4.6 Article

Non-contact method to reduce contact problems between sample and electrode in dielectric measurements

Journal

HIGH VOLTAGE
Volume 5, Issue 6, Pages 753-761

Publisher

INST ENGINEERING TECHNOLOGY-IET
DOI: 10.1049/hve.2019.0334

Keywords

electrodes; calibration; dielectric materials; dielectric loss measurement; noncontact measurement method; contact method; contact problem reduction; dielectric response measurement; electrode; dielectric materials; dielectric loss; error-sensitivity analysis; air-reference measurements; calibration

Funding

  1. China Scholarship Council (CSC) [201700260216]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Dielectric response measurement is a widely used technique for characterising dielectric materials in terms of their capacitance and dielectric loss. However, the widely used approach with contact between samples and electrodes can in some cases limit the accuracy of the measurement. The authors introduce an easily realised electrode arrangement for non-contact measurements, which avoids these contact problems. The performance of the electrode arrangement in terms of the edge effect is assessed. The non-contact and contact methods are compared based on error-sensitivity analysis and experimental results. Differences are studied further, with attention to contact pressure. The non-contact method is also compared experimentally with the one-sided non-contact method. Air-reference measurements, comparing the sample to an air-gap for improved calibration, are used for all measurements. The results show that the non-contact method can be an alternative to reduce contact problems between the sample and electrodes, although error sensitivity can be higher when the non-contact method is used. The non-contact method can decrease the influence of the pressure applied to the sample compared to the contact method, and can also reduce the problem of poor contact that can arise from the absence of pressure in the one-sided non-contact method.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available