TC 36 WG11 Proposals on comments on 36/220/NP : IEC 60815-1
No.
1.
National Committee
IT
2.
FR
3.
EG
4.
Clause/ Subclause
Paragraph Figure/ Table
EG
-1Type of comment (General/ Technical/Edit orial)
General
General
Title
1 Scope
Editorial Line4 (This is a comment on the NP form not on the draft)
36-WG11/Mannheim/189a
OBSERVATIONS OF 36WG11 on each comment submitted
COMMENTS
Proposed change
The document is well structured and take into account current experience and knowledge related to site pollution severity on insulators. These topics are very peculiar and hardly comprehensible by not expert users of the publication. The practical part of the main topics should be implemented with the aim to facilitate their comprehensibility and applicability. It is not clearly stated anywhere in the document that future evolution of site pollution severity should always be considered.
Proposal would be to give, in a new Annex, any typical example about the application of the rules referred in the publication
The proposal is valid, however WG11 does not currently have sufficient resources to produce useful examples of all cases. National Committees are invited to supply site data and insulation examples to the WG. It may be useful to publish an application guide once the work is finished on all parts ?
Include warning to this effect throughout the document.
Propose to add a note to 9.2 mentioning this.
For polluted and humid conditions instead of for polluted conditions
Not acceptable: The wording is too precise.
In certain polluted and humid environments instead of in certain polluted environments
Not acceptable: See comment 3 above
TC 36 WG11 Proposals on comments on 36/220/NP : IEC 60815-1
No.
National Committee
EG
5.
IT 6.
Clause/ Subclause
Paragraph Figure/ Table
Introduction from the project leader
Content and orientation
Clause 2 & Clause 7
2nd indent
7.
EG
Clause 3
8.
PL
3
-2Type of comment (General/ Technical/Edit orial)
COMMENTS
36-WG11/Mannheim/189a
Proposed change
in spite of this proposal pointed to the weak points including insulators with semi conducting glaze the five parts of the proposal didn’t involve this type of insulators
Editorial
Editorial
IEC 60038 is the basic publication Proposal would be to replace for the standardized highest voltage reference IEC 60071-1 with IEC for equipment Um. 60038 Add the definitions of “temporary overvoltage” and “creepage factor’
Apply the relevant IEC rules for presentation of terms and definitions.
OBSERVATIONS OF 36WG11 on each comment submitted Semi-conducting glaze (and other techniques to improve performance) are mentioned in Part 2 Clause 6. Clause 10.4 of Part 1 mentions semiconducting glaze as a solution for arid areas. However at present there is not sufficient knowledge to give more guidance than this. Correct, acceptable.
Not acceptable TOV is already defined in the IEV 604-03-12. Creepage factor is not used in this part of IEC 60815. Will be corrected
TC 36 WG11 Proposals on comments on 36/220/NP : IEC 60815-1
No.
9.
National Committee
JP
Clause/ Subclause
Paragraph Figure/ Table
3.2
-3Type of comment (General/ Technical/Edit orial)
Technical
COMMENTS
36-WG11/Mannheim/189a
Proposed change
There is a difference of range of the To change to include both ranges. Top angle:14 – 24 degree top and bottom angles of the Bottom angle: 8 – 16 degree standard shed profile for long rod insulator between the draft of Part 1(36/220/NP) and part 2(36/221/NP) as follows; Clause 3.2 of Part 1(36/220/NP) Top angle:14 – 20 degree Bottom angle: 8 – 13 degree Clause 9.1 of Part 2(36/221/NP) Top angle:16 – 24 degree Bottom angle: 8 – 16 degree
OBSERVATIONS OF 36WG11 on each comment submitted Acceptable: The values proposed are correct.
The range of top and bottom angles of the standard shed profile for long rod insulators should be harmonized for both parts. Delete the sentence in brackets.
10.
PL
Clause 3.3
11.
EG
Clause 3.7
Page 9
Editorial
The term “shank” is used in North America; maybe this should be moved to a note and mentioned in the TC 36 Glossary corrected as follows Partly acceptable: set of geometrical parameters that we propose have an influence on pollution “set of geometrical parameters distribution and/or pollution withstand that have an influence on pollution performance” performance
TC 36 WG11 Proposals on comments on 36/220/NP : IEC 60815-1
No.
12.
National Committee
Clause/ Subclause
EG
Clauses 3.8and3.9
Paragraph Figure/ Table
-4Type of comment (General/ Technical/Edit orial)
COMMENTS
36-WG11/Mannheim/189a
Proposed change Add after sodium chloride Nacl and mg Nacl/cm ²instead of mg /cm ²
Add after a site “over a given period of time”
13.
EG
Clause 3.11
OBSERVATIONS OF 36WG11 on each comment submitted Partly agreed: Propose to add only the first “NaCl” to keep the sentence simple. Not acceptable: SES is more related to pollution events rather than long-term measurement. However, the definition requires correction to read: “…that would give comparable peak values of leakage current on the…”
as follows at the end Add “a distilled water generally expressed in Us/cm”
Correct to read: “The volume conductivity, generally expressed in µS/cm, of the pollutants collected by a dust deposit gauge over a given period of time when dissolved in a standard quantity of demineralized water.” Accepted
14.
EG
Clause 3.12
15.
EG
Clause 3.13
16.
EG
Clause 3.14
at the end Add “generally expressed in mg” A period of at least instead of an appropriate period of time
17.
EG
Clauses 3 and 4
Clause 4 (abbreviation) should be before Clause 3 (definition)
Not accepted: The time necessary can vary very widely. Will check with respect to IEC directives
TC 36 WG11 Proposals on comments on 36/220/NP : IEC 60815-1
No.
National Committee
Clause/ Subclause
18.
EG
Table1
19.
EG
Table2
20.
SE
Table 2
21.
SE
7
22.
EG
Clause 8.1.2
23.
EG
Clause 8.2
24.
EG
Clause 8.2
Paragraph Figure/ Table
-5Type of comment (General/ Technical/Edit orial)
Technical 1st paragraph under “Imposed performance requirements
Coastal type line2
Technical
COMMENTS
Also snow and ice are environmental conditions
36-WG11/Mannheim/189a
Proposed change approach A decisions col.2 row 4 corrected as follows Yes use different insulation material No use different insulation material environmental conditions Add to wind “ frequency of sand storms” To add snow and ice in list.
OBSERVATIONS OF 36WG11 on each comment submitted The existing wording is not clear. A revised version of Table 1 is appended Will add “storms,…” after “Wind”
Acceptable, but will be added in italics since not directly dealt with in 60815. Acceptable.
Instead of a stress up to 2 times the “…. can be stressed up to a value of phase to earth voltage, 2,5 times is 2,5 times the phase to earth voltage.” more relevant. See for example Markussen K., et.al; Electra No. 26, 1973. at the end Unnecessary Add “and other sort of industrial pollution” Add new item “mixed pollution” Not necessary and possibly confusing. The text already states that most environments comprise more than one type of pollution. at the beginning Acceptable: see answer to FR Add “50Km for an open area and” comment below before “10-20Km inland”
TC 36 WG11 Proposals on comments on 36/220/NP : IEC 60815-1
No.
National Committee
Clause/ Subclause
Paragraph Figure/ Table
-6Type of comment (General/ Technical/Edit orial)
COMMENTS The description of “Coastal” type is incorrect, notably for type B pollution
25.
FR
8.2
“Coastal” type
Technical
36-WG11/Mannheim/189a
Proposed change These areas are typically in direct vicinity of the coast, but in some cases it can be as far as 10-20 km inland. Pollution is deposited onto the insulators mainly by spray, wind and precipitation. The pollution build-up is generally rapid, especially during spray or conductive fog conditions (B). A build-up of pollution over a longer term can also occur through a deposit of wind-borne particles, where the pollution layer on the insulators consists of quick dissolving salts with a low inert component (A) – i.e. low to very low NSDD. Natural cleaning of the insulators is typically effective as the pollution consists mainly of fast dissolving salts and is not very adhesive.
OBSERVATIONS OF 36WG11 on each comment submitted Acceptable with minor improvements: “These areas are typically in direct vicinity of the coast, but in some cases they can be as far as 50 km inland. Pollution is deposited onto the insulators mainly by spray, wind and fog. The pollution build-up is generally rapid, especially during spray or conductive fog conditions (B). A build-up of pollution over a longer term can also occur through a deposit of wind-borne particles, where the pollution layer on the insulators consists of quick dissolving salts with a degree of inert component (A) which depends on the local ground characteristics. Natural cleaning of the insulators is typically effective as the active pollution consists mainly of fast dissolving salts.”
TC 36 WG11 Proposals on comments on 36/220/NP : IEC 60815-1
No.
National Committee
Clause/ Subclause
Paragraph Figure/ Table
-7Type of comment (General/ Technical/Edit orial)
26.
IT
9.3
2nd and 3rd paragraph
Technical
27.
JP
9.3
Figure 3
Editorial
28.
FR
10.3
Second paragraph
Technical
29.
PL
Figures: 5b), c); 6b), c), e) and f); 7b) and c);
Technical
COMMENTS The figures show ranges of type A and B site pollution severities for the reference cap and pin and long rod insulators. These insulator types are normally used in overhead lines and have a poor representativeness of the insulator used in the substation. The approach for the evaluation of the site pollution severity should be applicable to all sites and insulator types Unit of SES “kg/m” is not correct. Overall length is important
It is proposed to use terms as in IEC 60050-471 and other standards.
36-WG11/Mannheim/189a
Proposed change Proposal would be to add a statement with the approach for the applicability of site pollution severity classes based on measurements on reference cap and pin and long rod insulator to post insulators.
OBSERVATIONS OF 36WG11 on each comment submitted
Not acceptable: The cap and pin and long-rod insulators are the reference insulators for which there sufficient data to correlate ESDD/NSDD with site severity. The use of post insulators to evaluate site severity is not common. The determining of dimensions of post insulators for a given site severity is dealt with in Parts 2-5. Correct To correct to “kg/m3” Add the following before the last Partially acceptable. sentence of the second paragraph: “It must be borne in mind that the minimum or maximum It must be borne in mind that the final overall length of the insulation length of the insulation is important in can also be an important almost all cases. Therefore the imposed parameter in some effectiveness of certain profiles may cases e.g. for insulation be reduced or negated because they coordination or tower height.” result in a solution which is too long (or tall) for the application. Is: "housing", we propose: "hollows". These terms are commonly used and understood. Perhaps include them in the TC 36 glossary ?
TC 36 WG11 Proposals on comments on 36/220/NP : IEC 60815-1
No.
National Committee
Clause/ Subclause
Paragraph Figure/ Table
-8Type of comment (General/ Technical/Edit orial)
COMMENTS As written, the text gives impression that anti fog insulators are only useful in “Coastal” environments (B).
30.
31.
FR
FR
10.3
Annex B
Paragraph above figure 6
B.1 Third paragraph
Technical
36-WG11/Mannheim/189a
Proposed change
Replace by : The use of anti fog profiles, (Figure 6) is effective in areas with type A pollution. Profiles with steep sheds or deep under-ribs are generally beneficial in areas exposed to a salt water fog or spray (B), or to other pollutants in the dissolved state. These profiles may also be effective in areas with a particulate pollution precipitation containing slow dissolving salts. Since anti-fog profiles generally have a high ratio of creepage distance to spacing, they result in more compact insulation. The main difference between a.c. The pollution flashover process is and d.c. pollution performance of also significantly affected by the the same insulator in the same site voltage waveform, a.c. or d.c. It has is mainly due to pollution deposit on been amply demonstrated the surface not to voltage wave experimentally that, for the same form. pollution severity, the peak a.c. withstand voltage far exceeds the corresponding value under d.c. conditions. Under a.c. arcpropagation across the insulator surface can take several cycles and, therefore, the arc is subject to an extinction and re-ignition process at around current zero.
OBSERVATIONS OF 36WG11 on each comment submitted Partially acceptable: Anti-fog profiles, (Figure 6) are effective in areas exposed to a salt water fog or spray, or to other pollutants in a dissolved state. They can also be effective in areas with low NSDD and slow dissolving salts.
Acceptable.
TC 36 WG11 Proposals on comments on 36/220/NP : IEC 60815-1
No.
32.
33.
National Committee
SE
SE
Clause/ Subclause
Paragraph Figure/ Table
Annex B B.2.2
Annex D D.2.1
-9Type of comment (General/ Technical/Edit orial)
Technical
3rd line, before last paragraph
COMMENTS
36-WG11/Mannheim/189a
Proposed change
OBSERVATIONS OF 36WG11 on each comment submitted
A note is suggested to be added: To add note. “The countermeasures against birds are strongly dependent on the type of birds, their habits, etc. Local ornithologists may contribute with information valuable for an optmal solution.” To add sentence. The following paragraph is proposed to be added: “However, the applied voltage should also be high enough to make measurements on rather long insulators possible.”
Unnecessary : Propose to add “appropriate to the local fauna.” At the end of the sentence
Suggested to be discussed in WG. Maybe the WG could consider to recommend a suitable interval of the applied voltage to be used.
We recommend a 2 minute interval.
A note should also be added, which A note is suggested to be included. explains that the surface conductance is not a comparable parameter for different insulators. It should be described how the surface conductance can be converted into surface conductivity with the help of a form factor and how this parameter is related to e.g. ESDD.
Acceptable Add notes as follows: “The surface conductance is not a comparable parameter for different insulators. Surface conductance can be converted into surface conductivity with the help of the form factor – see annex H.”
This is not necessary, since the clause already gives a typical voltage stress of 700V/metre creepage distance.
Technical
TC 36 WG11 Proposals on comments on 36/220/NP : IEC 60815-1
No.
34.
National Committee
SE
Clause/ Subclause
Paragraph Figure/ Table
Annex F
- 10 Type of comment (General/ Technical/Edit orial)
Technical
35.
PL
Annex H
Para 1
Editorial
36.
PL
H
Para 3
Editorial
37.
PL
H
Editorial
COMMENTS Sometimes there is a need for laboratory testing of naturally polluted insulators removed from service or test stations. A note is proposed to be added regarding recommended test methods applicable in this case, taking into account the number of insulators needed if a proper “up-and-down method will be applied. Amend the first sentence to read:
36-WG11/Mannheim/189a
Proposed change
OBSERVATIONS OF 36WG11 on each comment submitted
A note is suggested.
Not acceptable. The testing of naturally polluted insulators in the laboratory is a complex subject and is out of the scope of this Publication. It is mentioned in CIGRE 158.
"Form factor (Ff) is a dimensionless number that represents the length (l) of the partial creepage distance divided ..."
Correct
Amend the sentence "A surface that "A surface that contains a uniformly contains a conducting layer..." to distributed conducting layer..." read: "See IEC 60507" should be the last sentence of Annex H. The remaining part should be deleted. For an ordinary reader this part is not clear since no relation between the form factor and resistivity/conductivity of an insulator surface is presented there. The existing statement: "The Ff gives an exact relation between ..." is correct for uniformly polluted insulators only.
Correct
Not accepted, but change to: “The Ff gives an exact relation between the resistivity/ conductivity of a uniformly conductive surface, for example the surface of a uniformly polluted and wetted insulator, and the total resistance/ conductance of the same surface.“
TC 36 WG11 Proposals on comments on 36/220/NP : IEC 60815-1 Annex Revised part of Table 1 (see comment 18 EG)
Decisions
• Does the existing insulation satisfy the project requirements AND is it intended to use the same insulation design ? YES NO Use the same Use different insulation insulation design. design, materials or size. Use experience to pre-select the new solution or size
- 11 -
36-WG11/Mannheim/189a
