The mechanical effects of short-circuit currents in - Montefiore
The mechanical effects of short-circuit currents in - Montefiore
The mechanical effects of short-circuit currents in - Montefiore
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
5.2. SECOND LEVEL PROBABILISTIC<br />
METHOD<br />
5.2.1. Stress and strength relationship for<br />
support<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong>sulators<br />
5.2.1.1 Static and dynamic break-load<br />
In many cases post <strong>in</strong>sulators are mounted <strong>in</strong><br />
disconnectors. <strong>The</strong> permissible (tensile-) load for the<br />
disconnector depends on the m<strong>in</strong>imum break<strong>in</strong>g load<br />
<strong>of</strong> the post <strong>in</strong>sulator. Post <strong>in</strong>sulators can be stressed<br />
by static and/or dynamic loads. In the normal case it<br />
is a bend<strong>in</strong>g stress. Usually, ceramic materials are<br />
<strong>in</strong>flexible and differences between static and dynamic<br />
strength are not known [Ref 94]. Experimental [Ref<br />
95] and theoretical [Ref 96] <strong>in</strong>vestigations <strong>of</strong> 110 kV<br />
post <strong>in</strong>sulators under <strong>short</strong>-<strong>circuit</strong> load<strong>in</strong>g have not<br />
shown any significant differences between static and<br />
dynamic porcela<strong>in</strong> strength. For that reason it is<br />
possible to convert the maximum stress at a specific<br />
po<strong>in</strong>t <strong>of</strong> the porcela<strong>in</strong> <strong>in</strong> the case <strong>of</strong> a <strong>short</strong>-<strong>circuit</strong><br />
(i.e. measured as stra<strong>in</strong> εdyn on the surface <strong>of</strong> the<br />
<strong>in</strong>sulator core over the lowest shed) to an equivalent<br />
static load F max which generates the same stress at the<br />
same po<strong>in</strong>t. This load can be compared with the<br />
m<strong>in</strong>imum break<strong>in</strong>g load.<br />
Figure 5.3 Current-conduct<strong>in</strong>g-equipment with conductor, post<br />
<strong>in</strong>sulator and foundation (scheme)<br />
5.2.1.2 One po<strong>in</strong>t distribution <strong>of</strong> strength<br />
From a statistical po<strong>in</strong>t <strong>of</strong> view, the m<strong>in</strong>imum<br />
break<strong>in</strong>g load fixed by the manufacturer could be<br />
considered as a one po<strong>in</strong>t distribution <strong>of</strong> the<br />
<strong>mechanical</strong> strength <strong>of</strong> post-<strong>in</strong>sulators.<br />
This would mean that each post <strong>in</strong>sulator withstands a<br />
load lower than the m<strong>in</strong>imum break<strong>in</strong>g load. If the<br />
load is higher than the m<strong>in</strong>imum break<strong>in</strong>g load all<br />
post <strong>in</strong>sulators would be damaged. This approach<br />
does not, correspond with reality. <strong>The</strong> strength <strong>of</strong> post<br />
77<br />
<strong>in</strong>sulators is distributed statistically as a result <strong>of</strong> the<br />
fact that the strength <strong>of</strong> a ceramic body is statistically<br />
distributed, due to differences <strong>in</strong> the structure <strong>in</strong>side<br />
the ceramic body [Ref 97]. In most cases the real<br />
bend<strong>in</strong>g strengths <strong>of</strong> post-<strong>in</strong>sulators are higher than<br />
the m<strong>in</strong>imum break<strong>in</strong>g load. But it is possible that<br />
some post <strong>in</strong>sulators are damaged by loads lower than<br />
the m<strong>in</strong>imum break<strong>in</strong>g load. Exact knowledge <strong>of</strong> the<br />
strength distribution function is necessary (especially<br />
for little quantils <strong>of</strong> strength) for determ<strong>in</strong>ation <strong>of</strong><br />
<strong>mechanical</strong> reliability <strong>of</strong> a post-<strong>in</strong>sulator.<br />
5.2.1.3 Strength distribution function <strong>of</strong> 110 kV post<br />
<strong>in</strong>sulators<br />
111 ruptures <strong>of</strong> post <strong>in</strong>sulators with a m<strong>in</strong>imum<br />
break<strong>in</strong>g load <strong>of</strong> 8kN were evaluated for<br />
determ<strong>in</strong>ation <strong>of</strong> the strength distribution function <strong>of</strong><br />
brand-new post <strong>in</strong>sulators. <strong>The</strong> statistical evaluation<br />
<strong>of</strong> these test results showed three break value ranges<br />
(Figure 5.4) :<br />
1. ruptures due to loads up to 10 kN<br />
2. ruptures due to loads between 10 kN and 20 kN<br />
3. ruptures due to loads greater than 20 kN which<br />
can be approximated by a double exponential<br />
distribution.<br />
Figure 5.4 Distribution-function <strong>of</strong> <strong>mechanical</strong> strength <strong>of</strong> 110kV-post<br />
<strong>in</strong>sulators with different m<strong>in</strong>imum break<strong>in</strong>g<br />
load Fum<strong>in</strong> and age (courtesy ABB, Pr. Böhme)<br />
<strong>The</strong> same procedure is valid for 25-year-old post<br />
<strong>in</strong>sulators with a m<strong>in</strong>imum break<strong>in</strong>g load <strong>of</strong> 6 kN. To<br />
determ<strong>in</strong>e the distribution function <strong>of</strong> this type, 21<br />
post <strong>in</strong>sulators were tested to failure. <strong>The</strong> theoretical<br />
distribution function is also a double exponential<br />
distribution with the follow<strong>in</strong>g break value ranges :<br />
1. ruptures due to loads up to 7,5 kN<br />
2. ruptures due to loads between 7,5kN and 11 kN<br />
3. ruptures due to loads greater than 11 kN.