IEEE DESIGN TEST REPORT Report No. TD 01 057 E00 Type PDV ... · Type tests performed on PDV65 ND...

IEEE DESIGN TEST REPORT

Report No. TD 01 057 E00

Type PDV 65 ND Distribution Class

Surge Arrester This report records the results of the design tests made on Type PDV65 Normal Duty Distribution

Class surge arresters in accordance with IEEE Standard C62.11-2012 “IEEE Standard for Metal

Oxide Surge Arresters for AC Power Circuits (> 1kV)”.

Type tests performed on PDV65 ND Distribution arresters demonstrate full compliance with the

relevant clauses of the referenced standard and apply to all Hubbell PDV65 ND Distribution

arresters of this design manufactured and assembled at the following ISO 9001:2008 certified

Hubbell locations:

Hubbell Power Systems Hubbell Electric (Wuhu) Company, Ltd.

1850 Richland Avenue, East Exports Processing Zone, No 68

Aiken, South Carolina North Jiuhua Road, Wuhu City

29801 Anhui Province, PR China

The above locations manufacture, assemble, and test utilizing manufacturing, quality, and

calibration procedures developed from Hubbell Engineering Department Specifications.

Engineering Department Specifications are controlled by Arrester Business Unit design

engineering in the USA.

Dennis W. Lenk

Principal Engineer

Date: 4/01/2016

Fayaz Khatri Fayaz Khatri Design Engineering Supervisor

Separate reports provide details of the tests, according to the following table:

Report No. Description Clause Issue Date

TD 01 057 E01 Insulation Withstand 8.1 4/01/2016

TD 01 057 E02 Discharge Voltage 8.2 4/01/2016

TD 01 057 E03 Disc Accelerated Aging 8.5 4/01/2016

TD 01 057 E04 Polymer Accelerated Aging 8.6 4/01/2016

TD 01 057 E05 Salt Fog Accelerated Aging 8.7 4/01/2016

TD 01 057 E06 Verification of Thermally Prorated Section 7.2.2 4/01/2016

TD 01 057 E07 Arrester Seal Integrity Test 8.9 4/01/2016

TD 01 057 E08 Partial Discharge 8.11 4/01/2016

TD 01 057-E09 High Current, Short Duration 8.12 4/01/2016

TD 01 057 E10 Low Current, Long Duration 8.13 4/01/2016

TD 01 057-E11 Duty Cycle 8.16 4/01/2016

TD 01 057 E12 Temporary Overvoltage 8.17 4/01/2016

TD 01 057 E13 Short Circuit for Polymer-Housed Arrester 8.18 4/01/2016

TD 01 057 E14 Arrester Disconnector Tests 8.21 4/01/2016

TD 01 057 E15 Maximum Design Cantilever Load-Static 8.22 4/01/2016

TD 01 057 E01 - 2 -

IEEE TYPE TEST REPORT


Type PDV65

ND Distribution Class Arrester

Insulation Withstand Test

CERTIFICATION

This is to certify that the polymer accelerated aging design tests have been successfully

performed on Ohio Brass Type PDV65 Normal Duty Distribution Class surge arresters.

Dennis W. Lenk

Principal Engineer


Date: 4/01/2016

Attachment

Type PDV65 Normal Duty Distribution Arrester

TD 01 057 E02 - 3 -

Insulation Withstand Clause 8.1

Introduction: Table 1 summarizes polymer housing minimum leakage and strike

distances for each arrester rating, and 60 Hz and impulse withstand requirements for each

housing size as specified in Section 8.1.2.1a) and b) of C62.11-2012. In all cases, the

actual withstand values of each arrester housing exceed the minimum values specified in

the Standard. Table 1

Insulation Withstand Voltage Requirements of PDV-65 Arresters.

Catalog #

Rating kV rms

MCOV kV rms

Arrester Strike

w/Brkt mm

Arr Total

Ht W/Brkt

US Hrdwr-

mm

8/20 20 kA IR kVc

Reqd BIL WS kVc

Actual Imp WS

Arr w/Brkt

kVc

Reqd 10 second

wet power

frequency WS kVc

Actual 10 second wet WS

Arr W/Brkt

kVc

217253 3 2.55 200 236 12 17 125 7 34

217255 6 5.1 200 236 24 34 125 14 34

217258 9 7.65 200 236 34.9 50 125 21 34

217259 10 8.4 200 236 38.8 55 125 23 34

217560 12 10.2 200 236 46.5 66 125 28 34

213263 15 12.7 290 312 58.9 84 175 35 55

213265 18 15.3 290 312 69.7 99 175 42 55

213267 21 17 290 312 78.5 111 175 46 55

217570 24 19.5 330 373 92.9 132 195 53 65

213272 27 22 405 450 104.6 149 230 60 85

213274 30 24.4 405 450 116.2 165 230 67 85

213279 36 29 450 527 139.4 198 250 79 100

Per Section 8.1.2.1c), the insulating support bracket exceeded the required 10 second wet

withstand requirements per Table 2.

Table 2

Bracket Assy

Part #

Arrester

MCOV

Bracket

size

Required 10 second wet

withstand kVrms

Actual 10 second wet

withstand kVrms

273206 2.55-10.2 Small 15.3 30

274334 12.7-17 Medium 25.5 35

273207 19.5-29 Large 43.5 45

Conclusion: In all cases, the actual withstand values shown for each arrester rating

exceed the minimum values specified in the Standard.

TD 01 057 E02 - 4 -

IEEE Type Test Report


Type PDV65

ND Distribution Class Arrester

Residual Voltage Test

CERTIFICATION



Dennis W. Lenk

Principal Engineer


Date: 4/01/2016

Attachment

IEC Type Test Report

TD 01 057 E03 5

RESIDUAL VOLTAGE TESTS

IEEE CLAUSE 8.2

Sample Preparation

Residual voltage tests were performed on three 29mm x 42.8 mm MOV discs.

Test Procedure

The following tests were performed per Section 8.2 of C62.11-2012 on each sample.

Each sample was allowed to cool to ambient temperature between discharges.

1. Steep Current Impulse Residual Voltage Test: 1/2 µs, 5 kA;

2. Lightning Impulse Residual Voltage Test: 8/20 µs, 1.5, 3, 5, 10, 20 kA;

3. Switching Impulse Residual Voltage Test: 30-100/60-200 µs and 500 A.

Test Results

Each of the three test samples was subjected to a 5 kA, 1/2 µs steep current impulse with

and without an aluminum disc with the same geometry of the MOV disc. The difference

in the residual voltages is the inductive drop across the MOV disc. Figures 1a and 1b

show the oscillograms of the measured FOW residual voltage discharges of Sample 2

without and with an aluminum spacer, respectively.

Figure 1a: Sample 2, 5.036 kA, 18.836 kV w/o Aluminum spacer.

TD 01 057 E03 6

Figure 1b: Sample 2, 5.059 kA, 18.885 kV with Aluminum spacer.

Each sample was then subjected to 1.5, 3, 5, 10, 20 and 40 kA lightning surge impulses.

Figures 2 thru 7 show the oscillogram for each of the referenced 8/20 discharge current

levels on Sample 2.

Figure 2: Sample 2 , 1.513 kA, 15.108 kV.

TD 01 057 E03 7



TD 01 057 E03 8



TD 01 057 E03 9

Figure 7: Sample 2 , 39.906 kA, 27.912kV.

Each sample was then subjected to 500 A switching surge impulse. Figure 8 shows the

oscillogram of the switching surge discharge of Sample 2.

Figure 8: Sample 2, 507.7 A, 13.608 kV.

Table 1 shows the 5 kA IRs of the steep front wave measured on the three test samples

with and without the aluminum disc. Since the measured spacer inductive drop is less

than 2% of the MOV disc recorded FOW residual voltage, the inductive drop of the

MOV disc can be disregarded

TD 01 057 E03 10

Table 1: Measurement of Inductive effect on MOV discs

Sample No. I (kA) IR (KVpk)

with Al disc

IR (KVpk)

w/o Al disc

Al disc

L(di/dt)

effect (kV)

Recorded MOV disc

FOW voltage drop

(kV)

1

5

18.918 18.918 0 18.918

2 18.885 18.836 .049 18.885

3 18.902 18.853 .049 18.902

Table 2 summarizes the design factors used to extrapolate the 1.5 through 40 kA 8/20

residual voltage, the 500 amp switching surge residual voltage, and MOV disc .5

microsecond FOW residual voltage. The highest factor for each wave shape is shown

bolded and is multiplied by the 5 kA residual voltage of each rating to develop the family

of residual voltage values. Table 3 summarizes the residual voltage values measured and

claimed for each arrester rating.

Table 2: Residual Voltage Test.

Impulse

Current

(kA)

Wave

Shape

(µs)

Discharge Voltage (kVpk)

Discharge Voltage Ratio

(IR/10kV IR)

Sample

1

Sample

2

Sample

3

Sample

1

Sample

2

Sample

3

0.5 43/91 13.608 13.608 13.581 0.788 0.786 0.784

1.5 8/20 15.215 15.108 15.161 0.881 0.873 0.875

3 8/20 16.206 16.179 16.179 0.938 0.935 0.934

5 8/20 17.277 17.304 17.331 1.000 1.000 1.000

10 8/20 19.447 19.367 19.447 1.126 1.119 1.122

20 8/20 22.474 22.447 22.34 1.301 1.297 1.289

40 8/20 28.046 27.912 28.18 1.623 1.613 1.626

5

1/2

(w/o

inducti

ve

effect) 18.918 18.885 18.902

1.095 1.091 1.091

Table 3: Summary of Arrester Discharge Voltages

Uc Ur

IR Factors 0.788 0.881 0.938 1 1.126 1.301 1.626 1.095

5

Wave 44/98 8/20 8/20 8/20 8/20 8/20 8/20 1/2

Unit

Ht

5 kA

Induct

Drop

Total

FOW

I (kA) 0.5 1.5 3 5 10 20 40 5 m kV 5

2.55 3 Measured

IR 6.93 7.75 8.25 8.80 9.91 11.45 14.31 9.64

0.076 0.38 10.0

TD 01 057 E03 11

Catalog IR 7.3 8.1 8.7 9.2 10.4 12.0 15.0 10.1 0.076 0.38 10.5

5.1 6 Measured

IR 13.87 15.51 16.51 17.60 19.82 22.90 28.62 19.27

0.096 0.48 19.8

Catalog IR 14.6 16.3 17.3 18.5 20.8 24.0 30.0 20.2 0.096 0.48 20.7

7.65 9 Measured

IR 20.80 23.26 24.76 26.40 29.73 34.35 42.93 28.91

0.124 0.62 29.5

Catalog IR 21.1 23.6 25.1 26.8 30.2 34.9 43.6 29.3 0.124 0.62 30.0

8.4 10 Measured

IR 23.14 25.87 27.54 29.36 33.06 38.20 47.74 32.15

0.124 0.62 32.8

Catalog IR 23.5 26.3 28.0 29.8 33.6 38.8 48.5 32.6 0.124 0.62 33.3

10.2 12 Measured IR

27.73 31.00 33.01 35.19 39.62 45.78 57.22 38.53 0.139 0.695 39.2

Catalog IR 28.1 31.5 33.5 35.7 40.2 46.5 58.1 39.1 0.139 0.695 39.8

12.7 15 Measured IR

35.18 39.33 41.87 44.64 50.26 58.08 72.58 48.88 0.198 0.99 49.9

Catalog IR 35.7 39.9 42.5 45.3 51.0 58.9 73.7 49.6 0.198 0.99 50.6

15.3 18 Measured IR

41.61 46.52 49.53 52.80 59.45 68.69 85.85 57.82 0.198 0.99 58.8

Catalog IR 42.2 47.2 50.3 53.6 60.3 69.7 87.1 58.7 0.198 0.99 59.7

17 21 Measured

IR 46.85 52.38 55.76 59.45 66.94 77.34 96.67 65.10

0.218 1.09 66.2

Catalog IR 47.5 53.2 56.6 60.3 67.9 78.5 98.1 66.1 0.218 1.09 67.2

19.5 24 Measured

IR 55.46 62.00 66.02 70.38 79.25 91.56 114.44 77.07

0.292 1.46 78.5

Catalog IR 56.3 62.9 67.0 71.4 80.4 92.9 116.2 78.2 0.292 1.46 79.7

22 27 Measured

IR 62.41 69.78 74.29 79.20 89.18 103.04 128.78 86.72

0.32 1.6 88.3

Catalog IR 63.3 70.8 75.4 80.4 90.5 104.6 130.7 88.0 0.32 1.6 89.6

24.4 30 Measured

IR 69.34 77.52 82.53 87.99 99.08 114.47 143.07 96.35

0.332 1.66 98.0

Catalog IR 70.4 78.7 83.8 89.3 100.6 116.2 145.2 97.8 0.332 1.66 99.5

29 36 Measured

IR 83.21 93.03 99.05 105.60 118.91 137.39 171.71 115.63

0.393 1.965 117.6

Catalog IR 84.5 94.4 100.5 107.2 120.7 139.4 174.3 117.4 0.393 1.965 119.3

Test Summary

Table 1 summarizes the result of FOW discharge testing performed, per the standard,

with and without an aluminum spacer. The MOV disc FOW residual voltage is combined

with the inductive drop (associated with the arrester height) to develop each rated

arrester’s Total FOW residual voltage.

Table 2 summarizes residual voltage measurements for the three test samples across the

range of specified wave shapes and current values. The residual voltage of each MOV

disc is measured as a routine test with a discharge current of 5 kA, 8/20 s. The MOV

discs of each arrester are accumulated within 5 kA residual voltage ranges as specified

for each arrester rating. To verify the catalog maximum residual voltage levels, a

discharge voltage ratio was established at each current level based on the 5 kA residual

TD 01 057 E03 12

voltage of each test sample, as shown in Table 2. This ratio was multiplied by the

maximum 5-kA residual voltage accumulation specified for each rating.

As summarized on Table 3, the residual voltage calculated (based on the prorated test

sample data) was less than the maximum declared catalog levels for each rated arrester.

TD 01 057 E03 13

IEC Type Test Report


Type PDV65

Normal Duty Distribution Class Arrester

Disc Accelerated Aging

CERTIFICATION



Dennis W. Lenk

Principal Engineer


Date: 4/01/2016

Attachment

TD 01 057 E04 14

DESIGN TEST REPORT

PDV65 IEEE Normal Duty Distribution Class Surge Arrester

TITLE: MOV Disc Accelerated aging procedure

TEST PROCEDURE: Tests were performed to verify that the varistors remain stable

and do not increase in power dissipation at MCOV during their expected lifetime.

TEST SAMPLES: Six arrester sections were prepared. Three sections consisted of the

longest 29mm diameter disc and three consisted of a shorter 29mm diameter disc. Each

section also consisted of a spring, end terminals, barrier film and fiberglass/epoxy wrap

using standard module construction.

TEST PROCEDURE: Tests were performed per section 8.4 of the standard. Samples

were placed inside a 115 C ±2 C. oven and energized for 1,000 hours at Uct, a voltage

level greater than MCOV, for 1,000 hours.

TEST RESULTS: Watts loss for each sample was measured at Uct two hours after

energization and at the completion of the 1000 hour test duration. The table below

summarizes test results. Watts loss was periodically monitored at Uct during the 1000

hour test duration to identify the minimum watts loss value recorded during the test.

Accelerated aging test data

Watts

Loss

Watts

Loss

Watts Loss Reqd ratio Reqd ratio

at 2 Hr minimum at 1000 Hr <1.1 <1.3

Sample @Uc @Uc @Ur Measured Measured

No. -length Pstart (w) Pmin (w) Pend (w) Pend / Pmin Pend / Pstart

1-29x21 .42 .23 .23 1 .55

2-29x21 .46 .25 .25 1 .54

3-29x21 .59 .26 .26 1 .44

4-29x42 .59 .48 .48 1 .81

5-29x42 .62 .49 .49 1 .79

6-29x42 .57 .45 .45 1 .70

CONCLUSION: Over the 1000 hour test duration, each test sample demonstrated

decreasing watts loss at Uct, successfully completing the disc accelerated

aging test.

TD 01 057 E04 15

TYPE TEST REPORT No. TD 01 057 E04

Polymer Accelerated Aging

CERTIFICATION


performed on Ohio Brass Type PDV 65 Normal Duty Distribution Class surge arresters.

Dennis W. Lenk

Principal Engineer


Date: 4/01/2016

Attachments

TD 01 057 E05

DESIGN TEST REPORT

PDV 65 Distribution Class Surge arrester

TITLE: Accelerated aging tests of external polymeric insulating systems for distribution

Arresters.

TEST PROCEDURE: These tests were performed per clause 8.6 of IEEE Standard

C62.11-2012. Accelerated aging tests by exposure to light were performed per clause

8.6.1 test method 8.6.1.2.c. Tests on polymer housing and insulating bracket material

using the fluorescent UV technique described in ASTM G53-1996. Test duration was

1000 hours on three samples of each material. Accelerated aging tests by exposure to

electrical stress were performed per clause 8.6.2.

TEST SAMPLES: Three PDV-65 10.2 kV MCOV and three PDV-65 17 kV MCOV

arresters were tested. These represent the highest MCOV stress based on leakage

distance and arcing distance. Tests were performed by attaching arresters to a vertical

Ferris wheel, where the arresters are continuously energized. As the wheel rotates, each

arrester is sequentially sprayed with a 400 ohm-centimeter water spray. As the energized

arrester rotates around the wheel, the arrester housing goes through a dry band arcing

condition. The test continues until each arrester has reached 1000 hours of energized test

time. Prior to and after the 1000 hour test, each arrester is subjected to a 5 kA 8/20

discharge to confirm its electrical integrity.

The final portion of the test procedure consists of subjecting each arrester insulating

bracket to 20 hours on voltage with the insulating bracket energized at MCOV. At the

completion of the above tests, the arresters are examined to ensure there is no evidence of

surface tracking.

CONCLUSION: Both polymer housing and insulating bracket materials passed the test

requirements of clause 8.6.1.3, as there were no cracks greater than the allowed depth of

.1 mm. The arresters also passed the requirements of clause 8.6.2.4, as the arrester

discharge voltage changed by less than 1 % as a result of the 1000 hour Ferris wheel test.

There was no evidence of external flashovers, punctures, or internal breakdowns during

the described tests. There was no evidence of surface tracking on the arrester housings

after the 1000 hour on-voltage test or on the insulating bracket after the 20 hour on-

voltage test.

TD 01 057 E05

TYPE TEST REPORT


Type PDV65

IEEE ND Distribution Class Arrester

Salt Fog Polymer Aging Test

CERTIFICATION



Dennis W. Lenk

Principal Engineer


Date: 4/01/2016

Attachment

TD 01 057 E06 18

Type PDV65 ND Distribution Class Surge Arrester

Salt Fog test

TEST OBJECTIVE: Perform 1000 hour salt fog exposure test per section 8.7 of C62.11

– 2012 Standard.

TEST SAMPLE: Two 29 kV MCOV arresters were tested. Arrester #1 was tested

without its insulating support bracket attached to the base end of the arrester. Arrester #2

was tested with the insulating support bracket.

TEST PROCEDURE: The arresters were mounted vertically inside the salt fog

chamber. Prior to and after the 1000 hour test, the reference voltage and partial discharge

of the sample were measured. The 1000 hour test was performed with a spray having an

NaCl salt content of 10 kg/m3 per the procedure specified in section 8.7.3 of the standard

TEST RESULTS: The test arrester passed the 1000 hour salt exposure. The physical

condition of the polymer housings showed no signs of surface tracking or surface erosion.

There was no evidence of housing or shed punctures. The following table summarizes the

results of the electrical testing.

Sample # Reference

Voltage kVc

Before Salt Fog

Reference

Voltage kVc

After Salt Fog

Reference

Voltage %

Change

Partial

Discharge After

Salt Fog PC

1 44.3 45.0 +1.6 <1

2 44.6 45.0 +0.9 <1

Photographs #1 and 32 show the salt-contaminated surfaces of the two arresters after

completion of the 1000 hour duration salt fog test. There was no evidence of surface

tracking, erosion, or shed punctures.

CONCLUSION: The physical condition of the test arrester and the electrical testing

confirmed that the PDV65 arrester successfully passed the 1000 hour salt fog exposure

test.

TD 01 057 E06 19

Photograph #1

Photograph #2

IEEE Type Test Report

Report No.TD 01 057 E06

Type PDV65

IEEE ND Distribution Class Arrester

Thermal Equivalency

TD 01 057 E06 20

CERTIFICATION


performed on Ohio Brass Type PDV 65 Normal Duty Distribution Class surge arresters.

Dennis W. Lenk

Principal Engineer


Date: 4/01/2016

Attachment

PDV65 IEEE Normal Duty Distribution Class Surge Arrester

Thermal Equivalency Test

INTRODUCTION: Tests were performed as required per Section 7.2.2.3 of the IEEE

C62.11-2012 Standard, to compare the cooling characteristics of the prorated test sections

used for type tests with that of a full-size arrester unit.

TD 01 057 E07 21

PURPOSE: The purpose of this test is to verify that the thermal cooling curve for the

Type PDV65 prorated sections, when internally heated, will cool slower than that of a

full size 21 kV rated arrester unit.

PROCEDURE: A full size single unit 21 kV rated Type PDV65 arrester and a 12 kV

and a 6 kV prorated section were heated up by applying a temporary overvoltage to the

test samples. All samples (the arrester and the prorated sections) were energized in

approximately 10 minutes to a starting temperature of 140 ºC, at which time the voltage

was removed. The full size arrester and the two prorated sections were instrumented with

(1) fiber-optic sensors located in the middle of the MOV disc stack. During the cooling

portion of the test, the temperatures of the arrester and the test sections were monitored at

5 minute intervals to develop the cooling curve for each sample.

SUMMARY: As allowed in Section 7.2.2.3.5, the cooling curves for the 12 kV and 6

kV prorated sections can be adjusted higher to assure that, at no time during the 120

minute cooling period, do the section cooling curves drop below that of the full size

arrester. The adjusted temperature shown for each rated section was added to the

durability tests requiring a 60 degree C. preheat.

The cooling curve (Figure 1 below) confirms that the cooling rate of the 12 kV prorated

section is slower than that of the full size 21 kV Rated Type PDV 65 arrester unit,

confirming the thermal equivalency of the prorated sections to the full size arrester. Also

shown in Figure 1, the 6 kV prorated section starting temperature for durability design

testing needs to be increased 6 degrees C. above 60 degree C, prior to performing

durability tests. The 12 kV rated section needs no additional heating above 60 deg C.

Figure 1

COOLING CURVES FOR PDV65 29MM 21 KV RATED ARR VERSUS 6 KV

AND 12 KV PRORATED THERMAL SECTIONS

TD 01 057 E07 22

TD 01 057 E07 23

TYPE TEST REPORT NO. TD 01 057 E07

SEAL INTEGRITY TEST

CERTIFICATION

This is to certify that the seal integrity design test has been successfully performed on

Ohio Brass Type PDV 65 Normal Duty Distribution Class surge arrester.

Dennis W. Lenk

Principal Engineer


Date: 4/01/2016

Attachments

DESIGN TEST REPORT

TD 01 057 E08 24

PDV 65 Distribution Class Surge Arrester

TITLE: Distribution class surge arrester seal integrity design test:

OBJECTIVE: Seal integrity tests were performed per IEEE Standard.

TEST SAMPLES: Tests were run on three 18 kV rated arresters, catalog number

213265, constructed with single 18 kV rated modules.

TEST PROCEDURE: The seal integrity test consisted of the following steps:

a) Initial Electric Test: Each arrester was energized at rating, watts loss and IIV was

measured.

b) Terminal Torquing: A ¼” diameter hard lead was inserted between the wire clamp

and arrester end stud on one side only. The clamping nut was torqued to 22 ft-lb.

c) Thermal Conditioning: Each arrester was placed in a 70 C 3 C environment for

14 days, after which the arresters were stabilized at ambient room temperature and

watts was measured.

d) Seal Pumping: The arresters were heated to 60 °C 3 °C for one hour, then placed

into a 4 °C 3 °C water bath for two hours, after which the samples were returned

to the 60 °C oven. Each arrester was subjected to ten repetitions of this cycle. The

transfer time between media was 1-2 minutes.

e) Final Electric Test: Procedure (a) was repeated.

f) Final Inspection: The arresters were disassembled to verify no moisture penetration

was evident.

Table 1 Seal Test Data Summary- Single Module 10 kV arrester

Sample Number

Applied Voltage (kV) rms

Initial Watts Loss

Final Watts Loss

Partial Discharge Before (pc)

Partial Discharge After (pc)

1 18 1.0 1.1 0.9 0.6 2 18 1.1 1.1 1.0 0.6 3 18 1.1 1.2 0.9 0.6

Table 2 Seal Test Data Summary-Two Module 18 kV Arrester

Sample Number

Applied Voltage (kV) rms

Initial Watts Loss

Final Watts Loss

Partial Discharge Before (pc)

Partial Discharge After (pc)

1 18 0.56 0.58 0.5 0.5 2 18 0.58 0.62 0.5 0.5 3 18 0.76 0.84 0.5 0.5

TD 01 057 E08 25

CONCLUSION: As indicated on Tables 1 and 2, all arresters demonstrated proper

sealing with no evidence of internal moisture or change in watts loss or Pd. It should be

noted that the noise levels measured represent background noise at the test location. This

test confirms that the PDV 65 18 kV rated arrester, constructed with 2 short modules or a

single long module, successfully passes the Normal Duty Distribution Class arrester seal

integrity test.

TD 01 057 E08 26


Partial Discharge Test

CERTIFICATION

This is to certify that the RIV and partial discharge design tests have been successfully

performed on Ohio Brass Type PDV 65 Distribution Class surge arrester.

Dennis W. Lenk

Principal Engineer

Fayaz Khatri Fayaz Khatri

Design Engineering Supervisor

Date: 4/01/2016

Attachments

DESIGN TEST REPORT


TITLE: Partial discharge test:

TD 01 057 E09 27

TEST PROCEDURE AND SAMPLE: Partial discharge testing was performed per IEEE

Standard C62.11-2012. The test was performed on a 36 kV rated, 29.0 kV MCOV PDV-65

arrester.

TEST RESULTS: With the unshielded 36 kV arrester placed in the circuit, the partial discharge

measured 0 picocoulomb at 30.5 kVrms.

CONCLUSION: The 36 kV rated PDV-65 arrester passed test requirements as the measured

partial discharge was below the allowed 10 picocoulomb limit.

TD 01 057 E09 28


HIGH CURRENT, SHORT DURATION TEST

Type PDV65 Normal Duty Distribution Arrester

CERTIFICATION

This is to certify that the high current, short duration design test has been successfully

performed on Ohio Brass Type PDV 65 ND Distribution Class surge arrester.

Dennis W. Lenk

Principal Engineer


Date: 4/01/2016

Attachments

TD 01 057 E10 29

DESIGN TEST REPORT


TITLE: High Current, Short Duration Discharge Withstand Tests:

OBJECTIVE: High current, short duration discharge withstand tests were performed per

IEEE Standard C62.11-2012. Tests were performed per Normal Duty distribution arrester

requirements. TEST SAMPLE: As required by the standard, prorated samples contained the minimum

MOV mass per specified for the design. MCOV voltage was also prorated per unit Vref

to reflect the lowest margin case of the standard voltage ratings offered in this design.

TEST PROCEDURE: Per Section 8.12.2 of the C62.11-2012 Standard, test samples

were subjected to two 65 kA, 4/10 s discharges. Sufficient time was allowed between

discharges for the sample to cool to ambient temperature 23 C. Within 100 milliseconds

after the second high current discharge, samples were energized at the prorated MCOV

recovery voltage. Watts loss was monitored over a 30 minute period demonstrating

thermal stability.

TEST RESULTS: Figures #1 and #2 show the oscillograms of the two 65 kA shots

applied to Sample #1

TD 01 057 E10 30

Figure 1: Sample 1, Shot 1, 69.3 kA, 4.8/11.4

Figure 2: Sample #1, Shot 2, 66.3 kA, 4.8/11.4

TD 01 057 E10 31

Figures #3 through #5 show the recovery oscillograms for Sample 31 after the 2nd high

current shot.

FIGURE 3 THERMAL RECOVERY @ TIME = 0 FOR SAMPLE #1

TD 01 057 E10 32

FIGURE 4 THERMAL RECOVERY @ TIME = 1 MINUTE FOR SAMPLE #1

FIGURE 5 THERMAL RECOVERY @ TIME = 30 MINUTE FOR SAMPLE #1

Table 1 summarizes the results of high current tests performed on the three test samples.

TD 01 057 E10 33

Table 1

High Current Short Duration

Discharge Withstand Test Summary

Sample #1 Sample #2 Sample #3

HC Shot 1 69.3 kA 66.2 kA 66 kA

HC Shot 2 66.3 kA 66.7 kA 66.7 kA

delay 84msec 84 msec 84 msec

Watts @

0 34.5 35.4 40.7

1 minutes 1.48 1.51 1.56

2 minutes 0.82 0.86 0.9

5 minutes 0.48 0.51 0.49

10 minutes 0.35 0.38 0.35

20 minutes 0.26 0.26 0.25

30 minutes 0.22 0.21 0.21

CONCLUSIONS: All prorated test samples successfully completed the high current test

and demonstrated thermal stability during the recovery test. Disassembly revealed no

evidence of physical damage to the test samples, confirming the PDV65 arrester

successfully passed the Normal Duty Distribution Class arrester high current, short

duration requirement as specified in the IEEE C62.11-2012 Standard.


LOW CURRENT, LONG DURATION TEST

PDV65 Normal Duty Distribution Class Arrester

TD 01 057 E10 34

CERTIFICATION

This is to certify that the low current, long duration design test has been successfully

performed on Ohio Brass Type PDV65 Normal Duty Distribution Class surge arrester.

Dennis W. Lenk

Principal Engineer


Date: 4/01/2016

Attachments

DESIGN TEST REPORT

PDV65 Normal Duty Distribution Class Surge Arrester

Low Current, Long Duration Discharge Withstand Tests

Introduction: The low current, long duration discharge withstand test was performed per

clause 8.13 IEEE Standard C62.11-2012. Tests were performed per normal duty

distribution arrester requirements using 6 kV rated test samples.

Test Samples: Per section 8.21.2.1, a ground lead disconnector (GLD) was connected in

series with each of the three LCLD 6 kV rated test samples.

Procedure: Per section 8.13.3, each test sample was subjected to six sets of three

nominal 2000 s duration discharges greater than 75 amps. Sufficient time was allowed

between sets of discharges for the section to cool to room ambient temperature. Per

TD 01 057 E11 35

section 8.13.4, the 5 kA residual voltage of each MOV disc section was measured prior to

and after the (18) shot LCLD test.

Results: Table 1 summarizes the results of the 18 shot test performed on the three test

samples.

Table 1

Sample #1 Sample #2 Sample #3

Shot No. Amps Coul KJ/Shot Amps Coul KJ/Shot Amps Coul KJ/Shot

1 84.3 0.18 2.26 88.3 0.19 2.35 85.9 0.19 2.29

2 86.9 0.19 2.32 87.9 0.19 2.35 85.9 0.19 2.33

3 78.2 0.17 2.1 86.6 0.19 2.36 88.3 0.19 2.37

4 85.6 0.18 2.28 84.3 0.18 2.28 87.3 0.19 2.33

5 81.6 0.18 2.21 84.6 0.18 2.28 86.3 0.19 2.31

6 85.9 0.18 2.31 87.6 0.19 2.38 86.9 0.19 2.36

7 83.2 0.18 2.25 84.3 0.18 2.27 84.9 0.18 2.28

8 83.6 0.18 2.23 87.9 0.19 2.35 83.2 0.18 2.26

9 85.6 0.18 2.3 86.6 0.19 2.32 86.6 0.19 2.32

10 85.6 0.18 2.28 90.3 0.2 2.46 86.6 0.19 2.31

11 84.3 0.18 2.25 84.6 0.19 2.28 87.3 0.19 2.33

12 81.6 0.18 2.21 88.3 0.19 2.4 86.6 0.19 2.32

13 84.6 0.18 2.28 86.6 0.19 2.34 85.6 0.18 2.28

14 82.9 0.18 2.24 86.6 0.19 2.36 85.6 0.18 2.28

15 86.3 0.19 2.36 87.3 0.19 2.37 84.6 0.19 2.3

16 82.6 0.18 2.23 82.9 0.18 2.24 81.9 0.18 2.17

17 83.9 0.18 2.28 85.3 0.19 2.32 83.9 0.18 2.24

18 85.3 0.18 2.31 85.9 0.18 2.3 85.6 0.19 2.34

Figures 1 and 2, respectively show oscillograms of the 3rd and 18th shots performed on

sample #1. These oscillograms are typical for all three test samples.

Figure #1

TD 01 057 E11 36

Figure #2

Residual voltage at 10 kA was measured prior to and following the 18-shot 75 A

discharge tests. Table 2 summarizes the results of the 5 kA discharge voltage testing.

Table 2

TD 01 057 E11 37

Sample # 5 kA IR-kVc

(Before)

5 kA IR-kVc (After) 5 kA IR % Change

1 17.344 17.210 -0.77%

2 17.277 17.210 -0.39%

3 17.277 17.277 0%

Conclusion: The prorated test samples successfully completed the 18-shot low current,

long duration test. The sample discharge voltage was less than 1.0%, well below the 10%

change allowed in Section 8.13.4 of IEEE C62.11-2012 Standard. Disassembly revealed

no evidence of physical damage to the test samples. The ground lead disconnectors did

not detonate during the 18 shot test series. The PVR arrester successfully met the LCLD

requirements of the Heavy Duty Distribution Class arrester.

TD 01 057 E11 38


DUTY CYCLE TEST

Type PDV 65 Normal Duty Distribution Arrester

CERTIFICATION

This is to certify that the duty cycle design test has been successfully performed on the Ohio Brass Type PDV 65 Normal Duty Distribution Class surge arrester per Clause 8.16 of IEEE C62.11-2012 Standard.

Dennis W. Lenk

Principal Engineer

Date: 4/01/2016


DESIGN TEST REPORT

39

PDV 65 Normal Duty Distribution Class Surge Arrester Duty Cycle Test

Introduction: Duty cycle tests were performed per clause 8.16 of IEEE Standard C62.11-2012. Tests were performed on the PDV 65 prorated sections per Normal Duty Distribution arrester requirements. As required by clause 8.21, tests were performed on three prorated sections with a ground lead disconnector (GLD) to demonstrate that the GLD does not detonate during the test procedure. Test Procedure: The prorated test section was energized at its rated voltage and subjected to twenty 5 kA, 8/20 μs discharges spaced at 1 minute intervals. Following the twentieth impulse, the test section was placed in an oven at 60°C. After reaching 60°C, the sample was subjected to two additional 5 kA, 8/20 μs discharges. Within 5 minutes after the second high current discharge, the sample was energized at the prorated recovery voltage. Watts loss was monitored over a 30 minute period demonstrating thermal stability.

Test Results: Tests were successfully completed on three prorated sections, each assembled with a GLD. The following data summarizes the results of tests performed on prorated section #1.

The following data summarizes the results of the duty cycle test performed on prorated section #1. Figures 1 and 2 show the 1st and 20th shot performed during the rated voltage portion of the duty cycle test.

Figure 1 1st Shot @ Rated Voltage

40

Figure 2 20th Shot @ Rated Voltage

Figure 3 shows the oscillogram for the 2nd 5 kA impulse applied to the prorated section #1 during the recovery portion of the duty cycle test.

Figure 3 2nd 5 kA Discharge Prior to Recovery

41

Figures 4 and 5 show oscillograms of the prorated section #1 grading current through the test section at time zero and 30 minutes after application of recovery voltage, demonstrating thermal recovery has occurred.

Figure 4

Recovery @ Time = 0 Minutes

Figure 5 Recovery @ Time = 30 Minutes

Prior to and after the duty cycle test, the 5 kA, 8/20 μs discharge voltage was measured on the three prorated sections. Table 1 summarizes this test data.

42

Table 1

Section # 5 kA IR kVc

(Before) 5 kA IR kVc

(After) 5 kA IR % Change

1 36.028 36.286 +0.7

2 36.028 36.474 +1.2

3 36.095 36.312 +0.6

CONCLUSION: The Type PDV 65 prorated test samples successfully completed Duty Cycle testing and demonstrated thermal stability during the recovery test. The 10 kA discharge voltage increase ranged from 0.6-1.2%, less than the allowed 10% limit specified in Section 8.16.4 of the IEEE C62.11-2012 standard. Disassembly revealed no evidence of physical damage to the test samples. The ground lead disconnector (GLD) on each prorated section successfully withstood the duty cycle testing without detonating. The Type PDV 65 arrester successfully met the Normal Duty Distribution arrester Duty Cycle requirements.

IEEE TYPE TEST REPORT


TEMPORARY OVERVOLTAGE TEST

PDV 65 Normal Duty Distribution Arrester

CERTIFICATION

This is to certify that the temporary overvoltage design test has been successfully

performed on Ohio Brass Type PDV 65 Distribution Class surge arrester.

Dennis W. Lenk

Principal Engineer


TD 01 058 E13 43

Date: 4/01/2016

Attachments

DESIGN TEST REPORT

PDV 65 Normal Duty Distribution Class Surge Arrester

TITLE: Temporary over-voltage tests (TOV) performed on arrester without

insulating bracket:

OBJECTIVE: Temporary over-voltage tests were performed per section 8.17 of IEEE

Standard C62.11-2012.

SAMPLES: Tests were performed per Normal Duty distribution arrester requirements

using four thermally prorated test sections. Prorated sections were used to facilitate

testing of the lowest MOV mass, highest stressed arrester rating at voltages within

available laboratory facility capabilities. These tests cover ratings 3 - 36 kV with

corresponding MCOV levels of 2.55 - 29.0 kV using both short and long module

construction. As required by clause 7.2.2, prorated samples contained the minimum

MOV mass per specified for the design. MCOV and Rated voltages were also prorated

per unit Vref to reflect the lowest margin case of the standard voltage ratings offered in

this design. Prorated arrester ratings were within the 6 to 12 kV range specified for

distribution arrester tests.

TEST PROCEDURE: Each prorated sample was tested within four of the six designated

time ranges a - f, spanning overvoltage durations of .01 - 10,000 seconds. The tests were

performed demonstrating TOV capability of the design under “no prior duty" conditions.

For each TOV voltage setting, the test circuit applied voltage to the sample (preheated to

60 oC) for a time duration sufficient to exceed that claimed on the "no prior duty" curve.

TOV voltage was superimposed over MCOV recovery voltage such that, when TOV was

removed, there was no delay prior to application of recovery voltage. Recovery voltage

was applied for 30 minutes to demonstrate thermal stability.

TEST RESULTS: The following table and figure summarize the no-prior duty TOV

capability points for the PDV 65 normal duty arrester design without the series-connected

insulating bracket.

TD 01 058 E13 44

TOV Duration-

Seconds

No Prior Duty TOV-PU

MCOV (Without Bracket)

.02 1.63

.1 1.57

1 1.49

10 1.42

100 1.35

1000 1.28

CONCLUSION (arrester without insulating bracket): Tests were successfully

completed on four prorated samples without an insulating bracket over five specified time

ranges. Each sample demonstrated thermal stability after TOV exposure having no signs

of physical damage during inspection. Additionally, a fifth 12 kV rated section with an

TD 01 058 E13 45

Optima insulating bracket was energized for 10,000 seconds, followed by successful

thermal recovery. Residual voltage at 5 kA measured prior to and following the complete

TOV test series verified IR characteristics remained within the acceptable 10 % limits.

TD 01 058 E13 46

DESIGN TEST REPORT

PDV 65 Optima Distribution Class Surge Arrester

TITLE: Temporary over-voltage tests (TOV) performed on arrester with Optima

insulating bracket):

OBJECTIVE: Laboratory testing reveals that attachment of the PDV 65 arrester to the

Optima insulating bracket significantly improves the long time TOV capability of the

arrester assembly. The degree of improvement is a function of the individual arrester

ratings. The following curves show the improved TOV characteristic of the various

arrester ratings mounted to the insulating bracket.

SAMPLES: Arresters ranging in rating from 3 thru 36 kV were assembled with the

insulating bracket and subjected to TOV testing.

TEST RESULTS: The following tables summarize the claimable temporary overvoltage

capability of the various PDV 65 Optima arrester ratings mounted on an insulating base

bracket.

CONCLUSION (Arrester Mounted On Insulating Bracket): The following family of

curves defines the overvoltage withstand capability of the various rated PDV 65 Optima

bracket-mounted arresters when subjected to overvoltages with time durations ranging

from .02 to 10,000 seconds duration.

TD 01 058 E13 47

No Prior Duty Overvoltage Curve for PDV65 Optima 3 kV Rated Arrester Mounted on

Insulating Bracket

1.0

1.2

1.4

1.6

1.8

2.0

2.2

0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000

Time-seconds

Vo

ltag

e p

er

Un

it M

CO

V

3 kV rated

No Prior Duty Overvoltage Curve for PDV 65 Optima 6 kV Rated Arrester Mounted on

Insulating Bracket

1

1.1

1.2

1.3

1.4

1.5

1.6

1.7

0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000

Time- Seconds

Vo

ltag

e P

er

Un

it M

CO

V

6 kV Rated

TD 01 058 E13 48

No Prior Duty Overvoltage Curve for PDV 65 Optima 9 kV Rated Arrester Mounted on

Insulating Bracket

1

1.1

1.2

1.3

1.4

1.5

1.6

1.7

0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000

Time- Seconds

Vo

ltag

e o

er

Un

it M

CO

V

9 kV Rated

No Prior Duty Curve for PDV 65 Optima 10 and 12 kV Rated Arresters Mounted on Insulating

Bracket

1

1.1

1.2

1.3

1.4

1.5

1.6

1.7

0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000

Time-Seconds

Vo

ltag

e p

er

Un

it M

CO

V

10 thru 12 kV rated

TD 01 058 E13 49

No Prior Duty Overvoltage Curve for PDV 65 Optima 15 thru 21 kV Rated Arresters Mounted

on Insulating Bracket

1

1.1

1.2

1.3

1.4

1.5

1.6

1.7

0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000

Time-Seconds

Vo

ltag

e p

er

Un

it M

CO

V

15, 18, 21 kV Rated



1

1.1

1.2

1.3

1.4

1.5

1.6

1.7

1.8

0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000

Time- Seconds

Vo

ltag

e p

er

Un

it M

CO

V

24 thru 27 kV rated

TD 01 058 E13 50



1

1.1

1.2

1.3

1.4

1.5

1.6

1.7

1.8

0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000

Time- Seconds

Vo

ltag

e p

er

Un

it M

CO

V

30 thru 36 kV rated

TD 01 058 E13 51

TYPE TEST REPORT


SHORT CIRCUIT TEST

PDV65 Normal Duty Distribution Arrester

CERTIFICATION

This is to certify that the short circuit design test has been successfully performed on

Ohio Brass Type PDV65 Normal duty Distribution Class surge arrester.

Dennis W. Lenk

Principal Engineer

Date: 4/01/2016


TD 01 058 E13 52

PDV65 Normal Duty Distribution Class Surge Arrester

Short Circuit Test

TEST OBJECTIVE: Short Circuit tests were performed on the PDV65 Normal Duty

Distribution Class Distribution arrester per ANNEX N of IEC 60099-4, 2005 standard.

TEST SAMPLES: Per Annex N, tests were performed on fusewire shorted and

overvoltage failed arresters as defined in Table N.2 of the referenced standard. Short

circuit tests were performed on the longest mechanical section, as required in Clause

N.8.7.2.2 of the standard.

TEST PROCEDURE: Per clause 10.8.10.2 of 60099-4, Ed. 3.0, 2014, the polymer-

housed PDV is a “Design B” arrester. As such, per Table 8 of 60099-4, Ed. 3.0, 2014,

four short circuit tests are required. All four short circuit tests are to be performed per

Table 7 and Table 8 on unfailed arresters using the 2-source test method.

As short circuit tests were originally performed per Annex N, two test samples for the

high current test were assembled with a fuse wire oriented axially between the mov disc

stack and the fiberglass-epoxy wrap. These samples were subjected to the full offset

current test. In addition, six samples represented standard production arresters. These

samples were failed using the specified 2-source failure mode procedure. All tests were

performed at full voltage. Therefore, the prospective fault current, as measured during the

bolted fault test on the generator, is the claimable short circuit capability of the design. It

should be noted that the IEC 60099-4, Ed. 3.0, 2014 short circuit test is similar to that

defined in Annex N of new IEC 60099-4-2005 standard, except reduced level high

current testing was performed only at 7.5 kA, instead of 6 kA and 3 kA as required in the

IEC 60099-4, Ed. 3.0, 2014, standard. Also note that the original IEC testing was

performed on (8) total arresters versus only (4) per IEC 60099-4 Ed. 3.0, 2014.

TEST RESULTS: The following table summarizes the results these tests which

validated the claimed maximum 15 kArms symmetrical, 12 cycle fault current withstand

capability of this design, with an applied ratio of 1.55 between total asymmetrical to

symmetrical rms currents. This corresponds to a 2.6 ratio, in the first half loop of fault

current, between the crest asymmetrical to rms symmetrical current, i.e., full offset. In

addition to testing at the claimed maximum capability, tests were also performed, using

the 2-source procedure, at half the claimed capability and at 600 amps as specified in

Table 14 of the standard.

All tests were performed at full voltage. Therefore, the prospective fault current, as

measured during the bolted fault test on the generator, is the claimable fault current

capability of the design.

TD 01 057 E14 53

Table 1

Calibration Test 15.0 kA Symmetrical RMS 40.0 kAc 1st Half Loop

Sample

#

Failure

Mode

Minimum Test

Duration-seconds

Condition of Module/Polymer

Housing After Test

1 Fuse Wire .2 Module Intact/Hsg Torn but in Place

2 Fuse Wire .2 Module Intact/Hsg Torn but in Place

3 2-Source .2 Module Intact/Hsg Torn but in Place


Calibration Test 7.59 kA Symmetrical RMS No Asymmetrical Requirement

Sample

#

Failure

Mode

Minimum Test

Duration-seconds


Housing After Test



Calibration Test 600 Amp Symmetrical RMS No Asymmetrical Requirement

Sample

#

Failure

Mode

Minimum Test

Duration-seconds


Housing After Test

7 2-Source 1.0 Module Intact/Hsg Torn but in Place

8 2-Source 1.0 Module Intact/Hsg Torn but in Place

CONCLUSION: The eight test arresters assembled with the longest mechanical unit met

the test evaluation criteria as specified in the standard. In all tests, the arrester module

remained intact after the completion of each test. The flexible polymer housing wall

section split, as intended, on all samples to allow venting of internal arcing gases to the

outside of the arrester. In all cases, flames associated with the fault current test

extinguished immediately after completion of the test, well within the allowed 2 minute

duration. These tests have demonstrated the capability of the Type PDV65 Normal Duty

Distribution Class arrester design to successfully discharge a maximum claimable 15

kArms symmetrical fault current.

TD 01 057 E14 54

TYPE TEST REPORT NO. TD 01 057 E14

DISCONNECTOR TESTS

CERTIFICATION

This is to certify that the disconnector tests have been successfully performed on Ohio

Brass Type PDV 65 Distribution Class surge arrester.

Dennis W. Lenk

Principal Engineer


Date: 4/01/2016

Attachments

TD 01 057 E15 55

DESIGN TEST REPORT


TITLE: Distribution arrester disconnector tests:

OBJECTIVE: Tests were performed per clause 8.21 of IEEE Standard C62.11-2012.

TEST PROCEDURES: Per clause 8.21.2.1, high current short duration, low current

long duration, and duty cycle tests were performed on thermally prorated test sections

having the disconnector assembly connected in series. In all tests, the disconnectors

withstood the discharge duty without detonating.

Per clause 8.21.2.2, disconnector detonation testing was performed on five

bracket/isolator assemblies each at 20, 80, 200, and 800 Arms.

TEST RESULTS: Disconnectors did not operate when subjected to high current short

duration and low current long duration discharge duty tests and duty cycle tests on the

thermally prorated test sections.

In all cases, disconnectors separated during detonation tests at each of the required

current levels. Additionally, detonation tests were successfully performed at 5 and 1 amp

levels.

CONCLUSION: The disconnector passed all requirements of clause 8.21. The following

curve shows the claimed detonation curve for the PDV65 arrester disconnector.

TD 01 057 E15 56

PDV 65 Optima Disconnector Detonation Curve

0.01

0.1

1

10

1 10 100 1000

Current-Amps

Deto

na

tio

n T

ime

-Se

co

nd

s

Isolator Detonation Points

TD 01 057 E15 57


MAXIMUM DESIGN CANTILEVER

AND

MOISTURE INGRESS TEST

PDV 65 Arrester

CERTIFICATION

This is to certify that the maximum design cantilever (MDCL) and moisture ingress test

has been successfully performed on the Ohio Brass Type PDV 65 Normal Duty

Distribution Class surge arrester.

Dennis W. Lenk

Principal Engineer


Date: 4/01/2016

Attachments

TD 01 057 E15 58

DESIGN TEST REPORT

PDV65 Distribution Class Surge Arrester

TITLE: Maximum design cantilever (MDCL) and moisture ingress test:

TEST SAMPLES: The maximum design cantilever and moisture ingress test was

performed on a PDV 65 17 kV MCOV arrester, representing the longest mechanical unit.

Tests were performed on this 8.6” long arrester to validate the claimed 300 inch-pound

continuous cantilever rating.

TEST PROCEDURE: The test was performed per section 8.22 of C62.11-2012

Standard. The test arrester was subjected to PD, watts loss, and discharge voltage tests

prior to the bending moment and boiling water immersion test. The mechanical portion of

the test consisted of first applying a 20 ft-lb torque to the arrester end terminals for 30

second duration. The test arrester was then placed inside a thermal cycling oven and

mechanically loaded to its 300 in-lb continuous cantilever rating. The load application

and test temperature is shown on the attached figure.

TEST RESULTS: After completion of the thermal cycling under load test, the test

arrester was mechanically loaded in four directions and the top end deflection under load

and the residual deflection under no load were recorded. Table 1 summarizes the results

of this mechanical loading procedure.

Table 1

0o Load 90o Load 180o Load 270o Load

Deflection @load (in) .47 .37 .40 .43

Residual Deflection (in) .156 .031 .031 .125

At the completion of the mechanical loading test, the water immersion portion of the

bending moment test was performed per para. 8.22.3.3.b) and consists of placing the

TD 01 057 E15 59

mechanically stressed arrester into 80 degree C. salt water bath for 168 hours, after which

the arrester is cooled to room temperature and electrical tests are repeated. See Table 2

below for results.

Table 2

Sample

No.

Initial

Watts @

MCOV

Final

Watts @

MCOV

Initial PD

@ 1.05

times

MCOV

(pC)

Final PD

@ 1.05

times

MCOV

(pC

Initial 1.5

kA

Residual

Voltage

kVc

Final 1.5

kA

Residual

Voltage kVc

1 .168 .178 0 0 51.4 51.8

CONCLUSION: Per Section 8.22.4, the partial discharge levels were unchanged and the

watts loss changed 6%, less than the allowed 20% increase. The 10 kA IR changed 1%,

less than the allowed 10%. Visual examination revealed no evidence of mechanical

damage or moisture ingress inside the arrester as a result of the test procedure. The above

tests have validated the 300 inch-pound continuous cantilever rating of the base mounted

PDV65 normal duty Distribution Class arrester.

IEEE DESIGN TEST REPORT Report No. TD 01 057 E00 Type PDV ... · Type tests performed on PDV65 ND...

Documents

Transcript of IEEE DESIGN TEST REPORT Report No. TD 01 057 E00 Type PDV ... · Type tests performed on PDV65 ND...