2009 Annual Report Conference on Electrical Insulation and Dielectric Phenomena
The Dependency of Water Droplet Behaviour and
Leakage Current Pattern on Electrode Configuration
E. Da Silva
School of Electrical and Electronic Engineering,
The University of Manchester,
PO Box 88, Sackville Street,
Manchester, M60 1QD, UK
Abstract- The ageing processes of composite insulators are
heavily dependent on their surface hydrophobicity level. Corona
discharges and dry-band arcing are the main phenomena
associated with the degradation of polymer surfaces when
insulators are exposed to pollution, humidity and electric fields.
Additional environmental factors such as UV radiation,
temperature and mechanical stresses act as accelerating factors
for the ageing processes. Understanding of corona and dry band
arc processes is crucial to evaluate, diagnose and monitor the
insulators’ surface condition in advanced ageing stages. At the
same time, different experiments to study the effect of electric
field distribution and its influence on water droplet behaviour,
leakage current patterns, insipient corona discharges and water
droplets behaviour are needed to increase the knowledge about
early degradation stages. The study summarized in this paper
was focused on metal electrodes shapes and their influence on
electric field distribution, water droplet behaviour and leakage
current characteristics. Keeping the gap distance constant, five
different shapes of elongated electrodes (flat, three different
circle-sections, and rectangular bars) were simulated using Finite
Element Analysis (FEM) and four of them were experimentally
tested. Contact angles of water droplets were monitored using a
high speed camera. Images were synchronized with leakage
current and voltage signals. Significant differences were found
between the cases under study, and the influence of electrode
shape on processes seen on the material surfaces has been
established.
I. INTRODUCTION
Degradation of outdoor composite insulation surfaces,
including loss of hydrophobicity, can be associated with the
presence of water droplets under electric field stress. In the
literature these phenomena are commonly studied using small
rectangular polymer samples and a variety of electrode shapes
locations and materials [1-12]. It can be inferred that, under
dry conditions, different configurations of electrodes causes
differences in the electric field distribution [1,4,5], charge
injection, corona discharges [6,12,13], and leakage current [7].
Consideration of testing under wet and polluted conditions
and analysis of the effects of changing the electric field
intensity and distribution suggest that differences in the
induced electric charge at the tip of the water droplets and
conductive charges along the surface will result from changes
in electrode geometry. It is conceivable that local
enhancement of electric field, water droplet dynamic
behaviour, corona discharge inception voltage, magnitude and
current, and hence local ageing could be readily influenced by
these geometric factors. As result some misinterpretation of
978-1-4244-4559-2/09/$25.00 © 2009 IEEE
242
Authorized licensed use limited to: University of Moratuwa. Downloaded on August 28,2021 at 10:19:22 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
S. M. Rowland
the phenomena may result. This consideration was first
introduced in 1997 [3] and embedded electrodes were
consequently used. Nevertheless, this matter has been received
little attention or focus and many different electrodes can be
found generating data in the literature.
In this work, electrostatic field simulations of different
electrode configurations are presented to visualize the electric
field distribution on surfaces of silicone samples. The
enhancement factor, F, defined as the ratio between the
electric field calculated using the finite element method and
the homogeneous electric field magnitude (EHomogeneus=
VApplied/gapdistance) are also presented. Experimental tests were
carried out to evaluate leakage current characteristics and the
distortion of a single water droplet located at the centre of the
electrode gap. Correlation between the experimental measures
with simulation results is presented.
II. FEM SIMMULATIONS
Five different pairs of elongated electrode geometries
(Fig.1), with a water droplet located at their centre, were
simulated using Finite Element Method (FEM) to determine
the electric field distribution with a potential difference
applied to the electrodes. Fig. 2 shows, as an example, the
electric field distribution obtained using FEM simulations, for
a silicon rubber surface (İr = 4.6) with two semicircular bar
electrodes separated by 20 mm and one water droplet
(diameter = 2 mm, İr = 81, contact angle = 110°) located at the
centre of the gap, under 15 kV of electrical stress. The same
simulation was done for the other four pairs of electrodes
shown in Fig. 1.
Five different heights over the material surface were
considered for the analysis (see L1-5 in Fig. 2). The values of
maximum electric field (Ɯmax) at the edge of the electrode and
triple point and enhancement factors (F) for the five electrode
shapes tested are shown in the Figs. 3a-e. Enhancement
factors, F, along L1-5 lines are presented in Figs. 4 and 5.
Fig.1. Electrode cross-section shapes under study
(d; diameter; d’: base; h: height; l: length; t: thickness, all in mm)
 L4 L3

L1 L5 L2

Fig. 2. Electric field intensity with semicircle bar electrodes and a centred
water droplet under 15 kV. LX: height for the analysis (a)
(L1 = 0 mm; L2 = 1 mm; L3 = 2 mm; L4 = 3 mm; L5 = 0.5 mm)

IV. EXPERIMENTAL TESTS

12 mm diameter, 100 mm long electrodes were cut from

brass bars and the ends were rounded and polished. Flat
electrodes (12 mm width) were cut from Aluminium tape and
the ends were also rounded. Square bars were not tested.

A. Flashover Voltage (No droplets between electrodes)

The voltage was slowly and continuously increased until
flashover was reached. The average of five measurements was (b)
considered. Fig. 6 shows the flashover voltage for each
electrode configuration.

B. Phase Angle between Applied Voltage and Leakage

Current
One 30 μl distilled water droplet was placed at the centre of
the 20 mm gap in the four configurations under study. Five
different peak voltages were evaluated: 5, 7.5, 10, 12.5 and 15
kV. Voltage and leakage current signals were synchronized
with high speed camera images of the water droplet shape
(using 1600 fps and 255 signal values per frame). Fig. 7 (c)
presents the magnitude of leakage current detected in the three
hemispherical type configurations. Values of the flat
configuration at 12.5 and 15 kV are not included because the
corona discharges were significantly higher than the values
observed at the other three configurations and started at much
lower voltages. Fig. 8 shows the phase between leakage
current and voltage signals at ‘0 minutes’, just at the moment
when the value of the test voltage is reached and the voltage
signal crosses zero.

C. Pulses along Leakage Current Signals

In Fig. 7 the maximum value of the pulses that appear on the (d)
leakage current signal (pulses on the positive and negative
half-cycles) at 12.5 and 15 kV are also included.

D. Water Droplet Contact Angle

Fig. 9 presents the contact angle changes just at the moment
when the voltage reaches the test value and is at its first
positive maximum. Fig. 10 summarizes changes on the water
droplet dimensions caused by contraction and extension
movements for the electrodes under study at each value of the
test voltage.
(e)
Fig. 3. Ɯ (one water droplets, under 15 kV) along two long electrodes gap:
(a) Semicircle, (b) Super-semicircle, (c) Cap, (d) Square, (e) Flat.

243

Authorized licensed use limited to: University of Moratuwa. Downloaded on August 28,2021 at 10:19:22 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.

Fig. 4. Electric field enhance factors (F) along the material surface
Fig. 5. Enhance factors (F) of the electric field magnitude over the surface
(L2-4) and inside the polymer bulk (L5), at the electrode edge and at the water
droplet edge alignment.
Environmental conditions: 19 °C, 765.5 mmHg and 68% H2O.
Fig. 6. Changes of flashover voltages caused by different electrodes shapes
Fig. 7. Leakage current and pulses at leakage current signal
Fig. 8. Phase angle between leakage current versus applied voltage
244
Authorized licensed use limited to: University of Moratuwa. Downloaded on August 28,2021 at 10:19:22 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
VI. ANALYSIS OF RESULTS
As expected, FEM simulations (Figs. 2 and 3), show that
electric field is enhanced at the contact edges between
electrodes and polymer surface and also at the triple point
(polymer/water/air) when a water droplet is placed at the
centre of the gap. This introduces areas where the electric field
is concentrated and a significant enhancement factor results.
Consequently, important changes are seen in leakage current,
corona discharges, and water droplet dynamics. Fig. 4 shows
than super-semicircular and flat electrodes present the highest
electric field enhancement factors, followed by the cap bars
shape. Semicircle electrodes exhibit the smallest enhancement
factors at the water droplet edges and the square bars present
the smallest factor at the electrodes edge. A water droplet
located at the gap centre increases the maximum values of the
electric field intensity at the electrode edges. This is explained
by the new potential distribution along the surface (Fig. 11)
where a high electric field occurs at the edges of the water
droplet and is diminished within the droplet.
Fig. 5 presents the enhancement factors along the parallel
lines described in the Fig. 2. At the electrodes’ edge the
electric field intensity is higher for the cap electrodes and is
similar between semicircle and super-semicircle electrodes
and the smaller is presented at the flat configuration. This is
different from the values seen on the material surface and
shows a considerable sensitivity to distance from the surface.
Over the water droplet edge position, square electrodes
introduce the highest factor followed cap and super-semicircle
electrodes. Semicircle electrodes have the smallest effect at
the water droplet edge position above the surface. The highest
intensity in the bulk of the polymer (L5=-0.5mm) is presented
by flat electrodes under the electrode edge position and by
square electrodes under the water droplet edges. This will
cause the activation of different ageing phenomena in both the
polymer bulk and surface. Semicircle and super-semicircle
shapes introduce similar enhance factors at the polymer bulk.
Fig. 6 shows that without a water droplet on the material
surface, bar electrodes with super-semicircle cross section the
flashover voltage is 4.3% lower than the voltage reached using
semicircle bars. The gap at the super-semicircle electrodes is
20 mm along the surface line but is shorter (19 mm or 5%) at
2.05 mm over the surface because the cross section shape of
the electrodes (see Fig.1). The resulting enhancement of the
electric field accounts for this breakdown voltage reduction.
Using cap or flat electrodes the flashover voltage is reduced
8.5% and 10.5%, respectively, in comparison with semicircle
electrodes.
Leakage current behaviour, presented at fig. 7, shows very
similar behaviour between semicircle and super-semicircle
electrodes and is approximately 10% higher for cap electrodes.
This is consistent with the increased electric field
enhancement. Looking at the pulse magnitudes, cap electrodes
show the higher values of negative and positive pulses at 12.5
kV and the super-semicircle electrodes exhibit the higher
pulses at 15 kV. This might be also a consequence of the
smaller gap over the water droplet.
 The phase angle between the voltage and leakage current
signals, reported in Fig. 8, for super-semicircle electrodes have
the higher level of uniformity of the phase angle between the
voltage and leakage current signal when the voltage is
increased (~84°). A highly capacitive behaviour with angles
close to 90° between voltage and leakage current are expected
since conductive current are low. Any conductivity change on
the material surface will be seen as a change the phase angle
magnitude. The phase angle behaviour of super-semicircle
electrodes is very similar to that observed on cap electrodes
until corona discharge is initiated. The results using flat
electrodes are significantly different. The phase angle is
considerably reduced at voltages equal or higher than 12.5 kV.
It is apparent that leakage current is influenced by electrode
shape, as a result of resulting electric field distribution
enhancement.
Fig. 9 shows contact angle reduction when voltage
increases. The highest reduction is presented by cap electrodes
followed by the super-semicircle bars. The semicircle
configuration causes the least contact angle reduction. This is
agreement with the expansion of the water droplet observed
(Fig. 10). Symmetry was observed on both sides of the water
droplet.
Fig. 9. Contact angle versus applied voltage (Ground electrode side)
Fig. 10. Water droplet dimensions versus applied voltage. D1 is the drop
length on the axis between the electrodes, H is the droplet height and D2 is the
width of the droplet parallel to the length of the electrodes.
Fig. 11. Potential distribution with and without water droplet
245
Authorized licensed use limited to: University of Moratuwa. Downloaded on August 28,2021 at 10:19:22 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
VII. CONCLUSIONS
Preliminary conclusions can be summarized as follows:
x Complete understanding of water droplets’ behaviour on
organic material surfaces under the influence of electric
field is necessary to quantify the ageing mechanisms of
composite insulators.
x Experimental tests have been carried out previously to study
water droplet behaviour under electric fields, but ill-defined
conditions introduce barriers to comparison of phenomena.
Different conditions and results are introduced by the
experimental use of various electrode geometries.
x Semicircular bar electrodes cause reproducible distortion in
the electric field distributions, leakage currents, phase
angles between leakage current and voltage, contact angles
and water droplet displacement. Additional configurations
will be required to develop an understanding of
phenomenon and service conditions, but results may not be
directly comparable to published work.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The authors thank EdF Energy for permission to publish and
their support for this project.
REFERENCES
[1] N. Arise, et al, "Water droplet on Polymer Material and the Influence on
Discharge Characteristics". IEEE CEIDP, 1999, pp. 455-458.
[2] H. Gao, et al, "The Effect of Water Droplets on Hydrophobic
Contaminated Surface under AC Field Voltage Application". IEEE
CEIDP, USA, 2005, pp. 124-127.
[3] H. Kloes and D. Koening, "Basic Investigation of the Performance of
Droplets on Electrically Stressed Polymer Surfaces". IEEE CEIDP,
Minneapolis, USA, 1997, pp. 374-377.
[4] A. Krivda and D. Birtwhistle, "Breakdown between water drops on wet
polymer surfaces". IEEE CEIDP, 2001, pp. 572-580.
[5] A. Krivda, D. Birtwhistle, "Electrohydrodynamic phenomena related to
water drops on Polymer Surfaces". 7thICSD, 2001, pp. 345-350.
[6] Y. Zhu, et al, "Corona Discharge Phenomenon and Behavior of Water
Droplets on the Surface of Polymer in the AC Electric Field". 7th
ICPADM, Nagoya, Japan, 2003, pp. 638-641.
[7] Y. Zhu, et al, "Leakage Current Analysis and Electric Field Calculation
in Salt Fog Ageing Test on Polymer Insulation Material". IEEE CEIDP,
2003, pp. 92-95.
[8] R. Sundararajan, S. Sundhar and T. Asokan, "Electrohydrodynamics of
Water Droplets on Polymer Surfaces," 34th IEEE IAS Industry
Applications Conference, USA, 1999, pp. 1817-1824.
[9] S. Keim, et al, "Experimental Inv. on Electrodynamic Phenomena at
Single Droplets on Ins. Surf". IEEE CEIDP, USA, 2003, pp. 133-136.
[10] S. Keim and D. Koening, "Study of the Behavior of Droplets on
Polymeric Surfaces under the influence of an Applied Electrical Field".
IEEE CEIDP, Texas, USA, 1999, pp. 707-710.
[11] S. Keim and D. Koenig, "The dynamic behavior of water drops in an ac
field". IEEE CEIDP, 2001, pp. 613-616.
[12] T. Braunsberger et al, "Partial Discharge Processes at Sessile Water
Drops on Insulating Surfaces". XVI ICGDA, China, 2006, pp. 1-4.
[13] K. Katada, et al, "Corona Discharge of water droplets on Hydrophobic
Polymer surfaces," 6th ICPADM, China, 2000, pp. 781-784.