Talk:Copper conductor

Dubious
In overhead electrical transmission, an higher cross section increases the wind load on the cable but on the other side, it increases the surface area and therefore improves cooling, hence possibly allowing for an higher ampacity for the same cable resistance per unit length.

189.251.139.20 (talk) 20:40, 22 July 2014 (UTC)

Simple English Wikipedia
I made the Simple English version of this article. Please improve mine. I did not do mine well.

Qwertyxp2000 (talk) 06:27, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 one external links on Copper conductor. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130314150935/https://www.gocsc.com/UserFiles/File/Panduit/Panduit098765.pdf to http://www.gocsc.com/UserFiles/File/Panduit/Panduit098765.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100512134725/http://dow-futures.net:80/historical-copper-prices-history to http://dow-futures.net/historical-copper-prices-history/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 16:33, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

Conductor current rating
There is no table of conductor current ratings in the article, not even a link ! Please would someone knowledgeable add this ? Many thanks ! Darkman101 (talk) 01:17, 10 May 2017 (UTC)
 * What a conductor is rated to carry depends on a lot of factors, such as allowable temperature rise, installation conditions (free air vs. cable tray vs. direct buried, bare, insulated, etc.), and which agency is doing the rating. There's an NEC ampacity table at American wire gauge but no one has contributed a table for UK or other standards. --Wtshymanski (talk) 02:10, 10 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Copper conductor. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130720000331/http://www.copperinfo.co.uk/alloys/copper/ to http://www.copperinfo.co.uk/alloys/copper/
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://dow-futures.net/historical-copper-prices-history/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 00:08, 13 August 2017 (UTC)

recent change by IP
With an explanation of "Trim marketing waffle", the IP changed the meaning of the sentence from "improved conductivity performance" to "less conductivity"... So I checked the reference. The reference and the WP page on the conductivity of copper use 2 different scales, but once I converted the 14.1 Ω⋅cmil/ft into nΩ.m it turns out to be 23.44 nΩ.m, which is worse than 16.78 nΩ.m for pure copper. So the IP was correct to make the change, it is indeed a less conductive material. Dhrm77 (talk) 17:57, 5 September 2023 (UTC)