TC 36 WG11t Proposals on comments on 36/221/NP : IEC 60815-2
No.
1.
National Committee
Clause/ Subclause
IT
Paragraph Figure/ Table
-1-
Type of comment (General/ Technical/Edit orial)
General
2.
DE
Technical
3.
EG
Title Line1
4.
EG
Clause3
5.
PL
Clause 3
Editorial
36-WG11/Mannheim/190a
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 the selection of insulators in respect to pollution surface behaviour. The referred approaches are very peculiar and hardly comprehensible by not expert users of IEC 60815 publications. The practical part of the main topics should be implemented with the aim to facilitate their comprehensibility and applicability. A recommendation for dimension c is missing. This was implemented in Appendix D / D1 in existing IEC 60815:1986. The technical background to have a minimum clearance c is given to avoid bridging in rainfall conditions or under heavy pollution conditions.
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 ?
Define c>30mm as in existing IEC 60815:1986.
Agreed – note this is clearance, not spacing. Propose to insert between 10.1 & 10.2 giving ranges as a function of length (as in original 60815)
For polluted and humid conditions instead of for polluted conditions Add the definitions of “temporary overvoltage” and “creepage factor’
Not acceptable: The wording is too precise Not acceptable: TOV is already defined in the IEV 604-03-12. Creepage factor is defined inn 10.5. Will be corrected
Apply the relevant IEC rules for presentation of terms and definitions.
TC 36 WG11t Proposals on comments on 36/221/NP : IEC 60815-2
No.
6.
7.
8.
National Committee
Clause/ Subclause
EG
Clause3
FR
JP
9.1
9.1
Paragraph Figure/ Table
Third paragraph
1st paragraph
-2-
Type of comment (General/ Technical/Edit orial)
Technical
Technical
COMMENTS
36-WG11/Mannheim/190a
Proposed change
Clause 4 (abbreviation) should be before Clause 3 (definition) As written, the text gives impression Replace by : that anti fog insulators are only The use of anti fog profiles, (Figure 4) useful in “Coastal” environments is effective in areas with type A (B). pollution. Profiles with steep sheds or deep under-ribs are generally beneficial in areas exposed to a salt water fog or spray, 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. 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. The range of top and bottom angles of the standard shed profile for long rod insulators should be harmonized for both parts.
OBSERVATIONS OF 36WG11 on each comment submitted Will check with IEC directives 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: The values proposed are correct.
TC 36 WG11t Proposals on comments on 36/221/NP : IEC 60815-2
No.
9.
10.
National Committee
PL
PL
Clause/ Subclause
9.1
9.1
Paragraph Figure/ Table
Para 4
Table 1
-3-
Type of comment (General/ Technical/Edit orial)
Technical
Technical
36-WG11/Mannheim/190a
COMMENTS
Proposed change
Typical shed inclinations for "Alternating shed arrangements... aerodynamic or open profiles should They offer benefits regarding heavy be added. Amend "Alternating shed rain, pollution or icing." arrangements (Figure 5) are in general capable for all profiles. They offer benefits regarding heavy rain or icing." to read: Table 1, column "Alternating shed arrangements" - the next benefit that is "good natural cleaning" should be added.
−
good natural cleaning
OBSERVATIONS OF 36WG11 on each comment submitted Acceptable, propose "Alternating shed arrangements (Figure 5) are in general feasible for all profiles, although steep sheds are less beneficial. They offer increased creepage distance per unit without penalising performance in heavy rain or icing." (Change in Part 1) Not acceptable: Natural cleaning performance is already mentioned for the individual profile types
TC 36 WG11t Proposals on comments on 36/221/NP : IEC 60815-2
No.
National Committee
Clause/ Subclause
Paragraph Figure/ Table
-4-
Type of comment (General/ Technical/Edit orial)
COMMENTS
36-WG11/Mannheim/190a
Proposed change
The table based on same creepage Redo table assuming same distance per unit is misleading. For length/spacing. example, anti fog profile in desert area performs better than the standard insulator of the same length.
11.
FR
9.2
12.
DE
10.1
13.
PL
10.3
Table 2
title
Technical
Technical
The graph for the s/p ranges does not show explicit values for s/p. Explicit values are mandatory for specifications and agreements between customer and manufacturer (and also for design software).
Define the boundary to “Minor deviation” to s/p=0.8 for sheds with under ribs and to 0.65 for sheds without under ribs.
Technical
Modify "Shed overhang and spacing" (see 10.1 and 10.3 for s and c) to read:
"Shed overhang and minimum distance c between sheds"
OBSERVATIONS OF 36WG11 on each comment submitted Partly acceptable: However replacing or adding a table based on length rather than creepage is considered to be too confusing for the user. We suggest to add the following note to the standard profile column : “The Standard profile is taken as the reference "0" level. This does not automatically make the standard profile suitable for all applications, since in certain cases it cannot supply the necessary creepage distance within the required insulating length.” This note combined with the 2nd paragraph of clause 9.2 should suffice to take into account insulting length. Noted: The boundary of the upper line is badly defined, it will be moved to 0,8.
Already discussed under 2 DE
TC 36 WG11t Proposals on comments on 36/221/NP : IEC 60815-2
No.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
National Committee
Clause/ Subclause
DE
10.3
IT
10.1 and 10.3
IT
FR
JP
10.3
10.3
11.2
Paragraph Figure/ Table
-5-
Type of comment (General/ Technical/Edit orial)
Technical
Figures
Table
Editorial
Technical
Technical
Technical
36-WG11/Mannheim/190a
COMMENTS Experience made with the present IEC 60815:1986 show the benefits of alternating shed profiles with p1p2 being larger than 15mm, otherwise a profile should not be claiming to be an “alternating shed profile”. There is also no technical evidence that there is any influence by the spacing c on p1-p2. The same geometrical parameter (spacing) is indicated with a different code/symbol in two figures: i.e “S” in fig 10.1 and “C” in fig 10.3. The value of C referred in the Table should be reconsidered based on the current service experiences and the value indicated in the present edition of IEC 60815. In particular, C ≤ 20 would seem very critical in relation to insulator height and to have no effective application. Shed overhang is only important for heavy rain conditions, not for pollution. The applicable range of Da for the equation of Kad is not clear.
Proposed change
OBSERVATIONS OF 36WG11 on each comment submitted
Define p1-p2>15mm independently of Clause 10.3 will be reviewed spacing c as in existing IEC and revised by the WG. 60815:1986.
Proposal would be to adopt the same Already discussed under 2 DE code/symbol for terms having the same meaning. Suggestion would be to amend the text considering the rules referred in the present edition of IEC 60815.
Already discussed under 2 DE
Delete.
Unacceptable Shed overhang also has an influence on wetting of the pollution layer and on intershed flashover. Acceptable
To change as follows; Kad = 1 when Da is smaller than 300 mm. Kad = 0,001 Da + 0.7 when Da is equal to or larger than 300 mm.
TC 36 WG11t Proposals on comments on 36/221/NP : IEC 60815-2
No.
19.
National Committee
PL
Clause/ Subclause
Paragraph Figure/ Table Figures: 2b); 3b),4b) and d); 5b)
-6-
Type of comment (General/ Technical/Edit orial) Technical
COMMENTS It is proposed to use terms as in IEC 60050-471 and other standards.
36-WG11/Mannheim/190a
Proposed change Is: "housing", we propose: "hollows".
OBSERVATIONS OF 36WG11 on each comment submitted These terms are commonly used and understood. Perhaps include them in the TC 36 glossary ?
