陈俊豪, 陶霰韬, 叶刚, 常航瑞, 黄浩. 电力电缆修复液的相对扩散系数计算方法[J]. 中国电机工程学报, 2025, 45(1): 388-395. DOI: 10.13334/j.0258-8013.pcsee.231564
引用本文: 陈俊豪, 陶霰韬, 叶刚, 常航瑞, 黄浩. 电力电缆修复液的相对扩散系数计算方法[J]. 中国电机工程学报, 2025, 45(1): 388-395. DOI: 10.13334/j.0258-8013.pcsee.231564
CHEN Junhao, TAO Xiantao, YE Gang, CHANG Hangrui, HUANG Hao. Calculation Method of the Relative Diffusion Coefficient of Electric Power Cable Rejuvenation Fluid[J]. Proceedings of the CSEE, 2025, 45(1): 388-395. DOI: 10.13334/j.0258-8013.pcsee.231564
Citation: CHEN Junhao, TAO Xiantao, YE Gang, CHANG Hangrui, HUANG Hao. Calculation Method of the Relative Diffusion Coefficient of Electric Power Cable Rejuvenation Fluid[J]. Proceedings of the CSEE, 2025, 45(1): 388-395. DOI: 10.13334/j.0258-8013.pcsee.231564

电力电缆修复液的相对扩散系数计算方法

Calculation Method of the Relative Diffusion Coefficient of Electric Power Cable Rejuvenation Fluid

  • 摘要: 该文提出并推导电力电缆修复液的相对扩散系数计算方法。采用预测模型法,分别选用Helmroth模型、Piringer模型、Brandsch模型和Limm-Hollifield模型对相对扩散系数的计算模型进行推导和简化,并选择3种最常用的修复液主成分甲基苯基二甲氧基硅烷(phenyl-methyldimethoxy- silane,PMDMS)、三甲基甲氧基硅烷(trimethyl-methoxy- silane,TMMS)和二甲基二丁氧基硅烷(dimethyl-dibutoxy- silane,DMDB)作为研究对象,计算其在聚乙烯中相对扩散系数的计算值。同时,使用分子动力学法得到各成分相对扩散系数的模拟值,并将计算值分别与模拟值以及文献中的实验值进行对比分析。结果表明:在4种模型中,选用Limm- Hollifield模型用于计算相对扩散系数时具有更好的准确性和一致性,且与扩散系数相比,相对扩散系数的计算更简便且结果取值更直观。因此,选用Limm-Hollifeld模型计算的相对扩散系数作为修复液选型的指标更为准确而便捷。

     

    Abstract: The present work proposes a calculating method for the relative diffusion coefficients of rejuvenation fluids designed for power cables. The predictive modeling methods are chosen for calculation. The Helmroth, Piringer, Brandsch, and Limm-Hollifield models are refined to determine these coefficients. The paper focuses on PMDMS, TMMS, and DMDB, which are the three primary components of rejuvenation fluids, and derives their relative diffusion coefficients in polyethylene. Additionally, molecular dynamics techniques are employed to simulate and obtain coefficients. The study performs a comparative analysis between the calculated values, simulated outcomes, and experimental data sourced from existing literature. The results show that among the four models, the Limm-Hollifield model is chosen for better accuracy and consistency in calculating the relative diffusion coefficients. Moreover, when compared to ordinary diffusion coefficients, computing relative diffusion coefficients is simpler and results in more comprehensible numerical values. Consequently, when selecting rejuvenation fluids, using the Limm-Hollifield model to determine relative diffusion coefficients is a more accurate and convenient approach to assess diffusion properties.

     

/

返回文章
返回