EPA-650/4-73-003
November 1973
Environmental Protection Technology Series
:|:iijE;iji;:j:j^
-------
EPA-650/4-73.003
DETERMINATION OF CORONAL OZONE
PRODUCTION BY HIGH VOLTAGE
POWER TRANSMISSION LINES
by
Frank C. Whitmore and Robert L. Durfee
VERSAR Incorporated
6621 Electronic Drive
Springfield, Virginia 22151
Contract No. 68-02-0553
Program Element No. 1H1326
Formerly 110501
EPA Project Officer: Elbert C. Tabor
Quality Assurance and Environmental Monitoring Laboratory
National Environmental Research Center
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711
Prepared for
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Washington, D. C. 20460
November 1973
-------
This report has been reviewed by the Environmental Protection Agency and
approved for publication. Approval does not signify that the contents
necessarily reflect the views and policies of the Agency, nor does
mention of trade names or commercial products constitute endorsement
or recommendation for use.
11
-------
VER/A
IAR INC.
ABSTRACT
A sub-scale simulation of a high-voltage transmission line was con-
structed and operated in a chaniber roughly 1.5 meters long by 0.5 meter
in diameter to determine ozone production characteristics. Effects of
voltage and corona power, conductor size and surface condition/ air temp-
erature, relative humidity, and air flow rate (wind velocity) on ozone
yield were determined. Of these, corona power (voltage), relative humi-
dity, and air flow rate exhibited significant effects on ozone yield.
Averaged yield values ranged from about 3 gm/kw-hr at high humidity (75-80
per cent) to about 7 gm/kw-hr at low humidity (25-30 per cent).
111.
-------
AR INC.
ACKNOKMDGMENTS
The authors wish to express their gratitude to Mr. Elbert C.
Tabor, the EPA Project Officer for this program, for his patience
and consideration throughout. We must also express our thanks to
Professor M. M. Newman of the lightning and Transients Research In-
stitute, Minneapolis, Minnesota, for his guidance and advice in the
electrical aspects of the program.
IV
-------
76.
(AR INC.
It then remained to select an appropriate altitude, below which
all of the ozone so produced would be contained. This height of our cylind-
rical container was chosen to be one kilometer, based on the typical height
of an inversion layer being below this altitude and other considerations.
Thus, we assume that:
(1) The ozone produced is at a constant (average)
rate based on the mean values from our work
described herein (and assuming that the
average relative humidity of Sites (2) and
(3) is 25-30 per cent, that of Site (1) 50
per cent, and a linear relationship between
ozone yield and relative humidity on either
side of the selected mean);
(2) The ozone so produced is maintained in a
constant cylindrical volume contained within
the circular areas about the sites as des-
cribed above and a height of one kilometer; and
(3) ihe ozone"~cbncentration throughout the volume
is constant (alternatively, an average
concentration may be considered).
The steady-state (or limiting) ozone concentrations calculated on
the basis of these and the other assumptions as described previously, are as
follows (air density = 1.2 x 103gm/cu m; ozone density = 2.14 x 103 gm/cu m):
Site (1) - Amos, W. Va. (B = 5.5 gm/kw-hr; V = 2.06 x 1013 cu m)
0, Half-Life C
j °°
(hr) (ppb by volume)
1 1.2 x 10-3
10 1.2 x 10-2
100 1.2 x 10"1
Site (2) - Pour Corners, N. Mex. (B = 8 gm/kw-hr; V = 2.06 x 1013 cu m)
-------
VER/AR
INC.
0, Half-Life C
0 oo
(hr) Tppb by volume)
1 4.9 x 10"1
10 4.9 x 10"3
100 4.9 x 10"2
Site (3) - los Angeles, Calif. (B = 8.0 gm/fcw-hr; V = 1.02 x 1012 cu m)
0, Half-Life C
3 °°
(hr) (ppb by volume)
1 6.8xlO"3
10 6.8 x 10"2
100 6.8 x 10""1
The linear- dependence of the steady-state concentration of ozone
lifetime shows clearly that the lifetime is the single most important factor
considered here in determining the relative contribution of transmission lines
to local ozone levels. In reality, any wind condition other than calm will
dramatically reduce tire local contribution which can be attributed to trans-
mission lines.
(9)
lifetime measurements of ozone in smoggy air in a glass container
indicate a half-life under these conditions of about one hour. Other work with
cleaner air in a metal enclosure* has resulted in reported half-lives of
ozone of up to 8.2 hours. It is very difficult to relate these values to free
air above the three selected sites, but it appears reasonable to assign a
half-life of a few hours for Site (3), so that the corresponding C^ would be
on the order of 10~2 ppb. Thus, coronal ozone production would not appear to
be a sizeable contribution to the ambient ozone level in the area of Site (3).
The ozone half-life for Sites (1) and (2) may be of the order of five
hours (possibly ten hours in the Pour Corners area), and from the analysis
-------
VERfA
i- T 78.
IAR INC.
the contribution from transmission lines on the order of 10 2 ppb for Site
(1) and 5 x 10~3 ppb for Site (2) . Both would have to be considered insign-
ificant contributions. One could conclude from the above analysis that, even
under atmospheric conditions of relative calm, transmission lines appear to con-
tribute only minimally to local ozone levels. However, until applicable values
of ozone lifetimes in free air are available, the actual contribution remains
only a rough estimate.
In 1969 it was estimated that over 300,000 miles (540,000 km) of high-
voltage (69 kV-765 kV) transmission lines were operating in the contiguous .
48 states of the United States* ' , and an estimate of 250,000 miles (450,000
km) in 1966 was made by Rose .A reasonable estimate at present appears to
be 350,000 miles (630,000 km) . A reasonable projection for 1990 appears to be
500,000 miles (900,000 km) , unless significant new construction of under-
ground lines, is begun soon.
At an overall average of 4 kw/mile (2.22 kw/km) of corona loss on all
of these lines , and an average ozone yield of 5 gm/kw-hr , the total yearly
productions over the country in 1973 and 1990 are estimated to be:
1973 - 6.1 x 107 kg/yr (6.0 x 10" tons/yr)
1990 - 8.8 x 107 kg/yr (8.7 x 10" tons/yr)
These amounts of ozone spread over the entire area of the country would
not appear to be significant. However, in actual fact, transmission lines
tend to be concentrated about urban areas as discussed previously. Although
this would tend to magnify the effects of the ozone so produced, the quantities
involved do not appear to be significant to local air quality if any degree
of mixing occurs.
-------
VER/A,
/ER/AR INC. 79"
7.0 CONCLUSIONS AND REX30MMENDA.TIONS
The following conclusions and recommendations are based on the
results obtained from the program, and from analysis and interpretation of
the results.
7.1 Conclusions
(1) The experimental method used and the results observed
and consistent with previous efforts in the field
and represent simulation of an operating transmission
line in terms of environmental conditions in the region
where ozone is produced (coronal sheath about the
conductor);
(2) Ozone yield (in gm/kw-hr) was not found to be affected
significantly by conductor geometry, surface condition,
or air temperature;
(3) Ozone yield exhibited a complex dependence on longi-
tudinal air flow rate (wind velocity);
(4) Ozone yield exhibited a relatively strong dependence
on relative humidity, increasing as humidity was
decreased. Yields were more constant at higher humidity
and ranged from 5 to 8 gm/kw-hr at relative humidities
above about 40 per cent;
(5) Ozone yields were low at values of corona power dissi-
pation (which, in turn, was a complex function of
applied voltage) near the ozone production threshold,
and reached an apparently constant value at higher values
of corona power dissipation;
(6) At least two ozone decomposition processes were observed
in the experiment, one with a tine constant (e-fold
decrement) on the order of ten seconds and the other with
a tdjne constant on the order of ten minutes. Both
processes appeared to be affected by relative humidity; and
(7) Ozone from transmission lines appear to contribute only
minimally to local ozone levels in areas where concentrations
of transmission and distribution lines exist. However,
this result is based on extremely rough estimates of ozone
lifetimes in free air.
-------
VER/A
ER/AR INC.
7.2 Eeoorrmendations
(1) The decomposition processes involved in ozone
destruction should be defined, particularly those
processes which could limit the accuracy of ozone
production studies in enclosed volumes and those
which could affect persistence in free air; and
(2) Since corona losses are greatly increased by
precipitation, and since neither ozone yields nor
decomposition processes occurring during precipi-
tation appear to be well-defined at present, it is
recommended that possible effects of precipitation
on ozone production by transmission lines be
studied in more detail.
-------
VER/A
fAR INC. 81'
8.0 BTRT.TOGRAPHV.
1. (a) W. P. Baker, J. Elec. Eng. Ed. 2_, 1O3-U3, 1964 - Pergamon Press,
Great Britain.
(b) E. Eawlinson, et al; IRE, Control & Science, 113, 705, 1966.
2. W. R. Snathe, "Static and Dynamic Electricity", McGraw-Hill, 1939,
pp 119-120. (units in CGS).
3. EHV Transmission Line Reference Book, Edison Electric Institute, 1968,
pp 124-127.
4. Federal Register, 36_, 8195 ff (April 30, 1971).
5. A. H. Foley & F. Olsen; AIEE - Project EHV, pp 34O-346, June I960.
6. H. N. Scherer, et al, TKKK Transactions T72550-2, presented at the
TTW. PES Summer Meeting, San Francisco, Calif; July 9-14, 1972.
7. "Principal Electric Facilities in the United States", published by
the Federal Power Commission, 1972.
8. EHV Transmission Life Reference Book. Edison Electric Institute, 1968,
pp 127-170. ' -~
9. (a) Haagen-Smit, A.J., and M. M. Fox, Ind. Eng. Chem, 48, pp 1484-7
(1956). ~
(b) Haagen-Smit, A. J., and L. G. Wayne, "Atmospheric Reactions and
Scavenging", in "Air Pollution" (A. C. Stern, ed.), Vol. 1,2 ed.,
pp. 168-71. Academic Press, New York, N.Y. (1968).
10. (a) R. Sabersky, et al; Environmental Sci & Tech; 7_, 347 (1973).
(b) F. Mueller, et al; Enviromtiental Sci & Tech, 7, 342 (1973).
-------
BfBLIOGRAPHIC DATA
SHEET
1. Report No.
EPA-650/4-73-003
3. Recipient's Accession No.
4. Title and Subtitle
Determination of Coronal Ozone Production by High Voltage
Power Transmission Lines
5. Report Date s
November 1973
6.
7. Author(s)
Frank C. Whitmore and Robert L. Durfee
8. Performing Organization Kept.
No.
9. Performing Organization Name and Address
Versar/ Incorporated
6621 Electronic Drive
Springfield, Virginia 22151
10. Project/Task/Work Unit No.
Program Element 1H1326
11. Contract/Grant No.
68-02-0553
12. Sponsoring Organization Name a.nd Address
Environmental Protection Agency
National Environmental Research Center, RTP
Quality Assurance and Environmental Monitoring Laboratory
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711
13. Type of Report & Period
Covered
Final Report
14.
15. Supplementary Notes
Fonrerly Program Element 110501
16. Abstracts
A sub-scale simulation of a high-voltage transmission line was constructed and
operated in a chamber roughly 1.5 meters long by 0.5 meter in diameter to determine
ozone production characteristics. Effects of voltage and corona power, conductor
size and surface condition, air temperature, relative humidity, and air flow rate
(wind velocity) on ozone yield were determined. Of these, corona power (voltage),
relative humidity, and air flow rate exhibited significant effects on ozone yield.
Averaged yield values ranged froirTabout 3 gm/kw-hr at high humidity (75-80 per
cent) to about 7 gm/kw-hr at low humidity (25-30 per cent).
17. Key V'ords and Document Analysis. 17o. Descriptors
Air pollution
Ozone
Power Transmission lines
Electric corona
Sources
Measurement
17b. Idemificrs/Open-Ended Terms
Ozone concentrations
Transmission line simulation
17c. COSATl Field/Group 13B
18. Availability Statement
Unlimited
19..Security Class (This
Report)
UNCLASSIFIED
20. Security Class (This
Page
UNCLASSIFIED
21. No. of Pages
129
22. Price
FORM NTIS-35 IREV. 3-72)
USCOMM-DC I4952-P72
-------
VER/A
ERIAR INC.
ABSTRACT
A sub-scale simulation of a high-voltage transmission line was
constructed and operated in a chamber roughly 1.5 meters long by 0.5 ireter
in diameter to determine ozone production characteristics. Effects of
voltage and corona power, conductor size and surface condition, air temp-
erature, relative humidity, and air flow rate (wind velocity) on ozone
yield were determined. Of these, corona power (voltage), relative humi-
dity, and air flow rate exhibited significant effects on ozone yield.
Averaged yield values ranged from, about 3 gm/kw-hr at high humidity (75-80
per cent! to about 7 gm/kw-hr at lew humidity (25-30 per cent). Application
o£ these results to three areas of high concentration of transmission lines
showed that, under minimal wind conditions, such transmission line concentra-
tions can produce sizeable local ozone levels.
ill
-------
ACKNOWI£DO1ENTS
The authors wish to ejqpress their gratitude to Mr. Elhert C.
Tabor, the EPA Project Officer for this program, for his patience
and consideration throughout. We must also express our thanks to
Professor M. M. Newman of the lightning and Transients Research In-
stitute, Minneapolis, Minnesota, for his guidance and advice in the
electrical aspects of the program.
IV
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ABSTRACT
1.0 INTRODUCTION 1
2.0 ELECTRICAL AND PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE
EXPERIME3SITAL APPARATUS 2
2.1 General Considerations 2
2.2 Electrical System 2
2.2.1 Standard Capacitor 6
2.2.2 Meter Calibration for Measurement of
Standard Capacitor 9
2.2.3 Electrical Bridge Measurements 14
2.3 Test Sanple Selection and Attachment in Test
Chamber 24
3.0 GAS HANDLING SYSTEM AND OZONE CONCENTRATION ANALYSIS . 25
3.1 General Description 25
3.2 Air Leaks in System 25
3.3 Ozone Meter Calibration 30
3.4 Lifetime Measurements 33
4.0 EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS 38
4.1 General 38
4.2 Ozone Production as a Function of Applied
Voltage and Current (Corona Power) 39
4.3 Effects of Air Flow Velocity 40
4.4 Effects of Relative Humidity 50
4.5 Effects of Air Temperature 50
4.6 Effects of Surface Treatment of Conductor ... 59
4.7 Efforts with Airborne Particles 60
5.0 DISCUSSION OF RESULTS 61
5.1 Variation of Ozone Yield with Corona Power
Dissipation 61
5.2 Analysis of Averaged Data 62
5.3 Surttnary of Ozone Yield Results 66
5.4 Comparison with Published Results 68
v
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)
Pare
6.0 ESTIMATE OF ATMOSPHERIC OZONE GONTRIBUnONS FROM
CONCENTRATION OF TRANSMISSION LINES IN SELECTED
AREAS 72
6.1 Site Selection 72
6.2 Corona Losses from Each Site 73
6.3 Ozone Contribution from Corona Losses .... 74
7.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 79
7.1 Conclusions 79
7.2 Recommendations 80
8.0 BIBLIOGRAPHY 81
APPENDIX A - Tabulated Electrical Measurements and Ozone
Production Data.
VI
-------
LIST OF TABLES
Page
1. Experimental Data for Measurement of CQ .... 10
2. Voltmeter Calibration Data 13
3. DC Characteristics of O.635 on Diameter Test
Conductor 16
4. System Mr Influx Compared to Air Efflux ... 31
5. ^Flow Velocity Effects on Ozone Production (1.04
cm wire, Relative Humidity 65-66%, Air Tempera-
ture 296-298°K) 51
6. Flow Velocity Effects on Ozone Production (0.635
cm wire, Relative Humidity 51%, Air Temperature
297°K) 52
7. Flow Velocity Effects on Ozone Production (0.635
cm diameter specimen. Temperature 299°K, Rala-
tive Humidity 38%) 53
8. Flow Velocity Effects on Ozone Production (0.635
cm diameter specimen, Temperature 299°K, Kela-
tive Humidity 33%) 54
9. Variation of Averaged Ozone Yield Data with
Relative Humidity 63
10. Effects of Air Temperature on Ozone Yields over
Relative Humidity Range of 36-68 per cent 67
Vll
-------
LIST OF FIGURES
1. Ozcne Production from High Voltage Transmission -;i
Line Test Facility '.'..... 3
2. Overall View of Test Chanber and Air Flow System . . 4
3. Power Supply Unit and Control Console 5
4. Schematic of Sobering Bridge Circuit 7
5. Schematic of Circuit for Measurement of Z 8
6. Schematic Circuit for Meter Calibriation 11
7. Square Law Characteristic of 0.635 cm Diameter Test
Specimen 15
8. Plot of = Ratio Versus Voltage for 0.635 on Diameter
Sample, o 19
9. Corona Power Dissipation for 0.635 cm Diameter Sample 20
10. Plot of VC Ratio Versus Voltage for 1.04 on Diameter
Sample 21
11. Corona Power Dissipation for 1.04 on Diameter Sample 22
12. Plot of Corona Power Dissipation versus (V-rV r for
Two Conductor Sizes c 23
13. Schematic Diagram of Air Flow and Sampling Systems . 26
14. Overall View of Test Chamber and Air and Ozone Samp-
ling Systems . 27
15. Schematic Diagram of Ozone Sampling and Calibration
System 28
16. Ozone Monitoring and Calibration System 29
17. Spectrophotometric Calibration for Ozone Concentration
Measurements 32
-------
LIST OF FIGURES (Continued)
18. Ozone Concentration versus Tine for 40% R.H., 296 °K,
1.04 on Diameter Sanple 34
19. Ozone Concentration versus Time for 51% RH, 294°K, and
1.O4 on Sanple Diameter 35
20. Ozone Concentration versus Tine for 68%, 297°K, and
1.04 on Sample Diameter 36
21. Effect of Relative Humidity on Ozone Half-Life in the
Test Chamber 37
22. Plot of Ozone Yield versus Applied Voltage for 1.04
on Diameter Sample (Temp. = 299.5°K, Relative Humidity
65°) 41
23. Plot of Ozone Yield for 1.O4 cm. Diameter Sample versus
Corona Power Dissipation (Conditions on Figure 22) . . 42
24. Plot of Ozone Yield versus Applied Voltage for O.635
cm Diameter Sample (Temp. = 299 °K, Relative Humidity
= 51%) 43
25. Plot of Ozone Yield versus Corona Power Dissipation
for 0.635 cm Diameter Sanple (Conditions on Figure 24) 44
26. Plot Equilibrium Concentration of Ozone as a Function
Of Flow Rate (Eq. 14.) 46
27. Plot of Effect of Flow Velocity on Ozone Production
(Temp. = 297°K, Relative Humidity = 36%, 1.04 on
Diameter Wire) 47
28. Plot of Ozone Production as a Function of (flow velo-
city)-1 (Temp. 296-298°K, Relative Humidity 65-66%,
1.04 on Diameter Specimen) 49
29. Plot of Ozone Production as a Function of (flow rate)"1
(Temperature 298°K, Relative Humidity 51%, O.635 on
Diameter Specimen) 55
30. Plot of Ozone Yield as a Function of (flow rate)"1
(Temp. 299°K, Relative Humidity 38%, 0.635 on Diam-
eter Specimen) 56
IX
-------
LIST OF FIGURES (Continued)
Page
31. Plot of Ozone Yield as a Function of (flow-
rate)"1 (Temp. 299°K, Eelative Humidity 33%,
cm Diameter Specimen) 57
32. Plot of X"1 Versus Relative Humidity 58
33. General Effect of Relative Humidity on Ozone Yield
from Energized High-Voltage Cable 64
34. General Effect of Air Flow Rate on Ozone Yield from
Energized High-Voltage Cable . 65
-------
GLOSSARY OF SYMBOLS USED
Symbols Used in Section 2.0
Hie work described in this report was strongly interdisciplinary,
involving physics, electrical engineering, chemistry, and chemical
engineering inputs among others. The symbols used in the analytical
equations were primarily those typical of the various disciplines,
even though this practice resulted in the use of the same symbol for
several quantities in a few instances. This list of terms should
aid in the understanding of the work.
a = radius of conducting shell surrounding test line
b = radius of test line
C = general symbol for capacitance
C = standard (reference) capacitor used in electrical
measurements in test section
C3,C. = capacitance of variable elements in Schering bridge
e = constant = 2.7183
EL^ = voltage (ac) drop across R. (Figure 6) as measured
by test mater
E = average of E values (Figure 6)
F = frequency in hertz
h = height of conducting sphere from ground plane
(equation 3 ff)
i = meter current (Figures 5 and 6)
series = current flow through C calibration circuit in
Figure 5 °
k = permittivity of free space
n = summing index for summuation (equation 3 ff)
R. ,1^ = resistive elements used in calibration (Figures 5 and 6)
R, R. = variable resistive element in Schering bridge
J, et
r . = effective series resistance of test cell
R = neter internal series resistance (Figure 6)
m
V= effective resistance of meter in shunt with R_
(Figures 5 and 6) z
XI
-------
GLOSSARY OF SYMBOLS (Continued)
R. = total series resistance in Figures 5 and 6
V = synfool for applied voltage in a general sense
V, = voltage drop across R, in Figure 5
V = critical voltage for corona onset (Figure 12)
C
V = applied high voltage in Figure 6 for AC meter
calibration
X = capacitive reactance of test cell
Z = test sanple impedance
Z = standard/comparison impedance in Schering bridge
Z3,Z4 = variable inpedances in Schering bridge
-i/h \ f 1
a = cosh \ /a) [equation 3 ffj
e = dielectric constant of air
IT = constant = 3.1416
id = angular frequency as 2irf where f is the powder
frequency
xLi
-------
Symbols Used in Sections 4.0 and 6.0
a = constant = (-55-) in equation (14)
b = constant = (-55) in equation (14)
B = ozone yield (gm/kw-hr)
C = concentration of ozone
Ce = equilibrium concentration of ozone atf T? j = o
C = original ozone concentration (t = o)
C^ = final ozone concentration (t = °°)
C = ozone concentration as determined by monitor
e = constant = 2.7183
M = mass
P = corona power (watts)
Q = air flow rate (m3/sec)
FH = relative humidity (per cent)
t = elapsed, time
V = volume (m3)
a = ozone production rate
X = time constant
p = density of ozone at test conditions (gm/m3)
°3
Kill
-------
1.
1.0 INTH3DUCTION
In recent years it has become obvious that ozone has great signi-
ficance as an air pollutant due to its ability to cause human discomfort,
plant damage and significant chemical damage to plastics and rubber. Perhaps
the most important aspect of ozone is its role as a chemical intermediary or
as an end product in the formation of photochemical snog.
Major sources of ozone in the biosphere appear to include transport
via vertical mixing from the ozone-rich stratosphere and photolysis of pro-
ducts from combustion and photosynthesis processes. Other apparently minor
sources include production by natural electrical processes (natural corona
and lightning) and electrical machinery. None of these sources has been well-
characterized as to their importance to air quality, or even with respect to
the mechanisms involved in ozone formation within the biosphere or transport
from, the stratosphere.
Ihe program reported herein has been carried out in an attempt to
evaluate the magnitude of the contribution to the ozone level within the
biosphere arising from the corona associated with high voltage transmission
lines. In order to allow the widest possible range of atmospheric and elec-
trical variables, the study has been conducted in a sub-scale simulation
chamber which is described in detail below.
The program had as its major objectives the experimental determina-
tion of ozone yields from high-voltage electrical transmission lines, and the
subsequent use of this information to determine the possible significance of
the ozone so formed on air quality in the vicinity of one or more transmission
lines. The report includes a detailed description of the apparatus and
experimental methods used to determine ozone yields fron corona loss about
metal conductors used in power transmission, analysis and interpretation of
the data obtained, and an analysis of the significance of ozone production
from operating lines at selected sites of varying climatic conditions and
transmission line concentration. All of the experimental, data obtained during
the program are presented in tabular form as Appendix A.
-------
IAR INC.
2.0 ELECTRICAL AND PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE
2.1 General Considerations
The requirements for this experiment were such that it was essential
to provide good electrical insulation of all portions of the high voltage
system from the specific portion under test so that minimal interferences
existed in terms of ozone production from non-related corona discharges, in
addition, it was desirable that accurate measurement and some control of
such parameters as relative humidity, air velocity and air temperature be
available. In view of these specific requirements the system was designed as is
shown schematically in Figure 1 and in the photographs of Figures 2 and 3.
The predominant feature of this system was the high voltage assembly, termi-
nated on top by a 25 on diameter polished aluminum sphere and terminating
horizontally in the plastic cylindrical structure shown in more detail in
Figure 2. The six-inch diameter copperj^us-bar was terminated in a corona
ring whose center was pierced to allow the "test" specimen to be attached to
the interior support clamp. Tne otter end of the test specimen was secured
in a clamp affixed to the 18 cm diameter polished aluminum termination sphere.
Tne entire high voltage .termination and test wire was contained in an acrylic'
plastic chamber 1.22 meters long and terminated at each end by acrylic plas-
tic domes 0.76 meters in diameter. The ground (return) electrodes consisted
of two copper plates 0.91 by 0.30 meters cemented to the inside wall of the
acrylic cylinder equidistant from the end terminations. Tne electrodes were
so spaced that the separation of electrode to test speciment was 0.23 meters.
The sealed plastic envelope surrounding the test specimen thus served to pro-
vide electrical as well as environmental protection for the test system.
2.2 Electrical System
Tne power supply chosen for this work had the capability of delivering
-------
GROUND
PIfiNB (returned to Sobering bridge)
EXHAUST
Figure 1. Ozone Production f ran High Voltage
Transmission line Test Facility.
-------
Figure 2. Overall View of Test Chamber and Air
Flow System.
-------
Figure 3. Fewer Supply Unit and Control Console.
-------
VERfA
'AR INC.
some 10 milliamps at a maximum EM3 voltage of 150,000 volts (60 Hertz AC).
The supply terminated in the large porcelain insulator shown in Figure 2
to which was added the passive electrical network.
The electrical portion of the experimental program required the
accurate measurement of all corona losses associated.with the test specimen,
in order to determine losses as a function of the electrical, physical and
environmental variables of the experiment. The most practical method for
accomplishing this measurement was through the use of a Schering bridge
which is particularly adapted to the measurement of relatively small capaci-
tances in unbalanced high voltage currents. Schematically, the Schering
bridges takes the form as shown .in Figure 4, wherein Z is the unknown impedance,
J^
Z is a standard inpedance, usually a high quality capacitor, and Z_, Z.
are the adjustable components of the bridge.
Whereas Z is often1 an off-the-shelf, very high quality capacitor
with voltage rating sufficient for the highest test voltage .to be used, in this
program the alternate approach of sphere-to-plane capacitor was used for Z
(nominally designed for 50 picofarads, 200K volts). As shown in Figures 1 and
2, the high voltage assembly was terminated vertically in a polished 25 cm
aluminum sphere located approximately 1 meter below a large (4 meter x 6 meter)
ground plane. This capacitance served as the Z component of the Schering bridge.
The rest of the high voltage assembly was carefully shielded and polished so as to
minimize the leakage resistances and corona spots, and to fix (if not to minimize)
stray corona losses.
2.2.1 Standard Capacitor
The most direct method of measurement of Z is to place a precision
resistance stack in series with Z , apply high voltage to the series circuit
and measure the (ac) current as a function of applied voltage. The actual
arrangement was as shown schematically in Figure 5.
-------
AR INC.
KLGL
VOLTAGE
60 -x- AC
DETECTOR
@-
figure 4. Schematic of Schering Bridge Circuit
-------
HIGH
VOLTAGE
Figure 5. . Schematic of Circuit for Measurement
of ZQ.
-------
From Figure 5, it can be shown that
C . ^
O 0)
Vi2H2
1/2
where V is the applied voltage, V2 is the drop across IU and w = 2irf.
The above equation assumes that the resistance shunted across IU is suffi-
ciently large as to not seriously affect the current through the series R-C
circuit, a condition which may not be correct. In the experiment described
herein, the meter exhibited a 10* ohm per volt characteristic, which for the
50 volt scale would introduce 5 x 105 ohms in shunt with R- which must be
taken into consideration. The actual value of C was then computed by con-
verting the observed meter reading into an equivalent series current through
the meter, computation of the corresponding current through R~, computation
of the total series current-through the capacitor C and then the computation
of CQ. This experiment was repeated several times under different ambient
conditions of relative humidity, atmospheric pressure and air temperature,
with the result that (to the precision of this measurement) none of these
parameters affected the final result for CQ. A typical set of data is
shown in Table 1. The equation used to compute C is given by:
(1.)
C =
sgss.
(2.)
From the data in Table 1 the average value of C may be taken as
5.61 x 1O~12 farads, with a probable error of ± 0.03 x 1O~12 farads.
2.2.2 Meter Calibration for Measurement of Standard Capacitor
To be assured of the validity of the ac measurements, the 1O1* ohm/volt
ac voltmeter was calibrated using the circuit shewn in Figure 6, where R. and
1*2 were standard decade resistance boxes. The results of this measurement are
-------
-Table 1. Experimental Data for Measurement of C .
. w
V
(KV)
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
Maasured Values of ED
(volts)
5.8
8.3
11.3
14.2
16.0
19.9
21.9
24.2
26.9
5.2
8.2
.10.9
13.8
16.2
19.1
21.1
24.3
26.9
5.2
8.1
11.2
13.8
16.5
19.1
22.1
24.3
26.9
5.1
7.9
10.8
13.3
16.4
19.2
21.9
24.7
27.0
£X
5.1
7.9
10.5
13.3
16.4
18.9
21.9
24.8
27.0
5.2
7.8
10.8
13.3
16.2
18.9
21.8
ER
(volts)
5.25
8.03
10.91
13.61
16.33
19.17
21.77
24.46
26.94
i
m
(amps)
1.04 x ID"5
1.66 x IO-5
2.18 x 10"5
2.72 x IO-5
3.27 x 1Q-5
3.83 x 10~5
4.35 x KT5
4.89 x IO-5
5.39 x IO-5
1series
C6
(amps) (farads x IO12)
2.02 x
2.33 x
4.23 x
5.28 x
6.35 x
7.42 x
8.44 x
9.45 x
10.45 x
io-5
io-5
io-5
io-5
io-5
io-5
io-5 .
io-5
io-5
5.38
5.67
5.64
5.60
5.57
5.63
5.60
5.58
5.56
Air Tenp (82°F) 27.8°C
Relative Humidity 64%
Baronetric Pressure: 758 imiHg
CQ = (5.61 ± .03) x 10"12 farads
-------
-------
12.
shown in Table 2. The important fact to note on Table 2 is that the values
of I^ were similar to those experienced in the itEasurements associated with
the determination of the standard capacitance. Certainly, the experimental
data indicate that the meter readings were of sufficient accuracy to be
utilized for this experiment.
In order to place the experimental value of C into proper perspec-
tive, the capacitance of a conducting spherical shell of radius (a) removed
from an infinite conducting plane by a distance (h) has a capacitance given
f2)
byv (converted to MRS rather than ESU units as given in the cited reference)
CQ = 1.1 x 10~12 a sinh a V cosech (no) , . (3.)
n=l
where h = a cosh a. In the actual physical layout, a = 12.7 cm and
h = 1.14 meters, so that cosh a = 9.0 and a = 2.89. In this circumstances,
sinh a ~ cosh a. Now (cosech na) = (sinh na)"1, and since cosh a ~ sinh a,
e-na ea
thenaosech.na ~ 55 and sinh - -g . Hence,
C ~ 1.1 x 10'12 a (f-) > ^ ~ LI x 10"12a (4J
^J £* t ^ & ft
n=l
CQ ~ 3.5 x 10~12 farads.
The approximations used clsarly were justified numerically and also
in terms of the basic physics of the problem in that the overhead screen used
is not actually infinite. The experimental capacitance was somewhat larger
than the theoretical value since the former value also included whatever
stray capacitances existed in shunt with C and thus could not be differen-
tiated experimentally. Incidentally, for an isolated sphere of radius (a),
the capacitance is given by:
C = 4TTkQ a , C5.)
-------
Table 2.
Voltmeter Calibration Data
Vo
(volts)
118
ii
ii
n
ii
n
n
n
n
.(ohms)
130K
160K
200K
300K
400K
n
700K
"
»
.»
(ohms)
10OK
11
n
"
»
200K
"
150K
100K
50K
(ohms)
500K
n
n
ii
n
n
n
n
n
n
.(ohms)
83. 4K
H
n
n
n
143 K
"
115 K
- 83'. 4K
-" 45. 5K
. (ohms) .
213. 4K
243. 4K~
283. 4K
383. 4K
483. 4K
543 K
843 K
815 K.
783.4K
745. 5K
Current
.(amps .x 10* )
5.52
4.85
4.16
3.08
2.44
2.17
1.40
1.445
1.505
1.57
Voltage
Calculated
(volts)
46.0
40.4
34.7
25.7
20.4
31.0
20.1
16.7
12.2
7.18
Voltage
Measured
(volts)
46.0
40.3
34.6
25.7
20.3
31.0
20.0
16.8
12.3
7.00
s?
-------
14.
which for the given geometry represents a capacitance of the order of
1 2
12 x 10 farads. Thus, the actual theoretical value should lie between
the extremes of 12 x 10~12 farads as upper bound and 3.5 x 10~12 farads
as a lower bound.
2.2.3 Electrical Bridge Measurements
The actual realization of the bridge shown schematically in
Figure 4 consists of Z the standard air capacitance discussed above, Z
the test specimen and chanter assenbly, with Z and Z. consisting of par-
allel decade resistance boxes and decade capacitance boxes. Since the null
detector in Figure 4 must be such as to apply a minimal shunting effect across
the terminals of the bridge and must also have a large dynamic range, a .dual
channel differential amplifier-input-unit was used with an oscilloscope. Bal-
ance was accomplished by adjusting the components of Z_ and Z. for minimum
signal on the scope, but, because of the rectifying character of the system, it
was found that a second requirement for balance lay in the removal of as much
of the 60- component as possible, as shown by the purest third harmonic signal
on the scope.
The existence of rectification within the test section is, of
course, associated with the irreversible losses from the formation of the
corona. This effect is quite graphically shown in Figure 7 which is a plot
of the dc ground return current from the test section plotted against the
square root of the applied voltage (data included in Table 3) . The charac-
teristic square law plot, is shown in Figure 7;
The analysis of the bridge circuit of Figure 4 shews that, for
the current through the null detector to be zero, it is necessary that:
ZoZ3 - V4 = °
-------
15.
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
_L
(VOLTAGE)1/2 x 10~2
I l_
2.20
Figure 7 .
2.40
2.60
2.80
_L
3.00
3.20
Square Law Characteristic of O.635 cm Diameter Test
Specimen.
-------
16.
Table 3. DC Characteristics of 0.635 cm Diameter
Applied
Voltage
(kilovolts)
50
56
60
66
70
72
75
76
80
86
90
92
Test
DC Current
(Viamps)
3.5
10
12
18
' 26
23
35
, 33
41
48
56
58
Conductor
V1/2 x .10"2 .
2.24
2.37
2.45
2.56
2.64
2.68
2.74
2.77
-2:83
2.93
3.00
3.03
DC Power
(watts)
0.175
0.560
0.720
1.188
1.82
1.66
2.63
2.51
3.28
4.13
5.04
5.49
-------
INC.
17.
where Z is the impedance of the test section consisting of series capaci-
tance X and loss resistance .r, Z is the standard capacitance, and Z3/Z4
are parallel cortibinatLons consisting of R-irC-a and R^/C. respectively.
Clearly, equation (6.) represents two conditions (since most of the imped-
ances are complex) on the seven components of the bridge circuit, three of
the components being fixed - i.e., X, r and C! .- The result of these con-
siderations suggests that balance will affix only two of the remaining
components.
In terms of the assigned meaning of the various components, the
balance equation (5.) becomes, in general:
1 + .u
1 +
(wR4C4)
and
rX =
1 +
(uC4R4)
(7.)
(8.)
where to = 2irf has the usual meaning. It is generally assumed (since two of
the four variable components can be selected to have arbitrary but approp-
riate values) that
0)'
-R42C42 « 1, and w2R32C32 « 1,
whereupon the detailed balance equations (6.) and (7.) assume their usual and
simpler form:
X = C. ^ (7
and
rX =
(B1.)
-------
18.
In practice, it was found to be more practical to utilize the general
form of the balance equations for this program rather than to attempt in each
case to effect balance so that the simplified equations could be used.
In carrying out the actual bridge measurements it was deemed approp-
riate to interchange the R-C components making up Z, and Z^ at random in order
to reduce the possibility of systematic errors due to an incorrect calibration
of these components which otherwise have been assumed to be correct as labeled.
The data on the salient electrical features of the system are pres-
ented in Appendix A in Tables A-l and A-2. A summary of values for r, X
and Corona Power is presented in Figures 8 through 11 which are taken from
Tables A-l and A-2. The data for a wire 6f 0.635 cm diameter demonstrates
unusual behavior in that both the X/C ratio and corona power show markedly
different behavior above and below a critical relative humidity of 70%.
Similar behavior is shown in Figure 1O for the X/CQ ratio for a 1.O4 cm diam-
eter wire. Figure 11, which shows the Oorona Power for the 1.04 on diameter
Wire, indicates a general independence of power dissipated on relative
humidity. In no case was there an indication" that air temperature or relative
air velocity had an appreciable effect on the electrical characteristics of
the test system.
In a further attempt to understand the electrical characteristics,
we have plotted the corona power in watts versus (V-V )2 for two wire
diameters in Figure 12. For the 0.635 on wire V = 35 kV, and for the 1.04
cm wire V =43.5 kV. Using the relations frcm EHV Transmission Line Refer-
°(3)
ence Book v , we find that the critical field for corona is approximately
26 kV/cm for the O.635 wire and approximately 22.5 kV/on for the 1.04 cm wire.
These values suggest that the larger wire was rather badly surface roughened
and serves to explain the lack of effect of further surface treatment of this
wire (by NaOH etching).
As an additional check on the accuracy of the electrical measuremsnts
we note that the capacitance per unit length of a pair of concentric cylinders
-------
19.
3.4 r.
3.0 -
0
2.6 -
2.2
xlu
1.8
1.4
1.0
20-60%
Relative
Humidity
70%
Relative
Humidity
APPLIED VOLTAGE, kilovolts
I I
30
40
50
60
80 85
y
Figure 8. Plot of ^- Batio Versus Voltage for O.635 on
o Diameter Sanple.
-------
20.
20
10
9
8
7
6
5
1.0
.9
.8
.7
.6
.5
.4
RELATIVE
HUMIDITY
BELOW
60%
RELATIVE
HUMIDITY
71%
O
APPLIED VOLTAGE,
40
50
60
70
80
Figure 9. Corona Power Dissipation for 0.635 OT.
Diameter Sample.
-------
3.00
2.75
2.50
2.25
2.0
s
I 1'75
> 1.50
1.25
1.0
0
10
I
20
Figure 10.
APPLIED VDLTAGE, kilovolts
j I I
30
40
50
60
70
Plot of X/C Ratio Versus Voltage for 1.04 cm Diarteter Saitple.
70-77%
RELATIVE
HUMEDK
80
-------
22.
20
I
H
1
UJ
I
10
$.-.
8
7
6
5
.9
.8
.7
.6
.5
.4
.3
.2
.1
RELATIVE HUMIDITY
O 70%
A 65%
0 77%
38%
20 40 60 80
APPLIED VOLTAGE, kilovolts
100
Figure 11. Corona Power Dissipation for 1.04 on Diamster
Sample.
-------
3
g
CO
9
Q
O - 0.635 on diameter sample
Vc = 35 kV
- 1.04 on diameter sample
Vc = 43.5 kV
200 400 600 800 1000 120O
(V-VJ2, (volts)2 x 10-6
1400
1600
1800
200C
\
Figure 12.: Plot of Corona Power Dissipation versus (V-V~C) for Two
Conductor Sizes.
to
.00
-------
24.
of radii a and b respectively, when b > af is given as
C = 2Tre [log H" farads, (9.)
6 ci
which for the 0.635 on .wire yields a capacitance of
C ~ 15 x 10~12 farads.
Inferring to Figure 8, the X/C ratio at the limit of zero voltage approaches
unity, whereby X = C = 5.61 x 10~12 farads. Becalling, from Figure 2 that
the cylinders were not continuous, .we realize that the effective capacitance
should be somgwhat less than that for a pair of concentric cylinders.
2.3 Test Sample Selection and Attachment in Test Chaitfaer
The two test sanples had the following characteristics:
(a) 0.635 cm diameter - nominal gage size 2, seven aluminum
Strands each of nominal gage 0.023 on.
(b) 1.04 on diameter - nominal gage size 2/O, seven aluminum
strands eachiofrnorninal gage O.033 cm.
The test specimen, cut to a length of 1.52 meters was clamped into a four
jaw chuck mounted behind the corona ring which terminated the rigid high
voltage assembly and thence passed through a small hole in the center of the
corona ring. The other end of the test specimen was fastened into a polished
brass holder rigidly fastened to the 15 cm termination sphere. The chuck
assenbly was provided with an adjustment screw, accessible through the side
of the horizontal high voltage connector, which was provided in order to put
the specimen under sufficient tension to insure its being concentric within
the test chamber.
-------
25.
3.O GAS HANDLING SYSTEM AND OZONE CONCENTRATION ANALYSIS
3.1 General Description
A schematic of the gas handling system is shown in Figure 13, and
the photograph, in Figure 14 indicates the physical layout and approximate
dimensions of the system. The basic high velocity pump for the system was a
dual industrial vacuum cleaner exhausting into the outside air through an
activated charcoal filter to remove the ozone formed. Flow regulation was
accomplished by use of the shunting valve shown in Figure 13. Air tempera-
ture within the air flow system was determined by a nercury-in-glass thermo-
meter placed in a baffled box so as to insure full exposure. Similarly,
relative- humidity was determined with an in-line humidity meter. Flow
velocity in both input line (nominal 10 on diameter) and exhaust line
(nominal 3.8 cm diameter) was determined by pitot tubes in conjunction with
stationary manometers calibrated against a standard wet test meter. All
tubing in the air flow system was PVC pipe cemented and taped to prevent
leaks.
The ozone sampling system is shown schematically in Figure 15 and
photographically in Figure 16. Flow in the sampling lines was maintained at
2.1 liters/min by use of a pressure/vacuum pump monitored by flowmeters.
Flowmeters were used to monitor the sampling flow into the manifold and to
monitor the replacement air during ozone lifetime measurements. All small
diameter tubing used in the sampling system was Teflon with Teflon or stain-
less steel fittings. The sampling manifold was provided to allow simultaneous
sampling by a chemiluminescent ozone meter and by bubble tubes for standardi-
zation. Ozone measurements were made under standard conditions using the
ozone meter at the proper internal (900; cc/min) sampling rate.
3.2 Air Leaks in System
In order to test the system for leaks which would serve to dilute
-------
26,
TEST
CHAMBER
PITOT
TUBE
TEMP.
HUMIDITY
SAMPLING
LINE
HDMJLDI1Y &
TEMPERATURE
COSIDITIONING.
r
MANIFOLD
PITOT
TUBE
OZONE
METER
FILTER
&
OZONE
REMOVAL
INPUT
AIR
OZONE
REMOVAL
FLOW
GAUGE
VACUUM
PUMP
PUMP
EXHAUST
EXHAUST
Figure 13. Schematic Diagram of Air Flow and Sampling
Systems.
-------
27.
Figure 14. Overall View of Test Chanter and
Air and Ozone Sanpling Systems.
-------
OZONE
GENERATOR
BQTOMETER
ft r-=3> EXHAUST
SAMPLING'*
PORTS
TEST CHAMBER.
MANIFOLD
BEM)IX
°3
METER
OZONE
FILTER
BUBBLER
BUBBLER
OZONE
FILTER
Figure 15. Schematic Diagram of Ozone Sampling and .Calibration System.
00
-------
29,
Figure 16. Ozone Monitoring and Calibration System.
-------
30.
the ozone-laden efflux air, the input line (76.5 on2 cross section) was
fitted with a pitot tube and inclined manometer system. By adjusting the
efflux flow from 0.5 in. (1.27 on) of water head to a maximum of 1.62 in.
(4.12 cm) of water head (velocity range from 14.3 m/sec to 26.8 m/sec) and
simultaneously determining the velocity within the input tube, it was pos-
sible to estimate the losses (negative losses) by comparing the throughput
within the two lines. The data are presented in Table 4. Clearly, when
proper account is taken of the velocity differences corrected for by the
typical 0.9 pre-factor, there is substantial agreement between the two
flows, indicating no significant air leakage into the system.
3.3 Ozone Meter Calibration
The chemiluminescent ozone meter was calibrated initially and the
calibration checked weekly by use of the procedure outlined in the Federal
(A\
Register 36, 8155 ff (April 30, 1971) v ;. The solutions utilized for cali-
bration were an absorbing reagent (KH2P04, Na-HPO, and KI), As203 standard
solution, a standard iodide solution and a starch indicator solution made
up as indicated in the above reference; all reagents used were analytical
reagent grade or better. Using the procedure outlined in Section 8 of tihe
(4)
cited reference , the spectrophotometer calibration curve was constructed,
as shewn in Figure 17.
Note on Figure 17 that the calibration (and, of course, all sub-
sequent determinations) were made at 454nm, which was the wavelength providing
the greatest sensitivity on our instrument. This is a deviation from Reference
4, but not an important one.
In the calibration of the ozone meter, the flow system shown sche-
matically in Figure 15 was used. The ozone generator shown in Figure 16 was
constructed along the lines of that suggested by Figure D2 in the Federal
(4)
Register . In the calibration procedure, 10 ml of the absorging reagent was
pipetted into each all-glass impingers which were imnediately closed and
connected to the flew system through the sampling manifold. The ethylene (CP
grade) and the'flow rate to the ozone meter were adjusted and the calibration
run allowed to continue for 10 minutes, after which the exposed solutions
-------
31.
Table 4. System Air Influx Compared to
Air Efflux
INFLUX LINE
(76.5 on2 diameter)
EFFLUX LINE
(13... on2 diameter)
Head
(on H20)
.033
.048
.056
.061
.0685
.076
.081
.086
.088
Velocity
Cm/sec)
2.28
2.79
2.07
3.15
3.35
3.50
3.60
3.73
3.81
Flow
&n3/sec)
2
1.75 x 10
2.14 x 10~2
2.29 x 10"2
2.41 x 10~2
2.56 x 10"2
2.68 x 10~2
2.66 x 10~2
2.86 x 10"2
2.92 x 10~2
Head
(on H20)
1.27
1.78
2.28
2.54
2.79
3.06
3.30
3.56
4.11
Velocity
(m/sec)
14.4
17.5
19.3
20.3
21.3
22.3
23.2
24.0
25.9
Flow
(mVsec)
_2
1.87 x 10
2.28 x 10~2
2.51 x 10~2
2.64 x 10~2
2.77 x 10~2
2.90 x 10~2
3.02 x 10~2
3.12 x 10"2
3.37 x 10~2
Flow Corrected*
(m3/sec
_2
1.78 x 10
2.16 x 10"2
2.26 x 10"2
2.38 x 10~2
2.50 x 10~2
2.61 x 10~2
2.72 x 10~2
2.82 x 10"2
3.04 x 10~2
-------
95
m
90
85
5.0
10.0 15.0
OZONE CONTENT OF 5ml SAMPLES, ygm
20.0
Figure 17. Spec±rophotometric Calibration for Ozone Concentration
Measurements
-------
33.
were measured on the photometer and the concentration of ozone determined
from the calibration (Figure 17). Provisions were made to allow concentration
ranges of 100 to 1000 yg/fa3 of ozone for the test calibration. In the weekly
calibration setup the flow rate through the ozone generator was adjusted to
produce 700 ygm/m3 (0.35 pprn) of ozone for a spot check of the instrument.
3.4 Lifetime Measurements
To determine the lifetime of ozone in the test chamber under vary-
ing conditions of relative humidity and air temperature, the following proce-
dure was utilized. Ozone, at a concentration of the order of 1 ppm, was
introduced into the flow system upstream from the test chamber. After allow-
ing a sufficient time for mixing, as evidenced by a steady concentration
indicated at the sampling site, the line pumps were shut off to reduce the
flow through the test chamber to zero. The sampling pump was then connected
to the imput prots en the test fixture and adjusted to introduce 2.1 liter/min
of ozone-free air. This input, coupled with the extraction rate of 2.1 liter/
roin by the sampling system, resulted in the establishment of reproducible and
steady flow conditions within the test section. Ozone concentration measure-
ments were then taken at thirty (30) second intervals for a total elapsed
time of thirty (30) minutes.
Typical data are shown in semi-log plots in Figure 18 through 20.
A summary of life-tine data as a function of relative humidity is shown in
Figure 21.
-------
8
.3
.2
.'.07
. -06
.05
.04
.03
.02
.01
.OOq
.008
.007
.006
.005
TIME,(sec)
0 150 300 450 600 750 900 105O 120O 135O 1500 165O 1800 1950 210O
Figure 18. Ozone Concentration versus Time for 40% R.H., 296°K,
1.04 cm Diaiteter Sample
OJ
-------
35
.8
.7
.6
.5
.4
.2
.1
.09
.08
.07
.06
.05
.04
150 300 450 600
i 1 1 1 1_
750 900 1050 1200 1350
TIME,sec
1500 1650
Figure 19. Ozone Concentration versus Time for
51% KH, 294°K, and 1.04 cm Sample
Diameter.
-------
36.
0.2
300
Figure 20.
600 900
TIME, Sec
1200
1500
Ozone Concentration versus Time for
68% KH, 297°K, and 1.04 on Sairple
Diameter.
-------
12
11
10
37.
u
H
*?
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0 10 20 30
40 50 60 70 80 90
RELATIVE HUMIDITY, per cent
100
Figure 21. Effect of Relative' Humidity on Ozone
Half-Life in the Test Chamber.
-------
38.
4.0 'EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS
4.1 General
Using the equipment and methods described in previous sections of
the report, data collection required the following basic measurements for
each test point:
Barometric pressure
Chamber pressure
Chamber temperature
Chamber relative humidity
Background ozone level in chamber and test line
Zero level and calibration of ozone meter
Air flow velocity lead on input and efflux lines
Applied high voltage
Bridge balanoa conditions
Ozone measurements in ppm
Sampling volume flow in sampling manifold and in
ozone meter
' Ethylene pressure and flow rate to ozone meter.
To compute the ozone production in grams per minute from the basic
concentration measurements, advantage was taken of the calibration of the
ozone meter which reads parts per million by volume. Then the rate of ozone
production was determined as follows:
a (gm/min ozone) = Q (m3/sec) x pQ (gm/m3) x Cozonfat(ppn3 i (10.)
where the ozone density was computed from the reference density of 2.14 gm/
liter at 760 rnn Hg and 273°K, using the perfect gas law. The chamber tempera-
ture was assumed to be that in the exhaust line from the test chamber.
-------
39,
Ihe corona power for each voltage was obtained from the bridge
measurements as reported above. The yield for ozone production was then
calculated from the relationship:
6 x 10" a
* - p
where B is expressed in gm/kw-hr, a in grams 0_/min, P in watts and the
numerical factor serves to correct the units.
The results of a number of such measurements of B are included
in Appendix A as Table A-3 for the 0.635 cm. diameter aluminun specimsn and
Table A-4 for the 1.04 cm. diameter aluminum specimen.
4.2 Ozone Production as a Function of Applied Voltage and
Current (Corona Power)
Clearly, the rate of ozone formation, a, can be expected to 'increase
from zero at some onset voltage at which corona-like processes begin, and to
increase with voltage up to sparkover. The ozone yield, B, should be determined
by the conditions in the plasma and should depend to a lesser extent on the applied
voltage than a. The data presented herein are somewhat limited in terms of
voltage applied in that the physical conditions of the samples and chairber were
such that full breakdown (sparkover) with the accompanying noisy discharge
occurred at 86 to 92 kV, depending somewhat on the atmospheric conditions and
immediate previous history of the test chairber.
The test chamber was designed to operate at voltages up to 200 kV
(peak-to-peak, ac), and the observed breakdown limitation was probably a
result of surface jjiperfections on the samples. This effect will be discussed
further in Section 5.0.
A typical plot of ozone yield versus applied voltage for the 1.04 cm.
-------
40.
sarrple is presented in Figure 22. The internal consistency and reproducibility
of the data are very good, as shown by the bars enclosing iraxiinum and minimum
values at the stated conditions . A more meaningf ul plot of the same yield data
as a function of corona power dissipation is presented in Figure 23 . Figure
23 shows that, as the power dissipation increased, ozone yield increased until
a steady value of about 5.5 gm/kw-hr was attained. " Although the same trend
is present on Figure 22, the attainment of a steady value of ozone yield is
masked as compared to Figure 23 because of the non-linear relationship between
corona power dissipation and voltage.
The attainment of a constant ozone yield at higher values of voltage
and corona power dissipation is more clearly shown on Figures 24 and 25, res-
pectively, for the 0.635 cm. diameter sample. At the lower gir flow rate the
"constant" yield attained was about 5.2 gm/k&Hir, which is consistent with the
value for the larger wire . Similar plots can be obtained from other data in
Tables A-3 and A-4 in Appendix A.
4.3 Effects of Air Flow Velocity
Assume an equation of continuity which equates the change in mass of
ozone in the test chanber as being equal to the rate of production less the
losses- due to recombination or decomposition (by whatever process) and less the
loss due to the efflux of air from the chanber, viz . :
= BP - (AM + QC) (12.)
where B = ozone yield (gm/kw-hr)
P ;= Corona Power (kw-hr/sec)
X ?= decay constant (sec"1)
Q = flow rate (m3/sec)
C = ozone concentration (V/V)
V = volune of test chanber (m3 )
-------
5.0
4.0
I
3.0
2.0
1.0
APPLIED EMS VOLTAGE (kV)
40
50
60
7O
80
90
Figure 22. Plot of Ozone Yield versus Applied Voltage for 1.04 cm
Diameter Sanple (Tenp. = 299.5°K, Relative Humidity =
65°)
-------
5.0
4.0
3.0
8
2.0
1.0
2.5
ENERGY DISSIPATED IN CORONA DISCHARGE (watts)
5.0
7.5
10
12.5
15
17.5
Figure 23. Plot of Ozone Yield for 1.04 on Diameter Sample versus Corona
Power Dissipation (Conditions on Figure 22)
to
-------
6.4
4.8
3.2
°
o
O
o
D
B
8
8
D
D
O
O
D
8
O.
B
LEGEND:
O - 1-8.3 x 10~2 m'/sec
flow rate
D = 2.74 x 10 2 mV'sec
flav rate
1.6
APPLIED VOLTAGE, (kiiovolts)
4O
50
60
7O
80
90
Figure 24. Plot of Ozone Yield Versus Applied Voltage for 0.635 on
Diameter Sartple
(Tfeitp. = 299°K, Relative Humidity = 51%)
-------
6.4_
4.8
3.2
o
o
8
n
a
8
D
D
O
O
B
8
B
8
D
D
O
O
D
D
LEGEND:
Q = 1.83 x 10 2ra3/
sec f lav rate
D= 2.74 x^
sec flew rate
1.6
CORONA POWER DISSIPATION (watts)
4.0
8.0
12.0
16.0
20.0
24.0
28.0
Figure 25. Plot of Ozone Yield versus Corona Power Dissipation for 0.635 cm
Diameter Saitple (Conditions on Figure 24)
-------
45.
Then:
df" 'RP f)
>-*^ OJ- /\ i «\p
______ u +_JC
Integrating, C = JL^ (1 - e"VA^Vyi- (13.)
At steady state C = Ce,t
_ . _
C BP BP
e
±-=a + bQ (14.)
e
Thus a plot of jt- us Q with V, T, relative humidity and geometry fixed should
e
be a straight line as is shown in Figure 26.
Recalling that:
B , then = ~ yr=
or i ~ | + b, (15.)
which is illustrated an Figure 27.
The most significant feature of the curves in Figure 27 lies in the
drastic change in behavior noted at Q-1~ 35 or Q~2.85 x 10~2 m3/sec whereas
the behavior of = us ^ is markedly altered. Taking the chamber dimension of
J5 ll
0.249 m3, the Q/V ratio is then equal to 0.104 sec"1 corresponding to a
"time constant" of the order of 8.8 seconds. Recalling the very rapid decay
in ozone concentration under static conditions that occurs in the first few
seconds of a lifetime measurement, (see Figures 18 through 20), it is likely
that for very short dwell times (less than approximately 10 seconds) and thus,
-------
20
16
§
FLOW RATE (m3/sec x 102)
1.6
2.4
3.2
4.0
4.8
Figure 26. Plot Equilibrium Concentration of Ozone as a Function of
Flow Rate (Eg. 14.)
(Temp. = 300°K, Relative Humidity = 66%, 1.04 on diameter
sample)
OS
-------
47.
1.6
1.4
1.2
1.0
0.8
^-~^
r
0.4
0.2
(HOW RKTEr1 sec/m3
54 kV
20 30 40 50
60
70 80
Figure 27. Plot of Effect of Flow Velocity on Ozone
Production (Tenp. = 297°K, Relative
Humidity = 36%, 1.04 cm Diameter Wire)
-------
48.
IR INC.
for very high flow rates, this initial decay process is effective in estab-
lishing the ozone levels. This behavior is best shown in the example
plotted in Figure 28 which shows B in gm/kw-hr vs Q"1 for the 1.04 cm
diameter sample at relative humidity of 66%, and tenperature of 297°K and
applied voltage 54 kilovolts. The latter plot clearly indicates the altered
behavior of B vs Q"1 at flow rates of the order of 2.50 x 10~2 m3/sec or dwell
times of the order of 10 seconds or less.
Careful consideration of these results yields the result that, for
this geometry and relative humidity,
X = - 0.1 sec
-i
so that the exponential in Eq. (13.) is positive for ~ 1 0.1 and that B
o
increases as ^ increases from 0 to 0.1, or Q increases from 0 to 2.5 x 10~2
m3/sec. For values of Q > 2.5 x 10~2 m3/sec, the exponential is negative.
The relevant equation then takes the form
B ~ a
(Q/V)
$ - °'1)
where t, the transit time, is given by ^- , whereupon
B ~ a vwv/ <1 - e "^ I (16.)
(V ~ 0'1)
which yields a maximum in B at ^ -* O.I. Expression does not vanish because the
denominator approaches zero at approximately the same rate as does the
numerator at ^ * 0.1, and the resulting indeterminate form has a finite limit
a
V '
It should be noted that the particular value of Q ~ 2.5 x 10~2 m'/sec
at which B approaches its maximum value is dictated by the combination of the
chamber short time constant X ~ 10 sec and the volume of the chamber.
-------
49.
I
H
i
2.8
2.6
2.4
2.2
2.0
1.6
1.4
1.2
1.0
o
8 0.8
0.6
0.4
cP
00
(FLOW RATE)"1 (sec/m3)
j i i
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
Figure'28. Plot of Ozone Production as a Function of
(flew velocity)-1 (lerrp. 296-298°K,
Relative Humidity 65-66%, 1.04 cm Diameter
StDeciiren)
-------
50.
When the corresponding analysis is applied to the data from the
O.635 cm wire at 51% relative humidity the corresponding peak flow rate
is about 3.25 x 10~2 m3/sec, corresponding to a transit tine of the value of
7.7 sec. Ihe data for this analysis are shown in Tables 5 through 8 and in
Figures. 29 through 31 which follow.
4.4 Effects of Eelative Humidity
From the data presented in the previous section it is apparent that
the salient effect of relative humidity lies in its effect on those molecular
processes that affect the life time of the electrically created ozone. Speci-
fically, one can determine a rough estimate of the rate constant defined as'X
above, from the plots of ozone production against Q"1 (sec/m3) as shown in
Figures 29 through 31.
Equation (16.) in general form is
f1-
+ x I
B v U - e v h (16.)
Q
V
where.the factor X = X(EH) and where the appropriate numerical factors have
been omitted. Hence, the relative humidity effects on ozone production clearly
depend on the magnitude of the ratio of the flow velocity to the static volume
of the test cell (Q/V) and the dwell time within the chamber (t = V/Q). The
data shown in Figure 32 suggest that X is essentially constant above about
40% relative humidity, but that there is a real decrease in X at relative
humidities well below 40%.
4.5 Effects of Air Temperature
The data presented in Appendix A represent ozone production measurements
over the temperature range of 293°K to 307.4°K, a range of 14QC. T° the precision
of the data presented there is no significant effect on the ozone production
due to variation in air temperature over this range. Because of this lack of
-------
fAR INC.
51.
Table 5. Flew Velocity Effects on Ozone Production
C1.04 cm wire,
Q
Cm /sec
x 102)
1.30
1.50
1.67
1.83
1.98
2.12
2.24
2.37
2.48
2.59
2.71
2.80
2.90
2.99
3.67
3.89
VQ
Csec/m)
77
66.7
39.8
54.6
50.5
47.2
44.6
42.2
40.4
39
36.9
35.7
34.5
33.0
27.2
25.7
Air
B54kV
(gm/kw-
hr)
1.86
2.28
2.49
2.61
2.44
2.47
2.57
2.57
2.76
2.73
2.66
2.46
2.31
2.18
1.17
0.642
Jtelative Humidity 65-66%,
Temperature 296-29 8°K)
FT1
54kV
(gm/kw-
.535
.459
.402
.383
.41
.405
.390
.390
.362
.366
.375
.406
.423
.457
.855
1.56
64kV
(gm/kw-
hr)
3.50
3.50
3.96
4.02
4.03
4.07
5.10
3.84
4.02
4.12
4.35
4.43
3.68
4.45
2.59
1.72
- _ i
(gm/kw-
hr)-1
.286
.286
.252
.248
.248
.246
.196
.260
.248
.243
.230
.226
.272
.225
.386
.58
B74kV
(gm/kw-
hr)
5.07
5.07
4.87
5.04
4.78
4.98
4.54
4.73
4.69
5.20
4.85
5.04
4.95
4.78
3.82
2.53
FT1
74kV
(gm/kw-
hr)-1
.197
.197
.205
.199
.209
.201
.221
.211
.213
.193
.206
.199
.202
.209
.262
.396
-------
52.
Table 6. Flow Velocity Effects on Ozone Production
(0.635 on wire, Relative Humidity 51%,
Air Tenperature 297°K)
Q
(m3/sec
x 102)
1.83
1.83
1.83
2.26
2.26
2.26
2.74
2.74
2.74
3.86
3.67
3.53
3.26
3.14
2.79
1/Q
(sec/m3)
54.5
54.5
54.5
44.2
44.2
44.2
36.6
36.6
36.6
26.5
27.3
28.4
30.7
31.8
35.8
B50KV
(gm/kw-hr)
3.57
3.71
3.50
1.07
1.15
1.13
2.49
2.28
2.28
.768
4.55
6.80
6.60
8.00
8.40
B60KV
(gm/kw-hr)
5.32
5.32
5.10
3.15
3.15
4.22
3.29
3.29
3.42
2.26
5.12
7.50
8.56
12.2
9.2
B70KV
(gm/kw-hr )
5.58
5.63
5.58
3.66
3.66
3.88
3.78
3.86
3.52
4.35
6.10
7.50
8.04
9.30
9.02
B80KV
(gm/kw-hr)
5.45
5.37
5.65
3.70
3.90
4.26
3.40
3.45
3.27
5.30
6.57
-
-
-
_
-------
53.
Table 7. Flow Velocity Effects on Ozone Production
Q
(m3/sec)
2.11 x 10~2
2.11 x 10~2
2.11 x 10~2
2.52 x 10~2
2.52 x 10" 2
2.52 x 10~2
2.83 x 10~2
2.83 x 10~2
2.83 x 10~2
3.16 x 1CT2
3.16 x 10~2
3.16 x 10~2
3.47 x 1CT2
3.47 x 10~2
3.47 x 10~2
4.02 x 10~2
4.02 x 10" 2
4.02 x 10~2
(O.635 cm Diarcel
299 °K, Relative
Q-1
(sec/m3 )
47.4
47.4
47.4
39.7
39.7
39.7
35.3
35.3
35.3
31.8
31.8
31.8
28.8
28.8
28.8
24.8
24.8
24.8
:er Specimen, Ifenperature
Humidity 38%)
B (gm/kw-hr)
50 kilovolts
1.81
1.91
1.91
2.59
2.79
2.74
1.25
1.11
1.25
.565
.775
-
1.07
1.24
-
-
-
B (gm/kw-hr)
80 kilovolts
4.61
4.61
4.76
4.61
4.56
4.61
5.40
5.40
5.27
4.15
4.06
4.18
3.38
3.56
3.38
3.73
3.55
3.55
-------
54.
Table 8. Flow Velocity Effects on Ozone Yield
(0.635 on diameter specimen, Temperature
299 °K, Relative Humidity 33%)
Q
(m3/sec)
3.85 x 10~2
3.78 x ID"2
3.34 x 10" =
3.17 x 10~2
2.83 x 10~2
Q-1
(sec/m3 )
25.6
26.4
30.0
31.6
35.3
B (grti/kw-hr)
50 kilovolts
0.875
4.52
6.64
7.12
9.05
B (gm/kw-hr)
60 kilovolts
2.11
5.65
8.24
9.25
10.90
B (gm/kw-hr)
70 kilovolts
3.27
7.30
10.30
11.20
.
-------
12.0
10.0
8*°
4.0
2.0
0
0
A
O
O
LEGEND;
O - 5O kilovolts
O - 60 kilovolts
A _ 70 kilovolts
- 80 kilovolts
0
a
(FLCr/J RATEj'^sec/m3)
Q
30
40
50
8
6O
Figure 29. Plot of Ozone Production as a Function of (flow rate)'1
(Temperature 298°K, Relative Humidity 51%, O.635 cm
Diarmter Specimen) .
Ul
-------
5.0
4.0
3.0
*
D
D
s
s
LEGEND:
- 50 kilovolts
O - 80 kilovolts
S 2.0
M
8 1.0
1
o
0
20
8
8
O
O
(FIDW RATE)"1 (sec/m3)
30
40
8
50
^f 1
Figure 30. Plot of Ozone Yield as a Function of (flow rate)
(Temp. 299°K, Relative Humidity 38%, 0.635 on Diameter
Specimen)
CTl
-------
12.0
10.0
8.0
57.
D
6.0
Q
I. 4'°
a
o
2.0
D
O
A
D
LEGEND;
O - 5O kilovolts
d - 6O kilovolts
-A - 70 kilovolts
O
(FLOW RftTE)~1(seciABd )
20
30
40
Figure 31. Plot of Ozone Yield as a Function of
(.flow rate)"1 (Temp. 299°K, Eelative
Hunidity 33%, .. on Dianeter Specimen)
-------
12
o
10
o o
00
8
RELATIVE HUMIDITY (per cent)
J ' \
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
Figure 32. Plot of X"1 Versus Relative Humidity
-------
59.
a temperature dependence, no further range of air temperature was investi-
gated.
The lade of tenperature dependence for ozone yield is discussed
further and supported by averaged data in Section 5.2.
4.6 Effects of Surface Treatment of Conductor
In order to determine something of title nature of surface effects,
the 1.04 on diameter aluminum conductor was, after an extensive series of
tests on the as-received conductor was completed, exposed to a 0.1N sodium
hydroxide solution for 48 hours. The appearance of the sample was altered by
the treatment from shing aluminum to a mottled gray color with gray-white
patches. The patches were rough to the touch, but sane of this roughness could
be wiped off easily. Subsequent to this the appropriate electrical parameters
of the conductor in the test cell were measured. The results of this test
showed, at least to the extent of surface alteration produced by this treat-
ment, there was no discernible alteration in electrical characteristics. In
this connection, it should be pointed out that this particular conductor
showed, in the as-received condition, significant surface roughness as shown
in Figure 12 and as demonstrated by the relatively low corona onset and
sparkover voltages as compared to the smaller sample.
A total of 21 data points (nos. 672-692 on Table A-4) were obtained
with the surface-treated wire at 77 per cent relative humidity. The data
obtained exhibited excellent correlation with the other data at high humidity.
Points 621-671 at 68 per cent relative humidity for the untreated wire ex-
hibited average ozone yields of 1.89 gm/kw-hr at 50 kv and 3.65 gm/kw-hr at
70 kv, as compared to 1.78 and 3.21 gm/kw-hr, respectively, for the treated
wire. This result indicated, little if any direct effect of surface treatment.
The scale of the surface roughness resulting from surface treatment of this
type (chemical etch) was obviously much less than the scale of the scratches,
pits, and other malformations present on the surface of the as-received sample.
Thus, no further tests of this type appeared necessary.
-------
60.
fAR INC.
4.7 Efforts with Airborne Particles
When airborne dust or other particulate matter was introduced into
the test chanfoer, the line filter upstream of the ozone meter was observed to
plug readily. It was decided not to expose the ozone meter to dust-laden air
without the filter in place for fear of damaging the instrument; this effect-
ively eliminated the ozone meter as an analytical method for these particular
tests. Similarly, the use of the colorimetric method was not judged sufficiently
accurate for use with particle-laden streams because of light-scattering
by the particles in the samples. Any filtration other than use of the
same type of Teflon filter used upstream of the ozone meter would compromise
the colorimetric analysis by decomposing some of the ozone in the sample.
Thus, the efforts to study effects of airborne particles produced no inform-
ation because of the lack of an appropriate analytical method.
-------
'AR INC.
61.
5.0 DISCUSSION OF RESULTS
5.1 Variation of Ozone Yield with Cbrona Fewer Dissipation
Figures 23 and 25 indicate that the ozone yield, or production
efficiency, in girv/kw-hr generally increased with corona power at the lower
voltages and then tended to become constant at the higher values of corona
power (or voltage) . If the sets of data obtained are grouped so that each
set of environmental conditions (all variables except voltage) is constant
for a given set, there are 57 such sets within the 810 total points. Within
each set, then, the voltage was varied upwards, and ozone yields calculated
for each voltage setting. Of the 57 sets, 39 or about two-thirds exhibited
the general increase in ozone yield as voltage was increased. A total of
14 sets exhibited very little variation of yield with voltage, or varied
higher or lower but returned to near the low voltage values as voltage was
increased; and 4 sets exhibited a general decrease of yield as voltage was
increased.
Because of the preponderance of such sets exhibiting general in-
creases (or increases followed by attainment of a nearly constant value) ,
we must conclude that our results indicate relatively lower ozone yields at
voltage values near the corona threshold. Using the stylized plot below
Cwhere zero corona power dissipation occurs at the threshold voltage corres-
ponding to the onset of ozone production):
GOKQNA PCWER DISSIPATION
-------
VER/A
62.
fAR INC.
we must ask where on this curve an operating transmission line would be ex-
pected to lie. At high values of corona power dissipation, such as during
periods of precipitation or unsettled weather (high earth potential gradients),
the yield would appear to be higher than during fair weather (except for
humidity effects), unless all operating conditions lie at corona power values
corresponding either to zero (which is obviously not so) or to the relatively
constant values for a given set of environmental conditions. It seems likely
that the ozone yield of an operating line might shift up and down depending
on the conditions, of which the most important appear to be corona power,
humidity, and wind velocity.
In this sense, it is possible that an operating line could never be
simulated electrically by an enclosed experiment, since the ozone yield could
be continuously fluctuating as a result of fluctuating corona power dissipa-
tion on an operating line.
5.2 Analysis of Averaged Data
If the effects of corona power dissipation on ozone yield (as dis-
cussed above) are disregarded, then general or overall effects of relative
humidity and air flow rate can be shown. To accomplish this, the yields for
each data set (as described above) were averaged, with the results tabulated
in Appendix A as Table A-5. Ranges of relative humidity were assigned, and
the average yield values for each data set falling within each range were
averaged. The resulting data, tabulated on Table 9 and plotted en Figure 33
show that the general effect of increasing relative humidity was to reduce
ozone yield.
Selecting humidity ranges of 35-39 per cent and 65-69 per cent (in
each of which a relatively large number of data sets lie) and plotting the
average ozone yields versus the air flow rate for each set within these
humidity ranges produced the plot on Figure 34 . This plot indicates the
general reduction in ozone yield as flav rate through the chaoiber was in-
creased.
Examination of the averaged data on Table A-5, which is in approxi-
mately chronological order, indicates little or no effect of sample aging or
sample diameter. Tnese observations are subjective, of course, since the
-------
63.
TABLE 9
Variation of Averaged Ozone Yield Data with
Relative Humidity
Relative Humidity No. of Data Averaged Value of Ozone
Range Sets Within Yield for All Sets in
(per cent) m Range Range (gm/kw-hr)
25-29 5 6.81
30-34 5 6.76
35-39 8 3.64
40-44 3 3.82
45-49 4 1.85
50-54 9 5.70
55-59 2 4.46
65 - 69 18 3.87
75-79 3 2.85
-------
64.
LU
cr
10
9
tr 8
DC
O 6
o
ul 5
U 4
z
o
N ,
O 3
20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85
90
RELATIVE HUMIDITY ( PER CENT)
FIGURE 33. GENERAL EFFECT OF RELATIVE HUMIDITY ON OZONE
YIELD FROM ENERGIZED HIGH-VOLTAGE CABLE
-------
5.0
4.5
4.0
tr
x
i
3.5
Q
UJ
UJ
2
O
N
O
UJ
DC.
UJ
3.0
2.5
2.0
1.7
D D D n O
0° ° D
LEGEND:
O - 35 - 39 % RH
D - 65 - 69 % RH
o°
0 I 2 3 4
AIR FLOW RATE (CUM/SEC X I02)
FIGURE 34. GENERAL EFFECT OF AIR FLOW RATE ON OZONE YIELD FROM ENERGIZED
HIGH-VOLTAGE CABLE
en
Ln
-------
66.
fAR INC.
corona process and chemical reactions therein are inherently variable.
This type of variation appeared in our system both as point-to-point
fluctuations and as day-to-day variations. The process and the test re-
sults were less variable at the higher humidities, which is typical of
corona behavior.
The averaged data on Table A-5 also can be used to illustrate the
effect, or the lack of significant effect, of air temperature on ozone yield.
If one eliminates data corresponding to the highest and lowest relative
humidities, the averaged ozone yield data over a temperature range of 293 °K
to 300°K exhibit no effect of temperature. This result is presented in tabular
form on Table 10. The data at the lowest humidities corresponds to the highest
yield values and also the highest air temperatures. Thus, its inclusion in
Table 10 would reflect essentially an effect of humidity rather than temperature.
Likewise, use of the data at 77 per cent relative humidity, corresponding to
a temperature of 298°K, might introduce an effect which would be primarily that
of humidity and not temperature.
5.3 Summary of Ozone Yield Results
The experimental results reported herein indicate overall ozone
production efficiencies of the order of 2 to 10 gm per kilowatt hour dissi-
natesd within -the corona. It has teen shown chat, within the range of
variables covered, this ozone production efficiency is independent of ambient
air temperature and of conductor dimension and apparently independent of the
nature of surface roughness; the effect of the latter variable is reflected
in increased corona power losses and not in the efficiency of ozone produc-
tion. In the experimental apparatus used in this experiment there has been
found a marked dependence of ozone production efficiency on the longitudinal
flow velocity which is apparently a result of a very short time constant for
reduction of ozone concentration (-10 seconds) coupled with a fortuitous
combination of geometrical factors characteristic of the experimental appara-
tus. This flew velocity dependence also strongly involves the effect of
relative humidity which exhibits a marked increase in ozone production effi-
ciency at the lower relative humidities. To the extent such an analysis is
reliable, it appears that this relative humidity effect is associated with
-------
67.
fAR INC.
Table 10. Effects of Air Teitperature on Ozone Yields over
Relative Humidity Range of 36-68 per cent
Temperature
(°K)
293
294
295
296
297
298
299
300
Average
Ozone Yield
(gm/kw-hr)
1.82
6.06
3.00
2.08
3.86
3.59
3.55
4.21
No. of Data Sets
at Temp.
1
7
4
2
5
5
6
14
Relative Humidities
for Data Sets
(per cent)
45
45,51
45,58
65
36,42
51,68
38
66
-------
68.
fAR INC.
an alteration of the abovementioned very short life time as is shown in
Figure 32.
Ozone yields which can be applied to operating transmission lines
in the field should be better represented by the averaged data presented
and discussed previously in this section than by data within individual sets.
However, the relatively strong dependence of yield on corona power observed
in most data sets casts some doubt on the direct application of even the
averaged data to operating lines, as discussed in Section 5.1. Nevertheless,
our best estimates for average ozone yields for transmission lines (following
Figure 33) are:
(1) 5 gm/kw-hr at typical average relative humidities
of 50 per cent;
(2) 8 gm/kw-hr at low humidities (10-30 per cent) typical
of arid areas; and
(3) 3 gm/kw-hr during periods of high humidity (65-85 per
cent) but no precipitation.
5.4 Comparison with Published Results
In order to obtain some reasonable idea of the reliability of the
reported data we may compare the losses as indicated in Figures 9 and 11
with those reported by Foley and Olsen on a field set-up involving a 2-
co.. Victor system nnde up of appropriately 1 kilometer of 0.412 cm diarretev
conductor spaced 3.66 meters apart parallel to and approximately 11 maters
above ground. Foley and Olsen report a 60-cycle paver loss for this
system at 60 kilovolts of the order of 1.3 watts per meter of a pair of con-
ductors; this value contrasts to the approximately 7 watts per meter for the
0.635 cm conductor and approximately 4.7 watts per meter for the 1.04 cm
conductor obtained in this program. The possible contribution to the present
results that could arise from corona from the test conductor to the corners
of the copper sheets which formed the outer (ground) conductor of the test
arrangement has not been separately determined, but the data of Foley and
Olsen show that the observed dissipation in corona reported herein is of the
-------
69,
proper order of magnitude for the geometry used. Although efforts were made
to suppress undesired corona by coating the edges of the copper sheets with
acrylic resin layers (and, further, no visible evidence of streamer discharges
to those edges were obtained), the low breakdown voltages for full corona
could have arisen from this source. This situation of the unexpectedly low
breakdown voltages (-95 kilovolts for the 0.635 cm specimen and -90 kilovolts
for the 1.04 cm specimen) is not clear since, for reasons of experimental
necessity, it was always necessary to begin at the lowest voltage at which
detectable levels of ozone were produced and to gradually approach the upper
voltages; this procedure had the possibly undesirable effect of gradually
causing an increase in conductivity of the air within the test chamber
leading to relatively low breakdown potentials. Clearly, it would be de-
sirable to make attempts in future work to even further suppress corona
losses from any source other than that directly associated with the high
field gradient in the vicinity of the test specimen.
As has been pointed out above, the reference capacitance for the
Schering bridge was taken to be the capacitance of the high voltage assembly,
including the 25 on sphere which was the vertical termination of the high
voltage assembly, to the suspended ground plane. To clarify this it should
be pointed out that the return line for the "ground plane" was insulated and
connected to the Schering bridge at the top end of Z-. as is shown in Figure 4.
The actual capacitance used as C in the bridge is the total of all capaci-
tances lying between the high voltage network and the "ground plane." A
reasonable approximation of an upper bound on this capacitance can be made
by assuming the entire high voltage structure to be enclosed in a conducting
sphere of 70 on diameter located 1.20 meters from the plane. Referring to
equation (3.), we find:
(C ) - 19.5 x 10~12 farads.
upper
One should expect the measured C to lie between the limits of (3.5 to 19.5)
j 2
x 10 farads, as is the case.
-------
70.
fAR INC.
The measured capacitance of the test specimen has been found to be
sharply voltage dependent as is shown in Figures 8 and 10. Eeferring again
to the work of Foley and Olsen , we find equivalent changes in line capaci-
tance with operating voltage. The rather dramatic effect of high relative
humidity as seen in Figures 8 and 10 remains unexplained and will require
additional work to determine the nature of this effect. The consistency of
the experimental data used to construct Figures 8 and 10 (tabulated in
Appendix A] suggests that the relative humidity effect seen is real but veri-
ficiation studies will be required before a detailed explanation can be
attempted.
The ozone production measurements reported herein seem to be
consistent with those reported by other workers in the field. Scherer, et
(6)
al report the following observations:
CD The average production rate is approximately 489 kw-hr/kg
(which is equivalent to approximately 2 gm/kw-hr), with a
total range reported (Westinghouse work) of about 0.5 to
5.0 gm/kw-hr;
(2) The oxidant production rate is insensitive to temperature
variation;
C3} The humidity has an adverse effect on the oxidant produc-
tion, i.e., the yield decreases as the relative humidity
increases; and
C4) The half life was about 10 minutes in a chamber comparable
in size to that described herein, and varied about 45 minutes
in clean dry air to about 27 minutes with water spray in a
larger chamber.
Clearly, the results of Scherer, et al, agree very well with the data reported
herein. It does not seem possible at this time to account for the quantita-
tive differences in ozone production rate reported by Scherer and those
reported herein. Additional work will be required to resolve these quantita-
tive differences.
-------
71.
-------
72.
fAR INC.
6.0 ESTIMATE OF ATMOSPHERIC OZONE OMIRIBUTION FROM CONCENTRATION OF
TRANSMISSION LINES IN SELECTED AREAS
6.1 Site Selection
Study of the 1972 edition of "Principal Electric Facilities in the
United States" (published by the Federal Power Commission) revealed that the
highest concentrations of high voltage (69 kV and up) transmission occur
around major urban areas and to a lesser extent in the vicinity of major
power generating stations1 . Eeference (7) consists of a map with major
transmission lines marked and is based on reports filed with the FPC to
June, 1970. It is the most recent information available.
Three sites with apparently high transmission line concentrations
were selected for study:
(1) A circular area of 81 km. radius, centered at the Amos,
West Virginia generating plant, near the Kanawha and
Ohio Rivers and including small portions of Ohio and
Kentucky, plus seven generating plants besides Amos.
(2) A circular area of 81 km. radius, centered at the Four
Corners generating plant in northwest New Mexico; and
C3) A circular area of 18 km. radius comprising much of
south eastern Los .Angeles and centered between the Los
Angeles and the San. Gabriel Fivsrs at the intersection
of a major Southern California Edison line and (appar-
ently) two major Los Angeles Municipal lines.
( 8 )
The EHV Transmission Line Reference Book describes seven climatic
areas in the United States, and the three sites described above lie in three
separate such climatic areas:
Site'-(1) - Area 1; Northeastern
Site (2) - Area 4 (primarily); Western Mountain
Site (3) - Area 6; Coastal Pacific Southwest
-------
73.
Site (3), in the Los Angeles area, contains one of the highest local
concentrations of high-voltage transmission lines anywhere in the world.
Site (1) appears from Reference 7 to hold a relatively high concentration for
a non-urban area, and Site (2) contains a lower concentration of lines from
one large generating complex (Four Corners) and is essentially open country.
The total length of three-phase transmission line within each site, as
derived from measurements made on Reference 7 , are as follows:
Site (1) (Amos) - 1,345 mi. (2,420 km.)
Site (2) (Pour Corners) - 472 mi. (850 km.)
Site (3) (los Angeles) - 429 mi. (772 km.)
6.2 Corona Losses from Each Site
Selection of average corona loss factors for these sites is very
difficult, since voltages range from 115 kV to 765 kV, corona losses vary
widely between lines of the same voltage (due to geometric differences, local
weather, etc.), and relatively little data are available concerning actual
corona losses. Consultation and analysis of the information on operating and
( R )
design factors in the EHV Handbook ° produced the following information:
Climatic Base Line (Fair Weather)
Site Area Corona Loss (Ave.)
(kw/mi)
Average Adder Total Design
for 500 kV Line Corona Loss (SOOkV)
(kw/nu.)
'(kw/mi)
345 kV - 3.0
500 kV - 5.O
735 kV - 10.0
345 kV - 2.7
500 kV - 4.2
735 kV - 8.0
345 kV - 2.2
500 kV - 3.O
735 kV - 5.7
3.4
2.6
1.4
8.4
6.8
4.4
-------
74.
IR INC.
Based on this and other similar information, the following values
were assigned as the average corona loss per mile for all major lines in a
given area:
Site (1) - 5.0 kw/mi
Site (2) - 4.0 kw/mi
Site (3) - 3.0 mw/mi.
These values do not take into account lines operating at voltages
below 115 kV, lines operating at less than design voltage, new lines or
loss of lines since 1970, or corona losses in substations and immediately
around generating plants. These factors should, in general, tend to cancel
each other.
The corona losses for the three sites calculated from the average
losses per mile times miles of lines are as follows:
Site (1) (Amos) - 6,730 kw
Site (2) (Four Comers) - 1,888 kw
Site (3) (Los Angeles) - 1,287 kw
6.3 Ozone Contribution from Corona losses
The following analysis was performed to determine, as an order or
magnitude approximation, the potential contribution of transmission lines
to the local ozone concentration levels at the three sites described above.
Since many assumptions were necessary for the analysis, the reader should
bear in mind that the results of the analysis are only rough approximations.
Other assumptions can be made and applied to the analysis with equal
impunity.
The change in ozone concentration with respect to time (-^rr) arising
from the corona losses can be expressed as:
-------
75.
fAR INC.
., (0_ production rate) .- (0_ destruction rate)
dt " Volume
At steady state, (-^) = 0, production equals destruction, and a
limiting ozone concentration is maintained. For a given and closed volume,
and assuming perfect nixing, this limiting concentration depends on the
production rate (which, for our purposes, is assumed to be constant) and the
nature of the decomposition process. Assuming a single decomposition pro-
cess following:
C = C e"Xt
L o e
the limiting concentration is given by:
C =
VX
where:
C = limiting concentration, gm/m3
B = ozone yield, gm/kw-hr
P = power dissipated, kw-hr
V = volume, r;3
X = time constant, hr"1
Values of A over a range of ozone half- lives from one hour to 10O
hours are:
Half-Life X
(hours) (hr"1)
1 0.693
10 0.0693
100 0.00693
-------
76.
It then remained to select an appropriate altitude, below which
all of the ozone so produced would be contained. This height of our cylind-
rical container was chosen to be one kilometer, based on the typical height
of an inversion layer being below this altitude and other considerations.
Thus, we assurre that:
(1) The ozone produced is at a constant (average)
rate based on the mean values from our work
described herein (and assuming that the
average relative humidity of Sites (2) and
(3) is 25-30 per cent, that of Site (1) 50
per cent, and a linear relationship between
ozone yield and relative humidity on either
side of the selected mean) ;
(2) The ozone so produced is maintained in a
constant cylindrical volume contained within
the circular areas about the sites as des-
cribed above and a height of one kilometer; and
(3) The ozone concentration throughout the volume
is constant (alternatively, an average
concentration r.ay be considered) .
The steady-state (or limiting) ozone concentrations calculated on
the basis of these and the other assumption as described previously, are as
follows (air density = 1.2 x 103 gm/cu m) :
Site (1) - Amos, W. Va. (B = 5.5 gm/kw-hr; V = 2.06 x 101Q cu m)
O Half -Life C
(hr) (ppb)
1 2.15
10 21.5
100 215
Site (2) - lour Comers, N.Mex. (B = 8 gm/kw-hr; V = 2.06 x 1O10 cu m)
-------
77.
03 Half-life C^
(hr) (ppb)
1 0.88
10 8.8
100 88
Site (3) - Los Angeles, Calif. (B = 8.0 gm/kw-hr; V = 1.02 x 109 cu m)
03 Half-life C^
ThrJ(rob)
1 12.2
10 122
100 1,220
The linear dependence of the steady-state concentration of ozone
lifetime shows clearly that the lifetime is the single most important factor
considered here in determining the relative contribution of transmission lines
to local ozone levels. In reality, any wind condition other than calm will
dramatically reduce the local contribution which can be attributed to trans-
mission lines.
( 9)
Lifetime measurements of ozone in smoggy air in a glass container
.indicate a half-life under these conditions of about one hour. Other work with
(in)
cleaner ail' 111 a r-vjtdl enclosure *"' ha3 x^iv-iteJ. in reporceJ. haif-'li/es G.<:
ozone of up to 8.2 hours. It is very difficult to relate these values to free
air above the three selected sites, but it appears reasonable to assign a
half-life of a few hours for Site (3), so that the corresponding C^ would be
15-30 ppb. Thus, coronal ozone production would be a sizeable contribution
to the ambient ozone level in the area of Site (3), particularly to nighttime
levels since photochemical production would be minimal and the half-life could
increase.
The ozone half-life for Sites (1) and (2) may be of the order of
five hours (possibly ten hours in the Four Corners area), and from the analysis
-------
78.
fAR INC.
the contribution from transmission lines could be as high as 20 ppb for Site
(1) and 10 ppb for Site (2) . Both would have to be considered significant
contributions.
Qie could conclude from the above analysis that, under atmospheric
conditions of relative calm, transmission lines might contribute to local
ozone levels. Such conditions can ensue from the presence of trapped air
Cas under an inversion layer or because of terrain-wind interactions) in the
vicinity of transmission lines. There are many areas of the United States,
particularly near the larger cities, where this coirfoination of conditions could
be present.
In 1969 it was estimated that over 300,000 miles (540,000 km) of
high-voltage (69 k.V-765 kV) transmission lines were operating in the contiguous
48 states of the United States^11 ~, and an estimate of 250,000 miles (450,000 km)
(12)
in 1966 was made by Rose . A reasonable estimate at present appears to be
350,000 miles (630,000 km). A reasonable projection for 1990 appears to be
500,000 miles (900,000 km) , unless significant new construction of underground
lines is begun soon.
At an overall average of 4 kw/mile (2.22 kw/km) of corona loss on all
of these lines, and an average ozone yield of 5 gm/kw-hr, the total yearly
productions over the country in 1973 and 1990 are estimated to be:
1973 - 6.1 x 107 kg/yr (6.0 x 10" tons/yr)
1990 - 8.8 x 107 kg/yr (8.7 x 10 " tons/yr)
These amounts of ozone spread over the entire area of the country
would not appear to be significant. However, in actual fact, transmission
lines tend to be concentrated about urban areas as discussed previously and
this would tend to magnify the effects of the ozone so produced.
-------
79.
fAR INC.
7.0 CONCLUSIONS AND REOOMMEND^TIOSTS
The following conclusions and recommendations are based on the
results obtained from the program, and from analysis and interpretation of
the results.
7.1 Conclusions
CD The experimental method used and the results observed
and consistent with previous efforts in the field,
and represent simulation of an operating transmission
line in terms of environmental conditions in the region
where ozone is produced (coronal sheath about the
conductor);
(2) Ozone yield (in gm/kw-hr) was not found to be affected
significantly by conductor geometry, surface condition,
or air temperature;
(3) Ozone yield exhibited a complex dependence on longi-
tudinal air flow rate (wind velocity);
(4) Ozone yield exhibited a relatively strong dependence
on relative humidity, increasing as humidity was
decreased. Yields were more constant at higher humidity
and ranged from 5 to 8 gm/kw-hr at relative humidities
above about 40 per cent;
(5) Ozone yields were low at values of corona power dissi-
pation (which, in turn, was a complex function of
applied voltage) near the ozone production threshold,
and reached an apparently constant value at higher values
of corona power dissipation;
(6) At least two ozone decomposition processes were observed
in the experiment, one with a time constant (e-fold
decrement) on the order of ten seconds and the other with
a time constant on the order of ten minutes. Both
processes appeared to be affected by relative humidity; and
(7) Ozone from transmission lines contribute to local ozone
levels in areas where concentrations of transmission and
distribution lines exist. Under these conditions the
concentration of lines and local wind conditions would have
much greater effects on the local ozone contribution from
transmission lines than any of the variables studied in
1 this program.
-------
80.
7.2 Recommendations
(1) Regions in which locally high concentrations of
transmission lines exist should be studied more
closely with respect to local ozone contributions
from these lines during calm weather;
(2) Ihe decomposition processes involved in ozone
destruction should be defined, particularly those
processes which could limit the accuracy of ozone
production studies in enclosed volumes and those
which could affect persistence in free air; and
C3] Since corona losses are greatly increased by
precipitation, and since neither ozone yields nor
decomposition processes occurring during precipi-
tation appear to be well-defined at present, it is
recommended that possible effects of precipitation
on ozone production by transmission lines be
studied in more detail.
-------
81.
8.0 BTRT.TOGRflPHY
1. (a) W. P. Baker, J. Elec. Eng. Ed. 2_, 103-U3, 1964 - Pergamon Press,
Great Britain.
(b) E. Rawlinson, et al; IRE, Control & Science, 113, 705, 1966.
2. W. R. Smythe, "Static and Dynamic Electricity", McGraw-Hill, 1939, .
pp 119-120. (units in CGS).
3. EHV Transmission Line Reference Book, Edison Electric Institute, 1968,
pp 124-127.
4. Federal Register, 36_, 8195 ff (April 30, 1971).
5. A. H. Foley & F. Olsen; AIEE - Project EHV, pp 34O-346, June 1960.
6. H. N. Scherer, et al, IKKF! Transactions T7255O-2, presented at the
IEEE PES Sumnter Meeting, San Francisco, Calif; July 9-14, 1972.
7. "Principal Electric Facilities in the United States", published by
the Federal Power Commission, 1972.
8. EHV Transmission Life Reference Book. Edison Electric Institute, 1968,
pp 127-170.
9. (a) Haagen-Smit, A.J., and M. M. Fox, Ind. Eng. Chem, 48, pp 1484-7
(1956). ~
(b) Haagen-Smit, A. J., and L. G. Wayne, "Atmospheric Reactions and
Scavenging", in "Air Pollution" (A. C. Stern, ed.), Vol. 1,2 ed.,
pp. 168-71. Academic Press, New York, N.Y. (1968).
10. (a) R. Sabersky, et al; Environmental Sci & Tech; 7_, 347 (1973) .
(b) F. Mueller, et al; Environmental Sci & Tech, 7, 342 (1973).
-------
fAR INC.
APPENDIX A
Tabulated Electrical Measurements
and Ozone Production Data
-------
Table A-l. 'iXibulated Electrical Measurements for 0.635 cm
Diamster AluminuiTi Cable Sample
V(kv)
30
II
11
40
n
"
50
"
"
60
"
II
70
II
II
30
"
40
50
"D r*
IV} V-»^
(10~5) (108)
1.14
1.14
1.13
1.04
1.02
0.96
0.63
1.63
1.33
1.04
1.13
1.10
0.97
0.70
0.503
1.56
1.53
1.50
1.03
0.95
5.3
2.3
1.31
1.10
2.11
3.21
1.10
1.10
2.10
2.10
1.14
2.04
1.64
2.64
3.75
1.00
2.03
2.06
1.58
2.96
R4
do'5)
1.13
1.14
1.13
1.12
1.16
1.17
1.34
3.44
4.13
6.03
6.41
7.11
7.20
7.10
6.32
1.61
1.61
2.11
2.32
3.53
C4
do8)
5.26
2.27
1.25
1.46
2.47
3.47
1.47
1.56
2.46
2.46
1.86
2.36
2.04
3.04
4.01
0.99
2.01
2.30
2.33
2.43
X/S
1
1
1
0
1
1
1
1
2
1
2
2
2
2
2
1
1
2
1
1
.95
.02
.15
.92
.31
.11
.72
.20
.03
.31
.31
.40
.00
.02
.34
.22
.79
X
(10
5
5
5
5
5
6
10
7
11
9
12
11
13
13
13
5
5
13
6
10
r Ave P* KH
12) (10~7) (watts)
.61
.61
.61
.33
.73
.45
.8
.4
.9
.65
.4
.4
.0
.0
.5
.61
.71
.3
.84
.0
9
6
5
9
2
10
18
27
35
23
30
22
1
1
4
31
13
48%
- - "
_
.5
.5
.1 0.58
9 "
.2
.7 3.28
.7
.4
.0 7.7
.1
.5
.2 11.5
.04 - 51%
.05 0.041
.2 0.684
.1
.3 3.63
Flow
m /sec
0
"
"
-
"
"
"
"
"
it
"
"
.
"
"
2.3 x 10~2
2.85 x 10~2
2.85 x 10~2
2.3 x 10~2
2.85 x 10~2
^
*
Average value of corona loss calculrced from mean of measurements at stated ooriditions.
-------
Table A-l (Continued)
V(kv)
60
II
it
70
II
II
80
11
II
45
11
50
It
55
n
60
11
65
»
70
»
75
"
do-5)
0.75
0.65
0.64
0.63
0.54
0.54
0.55
0.45
0.45
0.60
0.70
0.58
0.55
0.44
0.38
0.35
0.35
0.30
0.35
0.33
0.35
0.34
0.32
C4
do8)
2
3
3
2
3
3
2
2
2
2
1
1
2
2
3
3
1
3
2
2
3
3
2
.26
.32
.32
.23
.41
.32
.03
.83
.83
.20
.20
.00
.30
.10
.10
.00
.72
.02
.10
.20
.30
.50
.60
R4_s
3.52
4.53
4.43
4.74
7.33
7.33
5.30
6.22
6.32
0.90
1.00
1.00
1.10
1.10
1.00
1.11
0.90
1.12
1.22
1.40
2.30
3.20
2.00
C4
) do8)
2
3
3
2
3
3
2
3
3
3
2
2
3
4
5
5
4
5
4
4
4
4
4
.96
.86
.86
.85
.56
.56
.65
.35
.35
.61
.41
.71
.81
.11
.11
.21
.51
.41
.42
.42
.42
.32
.22
x/s
1.90
1.82
1.84
2.61
2.58
2.60
3.50
3.58
3.62
1.17
1.21
1.47
1.40
1.76
1.71
2.03
2.00
2.34
2.40
2.76
2.94
3.39
3.43
X
do12)
10.
10.
10.
14.
14.
14.
19.
20.
20.
6.
6.
8.
7.
9.
9.
11.
11.
13.
13.
15.
16.
19.
19.
7
2
3
6
5
5
7
0
3
58
80
25
86
90
60
4
2
1
5
5
6
1
2
r Ave P* KH
(1O~7) (watts)
20.4 - 51%
24.5
24.3 7.00
22.6
20.7
22.0 13.0 "
13.2
20.7
20.4 23.7
20.5 - 34%
18.0 2.00
21.1
21.0 3.60
22.8
22.0 5.47
24.4
22.9 7.08
21.9
22.0 11.2
20.8
22.3 14.4
19.8
20.0 19.1
Flow
m/sec
2.3 x 10"2
2.85 x 10"2
3.45 x 10"2
3.45 x 10~2
2.85 x 10~ 2
2.3 x 10"2
2.85 x 10-2
2.85 x 10~2
2.45 x 10~2
3.81 x 10~ 2
11
"
"
"
"
n
"
11
"
M
II
II
II
*Average value of corona loss cojeclated from mean of measurements at stated'conditions.
-------
Table A-l (Continued)
VOcv)
31
34
38
42
46
50
54
58
62
66
70
74
78
82
40
45
50
55
60
65
R3
(lo- 5)
0.85
0.682
0.714
0.610
0.576
0.658
0.56O
0.540
0.490
1.10
0.58 '
0.35
0.35
0.34
1.64
0.84
0.84
0.81
0.75
0.66
3
2
3
2
3
2
3
2
2
1
3
3
3
3
1
1
2
2
1
1
C3
(108)
.46
.07
.22
.44
.38
.51
.16
.02
.75
.55
.15
.55
.75
.04
.34
.14
.10
.40
.00
.50
\
1.28
0.917
1.018
0.836
0.860
0.994
1.01
1.00
1.20
3.62
3.14'
1.45
1.94
1.55
1.20
1.18
2.10
4.40
2.40
3.30
C4
(108)
3.22
2.22
3.13
2.63
3.60
2.93
3.90
3.24
4.00
2.08
3.68
5.07
5.02
4.72
1.90
2.30
-3.00
3.00
2.30
2.40 .
X/S
1.22
1.22
1.22
1.22
1.22
1.23
1.30
1.44
1.55
1.75
1.96
2.36
2.53
2.59
1.02
1.21
1.43
1.73
2.04
2.50
X
do12)
6.9
6.9
6.9
6.9
6.9
6.9
7-. 3
8.1
8.7
9.8
11.0
13.2
14.2
14.5
5.6
6.8
8.0
9.7
11.4
14.0
r
(icr7)
5
5
6
6
8
9
14
17
20
22
20
23
23
21
1
,18
9
24
22
22
.94
.94
.21
.81
.12
.00
.4
.6
.0
.0
.9
.5
.7
.O
.02
.2
.6
.2
.7
.3
Ave P* RH Flew
(watts) m/sec
0.373
0.455
0.596
0.725
1.12
1.45
2.77
4.27
5.80
7.90
10.1
13.6
15.9
18.3
0.073
1.98
2.02
5.47
7.72
11.0
71% 3.47 x 10~2
.1 ii
I. M
ii . M
ii ii
ii ii
I. M
ii ii
ii ii
ii ii
ii »
ii ii
ii ...
ii ii
27% 3.95 x 10~2
ii ii
u ii
ii ..
u u
» u
Average value of corona loss calculated from mean of measurements at stated conditions.
-------
Table A-l (Continued)
V (kv)
30
35
40
11
45
"
50
If
55
11
11
60
IT
65
11
ir
70
"
"
75
11
R3
(IO"5)
1.015
1.10
0.83
O.8O
0.84
0.78
0.75
0.84
0.75
0.65
0.65
0.67
0.65
0.55
0.44
0.45
0.35
0.34
0.33
0.35
0.25
C3
(io8)
2.71
2.75
1.24
2.75
0.24
1.02
2.23
1.24
1.14
2.34
2.44
2.34
2.03
2.04
3.34
3.34
3.33
4.33
4.43
4.24
6.14
R4
(io-5)
0.971
0.980
0.86
0.86
1.02
1.02
1.50
1.40
1.51
1.70
1.70'
2.50
2.12
2.00
2.00
2.1O
1.81
2.31
2.21
4.21
3.11
C4
(10°)
2.64
2.65
1.64
2.55
1.24
2.24
3.24
2.30
2.50
3.50
3.50
3.20
3.10
3.30
4.30
4.30
4.70
5.20
5.30
4.70
6.70
X/S
1.00
0.97
.995
.98
1.21
1.15
1.25
1.29
1.52
1.52
1.52
1.80
1.84
2.09
2.13
2.11
2.57
2.53
2.54
3.26
3.26
X
(IO12)
5.01
5.58
5.61
5.59
6.80
6.35
7.05
7.25
8.5
8.5
8.5
10.1
10.3
11.7
12.0
11.8
14.4
14.2
14.2
18.3
18.3
r Ave P* RH
(10~7) (watts)
5.
2.
15.
18.
23.
20.
23.
24.
22.
21.
22.
22.
21.
21.
21.
21.
21.
-
-
38%
-
35
50 0.281
0 1.85
7
0 2.93
2 - "
6 4.65
7
6
9 6.7
8
9 9.4
2 -
5
3 12.3
1 -
0 -
"
"
2
3
2
3
2
3
2
3
3
3
3
2
2
3
2
3
3
2
2
Flow
m/sec
O
0
.07 x
.83 x
.07 x
.17 x
.85 x
.45 x
.07 x
.17 x
.83 x
.17 x
.83 x
.45 x
.85 x
.17 x
.07 x
.17 x
.45 x
.07 x
.45 x
io-2 .
io-2
io-2
io-2
io-2
1C'2
io-2
io-2
io-2
io-2
io-2
io-2
io-2
io-2
io-2
io-2
io-2
io-2
io-2
Average value of oorona .loss calculated from irean of ireasureitEnts at stated bonditions.
-------
Table A-l (Continued)
v(kv)
45
11
50
H
55
It
60
it
65
"
70
If
75
n
R-,
(io-5)
0.68
0.57
0.6O
0.58
0.01
0.70
0.81
0.62
0.72
0.55,
0.45
0.45
0.40
0.40
C3
(ioe)
1.10
2.00
0.93
2.11
1.11
2.21
1.11
2.60
1.50
2.51
2.61
1.61
1.50
2.30
R4
(IO-5)
0
o
1
1
1
2
2
3
3
3
3
2
2
3
.98
.85
.01
.21
.30
.30
.60
.10
.62
.40
.10
.40
.10
.00
C4
(io8)
2
3
2
3
2
3
2
3
2
3
3
3
3
3
.41
.51
.81
.51
.81
.11
.21
.41
.41
.31
.51
.21
.31
.51
X/S
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
3
3
.22
.20
.44
.46
.69
.89
.06
.08
.51
.45
.92
.89
.49
.55
X
do12)
6.86
6.75
8.10
8.20
9.50
10.6
11.6
11.7
14.1
13.8
16.4
16.3
19.6
20.0
r Ave P* RH Flow
(10~7) (watts) m/sec
19.
20.
23.
21.
23.
22.
24.
21.
22.
22.
22.
20.
20.
21.
7 - 34% 3.95 x 10~2
0 2.04
1 - . " .
2 3.49 "
2
4 5.55
5
6 7.10
8 - "
5 10.8
4 _ " »
7 14.3
O - " "
4 19.0
*
Average value of corona loss calculated from mean of measurements at stated conditions.
1/1
-------
Table A-2. Tabulated Electrical Msasureirents for 1..O4 an
Diameter Aluminum Cable Sample
V(kv)
31
n
34
"
38
"
42
"
46
"
50
"
54
"
58
"
62
11
66
II
II
70
II
R3
do-5)
0.85
0.67
0.687
0.723
0.714
0.610
0.610
0.572
0.576
0.616,
0.658
0.638
0.560
0.530
0.540
0.540
0.490
1.08
1.10
0.58
0.67
0.58
0.39
C3
(10°)
3.46
2.08
2.07
3.22
3.22
2.46
2.44
3.48
3.38
2.46
2.51
3.57
3.16
2.03
2.02
2.77
2.75
1.46
1.55
4.15
3.15
3.15
3.45
R4
do' 5)
1.28
0.90
0.917
1.027
1.018
0.825
0.836
0.8O6
0.860
0.850
0.994
1.00
1.01
0.80
1.00
1.12
1.20
2.60
3.62
3.62
3.15
3.14
1.34
C4
(10°)
3.22
2.21
2.22
3.12
3.13
2.62
2.63
3.53
3.60
2.79
2.93
3.80
3.90
3.04
3.24
3.80
4.00
2.02
2.08
4.38
3.58
3.68
4.87
X/S
. 1.235
1.228
1.22
1.21
1.22
1.22
.1.23
1.22
1.23
1.21
11.24
1.23
.1.31
1.28
1.44
1.44
1.61 .
1.50
1.73
.1.77
'1.75
1.99
1.93
X
do12)
6.96
6.87
6.85
6.79
6.85
6.85
6.90
6.85
6.90
6.79
6.95
6.90
7.35
7.7
8.07
8.07
9.04
8.41
9.70
9.93
8.90
11.2
10.8
r
( 10~7 )
5.6
6.3
6.6
5.5
6.1
6.4
7.0
6.7
8.6
8 x
1.1
9.7
1.5
1.4
1.8
1,3
'2.0
2.0
2.3
2.1
2.2
2.1
2.0
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
107
107
107
107
107
107
107
107
107
Ave P* RH
(watts)
0.394 70%
__ 11
0.49
_
0.60
- "
0.73
-
1.10
VT^
s>\
Flow £~ "
PC
m/sec
' _ ^
^
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
107
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
107
107
107
107
10 8
108
10s
108
10 8
108
108
1O8
108
1.60
-
2.70
_
4.15
-
5.95
-
7.90
"
_ ii
9.92
"
-
-
. -
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
*Average value of corona loss calculated from itean of measurements at stated conditions.
-------
Table A-2 (Continued)
v(kv)
74
ii
78
11
11
82
11
40
45
50
55
60
»
»
65
11
11
70
R3
do-5)
0.35
0.34
0.35
0.35
0.34
0.34
0.28
1.11
l.ll'
1.12
0.92
.0.95
1.23
0.92
1.06
0.84
0.82
0.73
C3
do8)
3.55
2.65
3.75
3.75
2.75
'3.04
4.04
2.53
2.53
2.56
2.17
2.18
1.11
2.52
1.13
2.33
2.50
2.52
\
1.45
1.23
1.94
2.04
1.64
1.55
1.45
1.15
1.16
1.21
1.21
1.72
1.72
1.83
1.75
2.09
1.95
2.40
C4
(10°)
5.07
4.77
5.02
5.01
4.72
4.72
5.72
2.46
2.47
2.58
2.67
2.85
1.75
3.14
2.04
3.04
3.29
3.34
X/S
2.41
2.31
2.47
2.52
2.61
2.54
2.64
1.04
1.05
1.03
1.08
1.19
1.12
1.21
1.24
1.38
1.33
1.58
X
(1012)
13.5
13.0
13.9
14.2
14.7
14.3
14.8
5.7
5.8
5.7
6.1
6.7
6.3
6.8
7.0
7.7
7.5
8.9
r
do-7)
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
.5
.2
.2
.3
.3
.1
.O
.7
.0
.7
x
x
X
X
X
X
X
-
X
X
X
108
108
108
108
10 B
10s
1O8
107
108
108
.65 x 108
.7
.1
.0
.0
.2
X
X
X
X
X
108
108
108
108
109
Ave P* RH Flow
(watts) m/sec
13.5 70%
_ ii _
17.7
"
"
18.0
_ ll _
38%
- "
.197 "
1.65 " - '
3.38 " 2.95 x 10~2
2.92
3.41 "
4.72
5.32 " "
5.13 "
7.82
Average value of corona loss calculated from mean of measurements at stated conditions.
-------
Table A-2 (Continued)
V(Jcv)
40
45
50
53
55
"
58
"
60
"
65
n
70
"
75
40
50
63
R3s
1.20
1.24
1.12
1.00
0.64
1.07
0.90
0.62
0.87
0.62
0.78
0.62
0.69
0.53
0.63
1.02
0.91
0.79
C3
(IO8)
2.40
2.37
2.33
2.25
2.69
2.36
2.45
1.48
2.55
1.47
2.36
1.45
2.36
1.36
2.14
3.14
2.50
2.40
R4
(IO-5)
1.45
1.58
1.58
1.70
1.04
1.98
2.05
0.98
2.12
1.01
2.16
1.20
2.20
1.12
2.30
1.22
1.24
2.06
C4
do8)
2.32
2.34
2.46
2.65
3.51
2.74
2.92
2.74
3.03
2.78
3.04
2.88
3.14
3.18
3.11
3.01
2.73
3.04
X/S
1.11
1.11
1.14
1.20
1.21
1.23
1.34
1.32
1.37
1.33
1.51
1.50
1.70
1.66
1.94
0.95
1.13
1.47
X
do12)
6.2
6.2
8.4
6.7
6.8
n
7.5
"
7.7
It
8.4
"
9.5
"
10.9
5.3
6.3
8.2
(1
3.4
4.5
7.8
1.35
1.35
r
.o~7)
x IO7
x IO7
x IO7
x IO8
x IO8
"
1.70 x IO8
n
1.80 x IO8
2.1
2.2
2.2
1.25
8.4
1.96
"
x IO8
"
x IO8
"
x IO8
x IO8
x IO7
x IO8
Ave P RH
(watts)
O.3O 65%
0.86
0.86 " .
2.16
2.4
4.6
4.5 "
,,
6.2
n ii
8.6
n n
12.3
0.76 65%
1.14
5.40
Flow
m/sec
2.89
2.89
2.89
3.09
2.89
3.09
3.09
2.89
3.09
2.89
3.09
2.89
3.09
2.89
3.09
3.09
3.09
3.09
x KT2
x 10- 2
x IO-2
x IO-2
x 10"2
x 10- 2
x IO-2
x 10- 2
x 10- 2
x 10" 2
x IO-2
x 10~2
x 10" 2
x IO-2
x IO-2
x 10" 2
x 10" 2
x IO-2
^
CO
-------
Table A-2 (Continued)
V(kv)
10
15
20
25
36
"
40
45
50
55
60
65
70
75
80
85
R3
(io- 5)
1.49
1.50
1.46
1.50
1.23
1.45
1.45
1.43
1.29
1.13 '
1.22
1.06
0.94
0.82
0.71
0.67
C3
do8)
2.63
2.63
2.63
2.6O
2.57
1.48
1.48
1.40
1.45
1.44
1.43
1.50
1.60
1.70
1.50
1.40
R4
(KT5)
2.36
2.36
2.38
2.37
2.00
2.00
1.97
2.03
2.14
2.27
3.27
3.17
3.57
3.77
3,37
3.47
C4
do8)
2.32
2.34
2.33
2.36
2.35
1.37
1.39
1.37
1.60
1.79
1.78
1.98
2.17
2.27
2.27
2.27
X/S
1.25
1.24
1.26
1.23
1.25
1.48
1.44
1.24
1.31
1.42
1.68
1.68
1.88
2.04
2.56
2.79
X
do12)
7.0
6.9
7.1
6.9
7.0
8.3
8.1
7.0
7.3
7.9
9.4
9.4
10.5
14.8
14.3
15.6
r
do'7)
5.3 x
4.0 x
5.8 x
5.8 x
6.2 x
-
-
6.5 x
1.1 x
IO7
IO7
IO7
IO7
IO7
IO7
IO8
1.58 x IO8
1.9 x
1.9 x
2.2 x
3. Ox
2.2 x
2.3 x
IO8
10 8
IO8
10 8
IO8
IO8
Ave P RH
(watts)
.036 77%
.06
.16.
.24
.64
-
- "
.86
1.92
3.45
5.78
6.95
10.6
13.8
17.2
20.3
Flow
m/sec
2.89 x
ii
n
11
n
11
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
io-2
-------
Table A-3 - Ozone Production and. Yield Data for 0.635 on
Diameter Aluminum
No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15 '
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
Volt-
age
(Kv)
40
II
45
50
"
H
55
60
»
M
65
"
"
70
"
»
75
"
80
»
85
(ppm)
.028
.033
.041
.044
.058
.061
.063
.084
' .108
. .121
.115
.155
.160
.161
.200
..210
.205
.250
.280
.320
.330
.410
Air 03
Flow Production
(m3/sec) (gm/min)
2.5 x 10~2 7.8 x 10"5
9.15 x 10~5
1.13 x 10~"
1.22 x 10~"
1.60 x 10~"
1.68 x 10~"
1.73 x 10-"
2.31 x 10""
3.0 x 10~"
3.36 x 10~"
3.19 x 10~"
4.3 x 10~"
4.44 x 10-"
4.47 x 10""
5.55 x 10~"
5.53 x 10~"
5.70 x 10~"
6.95 x 10""
7.77 x 10~"
8.9 x 10""
9.15 x 1O~"
1.O4 x 10" 3
Cable Sample
Corona 03 Air
Power Yield ffl. Temp.
(Watts) (gmAw-hr) % (°K)
0.7
"
1.95
it
3.4
"
"
5.5
7.8
"
"
10.8
M
ii
14.3 *
"
"
18.5
it
24
"
30
6.69 42 297
7.85
3.47
3.75
2.82
2.96 " . "
3 .05
2.52
2.28
2.6
2.5
2.39
2.47
2.49
2.34 "
2.45
2.40
2.3
2.5
2.24
2.31
2.1
°3
Density
(gm/liter)
1.95
"
11
"
"
11
"
"
"
11
"
11
It
"
it
it
it
11
"
it
it
it
-------
Table A-3 (ODntinued)
No.
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
Volt-
age
(Kv)
85
90
»
n
40
"
44
n
n
48
"
"
50
'
it
54
58
»
"
°3
Cone.
(ppm)
.405
.48
.44
.45
.016
.019
.028
.035
. .033
.042
.048
.051
.052
.055
.056
.080
.082
.120
.115
.115
Air 03
Flow Production
(m3/sec) (gnyjtin)
2.5 x 10~* 1.01 x 10~ 3
1.33 x 10"3
1.22 x ID"3
1.25 x 10~3
1.6 x 10~2 2.91 x ID'5
3.46 x 10"5
5.10 x 10"5
6.37 x 10~5
6.00 x 10"s
7.65 x 10"5
8.74 x 10~5
" 9.30 x 10"5
9.45 x 10- 5
1.00 x 10-"
1.02 x 10""
1.46 x 10~"
1.49 x 10-"
" 2.18 x 10""
2.09 x 10~"
2.09 x 10~"
Corona
Power
(Watts)
30
3.75
"
"
0.7
II
1.7
"
"
2.8
11
11
3.4
"
" .
5.0
"
6.8
"
"
°3 Air
Yield FH Tenp .
(gn/kw-hr) % (°K)
2.0 42 297
2.13
1.95
2.00
2.50 45 295
2.97
1.80
2.44
2.11
1.64
1.87
2.0
1.66
1.76
1.80
1.75
1.79
1.93
1.84
1.84 " "
°3
Density
(gm/ liter)
1.95
11
11
"
1.96
"
11
n
n
"
n
n
n
n
11
"
n
n
ii
"
-------
Table A-3 (Continued)
Mo.
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
Volt-
age
(Kv)
60
11
11
65
»
»
. 70
»
75
"
80
"
84
»
86
"
90
« '
92
ii
°3
Cone.
(opm)
.130
.125
.142
.195
.195
.210
.280
.290
.390
.395
.510
.511
.605
.615
.590
.640
.70
.72
.73
.75
Air 03
Plow Production
(m3/sec) (gm/min)
1.6 x 10~2 2.36 x 10""
" 2.28 x 10""
2.58 x 10~"
3.55 x 10""
3.55 x 10~"
" 3.82 x 10~"
5.10 x 10~"
5.27 x 10~"
7.10 x 10-"
7.20 x 10~"
9.27 x 10""
9.30 x 10~"
" 1.11 x 10"3
" 1.12 x ID"3
1.08 x 10"3
" 1.17 x 10"3
1.28 x ID'3
1.31 x 10" 3
1.33 x 10~3
1.37 x 10"3
Corona
Power
(Watts)
7.9
"
11
10.8
"
"
14.3
n
18.5
"
23.8
II
28.5
"
31
"
37.5
II
41
»
Yield
(gm/kw-hr)
1.80
1.73
1.96
1.97
1.97
2.13
2.14
2.21
2.30
2.33
2.34
2.35
2.34
2.36
2.09
2.27
2.06
2.10
1.95
2.01
%
45
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
ii
n
n
ii
n
n
n
M
ii
Air
Temp.
(°K)
295
H
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
"
n
n
n
n
n
Density
(gm/liter)
1.96
n
n
n
n
n
n
ii
n
ti
n
n
n
ii
ii
ii
M
ii
n
ii
^
-------
Table A-3 (Continued)
No.
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
Volt-
age
(Kv)
45
»
ii
50
11
II
54
»
56
"
60
"
n
64
n
68
"
70
II
74
n
°3
Cone.
(ppm)
Air 03
Flow Production
(m3/sec) . (gn0nin)
.016 2.76 x 10~2 5.1 x 10~5
.014
.017
.024
.022
.022
.029
.033
' .035
.035
.039
.044
.042
.055
.056
. .068 .
.067
.072
.074
.085
.086
4.46 x 10""5
5.41 x 10~5
7.65 x 10~5
7.02 x 10- 5
" 7.02 x 10~s
9.25 x 10-5
" 1.05 x 10~*
1.11 x 10~*
1.11 x 10~*
1.24 x 10"*
1.40 x 10-*
" ' 1.34 x 10~*
1.75 x 10-"
" 1.79 x 10~"
2.17 x 10~"
2.13 x 10~"
2.29 x 1Q-"
2.36 x 10~*
2.71 x 10-*
2.74 x 10~*
Corona
Power
(Watts)
2
II
11
3.4
tf
II
5.0
"
6.3
"
7.9
"
n
10
n
13
"
14.3
"
17.5
n
O3 Air 03
Yield HI. Temp. Density
(gin/kw-hr) % (°K) (gm/liter)
1.53 45 295 1.96
1.34
1.62
1.35
1.24
1.24
1.11
1.26
1.06
1.06
0.94
1.06
1.02
1.05
1.07
1.01
1.00 " " ' "
0.96
0.99
0.93
0.94
-------
No.
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
ICO
101
102
103
104
105
Volt-
age
(Kv)
74
78
11
80
II
84
»
90
II
40
II
II
45
"
n
50
'
55
II
»
60
°3
Cone.
(ppm)
.081
.092
.095
.100
.105
.120
.119
.140
1 .138
.032
.037
.033
.066
.065
.070
..110
.115
.115
.220
.200
.205
.350
Table A-3
Air 03
Flow Production
(mVsec) (gir/min) .
2.76 x 10~2 2.58 x 1O~*
2.93 x 10"*
3.03 x 10"*
3.19 x 10~*
3.35 x 10"*
3.83 x 10"*
3.80 x 1O~"
11 4.46 x 10"*
" 4.40 x 1O"*
2.86 x 10~2 8.55 x 1O"5
9.9 x 10"5
8.84 x 10~5
1.76 x KT*
1.73 x 10~*
1.87 x 10-*
2.94 x 10"*
3.08 x 10"*
3.08 x 10"*
5.87 x 10"*
5.35 x 10"*
5.55 x 10"*
9.35 x 10"*
^
(Continued) <£?
2^
Corona
Power
(Watts)
17.5
21.5
I)
23.8
"
28.5
II
37.5
11
.67
"
"
2.0
n
11
3.4
n
n
5.4
"
11
7.9
°3 Air 03
Yield Hi Temp. Density '^
(gitiAw-hr) % (°K) (gm/liter) -<
. ___ (~^
0.89 45 295 1.96
0.82 " "
0.85
0.80
0.84
0.81 " . "
0.80
0.72
0.70
7.65 42 297 1.97
8.85 " " "
7.90
5.3
5.2
5.6
5.2 "
5.44 " " ' "
5.44
6.52
5.95
6.16
7.10
-------
Table A-3 (Continued)
>3
No.
106
1O7
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
Volt-
age
(Kv)
60
»
65
n
»
70
II
11
75
"
"
40
"
45
»
50
»
n
55
11
M
60
°3
Cone.
(pprn)
.330
.335
.44
.49
.48
.64
.65
.60
. .78
.80
.81
.015
.013
.033
.035
.072
.075
.071
.140
.140
.144
.250
Air 03 Corona
Flow Production Power
(m3/sec) (git/nun) (Watts)
2.86- x 10~2 8.82 x 10"" 7.9
8.96 x 10-"
1.18 x 10"3 10.8
1.32 x 10~3
1.29 x 10"3
1.72 x 10"3 14.3
1.74 x 10"3
1.61 x 10- 3
11 2.09 x 10"3 18.5
2.14 x KT 3
2.17 x 10~3
1.83 x 10~2 4.2 x 10-5 .67
3.64 x 10~5
9.25 x 10"5 2.0
" 9,80 x 10"5
2.02 x 10~" 3.4
2.10 x 10-"
" 1.98 x 10-"
" 3.92 x 10"" 5.4
3.92 x 10~"
4.03 x 10~"
7.00 x 10~" 7.9
03 Air 03
Yield- FH Ternp. Density
(gm/kw-hr) % (°K) (gin/liter)
6.70 42 297 1.97
6.81
6.55
7.35
7.16
7.22
7.30
6.76
6.78
6.95
7.04
3.75 51 298 1.95
3.26
2.76
2.95
3.57
3.71 " " . "
3.50
4.44
4.44
4.48
5.32
-------
Table A-3 (Continued)
Volt-
age
No . (Kv)
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
60
"
65
"
»
70
II
II
75
II
II
80
11
II
45
11
ll
50
'
n
n
»
Cone .
(ppm)
.250
.240
.340
.350
.350
.470
.48
.47
, -61
.66
.66
.77
.76
.80
.027
.033
.031
.055
.059
.058
.155
.155
Air 03 Corona
Flow Production Power
(n\3/sec) (gro/min) (Watts)
1.83 x 10"2 7.OO x 1O"" 7.9
6.73 x 10~"
9.52 x 10"" 10.8
9.80 x 10~"
9.80 x 10~"
1.33 x 10~3 14.3
1.34 x 10~3
1.33 x 10~3
1.71 x 10~3 18.5
1.85 x 10~3
1.85 x KT3
2.16 x 10" 3 23.8
2.13 x 10~3
2.24 x 1O~3
2.26 x 10~2 2.97 x 10~5 2.0 .
3.64 x 10~5
3.42 x 10-5
6.05 x 10~5 3.4
6.49 x 10~5
6.37 x 10~5
4.15 x 10~" 7.9
4.15 x 10~"
°3 ^-r
Yield FH Temp.
(giVkw-hr) % (°K)
5.32 51 298
5.10
5.30
5.44
5.44
5.58
5.63
5.58
5.55
6.00
6.00 " "
5.45
5.37
5.65
0.89
1.10
1.03
1.07
1.15
1.13
3.15 "
3.15
°3
Density
(gin/ liter)
1.95
"
"
"
"
"
M
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
It
II
II
II
rt
-------
Table A-3 (Continued)
No.
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
153
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
Volt-
age
(Kv)
60
65
II
II
70 .
tl
tl
75
»
"
80
n
"
85
»
»
50
II
It
55
ii
..
°3 ^^
Cone. Flow
(ppm) (m3/sec)
.170 2.26 x 10~2
.255
.250
.255
.330
.330
.350
.445
, .450
.455
.550
.58
.63 .
.66
.70
.71
.044 . 2.74 x 10~ 2
.040
.040
.075
.075 "
.080 "
°3
Production
(gn\/min)
5.55 x 10""
6.83 x 10""
6.70 x 10""
6.83 x 10-"
8.85 x 10""
8.85 x 10""
9.38 x 10""
11.9 x 10-"
12.1 x 10""
12.2 x 10""
14.7 x 10" "
15.5 x 10~"
16.9 x 10~"
17.7 x 10~"
18.7 x 10""
19.0 x 10""
1.29 x 10""
1.29 x 10""
1.29 x 10""
2.41 x 10""
2.41 x 10""
2.57 x 10-"
Corona
Power
(Watts)
7.9
10.8
n
n
14.3
n
n
18.5
n
n
23.8
n
it
30
n
n
3.4
n
M
5.4
n
M
Yield
(gm/kw-hr)
4.22
3.80
3.72
3.80
3.66
3.66
3.88
3.86
3.92
3.95
3.70
3.90
4.26
3.54
3.74
3.80
2.49
2.28
2.28
2.68
2.68
2.86
RH
%
51
ii
n
n
ii
n
n
n
n
n
"
n
n
n
n
ii
n
M
ii
n
it
n
Air
Temp.
(°K)
298
ii
' n
n
n
n
n
IT
n
n
n
n
ii
"
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
ii
°3
Density
(gin/liter)
1.95
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
.
»
. "
"
"
»
"
»
1=3
-------
Table A-3 (Continued)
Volt-
age
No . (Kv)
172 60
173
174
175 65
176
177
178 70
179
180
181 75
182
183
184 80
185
186
187 50
188
189
190 55
191
192
193 60
(ppra)
.135
.135
.140
.190
.198
.190
.280
.285
, .260
.330
.335
.360
.420
.425
.400
.054
.055
.055
.150
.170
.170
.300
Air 03 Corona O^ Air
Flow Production Power Yield EH Temp.
(m3/sec) (gnv/min) (Watts) (gm/kw-hr) % (°K)
2.74 x 10~2 4.34 x 10~" 7.9
4.34 x 10~"
4.50 x 10~4
6.10 x 10"" 10.8
6.37 x 10~"
6 .10 x 10~"
9.00 x 10~" 14.3
9.17 x ID""
8.35 x 10~" "
10,7 x 10"" 18.5
10.8 x 10""
11.6 x 10""
13.5 x 10"" 23.8
13.7 x 10-"
12.9 x 10"" " ,
2.11 x ID"2 1.05 x 1C'" 3.4
1.08 x 10~"
1.08 x 10""
2.92 x 10~" 5.4
3.32 x 10""
11 3.32 x 10~"
5.85 x 10"" 7.9
3.29 51 298
3.29 "
3.42
3.49
3.54
3.49
3.78
3.86
3.52 "
3.47
3.50
3.77
3.40
3.45
3.27
1.81 38 299
1.91
1.91
3.24
3.69
3.69 "
4.45
°3
Density
(gm/ liter)
1.95
11
11
11
"
11
11
"
11
11
it
ii
"
11
n
1.94
"
"
"
n
"
n
?
£
-------
Table A-3 (Continued)
No.
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
2O7
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
Volt-
age
(Kv)
60
n
65
»
n
70
»
»
75
II
II
30
"'
45
"
"
50
"
"
55
n .
(ppm)
.315
.280
.45
.45
.47
.66
.60
.61
.81
.81
.77
.94
.94
.97
.027
.033
.031
.055
.059
.058
.099
.110 =
Air
Flow
(n\3/sec)
2.11 x 10~2
»
n
n
"
n
n
n
n
n
n
"
11
2.52 x 10"2
n
n
n
n
"
n
'
03
Production
(gity/min)
6.15 x 10~"
5.46 x 10~"
8.77.x 10""
8.77 x 10""
9.15 x 10~"
12.9 x 10""
11.7 x 10~"
11.9 x 10~"
15.7 x 10~"
15.7 x 10""
15.0 x 10""
18.3 x 10""
18.3 x 10-"
18.9 x 10~"
.722 x 10""
.884 x 10~"
.830 x 10""
1.47 x 10""
1.58 x 10""
1.55 x 10~"
2.65 x 10""
2.95 x 10~"
Corona
Power
(Watts)
7.9
n
10.8
n
n
14.3
11
II
18.5
II
. II
23.8
n
n
2.0
u
ii
3.4
n
n
5.4
ii
°3
Yield
(giVkw-hr)
4.66
4.15
4.87
4.87
5.07
5.42
4.92
5.00
5.09
5.09
4.87
4.61
4.61
4.76
2.17
2.65
2.49
2.59
2.79
2.74
2.95
3.28
m
%
38
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
Air
Temp.
(°K)
299
u
u
u
n
u
n
n
u
u
n
n
ii
ii
n
n
ii
u
u
u
n
u
°3.
Density
(gin/ liter)
1.94
11
n
"
"
11
11
11
"
11
11
11
"
11
"
"
11
"
"
11
"
11
I
-------
Table A-3 (Continued)
No.
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
224
235
236
237
238
Volt-
age
(Kv)
55
60
II
tl
65
II
II
70
II
»
"
»
»
80 '
"
50
II
II
55
"
"
60
°3
Cone.
(ppm)
.109
.22
.22
.20
.36
.34
.34
.52
.52
.50
.66
.66
.64
.82
.-81
.82
.025
.024
.025
.077
.077
.075
.160
Air . 03
Flow Production
(m3/sec) (gityrnin)
2.52 x 10"2 2.92 x 10""
4.81 x 10""
4.81 x 10""
4.46 x 10~"
8.O4 x 10""
7.59 x 10~"
7.59 x 10""
11.6 x 10-"
11.6 x 10""
' " 11.2 x 10""
14.7 x 10""
14.7 x 1Q-"
14.3 x 10~"
18.3 x 10~"
18,1 x 10""
18.3 x 10~"
2.83 x 1O~2 0.652 x 1O~"
0.626 x 10""
0.652 x 10-"
2.01 x 10""
2.01 x 10~"
1.96 x 10~"
4.17 x 10-"
Corona
Power
(Watts)
5.4
7.9
n
ii
10.8
tf
M
14.3
n
n
18.5
ti
i n
24
n
n
3.4
n
n
5.4
ti
n
7.9
°3
Yield Hi
(qiti/kw-hr) %
3.24 38
3.66
3.66
3.49
4.45
4.21
4.21
4.88
4.88
4.71
4.76
4.76
4.63
4.61
4.56
4.61
1.25
1.11
1.25
2.23 , "
2.23
2.18
3.17
Air O3
Temp . Density
(°K) (gm/liter)
299 1.94
n it
.
n
i
n n
n
"
n ii
n n
"
n n
n n
n it
n n
n
n ii
n
n ii
-------
Table A-3 (Continued)
NO.
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
. 248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
Volt-
age
(Kv)
60
n
65
"
n
70
»
»
75
»
"
»
"
.n
35
II
TI
50
'
55
n
60
°3
Cone.
(ppm)
.160
.167
.25
.25
.28
.38
.38
.40
.50
.54
.50
.82
.82
.80
.97
.99
.98
J .011
.015
.066
.070
.150
Air 03
Flow ., ;., Production .>
(m3/sec) (gm/min)
2.83 x 10-2 4.17 x 10~"
4.36 x 10~"
6.52 x 10~*
11 6 .52 x 10"*
. 7.30 x 10~*
9.90 x 10"*
9.90 x 10"*
10.4 x 10-*
13.1 x 10"*
14.1 x 10"*
13.1 x 10~*
21.4 x 10-"
21.4 x 10~*
20.9 x 10"*
25.3 x 10~*
25.8 x 10"*
r
" ' 25 .6 x 10~*
3.16 x 10~2 .32.x 10"*
11 ' .44 x 10~*
1.92 x 10"*
2.04 x 10"*
4.38 x 10-*
Corona
Power
(Watts)
7.9
"
10.8
"
"
14.3
n
"
18.5
II
II
24
' n
"
30
n
11
3.4
V
5.4
»
7.9
°3
Yield FH
(gm/fcw-hr) %
3.17 38
3.31
3.62
3.62
4 .05
4.15
3.15
4.36
4.25
4.57
4.25
5.40
5.40 "
5.27
5.06
5.16
5.12
0.565
0.775
2.04 . "
2.27
3.33
Air 03
Temp . Density
(°K) (gm/liter)
299 1.94
n n
n
i.
11
n n
n n
n it
M I,
II H
II II
II II
II II
"
..
!=a
*
ro
-------
Table A- 3 (Continued)
Volt-
age
No . (ICv)
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
280
281
282
60
65
it
»
70
tt
tl
75
»
»
80
It
It
85
»
50
"
55
"
60
"
65
°3
Ccnc.
(ppm)
.140
.230
.21
.205
.31
.33
.33
.40
.40
.44
.55
.50
.51
.72
.74
.019
.022
.060
.055
.120
.120
.200
Air O3 Corona
Flew Production Power
(m 3 /sec ) ( giT/min ) (Watts )
3.16 x 10~2 4.08 x Kf" 7.9
6.71 x 10'" 10.8
6.13 x 10~"
6 .00 x 10~"
9.05 x 10~" 14.3
9.63 x ICT*
9.63 x 10""
11.7 x 10~" 18.5
11.7 x 10~"
12.8 x 10""*
16.1 x 10~" 23.8
14.6 x lO'"
14.9 x 10"" ' "
11 21.0 x 10~" 30
21.6 x 10~"
3.47 x 10~2 0.607^ 1O~" 3.4
O.7O3 x 1O~*
1.91 -x 10-" 5.4
1.76 x 10-"
3.84 x 10"" 7.9
3.84 x 10-"
6.38 x 10-" 10.8
03 Air
Yield IH Temp .
(gnv/kw-hr) % (°K)
3.10 38 299
3.71
3.41
3.33
3.80
4.06
4.06
3.83
3.83
4.15
4.06
4.18
3.76
4.20
4.32
1.07
1.24
2.12
1.96
2.92
2.92
3.55
Density
(gm/liter)
1.94
ii
ii
n
ii
M
n
ii
n
ii
n
n
11
n
n
n
n
11
n
n
n
ii
-------
liable A-3 (Continued)
No.
283
284
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
294
295
296
297
298
299
300
301
302
303
304
Volt-
age
(Kv)
65
70
11
II
75
11
II
80
n
»
85
n
»
55 '
"
"
60
»
»
65
"
n
°3
Cone.
(ppm)
.180
.260
.265
.280
.360
.360
.380
.420
.440
.420
.510
.520
.550
.040
.044
.040
.100
.102
.095
.150
.150
.170
Air 03 Corona
Flow Production Power
(m3/sec) (gir/min) (Watts)
3.47 x 10~2 5.75
8.
8.
8.
30
45
95
x
X
X
X
10"" 10.8
10~" 14.3
1Q-"
IQ-"
11.50 x 10~" 18.5
11.50 x 10""
14
13
14
13
16
16
16
4.02 x 10~2 1.
1.
1.
3.
3,
3.
5.
5.
6.
.00 x 10""
.4
.1
.4
.3
.6
.0
49
63
49
71
78
52
55
55
30
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
;
X
X
X
X
X
X
10-" 23.8
10-"
10-"
10~" 30.0
10-"
IQ-"
10"" 5.4
10""
10""
1Q-" 7.9
IQ-"
10""
1Q-" 10.8
10~"
IQ-"
O3 Air 03
Yield FH Tenp. Density ^
(gnv/kw-hr) % (°K) (gm/liter) -^
3
3
3
3
3
3
4
3
3
3
3
3
3
1
1
1
2
2
2
3
3
3
.70
.49
.55
.76
.74
.74
.54
.38
.56
.38
.26
.32
.20
.65
.81
.65
.82
.87
.67
.07
.07
.48
38 299 1.94
n n ii
n n ii
n n n
n M n
n n n
n n n
n n n
M n n
n ii n
n M n
n n it
M n ti
n n M
n M H
n n n
n n ii
n n ii
n n ii
n n ii
n n ii
n n ii
*
K>
Ul
-------
Table A-3 (Continued)
No.
305
306
307
300
309
310
311
312
313
314
315
316
317
318
319
320
321
322
323
324
325
326
Volt-
age
(Kv)
70
11
II
75
n
"
80
»
"
85
»
»
40
45
50
55
60
65
70
40
45
50
°3
Cone.
(ppm)
.240
.210
.275
.300
.300
.340
.400
.380
.380
.430
.430
.460
.001
.007
.018
.048
.10
.20
.36
.006
.029
.060
Air
Flow
(m3/sec)
4.02 x 10~2
ti
it
n
n
n
n
"
M
n
ii
n
3.93 x 10~2
"
n
n
M
11
II
3.78 x 10"2
n
»
°3 .
Production
(grt/nan)
8.90 x 10
9.80 x 10""
8.35 x 10""
11.1 x 10
.11.1 x 10
12.6 x 10
14.8 x 10""
14.1 x 10""
14.1 x 10""
16.0 x 10""
16.0 x 10""
17.1 x 10
.036 x 10""
.254 x 10""
.652 x 10""
1.94 x 10
3 . 62 ,x 10""
7.24.x 10
13.5 x 10
.209 x 10""
1.O2 x 10""
2.09 x 10""
Corona
Power
(Watts)
14.3
"
"
18.5
"
"
23.8
II
II
30.O
11
II
0.6
1.95
3.40
5.40
7.9
10.8
14.3
0.6
1.95
3.4
°3
Yield FH
(gin/kw-hr) %
3.74 38
3.28
3.51
3.60
3.60
4.09
3.73
3.55
3.55
3.20
3 .20
3 . 42
0.36 27
0.78
1.15
1.93
2.75
4.02
5.50
2.09 28
3.14
3.50
Air 03
Temp. Density
(°K) (gm/liter)
299 1.94
,,
n n
ii n
n
n n
n n
n it
n n
n it
298 1.96
it it
n it
it n
n n
n ii
" "
1.955
n ii
11 "
-------
Table A-3 (Continued)
No.
327
328
329
330
331
332
333
334
335
336
337
338
339
340
341
342
343
344
345
346
347
348
349
Volt-
age
(Kv)
55
60
65
45
50
55
60
65
70
75
45
50
55
62
65
70
75
45
50
55
60
65
70
°3
Cone.
(ppm)
.140
.203
.37
.004
.014
.031
.077
.140
.22
.45
.039
.075
.130
.210
.350
.510
.650
.065
.120
.210
.340
.530
.790
Air
Flow
(m3/sec)
3.78 x 10~2
II
11
3.85 x 10~2
ii
"
.
it
ii
it
3.78 x 10~2
H
ii
ii
H
ii
H
3.34 x 10"2
ii
ii
ii
ii
H
°3 '.-
Production
4.90 x 10""1
7 .10 x 10""
12.9 x 10-"
.148 x 10~"
.496 x lO'1*
1.09 x 10~"
2.72 x 10"""
4.96 x 10" "
7.80 x 10-"
15.9 x 10-"
1.34 x 10~"
2.56 x 10""
4.45 x 1O""
7.19'x 10~"
12.2 * 10~"
17.4 x 10""
22.2 x'lO~"
2.06 x 10""
3.76 x 10~"
6.68 x 10" "
10.6 x 10~"
16.7 x 10~"
24.6 x 10-"
Corona
Power
(Watts)
5.4
7.9
10.8
1.95
3.4
5.4
7.9
10.8
14.3
18.5
1.95
3.4
5.4
7.9
10.8
14.3
18.5
1.95
3.4
5.4
7.9
10.8
14.3 .
Yield R3
(qnv/kw-hr) %
5.45 28
5.39
7.16
0.46 33
. 875
1.21
2.10
2.74
3.27
5.15
4.12
4.52
4.95
5.65
6.77
7.30
7.20
6.33
6.64
7.41 . "
8.24
9.27
10.30
Air
Temp.
(°K)
298
H
ii
304
ii
ii
n
ii
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
°3
Density
(gm/liter)
1.955
"
"
1.915
"
11
»
"
"
"
»
"
11
"
11
»
"
11
"
11
11
11
»
rs
I
U1
-------
Table A-3 (Continued)
No.
350
351
352
353
354
355
356
357
358
359
360
361
362
363
364
365
366
367
368
369
370
371
Volt-
age
(Kv)
45
50
55
60
65
70
45
50
55
60
40
42
44
46
48
50
52
54
56
58
60
62
(ppm)
.095
.14
.28
.49
.66
.93
.055
.20
.34
.55
.020
.025
.036
.047
.072
.080
.102
.140
.146
.205
.230
.290
Air
Flow
(m3/sec)
3.17 x 10~2
"
"
n
"
"
2.83 x 10~2
"
It
II
4.05 x 10~2
'
M
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
°3
Production
(gm/min)
2.72 x 10""
4.03 x 1O~"
8.04 x 10" "
14.1 x 1Q-"
18.9 x 10""
26.6 x 10~"
1.41 x 10~"
5.12 x 10""
8.71 x 10""
14.1 x 10~"
.725 x 10~"
.907 x 10" "
1.31 x 10""
1.70 x 10~"
2 .61 x 10~"
2.90,x 10~"
3.70 x 10~"
5.07 x 10~"
5.28 x 10~"
7.35 x 10~"
8.31 x ID'"
10.5 x 10""
Corona
Power
(Watts)
1.95
3.4
5.4
7.9
10.8
14.3
1.95
3.4
5.4
7.9
0.6
1.2
1.7
2.2
2.8.
3.4
4.1
5.0
5.8
6.7
7.9
9.0
°3
Yield EH
(girv/kw-hr) %
8.35 33
7.12
0.92
9.25
10.5
11.2
4.34
9 .05
9.67
10.90
7.25 27
4.54 " .
4.62
4.64
5.60
6.88 "
5.41
6.09
5.45
6.58 "
. 5.55
7.00 "
Air O3
Temp . Density
(°K) (gra/liter)
304 1.915
u
M
n n
307.4 1.895
"
..
n H
n
" . "
I
-------
Table A-3 (Continued)
£a
No.
372
373
374
375
376
377
378
379
380
381
382
383
384
385
386
387
388
389
390
391
392
393
Volt-
age
(Kv)
64
66
68
70
72
74
76
78
80
40
42
44
46
48 '
50
52
54
56
58
60
62
64
0., Air
Cone. Flow
(ppm) (m3/sec)
.348 4.05 x 10~2
.400
.460
.560
.580
.630
.700
.755
.820
.03 3.82 x 1O~2
.046
.066
.072
.115
.138
.172
.220
.240 "
.320
.330
.405
- .460
03
Production
12.6 x ID'"
14.5 x 10""
16.7 x 10-"
20.2 x 10"".
.21.0 x 10-"
22.8 x 10""
25.4 x 10~"
27.4 x 10~"
29.5 x 10-"
1.03 x 10""
1.58 x 10""
2.26 x 10""
2.46 x 10-"
3,93 x 10-"
4.72 x 10""
5.88 x 10-"
7.54;x 10""
8.21.x 10""
.11.0 x 10""
11.3 x 10""
13.8 x 10""
15.7 x 10~"
Corona
Power
(Watts)
10.1
11.5
12.9
14.3
16
17.6
19.3
22.5
23.8
0.6
1.2
1.7
1 2.2
2.8
3.4
4.1
5.0
5.8
6.7
7.9
9.0
10.1
°3
Yield EH
(gm/kw-hr) %
7.50 27
8.70
7.75
8.47
9.88
7.76
7.90
7.30
7.44
10.1 27
7.9
7.95
6.70
8.45
8.31
8.60
9.04
8.5Q
9.75
7.55
9. 2Q "
9.32
Air 03
Temp. Density
(°K) (gin/liter)
307.4 1.895
n it
,,
n ii
it n
n n
it n
n it
ii n
n n
n ii
n ii
n n
n |i
ii 11
it ii
n n
£
-------
Table A-3 (Continued)
NO.
394
395
396
397
398
399
400
401
402
403
404
405
406
407
408
409
410
411
412
313
414
415
Volt-
age
(Kv)
66
68
70
72
74
76
78
80
40
42
44
46
48
50
52
54
56
58
60
62
64
66
°3
Cone.
(ppm)
.550
.620
.730
.740
.800
.850
.910
.970
. .04
.055
.092
.132
.172
.180
.247
.300
.320
.410
.440
.530
.660
.740
Air 03
Flow Production
(m3/sec) (gn\/roin)
3.82 x 10~2 18.8 x 10"*
21.2 x 1O~"
25.0 x 10""
25.3 x 10""
27.4 x 10""
29.1 x 10""
31.2 x 10""
33.2 x 10""
3.56 x 10"2 1.28 x 10^"
1.76 x 10""
2.94 x 10""
" 4.23 x 10"*
5.51 x 10~"
5.76 x 10""
7.92 x 10""
9.60 x 10""
" 1O.2 x lO"*
13.1 x 10""
14.1 x 10""
16.9 x 10"*
21.1 x 10""
23.7 x 10""
Corona
- Power
(Watts)
11.5
12.9
14.3
16
17.6
19.3
22.5
23.8
0.6
1.2
1.7
2.2
2.8
3.4
4.1
5.0
5.8
6.7
7.9
9.0
10.1
11.5
°3
Yield HI
(gitv/kw-hr) %
9.80 27
9.85
10.50
9.50
9.32
9 .05 "
8.30
8.35
13.6
8.8
10.4
11.5
11.7
13.5
11.5
11.5
10.6
11.7
9.4
11.3
12.6
12.4
Air 0-,
Tenp . Density
(°K) (gm/liter)
307.4 1.895
n n
"
n
n ii
n
n n
n M
n n
n n
i. n
"
it
II M
II II
II II
II II
II II
1=0
00
-------
Table A-3 (Continued)
NO.
416
417
418
419
420
421
422
423
424
425
426
427
428
429
430
431
432
433
434
435
436
437
Volt-
age
(Kv)
68
50
52
54
56
60
64
68
72
76
80
82
40
44
48
52
56
60
64
68
72
76
°3
Cone .
.900
.012
.018
.025
.032
.082
.160
.255
. .325
.440
.580
.705
.011
.031
.058
.094
.130
.195
.255
.360
.495
.600
Flow
(m3/sec)
3.56 x 10-2
3.86 x 10~
it
it
ii
ii
"
H
ii
ii
it
H
3.67 x 10"2
H
ii
ii
H
ii
ii
ii
ii
ti
°3 .
Production
(giT/min)
28.8 x 1Q~*
.434 x 10""
.651 x 10""
.905 x 10""
1.16 x 10""
2.97 x 10""
5.79 x 10""
9.22 x 10""
11.80 x 10""
15.9 x 10""
21 .0 x 10""
25.5 x 10"*
.381 x 10~"
1.07 x 10""
2.02 x 10"*
3.26 x 10~"
4.50 x ID'"
6.75 x 10"*
8.82 x 10-"
12.45 x 10""
17.1 x 10"*
20.8 x 10""
- Corona
- Power
(Watts)
12.9
3.4
4.1
5.0
5.8
7.9
10.1
12.9
16
19.3
23.8
25.8
0.6
1.7
2.8
4.1
5.8
7.9
23.8
12.9
16.0
19.3
°3
Yield
(gVkw-hr)
13.4
.768
.955
1409
1.21
2.26
3.44
4.29
4.43
4.95
5.30
5.94
3.81
3.78
4.33
4.77
4.65
5.12
6.57
5.80
6.40
6.46
%
27
51
ii
n
ii
ii
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
11
n
n
ii
ii
n
n
Air 03
Temp . Density
(°K) (gin/liter)
307.4 1.895
294 1.99
n M
n n
it n
it H
n n
n ti
ti n
ti n
it it
n
it n
M ii
n it
n ii
s-
-------
Table A-3 (Continued)
No.
438
439
440
441
442
443
444
445
446
447
448
449
450
451
452
453
454
455
456
457
458
459
Volt-
age
(Kv)
80
40
44
48
52
56
60
64
68
72
76
40
44
48
52
56
60
64
68
72
74
40
(ppm)
.725
.024
.057
.095
.140
.210
.295
.380
.480
.605
.760
.0185
.056
.100
.150
.240
.315
.430
.560
.700
.770
.027
Air 03
Flow Production
(m3/sec) (gnv/ndn)
3.67 x 10"2 26.1 x 10"*
3.53 x 10~ .801 x 10"*
1.90 x 10"*
11 3.16 x 10"*
4.67 x 10"*
7.01 x 10"*
9.85 x 10~*
12.70 x 10~*
16.0 x 10"*
20.4 x 10~*
25.4 x 10~*
3.26 x 10"2 .567 x 10"*
1.72 x 10~"
3.07 x 10~*
4.60 x 10~*
7.37 x 10~*
9.67 x 10~*
13.2 x 10-*
17.2 x 10"*
21.5 x 10"*
23.6 x 10"*
3.14 x 10~2 .800 x 10~*
Corona
Power
(Watts)
23.8
0.6
1.7
2.8
4.1
5.8
7.9
10.1
12.9
16
19.3
0.6
1.7
2.8
4.1
5.8
7.9
10.1
12.9
16
17.6
0.6
°3
Yield
(giU/kw-hr)
6.57
8.00
6.70
6.77
6.84
7.25
7.50
7.60
7.45
7.50
7.90
5.67
6.06
6.56
6.71
7.64
8.56
7.83
8.00
8.07
8.05
8.00
FH
51
n
»
ii
n
M
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
It
II
II
II
Air
Temp.
(°K)
294
»
.»
"
ii
it
n
n
it
n
it
n
n
n
n
»
n
n
It
it
it
M
°3
Density
(gm/liter)
1.99
"
»
"
it
M
n
ii
n
ii
n
n
n
n
n
it
ii
n
ii
ii
ii
n
-------
Table A-3 (Continued)
No.
460
461
462
463
464
465
466
467
468
469
470
471
472
473
474
475
476
477
478
479
480
Volt-
age
(Kv)
44
48
52
56
60
64
68
70
72
74
40
44
48
52
56
60
65
68
70
72
40
(ppm)
.064
.120
.200
.270
.400
.520
.670
.750
, .840
.940
.O3O
.086
.146
.220
.320
.460
.590
.710
.820
.890
.004
Air 03
Flow Production
(m3/sec) (gityiriin)
3.14 x 10~2 1.89 x 10"*
3.55.x 10"*
5.92 x KT11
8.00 x 10""
13.8 x 10~*
15.4 x lO"*
19.8 x ID'11
22.2 x 10~*
24.8 x 10"*
" 27.8 x 10"*
2.79 x 10~2 .788 x 10~*
2.26 x 10""
3.84 x 10" *
5.77 x 10"*
8.41 x 10~*
12.1 x 10""
15.5 x 10~*
18.7 x 10"*
21.5 x 10"*
23.4 x 10"*
3.86 x 10~2 .151 x 10~*
Corona
Power
(Watts)
1.7
2.8
4.1
5.8
7.9
10.1
12.9
14.3
16.0
17.6
0.6
1.7
2.8
4.1
5.8
7.9
10.8
12.9
14.3
16
0.6
°3
Yield
(gn^/kw-hr)
6.66
7.61
8.65
8.29
12.2
9.15
9.20
9.". 30
9.30
9.50
7.88
7.95
8.25
8.47
8.70
9.20
8.61
8.70
9.02
8.80
1.51
EH
%
51
"
"
n
n
n
n
n
it
it
"
n
n
it
M
n
n
n
n
M
58
Air 0-
Tenp . Density
(°K) (gm/liter)
2.94 1.99
it it
n it
it ii
n it
it n
11
n it
it n
n ii
it n
n ii
it ti
n n
i,
295 1.98
^5
-------
Table A-3 (Continued)
No.
481
482
483
484
485
486
487
488
489
490
491
492
493
494
495
496
497
498
499
500
Volt-
age
(Kv)
44
48
52
56
60
64
68
72
76
80
84
40
44
48
52
56
60
64
68
72
°3
Cone.
(ppm)
.007
.013
.030
.062
.115
.160
.220
.315
, .430
.570
.770
.007
.044
.073
.128
.190
.230
.300
.400
.500
Air 03
Flow . Production
(m3/sec) (grr/nan)
3.86 x 10~2 .244 x 10~"
.466 x 10~"
1.08 x .10~"
2.23 x 10~"
4.13 x 10~"
5.75 x 10""
7.90 x 10~"
11.2 x 10-"
15.5 x 10~"
20.4 x 10" "
43.6 x 10~"
3.5 x 10"2 .232 x 10~"
1.44 x 10~"
2.39 x 10~"
4.17 x 10~"
6.20 x 10~"
9.51 x 10~"
8.80 x 10~"
13.1 x 10~"
16.4 x 10~"
Corona
Power
(Watts)
1.7
2.8
4.1
5.8
7.9
10.1
12.9
16
19.3
23.8
28.5
O.6
1.7
2.8
4.1
5.8
7.9
10.1
12.9
16
°3
Yield
(qm/kw-hr)
1.51
1.00
1.58
2.30
3.14
3.20
3.68
4.21
4.72
5.14
9.17
2.32
5.07
5.13
6.10
6.41
5.72
4.88
6.09
6.15
Hi
Q.
"o
58
ii
n
ii
n
"
n
n
ti
n
n
n
n
it
n
n
n
it
ti
n
Air 03
Temp . Density
(°K) (gm/liter)
295 1.98
n n
11 »
ii
n n
n n
n
"
n n
n ,.
n
ti M
n n
n n
?
GO
to
-------
Table A-3 (Continued)
No.
501
502
503
504
505
506
507
508
509
510
511
512
513
514
515
516
517
518
51S
520
521
522
523
Volt-
age
(Kv)
74
80
84
60
70
75
80
80
90
90
50
60
66
72
80
86
92
50
60
66
72
80
90
°3 Air
Cone. Flow
(ppm) (m3/sec)
.530 3.5 x 10"2
.800
.950
.108 2.43 x 10~2
.22
.25
.32
.33
.48
.44 " "
.014 1.6 x 1C'2
.13
.22
.31
.46
.59 "
.73
.09 1.27 x 10"2
.25
.36
.48
.52
.96
03
Production >
(git/min)
17.3 x 10" "
26.2 x 1O~"
31.1 x 10""
3.02 x 10""
6.15 x 10~"
6.98 x 1O~"
8.95 x 10~"
9.22 x 10~"
13.4 x 10~"
12.3 x 10""
0.26 x 10""
2.41 x 10" "
4.09 x 10""
5.75 x 10~"
8.54 x 10""
11.0 x 1O~"
13.6 x 10""
1.34 x 10""
3.72 x 10""
5.35 x 10~"
7.15 x 10~"
7.74 x 10~"
14.3 x 10-"
Corona
Power
(Watts)
17.6
23.8
28.5
7.9
14.3
18.5
23.8
"
37.5
11
3.4
7.9
11.5
16
23.8
31
41.5
3.4
7.9
11.5
16
23.8
37.5
°3
Yield EH
(gnv/kw-hr) %
5.90 58
6.60
5.55
2.31 42
2.58
2.26
2.25
2.32 "
2.15
1.97
0.46 45
1.83
2.14
2.06
2.15
2.12
1.97
2.36
2.82 .
2.80
2.68
1.95
2.29
Air 03
Temp . Density
(°K) (gm/liter)
295 1.98
"
1, n
297 1.92
n ii
n n
n n
it it
it n
n n
293 1.96
n H
n n
n n
n n
n n
ii n
294
n n
n ' n
n n
n n
ii it
-------
Table A-4 - Tabulated Ozone Production Data from 1.04 cm
Diameter Aluminum Cable Sample
No.
524
525
526
527
528
529
530
531
532
533
534
535
536
537
538
539
540
541
542
543
544
545
Volt-
age
(Kv)
45
50
55
58
60
60
62
62
65
65
68
68
70
70
72
72
75
75
78
78
40
45
°3
Cone.
(ppm)
.002
.005
.011
.018
.020
.024
.032
.035
. .055
.070
.090
.090
.102
.130
.160
.175
.277
.290
.450
.490
.006
.010
Air 03
Flow Production
(m3/sec) (gm/min)
3.74 x 10"2 0.069 x 10~"
0.172 x 10-"
0.377 x 10""
0.617 x 10""
0.686 x 10""
0.823 x 10""
1.10 x 10~"
1.70 x 10-"
1.89 x 10""
2.40 x 10""
3.09 x 10""
3.09 x 10~"
3.50 x 10""
4.45 x 10""
5.48 x 10-"
6.0O x 1O~"
9.50 x 10""
10.0 x 10~"
15.5 x 10""
16.8 x 10""
3.54 x ID'2 .195 x 10""
.326 x 10- "
Corona
Power
(Watts)
1.00
1.60
2.27
3.0
3.45
II
4.0
"
5.0
II
6.4
n
7.7
»
9.0
"
11.4
it
14.2
"
0.695
1.00
°3
Yield FH
(gm/kw-hr) %
.412 36
.646
.995
1.23
1.20
1.43
1.65
1.80
2.27
2.76
2.90
2.90
2.73
3.46
3.66
4 .00 "
5.02
5.27
6.55
7.10
1.69
1.96
Air 03
Temp. Density
(°K) (gm/liter)
297 1.95
it n
n n
n n
it it
n n
n it
M II
II It
II II
II II
II II
II It
II II
II ' II
II It
II II
II ' It
II II
tt II
-------
Table A-4 (Continued)
NO.
546
547
548
549
550
551
552
553
554
555
556
557
558
559
560
561
562
563
564
565
566
569
Volt-
age
(Kv)
50
50
53
53
55
55
58
58
60
60
63
63
65
65
68
68
70
70
71
71
73
73
°3
Cone.
(ppm)
.0150
.0180
.031
.030
.040
.041
.059
.064
. .100
.080
.120
.150
.150
.170
0.20
0.23
0.27
0.27
0.28
0.29
0.40
0.38
Air 03
Flow Production
(m3/sec) (gn/niin)
3.54 x 10~2 .489 x 10~"
.586 x 10""
1.01 x 10~ "
1.00 x 1O""
1.31 x 10~"
1.32 x 10""
1.93 x 10~"
2.08 x 10""
3.26 x 10~"
2.61 x 10-"
3; 91 x 10-"
11 4.89 x 10~"
4.89 x 10~"
5.54 x 10~"
6.52 x 10""
7.50 x 10-"
8 . 80 x 10-"
8.80 x 10~"
9.11 x 10""
9.45 x 10~"
13.1 x 10~"
12.1 x 10""
Corona
Power
(Watts)
1.55
1.55
2.0
2.0
2.27
2.27
2.90
2.90
3.45
3.45
4.40
4.40
5.00
5.00
6.4
6.4
7.7
7.7
8.4
8.4
9.8
9.8
°3
Yield
(grr/kw-hr)
1.90
2.27
3.03
3.00
3.46
3.49
4.00
4.31
5.55
5.05
5.34
6.67
5.86
6.64
6.13
7.10
6.85
6.85
6.52
6.75
8.0
7.40
FH
%
36
n
ii
n
n
n
"
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
Air 0.,
Tertp . Density
(°K) (gm/liter)
297 1.95
n
"
n n
it n
"
ii it
n n
n n
n n
n
»
?
OJ
Ul
-------
Table A-4 (Continued)
Volt-
age
l\o . (Kv)
570
571
572
573
574
575
576
577
578
579
580
581
582
583
584
585
586
587
588
589
590
591
95
95
50
53
55
60
60
58
58
62
62
65
65
68
68
70
70
72
72
75
75
80
0-, Air
Ccnc. Flew
(rcm) (m3/sec)
0.56 3.54 x 10~*
0.55
.0013 3.89 x 10"
.006
.007
.010
.0180
.0124
.0130
.024O
.0265
.04
.055
.070
.070
.085
.092
.120
.125
.135
.150
.200
°3 .
Production
(giri/min)
18.2 x 10~"
17.9 x 10~"
.0448 x 10~"
.214 x 10""
.250 x 10" "
.780 x 10""
.632 x 10" "
.442 x 10" "
.464 x 10""
.855 x 10~"
.945 x 10~ "
1.43 x 10""
1.97 x 10""
2.50 x 10-"
2.50 x 10""
3.04 x 10""
3.28 x 10""
4.28 X 10""
4.46 x 10-"
4.81 x 10""
5.35 x 10""
7.14 x 10""
Corona
Power
(Watts)
11.4
11.4
1.55
2.00
2.27
3.45
3.45
2.90
n
4.00
4.00
5.00
5.00
6.4
6.4
7.7
7.7
9.0
9.0
11.4
11.4
17.0
03 Air 03
Yield HI Temp. Density
(gm/kwH-ir) % (°K) (gin/liter)
9.55 36 297 1.95
9.39
.181 65 296 1.96
.642
.662
1.36
1.11
.915
.960
1.28
1.42
1.72 " " "
2.36
2.34
2.34
2.37
2.55
2.85
2.98
2.53
2.81
2.52
*"--»<
Co
-------
Table A-4 (Continued)
No.
592
593
594
595
596
597
598
599
60O
601
602
603
604
605
606
607
608
609
610
611
612
613
Volt-
age
(Kv)
80
85
85
50
50
55
55
58
58
60
60
62
62
65
65
68
68
70
70
72
72
75
°3 ^
Cone . Flow
(ppm) (iu3/sec)
.210 3.89 x 10~2
.300
.280
.004 3.67 x 10"2
.005
.014
.0175
.024
.020
.029
.033
.041
.044
.064
.068
.090
.080 "
.110
.113
.140
.138
.180
Production
5.70 x 10~"
10.70 x 10~"
10.00 x 10~"
.135 x 10~"
.168 x 1O"~"
.472 x 10~"
.590 x 10""
0.81 x 10""
0.675 x 10""
0.968 x 10~"
1.11 x 10""
1.38 x 10""
1.48 x 10~"
2.16 x 10""
2.49 x 10~"
3.04 x 10""
2.70 x 10""
3.67 x 10~"
3.76 x 10""
4.66 x 10~"
4.61 x 10""
6.00 x 10~"
Corona
Power
(Watts)
17.0
25.5
25.5
1.55
II
2.27
»
3.00
n
3.45
"
4.00
"
5.00
"
6.4
"
7.7
"
9.0
"
11.4
°3
Yield
(gm/kw-hr)
2.01
2.52
2.36
.522
.650
1.250
1.56
1.62
1.35
1.68
1.92
2.07
2.22
2.59
2.99
2.85
2.53
2.85
2.93
3.11
3.08
3.16
f
65
n
n
n
it
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n '
M
Air 03
Temp . Density
(°K) (gin/liter)
296 1.96
n n
n ii
"
n n
n n
"
n n
n ii
»
n n
n n
n n
ii n
n M
n ii
ti ii
,,
^
to
-------
Table A-4 (Continued)
I\o .
614
615
616
617
618
619
620
621
622
623
624
625
626
627
628
629
630
631
632
633
634
Volt-
GCIG
(Kv)
75
78
78
80
80
83
83
50
50
50
52
52
55
55
58
58
60
60
61
61
65
°3
Cone.
.185
.220
.240
.250
.265
.300
.300
.010
.011
.009
.015
.015
.023
.022
.033
.033
.041
.044
.046
.047
.076
Air O3
Flow Production
(m3/sec) (giP/irdLn)
3.67 x 10"2 6.17 x 10"*
7.35 x 10~*
8.02 x 10"*
8.25 x 10"*
8.85 x 10"*
10.0 x 10""
" 1O.O x 1O~"
3.68 x 10"2 .326 x 10~*
.371 x 10-*
. .302 x 10""
.505 x 10" "
.505 x 10~*
.775 x 10""
.740 x 10""
1.11 x 10""
1.11 x 10""
1.38 x 10""
1.48 x 10""
1.55 x 10~*
1.58 x 10~*
2.56 x 10""
Corona
Power
(Watts)
11.4
14.2
"
17.0
17.0
21.5
"
1.55
11
It
1.80
n
2.27
"
2.90
2.90
3.45
"
3.70
»
5.00
°3
Yield EH
(gm/kw-hr) %
3.25 65
3.10
3.49
2.91
3.12
2.79
2.79
1.26 68
1.43
1.17
1.69
1.69
2.05
1.96
2.30
2.30 "
2.40
2.57
2.51
2.56
3.08
Air 03
Temp . Density
(°K) (gin/liter)
296 1.96
II II
II H
.,
n n
n n
298 1.95
,.
n n
n n
n n
n n
II M
II II
II II
"
II H
II It
-------
Table A-4 (Continued)
No .
635
636
637
638
639
640
641
642
643
644
645
646
647
648
649
650
651
652
653
654
655
656
Volt-
age
(Kv)
65
68
68
70
70
75
75
80
80
45
45
50
50
53
53
55
55
58
58
60
60
60
(ppm)
.080
.100
.105
.115
.122
.170
.177
.245
.240
.011
.014
.775
.023
.035
.035
.046
.053
.065
.065
.085
.089
.092
Air 03
Flow Production
(m3/sec) (grVnan)
3.68 x 10"2 2.69 x 10""
3.26 x 10""
3.54 x 10~"
3.88 x 10""
4.11 x 10""
5.72 x 10~"
5.91 x 10-"
8.25 x 10""
8.08 x 10""
3.48" x 10~2 .342 x 10""
.434 x 10""
.775 x 10""
.714 x 10~"
1.09 x 10~"
1.08 x 10""
1.43 x 10""
1.64 x 10-"
2.04 x 10""
" 2.04.x 10""
2.64 x 10~ "
2.76 x 10""
2.86 x 10~"
Corona
Power
(Watts)
5.00
6.4
6.4
7.7
»
11.4
11.4
17.0
"
1.00
"
1.60
ir
2.00
"
2.27
»
3.00
"
3.45
"
"
°3
Yield Hi
(gnv/kw-hr) %
3.23 68
3 .06
3.32
3.02
3.21
3.01
3.12
2.92
2.96
2.05
2.60
2.91
2.68
3.27
3.27
3.78
4.34
4.08
4.08
4.59
4 . 8O
4.97
Air 03
Temp . Density
(°K) (gm/liter)
298 1.95
"
ii ii
n n
"
n n
n n
"
n n
n n
n n
n n
.,
n i.
-------
Table A-4 (Continued)
No.
657
658
659
660
661
662
663
664
665
666
667
668
669
670
671
672
673
674
675
676
677
678
Volt-
age
(Kv)
63
63
65
65
65
68
68
70
70
72
72
75
75
78
78
50
55
60
65
70
75
80
°3
Cone .
(ppm)
.110
.115
.126
.130
.130
.170
.155
.170
.185
.220
.225
.260
.245
.305
.310
.004
.013
.027
.054
.083
.126
.180
Air
Flow
(m3/sec)
3.48 x 10~2
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
ii
n
n
«
n
n
n
3.64 x 10- 2
II
II
II
11
II
II
°3 .
Production
(gm/min)
3.42 x 10~"
3.57 x 10~"
3.91 x lO"1*
4.03 x 10" *
4.03 x 10""
5.27 x 10-"
4.82 x 10~"
5.27 x 10""
5.74 x 10""
6.83 x 10~"
7.00 x 10~"
8.06 x KT"
7.60 x 10~"
9.46 x 10~"
9.61 x 10""
.134 x 10~"
.435 x 10-"
.912 x 10""
1.80 x 10~"
2.94 x 10~"
4.21 x 10~"
6. CO x 10""
Corona
Power
(Watts)
4.40
"
5.00
n
"
6.4
"
7.7
7.7
9.0
"
11.4
n
14.2
"
1.60
2.27
. 3.45
5.0
7.7
11.4
17.0
°3
Yield
(qm/kw-hr)
4.66
4.86
4.70
4.85
4.85
4.94
4.52
4.10
4.46
4.55
4.66
4.25
4.00
4.00
4.07
.503
1.15
1.59
2.16
2.49
2.21
2.12
Hi
Q.
'o
68
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
"
n
n
n
n
n
n
77
n
n
n
ii
n
n
Air
Tenp.
(°K)
298
n
n
n
ii
n
n
"
it
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
H
n
ii
n
n
°3
Density
(gra/ liter)
1.95
n
it
"
"
11
11
11
11
"
n
11
n
"
11
11
n
"
n
11
11
"
f
£*
O
-------
Table A-4 (Continued)
No.
679
680
681
682
683
684
685
686
687
688
689
690
691
692
693
694
695
696
697
698
699
700
Volt-
age
(Kv)
50
55
60
65
70
75
40
50
55
60
65
70
72
75
54
60
64
68
70
72
74
54
0., Air
Cone . Flow
(ppm) (m3/sec)
.016 3.39 x 10"2
.029
.060 "
.090
.126
.185
.012 3.14 x 10"2
.034
.063
.078
.130
.182
.198
.270
.047 1.30 x 10"2
.160
.182
.330
.462
.480
.595
.048 1.50 x 10"2
°3 .
Production
(gir/min)
.496 x 10""
.902 x 10""
1.86 x 10"*
2.79 x 10""
3.92 x 10-"
5.75 x 10""
.345 x 10~"
.976 x 10""
1.81 x 10~"
2.24 x 10~"
3.74 x 10~"
5.23 x 10""
5.70 x 10""
7.75 x 10""
.707 x 10~"
2.41 x 10""
2.74 x 10-"
4.97 x 10""
6.97 x 10~"
7.23 x 10~"
8.88 x 10""
.835 x 10~"
Corona
Power
(Watts)
1.60
2.27
3.45
5.0
7.7
11.4
.695
1.60
2.27
3.45
5.0O
7.70
9.0
11.4
2.07
3.45
4.70
6.4
7.7
9.0
10.4
2.07
°3
Yield m
(gitv/kw-hr) %
1.86 77
2.38
3.24
3.35
3 .06
3.03
2.98
3.67
4.79
4.02
4.48
4.07
3.81
4.08
2 .05 66
4.20 "
3.47
4.66
5.45
4.83
5.11
2.42
Air 0-
Teirp . Density
(°K) (gm/liter)
298 1.95
M H
ii H
it ti
H ti
ii ii
H H
M H
H it
ii H
it H
11 11
it ii
300 1.94
i,
. »
ii
11
11 "
"
*
*»
-------
Table A-4 (Continued)
No .
701
702
703
704
705
7O6
707
708
709
710
711
712
713
714
715
716
717
718
719
720
721
722
Volt-
age
(Kv)
60
64
68
70
72
74
54 .
56
60
62
64
66
68
70
72
74
76
78
80
54
60
64
°3
Cone .
(ppm)
.140
.156
.280
.370
.405
.510
.047
.100
. .122
.155
.158
.210
.265
.310
.325
.440
.570
.660
.810
.045
.097
.148
Air 03
Flow Production
(in3/sec) (gnyYnin)
1.50 x 10~2 2.44:x 1O~"
2.72 x 10""
4.86 x 10~"
6.34 x 10""
7.05 x 10~"
8.87 x 10""
1.69 x 10"2 .911 x 10~"
1.94 x 10~"
2.37 x 10""
3.02 x 10~"
3.08 x 10""
4.07 x 10" "
5.15 x 10""
6 .02 x 10~"
6.30 x 10~"
8.52 x 10""
11.1 x 10""
12.8 x 10""
15.7 x 10""
1.86 x 10~2 .955 x 10""
2.06 x 10""
3.14 x 10""
Corona
Power
(Watts)
3.45
4.70
6.40
7.70
9.00
10.4
2.O7
2.50
3.45
4.00
4.70
5.40
6.40
7.70
9.00
10.4
12.1
14.2
17.0
2.07
3.45
4.70
°3
Yield Hi
(grVkw-hr) %
4.24 66
3.48
4.57
4.94
4.7O
5.11
2.65
4.66
3.94
4.52
3.94
4.52
4 . 84
4.69
4.26
4.91
5.51
5.40
5.54
2.77
3.58
4 .01
Air 03
Teirp. Density
(°K) (gm/litsr)
300 1.94
u n
n u
,.
n u
ii u
n ,i
u u
n n
n n
n u
..
n u
ii u
u u
u n
n n
u u
n u
u n
ii ii
n n
-------
Table A-4 (Continued)
ito.
723
724
725
726
727
728
729
730
731
732
733
735
736
737
738
739
740
741
742
743
744
Volt-
age
(Xv)
68
70
72
74
54
60
64
68
70
72
74
54
64
66
68
70
72
74
76
78
80
°3
Cone.
(ppm)
.240
.285
.325
.415
.039
.090
.137
.220
.228
.320
.365
.037
.083
.126
.170
.200
.231
.305
.345
.468
.510
Air 03
Flow Production
(m3/sec) (gn/irtin)
1.86 x 10~2 4.88 x 10~"
6.05 x 10""
6.90 x 10~"
8.80 x 10~"
2.0O x 10~2 .895 x 10~"
2.06 x 10~"
3.15 x 10~"
5.05 x 10~"
5.23 x 10~"
7.34 x ID""
.8.37 x 10~"
2.14 x 10"2 .905 x 10~"
3.18 x 10~"
4.17 x 10""
5.05 x 10""
5.84 x 10-"
7.70 x 10""
8.71 x 10""
11.5 x 10""
12.5 x.lO~"
15.5 x 10""
Corona
- Power
(Watts)
6.40
7.70
9.00
10.4
2.07
3.45
4.70
6.40
7.70
9.00
10.4
2.07
4.70
5.60
6.40
7.70
9.00
10.4
12.1
14.2
17.0
°3
Yield KH
(gni/kw-hr) %
4.59 66
4.71
4.59
5.07
2.59
3.58
4 .03
4.74
4.08
4.90
4.81
2.62
4 .06
4.46
4.74
4.55
5.20
5.02
5.70
5.29 "
5.46
Air 03
Temp , Density
(°K) (gm/liter)
300 1.94
u ti
u ii
It M
II II
II II
II II
II II
It II
"
II II
II II
II II
II 11
II II
II II
II II
II II
II II
U)
-------
Table A-4 (Continued)
Volt-
age
No . (Kv)
745
746
747
748
749
750
751
752
753
754
755
756
757
758
759
760
761
762
763
764
765
766
54
60
. 64
68
70
72
74
54
60
64
68
70
72
74
54'
60
64
68
70
72
74
54
(ppm)
.036
.080
.115
.170
.220
.285
.305
.034
.082
.109
.140
.200
.250
.300
.035
.080
.110
.153
.200
.255
.285
.033
Air
Flow
(m3/sec)
2.26 x 10~2
n
n
ti
n
n
n
2.4O x 1O"2
it
n
it
n
it
n
2.50 x 10~2
ii
n
M
n
n
ii
2.62 x ID'2
°3 .
Production
(git/min)
.936 x 10""
2.08 x 10~"
3.98 x 10~"
4.41 x 10""
5.73 x 10""
7.41 x 10""
7.93 x 10""
.936 x 10~"
2.26 x 10""
3.00 x 10""
3.76 x 10-"
5.52 x 10""
6.89 x 10-"
8.26 x 10~"
1.01 x 10""
2.30 x 10~"
3.14 x 10~"
4.41 x 10~"
5.75 x 10~"
7.31 x 10-"
8.20 x 10""
1.00 x 10""
Corona
Power
(Watts)
2.07
3.45
4.70
6.40
7.7O
9.00
10.4
2.07
3.45
4.70
6.40
7.70
9.00
10.4
2.07
3.45
4.70
6.40
7.70
9.00
10.4
2.07
°3 Air
Yield m Temp .
(gm/kw-hr) % (°K)
2.71 66 300
3.62
5.08
4.15
4.47
4.95
4.46
2.72
3.93
3.83
3.53
4.31 " .
4.58
4.76
2.92
4.00
4.02 "
4.14
4.48
4.87
4.72
2.89
Density
(gin/ liter)
1.94
,.
»
»
n
«
n
»
II
»
n
n
»
»
»
»
.
it
it
»
n
»
=p
4=»
.U
-------
Table A-4 (Continued)
No.
767
768
769
770
771
772
773
774
775
776
777
778
779
780
781
782
783
784
785
786
787
788
Volt-
age
(Xv)
60
64
68
70
72
74
54
56
60
64
68
70
72
74
54
56
60
64
68
70
72
74
°3 Air
Cone. Flow
(ppm) (in3/sec)
.079 2.62 x 10~2
.106
.145
.180
.240
.300
.031 2.73 x 1Q-2
.044
.075
.108
. 144
.190
.225
.270
.027 2.86 x 10"2
.047
.069
.104
.129
.200
.220
.265
03 Corona 03 Air O3
Production Power Yield m Temp. Density
(giVmin) (Watts) (gnv/kw-hr) % (°K) (gin/liter)
2.40 x 10""
3.22 x 10~"
4.40 x 10""
5.46 x 10-"
7.30 x 10-"
9.1 x 10~"
.975 x 10~"
1.38 x 10""
2.35 x 10~"
3.40 x 10""
4.52 x 10""
5.95 x 10-"
7.07 x 10-"
8.48 x 10~"
.900 x ID'"
1.56 x 10~"
2.29 x 10""
3.45 x 10""
4.28 x 10-"
6.65 x 10""
7.31 x 10""
8.80 x 10""
3.45
4.70
6.40
7.70
9.80
10.4
2.07
2.52
3.45
4.70
6.40
7.70
9.00
10.4
2.O7
2.52
3.45
4.70
6.40
7.70
9.00
10.4
4.17 66 300 1.94
4.11
4.13
4.26
4.86
5.25
2.83
3.21
3.92
4.34
4.24
4.64
4.72
4.88
2.61
3.34
3.98 " " . "
4.41 " " "
4.02
5.19
4.88
5.06
rs
-------
Table A-4 (Continued)
No.
789
790
791
792
793
794
795
796
797
798
799
800
801
802
.803
804
805
806
807
808
809
810
Volt-
age
(Kv)
50
54
56
60
64
68
70
72
74
50
54
56
60
64
66 .
68
70
72
74
76
78
80
°3
Cone.
(pprn)
.009
.025
.044
.064
.085
.109
.168
.215
.255
.009
.023
.051
.067
.100
.110
.122
.175
.210
.240
.325
.385
.460
Air O3
Flow Production
(m /sec) (gn\/inin) .
2.97 x 10~2 .304 x 1O""
.813 x 10""
1.48 x 10~"
2.06 x 10""
2.87 x 10~"
3.67 x 10~"
5.65 x 10~"
7.25 x 10~"
8.60 x 10~"
3.00 x 10- 2 .314 x 10~"
.803 x 10~"
1.78 x 10~"
2.33 x 10""
3.48 x 10~"
3.83 x 10~"
4.25 x 10""
6.10 x 10~"
7.31 x 10~"
8.35 x 10~"
11.3 x 10~"
13.4 x 10~"
16.0 x 10~"
Corona
Paver
(Watts)
1.60
2.07
2.50
3.45
4.70
6.40
7.7
9.0
10.4
1.60
2.07
2.50
3.45
4.70
5.60
6.40
7.7
9.0
10.4
12.1
11.4
17.0
°3
Yield m
(qm/kw-hr) %
1.14 66
2.36
3.56
3.58
3.67
3.44
4.41
4.83
4.96
1.18
3.10
4.27
3.88
4.44
4.10
3.98
4.75
4.88
4.81
5.60
7.05
5.65
Air 03
Temp . Density
(°K) (gm/liter)
300 1.94
n n
n n
"
n n
n n
II It
..
H
II II
II It
II II
"
"
II II
II M
I
en
-------
A-47
TABLE A-5
Average Ozone Yield Values for Data Sets
Set
No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
Data Points
in Set
1-26
27-62
63-92
93-116
117-141
142-165
166-186
187-207
208-231
232-255
256-275
276-295
296-316
317-323
324-329
330-336
337-343
344-349
350-355
356-359
360-380
381-401
402-416
417-427
428-438
439-448
449^158
459-469
470-479
480-491
492-503
504-510
511-517
518-523
524-543
544-571
572-594
595-620
621-643
644-671
672-678
679-684
Relative
Humidity
(per cent)
42
45
45
42
51
51
51
38
38
38
38
38
38
27
28
33
33
33
33
33
27
27
27
51
51
51
51
51
51
58
58
42
45
45
36
36
65
65
68
68
77
77
Air Flow
Rate
frnVsec x 102)
2.5
1.6
2.76
2.86
1.83
2.26
2.74
2.11
2.52
2.83
3.16
3.47
4.02
3.93
3.78
3.85
3.78
3.34
3.17
2.83
4.05
3.82
3.56
3.86
3.67
3.53
3.26
3.14
2.79
3.86
3.50
2.43
1.60
1.27
3.74
3.54
3.89
3.67
3.68
3.48
3.64
3.39
Average Ozone
Yield
(gm/kw-hr)
2.87
2.06
1.03
6.33
4.78
3.22
3.39
4.22
3.79
3.64
3.39
3.12
3.12
2.36
4.46
2.26
5.79
8.03
9.22
8.49
6.78
8.86
11.59
3.05
4.76
7.35
7.32
8.90
8.56
3.43
5.49
2.26
1.82
2.48
2.90
4.96
1.76
2.40
2.47
4.10
1.75
2.82
-------
fAR INC.
A-48
TABLK A-5 (Cont'd.)
Set
No.
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
Data Points
in Set
685-692
693-699
700-706
707-719
720-726
727-733
735-744
745-751
752-758
759-765
766-772
773-780
781-788
789-797
798-810
Relative
Humidity
(per cent)
77
66
66
66
66
66
66
66
66
66
66
66
66
66
66
Air Flow
Rate
(m3/sec x 10 7)
3.14
1.30
1.50
1.69
1.86
2.00
2.14
2.26
2.40
2.50
2.62
2.73
2.86
2.97
3.00
Average Ozone
Yield
(gm/kvv-hr)
3.99
4.25
4.21
4.57
4.19
4.10
4.71
4.21
3.95
4.16
4.24
4.10
4.19
3.55
4.44
-------
BIBLIOGRAPHIC DATA
SHEET
1. Report No.
EPA-650/4-73-003
1. Title and Subtitle
Determination of Coronal Ozone Production by High Voltage
Power Transmission Lines
3. Recipient's Accession No.
5. Report Date Issued
November 1973-
6.
7. Author(s)
Frank C. Whitmore and Robert L. Durfee
8. Performing Organization Rept.
No.
9. Performing Organization Name and Address
Versar, Incorporated
6621 Electronic Drive
Springfield, Virginia
10. Project/Task/Work Unit No.
Program Element 1H1326
II. Contract/Grant No.
68-02-0553
12. Sponsoring Organization Name and Address
Environmental Protection Agency
National Environmental Research Center, RTP
Quality Assurance and Environmental Monitoring Laboratory
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711
13. Type of Report & Period
Covered
F.inal Report
14.
15. Supplementary Notes
Formerly Program Element 110501
16. Abstracts >
A sub-scale simulation of a high-voltage transmission line was constructed and operated
in a_chamber roughly 1.5 meters long by 0.5 meter in dianeter to determine ozone pro-
duction characteristics. Effects of voltage and corona power, conductor size and
surface condition, air temperature, relative humidity, and air flow rate (wind velocity)
on ozone yield were determined. Of these, corona power (voltage) , relative humidity,
and air flow rate exhibited significant effects on ozone yield. Averaged yield values
ranged from about 3 gm/kw-hr at high humidity (75-80 per cent) to about 7 gm/kw-hr at
lew humidity (25-30 per cent). Application of these results to three areas of high
concentration of transmission lines showed that, under minimal wind conditions, such
transmission line concentrations can produce sizeable local ozone levels.
17. Key Words and Document Analysis. 17o. Descriptors
Air pollution
Ozone
Power transmission lines
Electric corona
Sources
Measurement
17b. Identifiers/Open-Ended Terms
Ozone concentrations
Transmission line simulation
17c. COSATI Field/Group 133
18. Availability Statement
Unlimited
19.. Security Class (This
Report)
I.INCI.ASS1F1F.D
20. Security Class (This
P.I pe
"UNC1.ASSIFIKD
21. No. of Pages
129
22. Price
FORM NTIS-3S IREV. 3-72)
USCOMM-OC I4952-P7S
------- |