{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.026054590570719603, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 6.1415929203539825, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Difference in surface degradation due to partial discharges between polyamide nanocomposite and microcomposite [electrical insulation applications]

Partial discharge (PD) degradation was investigated to compare polyamide nanocomposites with two kinds of polyamide microcomposites. Such materials were exposed to PDs under the IEC(b) electrode configuration for evaluation of PD resistance. Comparisons were made as to the surface roughness using a scanning electron microscope, an atomic force microscope, and a mechanical surface profilometer. It is concluded that the polyamide nanocomposite is more resistant to PDs than microcomposites, and that nano-effects would work against PD degradation. The nano-effects include filler-matrix bonding, inter-filler space, morphology, and mesoscopic interaction.