Effect of booster shed on ceramic post insulator
pollution flashover performance improvement
YU Xinzhe, YANG Xiaolei, ZHANG Qiaogen,
Electrical Engineering Collage
Xi’an Jiaotong University
Xi’an, China
Abstract—To prevent substation post insulator from pollution
flashover, apart from PRTV (Permanent Room Temperature
Vulcanized) coating on insulator surface, booster shed adoption
is also a solution for operation maintenance. In this paper,
ceramic post insulators installed with silicone rubber sheds in
various configuration are tested by pollution flashover
experiment, to find out the optimized configuration of booster
sheds. Five test specimens are prepared for this work, including
25mm/kV ceramic insulator installed with 0, 2, 4, 6 silicone
rubber booster sheds, contaminated with same pollution degree
in solid layer method. As well, insulator coating with PRTV
material is prepared in same way for comparison. Pollution
flashover tests are performed following IEC/TS 60507.
Meanwhile, arc shape variation synchronized with voltage and
current change are record by high speed camera. In various
configuration, flashover voltage, leakage current and arc
development shape show significant characteristic separately.
Results show that the booster sheds not only provide additional
creepage distance, but also create an alternating hydrophobicity
distribution on insulator surface, which is more efficient for
pollution flashover performance improvement. Booster shed
made of silicone rubber alternates hydrophobicity distribution
along ceramic insulator. Accordingly it can enhance the pollution
flashover voltage greatly.
Keywords—pollution flashover, post insulator, booster shed,
hydrophobicity distributionˈ arc shape, outdoor insulation
I. INTRODUCTION
Post insulator is a very important equipment in substation,
as its mechanical support and external insulation functions in
power transformation. Once pollution flashover happens on it,
there will be huge economy loss due to the suddenly power cut.
Pollution flashover is mainly determined by contamination and
wetting condition in the field.
The pollution level of substation can be influenced by
surrounding environment change, especially the new pollution
source, such as factory, road, etc. As the pollution level
becomes higher, the external insulation failure risk gets bigger
than before. Solution for improve the outdoor insulation
performance on original size of insulator is meaningful for
substation operation maintaining.
Adoption of RTV coating is an option to increase the
outdoor insulation strength[1]. However, because of
contamination on surface and the fixed position of insulator, it
978-1-5090-0496-6/16/$31.00 ©2016 IEEE
YU Xinzhe, ZHOU Jun, LIU Bo
High Voltage department
China Electric Power Research Institute
Beijing, China
is difficult to guarantee the quality of the applied coating.
Booster shed has been reported as a good way to prevent
flashover of polluted substation insulators in heavy wetting[2].
As well, there are also research on booster shed for icing
flashover performance improvement[3]. In the two applications
above, booster shed cuts the channel bridged by water or
icicles. For pollution flashover, whether it works on flashover
voltage enhancing or not and how it works are the main
purpose of this research.
II. TEST FACILITIES AND TEST METHODS
A. Test facilities
1) Fog chambers
Contamination flashover tests in this research are carried
out in fog chamber of pollution and environment lab in
UHVDC Test Base, Beijing, with the dimension of
9m×9m×12m.
Clean steam fog is generated by high-power boilers, which
is sprayed from nozzles around fog chamber wall. The fog
input rate is controlled and remains constant by adjusting the
input valve, which meets the requirement about fog in IEC
60507:2013[4].
2) Test power supply
Test circuit arrangement of power supply is shown in Fig.
1, which meets the requirement of pollution flashover tests[4].
The parameters of power supply are shown in Fig. 1
Fig. 1. .AC contamination test system
Where:
T1-voltage regulator, 0-10kV/1000kVA;
T2-test transformer, 0-200kV/1000kVA;
R1-protective resistor, 6kȍ;
V.D - voltage divider, 200kV;
T.O-test object (insulator string)
R2- resistor for measurement of leakage current
B. Specimens
Six kinds of specimens are adopted in the pollution
flashover test. The first two are with the same profile, which
has no booster sheds. The No. 2 insulator is coated with PRTV.
To find out flashover performance alternation, 2, 4, 6 booster
sheds with 350mm diameter are installed on insulator with the
same profile of 1# insulator, separately, named 4#, 5#, 6#. 3#
insulator has different profile from the others, which possess a
longer creepage distance and larger creepage factor. The
specific profiles are shown in TABLE I. and Fig. 2.
Test method II: Procedure B of wetting after energization in
IEC publication[10] is also adopted in this research. Up-and-
down method was adopted to determine 50% withstand
voltage. For each individual test, insulator string was tested
only once. If flashover occurs, test voltage would be lower than
previous test. If withstand, test voltage would be higher than
previous test. At least 10 “useful” tests should be carried out in
one individual test condition. The determination of 50%
withstand voltage of insulator string should be calculated in the
following formula:

TABLE I. PROFILE OF 110KV POST INSULATOR SPECIMENS

U 50 =
¦ (n × U )
i i
Booster Insulation Creepage Shed Shed
No. shed length distance diameter overhang
N (1)
numbers (mm) (mm) (mm) ˄mm˅
1# 0 1050 3150 245/215 55/37.5 Where: Ui is a test voltage level. Ni is the number of test
2#a 0 1050 3150 245/215 55/37.5 groups carried out at the same Ui. N is the number of “useful”
3# 0 1050 4185 220/185 67.5/52.5.5 tests.
4# 2 1050 3380 350/245/215 120/55/37.5
5# 4 1050 3610 350/245/215 120/55/37.5 For the method I, SDD 0.15 mg/cm2 is applied. However,
6# 6 1050 3840 350/245/215 120/55/37.5 SDD 0.20 mg/cm2 is adopted in method II (up-and-down
a.
Coated with PRTV coating method), as shown in TABLE II.

TABLE II. TEST CONDITIONS

Creepage
Test SDD NSDD
No. distance
method (mg/cm2) (mg/cm2)
(mm)
1# method I 3150 0.15
2# method I 3150 0.15
3# method II 4185 0.2
4# method I 3380 0.15 1.0
5# method I 3610 0.15
method I 3840 0.15
6#
(a)1# (b)2# (c)3# (d)4# (e)5# (f)6# method II 3840 0.2
Fig. 2. 110kV Post Insulator Specimens
III. TEST RESULTS

C. Hydrophibicity simulation A. Average flashover voltage

Insulators to be test were pre-contaminated following solid- Through pollution flashover test in method I, average
layer method in IEC 60507[4]. Sodium chloride and inert flashover voltage of various test objects in same test condition
material (kaolin or kieselguhr) are mixed by deionized water, and method can be obtained. Results is shown in Fig. 3.
and then brushed uniformly onto insulators.
Most of the time, silicone rubber performs well
hydrophobicity in operation. To simulate the common case,
HC1-HC2 is simulated on silicone rubber booster sheds
surface, by adopting kieselguhr as inert material and four days
hydrophobicity migration interval. For HC7 hydrophilic
surface simulation, kaolin is applied on insulator specimens,
which will be test within one day after contaminated.

D. Test method and conditions

Test method I: In order to compare pollution flashover
performance of various profile, raising voltage to flashover
method is adopted in the test. Test object is wetted until
saturation. The test voltage is then applied, with 6 kV/s voltage
increasing rate until flashover. The insulator is then removed
from the fog chamber. Each insulator will be tested four times
in one test interval and three insulator tests in same profile will
Fig. 3. Relationship between booster shed numbers and flashover voltage
be performed. After eliminating abnormal value, average
flashover voltage is obtained.
 Test results show that, for post insulator of one profile
installed with various booster sheds number, booster shed play
an important part in pollution flashover voltage increment.
With booster sheds number increasing, average pollution
flashover voltage increase slightly when with 2 booster sheds,
then greatly when with 4 sheds (17.4%) and 6 sheds (55.8%).
As well, it is obvious that flashover voltages insulator coated
with PRTV and installed with 6 booster sheds are almost the
same, which indicates that 6 booster sheds insulator possesses
the similar insulation strength to one with HC6 hydrophobicity
surface and without booster shed.
B. 50% flashover voltage
In order to compare pollution flashover characteristic
between 3# insulator with large creepage distance and 6#
insulator with 6 hydrophobic sheds, in heavy polluted area,
50% flashover voltage of each insulator is obtained separately,
as shown in TABLE III. .
TABLE III. TEST RESULT IN UP-AND-DOWN METHOD
Creepage
SDD NSDD U50%
No. distance
(mg/cm2) (mg/cm2) (kV)
(mm)
3# 4185 0.2 1.0 52.50
6# 3840 0.2 1.0 115.50
From test results in the table above, it can be concluded that,
although 3# has 9% larger creepage distance than 6# insulator,
50% flashover voltage of 6# is 120% higher than 3#. Insulator
installed with hydrophobic booster sheds could be an effective
option to improve pollution flashover characteristic.
IV. DISCUSSION
A. Effect of creepage distance
Flashover voltage of insulator, as is well-known, is
positive-correlated with creepage distance, because mechanism
of pollution flashover is discharge along dielectric surface. For
normal profile insulator, there is usually a liner relationship
between creepage distance and flashover voltage, which
performs equal proportion increment as shown in Fig. 4.
Fig. 4. creepage distance and flashover voltage increment ratio
However, test results show that there is a non-liner
relationship between creepage distance and flashover voltage
increment ratio, which accords with power function well
(R2=0.9995). When there are two booster sheds installed on
post insulator, it seems no obvious effect on flashover
enhancement. But when booster shed number is more than four,
creepage distance offered by silicone rubber shed plays more
and more important part for pollution flashover voltage
improvement. From the above, it can be concluded that
creepage distance is not the only factor to evaluate insulator’s
pollution flashover performance.
B. Effect of booster on flashover current
In this research, flashover types with various booster sheds
numbers are not the same. The typical voltage-current curves
of each configuration is record in Fig. 5, where 32 cycles data
before flashover time are plotted in order to show the discharge
process until flashover.
Standard
Deviation
(%)
5.09
3.19
Fig. 5. Voltage-current curves of insulators with various booster sheds
As shown in Fig. 5, the four curves perform various V-I
characteristic. For insulators with various booster sheds, as the
sheds number increases, the maximum value of leakage current
decreases and the arc development speed increases. As well,
for comparison between insulator with and without booster
sheds, it is obvious that 2 booster sheds insulator and 4 booster
sheds insulator perform similar discharge characteristic
comparing with no shed one, which implies similarity of
discharge types. However, 6 sheds insulator differs from other
three specimens not only in flashover voltage increment ratio,
but also in leakage current.
C. Arc shape
From the discussion above, it's worth noting that insulator
installed with 6 sheds has obvious difference with other ones,
not only in flashover voltage, but also in V-I characteristic. It
seems that the 6 sheds insulator has different discharge
mechanism from other ones. In order to find out what the
difference is, typical 180ms flashover process of the four test
objects are record separately by high speed camera, which is
listed in four images as below.
(a) 0 booster shed
(b) 2 booster sheds
(c) 4 booster sheds
(d) 6 booster sheds
Fig. 6. Flashover process arc shape of insulators with various booster sheds
As shown in Fig. 6, it can be divided into three categories
form discharge types. First, for uniform hydrophilic surface
insulator, 0 shed ceramic insulator, uniform distributed local
arc are the most frequent discharge type. As these arcs develop
simultaneously, local arcs joint together and it becomes main
arc, which lead to flashover. For the second type, which refer
to 2 sheds and 4 sheds insulator, there are hydrophobic bands
among hydrophilic surface. When arc discharge occurs, it
usually happens at the hydrophobic bands, which is stably
bridged by local arc during the flashover process. There is few
local arcs on ceramic part until the hydrophobic shed are
bridged by arc. Consequently, it can be divided into two stages:
hydrophobic bands bridge and hydrophilic surface pollution
flashover. As the booster shed number increases, another
discharge form is shown by 6 sheds insulator flashover. Local
arcs both on hydrophilic surface and on hydrophobic surface
can be observed. As well, however, obvious stable arc bridge at
booster shed can barely be found. In the third type, it seem that
pollution flashover discharges on hydrophilic and hydrophobic
surface happen synchronously.
D. Non-uniform distribution of hydrophobicity
It should be noticed that under non-uniform hydrophobicity
distribution of insulator surface, creepage distance is not the
only factor to determine flashover voltage.
Fig. 7. Booster shed numbers and creepage distance efficiency
As shown in Fig. 7, the flashover voltage per creepage
distance doesn’t perform a positive correlation relationship
with sheds number. Voltage with 2 sheds is even lower than
that without shed. As discussed above, it can be inferred that
unsynchronized flashover happens on insulator with 2 and 4
sheds. However, when booster sheds reach 6, voltage applied
on each hydrophobic shed is not high enough to maintain
stable bridge across the shed so that synchronized flashover is
the discharge mechanism, which results in much higher
flashover voltage.
V. CONCLUSION
(1) Insulator installed with hydrophobic booster sheds could
be an effective option to improve pollution flashover
characteristic.
(2) Booster shed not only provides additional creepage
distance, but also creates non-uniform distribution of
hydrophobicity along post insulator, which is more important
for flashover enhancing.
(3) For hydrophilic and hydrophobic surface alternating
distribution, there are two typical flashover mechanism:
synchronized and unsynchronized flashover. Unsynchronized
flashover has less creepage distance utilization efficiency,
which should be avoided in insulator design and maintaining.
REFERENCES
[1] A. Basuki and F. Lendy, "Improving outdoor insulator performances
installed at coastal area using silicone rubber coating," in International
Conference on Condition Monitoring and Diagnosis (CMD), 2012, pp.
1143-1146.
[2] C. H. A. Ely, P. J. Lambeth and J. S. T. Looms, "The Booster Shed:
Prevention of Flashover of Polluted Substation Insulators in Heavy
Wetting," IEEE Transactions on Power Apparatus and Systems, vol.
PAS-97, pp. 2187-2197.
[3] S. M. Ale-Emran and M. Farzaneh, "Design of booster shed parameters
for post insulators under heavy icing conditions using geometric
modelling and the Taguchi method," IET Science, Measurement and
Technology, 2015.
[4] IEC Standard 60507: “Artificial pollution tests on high-voltage ceramic
and glass insulators to be used on a.c. systems͇, third edition, 2013.