478

Important Material Properties of

RTV Silicone Rubber Insulator Coatings

Working Group

D1. 14

October 2011
 Important Material Properties of RTV
Silicone Rubber Insulator Coatings

Working Group
D1.14

Members:
J. Kindersberger (DE, Convener), D. Windmar (SE, Secretary), D. Agoris† (GR), R. Bärsch (DE),
E. Brocard (FR), C. George (FR), R. Gorur (US), S. Gubanski (SE), W. Haverkamp (DE), M. Henriksen
(DK), H. Janssen (DE), X. Kornmann (CH), M. Kurrat (DE), J. Lambrecht (DE), C. Leuci (FR), C. Lumb
(FR), R. Macey (ZA), P. Mähönen (FI), U. Maßen (CH), M. Nagao (JP), F. Schmuck (CH), J. Seifert
(DE), W. Vosloo (ZA), H.-J. Winter (DE)

Laboratory Participants:
F. Exl (DE), H. Janssen (DE), B. Komanschek (DE), X. Kornmann (CH), J. Seifert (DE),
F. Schmuck (CH), H.-J. Winter (DE)

Copyright © 2011

“Ownership of a CIGRE publication, whether in paper form or on electronic support only infers right of
use for personal purposes. Are prohibited, except if explicitly agreed by CIGRE, total or partial
reproduction of the publication for use other than personal and transfer to a third party; hence circulation
on any intranet or other company network is forbidden”.

Disclaimer notice
“CIGRE gives no warranty or assurance about the contents of this publication, nor does it accept any
responsibility, as to the accuracy or exhaustiveness of the information. All implied warranties and
conditions are excluded to the maximum extent permitted by law”.

ISBN: 978- 2- 85873- 169-5

Contents

1 Introduction

2 Basic Coating Information

2.1 Curing

2.2 Standardization Status

2.3 Ageing and Lifetime Estimation

3 Material Properties of RTV Coatings and their Testing

3.1 Hydrophobicity
3.1.1 Retention of Hydrophobicity and Loss Mechanisms
3.1.2 Hydrophobicity Recovery
3.1.3 Hydrophobicity Transfer

3.2 Resistance to Tracking and Erosion

3.2.1 RTV Coating Materials
3.2.2 6mm Bulk Samples
3.2.3 Porcelain Plates with a Thin Coating Layer
3.2.4 Coating Application
3.2.5 Tracking and Erosion Testing
3.2.6 Results
3.2.7 Conclusion

3.3 Resistance to Weathering and UV

3.3.1 UV Radiation
3.3.2 Rainfall
3.3.3 Wind

3.4 Resistance to Chemical and Physical Degradation by Water

3.5 Volume Resistivity

3.6 Resistance to Corona and Ozone

3.7 Adhesion Ability

4 References

5 Additional References

2
1 Introduction
Thanks to the outstanding properties of silicones, these materials are ideal for many
sealing, bonding and coating applications. The application of RTV coatings on ceramic or
glass insulators improves their pollution performance. RTV coatings as reported in this
paper are typically 1-component room-temperature curing silicone rubber coatings. RTV
coatings provide an alternative solution in cases where the use of composite housings is
technically not possible or economically not of interest. A typical example is the already
installed equipment in substations, where the replacement cost is not economical in
comparison with the total cost of coatings application and maintenance within a specified
time interval.
The properties of interest for polymeric materials for outdoor use are summarized in
IEC/TR 62039 [1]. For coatings the following properties are relevant:
• Hydrophobicity: retention, loss, recovery and transfer
• Resistance to tracking and erosion
• Resistance to weathering and UV
• Resistance to chemical and physical degradation by water
• Volume resistivity
• Resistance to corona and ozone.
Additional relevant properties for insulator coatings are the following:
• Aging and lifetime estimation
• Adhesion ability.

This report is based on a literature review as well as the know-how of the current global
experts. Experiments were conducted in order to evaluate the hydrophobicity transfer and
resistance to tracking and erosion.

3
2 Basic Coating Information

RTV coatings as reported in this paper are mostly 1-component room-temperature curing
silicone rubbers, which are usually dissolved in a solvent. RTV-1 silicone rubbers are
ready-to-use one-part materials which have a free-flowing to non-sag consistency. They
cure under the influence of atmospheric moisture to form a silicone elastomer (RTV-1 =
Room-Temperature Vulcanizing, 1 component). Other types of silicone systems are also
used and they have to fulfill the same service requirements and therefore the properties are
described in this report as well.

2.1 Curing
Curing occurs when the RTV coating is exposed to atmospheric moisture with the release
of by-products. This reaction, also referred to as vulcanization, is initiated at the surface of
the applied layer of silicone rubber and gradually progresses towards the substrate.
Depending on the type of crosslinker used, the curing system of RTV-1 coatings can be
one of three kinds:
- Basic or amine systems: small amounts of an amine are released.
- Acidic or acetoxy systems: small amounts of acetic acid are released.
- Neutral, i.e. oxime or alkoxy systems: small amounts of an oxime or alcohol are released.
Other silicone systems as mentioned above employ other types of curing, for instance a
RTV-2 system can use a Platinum catalyzed 2-component addition cure system.

2.2 Standardization Status

Many applications of RTV coatings have been reported worldwide [2-6] and even an
application guide has been issued in 2002 from IEEE, Standard 1523 “IEEE Guide for the
Application, Maintenance and Evaluation of Room Temperature Vulcanizing (RTV) Silicone
Rubber Coatings for Outdoor Ceramic Insulators” [7]. However, collecting further
experience was and is ongoing regarding material composition, life time and testing of
coatings.
According to the definition given in IEC 62217 [8], the housing is the external part of a
composite insulator which provides the necessary creepage distance and protects the core
from environmental stress. Coatings are applied to insulations with fixed shapes and

4
cannot change the initial geometrical profile. The specific purpose of the coating is to
provide enhanced hydrophobic surface properties on the ceramic or glass surfaces which
already have a set geometry. Consequently, several material properties are of importance,
but not all the same as for other polymeric housing materials. Adjustments are also
necessary due to the special characteristics of the application. Additional important
properties need consideration in the case of coatings like adhesion on the insulation
surface.

2.3 Aging and Lifetime Estimation

RTV coatings are applied in order to take advantage of its hydrophobic properties. End of
materials lifetime can be defined as the permanent loss of a material's hydrophobicity. For
a coated insulation system the lifetime might be defined differently e.g. as the point
where the hydrophobicity level is not zero but no longer high enough for the proper
operation of the insulation system. Non reversible degradation mechanisms that
permanently decrease the level of hydrophobicity can result in the aging of the coating
material. Corona as well as chemical and physical degradation are the main factors that
can affect aging and consequently a coating's life. Today it is well known that material
testing, correlated with corresponding tests that are applied for composite insulators, is
useful for the evaluation of a coating but it cannot be used for the precise determination of
the lifetime of a coating. Even typical salt fog chamber testing like the 1000h or the cyclic
5000h test are useful for the evaluation of the coatings, but cannot provide an estimate of
the expected lifetime, because outdoor pollution influence is not simulated by these tests.
However, should the coating reach the end of its lifetime, a new application of the coating is
easily possible and renews the life cycle of the insulation system.

5
3 Material Properties of RTV Coatings and their Testing

3.1 Hydrophobicity
The application of RTV coatings provides a hydrophobic surface on originally hydrophilic
insulation materials like ceramic or glass insulators. The hydrophobicity suppresses
leakage current activities and enhances the flashover voltage, especially under highly
polluted conditions.
According to IEC/TS 62073 [9] the words hydrophobic and hydrophilic describe two
extreme levels of wettability of a surface by water. A surface is called hydrophobic if it has
low surface tension and is water-repellent. Water on hydrophobic surfaces will form distinct
water droplets. The opposite is a hydrophilic surface that is wetted by water which forms a
film. The degree of hydrophobicity can be evaluated by three methods:
- Determination of the contact angle (static or dynamic contact angle)
- Determination of the surface tension by using different reference fluids
- Spray method according to STRI-Guide 92/1 [10].
All three methods are used to measure the wettability of external surfaces of insulators.
The dominant mechanism responsible for the hydrophobicity of RTV coatings is the
orientation of hydrophobic methyl groups towards the surface. By the migration of
hydrophobic low molecular weight (LMW) molecules from the bulk to the surface of the
coating the water repellent effect is increased [11-13].

3.1.1 Retention of Hydrophobicity and Loss Mechanisms

Hydrophobicity retention is defined as a material’s resistance to the loss of
hydrophobicity, which is mainly important for unpolluted coating surfaces. Basically
today’s RTV coatings show a good long term stability of hydrophobicity. However, an
appropriate test has been available for just a few years [14]. The test is based on a
modification of the well known Rotating Wheel Dip Test. Hereby the early aging period of
clean polymer insulator surfaces during an accelerated aging test is evaluated. Leakage
currents are measured at a cylindrical model insulator. For RTV coatings it was shown that
the retention (or described as "early aging period" where leakage currents are still
suppressed) is prolonged with increased layer thickness.

6
Loss of hydrophobicity can be observed under very intensive stress by physical or
chemical changes. These changes are usually temporary as hydrophobicity recovery
follows. However, under very extreme conditions a permanent material deterioration can be
observed: it appears first as a reduced recovery capability and finally results in a
permanent hydrophobicity loss of the unpolluted material. Much research work was done
on clean unpolluted coating samples or insulators to understand the multiple mechanisms
of hydrophobicity loss. A good know how was build up, but the transfer of these results to
the behavior of coatings in real service is limited as here typically a layer of pollution is
collected.

A temporary hydrophobicity loss by corona stress alone was investigated and described
by Hillborg et al. [12]. Under very specific corona conditions (energy intensive,
homogenous and ongoing discharges) a formation of a glassy SiOx surface layer was
found. This SiOx layer is hydrophilic and allows water to spread. The glassy layer is very
thin, and already minor mechanical stress (deformation) creates cracks. Through these
cracks the migration of LMW molecules to the surface is possible resulting in a recovery of
the hydrophobicity.

S.H. Kim et aI. [15, 16] investigated the chemical changes that take place on the surface of
RTV coatings when electrically stressed during a salt fog test. The investigation was
performed by ESCA and ATR – FTIR measurements. In both cases the main chemical
change has been found like this: The energy supplied from electrical discharges (e.g. dry
band arcing, water drop corona) can cause scission of the non-polar hydrophobic –CH3
side groups from Si (in the polymer chain backbone) and the formation of free radicals as
shown in figure 1 (the dots represent free radicals):

Figure 1: Methyl scission reaction of RTV coatings due to electrical discharges / dry band arcing

7
In the presence of moisture hydrolysis will occur with water as shown in figure 2:

Figure 2: Hydrolysis reactions in the presence of moisture and dry band arcing

This process reduces the degree of surface hydrophobicity: A decrease of hydrophobic -

CH3 methyl groups increases the specific surface energy, allowing better wetting by water.
Despite the reduction of hydrophobicity by electrical stress, a positive side effect can be the
generation of new LMW molecules by recombination of backbone Si-O siloxane radicals
instead of the described hydrolysis reaction.

A loss of hydrophobicity due to environmental stresses is also possible. UV irradiation is

an energy source that can cause scission of methyl groups from the Si, as described for the
electrical discharges (figure 1). Nevertheless, a significant hydrophobicity reduction
requires UV radiation of very short wave lengths' (300 nm, part A of the sun’s spectrum)
combined with a long term and high radiation intensity. The Si-O backbone itself can not be
attacked by UV irradiation due to the high bonding energy (see table 1).

Table 1: Typical values of average bond energies E in materials for outdoor insulation
Chemical Bond Bond Energy E
(kJ/mol)
-Si-O- 454
-C-H- 414
-C-O- 360
-Si-C- 318
-Si-H- 314

8
[17] and [18] describe a loss mechanism without chemical change, but by simple
geometric reorientation of the PDMS chain. In the case of continuous intensive presence
of water which is a polar substance the hydrophilic Si-O part rotates to the outer surface.
The hydrophobic methyl groups therefore turn to the inner side of the material. At that point
the polar substances disappear and the molecule reorientates and reforms the
hydrophobicity via the non-polar methyl groups. [17, 18] recognized that this mechanism
requires an intensive and long term stress by water. Dry band arcing activities starting
simultaneously due to the presence of water will be the dominating loss mechanism. In the
case of real insulators typically a pollution layer is present and soon suppresses the above
mentioned process. The reorientation mainly occurs in case of clean silicone surfaces.

3.1.2 Hydrophobicity Recovery

Even in the case of unpolluted RTV coatings, hydrophobicity recovery is mainly attributed
to the migration of LMW molecules. The reorientation of the side methyl groups contribute
only partly [17, 18]. The overall recovery speed therefore basically is a function of [19]
- the absolute amount of LMW molecules
- their chemical structure (e.g. linear or cyclic)
- their distance from the surface
- the ease of movement (material formulation).

The initial content of the LMW molecules depends on the material formulation. The
exposure of non polluted materials to field conditions can influence this amount of the LMW
molecules in the coating. Electrical or environmental stress can act either as regeneration
or loss mechanisms [16, 20, 21, 22 and 23]. Consequently the amount of the LMW
molecules in field conditions varies depending on the sum of applied stresses. But as
coatings are typically applied on insulators with pollution problems, the performance of the
clean RTV coating surface is of minor practical importance.

3.1.3 Hydrophobicity Transfer

During service the RTV coating surface is covered by a pollution layer. The LMW
molecules penetrate into and onto the pollution layer and transfer hydrophobicity to the
outer (pollution) surface. The penetration capability and as a consequence the speed of

9
hydrophobicity transfer depends on the type and amount of contamination and the quantity
and quality of the diffusing LMW molecules [19, 24].

Several test procedures have been developed in the past [19, 25]. R. Bärsch et al. [26]
performed a transfer test with an artificial pollution layer consisting of water, fumed silica
and a wetting agent. The pollution layer was applied on plates of different kinds of silicone
rubbers and afterwards drying for 60 min at 50 oC. The parameters evaluated were the
advancing and receding angles and the silicone's loss of weight. Starting from an
advancing angle of 0 degrees, an increase is detectable in almost all cases and measured
after a 600 h period. It was found that the hydrophobicity recovery is correlated to the
silicone sample weight loss, indicating LMW diffusion.

CIGRE working group D1.14 [27] used this method and made it reproducible by specifiying
the application of the pollution layer and the kind of pollution material in detail. For a
reproducible test it is mandatory to apply artificial pollution layers with defined thicknesses,
smooth surface and without any defects. The solid material used shall be untreated silica
powder with a medium grain size of 3 µm (e.g. SF600). The artificial layer material is
applied in form of a slurry. To control the thickness of the applied slurry the coated samples
are covered with adhesive foil in such a way that a window of the dimensions (length x
width) 30 mm x 30 mm was obtained. The thickness of the adhesive foil defines the
evaluated thickness of the pollution layer. By putting several foils on top of each other,
different layer thicknesses can be achieved [28].
Coated glass substrates of the dimensions 50 mm x 50 mm are used for the test (glazed
porcelain is suitable as well). A coating thickness of approximatly 0,5 mm is chosen, which
is similar to service conditions. Prior to testing the specimens are first cleaned with
isopropanol and then with water.

10
 Figure 3: Hydrophobicity Transfer with the Example of an RTV Silicone
(samples storage not climatized)

The evaluation of the hydrophobicity transfer can be performed by monitoring the contact
angle of a water droplet set onto the artificial pollution layer. Figure 3 shows an example of
the advancing angle measurement; the static angle here is a suitable tool as well. Minimum
requirements are defined by CIGRE working group D1-14 [28].

Using other types of contamination beside the above described silica (fumed silica, quartz),
causes the recovery capability to vary. J. Zhidong et al. [29] investigated the hydrophobicity
transfer capability of RTV coatings with kaolin and kieselgur. The contact angle was
measured as a function of time with a goniometer, using a 10μl sessile droplet of distilled
water. The results verified again that the contamination type influences the hydrophobicity
transfer capability. Despite that kaolin and kieselgur are known to perform slow to very slow
in terms of transfer, in this case the contact angle obtained after recovery for Kieselguhr
was finally measured at 125o and in the case of kaolin at 100o. For a few very rare and
specific pollution material types, after a period of time the accumulated contamination may
block the LMW diffusion due to the special physical appearance of the pollution (like with
Tonoko being flat particles covering the surface like a stack of paper). Here as well,
cleaning and recoating solves the issue by again delivering a hydrophobic coated surface.

11
Field and laboratory reports correspond well with regard to the influence of contamination
[30, 31].

3.2 Resistance to Tracking and Erosion

Despite superior hydrophobicity performance, coatings can loose the hydrophobicity on
their surface due to intensive corona/partial discharges, intensive pollution accumulation or
long-term constant wetting. Until self healing by hydrophobicity recovery and/or transfer,
the surface can stay hydrophilic and the material might be stressed by electrical
discharges. Therefore the tracking and erosion (T+E) behavior is an important property that
needs to be evaluated. The working group used IEC 60587 [32] and evaluated its
relevance.

3.2.1 RTV Coating Materials

Three different materials types were taken, all of them commercially available but each
from a different manufacturer; they were used as delivered:
Type A) ATH filled white RTV
Type B) Non-ATH filled blue RTV
Type C) Red RTV with unknown fillers.

3.2.2 6 mm bulk samples

IEC 60587 [32] requires 6 mm thick samples for the inclined plane test. Trying to prepare
and use such samples, brought up several challenges:
To generate a 6 mm thick sample of coating material by spraying as done on real
insulators is not appropriate. The insulator spray procedure is set up to provide a thin,
typically 400 µm thick layer. Often 2 or 3 layers are required to get the final thickness of
400 µm. For a 6 mm sample about 24 or more spraying cycles would be required.
Casting a 6 mm sample is also not appropriate. The following problems will occur:
Inhomogenous surfaces: Casting should be done using an open mold to cure the coating in
air as in service. Due to their compositions the coatings have a special flow behavior and it
is difficult to get a smooth surface of thick samples without touching them with a tool.

12
Non flat samples and Air encapsulations: Typically RTV coating materials are solvent
based. After application on the insulator surface, the solvent evaporates. As the solvent
content is high, its evaporation causes significant shrinkage and internal mechanical stress,
resulting in deformation. In addition, areas with small or bigger air encapsulations in the
sample's bulk can occur. Additional trials were done by embedding the coating in a 6 mm
silicone rubber frame, but still it is difficult to get a sufficient sample quality (fig. 4).

Figure 4: Samples prepared by the casting process for (embedded) 6mm bulk test slabs

T+E Test result for 6 mm bulk samples: Despite the non-satisfying surface quality, a T+E
test was done. The embedded coating samples show a large scatter of the test results;
even in one test large deviations in discharge appearance of the 5 samples during the 6 h
test duration were observed. A major reason was the difference in flow (amount and
location) of the conductive liquid, caused by the non homogenous surfaces. It can be
concluded that a 6 mm coating sample is not practical to sufficiently evaluate the T+E
performance.

3.2.3 Porcelain Plates Wearing a Thin Coating Layer

As the results with 6 mm thick coating samples were not satisfying, real coated samples
were taken for further evaluation. The substrate was a glazed porcelain plate. This is
mandatory for direct comparability to service conditions. The substrate's thermal
conductivity can influence the T+E test result.
The working group manufactured plates from original HV insulator porcelain material with
original insulator glazing. Standard porcelain as substrate is suitable as well, as long as the
porcelain is glazed without damage and has a thickness of 6 mm. The holes to assemble
the electrodes must have the same center position, but may have a 20% longer diameter

13
than requested in IEC 60587 [32]. In case the holes are drilled, the drilling must be done
before the coating is applied. No damage to the porcelain or glazing is allowed.

3.2.4 Coating Application

Often original spraying equipment for the coating application is not available in the
laboratory. For practicability, application by hand and casting instead of spraying is
suggested (however, if available spraying is suitable for the application). For comparison
between samples all the materials have to be applied with the same thickness: a value of
400 µm which is close the to typical service conditions is chosen. The actual laboratory
coating sample thicknesses were measured and found to be approximately between 370
and 430 µm - a variation that also occurs on service coated insulators as well. Due to the
low thickness the issues with air encapsulations or deformations did not exist as they did
for the 6mm bulk samples. Nevertheless, the coating layer quality is very important and it
might require the collection of further experience in terms of this procedure. The surface
quality requirements are:
-> homogenous thickness, comparable to service (370 to 430 µm)
-> very good surface quality.
For comparability, all porcelain coated samples are manufactured in the same laboratory.
The required quality for all three materials is shown below:

Figure 5: Coating layer of the tested three materials before testing

14
3.2.5 Tracking and Erosion Test
The test shall be performed in accordance to IEC 60587 [32], procedure 1A 3.5 kV. Despite
the solid supporting characteristic of the porcelain plate, a support structure may be used:
the working group found that the breaking of porcelain plates can occur in the case of
intensive surface discharge activities. Fixing the sample onto the frame with screws needed
careful handling to avoid the mechanical stressing of the sample.

3.2.6 Results
The white (type A) and the blue (type B) coating both passed the test (table2, table 3). No
overcurrents occurred for the whole 6 hours of testing. The materials were capable of
suppressing the leakage currents and avoiding critical erosion even though just a very thin
layer was present and the hydrophobicity was soon lost on the bottom sides. Few other
then minor damages were present on the bottom electrode as expected. While the type A
coating had lower weight loss, the damages were more concentrated on the bottom side.
The coating type B had a slightly higher loss of weight while the discharge traces (not
conductive tracks) were a little longer.
The coating type C failed due to overcurrent on all five samples within one hour (table 4).
The material was severely degraded and this was observed visually and by the high loss of
weight: values of 147 mg to 328 mg occurred within one hour.

Table 2: Result of the tracking and erosion test at 3.5 kV with the coating type A

15
 Table 3: Result of the tracking and erosion test at 3.5 kV with the coating type B

Table 4: Result of the tracking and erosion test at 3.5 kV with the coating type C

3.2.7 Conclusion
The significant difference in resistance against tracking and erosion confirms that coatings
used for outdoor applications have to be evaluated with regard to this property. A modified
IEC 60587 shall be the recommended test procedure. Samples shall consist of smooth
porcelain plates of 6 mm (±0,5 mm) thickness, coated with the typical thickness of the
material as used in service (e.g. 400 µm). The samples need to have a good surface
quality: smooth surface, homogenous thickness and no damages. A picture of the non-
tested samples surface shall be included in the test report. The minimum requirement for
coating materials is the passing of the 1A 3.5 kV 6h /60 mA criterion. Not allowed is the
breaking of the porcelain substrate (can be caused by energy intensive surface activities).

16
The appearance of erosion (length / depth) has to be recorded in the test report, but is no
pass/fail criterion. Bulk samples of 6 mm thickness of the coating are basically not suitable.

3.3 Resistance to Weathering and UV

Field performance is the key factor for any outdoor material application. The environmental
parameters relevant from the outdoor insulation point of view are UV radiation, rainfall and
wind. Laboratory tests are usually performed as accelerated tests to observe possible long
term material changes: the target is to find a correlation as close as possible to data
collected in service experience at field test stations or service application. Nevertheless, up
to now even in case of just one type of stress applied in the tests, the correct correlation
factor is not known.

3.3.1 UV Radiation
UV radiation has been recognized as a parameter that can influence the lifetime of
polymeric materials [33]. It´s source can be from outdoor exposure, as part of the sun´s
radiation (290 nm to 350 nm wavelength) or due to corona, which is also considered as
environmental influence.
It is worth to be mentioned that in field conditions the contaminant layer formed on the
surface protects the coating material against degradation by absorbing 40% to 60% of the
radiated energy [34]. Due to the absorbed UV energy, hydrophobicity is also transferred
faster in contaminated surfaces as the LMW diffusion is accelerated [35]. UV radiation is
therefore supporting a long life span of the coating's hydrophobicity recovery and transfer.

Two artificial UV stress tests are used today to evaluate outdoor insulation materials: the
well established ISO 4892-2 Xenon Arc test [36], and alternatively the ISO 4892-3
fluorescent test [37]. The advantage of the Xenon arc test is that the test equipment is
available in the majority of laboratories, and therefore much reference test data exists. The
disadvantage is a short lifespan and high cost of the Xenon Arc lamp. The advantage of the
fluorescent method is the lower test/equipment costs, but it is limited in usage thus
restricting the discussion/comparison of the test data.
S. Kumagai and N. Yoshimura published numerous works using a 500 W Xenon short arc
lamp (Ushio UXL 500D) [38]. Several different results have been reported: e.g. in [39,40] it

17
was found that under UV radiation the tracking and erosion resistance increases and the
surface hydrophobicity slightly reduces. The authors developed a theory that under UV
stress Si-C bonds are broken and form silanol groups. This indeed reduces the level of
hydrophobicity (see chapter 3.1.1). A second theory describes a release of ATH particles
due to the UV stress; this is unlikely and obviously correlated to the surface discharges
occurring in the test. However, in none of the work a correct correlation factor could be
found.

3.3.2 Rainfall
The main effect of rainfall in the case of outdoor insulators is considered to be cleaning
[19]: hydrophobic rough surfaces (polluted coating) give higher static contact angles (e.g.
165°) than hydrophobic smooth surfaces (clean coating, e.g. 105°). Water droplets run off
very easily. They take up surface pollution resulting in a self cleaning effect.
Dielectrical effects of rainfall can be taken into account as well. Depending on the water
conductivity and the precipitation rate, the flashover performance as well as the field
distribution of an outdoor insulator can be influenced. The application of RTV coating can
improve the behavior of a ceramic or glass insulator during rainfall. R. Hartings [41] has
investigated the performance of two identical ceramic post insulators, one of them covered
with a RTV coating. The results indicated that the field distribution in the case of the coated
insulator was maintained capacitive for all environmental conditions, in contradiction to the
uncoated insulator, where the field distribution was strongly dependent on the rain
conditions. H.M. Schneider et al. [42] also reported that the application of the coating
improves the insulator performance under rain; the wet flashover voltage for coated,
polluted insulators can increase up to 30% compared to polluted uncoated ceramic
insulators.

3.3.3 Wind
Apart from abrasion by sandstorms there is a two-fold effect regarding pollution in case of
wind. On the one hand, wind is the transportation medium for contaminants to the
insulator's surface; vice versa, wind has a cleaning effect [43]. In addition, beside the
housing geometry, the insulation material can influence the amount of contaminants found
on the surface. In the case of RTV coatings, LMW molecules on the surface of insulators

18
are responsible for the hydrophobicity recovery and transfer, but also can induce a sticky
effect to the contaminants (supplied by the wind) due to their oily appearance. Indeed
higher amounts of collected contaminants are reported from field measurements on coated
insulators when compared to uncoated ceramic insulators [44].

3.4 Resistance to Chemical and Physical Degradation by Water

RTV-1 silicone rubber is more susceptible to hydrolysis reactions in comparison to HTV,
LSR or addition curing RTV-2 silicone rubbers. The RTV-1 crosslinking process usually
takes place as a condensation reaction of silanol groups to form siloxane bonds with the
deliberation of water [45, 46, 47]. Water is present during the curing process (room
temperature). As the used catalysts (e.g. dibutyl tin) remain in the rubber, further hydrolysis
reactions are possible. The chemical changes by hydrolysis in RTV coatings have been
studied by S.H. Kim et al. [15], where the main influence appears to be chain scission.
Numerous other publications deal with water storage experiments. However it must be
clarified that the reported observations most of the time do not trace back to a degradation,
but only to non-destructive diffusion or water storage effects.

H. Deng et al. [48] investigated whether rainfall may lead to a coating's material loss. A
number of RTV coating specimens were immersed in water of 70μS/cm conductivity for a
period of 12 months. The samples lost only 0.46 % points, which can be explained by
reduction of LMW siloxanes due to the dissolution of LMW from the coating into the water.

Water immersion of RTV samples has been applied in order to investigate the influence of
water to the material degradation and especially hydrophobicity. T. G. Gustavsson et al.
[49] performed a water immersion test (distilled water at 50°C in darkness). The evaluation
parameters were the advancing and receding contact angle. A step-like behavior in the
decrease of the receding contact angle values during the immersion of silicone rubber
based materials in water is described. The character and rate of the decrease in the
receding contact angle seems to be strongly dependent on the frequency of water change,
the amount of water in the immersion bath and its ratio to the surface area of the immersed
samples. It is suggested that the step-like behavior of receding contact angle is associated
with the hydratization of the PDMS backbone at the material surface. These effects are

19
attributed simply to the rotation of the methyl groups in the PMDS due to water storage, but
not due to degradation.
Thermally Stimulated Depolarization Current technique (TSD) has been used by many
authors in order to investigate the influence of water immersion. E. Tuncer et al. [50]
applied this method on RTV and HTV with different filler concentration. The samples were
stored separately in distilled water, which was changed every 100h, in darkness at 50oC.
Every second day two samples of each material were removed for investigation. The
measured parameters were the weight, electrical capacitance and loss factor and electrical
resistance (DC value after 1min). It was found that increased filler concentration resulted in
higher water immersion sensitivity. Today it is known that this depends on the quality of the
filler and its treatment.

No references about RTV coatings regarding a water diffusion test as described in IEC
62217 [8] were found. Very severe tests regarding boiling water for 100 hours have been
proposed in the IEEE guide [7] in order to evaluate coating materials reversion i.e. the
softening of the polymeric material or its reduction to a sticky mass due to hydrolysis
reactions.

In IEC 62217 [8] a hardness test on shed and housing material after immersion in boiling
water for 42 h is requested. The hardness should not change from the pre-boiled specimen
by more than 20%. This test is not applicable to coatings due to their thin application of
typically 400 µm. Thicker samples are not practical as was experienced with the T+E
sample preparation (chapter 3.2).

3.5 Volume Resistivity

The preferred test method is IEC 60093 [52]. The method is applicable to all coating
materials. Sample thickness is 2 mm which can be obtained, e.g. by using an open mold
casting technique. The minimum volume resistivity requirement shall be 1010 to 1012 Ohm
cm.

20
3.6 Resistance to Corona
Corona stress is considered as one important factor that affects the life of an RTV coating
[7]. Corona can be generated on a hydrophobic surface due to the water droplets that are
present, but also due to discharges initiated at the metal fittings or hardware of the
insulator. Consequently, corona tests are necessary in order to investigate the material
performance and especially the influence of corona on the coating's hydrophobicity. Corona
tests should be focused on the influence on hydrophobicity (as described above), since the
mechanical integrity of the insulator is obtained by the ceramic or glass substrate.

Ozone is an aging factor that can be studied independently from corona. CIGRE WG D1.14
set up a project group dealing with ozone and combined ozone and corona evaluation. The
subject is still under consideration.

3.7 Adhesion Ability

The adhesion of coatings to porcelain or glass surfaces is important. Otherwise leakage
currents might occur in the macroscopic interface, destroying the coating and increasing
the risk of flashover. Despite this importance, suitable test procedures for evaluating the
adhesion have not been reported. A proposal (the boiling water test for 100 hours) for
adhesion evaluation, but limited to laboratory samples is provided in IEEE guide [7].

21
4. References

[1] IEC/TR 62039, Polymeric materials for outdoor use under HV stress, 2007
[2] Cherney E.A., Gorur R.S., RTV Silicone Rubber Coatings for Outdoor Insulators,
IEEE Transactions on Dielectrics and Electrical Insulation, Volume 6, Issue 5, October
1999, pp. 605–611
[3] Cherney E.A., RTV Silicone – A high tech Solution for a dirty insulator problem, IEEE
Electrical Insulation Magazine, Volume: 11, Issue: 6, November/December 1995, pp.
8–14
[4] Carberry R.E., Schneider H.M., Evaluation of RTV Coating for station insulators
subjected to coastal contamination, IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery, Volume:4,
Issue:1, January 1989, pp. 577-585
[5] Hoch D.A., Reynders J.P, Macey R.E., A Silicone based hydrophobic Coating for high
voltage insulators, IEEE International Conference on Electrical Insulation and
Dielectric Phenomena, 1992
[6] Agoris D.P., Siderakis K.G., Thalassinakis E.J., Influence of the environment to the
pollution performance of RTV Silicone Rubber Coatings in Crete, 13th International
Symposium on High Voltage Engineering, Netherlands 2003
[7] IEEE Std 1523-2002, IEEE Guide for the Application, Maintenance and Evaluation of
RTV Silicone Rubber Coatings for Outdoor Ceramic Insulators, IEEE DEIS Society,
2002
[8] IEC 62217, Polymeric insulators for indoor and outdoor use with a nominal voltage
greater than 1 000 V - General definitions, test methods and acceptance criteria, 2005
[9] IEC/TS 62073, Guidance on the measurement of wettability of insulator surface, 2003
[10] STRI-Guide 92/1, Hydrophobicity Classification Guide, Swedish Transmission
Research Institute, 1992
[11] Kim J., Chaudhury M.K., Owen M.J., Hydrophobicity Loss and Recovery of Silicone
HV Insulation, IEEE Transactions on Dielectrics and Electrical Insulation, Volume: 6,
Issue: 5, October 1999, pp. 695 – 702
[12] Hillborg H., Gedde U.W., Hydrophobicity in Silicone Rubber, IEEE Transactions on
Dielectrics and Electrical Insulation, Volume: 6, Issue: 5, October 1999, pp. 703–717
[13] Kim S.H., Cherney E.A., Hackam R., The loss and recovery of RTV SIR Insulator
Coatings, IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery, Volume: 5, No: 3, July 1990, pp.
1491–1500
[14] Bärsch R., Lambrecht J., Winter H.-J., On the Valuation of the Early Aging Period of
Polymer Insulator Surfaces During Accelerated Aging Tests, 9th International
Symposium on High Voltage Engineering, Graz, 1995, paper 3023
[15] Kim S.H.; Cherney E.A., Hackam R., Rutherford K.G., Chemical changes at the
surface of RTV Silicone Rubber Coatings on insulators during Dry band Arcing, IEEE
Transactions on Dielectrics and Electrical Insulation,Volume: 1, Issue: 1, February
1994, pp.106 – 123.

22
[16] Kim S.H., Cherney E.A., Hackam R., Effect of Dry band Arcing on the Surface of RTV
Silicone Rubber Coatings, IEEE International Conference on Electrical Insulation,
June 7-10, 1992, pp. 237-240.
[17] Chang W.J., Gorur R.S., The role of the backbone chain rotation in the hydrophobicity
recovery of polymeric materials for outdoor insulation, IEEE International Conference
on Electrical Insulation and Dielectric Phenomena, 1992
[18] Kim S.H., Hackam R., Evaluation of Silicone Rubber Insulator Coatings in a Salt Fog
Chamber, IEEE International Conference on Electrical Insulation and Dielectric
Phenomena, 1990
[19] Janssen H., Herden A., Kärner H.C., The Loss and Recovery of Hydrophobicity on
Silicone Rubber Surfaces, 10th International Symposium on High Voltage Engineering,
Montreal, 1997, p.145-148
[20] Kim S.H., Cherney E.A., Hackam R., Effects of filler level in RTV Silicone rubber
Coatings used in HV Insulators, IEEE Transactions on Dielectrics and Electrical
Insulation, Volume: 27, Issue: 6, December 1992, pp. 1065 – 1072.
[21] Janssen H., Herden A., Karner H.C., LMW components in Silicone Rubber and Epoxy
Resins, 11th International Symposium on High Voltage Engineering, London 1999
[22] Homma H., Kuroyagi T., Izumi K., Mirley C.L., Ronzello J., Boggs S.A., Diffusion of
Low molecular weight siloxane from the bulk to surface, IEEE Transactions on
Dielectrics and Electrical Insulation, Volume: 6, Issue: 3, June 1999, pp. 370 – 375
[23] Chang W.J., Gorur R.S., Surface recovery of Silicone Rubber used for HV Outdoor
Insulation, IEEE Transactions on Dielectrics and Electrical Insulation, Volume 1, Issue
6, December 1994, pp. 1039 – 1046
[24] Gorur R.S., Mishra J., Tay R., McAfee R., Electrical performance of RTV Silicone
Rubber Coatings, IEEE Transactions on Dielectrics and Electrical Insulation, Volume:
3, Issue: 2, April 1996, pp. 299 – 306.
[25] Kindersberger J., Kuhl M., Effect of Hydrophobicity on Insulator Performance, 6th
International Symposium on High Voltage Engineering, New Orleans, 1989, paper
12.01
[26] Bärsch R., Lambrecht J., Winter H.-J., On the evaluation of influences on the
hydrophobicity of Silicone Rubber Surfaces, 10th International Symposium on High
Voltage Engineering, Montreal, 1997, paper 3220
[27] CIGRE WG D1.14, Material properties for non-ceramic outdoor insulation, CIGRÉ TB
255
[28] Kindersberger J., Evaluation of dynamic hydrophobicity properties of polymeric
materials for non-ceramic outdoor insulation - Retention and transfer of
hydrophobicity, on behalf of Working Group D1.14 “Material properties for non-
ceramic outdoor insulation”
[29] Zhidong J., Haifeng G., Liming W., Zhicheng G., Jie Y., Effects of contaminants on
hydrophobicity transference of RTV SIR coating, 13th International Symposium on
High Voltage Engineering, Netherlands 2003

23
[30] F Fong, Operational Experience on HVDC and HVAC Insulators at Sylmar Converter
Station, IEEE International Symposium on Electrical Insulation, April 7-10, 2002
[31] Kim S.H.; Cherney E.A., Hackam R., Artificial Testing and Evaluation of RTV Coatings
in a Salt Fog Chamber, IEEE Transactions on Electrical Insulation, volume 26, Issue
4, August 1991, pp. 797–805
[32] IEC 60587, Electrical insulating materials used under severe ambient conditions -
Test methods for evaluating resistance to tracking and erosion, 2007
[33] Gubanski S.M., Erosion resistance of different housing materials to UV irradiation and
surface discharges action, Fifth International Conference on Dielectric Materials,
Measurements and Applications, 27-30 Jun 1988, pp. 37 – 40
[34] Gubanski S.M., Wankowicz J.G., Distribution of Natural Pollution Surface Layers on
Silicone Rubber Insulators and their UV Absorption, IEEE Transactions on Dielectrics
and Electrical Insulation, Volume: 24, Issue: 4, August 1989, pp. 689 – 697
[35] Gubanski S.M., Wankowicz J.G., Lampe W.D., Loss and Recovery of Hydrophobicity
on RTV Coating Surfaces, Dielectrics and Electrical Insulation, IEEE Transactions on,
Volume: 1, Issue: 4, August 1994, pp. 604 – 614
[36] ISO 4892-2: 1994 Methods of exposure to laboratory light sources – Part 2: Xenon-
arc sources
[37] ISO 4892-3: 1994 Methods of exposure to laboratory light sources – Part 3:
Fluorescent UV lamps
[38] Kumagai S., Yoshimura N., Influence of single and multiple environmental stresses on
Tracking and Erosion of RTV Silicone Rubber, IEEE Transactions on Dielectrics and
Electrical Insulation, Volume: 6 , Issue: 2 , April 1999, pp. 211–225.
[39] Kumagai S., Yoshimura N., Electrical and Environmental Stresses and the
Hydrophobic Stability of SIR, EVA and their Blends, IEEE Transactions on Dielectrics
and Electrical Insulation, Volume 8 , Issue 4 , August 2001, pp. 679 – 686.
[40] Yoshimura N., Kumagai S., Nishimura S., Electrical and environmental aging of
Silicone Rubber Used in Outdoor Insulation, IEEE Transactions on Dielectrics and
Electrical Insulation, Volume: 6, Issue: 5, October 1999, pp. 632 – 650
[41] Hartings R., The AC behavior of a Hydrophilic and hydrophobic Post Insulator during
Rain, IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery, Volume: 9, No 3, July 1994, pp. 1584 -
1592
[42] Schneider H.M., Hall J.F., Nellis C.L., Low S.S., Lorden D.J., Rain and contamination
tests on HVDC Wall bushings with and without RTV SIR Coatings, IEEE Transactions
on Power Delivery, Volume: 6, No: 3,July 1991, pp. 1289 -1300
[43] CIGRE, WG 33-04, Taskforce 01, Polluted Insulators - A Review of current
knowledge, CIGRÉ TB 158, 2000
[44] Karady G.G, Flashover mechanism of Non Ceramic Insulators, IEEE Transactions on
Dielectrics and Electrical Insulation, Volume 6, Issue 5, October 1999, pp. 718 – 723
[45] Gustavsson T.G., Outdoor Aging of Silicone Rubber Formulations in Coastal
Environment, Thesis for the Licentiate of Engineering, Chalmers University of
Technology, Gothenburg, Sweden, 2000

24
[46] Hillborg H.C., Loss and Recovery of Hydrophobicity of Polydimethylsiloxane after
exposure to electrical discharges, KTH, Stockholm, Sweden, 2001
[47] Hechtl W., Chemistry and Technology of Room-Temperature-Vulcanizable Silicone
Rubber, in Silicones (Chemistry and Technology), Vulkan-Verlag, Essen, 1991, 45
[48] Deng H., Hackam R., Impact of weather conditions and formulations on LMW Silicone
Fluid content in RTV Silicone Rubber Coatings, Electrical Insulation and Dielectric
Phenomena, 1996. Conference on, Volume: 2, 20-23 Oct. 1996, pp. 437 - 440 vol.2
[49] Gustavsson T.G., Gubanski S.M., Lambrecht J., Hydratization of the PDMS Backbone
during water immersion test, Hydratization of the PDMS backbone during water
immersion test, Conference on Electrical Insulation and Dielectric Phenomena, 1998.,
Volume: 1, 25-28 Oct., 1998, pp. 269 – 272
[50] Tuncer E., Gubanski S.M, Lambrecht J., Barsch R., Thermally Stimulated
Depolarization Currents of Silicone Rubbers Immersed in Water, Conduction and
Breakdown of Solid Dielectrics, International Conference on, June 22-25, 1998,
Vasteras, Sweden.
[51] IEC 61109, Composite Insulators for a.c. overhead lines with a nominal voltage
greater than 1000V – Definitions, test methods, and acceptance criteria, 2008
[52] IEC 60093, Methods of test for volume resistivity and surface resistivity of solid
electrical insulation materials, 1980

25
5. Additional References
[A1] Kumagai S., Wang X., Yoshimura N., Solid residue formation of RTV Silicone
Rubber due to dry-band arcing and thermal decomposition, IEEE Transactions on
Dielectrics and Electrical Insulation ,Volume: 5 , Issue: 2 , April 1998, pp.281–289.
[A2] Montesinos J., Gorur R.S., Goudie J., Electrical performance of RTV Silicone
Rubber coatings after exposure to an acidic environment, Conference on Electrical
Insulation and Dielectric Phenomena, Volume1, 25-28 October 1998, pp. 39-42
[A3] Meyer L.H., Omranipour R., Jayaram S.H., Cherney E.A., The effect of ATH and
Silica on tracking and erosion resistance of Silicone rubber compounds for outdoor
insulation, 2002 Conference record on Electrical Insulation
[A4] Omranipour R., Meyer L.H., Jayaram S.H., Cherney E.A., Tracking and erosion
resistance of RTV Silicone Rubber: Effect of filler particle size and loading, 2002
Annual report conference on Electrical Insulation and Dielectric phenomena
[A5] Omranipour R., Meyer L.H., Jayaram S.H., Cherney E.A., Inclined plane tracking
and erosion evaluation of filled and unfilled Silicone Rubber, 2001 Annual report
conference on Electrical Insulation and Dielectric phenomena
[A6] Wieczorek K., Jaroszewski M., Resistance of Silicone High Voltage Insulation to
leakage current in modified inclined plane test, XIIIth International Symposium on
High Voltage Engineering, Netherlands 2003
[A7] Warren L., Testing for tracking [organic insulating materials], Insulation Diagnostics
– Methods for determining Quality, Remnant Life and Proof Testing, IEE
Colloquium on, 25 March 1991.
[A8] IEC 61302, Electrical insulating materials - Method to evaluate the resistance to
tracking and erosion – Rotating wheel dip test, 1995
[A9] Kumagai, S.; Suzuki M., Yoshimura, N., Electrical Performances of RTV Silicone
Rubber Coatings in Salt Fog and Rotating Wheel Dip Test, Japanese Transactions
IEE, Volume: 121-A, No: 4, 2001
[A10] Kaltenborn U., Kindersberger J., Bärsch R., Jahn H., On the Electrical Performance
of different Insulating Materials in a Rotating Wheel Dip Test, Annual report,
Conference on Electrical Insulation and Dielectric phenomena, October 19-22,1997
[A11] Gubanski S.M., Experience with the Merry-go-round Test, IEEE Transactions on
Dielectrics and Electrical Insulation, Volume: 25, Issue: 2, April 1990, pp. 331 –
340.
[A12] Deng H., Hackam R., Cherney E.A., Influence of thickness, substrate type, amount
of silicone fluid and solvent type on the electrical performance of RTV Silicone
Rubber Coatings, IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery, January 1996, Vol. 11, No
1, pp. 431-443

26
[A13] Kumagai S., Yoshimura N., Hydrophobic Transfer of RTV Silicone Rubber Aged in
Single and Multiple Environmental Stresses and the behaviour of LMW silicone
fluid, IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery, Volume: 18 , Issue: 2 , April 2003, pp.
506–516.
[A14] Kumagai S., Yoshimura N., Hydrophobicity Recovery of Silicone Rubber and LMW
Behaviour, Symposium on Electrical Insulating Materials, Proceedings of, Japan,
September 27-30, 1998.
[A15] Wankowicz J.G., Gubanski S.M., Lampe W.D., Loss and Recovery of
Hydrophobicity on RTV Coatings Surfaces, IEEE Transactions on Dielectrics and
Electrical Insulation, Volume: 1, Issue: 4, August 1994, pp. 604 – 614.
[A16] Tokoro T., Nagao N., Kosaki M., Effect of water absorption on the high field
dielectric property of Silicone Rubber, International Symposium on Electrical
Insulating Materials, Sept. 27-30, Toyohashi, Japan
[A17] Danikas M.G., On the breakdown strength of silicone rubber, IEEE Transactions on
Dielectrics and Electrical Insulation, Volume: 1, Issue: 6, December 1994, pp.
1196-1200
[A18] Onodi T., Danikas M.G., Bruning A.M.;A study of factors affecting the breakdown
strength of silicone rubber, Conference on Electrical Insulation and Dielectric
Phenomena, 1992, October 18-21, 1992, pp.811 – 816
[A19] Toskey G.A., Test methods and application considerations for evaluation of silicone
RTV coatings in the mitigation of wildlife-induced flashovers, Electrical Insulation,
Conference Record of the 1992 IEEE International Symposium on , 7-10 June
1992, pp.249 - 253
[A20] Homma H., Mirley L., Ronzello J., Boggs S.A., Field and Laboratory Aging of RTV
SIR Coatings, IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery, Volume: 15, No: 4, October
2000, pp. 1298 – 1303
[A21] Papailiou K.O., Schmuck F., Vojatzakis Y., Silicone Rubber Performance in respect
to Mediterranean Environment, CIHVI Conference, 26-27 April 2001, Heraklion,
Crete, Greece
[A22] Xischan L.L.W., Dengke C., Hui L., Study of the properties of RTV nanocomposite
coatings, XIIIth International Symposium on High Voltage Engineering, Netherlands
2003
[A23] Büchner H., Schmuck F., Zanetti A., Zingg A., Bärsch R., Jahn H., Impact of filler to
Silicone Rubber Basing on RTV-2 and LSR systems, 10th ISH, August 25-29, 1997,
Canada
[A24] Kim S.H., Cherney E.A., Hackam R., Hydrophobic behaviour of insulators coated
with RTV Silicone Rubber, IEEE Transactions on Dielectrics and Electrical
Insulation, Volume: 27, Issue: 3, June 1992, pp. 610 – 622
[A25] Kim S.H., Hackam R., Formation of Silicone Fluid at the Surface of RTV Silicone
Rubber Coatings due to heat, IEEE International Conference on Electrical
Insulation and Dielectric Phenomena, June 7-10, 1993

27
[A26] Deng H., Hackam R., Low molecular weight silicone fluid in RTV Silicone Rubber
Coatings, IEEE Transactions on Dielectrics and Electrical Insulation, Volume: 0,
Issue: 1, February 2000, pp. 84 – 94
[A27] Jahn H., Bärsch R., Wendt E., The influence of temperature on the recovery of the
hydrophobicity on Silicone Rubber Surfaces, IEEE Conference on Electrical
Insulation and Dielectric Phenomena, Victoria, BC, Canada, October 15-18, 2000,
pp. 242 – 245

28