Abstract
The electrical performance of two water-borne wood pole preservatives (ACA and CCA) has been compared to that, of pentachlorophenol preservatives. Laboratory tests have indicated that for water-borne preservative treated poles, fire inception currents are two to three times greater than for comparable penta- chlorophenol treated poles. This is likely due to different pole fire evolution mechanisms. Wood pole and hazard models are developed and augmented with fleld tests to demonstrate that, from the point of view of pole contact near ground level, a comparable degree of safety exists with both water-borne and oil-borne preservative treatments under normal operating conditions. With fire inception currents flowing, poles treated with water-borne preservatives could result in painful shocks.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
