Talk:Aluminium-conductor steel-reinforced cable

	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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Skin effect[edit]

Skin effect is an radio frequency phenomenon, there is no significant skin effect at 50 or 60 Hz. Tabby (talk) 23:34, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, sorry, I saw this note after I restored the link just now. But there is an effect. At high currents in a cylindrical conductor, the electrons all repel each other, and there ends up being a net current deficit at the center for that reason, which ACSR exploits. (I'm pretty sure ACSR "works" -- that is, is effective -- even at DC.) So what's the right name for that skin effect phenomenon? —Steve Summit (talk) 17:21, 21 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I call this transformer action, being caused by the interaction of fluxes within the cable. This forces the current to the outer layers. Tests by V.T.Morgan ( IEEE Power Delivery July 2003, pp 859-866 ) on a 19 Fe 54 Al cable gave internal inductance of between 0.046 and 0.05 uH/m with currents between 100 and 1800 A. An theoretical all-aluminum cable would be 0.05 uH/m, without transformer effect. Hence steel is invisible at 60 Hz Donald.stuart (talk) 16:52, 9 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I believe the problem to be the article says the iron inner strands are below the skin depth. The issue however is the skin depth in steel is just very limited due to its high magnetic permeability, so the article should say something like "the skin depth of steel is so small it had a negligible effect on overall conductivity". The skin depth of the steel core should be calculated separately, then the limited conductivity as compared to the aluminum outer strands would become apparent. 82.139.114.136 (talk) 13:14, 18 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The microscopic skin depth in the steel at AC means that it provides a negligible contribution to overall conductivity, but that's not the issue. The issue is how much is lost be removing the aluminium from the core to make room for the steel. 71.41.210.146 (talk) 14:36, 17 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Cable?[edit]

According to the IEV a cable is an "assembly of one or more conductors and/or optical fibres, with a protective covering and possibly filling, insulating and protective material". A bare conductor rope which is hanging from insulators at overhead line towers isn't a cable according to this definition. Cables are these insulated conductors which you dig into the ground or which are installed in homes. Cables need to have a protective covering, which includes the insulation in power engineering. --Gunnar (talk) 06:39, 10 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Referencing standardisation organisation[edit]

In the introduction, reference is made to the Aluminium Electrical Conductor Handbook [1], which has 371 pages. It would be better to add the referenced pages, so it is easier to find the relevant passage. Regarding the results of a standardisation process, I do recommend just to cite the relevant IEC standard, which classifies the different types of aluminium conductor ropes. --Gunnar (talk) 06:53, 10 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]