4.6 Article

Impulse Life Evaluation Method of MOV Based on Weibull Distribution

期刊

IEEE ACCESS
卷 9, 期 -, 页码 34818-34828

出版社

IEEE-INST ELECTRICAL ELECTRONICS ENGINEERS INC
DOI: 10.1109/ACCESS.2021.3062454

关键词

MOV; impulse life; evaluation; Weibull distribution; MRR

资金

  1. Shanghai Municipal Market Supervision and Administration Bureau [19TBT018, 20TBT010]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This paper introduces an evaluation method for the impulse life of MOV based on the Weibull distribution and MRR method, and validates the effectiveness of this method by establishing a mathematical model and testing with real MOV samples.
The working life evaluation of metal oxide varistor (MOV) is always expected by MOV manufacturers and users. In Oct. 2019, the International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) SC37B established a project team PT 61643-333 led by the author of this paper to draft a technical report about MOV life assessment. As an early researching achievement of PT 61643-333, this paper provides an evaluation method for the impulse life of MOV with the median rank regression (MRR) method based on the Weibull distribution, which provides an effective means for evaluating the impulse life of MOV. Firstly, the theory of Weibull distribution and impulse life characteristics of MOV are introduced. Then the evaluation method and procedure of MOV impulse life is derived from the combination of the MRR method and the impulse characteristics of MOV. Finally, an application example of the proposed evaluation method is given with the test results from real MOV samples. By establishing three basic impulse life characteristics equations, the life evaluation of MOV under arbitrary impulse current can be achieved. In addition, the fitting validity of six groups of samples is checked to prove the effectiveness of the proposed parameter model. And further sensitivity analysis of the variables has been done to examine the effect of changes in the values of the parameters on the propose model.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据