2364 IEEE Transactions on Power Apparatus and Systems, Vol. PAS-102, No.
7, July 1983
ELECTRICAL ASPECTS OF TESTING
INSULATING GLOVES
Nestor Kolcio, Senior Member
American Electric Power Service Corporation
180 East Broad Street
Columbus, Ohio 43215
Abstract - Electrical aspects of testing
insulating gloves (used in live line maintenance) are
discussed with a major emphasis on the electrical
stresses that occur at the water surface near the
cuff of the glove. Methods are presented for
reducing corona and ozone damage to natural rubber
insulating gloves during in-service AC electrical
testing. Also, improvements made in AC and DC glove
tests show a reduction in the cuff to water line
clearance for Class 4 gloves from 15.2 to 7.6 cm,
enabling an additional 18% of the glove to be tested.
1. INTRODUCTION
Insulating gloves used for live line maintenance
work are electrically tested according to Standards
[1,2,3] for acceptance and for in-service testing.
Both tests have the same test voltage requirements.
For example, in the case of Class 2 gloves, the
Acceptance Standard [1] proof test voltage (20 kV AC
or 50 kV DC) is the same as the retest voltage in the
In-Service Standard [2]. The tests are meant to be
nondestructive. However, there is evidence that the
AC tests are suspected of causing damage even to
Class 2 gloves. This is quite evident in Class 4
gloves. In fact, the standards give some recognition
to the nature of the damage by mentioning "corona
cutting" and "ozone checking. " Also, gloves and
sleeves are classified in the standard as Type I
natural rubber and Type II ozone resistant (made from
synthetic material). The practice, perhaps in the
majority of utilities that use Class 4 gloves, is to
retest the gloves with a DC rather than an AC source.
However, even though DC may be a solution for
retesting gloves periodically, a number of utilities
would like to proof test or certify new gloves with
an AC test.
The problem in AC testing of natural rubber
gloves lies in the test equipment. Due to the test
electrode configuratioIn in the wet (water to water)
test set, the electrical stresses at the water
surf ace and the cuf f of the glove can reach a- level
at which the surrounding air is ionized, resulting in
the production of ozone and corona [4,5]. Some work
investigating this phenomenon was made by American
Electric Power Service Corp. (AEPSC) back in 1974
when tests with Class 4 gloves were conducted at
Appalachian Power Company's (APCo) Huntington, W.
Virginia glove test facility. At that time, special
grading rings were first installed on the inside and
outside of a glove to reduce corona effects. Also,
83 WM 174-0 A paper recommended and approved by
the IEEE Transmission and Distribution Committee
of the IEEE Power Engineering Society for presen-
tation at the IEEE/PES 1983 Winter Meeting, New
York, New York, January 30-February 4, 1983.
Manuscript submitted August 30, 1982; made avail-
able for printing November 16, 1982.
0018-9510/83/0700-2364$01.00 1983 IEEE
Richard A. Peszlen, Member
photographs of negative and positive coronas have
shown that with proper grading, negative streamers
could be controlled so that the cuff to water line
clearance was reduced, enabling more of the glove to
be tested. Later, in 1981, work in this area was
further continued at APCo's Roanoke, Virginia
facilities using a specially constructed test
container. Tests were performed with an AC and DC
source and in each case means were found to reduce the
cuff to water line clearance. The Roanoke tests
showed that in AC testing, visual corona started at
about 10 kV which meant that some effects of corona
damage may occur at test voltages above 10 kV. This
was substantiated by the retest experience from
several utilities. It was found that in retesting
Class 2 gloves at 20 kV AC, about 50% of the
electrical breakdown failures of the gloves occurred
around the cuff at the water surface where corona can
be observed.
The aim of this paper is to discuss electrical
aspects of testing insulating gloves with a major
emphasis on the electrical stresses that occur at the
water surface near the cuff of the glove. The results
from Huntington and Roanoke tests were used to
describe the electrical stresses that cause corona
effects on gloves. The paper discusses AC and DC
tests. Also, some practical suggestions are given for
the reduction of electrical stresses so that in both
AC and DC tests, the length of glove cuff above the
water line can be reduced enabling as much as an
additional 20% of the glove to be tested.
More work is needed to provide the information on
the magnitude of electrical stresses that exist around
the glove below, at and above the water level for both
AC and DC tests. Also, a number of questions are
being raised in regard to the adequacy and correctness
of the existing Standards for glove testing and for
that matter, the testing of sleeves and other
insulating protective equipment.
2. AC TEST CONSIDERATIONS
A. Electrical Stresses
A common method of testing the electrical
strength of gloves involves applying a test voltage to
water electrodes, one outside and one inside of the
glove. In general, since the electrical breakdown of
the glove varies with the thickness of the rubber [6],
this type of test is used to identify imperfections
such as cuts, scratches or other damage to the glove.
The permittivity of water is relatively 80 times that
of air, causing a reduction of the electric field in
the water. Some intensification of the field will
occur in areas such as the finger tips and between the
fingers of the glove. The electrical field is also
intensified at the water surface, due to the shape of
the water meniscus. This field intensification can
break down the air, causing corona effects.
Consequently, the electrical stresses at the water
surface can cause major problems in testing gloves.
Therefore, further discussions will be limited to the
control of electrical stresses at and above the water
level.

Cross Section of Cross Section of
Glove Without Modified Glove
Modifications
A B
Figure 1 Reduction of Electrical Stresses
at and Above the Water Level
Figure IA provides an enlarged cross-sectional
view of the glove in its testing position. It can be
seen that the surface of the water around the inside
and outside of the glove cuff and around the metal
rod electrode curves concavely upward into a
meniscus. This meniscus is due to the hydrophilic
and capillary action of the water at these surfaces.
The water meniscus resembles a sharp water lip or
edge protruding above the surface of the water and
clinging around the edges of the glove cuff and metal
rod electrode surfaces. This action of the water
around the rod electrode is beneficial because it
smooths out the transition from one conductive medium
(the metal rod electrode) to another conductive
medium (the surface of the water). Thus, during
testing, the water meniscus about the rod electrode
will help to reduce the concentration of the electric
field thereby minimizing electrical stresses in the
air and water in this region.
However, the water meniscus which exists around
the interior and exterior of the glove cuff is an
undesirable characteristic. It represents a sharp
discontinuity in the electric field existing around a
conductor and an insulator. During testing, the
water meniscus will tend to intensify the electric
field in the air, water and glove cuff in this
region. As a result, these highly electrically
stressed areas are prone to the effects of corona.
The presence of corona can be noted during the
initial stages of testing a Class 4 glove. For
example, during the Roanoke tests, even at a
potential of 10 to 15 kV AC, the electrical stresses
were high enough in the air just above the water
meniscus around the glove cuff to exceed the
dielectric strength of air (30 kV/cm). The resulting
breakdown in the air manifested itself in the form of
visible and audible corona.
The presence of audible and visual corona is due
to excitation and ionization of the gases that
comprise air. Free electrons, present in air, are
2365
accelerated by the intense time changing electric
field about the water meniscus causing them to
collide into gas molecules which can result in the
excitation or ionization of the gases. Reactive
compounds are formed as a result of the excitation
and ionization processes. Ozone, which results from
ionized oxygen, is one of these reactive compounds
which is detrimental to natural rubber gloves.
In addition, the intense time changing (60 Hz)
electric field is also present in the water at this
potential. The electric field perturbs the water
surrounding the glove cuff, causing ripples that
emanate outward on the water surface. As the voltage
is increased, it enhances the rippling activity in the
water.
At about 30 kV AC, the electric field reaches
such an intensity that it breaks up the water
meniscus around the cuff into a spray of water
droplets. Then at around 35 kV AC, streamers may be
observed tracking upward along the glove cuff,
emanating from the water droplets and glow discharge.
The audible sizzling hiss and crackle of corona
discharge activity and the strong smell of ozone can
be quite prevalent at this stage. Eventually, as the
voltage is raised the streamer activity will track to
the top of the interior and exterior of the cuff
causing a flashover.
B. Controlling Electrical Stresses at Water Meniscus
The high electrical stresses which exist in the
region around the water surface, air, and glove cuff
can be reduced by altering the shape of the water
meniscus. This was easily accomplished by
fabricating two unique water surface grading rings.
As shown in Figure lB these rings were specially
shaped to provide a gradual smooth curve to the water
surface around the areas where it comes in contact
with the interior and exterior of the glove cuff.
Therefore, the electric field intensity is reduced
around these areas and the resulting electrical
stress in the air, water and glove cuff is minimized.
C. Comparison of AC Testing With and Without Grading
Rings
The grading rings were first used in 1974 at
APCo's Huntington, W. Virginia test facility during
AEP's effort to develop 40 kV AC glove testing
procedures.
To verify the effectiveness of the water grading
rings, photographs, shown in Figure 2, were taken of
two Class 4 gloves (one with and one without water
grading rings) at various voltage levels in a
commercial glove tester. Photo 1 displays the two
gloves prior to testing, showing clearly the outside
water grading ring (interior ring not visible)
installed on the left glove, to be noted as gr-glove.
Both gloves were carefully positioned so that 10.2 cm
of the glove cuff was exposed above the water
surface.
The same voltage was applied to both gloves till
at about 10 kV AC (rms) visual cororia appeared (Photo
2) on the right glove with no rings. At 20 kV AC
visual corona was noted on the left gr-glove as shown
in Photo 3. Corona and streamer activity rapidly
increased on the glove without the rings as the
voltage was further raised. Then as seen in Photo 4,
the right glove flashed over at 35 kV AC. The right
glove was deenergized and the test on the gr-glove
continued. Photo 5 Shows the corona activity on the
gr-glove when 40 kV AC was reached. The corona
activity present during just the positive or negative
half cycle at 45 kV AC is shown in Photos 6 and 7. In
Photograph 6, the negative corona manifests itself
mainly in the form of negative streamers, whereas the
2366

positive corona shown in Photograph 7 appears as a

solid glow discharge. Lastly, Photo 8 captures a
flashover which occurred in the air over the top of
the cuff at 50 kV AC on the gr-glove. This indicates
a considerable improvement in the breakdown
capabilities over that of the glove without grading
rings.

3. DC TEST CONSIDERATIONS

Photo 1 Photo 2
Class 4 Gloves Before Visual Corona Starts at
Testing Left Glove Shown 10 kVAC on Right Glove.
With Water Grading Rings Both Gloves Have 10.2cm
of Cuff Above Water
Photo 3 Photo 4
20 kV AC Corona 35 kV AC Right Glove
Begins on Left Glove Flashes Over in Air
Photo 5 Photo 6
40 kV AC on Left Glove 45 kV AC Negative
Right Glove Deenergized Corona on Left Glove
A. Electrical Stresses
There is a difference in the electrical phenomena
during AC and DC testing of gloves. In AC testing,
there is an intense time changing electric field
present in the water, air and glove in the area of the
water meniscus which causes corona discharge.
However, with a constant DC voltage (less than 2%
ripple), this intense electric field is static
(stationary).
The following explanation of DC phenomena is
given in the attempt to describe this method of
testing gloves. During DC testing, the stationary
electric field is of such intensity that ionized
particles are created about the water meniscus areas.
However, since the electric field is static, the
particles are suspended or held in place about the
water meniscus in the form of nonvisible space
charges. These space charges exist about the water
meniscus areas on the negative and positive energized
water inside and outside of the glove. These space
charges act as an extension of the water electrode at
the glove cuff, smoothing out the electric field about
the area.
Further increase in voltage tends to enlarge the
size of the space charge causing it to develop farther
up the cuff. Eventually, at the flashover voltage, a
discharge will occur in the air over the glove cuff
as the space charges on either side of the glove cuff
reach the top and merge.
Consequently, during the course of DC testing of
gloves, there are no detectable visible or audible
electrical discharges or is there any appreciable
generation of ozone. Of course, during a flashover or
a glove puncture, a visual and audible discharge will
occur. It should be noted that a widely fluctuating
DC source can cause some corona generation. Most
commercial glove testers,however, do not have this
problem since they operate in accordance to the
Standard's recommended DC voltage of less than 2%
ripple.
4. ROANOKE TEST CONFIGURATION

Both AC and DC glove tests were conducted at the

APCo, Roanoke, Virginia, facility and were performed
in a specially constructed clear plastic container as
shown in Figure 3. During the tests, a variable 50 kV
AC or a 120 kV DC source was used to energize the
water by means of two electrodes: 1) a flat metal
plate electrode residing under the water outside of
the glove; and 2) a metal rod electrode situated down
in the water inside of the glove. It should be noted
that a certain portion of the glove cuff must remain
above the water during testing to provide a suitable
Photo 7 Photo 8 insulating distance between the two water electrodes.
Standards for Class 4 gloves require the cuff to water
45 kV AC Positive 50 kV AC Flashover line distance of 12.7 cm for AC and 15.3 cm for DC
Corona on Left Glove Occurs in Air on testing. In AC tests, steps were taken to avoid
Left Glove damage or puncture of the glove by utilizing a Class
4-Type II ozone resistant glove. This one glove
tester provided an excellent opportunity to observe
Figure 2 Photographs of Huntington Glove Tests corona and to try out various schemes for controlling
electrical stresses.
 2367
Key: level. The corona and streamer activity was very
GS-Insulating Support Strap and Clip WL-Water Level intense while holding at 40 kV AC for 3 minutes.
CL-Length of Glove Above Water A -Air Corona activity produced several intermittent
El-Rod Electrode W -Water discharges while holding at this voltage. As the
E2-Plate Electrode G -Glove voltage was raised, corona activity increased until at
PC-Covered Clear Plastic Container 48 kV AC, streamers on either side of the glove cuff
met at the top causing a flashover.
The same test arrangement was used in Test No. 2
as in Test No. I (with 12.7 cm of cuff above the
water) except this time two nonconductive synthetic
rubber rings were used. One ring 1.4 cm in diameter
was installed around the inside and the other ring
1.9 cm in diameter was put around the outside of the
glove cuff at the water level to reduce electrical
stresses at the water edge to glove cuff surfaces.
The corona glow was first noted at 13.8 kV AC.
Streamers did not appear until the test level of 40
kV AC was reached. After holding at the test level
for 3 minutes, the voltage was raised until a
flashover occurred at 54.4 kV AC.
In Test No. 3, everything was kept the same as
in Test No. 2, except the length of cuff exposed
above the water was reduced from 12.7 to 6.4 cm. As
shown in Table I, the corona glow was noted at 15.6 kV
AC, and streamers appeared at 28.8 kV AC. A flashover
occurred at 34.4 kV AC. Consequently, the 6.4 cm of
cuff exposed above the water did not have sufficient
clearance for testing the class 4 gloves.
In Test No. 4, the only change from Test No. 3
was that the length of the cuff exposed above the
water was increased from 6.4 to 7.6 cm. Corona was
Figure 3 Roanoke Glove Testing Apparatus observed at 14.6 kV AC. As in Test No. 2, the
streamer activity was first noted at 40 kV AC and the
flashover occurred at 47 kV AC. Thus, by using the
grading rings and 7.6 cm of the cuff exposed above the
water, an additional 5.1 cm of the glove cuff could be
5. RESULTS OF ROANOKE AC TESTS tested.
Table I summarizes the results of the Roanoke, 6. RESULTS OF ROANOKE DC TESTS
Virginia tests performed on an 46 cm, EPDM, Class 4
synthetic glove. Four observations were made In the three DC tests summarized in Table I, the
which were critical to all the tests: 1) voltage following items were observed and noted: 1) the
when visual corona begins; 2) voltage when streamers presence of audible or visual corona; 2) the ability
occur; 3) reaching and maintaining the 40 kV AC for to maintain 70 kV DC for 3 minutes as per the
three minutes as per the standards; and 4) the Standards; and 3) the flashover voltage level.
voltage required to produce a flashover in the air For the DC Test No. 1, the exact same set-up was
above the water inside and outside of the glove. used as in Test No.4 of the AC testing, except the
high voltage source used was DC with the inside
electrode (-) and the outside electrode (+).
As the voltage was increased up to the test level
Table I Roanoke Results of 70 kV DC, there was no observable corona or
streamer activity causing the test to be quieter than
Key:R -Water grading rings CSL-Visual corona start the previous AC tests. After the test level was
SG-Synthetic glove OS -Onset of streamers maintained for 3 minutes, the voltage was increased
WV-Withstand voltage NRC-Natural rubber glove until a flashover occurred at 83 kV DC between the
CL-Cuff length in air FOL-Flashover in air inside rod electrode and a metal pin in one of the
glove support clips. At this point, the inside rod
Test AC Tests (kV AC) DC Tests (kV DC) electrode was taped with 1-1/2 turns of electrical
# 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 tape and the test was repeated. This time a flashover
SG SG(R) SG(R) SG(R) SG(R) NRG NRG occurred at 93 kV DC, an improvement of 10 kV DC over
CL 12.7cm 12.7cm 6.4cm 7.6cm 7.6cm 7.6cm 5.1cm the previous run.
CSL 10.8 13.8 15.6 14.6 In DC Test No. 2, a Type I natural rubber glove
OS 33.5 40.0 28.8 40.0 without grading rings was used in place of the Type II
WV 40.0 40.0 40.0 70.0 70.0 synthetic glove of Test No. 1, while still maintaining
FOL 48.0 54.4 34.4 47.0 93.0 90.0 63.0 the 7.6 cm of cuff exposed above the water. The
results were no different from DC Test No. 1. No
visible or audible corona was observed during the
In Test No. 1, a Class 4 glove was tested in test. At 70 kV DC, the voltage was held for 3 minutes
accordance to the 'Standard's procedure with 12.7 cm and a flashover occurred at 90 kV DC.
of the cuff exposed above the water and without such The same natural rubber Class 4 glove was used in
devices as grading rings to reduce the electrical DC Test No. 3. Here the cuff to water distance was
stress on the glove. reduced from 7.6 to 5.1 cm. At 63 kV, a flashover
The visual glow of corona was observed at 10i8 occurred in the air over the cuff. Consequently, the
kV AC. At 33.5 kV AC, thin violet-blue streamers required test level of 70 kV DC could not be achieved
appeared measuring about 4 cm long from the water using 5.1 cm of cuff exposed above the water.
2368
7. DISCUSSION
The results from Huntington and Roanoke AC tests
have demonstrated that by reducing the
electrical stresses at the water surface, about the
cuff of the glove, testing of gloves can be achieved
without the corona and ozone damage experienced
before. Thus the argument relating to the adequacy
of AC vs. DC testing can be directed toward the
Standards. Comments expressed by a number of persons
associated with glove testing indicated that DC seems
to be more sensitive than AC in identifying damage in
gloves. In one case, [7], 36 Class 1 gloves,
previously condemned by inspection were tested to the
AC breakdown level (20 kV AC). Only two of these
gloves failed where the defects were previously
identified. The remainder of the other gloves either
flashed over or failed through some spot where no
defect was noticeable. Likewise a DC breakdown test
(at 60 kV DC) on eleven Class gloves showed that
eight gloves failed at defects previously identified
during inspection. Is DC really more sensitive than
AC in identifying glove defects? Perhaps not. The
glove breakdown is related to the voltage or to the
electrical stress applied. At 20 kV AC, the gloves
were subjected to certain electrical stress in the
water electrodes. At 60 kV DC, it appears that the
electrical stress was much higher than at 20 kV AC,
resulting in the increased rate of glove failures.
The above examiple is of interest because it
gives results from actual glove tests. More
importantly it may exemplify the nature of stresses
associated with the current AC and DC glove test
standards. Table II shows the Standard [1]
requirements for AC and DC proof test and minimum
breakdown voltage.
Table II
Proof Test Voltage Minimum Breakdown
Class kV AC kV DC kV AC kV DC
1 10 40 20 60
2 20 50 30 70
3 30 60 40 80
4 40 70 50 90
For example, a Class 1 glove is AC proof tested at 10
kV, AC whereas in DC it is 40 kV DC. Why is there
such a difference in magnitude? Does the Standard
imply that the electrical stress in water at 10 kV AC
is equivalent to 40 kV DC? The minimum breakdown
voltage for a Class 1 glove is 20 kV AC and 60 kV DC.
Once again,, one would expect that the electrical
stress causing breakdown would be equivalent. Of
course they should be equivalent; but are they?
In-AC testing, the dominant electrical stress is
on the water surface about the cuff of the glove.
Therefore, in this area the corona and ozone
influences the breakdown level of the glove.
Consequently, a good number of glove punctures during
testing will occur at the area affected by corona and
ozone. It is expected that the minimum breakdown
level of gloves during AC testing can be increased
(above 20 kV AC for Class 1) when means are utilized
to reduce the corona effects. This is perhaps most
evident in the Class 4 gloves where the corona
effects are prominient. Judging from the results in
the Huntington tests, it appears that with proper
corona control (such as the use of grading rings),
the minimum breakdown level of Class 4 gloves could
be increased from the current 50 kV AC to at least 65
to 70 kV AC. More work is needed to explore the AC
breakdown of gloves when corona suppression schemes
are employed. Likewise, more information is required
to determine AC and DC electrical stresses that exist
across gloves in the water electrodes.
8. CONCLUSIONS
1) The major electrical stresses that occur in AC
glove testing is not below but above the surface
of the water about the cuff.
2) Tests have shown that electrical stresses about
the glove cuff are high enough to ionize the air
and cause corona effects. Visual corona activity
was first observed at about 10 kV AC and further
increases in the voltage intensified this
activity.
3) One prominent effect of corona is the generation
of ozone which is detrimental to natural rubber
gloves. The effect of ozone can be reduced with
proper ventilation.
4) One way to reduce corona activity is to minimize
the electrical stresses at the water surface. The
introduction of grading rings proved to be
effective in minimizing corona.
5) Grading rings contour the water surface about the
cuff controlling negative streamers so that the
cuff to water line clearance could be reduced,
enabling an additional 18% of the glove to be
tested.
6) During DC testing of Class 4 gloves, there were no
detectable audible or visual corona effects.
7) Insulating the rod electrode exposed above the
water can increase the flashover level of a glove
by 10 kV DC.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors would like to express their
appreciation to A. Q. Croy, J. K. Reid, A. B. Purdy,
R. L. Jamison, and H. A. Mutter for their
contributions during the AC/DC testing of insulating
gloves conducted in APCo's Roanoke, Virginia facility.
REFERENCES
[1] ANSI/ASTM Standard D 120-79a, " Standard
Specification for Rubber Insulating Gloves."
[2] ANSI/ASTM Standard F 496-79a, " Standard
Specification for the In-Service Care of
Insulating Gloves and Sleeves."
[3] CSA Standard Z259.4 "Rubber Insulating Gloves
and Mitts."
[4] J. M. Meek and J. D. Craggs, " Electrical
Breakdown of Gases," New York, John Wiley &
Sons, Ltd., 1978.
[5] S. Whitehead', "Dielectric Breakdown of Solids,"
Oxford, Oxford University Press, 1953.
[6] E. Nasser, "Fundamentals of Gaseous Ionization
and Plasma Electronics," New York, John Wiley &
Sons, Inc., 1971.
[7] W. H. Meade and M. R. Gavin, "Testing Lineman's
Rubber Protective Equipment," Record of the
75th Meeting of the Accident Prevention
Committee, Edison Electric Institute, Tampa,
Florida, April 23, 1963.