Arshad 2017

3630 Arshad et al.
: Properties and Applications of Superhydrophobic Coatings in High Voltage Outdoor Insulation: A Review
Properties and Applications of Superhydrophobic Coatings

in High Voltage Outdoor Insulation: A Review
Arshad1, G. Momen2, M. Farzaneh2 and A. Nekahi1
1
School of Engineering and Built Environment, Glasgow Caledonian University, Glasgow, United Kingdom
2
Department of Applied Science, Université du Québec à Chicoutimi, Chicoutimi, QC, Canada
ABSTRACT
The deposition of ice, snow, pollution or their mixtures on the surface of outdoor insulators
may severely affect their performance, resulting in electrical and or mechanical failures.
Various preventative methods are used to minimize the problems of ice and pollution build up
on the surface of outdoor insulators. In the last few decades, advanced coatings have been
developed for better performance of outdoor insulators in contaminated and freezing
environments. These advanced coatings offer the advantage of low wettability, high thermal
and ultraviolet resistance, self-cleaning, self-healing, low ice adhesion strength and delayed
freezing time. It is believed that these benefits will not only increase the reliability of
transmission systems but may also reduce the capital cost of transmission infrastructure. This
paper presents a detailed review on the properties and applications of superhydrophobic
coatings in outdoor high voltage insulation. This review can be beneficial to scientists and
engineers in evaluating the performance and durability of superhydrophobic coatings in
polluted and freezing conditions. It also highlights the need for standardized tests and
procedures for better understanding the behavior of superhydrophobic coatings in different
environments and their long-term durability.
Index Terms — Superhydrophobicity, icephobicity, self-cleaning, self-healing, outdoor
insulators
1 INTRODUCTION
HIGH voltage outdoor insulators play an important role in possibility of flashover and power outage is high when ice and
the safe and reliable transmission of power. Although the cost snow accretion is followed by thaw [8]. Similarly, flashover
of insulators in an overhead transmission line project may be due to icing is of more concern for insulators and substations
as low as 5% of the total cost of the line, their performance is located close to roads, which are regularly salted thus
of vital importance in power system [1]. During service exposing the insulators to salt spray and contamination
conditions, outdoor insulators are exposed to various types of buildup. Important insulator properties that influence their
stresses (electrical, mechanical, etc.). Mechanical design performance under icing and contamination are dimensions,
specifications for outdoor insulators are well developed and shape and surface [4, 9].
provide promising results in different climates [2]. However, The problems of ice and pollution buildup on insulator
the electrical performance of outdoor insulators in harsh surfaces resulting in insulator flashovers are not new.
environments is more challenging [3, 4]. The reliability of Incidents of power outages due to pollution, ice and snow
electrical transmission system is dependent on the have been reported from various countries in the past and
performance of outdoor insulators in adverse weather resulted in the loss of billions of dollars [10–20]. Different
conditions. In contaminated conditions, soluble and non- preventative measures are used to reduce ice and snow
soluble contaminants deposit on the insulator surface. Under buildups on the surface of insulators and conductors. The de-
moisture, cold fog and mist, the pollution layer becomes wet, icing methods used for conductors, like Joule heating [21, 22],
and soluble contaminants dissolve in water leading to the laser de-icing [23], de-icing vehicles [24, 25], are not
formation of a conductive layer, resulting in a flow of leakage applicable to insulators due to their complex shape and surface
current, dry band formation and, under certain conditions, morphology. The use of alternating shed glass and porcelain
flashovers [5–7]. insulators showed improved performance in moderate icing
In cold climate regions, ice builds up on the insulator surface conditions [26]. Similarly, composite insulators with greater
in addition to pollution. Performance of outdoor insulators shed diameters and spacing offer better performance in the
exposed to ice and snow is of great concern to utilities. The same conditions [27]. Under heavy icing and pollution,
however, changing insulator shape and dimensions may be
Manuscript received on 23 March 2017, in final form 5 July 2017,
ineffective and therefore, most efforts have been focused on
accepted 28 August 2017. Corresponding author: Arshad. modification of insulator surface properties [28]. For this
DOI: 10.1109/TDEI.2017.006725
IEEE Transactions on Dielectrics and Electrical Insulation Vol. 24, No. 6; December 2017 3631
purpose, Room Temperature Vulcanized (RTV) silicone review of superhydrophobic coating properties which are of
rubber coatings are applied to porcelain and glass insulators to interest in high voltage application is presented in this paper.
improve their performance against ice and snow. However, at The paper is divided into two parts: The first part discusses
low temperatures, their effectiveness to prevent or delay ice characteristics of superhydrophobic coatings e.g. ultraviolet
accretion is questionable [9, 29]. Furthermore, the stability and thermal stability, self-healing and cleaning, ice-
hydrophobicity of silicone rubber is effected by humidity, accretion and ice adhesion, erosion resistance, flashover
temperature, soluble and non-soluble deposits, and UV voltage and leakage current. In the second part, existing test
irradiations [30–32]. Farzaneh et al [33] proposed the idea of methods for characterizing superhydrophobic coatings and
applying ceramic semiconducting glaze to whole insulators to suggestions for modifications in the existing test methods are
produce Joule heat and improve their icing performance. presented.
However, this method involves continuous loss of power. 2 SUPERHYDROPHOBICITY
Semi conductive silicone coating, including conducting
When a water droplet rests on a solid surface, the wettability
particles such as zinc oxide, carbon fibers and carbon black
of this surface depends on the balance of adhesive forces
was proposed in [34, 35] to improve the anti-icing
(between liquid and solid) and cohesive forces (within liquid).
performance of outdoor insulators. The freezing time of water
As a result, a contact angle is formed between the solid
droplets on these semi conductive coated insulators was
surface and the water droplet. This angle can be described as
increased due to the heat produced by the flow of leakage
the tangent angle between the liquid vapor interface at the
current and hydrophobicity. Although semi conductive
three-phase boundary as shown in Figure 1 [55]. Although
silicone coatings have shown some promising results, the
static contact angle measurement is considered a powerful tool
major disadvantage of this method is high power loss and
to investigate the wettability of a surface, some researchers
degradation of the coating material.
also studied the dynamic wetting behavior for better
In recent years, superhydrophobic coatings (contact angle > understanding of superhydrophobicity and icephobicity [19].
150° and sliding angle < 10°) have been developed with The dynamic wetting behavior can be characterized by
intrinsic properties of self-cleaning, self-healing icephobicity, measuring the advancing contact angle (maximum stable
high thermal conductivity, and relatively higher permittivity angle) and receding contact angle (minimum stable
and dielectric strength [36–38]. Traditional areas of angle) . The static contact angle is a number between and
applications of superhydrophobic surfaces include anti- while the difference between these two angles is defined as
fogging screens, antifouling, foils for food packaging, non- contact angle hysteresis [19]. On a flat and homogenous
adhesive surfaces for micro devices, microfluidic windows surface, the contact angle depends on the surface free energy
and lenses etc. [39, 40]. Superhydrophobic surfaces are at the three-phase boundary and can be described by Young’s
observed in nature in many plants and animal furs [41–43], the equation as given below [56]:
most common and studied example being the lotus leaf [44,
45]. Such non-wetting behavior leads scientists and engineers
(1)
to artificially create superhydrophobic surfaces. Due to recent
developments in the fabrication techniques of
superhydrophobic surfaces, their potential applications has where , , are the surface energy components
increased significantly [46]. The self-cleaning and low between solid-vapor, solid-liquid and liquid-vapor interface
wettability properties of superhydrophobic surfaces can be respectively. Young’s Equation [56] is only valid for a flat and
exploited to reduce surface contamination and ice buildup on homogenous surface and the static contact angle on the flat
outdoor insulators. The anti-icing performance of surface cannot exceed 120° unless reducing the surface energy
superhydrophobic coatings have been investigated in [37], and changing the surface chemical composition [57].
[47–50] showing delayed freezing time, low ice adhesion and
stability against UV irradiations. Some studies also reported
the flashover performance of superhydrophobic coatings
which showed increase in flashover voltage and reduction in
leakage current [51–53]. Ageing and degradation of
superhydrophobic coatings under multiple electrical and non-
electrical stresses was investigated in [54] under clean fog,
rotating wheel dipping and surface conductance tests.
Although the long term reliability of these coatings have not
been fully investigated yet, their self-cleaning, self-healing Figure 1. Forces acting on a water droplet at the three phase contact line on a
and anti-icing properties can be exploited to benefit the solid [55].
electrical power system industry by reducing ice and
It was reported that the wettability behavior of a solid
contamination buildups on insulators, conductors and support
surface depends on surface roughness along with surface
structures [19].
energy [58]. The relation between surface roughness, energy
The self-cleaning and self-healing properties of these and contact angle is best described by two models: Wenzel
advance coatings are of vital importance in outdoor insulation. model [59, 60] and Cassie-Baxter model [61–63] as shown in
This will help in reducing ice and pollution build up on Figure 2 [48]. According to Wenzel model, when the water
insulator surface and increasing service life. A systematic droplet comes in contact with a rough surface, it penetrates in
3632 Arshad et al.: Properties and Applications of Superhydrophobic Coatings in High Voltage Outdoor Insulation: A Review
the holes on the surface increasing the contact area between Different definitions of icephobicity have been proposed in
solid surface and liquid. According to Wenzel regime, the literature [76, 77]. Sojoudi et al [78] proposed a more
contact angle on a rough surface (Figure 2a) can be calculated comprehensive definition of icephobicity. According to them,
using Wenzel equation [59]: the icephobicity of a surface depends on the relative
(2) humidity of the atmosphere, surface topography, liquid
extent and elasticity (coating applied to hard or
where is the Wenzel contact angle, is the static contact elastomeric soft surface). Figure 3 shows a framework for
angle and is the surface roughness. According to equation classifying icephobic coatings based on these three
(2), the Wenzel contact angle will increase with an increase in properties (elasticity, topography and liquid extent).
surface roughness for a hydrophobic surface, and will decrease Superhydrophobic surfaces have been reported to provide
with an increase in surface roughness for a hydrophilic surface small droplet rebound time, low ice adhesion strength and
[64]. In Wenzel’s regime, for a hydrophobic surface the static reduced ice nucleation at freezing temperatures [79–[1]. A
contact angle and contact angle hysteresis increase with an relation between superhydrophobicity and icephobicity is
increase in surface roughness. However, this relation is true established in [74, 82]. It has been reported in [79] that
unless the surface roughness is lower or equal to 1.7 ( ), superhydrophobic surfaces with low contact angle
after which the contact angle hysteresis starts to decrease [63, hysteresis tend to be icephobic. However, at high relative
65]. This could be due to the start of Cassie-Baxter regime humidity, the anti-icing performance of superhydrophobic
(composite state) and the increase air fraction resulting in surfaces has been challenged [83, 84]. At freezing
suspension of water droplet and a composite phase (Figure 2b) temperatures, the surfaces lose some of their
[66]. The contact angle will increase in the composite state superhydrophobicity and tend to become hydrophobic.
irrespectively of the surface energy [64]. The Cassie-Baxter Furthermore, contact angle hysteresis increases with a
equation explains the relation between surface roughness and decrease in temperature which is an indication of loss of
contact angle as given below: icephobicity at freezing substrate temperatures. At
temperatures below freezing point, condensed water vapor
penetrates into porosities of nanostructured surfaces
(3) leading to Cassie-Wenzel regime transition [85]. The
rebound time of a water droplet from a solid substrate also
where is the Cassie-Baxter contact angle and is the increases with a decrease in substrate temperature
fraction of the solid surface. Both theories can be used to effecting icephobicity of superhydrophobic surfaces. The
predict the contact angle qualitatively. Although it is not clear relation between surface chemistry (roughness, porosity
which theory should be used and in what circumstances, etc.) and icephobicity is not clearly established yet [78].
however, it is suggested that the one with smaller contact
angle is the dominant regime [67]. The dominant regime is
also associated with the droplet size in [68]. Although the
transition between Cassie-Baxter and Wenzel regime is not
fully understood, the Cassie-Baxter regime is assumed to be a
quasi-stable state and transform into Wenzel regime [69].
Further details about superhydrophobicity and the two regimes
can be found in [55, 57, 70]. Apart from Wenzel and Cassie-
Baxter wetting regimes, the wetting of rough surfaces was also
explained by Bico et al [71] and Quere [72, 73]. However,
these models are more applicable to textured surfaces.
Figure 3. Framework for classifying icephobic coatings [78].
4 FABRICATION OF SUPERHYDROPHOBIC
SURFACES
The various methods used for preparing
superhydrophobic surfaces are mainly divided into three
types: top-down approach [86], bottom-up approach [87]
Figure 2. Wetting models (a) Wenzel (b) Cassie-Baxter [48]. and combination of both [88]. Examples of these
approaches are chemical vapor deposition [89], wet
3 ICEPHOBICITY chemical reaction [90], electrochemical deposition [47],
layer-by-layer method [91, 92], self-assembly [93],
Icephobicity is defined as the ability of a solid electrospinning [94], plasma treatment [66, 95], sol-gel
surface to prevent and delay ice formation and nucleation [96]. A detailed description of superhydrophobic surfaces
induced either by lowering the substrate temperature or by preparation methods and their potential applications can
pouring a super cooled water droplet on the surface [74, 75]. be found in [70, 97].
5 CHARACTERIZATION OF nanocomposites was investigated in [48] according to ASTM

SUPERHYDROPHOBIC COATINGS G154 [101]. There was no visible difference observed for the
static contact angle and the contact angle hysteresis which was
lower than 7° throughout the UV exposure. These results
5.1 WATER IMMERSION STABILITY
indicate that the samples retain their superhydrophobicity and
Outdoor insulators are exposed to fog, mist and rain during roll-off property even after 4 test cycles.
service conditions. Degradation of coatings may occur while
Seyedmehdi et al [99] tested superhydrophobic RTV
in continuous contact with water or other liquid solutions.
silicone rubber samples according to the ASTM G155 [102]
Water ageing may inflict either a permanent damage to the
test procedure which uses xenon arc light and water apparatus
coating material or a temporary loss of surface wetting. To
to model the effect of sunlight and moisture in field
predict the useful service life of coatings, their resistance to
conditions. Samples were exposed to UV irradiation and
water immersion is important [38, 98]. Stability of
moisture for 1000 h and the contact angle was measured every
superhydrophobic silicone rubber/ZnO/SiO2 composite was
200 h. Test results indicated excellent durability of the
tested by immersing samples in solutions of different pH
superhydrophobic RTV silicone rubber coating with a slight
levels for 10 days [48]. After 10-day immersion in pH
increase in the static contact angle and slight decrease in the
solutions, the static contact angle slightly decreased while
sliding angle. This increase in static contact angle and
contact angle hysteresis increased. This decrease was more
decrease in sliding angle were associated with the diffusion of
evident in the case of tap water as compared to other solutions
silicone fluid to the surface. Isimjan et al [103] reported the
due to ionic contamination. Fourier Transform Infrared (FTIR)
stability of TiO2/SiO2 coated steel surfaces against UV
and Atomic Force Microscopy (AFM) results showed a
irradiation. SiO2 was coated on top of TiO2 and the prepared
decrease in Si-CH3 relative to C-H bonds and a decrease in
samples showed excellent UV resistance. In the presence of
surface roughness from 304 nm to 150 nm respectively which
the SiO2 layer, the high energy electron irradiation generated
is an indication of reduction in icephobicity after pH
by TiO2 when exposed to the UV light could not penetrate the
treatment. Furthermore, a transition from Cassie-Baxter
surface to form hydroxyl groups and start oxidation. The
regime to Wenzel regime was observed during pH treatment
current literature suggests that superhydrophobic coatings
which may be due to the damage to coating caused by this
provide good UV stability for short and prolonged UV
treatment. Seyedmehdi et al [99] studied the loss and recovery
exposure [104]–[106]. The high UV resistance of
of the superhydrophobicity property by immersing
superhydrophobic coatings makes them suitable for high
superhydrophobic RTV surfaces in tap water for one day and
voltage insulation in arid and tropical environments.
then by drying them in open air for three days. It was observed
that the contact angle decreased initially after immersion in
5.3 THERMAL STABILITY
water but fully recovered again after drying for three days in
open air. The results were compared with a hydrophobic RTV
Outdoor insulators may be exposed to elevated temperatures
silicone rubber and it was concluded that the recovery speed
during service conditions (dry band arcing, flashovers, etc.).
of the superhydrophobic samples were faster than commercial
The stability of superhydrophobic coatings to elevated
RTV silicone rubber. This high recovery speed of the
temperature is important for their long term performance. Xiu
superhydrophobic RTV coating was attributed to the higher
et al [107] tested the thermal stability of superhydrophobic
filler (ATH and nano fluoric) concentration. Yan et al [100]
samples prepared by depositing silica films on glass substrates
studied the loss and recovery of superhydrophobicity of
using a sol-gel process. At low temperatures (<200 °C), the
silicone rubber caused by water immersion. The static contact
samples maintained their high contact angles but at high
angle of an unaged sample was 151° which was reduced to
temperatures (>200 °C) the surfaces lost their
127° after immersion in solution of different salinity,
superhydrophobicity which may be due to the oxidation and/or
recovered to 148° after 200 h. On the other hand, the contact
bond cleavage of the isobutyl group. After modifying the
angle hysteresis increased from 2.2° to 27.6° after water
silica films with fluoralkyl silanes, the thermal stability was
immersion but did not recover. This can be due to the
improved as compared to the as-prepared silica coatings. This
hydration of the PDMS backbone which affects the surface
improvement after surface treatment was attributed to the
retention properties and the receding contact angle. This
attachment of fluoralkyl groups resulting in linear
shows that long term water immersion could decrease
fluorocarbon chain on the surface.
icephobicity and self-cleaning ability of superhydrophobic
The thermal stability of silicone rubber/ZnO/SiO2 was
silicone rubber coatings.
studied by placing the samples in oven for over a month at 150
°C [48]. After thermal treatment, the superhydrophobic
5.2 ULTRAVIOLET STABILITY
samples retained their low contact angle hysteresis and high
Outdoor insulators are exposed to sunlight and moisture static contact angle.
which are considered one of the important factors in the Latthe et al [108] prepared superhydrophobic samples by
ageing of insulators and reduction of their useful service life. applying silica coatings on glass substrates and then studying
The reliability of these advanced coatings is related to their the influence of temperature on contact angles by placing the
stability when exposed to UV irradiation and other samples in a furnace for 5 h. It was observed that the
environmental stresses. The influence of humidity and UV superhydrophobic samples showed excellent thermal stability
irradiation on superhydrophobic silicone rubber/ZnO/SiO 2 up to 275 °C but lost their hydrophobicity at higher
temperatures. At higher temperatures, the methyl groups

converted into Si-OH groups resulting in water absorption and
reduction in contact angle.
The cyclic variations of temperature under atmospheric
conditions was studied for superhydrophobic coated Siloxane
rubber [109]. Coatings were exposed to a wide range of
temperatures (-18 to 25 °C). It was observed that after 10
temperature cycles, superhydrophobicity decreased. This
decrease in superhydrophobicity was attributed to mechanical
damage of the sample and coatings due to the difference in
thermal expansion coefficient between Siloxane and the
coating material.
Existing literature indicates that the thermal stability of
superhydrophobic coatings depends on the fabrication method,
type of coating material and temperature range. Further
research is needed to fully understand the thermal behavior of
superhydrophobic coatings.
Figure 4. Self-cleaning process of NaCl contaminants on superhydrophobic
5.4 SELF-CLEANING glass substrates by a 10 water droplet with time: arrows indicate the
direction of water drop movement and the dotted circle shows NaCl
contaminants [110].
Self-cleaning is the ability of a surface to wash out
contaminants when water drops come in contact with the 5.5 SELF-HEALING
surface. Self-cleaning characteristics of superhydrophobic
coatings are of prime importance for outdoor insulators used Self-healing is the ability of a surface to restore its surface
in contaminated and freezing environments. Huang et al [110] free energy, and/or surface roughness [113]. Natural
characterized the self-cleaning process of superhydrophobic superhydrophobic surfaces (lotus leaf, insect wings, etc.) have
RTV coated glass substrates by randomly depositing sodium the ability to self-heal mechanical damage due to their
chloride (NaCl) on the surface. The surface was impacted by a biological growth process. It is important to fabricate artificial
10ml water droplet and it was observed that a portion of NaCl superhydrophobic surfaces with self-healing ability which can
dissolved in the water droplet and was removed as the water recover their properties when damaged [114], [115]. The self-
droplet rebounded. A partially clean and dry surface was healing ability of crushed poly(ethylenemine) based
obtained after water drop impacts, as shown in Figure 4. superhydrophobic coatings by treating the damaged film with
Wang et al [111] investigated the self-cleaning properties of water has been reported in [113]. It was also demonstrated that
a superhydrophobic Ag/PDMS composite at temperatures the crushing and healing process can be repeated multiple
below freezing point. Samples were placed at a tilt angle of times using the proposed water-assisted approach. The
10° and active carbon was homogenously dispersed as coatings were subjected to compressive loads to destroy their
contaminant on the surface. Samples were precooled at -10 °C topographic features. The contact angle of the
before water droplets at 0 °C were added continuously onto superhydrophobic coating reduced from 156° to 130° after
the surface. It was observed that the water droplets picked up damage. Surface roughness was also significantly reduced
the dust and slid away, resulting in a clean surface. At lower after the mechanical damage. The damaged samples were
temperature (-12 °C) a thick frost formed on the sample placed in open air for 8 days but no significant change in
surface reducing contact angle and consequently it’s self- contact angle was observed. However, when crushed coatings
cleaning. This might be due to the presence of moisture in the were submerged in water for a brief period, it was observed
air condensing on the surface to form a frost layer [112]. that the surface topography and contact angle were restored.
Bhushan et al. [36] performed a self-cleaning experiment on The healing process is explained by infiltration of water into
superhydrophobic surfaces using silicone carbide (SiC) as the crushed coatings followed by its swelling, restoring its
contaminant. Two sizes of contaminants were used: 1-10 thickness and other surface features. The recovery process was
and 10-15 . The contaminated surfaces were subjected to 2 much faster in low pH water solution (acetate buffer) as
water droplets for 2 minutes. It was observed that about compared to high pH solution. This faster recovery in low pH
30% of the contaminant remained on the surface after the test may be due to the protonation of amines present in the poly
irrespective of particle size. The dirt particles trapped in the (ethylenemine) layer, resulting in faster swelling.
Xue et al [116] investigated the self-healing ability of
cavities of microstructures were not removed by rolling
superhydrophobic coatings fabricated by spraying of
droplets leading to partial cleaning. The available literature
PDMS/SiO2 composite on glass substrates. The samples were
suggests that superhydrophobic coating self-cleaning
treated with air plasma and they observed that the samples lost
characteristics are irrespective of contaminant type, size and
their superhydrophobicity completely after plasma treatment
distribution. However, further investigation is needed to fully
due to the decomposition of the PDMS and introduction of
understand the self-cleaning properties of superhydrophobic
polar groups on its surface [117]. However, after exposing the
coatings under soluble and non-soluble contaminants.
samples to ambient conditions for 12 h, the surfaces were
covered again with PDMS restoring their Chavan et al [120] established a relation between the
superhydrophobicity. This etching and healing process was delayed freezing time and thermal resistance of the
repeated several times and it was found that increasing the superhydrophobic coatings. According to them, delayed
etching/healing cycles increased the recovery time as shown in freezing time can be achieved when thermal resistance at
Figure 5. It may be due to the movement of PDMS polymer the water/ice interface is equal to the conduction
chains which result in the formation of hidden polar groups resistance inside the water/ice column. Low ice adhesion
and subsequent decrease in surface tension and surface free strength of superhydrophobic surfaces is another
energy. Heat assisted self-healing process was also reported in important factor in their anti-icing behavior. Adhesion of
the same paper. Indeed, it was found that the healing process ice on the surface of a solid surface is governed by one or
becomes faster with heat treatment. However, it also resulted more of the following parameters: electrostatic forces,
in the loss of PDMS molecules and, after two cycles, the Vander Waals forces, hydrogen bonding, liquid-like layer
coatings did not recover their superhydrophobicity. The (LLL) and mechanical interlocking [2, 121, 122]. Jian et
etching and healing process of TiO2-based superhydrophobic al [123] studied the anti-icing performance of glass
coating was reported in [105]. It was found that surface insulators coated with superhydrophobic PDMS and
superhydrophobicity was regained after UV treatment. hydrophobic RTV. It was observed during the
experiments that ice accreted much faster on the
hydrophobic RTV silicone rubber coated insulators than
on the superhydrophobic insulators as shown in Figure 6.
The weight of ice accumulated on the superhydrophobic
insulator was found to be less than half of that on the
hydrophobic insulator after a 3.1-h exposure. Ice accretion
on superhydrophobic coated insulators can be described in
three stages. In the first hour of exposure to cold fog,
almost all the water droplets on the insulator rolled off
and the process of ice accumulation was very slow. After
some ice particles formed on the insulator surface, water
droplets falling on or near the ice particles started getting
attached to it resulting in accelerated icing. However,
water droplets falling on ice-free regions on the insulator
still rolled off resulting in the breaking of some ice
particles. Furthermore, the low ice adhesion strength of
superhydrophobic coatings resulted in the breaking of icicles,
thus reducing ice accumulation. Liao et al. [50] investigated
Figure 5. Etching and healing cycles of PDMS/SiO2 coated glass substrates
healed automatically at ambient temperature [116].
the anti-icing performance of glass insulators with
superhydrophobic and RTV coating in a climate chamber by
simulating glaze ice on the insulator surface. After 80 minute
5.6 STABILITY AGAINST ICING of ice accretion in the chamber, it was observed that a thick ice
Ice accretion on the surface of outdoor insulators and layer formed on the RTV coated insulator, while only isolated
conductors is one of the major problems concerning the ice formations were observed on the superhydrophobic
reliability of power transmission. Advanced coatings with insulator. Furthermore, the weight of ice accreted on the
superhydrophobic and icephobic properties are considered superhydrophobic insulator was 51% lower than that on RTV
potential solutions to prevent or delay ice accumulation. One coated insulator. This delayed freezing of water droplets on
of the advantages of superhydrophobic coatings is their ability superhydrophobic as compared to hydrophobic and
to delay the formation of ice on their surfaces. The reduction hydrophilic surfaces was investigated in [124]. The freezing of
of ice accretion on superhydrophobic surfaces can be a 4 water droplet was demonstrated on three different
explained by some of the following mechanism [118]: surfaces: (a) polished aluminum (hydrophilic), (b) RTV
silicone rubber (hydrophobic), and (c) TiO2 coated silicone
x Heat transfer hindrance between water droplets and rubber (superhydrophobic). Figure 7 displays the freezing time
the surface cause by the insulation effect of the of a single water droplet on the three surfaces at a substrate
surface roughness[81] temperature of -15 °C. From the figure, it can be seen that on
x As the contact area between the water droplet and hydrophilic surface the water droplet freezes immediately
hydrophobic surface becomes smaller, there are ( s), on the hydrophobic surface the freezing time was 3-4
less nucleation points on the surface and lower min, while for the superhydrophobic surface it took about
heat transfer between the water droplets, the 12-13 min to freeze. The delayed freezing time for the
surface leading to delayed freezing time[74] superhydrophobic coating can be explained by the reduction
x The rebound time of the water droplets on the of liquid-solid contact area and the trapping of a large amount
superhydrophobic surface is less than the time of air in the liquid-solid interface slowing down heat exchange
needed for ice nucleation leading to reduction or between the water droplets and the solid surface. Furthermore,
prevention of ice formation on the surface [119] the low rebound time of water droplets also explains the
delayed freezing time as water can be removed from the

surface before it gets frozen. The ice adhesion strength of
superhydrophobic TiO2-coated aluminum sample and polished
uncoated sample was calculated using a custom made
centrifuge apparatus and it was found that ice adhesion
strength of the superhydrophobic samples was 7 times lower
than that of the uncoated polished aluminum sample. They
also studied the effect of icing/de-icing cycles on ice adhesion
strength. It was observed that the adhesion reduction factor
reduced from 6.96 to 4.95 after 10 icing/de-icing cycles. Due
to such cycles, the surface asperities are likely to be damaged
due to water solidification resulting an increase in ice-solid
contact area and adhesion strength. It has been reported in
[125] that ice adhesion strength of a solid substrate is
dependent on the type of ice, surface chemistry and wetting
behavior. Kulinich et al. [79] reported that ice adhesion Figure 7. Images of water droplet frozen on (a) polished aluminium, (b) RTV
strength and contact angle are not directly related. They silicone rubber, and (c) superhydrophobic silicone rubber [124].
established a relation between shear stress of ice detachment
5.7 LEAKAGE CURRENT AND FLASHOVER
and contact angle hysteresis and concluded that with increase
VOLTAGE
in contact angle hysteresis, shear stress of ice detachment
increases. A similar relation between contact angle, contact The flow of leakage current along the insulator surface in
angle hysteresis and ice adhesion strength was reported in contaminated and freezing conditions is one of the major
[126]. Furthermore, it was reported in [76], [77] that water problems leading to flashovers and power outages. Different
condensation on a sample surface in humid environments preventative techniques are used to minimize the flow of
leads to an increase in ice adhesion strength of leakage current and improve the performance of outdoor
superhydrophobic surfaces. Varanasi et al. [83] studied the insulators in contaminated and freezing environments [8, 33,
anti-icing behavior of superhydrophobic surfaces in the case 132]. Due to the self-cleaning, non-wetting and icephobic
of frost formation and reported an increase in ice adhesion properties of superhydrophobic coatings, they are considered
strength due to the frost formation irrespectively of surface good candidates for reducing the risk of flashover on
roughness. Increased ice adhesion on fluoropolymer surfaces contaminated and ice-covered insulators. The surface leakage
due to the condensation of water from atmospheric humidity current of superhydrophobic coated and uncoated glass string
in the surface rough structure was also reported [77]. Other insulators has been investigated under icing conditions [52].
studies on the anti-icing performance of superhydrophobic Average leakage current magnitude was reported to be 38.6%
surfaces have reported similar results [37, 49, 76, 80, 126– lower for superhydrophobic glass insulators than for uncoated
131]. These findings suggest that although superhydrophobic insulators. The decrease in leakage current magnitude of
coatings have good stability (delayed freezing time, low superhydrophobic insulators may be due to the absence of a
adhesion strength) against icing under certain conditions, their uniform ice layer on the insulator surface. Furthermore,
use as universal anti-icing coatings may be limited in humid leakage current distortion was found to be less for
conditions. Furthermore, their anti-icing performance superhydrophobic insulators than uncoated ones. This may be
degrades after a certain number of icing/de-icing cycles. due to the presence of partial arcs (dry band arcing) on the
surface of uncoated insulators. Flashover voltage and electric
field distribution along water droplets on superhydrophobic
silicone rubber surfaces was studied in [51]. Simulation results
showed that superhydrophobic surfaces have better electric
field shielding than ordinary silicone rubber surfaces. The
effect of contact angle on electric field distribution was
demonstrated that as the contact angle was increased from 90°
to 150° the concentration of electric field at the triple junction
decreased. The electric field enhancement factor (Emax/Eavg)
reduced from 5.0 to 2.6 when the contact angle increased from
90° to 150°. This reduction in electric field enhancement
factor results in a decrease of corona discharge, partial arcs
and flashover. Experimental results showed an increase in
flashover voltage for superhydrophobic surfaces, confirming
the simulation results. Furthermore, increasing the droplet
volume resulted in a reduction of flashover voltage for both
superhydrophobic and hydrophobic surfaces [51]. Numerical
simulations were performed to investigate the motion of water
Figure 6. Ice accretion on hydrophobic and superhydrophobic insulators
[123]. droplets under the influence of applied electric field on a
superhydrophobic surface [133]. It was concluded that a water between them [135]. Due to the Wenzel wetting mode, more
droplet moves on a superhydrophobic surface under the ice is accreted on these surfaces in case of freezing rain [79]. It
influence of applied electric field while it stretches or deforms can be concluded that in an environment where high humidity
in the presence of a hydrophobic or hydrophilic surface. In the and temperatures near freezing point are expected, anti-icing
presence of an external electric field, charge accumulates properties of superhydrophobic coatings may be suppressed
inside the body of a water droplet resulting in an electrostatic and may result in failure of the system. In such conditions, it is
force. By increasing the external electric field magnitude, a likely that smooth surfaces may perform better than rough
water droplet cannot sustain the increasing electrostatic force surfaces [131]. Surfaces with both micro and nano surface
resulting in either deformation or motion. Due to the low roughness have demonstrated better icing performance under
contact area between water droplet and superhydrophobic condensation. However, their mechanically durability is
surface, the water droplet begins moving in the direction questionable and needs further investigation [136]. These
parallel to the applied electric field due to the imbalance of studies raise doubt on the application of superhydrophobic
Maxwell stress [134]. A water droplet on a superhydrophobic coatings in humid and freezing environments.
surface absorbs contaminants and moves in the presence of
electric field. This water droplet movement is responsible for
the self-cleaning and reduction in flashover voltage of 6 TEST METHODS FOR
superhydrophobic coatings. Existing literature suggests that a SUPERHYDROPHOBIC COATINGS
superhydrophobic coating can be a good candidate for EVALUATION
improving the flashover performance of contaminated and ice-
covered insulators. However, further research is needed to Evaluating the long-term performance of
fully understand the flashover mechanism of superhydrophobic coating in outdoor conditions is
superhydrophobic insulators. important to determine their durability. Outdoor insulators
are subjected to various types of stresses during service
5.8 SURFACE CONDUCTANCE conditions and it is important to check the durability of
superhydrophobic coating against those stresses. A three-
Surface conductance of an insulator is the ratio of the current tier approach is proposed in [19, 137] for evaluating the
flowing along the insulator surface and the applied voltage. performance of advanced coatings, as shown in Figure 8.
Surface conductance measurement can be used to monitor the
contamination level on the insulator surface. In humid Tier 1: Small scale testing on coated samples by applying
conditions, when the temperature suddenly drops below dew a single stress.
point, a thick water layer forms on the insulator surface Tier 2: Tier 2 involves laboratory testing of realistic
resulting in a flow of leakage current, and dry band formation samples of conductors or insulators by applying a specific
which may lead to flashover. The performance of number of stresses.
superhydrophobic coatings under humid conditions was Tier 3: Tier 3 involves field demonstration at utility
investigated in [54]. In this study the relative humidity inside stages. In this case real samples are exposed to field
the chamber was kept constant at 95% and temperature was conditions for an extended period of time (e.g. one year).
suddenly reduced from 35 °C to 10°C. The test specimens
were subjected to high electric field stress (4 kV/cm) and
leakage current was monitored. It was observed that most of
the superhydrophobic samples failed the condensation test and
showed short life span. However, the hydrophilic samples
showed better results. A relation between surface roughness
and durability was found such that samples with high surface
roughness were observed to fail earlier than those with low
surface roughness. Due to the temperature difference between
cold substrate and ambient air, the local pressure gradient rises
in the vicinity of the solid substrate resulting in the
condensation of water content in the air on the insulating
surface. It should be noted that the surface was covered with a
homogenous condensed moisture layer attenuating surface
wettability. Experiments conducted on samples of various
Figure 8. Three-tier approach for testing of functional specifications [137].
surface roughness showed that an increase in surface
roughness resulted in poor performance under condensation In this section existing test methods for
[131]. Ice adhesion strength was reported to be twice as much superhydrophobic coatings are reviewed and new tests are
after condensation as compared to dry samples. Furthermore, recommended to evaluate the performance of
the freezing time was also reduced. These results could be superhydrophobic coatings.
explained by the condensation of water droplets inside the
surface rough structure resulting in Wenzel wetting mode. 6.1 ARTIFICIAL CONTAMINATION METHODS
Indeed, it was observed that water droplets placed on the Artificial contamination methods are used to evaluate the
surface not only rest on the surface asperities but also intrude performance of outdoor insulators in laboratory. Artificial
pollution tests on high voltage insulators used on AC systems 6.2 CONDENSATION TEST
are proposed in IEC 60507 [138]. IEC 60507 proposes two
In the presence of high relative humidity (>90%), low wind
methods for testing high voltage outdoor insulators based on
speed and sudden variation in ambient temperature, the
insulator design, material and available laboratory facilities:
possibility of dew formation is high [9]. The moisture
the salt fog method in which the insulator is exposed to
contained in the surrounding air condenses on the insulator
defined levels of ambient pollution, and the solid layer method
surface forming a thin wet layer having a homogenous
in which a uniform pollution layer is applied on the insulator
structure. J. Wu and A. Schnettler [54] proposed a
surface. These two methods are commonly used to
condensation test for superhydrophobic coatings to evaluate
characterize the pollution performance of glass and porcelain
their performance under high humidity and changing
insulators. The salt fog method is applicable to all types of
temperatures. In this study, the temperature inside the chamber
insulators because the pollution is not physically deposited on
was varied between 35 °C and 10 °C once an hour and relative
the insulator surface. Due to the hydrophobic nature of
humidity was kept constant at 95%. An electric field stress of
polymeric insulators, the solid layer method cannot be applied
4 kV/cm was applied to the specimens and leakage current
to its surface because it resists the formation of a uniform
was monitored. When the leakage current magnitude crossed 5
layer. Therefore, a modified solid layer method was proposed
mA, the test was interrupted and the sample was considered to
in [139] for polymeric insulators. The modified solid layer
have failed the test. The time to failure was also calculated for
method involves an additional step consisting in pre-
statistical analysis. A test specimen under condensation is
conditioning the insulator surface with dry kaolin or
shown in Figure 10. A Peltier cooling stage can also be used to
kieselguhr and adding a wetting agent in the pollution
perform the condensation test on small specimens as proposed
suspension. A flow chart of the modified solid layer method is
in [131]. The condensation test can be used to evaluate the
shown in Figure 9 [140]. Superhydrophobic coatings have a
performance of superhydrophobic coatings in humid and cold
contact angle of more than 150o and are highly water resistant.
climate regions.
It is a real challenge to apply a uniform pollution layer on the
surface of superhydrophobic coated insulators. The
applicability of the modified solid layer method depends on
the loss of surface hydrophobicity of the superhydrophobic
coating. It would be interesting to perform the pre-
conditioning with dry kaolin or kieselguhr on
superhydrophobic coatings. The validity of pre-conditioning
also depends on the hydrophobic recovery property of the
superhydrophobic coating. For instance, in the case of silicone
rubber, the surface recovers its hydrophobicity after the
application of the pollution layer. The loss and recovery of
superhydrophobicity needs to be investigated before proposing
a suitable method for pollution application.
Figure 10. Test specimen under condensation [54].
6.3 ROTATING WHEEL DIPPING TEST (RWDT)

RWDT is generally used to evaluate the performance of
outdoor insulators in the presence of moderate electric field
stress in combination with heavy pollution. Surface
degradation due to pollution accumulation and electric field
stress is investigated using RWDT. The test samples are
subjected to electric field stress between 0.2 kV/cm to 0.8
kV/cm and to a NaCl solution of high conductivity (0.5-5
mS/cm). Each test cycle is divided into four stages with each
stage lasting for one minute. Initially, the sample is fully
dipped in the NaCl solution then the sample is shifted by 90°
so that water drops can drip from the lower edge. In the third
stage, the sample is energized with AC voltage and the
leakage current is measured. A decrease in surface wetting is
indicated by an increase in peak value of the leakage current.
The test is continued until a continuous pollution layer is
formed on the specimen surface. Further detail about RWDT
can be found in [141]. Figure 11 shows the test setup for
RWDT. Although RWDT is designed for polymeric
Figure 9. Modified solid layer method for pollution application on polymeric
insulators [140].
insulators, it can be used for superhydrophobic coatings in the
same manner with certain adjustment to the applied electric 6.5 DRY ARCING TEST
field stress depending on the specimen dimension. The dry arcing test is similar to that of inclined plane test
except that this test gives faster results about the resistance of
a coating material exposed to low current discharges. A high
voltage low current (10-40 mA) discharge is ignited close the
insulator surface between two needle electrodes. This
discharge is similar to the dry band arcing. It generally occurs
in service conditions and causes the insulator material to heat
up and degrade. This results in the thermal decomposition of
the material and the loss of surface hydrophobicity. The
resistance of a material (coating) to dry band arcing is
evaluated by the time it takes to allow a conducting path on its
surface. The automated testing device (Figure 13)
recommended in IEC 61621 [145] is used to perform the test.
The test is stopped as soon as the arc enters the coating. This
Figure 11. Test setup for RWDT [54].
test can be used to assess the resistance to dry band arcing of
6.4 INCLINED PLANE TEST the superhydrophobic coating. A schematic diagram of the dry
arcing test is shown in Figure 14.
Inclined plane testing is a well-established testing technique
to evaluate the tracking and erosion resistance of coatings
without considering surface hydrophobicity [142]. The
detailed procedure of the inclined plane test can be found in
ASTM D2303 [143] or IEC 60587 [144]. The test sample is
placed at an inclination angle of 45° and voltage is applied
through clamp electrodes. An electrolyte solution (mixture of
salt and wetting agent) is streamed along the sample at a
constant rate of 0.075 ml/min between the two electrodes.
There are standard procedures to perform the test: a standard
voltage method in which the test specimen is energized at a
constant voltage for the test duration of 6 hours, and a
stepwise voltage method in which the applied voltage is
increased every hour by 250 V as the test is continued for 4
hours. Although the inclined plane testing has been
extensively used to evaluate the tracking and erosion
resistance of polymeric insulators, no literature was found on
the inclined plane testing of superhydrophobic coatings. It is
recommended that a lower voltage should be used for Figure 13. Test setup for dry arcing test [146].
superhydrophobic coatings due to the smaller coating
thickness. Figure 12 shows the schematic diagram of the test
setup and sample configuration for the inclined plane test.
Figure 14. Schematic diagram of the dry arcing test [146].
6.6 CORONA RESISTANCE TEST

Ageing and degradation of polymeric insulators due to
Figure 12. Test setup and sample configuration for inclined plane testing corona have been extensively investigated in the literature.
[143].
Due to corona discharge, a mixture of radiation and species 6.7 WATER IMMERSION TEST
(ions, ozone, electrons, UV, etc.) is generated in the vicinity of Previous literature suggests that the surface properties
insulator, resulting in chalking, oxidation and loss of surface of superhydrophobic coatings change when it has been in
hydrophobicity [147]. Corona exposure is considered an contact with water for longer duration. The influence of
important factor in evaluating the long term performance of water immersion on the contact angle and contact angle
superhydrophobic coatings. The UV light associated with hysteresis have been reported in [38], [48], [98], [100].
corona has a shorter wavelength than sunlight and may The superhydrophobic coated samples were immersed in
severely age the coating. According to the authors, no standard water of varying conductivity for 500 h at room
corona exposure test has been developed for superhydrophobic temperature (25 °C) in [38]. Contact angle and contact
coatings till now. In most of the available literature, the corona angle hysteresis were measured initially after 15 min, then
test setup proposed by CIGRE WG D1.14 [148] has been after 120h and finally after the test was stopped. In [98],
used. Ma et al [149] proposed a corona ageing setup based on however, the samples were placed in tap water with
the recommendation of CIGRE WG D1.14 to evaluate the conductivity of 240 μS/cm at room temperature for 10
resistance of polymeric insulators to corona and ozone. Tests days. After that, the test specimens were removed from
were carried out in a glass chamber under controlled the water and dried in open air for 24 h. Contact angle
atmosphere. During the experiment, chamber was was measured every 24 h for 11 days to check the
continuously ventilated to control humidity, ozone level recovery of superhydrophobicity after water immersion.
and remove the by-products of gaseous decomposition. In the available literature, no standard procedure was
Dry air was flown in the chamber at a continuous rate of 5 followed for the water immersion tests. Therefore, further
l/min and the temperature was kept constant at 20±2 °C. A tests are needed to standardize water conductivity,
schematic diagram of the corona test setup is shown in immersion time and recovery time for the water
Figure 15. The test specimen was placed on a metallic immersion test.
ground electrode and the corona electrode consisted of a
circular metallic disc and 31 stainless steel sewing needles 6.8 ICE ADHESION TESTS
sticking out. The purpose of this corona electrode was to As mentioned earlier, ice and snow adheres to solid
ensure homogenous electric field distribution in the surfaces due to the presence of electrostatic and Vander
vicinity of the test sample. Electrode dimension and Waals forces, hydrogen bonding, liquid like layer and
configuration is shown in Figure 16. mechanical interlocking. It is pertinent to find suitable
test and techniques to calculate the strength of ice
adhesion to a solid surface. The most commonly test
method for finding ice adhesion strengths are the pulling
test [80], centrifugal chamber test [118], sliding weight
method [150], ice push off test [128, 151] and conductor
ice pull off test [19, 105]. Some of these test methods are
described below:
Pulling Test:
In this test, ice is pulled mechanically from the
surface and the force required to detach the ice is
calculated. The ice is grown in a mold made of
thermocoal. A hole is drilled through the center of
thermocoal block and sample is attached to one end. De -
Figure 15 Test setup for corona exposure [149] ionized water is poured into the mold and the setup is kept
inside refrigerator for 12 h at -20 °C. The ice block is
detached from the surface through a pulley connected to a
spring balance at cold room temperature (-12 °C). The
following equations are used to calculate the ice adhesion
force[80]:
(4)
(5)
where and are, the force required to detach ice block

and the surface area of the ice in contact with sample
respectively. A schematic diagram showing the formation
Figure 16. Corona electrode arrangement [149]. of ice block for the pulling test is shown in Figure 17.
Figure 18. Multi-finger scratch/Mar tester [154].
Abrasion Test:
The abrasion resistance of coating is measured using Taber
Rotary Abraser according to ASTM D4060 [155]. The test
specimen is mounted on a rotating turntable and is subjected
to wear by two abrasive wheels. The wheels produce abrasion
Figure 17. Schematic of ice block formation [80].
marks and produce a circular path pattern. The abrasion
Centrifugal Chamber Method: resistance of coating is evaluated from the number of turntable
For ice adhesion strength measurement, a centrifugal test set revolutions required to completely remove the coating from
up was designed and developed in CIGELE laboratory [76]. In the sample. A picture of Taber 5151 Abraser is shown in
this method, ice is first accumulated on the sample and Figure 19.
mounted at one end of an aluminum beam while a counter
weight is attached to the other side of the beam. The
aluminum beam is fixed in a climate chamber where
temperature is maintained at -10 °C. It is assumed that the ice
adhesion strength is equal to the centrifugal force at the instant
of ice detachment. The following equations are used to
calculate the shear stress of ice detachment:
(6)
(7)
where , , and are the ice mass, radius of aluminum beam
and rotational speed ( ) respectively. Figure 19. Taber 5151 Abraser [155].
6.9 MECHANICAL WEAR AND TEAR TESTING
Due to mechanical wear and tear on superhydrophobic 7 CONCLUSION
coatings, their non-wettability may decrease leading to Performance of superhydrophobic coatings in polluted and
increased water sticking. It is important to measure the freezing environments has been reviewed.
resistance of superhydrophobic coatings to mechanical wear Superhydrophobic/icephobic coatings for outdoor insulators
and tear in order to characterize their surface wettability [152]. seem promising in reducing the risk of ice accretion and
The commonly used methods to test the mechanical wear and pollution build up. However, this has to be further verified
tear of superhydrophobic coatings on insulators are the scratch from experiments. In particular, this review suggests the need
test and the abrasion resistance test. for standardized tests and procedure to evaluate the long term
Scratch Test: durability of superhydrophobic coatings in outdoor
The scratching, marring, and other physical damage of environments. Furthermore, extensive laboratory tests are
superhydrophobic coatings is evaluated using Multi-Finger required to evaluate the ageing and degradation of
Scratch Tester in accordance with ASTM D5178 [153]. The superhydrophobic coatings in harsh environments.
test specimen is secured underneath five independent spline- Based on the literature review, it is concluded that more
shaft fingers to a pneumatically driven platform. Each spline- work is needed to characterize the electrical performance
shaft finger is loaded with a different weight. A constant (leakage current, flashover voltage, surface resistance, ageing
vertical load is exerted on the coating and the platform is and degradation, dry band arcing resistance,) of
moved to produce scratches on the surface. The depth of the superhydrophobic coatings for outdoor insulation. Some
scratches on the coating after test is used to evaluate the recommendations for electrical tests methods are also
scratch resistance. A picture of the multi-finger scratch/Mar discussed which might be useful in performance
tester is shown in Figure 18. characterization of these advanced coatings.
8 REFERENCES
[1] J. Yli-Hannuksela, “The transmission line cost calculation,” conductors,” IEEE Trans. Power Deliv., Vol. 22, No. 1, pp.
MSc Thesis, Univ. Appl. Sci. Finl., 2011. 565–574, 2007.
[2] M. Farzaneh, Atmospheric Icing of Power Networks, Springer [22] C. Guanghui, S. Sheng, L. Mingming, and C. Daifeng,
Science & Business Media, 2008. “Novel deicing approach of overhead bundled conductors of
[3] I. Ramirez, R. Hernandez, and G. Montoya, “Diagnostics for EHV transmission systems,” IEEE Trans. Power Deliv., Vol.
nonceramic insulators in harsh environments,” IEEE Electr. 24, No. 3, pp. 1745–1747, 2009.
Insul. Mag., Vol. 25, No. 6, pp. 28-33, 2009. [23] G. Zhang, S. Chen, S. Xu, B. Luo, and Y. Zhao, “Application
[4] M. Farzaneh, “Insulator flashover under icing conditions,” and research of laser de-icing in power system,” in Power
IEEE Trans. Dielectr. Electr. Insul., Vol. 21, No. 5, pp. Modulator and High Voltage Conference (IPMHVC), 2010
1997–2011, 2014. IEEE International, 2010, pp. 470–473.
[5] M. T. Gençoğlu and M. Cebeci, “The pollution flashover on [24] J. Zhao, R. Guo, L. Cao, and F. Zhang, “Improvement of
high voltage insulators,” Electr. Power Syst. Res., Vol. 78, LineROVer: A mobile robot for de-icing of transmission
No. 11, pp. 1914–1921, 2008. lines,” in Applied Robotics for the Power Industry (CARPI),
[6] R. Hackam, “Outdoor HV composite polymeric insulators,” 2010 1st International Conference on, pp. 1–4, 2010.
IEEE Trans. Dielectr. Electr. Insul., Vol. 6, No. 5, pp. 557– [25] R. Guo, F. Zhang, L. Cao, and L. Zhong, “A mobile robot
585, 1999. prototype for inspection of overhead bundled conductors,”
[7] H. Boehme and F. Obenaus, “Pollution Flashover Tests on 10th IEEE Int'l. Conf. Control and Automation (ICCA), pp.
Insulators in the Laboratory and Systems and the Model 1419–1422, 2013.
Concept of Creepage–path–flashover,” CIGRE Pap., no. 7, [26] M. Farzaneh, A. C. Baker, R. A. Bernstorf, J. T. Burnhan, E.
pp. 1–15, 1969. A. Cherney, W. A. Chisholm, I. Fofana, R. S. Gorur, T.
[8] M. Farzaneh and W. A. Chisholm, “50 years in icing Grisham, I. Gutman, and L. Rolfseng, “Selection of Line
performance of outdoor insulators,” IEEE Electr. Insul. Mag., Insulators With Respect to Ice and Snow—Part II: Selection
Vol. 30, No. 1, pp. 14–24, 2014. Methods and Mitigation Options,” IEEE Trans. Power Deliv.,
[9] M. Farzaneh and W. A. Chisholm, Insulators for Icing and Vol. 22, No. 4, pp. 2297–2304, 2007.
Polluted Environments, Vol. 47, John Wiley & Sons, 2009. [27] Q. Hu, L. Shu, X. Jiang, C. Sun, Z. Zhang, and J. Hu,
[10] J. S. Forrest, “The performance of high -voltage insulators in “Effects of shed configuration on AC flashover performance
polluted atmospheres,” IEEE Winter Power Mtg, pp. 172- of ice-covered composite long-rod insulators,” IEEE Trans.
187, 1969. Dielectr. Electr. Insul., Vol. 19, No. 1, pp. 200-208, 2012.
[11] W. A. Chisholm, Y. T. Tam, C. C. Erven, and T. O. Melo, [28] Z. Xu, Z. Jia, Z. Li, X. Wei, Z. Guan, M. MacAlpine, Y.
“500 kV Insulator Performance under Contamination Ice Fog Zhao and Y. Li, “Anti-icing performance of RTV coatings on
and Rising Temperature—Operating Experience and Field porcelain insulators by controlling the leakage current,”
Studies.” IEEE Power Engineering Summer Meeting, pp. 1-8, IEEE Trans. Dielectr. Electr. Insul., Vol. 18, No. 3, pp. 760-
1993. 766, 2011.
[12] W. Henson, R. Stewart, and B. Kochtubajda, “On the [29] G. Momen and M. Farzaneh, “Survey of micro/nano filler use
precipitation and related features of the 1998 ice storm in the to improve silicone rubber for outdoor insulators,” Rev. Adv.
Montréal area,” Atmospheric Res., Vol. 83, No. 1, pp. 36–54, Mater. Sci, Vol. 27, No. 1, pp. 1–13, 2011.
2007. [30] Z. Li, X. Liang, Y. Zhou, J. Tang, J. Cui, and Y. Liu,
[13] K. F. Jones, “Ice storms in the St. Lawrence Valley region,” “Influence of temperature on the hydrophobicity of silicone
DTIC Document, 2003. rubber surfaces [outdoor insulator applications],” IEEE
[14] X. Jiang, L. Shu, W. Sima, S. Xie, J. Hu, and Z. Zhang, Electr. Insul. Dielectr. Phenomena (CEIDP), pp. 679–682,
“Chinese transmission lines’ icing characteristics and 2004.
analysis of severe ice accidents,” Int. J. Offshore Polar Eng., [31] F. Zhao, F. Z. Zhang, H.L. Yang, Z. C. Guan, L. M. Wang,
vol. 14, no. 3, 2004. H. Wen and Y. Ma, “Influence factors of hydrophobicity and
[15] Q. HUANG, J. WANG, and M. OU, “Analysis on Accidents DC flashover performance for composite insulators,” Proc.
Caused by Icing Damage in Hunan Power Grid in 2005 and Chinese Sos. Electr. Eng. (CSEE), Vol. 1, p. 19, 2009 (In
Its Countermeasures,” Power Syst. Technol., vol. 24, p. 3, Chinese).
2005. [32] S.-H. Kim, E. A. Cherney, and R. Hackam, “Hydrophobic
[16] G. Andersson et al., “Causes of the 2003 major grid behavior of insulators coated with RTV silicone rubber,”
blackouts in North America and Europe, and recommended IEEE Trans. Electr. Insul., Vol. 27, No. 3, pp. 610–622,
means to improve system dynamic performance,” IEEE 1992.
Trans. Power Syst., Vol. 20, No. 4, pp. 1922–1928, 2005. [33] M. Farzaneh and W. A. Chisholm, “Mitigation Options for
[17] M. Kawai, “AC Flashover tests at project UHV on ice-coated Improved Performance in Pollution Conditions,” Insul. Icing
insulators,” IEEE Trans. Power Appar. Syst., no. 8, pp. Polluted Environ., pp. 291–361, 2010.
1800–1804, 1970. [34] W. Liao, Z. Jia, Z. Guan, L. Wang, J. Yang, J. Fan, Z. Su and
[18] M. Farzaneh and J. Kiernicki, “Flashover problems caused by J. Zhou, “Reducing ice accumulation on insulators by
ice build up on insulators,” IEEE Electr. Insul. Mag., Vol. applying semiconducting RTV silicone coating,” IEEE Trans.
11, No. 2, pp. 5–17, 1995. Dielectr. Electr. Insul., Vol. 14, No. 6, pp. 1446-1454, 2007.
[19] M. Farzaneh (Convener), H. Gauthier, G. Castellana, C. [35] G. Momen and M. Farzaneh, “Study of ice accumulation on
Engelbrecht, A. Eliasson, M. S. Fikke, C. Greyling, I. nanocomposite semiconducting coatings,” IEEE Electr. Insul.
Gutman, T. Hayashi, F. Jakl, Z. Jia, H. Lugschitz, V. Dielectr. Phenomena (CEIDP), pp. 1–4, 2010.
Shkaptsov, L. Riera, N. Sugawara, N. Vaga and B. Warieng, [36] B. Bhushan, Y. C. Jung, and K. Koch, “Self-Cleaning
“Coatings for Protecting Overhead Power Network Efficiency of Artificial Superhydrophobic Surfaces,”
Equipment in Winter Conditions.” CIGRE Working Group Langmuir, Vol. 25, No. 5, pp. 3240–3248, 2009.
B2.44, 2015. [37] R. Menini, Z. Ghalmi, and M. Farzaneh, “Highly resistant
[20] Q. Li, Z. Fan, Q. Wu, J. Gao, Z. SU, and W. ZHOU, icephobic coatings on aluminum alloys,” Cold Reg. Sci.
“Investigation of Ice-Covered Transmission Lines and Technol., Vol. 65, No. 1, pp. 65–69, 2011.
Analysis on Transmission Line Failures Caused by Ice- [38] Z. Yan, X. Liang, Y. Gao, and Y. Liu, “Aging and self-
Coating in China ,” Power Syst. Technol., Vol. 9, pp. 33–36, healing properties of superhydrophobic silicone rubber,”
2008. IEEE Trans. Dielectr. Electr. Insul., Vol. 23, No. 6, pp.
[21] Z. Péter, M. Farzaneh, and L. I. Kiss, “Assessment of the 3531–3538, 2016.
current intensity for preventing ice accretion on overhead [39] M. Nosonovsky and B. Bhushan, “Superhydrophobic
surfaces and emerging applications: non-adhesion, energy,
green engineering,” Curr. Opin. Colloid Interface Sci., Vol. [61] A. B. D. Cassie, “Contact angles,” Discuss. Faraday Soc.,
14, No. 4, pp. 270–280, 2009. Vol. 3, pp. 11–16, 1948.
[40] M. Nosonovsky and B. Bhushan, “Roughness-induced [62] A. B. D. Cassie and S. Baxter, “Wettability of porous
superhydrophobicity: a way to design non-adhesive surfaces,” Trans. Faraday Soc., Vol. 40, pp. 546–551, 1944.
surfaces,” J. Phys. Condens. Matter, Vol. 20, No. 22, p. [63] R. E. Johnson and R. H. Dettre, “Contact Angle Hysteresis,”
225009, 2008. in Contact Angle, Wettability, and Adhesion,” American
[41] M. Nosonovsky and B. Bhushan, Multiscale Dissipative Chemical Society, Vol. 43, Vol., pp. 112–135, 1964.
Mechanisms and Hierarchical Surfaces: Friction, [64] Y. Y. Yan, N. Gao, and W. Barthlott, “Mimicking natural
Superhydrophobicity, and Biomimetics, Springer Science & superhydrophobic surfaces and grasping the wetting process:
Business Media, 2008. A review on recent progress in preparing superhydrophobic
[42] B. Bhushan and Y. C. Jung, “Wetting, adhesion and friction surfaces,” Adv. Colloid Interface Sci., Vol. 169, No. 2, pp.
of superhydrophobic and hydrophilic leaves and fabricated 80–105, 2011.
micro/nanopatterned surfaces,” J. Phys. Condens. Matter, [65] J. Jopp, H. Grüll, and R. Yerushalmi-Rozen, “Wetting
Vol. 20, No. 22, p. 225010, 2008. behavior of water droplets on hydrophobic microtextures of
[43] X. Gao and L. Jiang, “Biophysics: water-repellent legs of comparable size,” Langmuir, Vol. 20, No. 23, pp. 10015–
water striders,” Nature, Vol. 432, No. 7013, p. 36, 2004. 10019, 2004.
[44] P. Wagner, R. Fürstner, W. Barthlott, and C. Neinhuis, [66] R. Jafari, S. Asadollahi, and M. Farzaneh, “Applications of
“Quantitative assessment to the structural basis of water plasma technology in development of superhydrophobic
repellency in natural and technical surfaces,” J. Exp. Bot., surfaces,” Plasma Chem. Plasma Process., Vol. 33, No. 1, pp.
Vol. 54, No. 385, pp. 1295–1303, 2003. 177–200, 2013.
[45] K. Koch, B. Bhushan, and W. Barthlott, “Diversity of [67] X. Ye, M. Zhou, D. Jiang, J. Li, and L. Cai, “Transition of
structure, morphology and wetting of plant surfaces,” Soft super-hydrophobic states of droplet on rough surface,” J.
Matter, Vol. 4, No. 10, pp. 1943–1963, 2008. Cent. South Univ. Technol., Vol. 17, No. 3, pp. 554–559,
[46] J. Drelich and A. Marmur, “Physics and applications of 2010.
superhydrophobic and superhydrophilic surfaces and [68] P. S. Brown, A. Berson, E. L. Talbot, T. J. Wood, W. C. E.
coatings,” Surf. Innov., Vol. 2, No. 4, pp. 211–227, 2014. Schofield, C. D. Bain and J. P. S Badyal, “Impact of picolitre
[47] G. Momen, M. Farzaneh, and R. Jafari, “Wettability droplets on superhydrophobic surfaces with ultra-low
behaviour of RTV silicone rubber coated on nanostructured spreading ratios,” Langmuir, Vol. 27, pp. 13897-13903,
aluminium surface,” Appl. Surf. Sci., Vol. 257, No. 15, pp. 2011.
6489–6493, 2011. [69] C. Ishino and K. Okumura, “Wetting transitions on textured
[48] G. Momen and M. Farzaneh, “A ZnO-based nanocomposite hydrophilic surfaces,” Eur. Phys. J. E, Vol. 25, No. 4, pp.
coating with ultra water repellent properties,” Appl. Surf. 415–424, Apr. 2008.
Sci., Vol. 258, No. 15, pp. 5723–5728, 2012. [70] X.-M. Li, D. Reinhoudt, and M. Crego-Calama, “What do we
[49] L. F. Mobarakeh, R. Jafari, and M. Farzaneh, “The ice need for a superhydrophobic surface? A review on the recent
repellency of plasma polymerized hexamethyldisiloxane progress in the preparation of superhydrophobic surfaces,”
coating,” Appl. Surf. Sci., Vol. 284, pp. 459–463, 2013. Chem. Soc. Rev., Vol. 36, No. 8, pp. 1350–1368, 2007.
[50] R. Liao et al., “Ice accretion on superhydrophobic insulators [71] J. Bico, C. Tordeux, and D. Quéré, “Rough wetting,” EPL
under freezing condition,” Cold Reg. Sci. Technol., Vol. 112, Europhys. Lett., Vol. 55, No. 2, p. 214, 2001.
pp. 87–94, 2015. [72] D. Quéré, “Wetting and roughness,” Annual Rev. Mater.
[51] H. Jin et al., “Flashover characteristics of discrete water Res., Vol. 38, pp. 71–99, 2008.
droplets on the surface of super-hydrophobic silicone [73] A. Lafuma and D. Quéré, “Superhydrophobic states,” Nat.
rubber,” IEEE Trans. Dielectr. Electr. Insul., Vol. 21, No. 4, Mater., Vol. 2, No. 7, pp. 457–460, 2003.
pp. 1718–1725, 2014. [74] P. Tourkine, M. Le Merrer, and D. Quéré, “Delayed freezing
[52] G. Yiyu, L. Jian, Z. Yushun, H. Jianlin, and J. Xingliang, on water repellent materials,” Langmuir, Vol. 25, No. 13, pp.
“Analyze to Surface Leakage Currents on Super-hydrophobic 7214–7216, 2009.
Insulators under Icing Condition.” 14th International [75] S. Jung, M. Dorrestijn, D. Raps, A. Das, C. M. Megaridis,
Workshop on Atmospheric Icing of Structures, Chongqing, and D. Poulikakos, “Are superhydrophobic surfaces best for
China, pp. 1-4, 2011. icephobicity?,” Langmuir, Vol. 27, No. 6, pp. 3059–3066,
[53] I. Ramalla, R. K. Gupta, and K. Bansal, “Effect on 2011.
superhydrophobic surfaces on electrical porcelain insulator, [76] S. Farhadi, M. Farzaneh, and S. A. Kulinich, “Anti-icing
improved technique at polluted areas for longer life and performance of superhydrophobic surfaces,” Appl. Surf. Sci.,
reliability,” Int. J. Eng. Technol., Vol. 4, No. 4, p. 509, 2015. Vol. 257, No. 14, pp. 6264–6269, 2011.
[54] J. Wu and A. Schnettler, “Degradation assessment of [77] S. Yang, Q. Xia, L. Zhu, J. Xue, Q. Wang, and Q. Chen,
nanostructured superhydrophobic insulating surfaces using “Research on the icephobic properties of fluoropolymer-
multi-stress methods,” IEEE Trans. Dielectr. Electr. Insul., based materials,” Appl. Surf. Sci., Vol. 257, No. 11, pp.
Vol. 15, No. 1, pp. 73-80, 2008. 4956–4962, 2011.
[55] N. J. Shirtcliffe, G. McHale, S. Atherton, and M. I. Newton, [78] H. Sojoudi, M. Wang, N. D. Boscher, G. H. McKinley, and
“An introduction to superhydrophobicity,” Adv. Colloid K. K. Gleason, “Durable and scalable icephobic surfaces:
Interface Sci., Vol. 161, No. 1, pp. 124–138, 2010. similarities and distinctions from superhydrophobic
[56] T. Young, “An Essay on the Cohesion of Fluids,” Philos. surfaces,” Soft Matter, Vol. 12, No. 7, pp. 1938–1963, 2016.
Trans. R. Soc. Lond., Vol. 95, pp. 65–87, 1805. [79] S. A. Kulinich and M. Farzaneh, “How wetting hysteresis
[57] R. Jafari and M. Farzaneh, “Fabrication of superhydrophobic influences ice adhesion strength on superhydrophobic
nanostructured surface on aluminum alloy,” Appl. Phys. surfaces,” Langmuir, Vol. 25, No. 16, pp. 8854–8856, 2009.
Mater. Sci. Process., Vol. 102, No. 1, pp. 195–199, 2011. [80] D. K. Sarkar and M. Farzaneh, “Superhydrophobic coatings
[58] H. Ogihara, T. Katayama, and T. Saji, “One-step with reduced ice adhesion,” J. Adhes. Sci. Technol., Vol. 23,
electrophoretic deposition for the preparation of No. 9, pp. 1215–1237, 2009.
superhydrophobic silica particle/trimethylsiloxysilicate [81] A. Alizadeh, M. Yamada, R. Li, W. Shang, S. Otta, S. Zhong,
composite coatings,” J. Colloid Interface Sci., Vol. 362, No. L. Ge, A. Dhinojwala, K. R. Canway, V. Bahadur and A. J.
2, pp. 560–566, 2011. Vinciquerra, “Dynamics of Ice Nucleation on Water
[59] R. N. Wenzel, “Ind Eng Chem 1936, 28, 988,” Cross Ref Repellent Surfaces,” Langmuir, Vol. 28, No. 6, pp. 3180–
CAS Web Sci. Times Cited, Vol. 1648. 3186, Feb. 2012.
[60] R. N. Wenzel, “Surface Roughness and Contact Angle.,” J. [82] C. Antonini, M. Innocenti, T. Horn, M. Marengo, and A.
Phys. Colloid Chem., Vol. 53, No. 9, pp. 1466–1467, 1949. Amirfazli, “Understanding the effect of superhydrophobic
coatings on energy reduction in anti-icing systems,” Cold [100] Z. Yan, X. Liang, C. Wu, W. Bao, S. Li, and Y. Liu, “Aging
Reg. Sci. Technol., Vol. 67, No. 1, pp. 58–67, 2011. and recovery of superhydrophobic silicone rubber under
[83] K. K. Varanasi, T. Deng, J. D. Smith, M. Hsu, and N. Bhate, electrical and non-electrical stresses,” IEEE Electr. Insul.
“Frost formation and ice adhesion on superhydrophobic Dielectr. Phenomena (CEIDP), pp. 189–192, 2015.
surfaces,” Appl. Phys. Lett., Vol. 97, No. 23, p. 234102, [101] A. G. 12a, “Standard Practice for Operating Fluorescent
2010. Ultraviolet (UV) Lamp Apparatus for Exposure of
[84] J. Chen et al., “Superhydrophobic surfaces cannot reduce ice Nonmetallic Materials,” 2012.
adhesion,” Appl. Phys. Lett., Vol. 101, No. 11, p. 111603, [102] G. ASTM, “155-04a: Standard Practice for Operating Xenon
2012. Arc Light Apparatus for Exposure of Non-metallic
[85] L. Yin, Q. Xia, J. Xue, S. Yang, Q. Wang, and Q. Chen, “In Materials,” ASTM Int. West Conshohocken PA, 2004.
situ investigation of ice formation on surfaces with [103] T. T. Isimjan, T. Wang, and S. Rohani, “A novel method to
representative wettability,” Appl. Surf. Sci., Vol. 256, No. prepare superhydrophobic, UV resistance and anti-corrosion
22, pp. 6764–6769, 2010. steel surface,” Chem. Eng. J., Vol. 210, pp. 182–187, 2012.
[86] M.-F. Wang, N. Raghunathan, and B. Ziaie, “A [104] Y. Xiu, L. Zhu, D. Hess, and C. P. Wong,
nonlithographic top-down electrochemical approach for “Superhydrophobicity and UV stability of
creating hierarchical (micro- nano) superhydrophobic silicon polydimethylsiloxane/polytetrafluoroethylene (PDMS/PTFE)
surfaces,” Langmuir, Vol. 23, No. 5, pp. 2300–2303, 2007. coatings,” in Advanced Packaging Materials: Processes,
[87] S. Srinivasan, V. K. Praveen, R. Philip, and A. Ajayaghosh, Properties and Interface, 11th International Symposium, pp.
“Bioinspired Superhydrophobic Coatings of Carbon 98–103, 2006.
Nanotubes and Linear π Systems Based on the ‘Bottom-up’ [105] K. Chen, K. Gu, S. Qiang, and C. Wang, “Environmental
Self-Assembly Approach,” Angew. Chem., Vol. 120, No. 31, stimuli-responsive self-repairing waterbased
pp. 5834–5838, 2008. superhydrophobic coatings,” RSC Adv., Vol. 7, No. 1, pp.
[88] A. Biswas, I. S. Bayer, A. S. Biris, T. Wang, E. Dervishi, and 543–550, 2017.
F. Faupel, “Advances in top–down and bottom–up surface [106] R. Jafari, G. Momen, and M. Farzaneh, “Durability
nanofabrication: Techniques, applications & future enhancement of icephobic fluoropolymer film,” J. Coat.
prospects,” Adv. Colloid Interface Sci., Vol. 170, No. 1, pp. Technol. Res., Vol. 13, No. 3, pp. 405–412, 2016.
2–27, 2012. [107] Y. Xiu, D. W. Hess, and C. P. Wong, “UV and thermally
[89] T. Ishizaki, J. Hieda, N. Saito, N. Saito, and O. Takai, stable superhydrophobic coatings from sol–gel processing,”
“Corrosion resistance and chemical stability of super- J. Colloid Interface Sci., Vol. 326, No. 2, pp. 465–470, 2008.
hydrophobic film deposited on magnesium alloy AZ31 by [108] S. S. Latthe, H. Imai, V. Ganesan, and A. V. Rao,
microwave plasma-enhanced chemical vapor deposition,” “Superhydrophobic silica films by sol–gel co-precursor
Electrochimica Acta, Vol. 55, No. 23, pp. 7094–7101, 2010. method,” Appl. Surf. Sci., Vol. 256, No. 1, pp. 217–222,
[90] S. Wang, L. Feng, and L. Jiang, “One-Step Solution- 2009.
Immersion Process for the Fabrication of Stable Bionic [109] A. S. Pashinin, V. I. Zolotarevskii, M. R. Kiselev, A. M.
Superhydrophobic Surfaces,” Adv. Mater., Vol. 18, No. 6, Emel’yanenko, and L. B. Boinovich, “Thermal stability of
pp. 767–770, Mar. 2006. superhydrophobic coatings,” Doklady Phys. Chem., Vol. 436,
[91] L. Zhang, H. Chen, J. Sun, and J. Shen, “Layer-by-layer pp. 19–22, 2011.
deposition of poly (diallyldimethylammonium chloride) and [110] Z. Huang, J. Li, F. Wang, X. Yan, and Y. Wei, “Fabrication
sodium silicate multilayers on silica-sphere-coated of superhydrophobic surface with discarded silicone under
substrate—facile method to prepare a superhydrophobic arc exposure,” RSC Adv., Vol. 5, No. 125, pp. 103739–
surface,” Chem. Mater., Vol. 19, No. 4, pp. 948–953, 2007. 103743, 2015.
[92] J. Ji, J. Fu, and J. Shen, “Fabrication of a superhydrophobic [111] F. Wang, T. Shen, C. Li, W. Li, and G. Yan, “Low
surface from the amplified exponential growth of a temperature self-cleaning properties of superhydrophobic
multilayer,” Adv. Mater., Vol. 18, No. 11, pp. 1441–1444, surfaces,” Appl. Surf. Sci., Vol. 317, pp. 1107–1112, 2014.
2006. [112] K. Rykaczewski, S. Anand, S. B. Subramanyam, and K. K.
[93] X. Song, J. Zhai, Y. Wang, and L. Jiang, “Fabrication of Varanasi, “Mechanism of Frost Formation on Lubricant-
superhydrophobic surfaces by self-assembly and their water- Impregnated Surfaces,” Langmuir, Vol. 29, No. 17, pp.
adhesion properties,” J. Phys. Chem. B, Vol. 109, No. 9, pp. 5230–5238, Apr. 2013.
4048–4052, 2005. [113] U. Manna and D. M. Lynn, “Restoration of
[94] M. Ma, R. M. Hill, J. L. Lowery, S. V. Fridrikh, and G. C. Superhydrophobicity in Crushed Polymer Films by
Rutledge, “Electrospun Poly(Styrene-block- Treatment with Water: Self-Healing and Recovery of
dimethylsiloxane) Block Copolymer Fibers Exhibiting Damaged Topographic Features Aided by an Unlikely
Superhydrophobicity,” Langmuir, Vol. 21, No. 12, pp. 5549– Source,” Adv. Mater., Vol. 25, No. 36, pp. 5104–5108, 2013.
5554, 2005. [114] L. Ionov and A. Synytska, “Self-healing superhydrophobic
[95] J. P. Fernández-Blázquez, D. Fell, E. Bonaccurso, and A. Del materials,” Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys., Vol. 14, No. 30, pp.
Campo, “Superhydrophilic and superhydrophobic 10497–10502, 2012.
nanostructured surfaces via plasma treatment,” J. Colloid [115] M. Nosonovsky and B. Bhushan, “Surface self-organization:
Interface Sci., Vol. 357, No. 1, pp. 234–238, 2011. From wear to self-healing in biological and technical
[96] R. V. Lakshmi, T. Bharathidasan, and B. J. Basu, surfaces,” Appl. Surf. Sci., Vol. 256, No. 12, pp. 3982–3987,
“Superhydrophobic sol–gel nanocomposite coatings with 2010.
enhanced hardness,” Appl. Surf. Sci., Vol. 257, No. 24, pp. [116] C.-H. Xue, Z.-D. Zhang, J. Zhang, and S.-T. Jia, “Lasting
10421–10426, 2011. and self-healing superhydrophobic surfaces by coating of
[97] S. L. Sanjay, B. G. Annaso, S. M. Chavan, and S. V. Rajiv, polystyrene/SiO2 nanoparticles and polydimethylsiloxane,”
“Recent progress in preparation of superhydrophobic J. Mater. Chem. A, Vol. 2, No. 36, pp. 15001–15007, 2014.
surfaces: a review,” J. Surf. Eng. Mater. Adv. Technol., Vol., [117] H. Wang, Y. Xue, J. Ding, L. Feng, X. Wang, and T. Lin,
pp. 77-97, 2012. “Durable, self-healing superhydrophobic and
[98] I. Gutman, I. Djurdjevic, J. Seifert, and C. Greyling, superoleophobic surfaces from fluorinated-decyl polyhedral
“Recovery of Hydrophobicity of a New Nano-composite oligomeric silsesquioxane and hydrolyzed fluorinated alkyl
Coating for Ceramic Insulators.” IEEE International silane,” Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. Engl., Vol. 50, No. 48, pp.
Symposium on Electrical Insulation, pp. 48-52, USA, 2012 11433–11436, 2011.
[99] S. A. Seyedmehdi, H. Zhang, and J. Zhu, “Superhydrophobic [118] G. Momen, R. Jafari, and M. Farzaneh, “Ice repellency
RTV silicone rubber insulator coatings,” Appl. Surf. Sci., behaviour of superhydrophobic surfaces: Effects of
Vol. 258, No. 7, pp. 2972–2976, 2012. atmospheric icing conditions and surface roughness,” Appl.
Surf. Sci., Vol. 349, pp. 211–218, 2015.
[119] L. Mishchenko, B. Hatton, V. Bahadur, J. A. Taylor, T. [139] I. Gutman and A. Dernfalk, “Pollution tests for polymeric
Krupenkin, and J. Aizenberg, “Design of Ice-free insulators made of hydrophobicity transfer materials,” IEEE
Nanostructured Surfaces Based on Repulsion of Impacting Trans. Dielectr. Electr. Insul., Vol. 17, No. 2, pp. 384-393,
Water Droplets,” ACS Nano, Vol. 4, No. 12, pp. 7699–7707, 2010.
2010. [140] Arshad, A. Nekahi, S. G. McMeekin, and M. Farzaneh,
[120] S. Chavan, J. Carpenter, M. Nallapaneni, J. Y. Chen, and N. “Flashover Characteristics of Silicone Rubber Sheets under
Miljkovic, “Bulk water freezing dynamics on Various Environmental Conditions,” Energies, Vol. 9, No. 9,
superhydrophobic surfaces,” Appl. Phys. Lett., Vol. 110, No. p. 683, 2016.
4, p. 41604, 2017. [141] IEC TR 62730:2012, "HV polymeric insulators for indoor
[121] M. Farzaneh, F. Jakl, M. P. Arabani, A. J. Eliasson, S. M. and outdoor use tracking and erosion testing by wheel test
Fikke, A. Gallego, A. Haldar, M. Isozaki, R. Lake, L. and 5000h test," Technical report, 2012.
Leblond and G. McDougall, “Systems for prediction and [142] R. S. Gorur, J. Montesinos, L. Varadadesikan, S. Simmons,
monitoring of ice shedding, anti-icing and de-icing for power and M. Shah, “A laboratory test for tracking and erosion
line conductors and ground wires,” Cigre WG. B2.29, 2010. resistance of HV outdoor insulation,” IEEE Trans. Dielectr.
[122] V. F. Petrenko and S. Peng, “Reduction of ice adhesion to Electr. Insul., Vol. 4, No. 6, pp. 767–774, 1997.
metal by using self-assembling monolayers (SAMs),” Can. J. [143] ASTM D2303, “Standard Test Methods for Liquid-
Phys., Vol. 81, No. 1–2, pp. 387–393, 2003. Contaminant, Inclined-Plane Tracking and Erosion of
[123] J. Li, Y. Zhao, J. Hu, L. Shu, and X. Shi, “Anti-icing Insulating Materials.” ASTM International, West
performance of a superhydrophobic PDMS/modified nano- Conshohocken, PA, 2013.
silica hybrid coating for insulators,” J. Adhes. Sci. Technol., [144] IEC 60587:2007, "Electrical insulating materials used under
Vol. 26, No. 4–5, pp. 665–679, 2012. severe ambient conditions - Test methods for evaluating
[124] F. Arianpour and M. Farzaneh, “On hydrophobic and resistance to tracking and erosion," International standard,
icephobic properties of TiO2-doped silicon rubber coatings,” 2007.
International J. Theoretical and Appl. Nanotechnology, Vol. [145] IEC 61621:1997, "Dry, solid insulating materials -
1, pp. 79–85, 2012. Resistance test to high-voltage, low-current arc discharges,"
[125] C. Stenroos, “Properties of icephobic surfaces in different International standard, 1997.
icing conditions,” Master Thesis, Tampere University of [146] S. Ansorge, F. Schmuck, and K. O. Papailiou, “Impact of
Technology, 2015. different fillers and filler treatments on the erosion
[126] S. A. Kulinich and M. Farzaneh, “Ice adhesion on super- suppression mechanism of silicone rubber for use as outdoor
hydrophobic surfaces,” Appl. Surf. Sci., Vol. 255, No. 18, insulation material,” IEEE Trans. Dielectr. Electr. Insul.,
pp. 8153–8157, 2009. Vol. 22, No. 2, pp. 979–988, 2015.
[127] R. Jafari, R. Menini, and M. Farzaneh, “Superhydrophobic [147] J. Kim, M. K. Chaudhury, and M. J. Owen, “Hydrophobicity
and icephobic surfaces prepared by RF-sputtered loss and recovery of silicone HV insulation,” IEEE Trans.
polytetrafluoroethylene coatings,” Appl. Surf. Sci., Vol. 257, Dielectr. Electr. Insul., Vol. 6, No. 5, pp. 695–702, 1999.
No. 5, pp. 1540–1543, 2010. [148] CIGRÉ WG D1.14, “RTV Silicone Rubber Insulator
[128] A. J. Meuler, J. D. Smith, K. K. Varanasi, J. M. Mabry, G. H. Coatings.” CIGRE Technical Brochure #478, 2011.
McKinley, and R. E. Cohen, “Relationships between water [149] B. Ma, J. Andersson, and S. M. Gubanski, “Evaluating
wettability and ice adhesion,” ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces, resistance of polymeric materials for outdoor applications to
Vol. 2, No. 11, pp. 3100–3110, 2010. corona and ozone,” IEEE Trans. Dielectr. Electr. Insul., Vol.
[129] H. Saito, K. Takai, and G. Yamauchi, “Water- and ice- 17, No. 2, 2010.
repellent coatings,” Surf. Coat. Int., Col. 80, No. 4, pp. 168– [150] F. Wang, C. Li, Y. Lv, F. Lv, and Y. Du, “Ice accretion on
171, 1997. superhydrophobic aluminum surfaces under low-temperature
[130] L. Cao, A. K. Jones, V. K. Sikka, J. Wu, and D. Gao, “Anti- conditions,” Cold Reg. Sci. Technol., Vol. 62, No. 1, pp. 29–
Icing Superhydrophobic Coatings,” Langmuir, Vol. 25, No. 33, 2010.
21, pp. 12444–12448, Nov. 2009. [151] C. Wang, W. Zhang, A. Siva, D. Tiea, and K. J. Wynne,
[131] S. A. Kulinich, S. Farhadi, K. Nose, and X. W. Du, “Laboratory test for ice adhesion strength using commercial
“Superhydrophobic surfaces: are they really ice-repellent?,” instrumentation,” Langmuir, Vol. 30, No. 2, pp. 540–547,
Langmuir, Vol. 27, No. 1, pp. 25–29, 2010. 2014.
[132] S. Goto, M. Nakamura, N. Nannyakkara, and T. Taniguchi, [152] T. Verho, C. Bower, P. Andrew, S. Franssila, O. Ikkala, and
“Accurate decision-making for timely washing of substation R. H. Ras, “Mechanically durable superhydrophobic
insulators, based on a pollution model,” Control Eng. Pract., surfaces,” Adv. Mater., Vol. 23, No. 5, pp. 673–678, 2011.
Vol. 5, No. 12, pp. 1683–1689, 1997. [153] ASTM D5178 - 16, “Standard Test Method for Mar
[133] J. Li, Y. Wei, Z. Huang, F. Wang, and X. Yan, “Investigation Resistance of Organic Coatings.” ASTM International, West
of the electric field driven self-propelled motion of water Conshohocken, PA, 2016.
droplets on a super-hydrophobic surface,” IEEE Trans. [154] “Taber Multi-Finger Scratch / Mar Tester (Scratch & Mar) -
Dielectr. Electr. Insul., Vol. 23, No. 5, pp. 3007–3015, 2016. Taber Industries.” http://www.taberindustries.com/multi-
[134] M. Gunji and M. Washizu, “Self-propulsion of a water finger-scratch-mar-tester.
droplet in an electric field,” J. Phys. Appl. Phys., Vol. 38, [155] ASTM D4060-14, “Standard Test Method for Abrasion
No. 14, p. 2417, 2005. Resistance of Organic Coatings by the Taber Abraser.”
[135] K. A. Wier and T. J. McCarthy, “Condensation on ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 2014.
ultrahydrophobic surfaces and its effect on droplet mobility:
ultrahydrophobic surfaces are not always water repellant,”
Langmuir ACS J. Surf. Colloids, Vol. 22, No. 6, pp. 2433–
2436, 2006.
[136] B. Mockenhaupt, H.-J. Ensikat, M. Spaeth, and W. Barthlott,
“Superhydrophobicity of biological and technical surfaces
under moisture condensation: stability in relation to surface
structure,” Langmuir ACS J. Surf. Colloids, Vol. 24, No. 23,
pp. 13591–13597, 2008.
[137] EPRI, “Application of Nano Technology Coatings to
Transmission Components.” 2012.
[138] IEC 60507, “Artificial pollution tests on high voltage
insulators to be used on AC systems.” 1991.
3646
Arshad et al.: Properties and Applications of Superhydrophobic Coatings in High Voltage Outdoor Insulation: A Review

=^=;+

~
~\

!$
~

*+;;
=
~\ \$_ `

@
\ @

++ ~~
;

*+;^_ ` \$ $ $ ~ ~\ _
\
!{
\ |
!
;^+
@ @

_ ~

~
\
\$
` @ }
_ ` \ !
{ *+;^
!$_ `

{

~\

~~_
| ` \
| | * *
*_ ~

~

__
=__ \

} | |
@
! |
_ ` _ ` \ \

!_{_~

\
@ !_` |
|_ `

~

~ ~
\

~
~~
_

~
~
~

~_
__

~@ |_! $
@|\$
{
~ !

~
~~
|| *++_
=
!_{_
}~_\$~ *
~ *++
*+;;
| ~
~\ \$ ~ \ @
| \

!~
{_ ` |`
@|
|

~
~\ ~ !\ \$
\$~
_ ~|_|{_ $
\ |
@ _ `

~

~~_

Arshad 2017

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Arshad 2017

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Arshad 2017

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

3630 Arshad et al.

Properties and Applications of Superhydrophobic Coatings

Figure 3. Framework for classifying icephobic coatings [78].

5 CHARACTERIZATION OF nanocomposites was investigated in [48] according to ASTM

temperatures. At higher temperatures, the methyl groups

delayed freezing time as water can be removed from the

Figure 10. Test specimen under condensation [54].

6.3 ROTATING WHEEL DIPPING TEST (RWDT)

Figure 14. Schematic diagram of the dry arcing test [146].

6.6 CORONA RESISTANCE TEST

where and are, the force required to detach ice block

Figure 18. Multi-finger scratch/Mar tester [154].

You might also like

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.