Talk:Electrical treeing

	Engineering portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Electrical engineering, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Electrical engineering on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Electrical engineeringWikipedia:WikiProject Electrical engineeringTemplate:WikiProject Electrical engineeringelectrical engineering articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

We could do with some pictures of treeing. In the mean time how about including the Lichtenberg figure photo?--Light current 01:34, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I do have a picture of a polycarbonate insulating plate from a trigatron that has extensive tracking (2D treeing) that I can make available. I also have a particularly good 3D Tree-shaped Lichtenberg figure within a cube that I could also make availablefor this page. Will try to add over the next few days... Bert 03:57, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds good! 8-) THe 3D one wouldnt be this , would it?

Modern 3D Lichtenberg Figure in a block of clear acrylic. The fractal discharge pattern is believed to extend down to the molecular level. Actual size: 3" x 3" x 2".

--Light current 05:16, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No - although that is a pretty one. The specimen I'm thinking of is a beautiful little tree inside a 1.5" cube, but I haven't uploaded it to Wikipedia as yet. It's more representative of an small electrical tree (the type that might form within a highly stressed HV cable) than the double-layered specimen above. Bert 13:19, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nice trees!

Some nice treeing ther Bert!--Light current 17:47, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Reworded the description about water trees to also include electrical trees (especially as it relates to HV cables). Individual water tree channels are virtually invisible, while electrical trees have much larger channels. Electrical trees can develop and grow without the need for water, but they can evolve from water trees. Bert (talk) 01:53, 23 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Merge

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

The result of this discussion was to merge. Wikfr (talk) 23:09, 19 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Water tree is a description of the same phenomenon under a different title, and could usefully be merged here. --Wtshymanski (talk) 21:09, 11 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support ~~with reservation~~: They are not the same phenomenon according to the Water tree article which states that, "Water trees may eventually progress to electrical trees". However, given the conjoined train of events, a merge would on the face of it seem to be a reasonable step. If they are not the same thing, the merged article should document what the difference is (with appropriate references). If they do turn out to be the same thing, then a reference in support of that claim is required. I B Wright (talk) 12:02, 12 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Well...yes. Like, every textbook on the subject, ever? How about page 260 of Hugh M. Ryan (ed.), High Voltage Engineering and Testing Second Edition, The Institution of Electrical Engineers, 2001 ISBN 0 85296 775 6 ? This talks about trees in insulation as a result of water and electric fields. --Wtshymanski (talk) 15:00, 12 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Try not to be so condescending when responding to other editors (WP:CIVILITY). That you might have an entire bookshelf devoted to the subject does not mean that the rest of us do. I looked it up in an online encyclopedia which told me they were not the same thing, hence the request for a supporting reference. If you have such evidence, then there is no problem, is there? I B Wright (talk) 16:11, 12 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is not a reference for Wikipedia. Every time I express an opinion on something I know nothing about, I get called on it and usually feel foolish. --Wtshymanski (talk) 16:31, 12 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I did not claim that it was. However, it is you that is claiming that they are the same thing. If that is the case, it requires a reference (which you seem to have). I B Wright (talk) 17:15, 12 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Incivility is something at which Wtshymanski is the master. You may care to read this and this for a rivetting accout of all his editing faults. 86.159.159.194 (talk) 17:07, 12 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Strewth! I had no idea, possibly because I have had minimal interaction. How come the admins have taken no action following all of that? I B Wright (talk) 17:15, 12 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support: I created this article, because it appeared as an undefined link in space charge. I stopped updating it, after I discovered the Electrical treeing article, which covers much of the same ground. I considering merging the articles myself, but do not have enough technical knowledge in this area. "Water trees" appear in titles of plenty of technical papers, so they must be a distinct phenomena. See the second and third references in water tree. We need a well written paragraph to bring the two concepts together. Wikfr (talk) 21:58, 17 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I am coming to the conclusion, that definitions vary from one author to another. For instance:

This author uses "electrical treeing" to describe all stages of the process, without any mention of "water tree."
This author suggests "water tree" is a stage in the development of "electrical trees.
The author Hugh M. Ryan, (suggested by Wtshymanski) never mentions "electrical trees," but consistantly uses "water trees" instead.

In any event, now it it even more obvious to me, that I should not have created a new article for water trees.Wikfr (talk) 20:46, 19 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Gravitoelectrical Treeing

This section keeps on being removed by various named Wiki editors and reinserted by one or more anonymous editors who continue to ignore suggestions to discuss it in the Talk section. So, I'm adding it to as an item in Talk to (hopefully) establish a reasoned dialog.

The phenomena discussed in the proposed Gravitoelectric section appears to be completely unrelated to the subject of this article: dielectric breakdown and electrical treeing. Although the tree-like structures may look similar, they are the result of completely unrelated phenomena. Nature displays many examples of similar-appearing dendritic structures (river drainage systems, mammalian circulatory systems, some neural structures, etc.), that are the result of completely unrelated processes. None of these are included in this article, and neither should "gravitoelectrical treeing". The anonymous author(s) are welcome to provide their views here...