24 M. Lisowski and A.

Skopec: Effective Area of Thin Guarded Electrode in Determining of Permittivity and Volume Resistivity

Effective Area of Thin Guarded Electrode

in Determining of Permittivity and Volume Resistivity
Michal Lisowski
Wroclaw University of Technology, Institute of Electrical Engineering Fundamentals,
Wybrzeze Wyspianskiego 27, 50-370 Wroclaw, Poland

and Adam Skopec

Electrotechnical Institute, Division of Electrotechnology and Material Science,
Sklodowskiej-Curie 55/61, 50-369 Wroclaw, Poland

ABSTRACT
Effective area of guarded electrode is always larger than its geometrical area as a result
of fringing effect. In most standards concerning permittivity and volume resistivity
measurements, an increase in the effective fringing is assumed as a half of the width of
the gap between the guarded electrode and the guard electrode (then the factor B = 1).
In some standards, the increase calculated from Amey relation, is assumed to be
smaller (B < 1). The Amey relation is exact only for sample permittivity Hof. It is
correct to apply the relation to calculate the volume resistivity, but it is incorrect to use
it to calculate the permittivity of a sample. In this paper, a proper relation for the
factor B has been derived analytically for thin electrodes made usually by thin film
technology. The factor B can be used to calculate the permittivity of samples with
arbitrary value of H. Appropriate changes into the standard IEC 60250 and into other
standards concerning permittivity measurements are proposed.
Index Terms – Dielectric materials, permittivity, resistivity, measurement,
electrodes, standardization.

1 INTRODUCTION
IN order to measure permittivity or volume resistivity of
solid dielectrics a tested sample is placed between electrodes
which together with the sample form a capacitor and then the
capacity or volume resistance of the capacitor is measured [1,
2]. One could use thick massive electrodes, but usually they
do not properly adhere to stiff dielectrics and cause large
measuring errors [2]. The electrodes adhere well only to
elastomers and such case the measuring errors are negligible.
In order to improve the contact between thick electrodes and
the dielectric, the contact parts of the electrodes can be coated
with conductive rubber, which is allowed by the standard IEC
60093 [3] and recommended by IEC 61340-2-3 [4] for
resistivity measurements. However, when the rubber
electrodes are used, the results of volume resistivity
measurement are always enlarged (few tents-few hundreds %)
in comparison to that obtained for metallic electrodes [5]. Any
electrodes made of conductive rubber are not allowed in
permittivity measurement since they diametrically alter the
measurement results. Nowadays extremely thin (e.g. silver)
electrodes made by thin film technology are applied. Such
electrodes ensure resistivity and permittivity measurements
with the smallest errors due to their close contact with the
Manuscript received on 26 April 2008, in final form 19 November 2008.
dielectric. The effect of the gap between the guarded and
guard electrodes on the results of calculations of effective area
of the guarded electrode for such thin electrodes is analyzed
below.
In order to calculate permittivity H and volume resistivity Uv
of homogenous materials one needs to know the capacitance
Cx and volume resistance Rv between the electrodes deposited
on the sample as well as the sample thickness h and effective
area A of guarded electrode. The effective area of the guarded
electrode is always larger than its geometrical area due to
fringing effect. The effect may also occur in three-electrode
systems since the gap width g is not infinitely small (it usually
amounts to 1-2 mm). An example is shown in Figure 1.
Figure 1. Distribution of electric field lines in a volume of dielectric sample
in three-electrode system. Electrodes: 1 – guarded, 2 – guard,
3 – unguarded.
It is a common practice to add g/2 to the radius of
a circular guarded electrode, i.e. to add the gap width g to the

1070-9878/09/$25.00 © 2009 IEEE

IEEE Transactions on Dielectrics and Electrical Insulation Vol. 16, No. 1; February 2009
electrode diameter. Similarly, the gap width g is added to each
dimension of a rectangular electrode and to the length of a
cylindrical electrode. This assumption was made in the
international standards IEC 60093:1980 [3] and
IEC 61340-2-3:2000 [4], concerning the measurements of the
volume resistivity of solid dielectrics, in the Polish standard
PN-88/E-04403 [6], in the main part of the American standard
ASTM D 257-99 [7] and in the standard IEC 60250:1969 [8]
relating to permittivity measurements.
In practice, the edge effect is not so large so the effective
margin width is smaller than g/2 and can be estimated from
the expression [1, 2, 5, 9-13]:
g 2 G (1)
Thus, the guarded electrode width extends by
§ 2G ·
g ¨¨1  ¸ Bg (2)
© g ¸¹
where B is the factor determining the increase of the guarded
electrode spreading margin.
However one should note that in the appendix X2 to the
standard ASTM D 257-99 [7] it is stated that fringing
effectively extends the guarded electrode edge not by g/2 but
by a smaller value. It should be considered in the calculation
of the guarded electrode effective area. It is specified there
that the parameter:
2h §S g ·
G ln cosh¨ ¸ (3)
ʌ ©4 h¹
and the coefficient representing the guarded electrode edges
extension, used in its effective area calculations, is as follows:
4h §ʌ g·
B 1 ln cosh¨ ¸ (4)
ʌg ©4 h¹
In the appendix X2 to the standard ASTM 257-99,
concerning insulation material conductivity measurements, the
formula (3) is given with reference to H.S. Endicott’s paper
[11]. In that paper, the formula (3) concerns the case when a
sample permittivity H is much higher than ambient permittivity
Ho, with reference to W.G. Amey’s PhD dissertation [12].
Another source of the relation (3) is a paper [10] by W.G.
Amey and F. Hamburger. Relation (4), called Amey function,
was presented in a graphical form in our earlier paper [5]. It is
also included among other curves in Figure 8 in the present
paper.
In the standard ASTM 150-99 [14] for permittivity
measurements, in formulas for effective area of guarded
electrode, the factor B is taken into account through the
expression (4). Also the Polish standard PN-86/E-04403 [15]
and the standard ST SEW 3164-81 of the former COMECON
[16], concerning permittivity, take the factor B into account.
For thin (much thinner than the sample) electrodes they give
the following formula:
h § g·
B 1  2.932 lg cosh¨ 0.7854 ¸ (5)
g © h¹
and for electrodes much thicker than the sample B = 1 is
25
logarithm and S = 3.141 is assumed, it turns out that the
formula (5) is identical with equation (4).
A very good critical review of the knowledge about the
effective extension of guarded electrode edges can be found
in the paper by D.G.W Goad and H.J. Wintle [13]. The paper
is mainly devoted to a numerical analysis of capacitance
corrections for guard gaps when thick electrodes are used.
The present paper is focused on thin electrodes (much
thinner than the sample thickness) and analytical analysis. In
our earlier paper [5], proposing changes to the standard IEC
60093, we presented our own approximate relation (without
its derivation) for the factor B = 2/(H+1), citing our
unpublished paper (Ref. 9). Since that relation was obtained
for an extension of guarded electrode edges, assumed in
volume resistivity calculations, it was derived through a flow
field analysis. According to our relation, curve B = f(g/h) is
very similar to the curve determined from the exact Amey
relation for the relative permittivity Hrof (Figure 8). We
will prove the exactness of the Amey relation in a paper to
be published soon [17].
In the present paper simplified and exact formulas for the
factor B for thin electrodes, made usually by thin film
technology, and arbitrary permittivity and volume resistivity
measurements are derived. For this purpose, an analysis of
electric field distribution in the gap between the electrodes
by means of the conformal transformation and the Schwarz-
Christoffel integral was carried out [18,19].
2 FACTOR B FOR PERMITTIVITY
CALCULATIONS
2.1 EQUALITY OF PERMITTIVITY OF SAMPLE AND
ITS SURROUNDINGS
Let us assume that the sample permittivity H is equal to the
surroundings permittivity Ho. The value of Ho is usually close to
that of the vacuum permittivity.
The three-electrode system shown in Figure 1 consists of
two half planes of guarded electrode 1 and the guard
electrode 2 separated by g = 2a and situated at the distance
h from the plane of unguarded electrode 3 (Figure 2a). The
real electric field between those electrodes can be
considered as a superposition of the primary field, which is
an outcome of conformal transformation at electrodes
potential V=0, and a uniform field perpendicular to
equipotential planes of the electrodes.
In order to ensure the correctness of further
considerations, let us assume that the half planes of the
guarded electrode 1 and the guard electrode 2
( x ! a , y h ) and the plane of unguarded electrode 3
(y = 0) are equipotential with the potential V = 0.
The complex variable:
z x  jy (6)
for y t 0 (Figure 2a) can be conformally transformed
(mapped) into the complex variable (complex potential)
assumed. If a common logarithm is replaced by a natural W z  U x , y   jV x , y  (7)
26 M. Lisowski and A. Skopec: Effective Area of Thin Guarded Electrode in Determining of Permittivity and Volume Resistivity

for V(x,y) t 0 (Figure 2b) which specifies the complex i.e.

potential of points (x,y) [18]. V(x,y) is a potential of the W 2  U 22 § U 2  U 22 W  U1 ·
primary electric field (Figure 3) with intensity z K³ dW  C K ¨¨ W  1 ln ¸  C ,(15)
W 2  U 12 © 2U 1 W  U 1 ¸¹
E 1 x E x  1 y E y  grad V (8)
where K is an equation coefficient and C – an integration
whose components are: constant.
wV wV Since the primary electric field in the gap g = 2a is
Ex  and Ey  (9)
wx wy symmetrical (Figures 1 and 2a), so for z = 0 the complex
potential W = 0. Hence the integration constant:
and U(x,y) is a flux potential.
ªU 2  U 22 º
C K « 1 ln  1» (16)
¬ 2U1 ¼
and finally:
§ U 2  U 22 U1  W ·
z K ¨¨ W  1 ln ¸. (17)
© 2U1 U1  W ¸¹
For this primary field symmetry if W 0  jV , then
z 0  jy , i.e. imaginary axis V becomes an imaginary axis y,
and the relation (17) takes the form:
§ U 2  U 22 U1  jV ·
jy K ¨¨ jV  1 ln ¸
¸
© 2U1 U 1  jV ¹
(18)
ª U 2  U 22 § V ·º
jK «V  1 ¨  2 arc tg ¸»
2U1 ¨ U1 ¸¹»¼
Figure 2. Conformal transformation of complex variable z x  jy for y t 0 «¬ ©
(a), assigning complex variable Wz U x , y  jV x , y for V(x,y) t 0, From the relation (18) it follows that the coefficient K takes
which specifies complex potential of points (x,y) (b). on real values. In the imaginary axis y z jy and the
component of electric field, parallel to the axis x, there is
According to the analytical functions theory, U(x,y) and
E x  wV wx wU wy w 0 wy 0 (Figure 3).
V(x,y) components satisfy Cauchy-Riemann conditions [18]:
wU wV wU wV
,  . (10)
wx wy wy wx
Hence:
w 2U w 2U w 2V w 2V
 0 and  0 (11)
wx 2 wy 2 wx 2 wy 2
and the components U(x,y) and V(x,y) satisfy the Laplace
equation:
’ 2U 0 and ’ 2V 0 (12)
In the case of conformal transformation, point P–2 (Figure
2a) with coordinates (–a + jh) corresponds to point S–2 (Figure
2b) with coordinates (–U2 + j0) and clockwise rotation angle
D–2 = S, point P–1 with coordinates (–f +j 0) corresponds to
point S–1 with coordinates (–U1 + j0) and angle D-1 = –S, point
P1 with coordinates (f +j 0) corresponds to point S1 with
coordinates (U1 + j0) and angle D1 = –S, point P2 with Figure 3. The lines sketch of the primary electric field.
coordinates (a + jh) corresponds to point S2 with coordinates
(U2 +j0) and angle D2 = S. When z a  jh , then W U 2  j0 and the formula (17)
Therefore the Schwarz-Christoffel integral equation [18, 19] takes on the form:
for conformal transformations § U 2  U 22 U1  U 2 ·
z a  jh K ¨¨U 2  1 ln ¸
U1  U 2 ¸¹
D 2 D 1 D1 D2
K W  U 2  S W  U1  S W  U1  S W  U 2  S dW  C (13) © 2U1
z ³ (19)
can be expressed in the form: ª U 2  U 22 § U  U1 ·º
K «U 2  1 ¨ - jʌ  ln 2 ¸» ,
2U1 ¨ U1  U 2 ¸¹»¼
z K ³ W  U 2 W  U1  W  U1  W  U 2 dW  C
1 1
(14) «¬ ©
IEEE Transactions on Dielectrics and Electrical Insulation Vol. 16, No. 1; February 2009 27

i.e. Eyo = 1/K) perpendicular to the equipotential planes of the

§ 2 2 electrodes should be added to the primary field (Figure 3).
U U U  U1 ·
a K ¨¨U 2  1
ln 2 2
¸ (20) Then when yof, the resultant (from the superposition) field
© 2U1 U1  U 2 ¸¹ will decay in the infinity. This corresponds to the actual state
U 22  U 12 of the electrodes system during electric field measurements
h ʌK (21) (Figure 5).
2U 1
Dividing the sides of equations (20) and (21) for U2 > U1
one gets the following relation:
a 2 U U 1
ʌ  ln 2 1 (22)
h U 2 U1  U1 U 2 U 2 U1  1
Denoting:
U 2 U1  1
H (23)
U 2 U1  1
and considering that a = g/2, the equation (22) turns into this
simple form:
g 1 Figure 5. Resultant electric field between electrodes with edge effect taken
ʌ H   2lnH (24)
h H into account.

at:
In the real field the interelectrode capacitance is higher than
U 2 H 1 in case when no edge effect is taken into account (Figure 6).
(25)
U1 H  1
Since the expression (24) will be used in the calculations of
guarded electrode effective area it is presented graphically in
Figure 4. From this diagram one can easily read out the value
of H for a given ratio g/h.
26
24
22
20
18 Figure 6. Electric field between electrodes with no edge effect taken into
account.
16
14
When the edge effect is neglected (Figure 6), the
H 12
capacitance per unit guarded electrode edge length is
10
calculated from the formula:
C1 Q1 U 0 H ol h >F m@
8
(27)
6
4 where: Q(1) is a charge per unit width guarded electrode edge,
2 U0 – interelectrode voltage, l – guarded electrode length along
0 axis x, h – interelectrode distance.
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
g/h
In order to determine the increase in capacitance due to the
edge effect one should subtract the charge Q(1) of the guarded
Figure 4. Graphic illustration of expression (24). electrode (Figure 6) from the charge Q(2) of unguarded
electrode (Figure 5). The superposed field at the unguarded
The intensity of the primary field (Figure 3) in infinity electrode (y = 0) is the sum of the intensities of primary field
(yof) is uniform (Wojf) and according to the relations E y  wV wy  wU wx (the formulas (9) and (10) and
(17), (9) and (10) it is:
uniform field E yo 1 K . Hence, the charge Q(2) per a unit
 1 1 " ,0"  0
- +  ,- 
 
 " 

 8"/: edge length of unguarded electrode for the resultant field in
   1  . 1
+
"
, 
"  1 .  Figure 5 is:
i.e. Ex = 0 and Ey = –1/K. Thus the field in the infinity is § wV 1 ·¸ § wU 1 ·¸
a l a l
perpendicular to the planes of the electrodes. Q( 2 ) Ho ³ ¨¨  wy 
K¸
dx H o ³ ¨¨  
K ¸¹
dx
In a real electrode system the intensity of the field in the 0 © y 0 ¹ 0 © wx y 0 (28)
infinity declines to zero. Therefore in order to model a real ª alº
H o «U 0,0  U a  l ,0  ,
electric field, the uniform field (with components Exo = 0 and ¬ K »¼
28 M. Lisowski and A. Skopec: Effective Area of Thin Guarded Electrode in Determining of Permittivity and Volume Resistivity

where U(0,0) = 0 since according to Figure 2 and formula (17) the whole space, i.e. the permittivity H of the sample is the
a z-plane point with coordinates x = y = 0 has same as surroundings permittivity Ho (H = Ho). The relation (37)
a corresponding point on W-plane, with coordinates is fully consistent with the J.J. Thomson relation cited by H.S.
W = 0 + j0. Similarly U(a+l, 0) = U1 when l o ’ since point Endicott [11], D.G.W. Goad and H.J. Wintle [13] and the
P1 with coordinates x = a + l o ’, y=0 has American standard ASTM D 150-99 [14], with the difference
a corresponding point S1 with coordinates W = U1 + j0 that the parameter H was there replaced by p.
(U = U1, V = 0). It was assumed that the edge length l
approaches infinity because theoretically an edge disturbance 2.2 SAMPLE PERMITTIVITY HIGHER THAN
decreasing to zero extends infinitely. Therefore: SURROUNDINGS PERMITTIVITY
§ al · In real conditions the tested sample has permittivity H
Q( 2 ) Ho¨  U1 ¸ (29)
© K ¹ higher than surroundings permittivity Ho and in the space
between guarded electrode and the guard electrode refraction
The voltage Uo between the guarded and unguarded
of the electric field lines occurs at the boundary between the
electrodes, in the resultant field, can be calculated by sample and the surroundings ( y = h, 0 < x < a ) (Figure 7).
integrating the intensity of the resultant field Let us make now an approximate analysis.
E y  E yo wV wy   1 K along the interelectrode segment
lying on a straight line perpendicular to the electrodes and
passing through an arbitrary point x > a on axis x. Hence:
h § wV 1 ·¸ h
Uo ³0 ¨¨  wy  dy V x ,0  V x , h   (30)
K¹ ¸ K
© x!a

Thus in the primary field both electrodes are equipotential

V(x,0) = V(x,h) and Uo = h/K.
According to the relation (27) in the uniform field (Figure
6), at the voltage U0 between electrodes defined by the
expression (30), the charge Q(1) per unit of unguarded
electrode edge is:
Q1 C1U 0 H olU 0 h H ol K (31) Figure 7. Distribution of electric field when sample with H > Ho is located
between electrodes.
Thus the capacity increase:
'Q Q2   Q1 §a K · At yo’ the electric field decays and its potential
'C H o ¨  U1 ¸ (32) M(x,f) = 0. When y = h and x > a, the guarded electrode
U0 U0 ©h h ¹ potential M(x,h) = 0. However, at y t h the potential of the
can be regarded as a result of guarded electrode edges electric field can be assumed to be a superposition of
extension by 'l, causing an increase in capacitance by: a primary field potential V(x,y) and uniform field potential
'C H o 'l h H o Ba h (33) (y  h)/K, i.e.:
where 'l Ba . M x , y  V x , y    y  h  K (38)
Comparison of the equations (32) and (33) yields Similarly at 0 d y < h it can be assumed that the potential is
a formula for the electrode dimension increase factor expressed by:
B 1 KU1 a . (34) M x , y  V x , y    y  h D (39)
When K is determined from the equation (21) where D is the intensity of the uniform field between
electrodes determined from the boundary conditions. For y = h
2hU 1
K (35) and 0 <x < a there are two boundary conditions:

ʌ U 22  U 12  a) the condition of the continuity of the tangent field intensity
and substituted into equation (34) one gets components:
2h 1 wM wM
B 1 (36) (40)
ʌa U 2 U1 2  1 wx y h0 wx y h0
0 x a 0 x  a
Substituting the equation (25) for U2/U1 and taking into
account that a = g/2, the formula (36) assumes the final form: b) the condition of the continuity of the normal field intensity
components:
h H  1
2
B 1 (37) wM wM
ʌg H Ho H (41)
wy y h0 wy y h0
where H satisfies the equation (24). 0 x a 0 x  a

The formula (37) derived from very accurate analytical When the formulas (38) and (39) are substituted into the
relations, holds true when electrical permittivity is identical in expression (40), it is found that the condition “a” is satisfied.
IEEE Transactions on Dielectrics and Electrical Insulation Vol. 16, No. 1; February 2009 29

In order to fulfill the condition “b” at y = h and 0 < x < a the Thus, the increase in capacitance due to the edge effect is:
following relations should be satisfied: l  a of
'Q H § wV · aH
§ · § ·
'C
Uo

Uo ³ ¨¨
© wy
¸¸ dx 
¹y 0 h
(50)
¨ wV 1¸ ¨ wV ¸ 0
Ho¨  ¸ H¨  D¸ (42)
¨ wy y h K¸ ¨ wy y h ¸ From the Cauchy-Riemann relation (10) one gets:
© 0 x  a ¹ © 0 x  a ¹
f f
wV wU
The above relation follows from the equations (38) and (39).
³ dx ³ wx dx U ( f ,0 )  U 0,0 U1 . (51)
The condition “b” would be fulfilled if the derivative 0
wy y 0 0 y 0
wV wy y h was constant. But since this is not the case, it is
0 x  a Thus:
advisable to select such factor D for which the integrals of two HU 1 aH aH HU 1 H'l H
sides of the equation (42) are identical. This will ensure the 'C    Ba (52)
U0 h h hD h h
continuity of the electric flux flowing through the boundary
y = h, 0 < x < a. After the integration of the expression (42) Hence:
the factor is: B 1 U1 aD (53)
a
§ 1 · 1 wV 1 1 and after substituting the expressions (53) and (45) one gets:
D ¨¨1  ¸¸ ³ dx  (43)
© Hr ¹ a 0 wy y h
0 x  a
Hr K
B 1
U1
1
1 (54)
§ 1 · 1 a § 1 · U2 1 a
where H r H H o is the relative permittivity. ¨¨1  ¸¸U 2  ¨¨1  ¸¸ 
© Hr ¹ Hr K © Hr ¹ U1 H r U1K
From Cauchy–Riemann relation (10) one gets:
From the formula (21) it follows that:
a a
wV wU 2 h
³ wy dx ³ wx dx U ( a , h )  U 0 , h  U 2 (44) KU1 (55)
0
y h
0
y h ʌ U 2 U1 2  1
0 x  a 0 x  a

If the relation (44) is taken into account, the expression (43) Substituting the expressions (55) and (25) into the formula
assumes the form: (54) and considering that a = g/2, one gets:
H 1
§ 1 · U2 1 1 B 1 (56)
¨1  ¸ § 1 · ʌgH
D ¨ H ¸ a H K (45) ¨¨1  ¸¸H  1 
r H  1
© r ¹ r H H h
© r ¹
Similarly as in section 2.1, one should calculate the charge
If Hr = 1, the formula (56) becomes the expression (37).
of the unguarded electrode:
Whereas if Hrof, i.e. for the sample permittivity Hr >> 1,
    
$  the formula (56) takes the form:
  
  !*   +   +  4" 
% 

%
+ +
% %
+ 2
B (57)
    * H 1
 4  

   +  86/: The formula (56) was derived with the condition (42) not
%  +
% 
exactly satisfied. If however, a supplementary charge with a
With no edge effect taken into account, the charge of the surface density
unguarded electrode (Figure 6) is: Ho
l  aof
q s x  H o  H wV   HD (58)
wy y h K
H ³ Ddx . (47)
0 x  a

a is introduced into the interface between the sample and the

The difference between the charges given by the surroundings (air), it will generate a supplementary field in
expressions (46) and(47) is: which the equality of the normal field components at the
dielectric-surroundings interface (-a < x < a, y = h) fully holds.
l  a of § wV · l  a of When the formula (45) is substituted into the expression (58),
'Q H ³ ¨  D ¸dx  H ³ Ddx the latter will assume the following form:
¨ wy ¸
0 © y 0 ¹ a
(48) § ·
l  a of
wV
a
q s x  H H o ¨¨ U 2  wV ¸
¸¸ (59)
H ³
0
wy y 0
dx  H ³ Ddx .
0
¨
©
a w y y h
0 x  a ¹

It follows from the relation (59) that the supplementary charge

The interelectrode voltage is:
qs(x) is proportional to the difference between the sample
h
permittivity and the ambient permittivity (H – Ho). Also the
Uo ³ Ddy
0
hD (49)
supplementary charge induced on the unguarded electrode
30 M. Lisowski and A. Skopec: Effective Area of Thin Guarded Electrode in Determining of Permittivity and Volume Resistivity

(y = 0) is proportional to the permittivity difference H – Ho and In an alternating field, the relative permittivity of the sample
amounts to: is a complex quantity expressed by the following relation:
'Qu H  H o L (60) İr H r'  jH "r (68)
where L is a parameter dependent on a, b, Uo and H. in which H r' is an active component, H r" 1 U acZ H o is
The charge 'Qu added to the charge 'Q expressed by the a reactive component resulting from the sample relaxation
formula (48) gives a resultant charge generating an additional losses and the volume resistivity Uac (for alternating current),
electric field causing an increase in the capacitance correction where Z = 2Sf and f is a frequency.
for the guard gap
In the expression (56)
'Q  'Qu L
'C a 'C  H  H o  (61) 1 ZH o
(69)
Uo Uo '
İ r ZH  j U ac
Having substituted the relation (52) into the expression (61),
one gets the formula: Since usually in practice H "r  H r' , it can be assumed that
H L İ H ' and İr H r' .
'C a Ba  H  H o  (62)
h Uo
But also
3 FACTOR B FOR VOLUME RESISTIVITY
CALCULATIONS
H
'C a Ba a (63) The volume resistivity Uv is measured by applying
h
a constant flow field. For a constant electric field (Z = 0) the
where Ba is exactly determined factor of guarded electrode
expression (69) gives the value of 1/Hr = 0 and the formula
dimension increase factor. It can be determined by equating
(56) assumes the form
the expressions (62) and (63) whereby one gets
2
§ 1 · hL BZ 0  (70)
Ba B  ¨¨1  ¸¸ (64) H 1
© H r ¹ aU o which is identical with the formula (57) for the sample
where B is expressed by the formula (56). permittivity Hr >> 1.
For Hrof, according to the formula (56), the factor
B = 2/(H+1). The factor B given by Amey (the formula (4)) is 4 CONCLUSIONS
an exact factor for Hrof [17] and it will be denoted here as Figure 8 shows graphical illustration of the factor B,
Ba. Having transformed the relation (64), for Hrof one gets calculated from the formula (56), versus a ratio of gap width g
hL to sample thickness h for different relative permittivities
 Ba  B  H o f (65) Hr = H /Ho. For comparison the curve of the factor B calculated
r
aU o
from Amey formula (4) has been included.
Substituting the relations (65), (57) and (4) into the expression 1.0
(64) and taking into account that a = g/2, after some
0.9
transformations, one gets the final formula for the calculated
factor of dimension increase of guarded electrode with relative 0.8
Hr=1
permittivity Hr: 0.7
Hr=2
§ 1 ·ª 4 h §S g · 2 º LH r  0.6
Ba B  ¨¨1  ¸ «1 
¸ ln cosh¨ ¸ » (66) Hr=3
© H r ¹¬ ʌ g © 4 h ¹ H  1 ¼ LH r o f  0.5
B Hr=4 Hr=5
where B is the factor given by the formula (56), while the 0.4
second term of the equation (66) is the error of determination 0.3
of the factor B from the formula (56). The error equals zero for
0.2
Hr = 1 and assumes a maximum value for Hrof expressed by
the relation: 0.1
Hr f Amey's
ª 4 h §S g · 2 º 0.0
'B B  Ba  «1  ln cosh ¨ ¸ » (67) 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
¬ ʌ g © 4 h ¹ H  1¼ g/h
The value of error 'B can be read out from Figure 8 as Figure 8. The factor B, calculated from formula (56), versus g/h for different
a difference between points on Amey curve and curve for relative sample permittivities, and the factor B determined from Amey
Hrof. For example, the maximum value of this error for formula (4).
g/h = 1 is 0.00 and for g/h = 10 it amounts to –0.01. The
values are so small that they are practically insignificant and One can see that the factor B determined from Amey relation
the coefficient B can be calculated from the simplified formula approximately coincides with the authors’ characteristics for the
(56). measurement of relative permittivity Hrof, i.e. for the
IEEE Transactions on Dielectrics and Electrical Insulation
measurement of volume resistivity Uv. As the permittivity Hr
decreases, the differences between the characteristics increase. If
the guarded electrode effective area was determined from Amey
relation it might result in considerable measuring errors.
The largest errors (from a few to twenty %) result when B = 1
[2]. This is the case in most of standards for volume resistivity
measurements and in many of standards for electrical permittivity
measurements.
The authors previously proposed relevant changes into the
international standard IEC 60093 concerning the measurements
of volume resistivity of solid dielectrics
[5, 9] and now they suggest introduction of the factor B into the
formulas for effective area of guarded electrode for permittivity
calculations.
The effective area of the guarded electrode should be calculated
from the following formulas:
x circular electrodes
Vol. 16, No. 1; February 2009 31
[7] ASTM D 257-99, “Standard test methods for dc resistance or
conductance of insulating materials”, 1999.
[8] IEC 60250 “Recommended methods for the determination of the
permittivity and dielectric dissipation factor of electrical insulating
materials at power, audio and radio frequencies including metre
wavelengths”, 1980.
[9] M. Lisowski, A. Skopec and R. Kacprzyk, “Changes proposed for the
IEC 60093 standard concerning measurements of the volume and
surface resistivities of solid dielectrics”, 2nd Intern. Conf.
APDATM’2004, Scientific Papers of the Institute of Electrical
Engineering Fundamentals of the Wroclaw University of Technology,
No. 40, Conf. No. 15, pp. 147-152, 2004.
[10] W.G. Amey and F. Hamburger, “Method for evaluating the surface and
volume resistance characteristics of solid dielectric materials”, Am. Soc.
Testing and Materials Proc. Vol. 49, pp. 1071-1091, 1949.
[11] H.S. Endicott, “Guard-gap correction for guarded electrode
measurements and exact equations for the two-fluid method of
measuring permittivity and loss”, J. of Testing and Evaluation, Vol. 4,
pp. 188–195, 1976.
[12] W.G. Amey, A Method for Evaluating the Surface and Volume
Resistance Characteristics of Solid Dielectric Materials, D. Eng. Johns
Hopkins University, 1947.
[13] D.G.W. Goad and H.J. Wintle, “Capacitance corrections for guard
A S d1  Bg  4
2
(71) gaps”, Meas. Sci. Technol., Vol. 1, pp. 965-969, 1990.
[14] ASTM D 150-99, “Standard test methods for a-c loss characteristics and
x rectangular electrodes permittivity (dielectric constant) of solid electrical insulation”, 1999.
[15] PN-86/E-04403, „Solid electric insulating materials. Measurements of
A a  Bg b  Bg  (72) permittivity and dielectric dissipation factor”, 1986 (in Polish).
x square electrodes [16] ST SEW 3164-81 “Solid electrical insulating materials. Methods of test
for the determination of the permittivity and dielectric dissipation
A a  Bg 2 (73) factor”, 1981 (in Russian).
[17] A. Skopec and M. Lisowski, “The Amey’s expression derivation”.
x tubular electrodes (unpublished), 2007.
[18] K.J. Binns, P.J. Lawrenson, C.W. Trowbridge, The Analytical and
A S d o  h l1  Bg  (74)
where: d1 – guarded electrode diameter, g – width of the gap
between the guarded and guard electrodes, a and b –sides of a
rectangular or square guarded electrode, do – sample outer
diameter, l1 – guarded electrode length.
The factor B for electrical permittivity calculations should be
calculated from the relation (56) and for volume resistivity
calculations from the relation (70) or Amey’s formula (4). The
coefficient H in the relations should be calculated from the
equation (24). In order to simplify the calculations one should
read out the appropriate values from the graphs of the functions
(Figure 8). Since before the calculations the electrical permittivity
value is unknown, it should be preliminary assessed without
considering the factor B and then the evaluated value should be
assumed for the factor B recalculation.
REFERENCES
[1] A. von Hippel, editor, Dielectric Materials and Applications. Part II:
R.F. Field, Permittivity. Artech House Press, Boston-London, 1995.
[2] M. Lisowski, Measurements of Electrical Resistivity and Permittivity of
Solid Dielectrics (in Polish: Pomiary Rezystywnosci i Przenikalnosci
Elektrycznej Dielektrykow Stalych), Wroclaw University of Technology
Press, Wroclaw, 2004.
[3] IEC 60093, “Methods of test for volume resistivity and surface
resistivity of solid electrical insulating materials”, 1980.
[4] IEC 61340-2-3 “Electrostatics – Part 2-2: Methods of test for
determining the resistance and resistivity of solid planer materials used
to avoid electrostatic charge accumulation”, 2000.
[5] M. Lisowski and R. Kacprzyk, “Changes proposed for the IEC 60093
standard concerning measurements of the volume and surface
resistivities of electrical insulating materials”, IEEE Transactions on
Dielectrics and Electrical Insulation, Vo. 13, No. 1, pp. 139-145, 2006.
[6] PN-88/E-04405 “Solid insulating materials. Measurements of the
electrical resistance”, 1988 (in Polish).
Numerical Solution of Electric and Magnetic Fields. John Wily
& Sons, Chichester, 1992.
[19] H. Kober, Dictionary of Conformal Representations, Dover
Publications, New York, 1947.
Michal Lisowski was born in Poland in 1943. He
received the M.Sc., Ph.D., and D.Sc. degrees in electrical
engineering from the Wroclaw University of Technology
(WUT) in 1968, 1975, and 1990, respectively. His
current research interests are focused on electrical
metrology and electrical insulation engineering. He has
been a Professor in the Department of Electrical
Engineering WUT. From 1995 to 2007 he also worked
for the Electrotechnical Institute, Division of
Electrotechnology and Materials Science in Wroclaw, as the Head of the
Measurements and Diagnostics Laboratory. He has been generally engaged in
precise measurements as well as in the calibration of electrical equipment. He
specializes in measuring systems for high temperature superconductivity and
dielectric materials investigations.
Adam Skopec was born in Stanislavov (presently
Ukraine) in 1931. He obtained his MSc degree in
Mathematics from Wroclaw University as well as MSc
and PhD degrees in Electrical Engineering from
Wroclaw University of Technology (WUT). Since 1993
he has been a Professor at WUT. In 1999 he also joined
the Electrotechnical Institute, Division of
Electrotechnology and Materials Science in Wroclaw, as
scientific consultant. His research interests are focused
on theoretical electrotechnics and applications of mathematics in
electrotechnics.
This work was carried out as a statutory project supported by the Ministry
of Science and Higher Education, Warsaw, Poland.