizzle.”
38
Meeting Discussion Japan
9.1
1st paragraph
39
Meeting Discussion
Technical
Information on the measurement interval of ESDD and NSDD should be introduced for reference.
OBSERVATIONS OF THE SECRETARIAT on each comment submitted The comments below are those of the project leader of TC 36 WG 11
Not agreed. The WG decided that this would cause confusion if mentioned here. However, some subscribers cannot read the reference [1].
Meeting Decision Agreed that the draft should state that this matter is under consideration To change the order of sentence of 1st Agreed paragraph as follows: “Type A pollution is most often associated with inland, desert or industrially polluted areas. Type A pollution can also arise in cases where a dry salt layer builds up and then rapidly becomes wetted by dew, mist, fog or drizzle. Solid layer type A pollution is classified into two main categories, …..” Meeting Decision Agreed to this editorial change Agreed. To add the information on However it should be made clear that measurement interval as follows: the measurement interval is not “The Site Pollution Severity (SPS) is the maximum value(s) of either ESDD necessarily fixed and can/should be and NSDD, or SES, recorded over an varied according to site and season appreciable period of time - i.e. one or Suggest also adding a reference to more years with certain measurement Annexes B & C. interval such as every month, every three month, each year, after two years etc. - on a vertically mounted reference insulator.” Meeting Decision Agreed that the suggested addition should be made with the additional information suggested by the project leader
11
C. Lumb
Comment number
36-WG11/Capetown/129 November 2002 National Committee
Japan
Clause/ Sub clause
9.1
Paragraph Figure/ Table
1st paragraph
Type of comment
Technical
Meeting Discussion 9.1
Technical
41 Meeting Discussion
JP
9.2
2nd paragraph Figure 2 Figure 3
42
Meeting Discussion
Proposed change
(General/ Technical/Editorial )
40
Japan
COMMENTS
Technical
Definition of maximum value of SPS is To add the following sentence at the st not clear. end of the 1 paragraph. “The maximum value(s) should be obtained by 1% or 5% value of statistical estimation of the recorded value.”
OBSERVATIONS OF THE SECRETARIAT on each comment submitted The comments below are those of the project leader of TC 36 WG 11
Agreed ? However one needs 4 years of monthly measurements to get a 2% value. Suggest adding this as a note e.g. “When sufficient measurements are available to permit statistical estimation, the maximum may be replaced by a 1% or 5% value”
Meeting Decision Agreed that the Note suggested by the project leader should be added In the case of cap and pin type To add the NOTE 3 as follows: Requires discussion insulator, it is necessary to clarify a “NOTE 3 In the case of cap and pin The WG has omitted to specify if top, part of the shed such as top or bottom type insulator, ESDD and NSDD of bottom or average ESDD/NSDD surface for evaluation of ESDD and bottom surface are used for evaluation should be used. NSDD. usually.” Requires discussion/study by the WG Meeting Decision The meeting agreed that the working group should study this matter and specify whether the top, bottom or average ESDD/NSDD should be used. It is necessary to comment on the pollution deposition condition of cap and pin insulator and long rod insulator.
To add the following sentence to Agreed NOTE. However exact wording needs “Usually less pollution is deposited on discussion in the WG. log rod insulators compared to cap and pin insulator due to rain washing effect under ordinary pollution condition as shown in Figures 2 and 3. However, in the case of rapid pollution condition such as typhoon or hurricane, more pollution is deposited on long rod insulator than cap and pin insulator by strong wind from sea in a short time.“ Meeting Decision Agreed that the working group should formulate additional words to cover this.
12
C. Lumb
Comment number
36-WG11/Capetown/129 November 2002 National Committee
SE
Clause/ Sub clause
Paragraph Figure/ Table
9.2
Type of comment
Editorial
Meeting Discussion
10.1
Technical
Meeting Discussion
CA DE FR
10.2
Second paragraph
10.3.1
46
Meeting Discussion
In connection with table 3, figure 2, 3 and 4 should be placed. All three figures should be on one page.
OBSERVATIONS OF THE SECRETARIAT on each comment submitted The comments below are those of the project leader of TC 36 WG 11
IEC Drafting rules require figures to be at the end. We will try for a derogation or convert Table 3 into a "figure" Meeting Decision The new Central Office Engineer for TC 36 Mr Pierre Amiguet agreed that the figures could be placed with the Table.
44
45
Proposed change
(General/ Technical/Editorial )
43
FR
COMMENTS
Editorial Technical
This clause does not mention the fact Add a paragraph pointing this out. that the use of the different profiles can result in widely different insulation lengths. This is an important parameter in the selection of insulation and should be mentioned.
Agreed
Meeting Decision Agreed that the working group should study this and make an addition that if possible gives an objective meaning to “widely” “are as” should read “areas”. Revise to read: “… deserts, heavily Agreed polluted industrial areas or coastal …”. It is not clear from the text that the Modify last paragraph to read "The Agreed uniformity of the voltage distribution is pollution performance of hollow core mainly influenced by internal insulators is not only a function of components and uneven wetting. The profile, leakage distance and diameter, clauses 10.3.1.1 and 10.3.1.2 do not but also function of the uniformity of follow on logically. voltage distribution. The two major parameters affecting voltage distribution are internal components and uneven wetting (see 10.3.1.1 and 10.3.1.2). Care should be taken …. critical" Meeting Decision Agreed with this essentially editorial comment
13
C. Lumb
Comment number
36-WG11/Capetown/129 November 2002 National Committee
AT
Clause/ Sub clause
Paragraph Figure/ Table
10.3.1.1
Type of comment
COMMENTS
(General/ Technical/Editorial )
Technical
47
Page 19: A contaminated insulator is only one of the parts that contribute to the total electrical field in the system. If the insulators field contribution is evening out in homogeneities caused by other parts, outside and inside the insulator, will the final field have optimum homogeneity?
Meeting Discussion
SE
10.3.1.1
2nd column
48
Meeting Discussion
Proposed change
OBSERVATIONS OF THE SECRETARIAT on each comment submitted The comments below are those of the project leader of TC 36 WG 11
Replace “The best performance (…) is generally obtained on housings with a uniform axial and radial voltage distribution…” by "The best performance (…) is generally obtained on a system with a uniform axial and radial voltage distribution… An insulator design that evens out the total voltage distribution is thereby the optimum alternative"
Agreed Maybe better to use the term "insulation system" ?
Meeting Decision Agreed with this essentially editorial comment with the variation suggested by the project leader. Technical
A contaminated insulator is only one of the parts that contribute to the total electrical field in the system. If the insulator field contribution is evening out in homogeneties caused by other parts, outside and inside the insulator, the final field will have optimum homogeneity
Agreed The text is suggested to be added to However it is not necessarily the be: insulator design, but rather the whole “The best performance (…) is system which evens out the voltage. generally otained on a system with a WG will re-write suitably. uniform axial and radial voltage distribution… An insulator design that evens out the total voltage distribution is thereby the optmal alternative. Meeting Decision Agreed with this essentially editorial comment with the variation suggested by the project leader.
14
C. Lumb
Comment number
36-WG11/Capetown/129 November 2002 National Committee
AT
49
SE
50
Clause/ Sub clause
10.3.2
Paragraph Figure/ Table
Type of comment
COMMENTS
Proposed change
(General/ Technical/Editorial )
Technical
OBSERVATIONS OF THE SECRETARIAT on each comment submitted The comments below are those of the project leader of TC 36 WG 11
Not agreed This is not the place for this. Any Cap & pin and long rod insulators. reference to differing behaviour, need . for more or less creepage etc., Text shall be: As shown in figure 2 belongs in parts 2 and 4 The collected material presented in figure and 3 the resulting ESDD and NSDD 2 and 3, visually shows a basic different values obtained in a specific environment, behaviour between cap & pins and long are higher for cap & pin insulators rods regarding contamination compared with long rod insulators. performance. It is very important that this Thereby, the creepage distance on a cap & knowledge is clearly presented in the text pin system must be higher than on a long to the users of this standard. rod system used at the same location Page 19: A new paragraph shall be included as 10.3.2.
New 10.3.2 Title shall be:
10.3.2 Arid areas shall be renumbered as 10.3.3. 10.3.2 Technical The collected material presented in Add: Not agreed figure 2 and 3, visually shows a basic 10.3.2 Cap & pin and long rod This is not the place for this. Any insulators different behaviour between cap & reference to differing behaviour, need pins and long rod regarding As shown in figure 2 and 3 the for more or less creepage etc., contamination performance. It is very resulting ESDD and NSDD values belongs in parts 2 and 4 important that this knowledge is obtained in a specific environment are clearly presented to the users in the higher for cap 6 pin insulators text of this standard. compared with long rod insulators. Thereby, the creepage distance on a A new clause is therefor suggested to cap & pin system must be higher than be included. The present Clause on a long rod system used at the same 10.3.2 will then be renumbered location. 10.3.3. Meeting Discussion Meeting Decision Noted that these matters are to be covered in subsequent parts of the This suggestion was unanimously rejected new 60815
15
C. Lumb
Comment number
36-WG11/Capetown/129 November 2002 National Committee
AT
Clause/ Sub clause
Paragraph Figure/ Table
FIGURE 1 Fig 1
Type of comment
COMMENTS
Proposed change
(General/ Technical/Editorial )
Editorial
51
Page 20: Shed profiles are not different Only Figure 1a and Figure 1b are because of material or insulator type, but necessary. Delete Figure 1c and only because of design. For example: Figure 1 d. Plain profile is basically similar regardless if it is a) porcelain or polymeric material, b) used on a post, rod or hollow insulator. The same is true for alternating and under rib sheds.
OBSERVATIONS OF THE SECRETARIAT on each comment submitted The comments below are those of the project leader of TC 36 WG 11
Not agreed In general polymeric profiles are thinner and flatter than porcelain. Figures will be modified to better show this difference.
Please supply a wmf file There also existing an aerodynamic design, an antipollution design and fog design for long rods
Shed design according to DIN standard shall be added to figure 1a Please supply a wmf file Shall be mentioned in the context
Meeting Discussion
IT
Figure 1
DE
Figure 1c
1a, 1b, etc
Meeting Decision The meeting rejected the suggestion to delete Figures 1b and 1c and noted the project leaders comment that the figures will be modified to show how polymeric profiles differ from porcelain. The meeting agreed that Figures should be added for: • Shed design according to the DIN Standard: and • To add drawings for aerodynamic design, an antipollution design and fog design for long rods
Editorial
The insulator profile shown in figure 1 should be considered as typical and not mandatory.
Technical
The profiles shown in Figure 1c are not only relevant for polymeric suspension insulators but also for tension insulators
52
53
The meeting also agreed a suggestion from Germany for revision to 9.1. and the drawings of shed profiles based on aerodynamic, standard and fog—type profiles would be considered and adapted by the WG. Suggestion would be to add the term Due to an error, the correct version of “typical shape of “ in the title of the the figure titles was not reproduced. figures, for example “Figure1a Each set of figures should have the Typical shape of porcelain title "Typical …" – will be corrected post……shed profiles” Figure 1c It was assumed that suspension Polymeric long rod and line post insulators included tension insulators. insulator shed profiles Maybe better to use "line insulators" ?
16
C. Lumb
Comment number
36-WG11/Capetown/129 November 2002 National Committee
Clause/ Sub clause
Paragraph Figure/ Table
Type of comment
COMMENTS
(General/ Technical/Editorial )
Meeting Discussion IT
Figure 1c
Proposed change
Meeting Decision Editorial
54
The figures should show sketches of insulator profile and not a coloured picture drown by a manufacturer product catalogue.
Meeting Discussion
Suggestion would be to replace the figure of the under ribbed profile in Figure 1c with a specific sketch.
Figures
Technical
Meeting Decision
SE
Meeting Discussion Same as previous comment from AT. Figure 4 Technical The figure should be logarithmic for SES, where the values are spread accordingly over the scale.
Meeting Discussion
Meeting Decision Working group to consider Change "...the arcs bridging the dry bands are sustained and will continue to extend..." to reed "...the arcs bridging the dry bands are sustained and may finally continue to extend..."
55
Shed profiles are not different because of material or insulator type, but only because of design. For example; Plain profile is basically similar regardless if it is a) porcelain or polymeric material, b) used on a post long rod or hollow insulator. The same is true for alternating and under rib sheds.
Only Figure 1a and Figure 1b is necessary. Delete Figure 1c and Figure 1d. Delete porcelain in the title of 1a. Only one anti-fog shed is suggested to be shown.
The figure to be adjusted.
56
57
Annex A
Phase 6, st 1 sentence
Agreed Could DE supply a wmf file ?
Meeting Decision
SE
CH
OBSERVATIONS OF THE SECRETARIAT on each comment submitted The comments below are those of the project leader of TC 36 WG 11
Editorial
Not agreed In general polymeric profiles are thinner and flatter than porcelain. Figures will be modified to better show this difference.
The scale IS logarithmic, however the use of numbers such as 112 or 14 may mean that the frontiers between classes could be taken as exact limits. It may be better to use a decade log scale. Suggest discussion in the WG.
Agreed
17
C. Lumb
Comment number
36-WG11/Capetown/129 November 2002 National Committee
Clause/ Sub clause
Paragraph Figure/ Table
Type of comment
COMMENTS
(General/ Technical/Editorial )
Meeting Discussion
58
OBSERVATIONS OF THE SECRETARIAT on each comment submitted The comments below are those of the project leader of TC 36 WG 11
Meeting Decision
SE
Annex A A.3 Meeting Discussion
Editorial
IEC 62073 should be referred to.
AT
Annex B
Fig B1
Editorial
Page 26: Comparison between Cap & pin Picture of insulators shall be in same and Long rod insulator picture gives a scale. very strange impression. Cap & pin is too small and/or Long rod is too large.
Agreed
SE
Annex B
Figure B1
Editorial
Insulators shall be in the same scale.
Agreed
Japan
Annex B3 B3.1
Comparison between cap & pin and long rod insulator figures gives a very strange impression. Cap & pin is too small and/or long rod is too large. When a small amount of NSDD is measured, an influence of the cotton is expected.
Editorial
Equation (2) has an extra “+” sign. “E” should be lower case. Should the third word be “low” instead of “close”.
Remove the “+” sign in front of “8,272”. Revise to read: “is equivalent salt …”. Confirm or revise. Meeting Decision
Agreed Agreed, or caps on all ? Should be "precise"
Editorial
Wrong font for Ihighest-values.
Revise to “Ihighest-values”.
retain “values of Ihighest”
Editorial
The note is suggested to be replaced by text.
Delete the note but keep the text.
Agreed
59
60 Technical
61
Meeting Discussion CA
62
Annex B.4.1
Formula & p.29 & NOTE 1
Meeting Discussion
63
CA
64
SE
CA
65
Proposed change
Annex C
Second Paragraph Annex C 3rd paragraph Meeting Discussion
Annex D.3
Second Editorial and sixth paragraph.
Add reference, also in Cl.2. Meeting Decision
Why is this necessary ?
To add NOTE as follows: Agreed “NOTE The brush is recommended for measurement of a small amount of NSDD instead of cotton to reduce the influence of cotton on measurement result.” Meeting Decision
Meeting Decision A period is missing at the end of the sentences.
Add a “.” after “… result sheet” and “… Agreed 40 days”.
18
C. Lumb
Comment number
36-WG11/Capetown/129 November 2002 National Committee
SE
Clause/ Sub clause
Annex E.2.1
Paragraph Figure/ Table
2nd and 3rd paragraph
Type of comment
COMMENTS
(General/ Technical/Editorial )
Editorial
66
The 2nd and 3rd paragraph should be rd integrated to reflect that also the 3 paragraph only apply to insulators of type ceramic and glass.
Meeting Discussion AT
Annex F
Editorial
Annex F
Under 1 & 4
Editorial
The word “tower” usually implies a steel structure and might exclude wood structures.
Meeting Discussion CA
69
Annex F
Under 2
Technical
71
DE
Meeting Decision Previously agreed not to include form factor. Change the word “tower” to “structure”. Agreed Suggest using "tower or structure" ?
Should include surface information of Add a line to indicate whether the the routing under General information. transmission line is “sheltered or not sheltered”. Include insulator configuration and, size of the insulator.
DE
Not agreed See discussions above
Meeting Decision
Under 3
70
Agreed. Suggest that the sentence of para. 3 read. "As a general rule, FOR CERAMIC AND GLASS insulators, the solid....
Page 38, 3-Insulator parameters: Parameters for Overhead lines and Substations shall include Form factor.
Meeting Discussion CA
OBSERVATIONS OF THE SECRETARIAT on each comment submitted The comments below are those of the project leader of TC 36 WG 11
Meeting Decision .
67
68
Proposed change
Not agreed The point of this information is to see what environments the line crosses What is meant by sheltered ? Already included in "position of string" suggest modifying to "position and type.."
Add “V or I-string”. Revise to read “Type and size of insulator”. Meeting Discussion Meeting Decision It was noted that within a kilometre or the coast trees on the coastal Agreed that a line be added to indicate whether the transmission line is side of a line would shelter a line from pollution. sheltered or not. See next comment regarding type of string. Annex F 2nd T The type of a string, e.g. I-, V-, Add for overhead lines: Already included in "position of string" Clause 3 paragraph inverted V-, multiple string is an Type of string (I-, V-, inverted V-, suggest modifying to "position and important additional information. multiple string) type.." Meeting Discussion Meeting Decision Agreed to “position and type…..” Annex F 2nd E The term "length" is not clear defined. Use in both cases "overall length". Agreed Clause 3 paragraph
19
C. Lumb
Comment number
36-WG11/Capetown/129 November 2002 National Committee
Clause/ Sub clause
Paragraph Figure/ Table
Type of comment
SE
Annex F
3
Annex F Clause 3
2nd paragraph
73 Meeting Discussion
OBSERVATIONS OF THE SECRETARIAT on each comment submitted The comments below are those of the project leader of TC 36 WG 11
Meeting Decision Technical
Meeting Discussion DE
Proposed change
(General/ Technical/Editorial )
Meeting Discussion
72
COMMENTS
T
Parameters for Overhead lines and Add Form factor Not agreed Substations shall include Form factor. See discussion above Meeting Decision Previously agreed not to cover form factor Since also different insulator materials Suggest adding "Insulator material" to are used in substations, there isn’t the substation list any necessity to make a distinction between overhead lines and substations. Meeting Decision Agreed to add “Insulator material” to the substation list
20 FORM 8C (IEC) 1998-08-01
