equation 11 or 12, the initial values of in-
cremental reactance for the seven sizes of
core wire tested are given by Table XVI.
The values for other strand sizes may be
derived as needed. These values for the
0.0661-inch-diameter strand have been used
in Fig. 10.
Nomenclature
A,=Area of steel core strand
B = Magnetic flux density
BM = Magnetic flux density, maximum value
during cycle
c= Fraction of total current in aluminum
layer that follows strands around
spiral, without leaking from strand to
strand
d = Diameter of steel core strand
f Frequency, cycles per second
H-=Magnetizing force
H, = Coefficient of variable component of
magnetizing force, dependent upon
area of steel core wire
Ho = Constant component of magnetizing
force, independent of area of steel
core wire
Resistance and Reactance of
The
Aluminum Conductors, Steel Reinforced
W. A. LEWIS
FELLOW AIEE
THE EXPRESSION ACSR has been
so long identified with aluminum con-
ductor, steel reinforced, as manufactured
initially by the Aluminum Company of
America, that it has become simply an
identifying product name that is univer-
sally used in the industry. Many tables
have been published1'2 giving the resist-
ance and reactance, as well as other
characteristics, of these conductors, based
partly on analysis and partly on extrapo-
lation of test results, but no complete
presentation has been given of the methods
of determining these characteristics or
of predicting them for new designs of
conductors.
This paper will present comprehensive
methods of determining these character-
istics for all such conductors so long as
the magnetic characteristics of the steel
core material are substantially the same
as that now used.
The presentation falls naturally in
several parts. Early tests by the late
W. R. Work, at Carnegie Institute of
Technology, for the Aluminum Company
of America, as well as other less extensive
tests, showed that when two or more
layers of aluminum strands, spiralled in
FIEBRUARY 1959 Lewis, Tuttle-The Resistance and Reactance of A CSR
I = Current
k8 = Correction factor for unstressed condi-
tion
N= Number of turns per unit length of
magnetizing winding
n= Number of strands of steel core
P = Active power loss per unit length of
core
Pe = Coefficient of variable component of
active power loss, dependent upon
area of steel core wire
Po = Constant component of active power
loss, independent of area of steel
core wire
PI =Active power loss for one strand, per
unit length
Q =Reactive power loss per unit length of
core
Q. = Coefficient of variable component of
reactive power loss, dependent upon
area of steel core wire
Qo =Constant component of reactive power
loss, independent of area of steel core
wire
Q=-Reactive power loss for one strand, per
unit length
AR= Incremental resistance of ACSR,
P. D. TUTTLE
MEMBER AIEE
opposite directions, surround the central
steel core, the effect of the core is negligi-
ble to a high degree of accuracy for an
even number of layers. Thus, for such
conductors, the determination of the
inductance and inductive reactance can
be made by calculation for the aluminum
strands alone, that is, for a hollow tube of
aluminum strands. For multilayer con-
ductors having an odd number of layers,
the effect of the core is noticeable but can
be neglected with satisfactory accuracy,
and calculations based on the aluminum
strands alone will serve. Methods by
which these calculations can be made
have been published, the most extensive
work being that of H. B. Dwight.3-7 In
this area the present paper will extend
and simplify the work of Dwight, so that
the calculations for any given in-
dividual conductor can be more easily and
more rapidly made.
The tests previously referred to, as
well as other tests and some analytical
work, have shown that the resistance of
multilayer sizes of ACSR is very slightly
less than the resistance of the aluminum
alone, because a small part of the current
finds a path in the core, thus slightly re-
resulting from active power loss in
the core
AR1,=Incremental resistance resulting from
active power loss in one strand of
core (for c3=s=l)
s = Lay of spiral of aluminum layer
T=Temperature, degrees centigrade
AX, = Incremental reactance of ACSR,
resulting from reactive power loss in
the core
AX, = Incremental reactance resulting from
reactive power loss in one strand of
core (for c5 =s= 1)
A = Magnetic flux linkages
ag = Absolute permeability of steel core
ue,, -Absolute permeability of free space
=4rX10 (henrys per meter)
-
po = Relative permeability of steel core at
low magnetization (initial perme-
ability)
c = 2rf
Reference
1. Tai RsSISTANCB AND REACTANCB or ALuYI-
Num CoNDucroRS, STEEL REINPORCBD, W. A.
Lewis, P. D. Tuttle. AIEE Trassactsoxs. vol. 77,
pt. III, 1958, pp. 1189-1215 of this Issue.
ducing the current and the resistance drop
in the aluminum. It has been customary
practice to compute the resistance of
stranded conductors of both copper
and aluminum as if the strands were
straight, of a length equal to the length
of the conductor, not spiralled, and then
add a conventional allowance, which
is usually 2%, for sizes used for overhead
conductors, to take care of the increased
length needed for spiralling.8 Some cur-
rent undoubtedly leaks from strand to
strand, not only in the same layer but in
adjacent layers, and this leakage will
vary somewhat depending upon the con-
dition of the strand surface, the conductor
tension, and perhaps other operating
conditions. Thus high precision in deter-
mining the resistance is not justified,
because the resistance will vary somewhat
in service, for reasons other than tempera-
ture effect. For ACSR, the standard
practice9 has been to include an allow-
ance for the requirements of spiralling,
which varies from 1.5% to 3.0%, depend-
ing on the size and design, and to ignore
any reduction for the conductance of the
core. Thus the actual resistance may
be slightly less than the resistance com-
puted by the conventional method.
There is also some manufacturing toler-
Paper S8-1029, recommended by the AIEE Trans-
mision and Distribution Committee and approved
by the AIEB Technical Operations Department
for presentation at the AIRE Pacific Generd
Meeting, Sacramento, Calif., August 19-22, 1958.
Manuscript submitted February 14, 1958; made
printing July 8, 1958.
available for
W. A. LBwis is with the llinois Institute of Tech-
nology, Chicago, Ill.; and P. D. TirrLB is with
the Aluminum Company of America, Massena,
N. Y.
1189
 snce in the inherent conductivity of the
aluminum itself, which may cause the
resistance of an actual conductor to be
somewhat less than the nominal resistance,
since the applicable ASTM (American
Society for Testing Materials) specifica-
tionsl" state the minimum conductivity,
that is, the maximum permissible resist-
ivity of the aluminum strands. For
these reasons, alimiting valueof resistance,
based upon definite assumptions, seems
preferable in published tables to a meas-
ured value for conditions that cannot be
precisely described or controlled.
When the thickness of the aluminum
layers is sufficient, skin effect will cause
an increase in the a-c resistance over the
d-c resistance of the same conductor, and
this effect, whenever appreciable, should
be included in the nominal resistance
value. Some of the tests and analyses re-
ferred to6Ill-1a have shown that the skin-
effect factor for stranded conductors is
very closely the same as that of a uniform
conductor of the same inside and outside
diameters and the same resistance to
direct current. For ACSR the skin-effect
factor would be taken as that applicable
to a uniform tube having an inside diam-
eter equal to the diameter of a circle
which can just be inscribed inside the
inner layer of aluminum strands and an
outside diameter equal to the diameter of
a circle that can just be circumscribed
around the outer layer of aluminum
strands.
Formulas for the skin-effect factors of
hollow tubes have been published by H. B.
Dwight. 14,16 However, these formulas
are in the form of infinite series, which
makes them impractical for frequent use.
The results have been plotted,6'1' but the
curves were intended for use primarily at
high frequencies, where the factors are
quite large, and the scale of the curves
makes impossible accurate determination
of the skin-effect factors in the region
applicable to ACSR at the usual power
frequencies. The contribution of this
paper in the area of resistance determina-
tion for multilayer conductors consists of
the reporting of the results of recalcula-
tion of the skin-effect factors, using
Dwight's series formulas and a digital
computer, in a range and form more suit-
able for stranded tubular conductors at
power frequencies. These results may
then be applied to the determination of
the resistance of multilayer ACSR for 60
cps or other power frequency.
Where only a single layer of aluminum
strands surrounds the steel core, Work's
tests, as well as others, have shown that
both the resistance and reactance of sucb
conductors vary over a substantial range,
1190 Lewis, Tuttl-The Resistance and Reactance of A CSR
depending primarily on the current in
the conductor. If the current follows the
strands of aluminum and does not leak
from strand to strand, the aluminum
strands constitute a spiral solenoid which
magnetizes the core, producing hysteresis
and eddy-current losses in the core and
additional magnetic flux which links the
current path. The hysteresis and eddy-
current losses add to the conductor loss
and increase the apparent resistance.
The increased flux linkages increase the
inductance and inductive reactance. Al-
though there is undoubtedly some strand-
to-strand leakage of current longitudinally
along the conductors, thus decreasing the
magnetizing effect, the fact that the resist-
ance and reactance, as determined by test,
vary substantialy with current shows that
at least an appreciable part of the current
does follow the spiral of the strands. This
leakage can be expected to vary some-
what, depending upon the condition of
the surface of the strands, the conductor
tension, the pitch of the spiral of the
aluminum strands, and probably other
factors. Thus the resistance and react-
ance are inherently subject to some varia-
tion depending upon manufacturing toler-
ances and variable service conditions.
The values of resistance and reactance
for these single-layer sizes of ACSR that
have been included in published tables
have been extrapolated from tests of
representative samples. To place the
tabulated values on a firmer base, much
more extensive tests have been needed
A comprehensive series of tests of a large
variety of sizes has now been completed,
so that much more reliable test values can
be used as a basis for revising the tab-
ulated values. However, it is difficult to
duplicate in the laboratory the range of
temperature and cooling conditions that
are encountered in service outdoors.
Unless very carefully controlled forced
ventilation of test conductors and ex-
tensive refrigeration of a large laboratory
are incorporated in the test program, it is
not feasible to duplicate in the laboratory
the range of conditions necessary to con-
firm fully the characteristics of these
conductors for the usual range of operating
conditions. Outdoor tests are also im-
practical because of the lack of control
of environment and the rapid variability
of conductor cooling conditions.
Thus, to provide reliable data over the
desired range of conditions, some method
for determining the conductor character-
istics, in addition to direct testing, is
highly desirable. In this paper such a
method is presented, based upon a com-
bination of calculation and empirical test
data on the steel core material. In this
method, the resistance and reactance of
the single layer of aluminum strands is
calculated, and then increments of resist-
ance and reactance are added, based upon
the test data on the core material, the
construction of the core, the current in
the conductor, the temperature, the pitch
of the spiral of aluminum strands and
the estimated longitudinal leakage of cur-
rent from strand to strand. The esti-
mate of strand-to-strand leakage is based
upon the correction needed to bring agree-
ment between the test values and the
calculated values for the test conditions.
The fact that the values for the leakage
factor thus found are small and quite con-
sistent gives support and confirmation
to the method and suggests that it may
be applied generally to establish values
of resistance and reactance for such con-
ductors over a wide range of conditions,
with an accuracy that is consistent with
the variations that may be encountered
in service.
Such a method is also very valuable for
predicting the resistance and reactance
of special conductors, such as those that
may be needed for river crossings and
other very long spans, where the steel
core needed for adequate strength is so
large that a single layer of aluminum
strands surrounding it will provide all the
conductance needed even for quite large
currents. In comparing the merits of
alternative designs, the ability to predict
the resistance and reactance, without
manufacturing and testing a sample,
is extremely valuable.
The method of determining the resist-
ance and reactance of test conductors by
direct measurement which was used in
the extensive series of tests reported here
has previously been published."' The
results of the new series of tests are too
extensive to be included here, but repre-
sentative agreements between the test
results and the calculated results are in-
cluded. Revised tables and curves of
conductor characteristics, based upon
these results, will be published by the
Aluminum Company of America.
The test program for determining the
characteristics of the steel-core material,
in a form suitable for use in the method
of calculation presented here, was con-
ducted at Illinois Institute of Technology,
and is reported in a companion paper by
L. W. Matsch and W. A. Lewis.17
Thus the contribution of this paper in
the area of single-layer types of ACSR
is the presentation of a method whereby
the resistance and reactance of such
conductors can be calculated with a de-
gree of accuracy consistent with the varia-
tions of these quantities in service, and
FRBRUARY 1959
the verification of the method by an
extensive series of tests on such conduc-
tors.
These several facets of the problem
will be treated in turn.
I. Inductive Reactance of Stranded
Conductors
Most of the work on the inductive re-
actance of stranded conductors is based
upon the method of geometric-mean
distances (GMD). The basic assump-
tion of this method is that the current is
uniformly distributed over the cross sec-
tion of the conductor. This means that
any nonuniformity of current distribution
resulting from skin effect or proximity
effect is neglected. The conductors of
overhead lines are so far apart, relative
to the diameter of the conductor, that
proximity effect is completely negligible.
Skin effect causes an appreciable change
in the a-c resistance of the larger stranded
conductor, but both tests and calculations
show that the effect on the inductive re-
actance is generally negligible. Thus
the method of GMD is applicable for the
calculation of the inductive reactance of
quite large conductors.
As applied to multilayer ACSR, the
current is assumed to be uniformly dis-
tributed over the aluminum strands, and
the current in the steel core is considered
to be zero. Thus, if the several aluminum
strands have the same diameter, each will
be considered to carry the same current,
in calculating inductive reactance.
It is shown in any standard text on
electric power transmission"8 that the
inductive reactance of one conductor of a
long transmission line, consisting of two
parallel round conductors considered as
a finite section of line of infinite length, for
any frequency f, can be given by the
formula
Xl =0.0046566f logl ab (ohms per mile)
dea
(1)
where
db =the GMD between the two conductors
dae =the GMD from the conductor a to it-
self, often called, for convenience,
the geometric-mean radius of the
conductor, or self-GMD
-If the conductors are duplicate, the in-
ductive reactance of the single-phase loop
is twice the reactance of one conductor.
The geometric-mean radius is the radius
of a thin tube of infinitesimal thickness
that has the same inductive reactance.
The distances deb and dee can be ex-
FIEBRUARY 1959 Lewis, Tuttle-The Resistance and Reactance of A CSR
pressed in any units of length, provided
both are given in the same units. The
most practical unit for overhead lines, in
countries using the English system of units,
is the foot, and will be used herein as the
basic unit for all GMD. For overhead
lines, lengths are usually expressed in
miles, and the formulas herein will all
be applicable for one mile of line. Of
course, under the assumptions made,
the inductive reactance is directly pro-
portional to length, so that the reactance
for any length is obtained by multiplying
the value for one mile by the length in
miles.
It was shown by W. A. Lewis,2"8" 9
that equation 1 could conveniently be
divided into two parts by writing it as
Xl-0.0046566f logio dab+0.0046566f
log1, - (ohms per mile) (2)
daa
and defining the two parts as
Xd=0.0046566f log1o de8 (ohms per mile)
Xa =0.0046566f log,,o (ohms per mile)
daa
(3)
where
Xd= the separation component of reactance
Xa = the self-component of reactance, or the
reactance for one-foot spacing
This method has several advantages.
One is that Xd has the same value, at a
given spacing, for all types of round
conductors and is thus independent of
the conductor characteristics. The prop-
erties of the conductor itself are entirely
expressed in Xa, which can be tabulated
as a conductor characteristic. Formulas
for the reactance of polyphase circuits or
more complex, multiconductor circuits
can all be expressed in a form that in-
volves values of Xd for the various separa-
tions and of Xa for the conductors used.
The reactance of ground-return circuits
can be expressed in a similar form by
defining an additional component, X., to
represent the contribution of the
earth.2,"920 Since Xd is proportional to
the logarithm of a distance, the value of
Xd can be tabulated as a function of the
distance like a table of logarithms, in com-
pact form. Thus the reactance of any
transmission or distribution circuit can be
conveniently determined by substituting
in simple formulas, to suit the type of
circuit, the values of Xd and Xa (and Xe
for ground-return circuits) which are
applicable.
The method was first published by Dr.
Lewis' former associates, Wagner and
Evans, 19 and has now been widely adopted
in handbooks and in the publications of
conductor manufacturers.
Thus the present problem can be con-
fined entirely to the determination of X.
for the types of conductors considered.
To take advantage of geometric rela-
tionships, it is desirable to subdivide
Xe also into two parts. Thus, let
Xa = 0.0046566f logo1- -0.0046566f
rn
log1o - (ohms per mile) (4)
rn
where
rn=the radius of a circle that just encloses
the outer layer of n strands of the
stranded conductor, in feet
Then the internal reactance of a conductor
may be defined as
Xi-0.0046566f logo -aa (ohms per mile)
rn
(5)
As will be shown, Xi for nonmagnetic
conductors depends only on the geo-
metric properties of a conductor, and is
independent of its actual dimensions.
Thus Xi can be determined for a given
pattern of conductor stranding, once and
for all, and Xa for any conductor using
that arrangement of strands can then be
found by simply adding the first term of
equation 4, which depends only on the
over-all size of the conductor.
Thus the problem reduces to the deter-
mination of d. and the ratio of d. to r.
for the various conductor designs
The GMD between any two noninter-
secting circular conductors is the distance
between their centers. This relation is
derived in any introductory treatment of
GMD.6 The GMD from any conductor
p to a second conductor q consisting of n
duplicate round conductors parallel to
the first is, by definition of the geometric
mean,
dp,g V(dpi) (dp2) (dps) (dP4)
- ... (dpn) (6)
Let us assume that the n elements of
conductor q are equaRly spaced around
the circumference of a circle of radius
rc, with center at the origin 0, as shown
in Fig. 1, and that the distance from point
p to the center of the circle is dp. For
convenience it will be assumed that the
center of the circle and the center of
conductor p lie on the horizontal reference
axis, and that the radius from the center
of the circle to the last of then conductors,
n, makes an angle 0 with the horizontal
axis, as shown.
Now let f, represent the phasor, or
complex number, that locates conductor n
from the center of the circle. Then if
1191
 Fig. 1. Elementary conductor where r is any integer. Thus, if one of
oF n elements equispaced on the n elements is on the horizontal axis
circle circumference on the side toward p, the minimum value
pn applies, and if two adjacent elements are
equally spaced on either side of the hori-
zontal axis on this same side, the maxi-
P mum value applies.
If the n elements of conductor q are
spiralled, the value of 6 will change con-
*kir (12) tinuously, each value applying for a small
dp fge= interval of length. This will have the
same effect, on the average, as making n
where k is any integer. The n distinct infinite. Then the GMD from p to a
roots required are obtained by giving k spiralled conductor of n strands is the
di, dg,la, .. J,, are the phasors that locate values from 1 to n inclusive.
each of the n elements of conductor q limit of equation 15 or 17 as n approaches
from the same center, they may be ex- Since each root corresponds to a factor infinity. If dp is greater than rc, so that
of equation 11, the factors of equation conductor p is outside of q, then d;, may be
pressed as 1 may be written factored out of the radical, and equa-
tion 15 gives
(p- >e (dp-g e )...
(d=p - fq)
n
42w
4w
dppn- n ( 13) d p q dp i rq
.,no (21)
.1- The factors, once determined, remain dp
86 = PC(
factors whether the right-hand side is zero Now if ru is less than dp, the value of
.1- or not.
jn2v the fraction, as n approaches infinity,
dns*qe n F By substituting from equations 7 and approaches zero, and in the limit
9, equation 13 becomes
fe =ed
rq (7) dpq =dp (if dp>rr) (22)
(Jp-11) (d p-2) . . . (d4-Jn) If p is inside of q, so that d4 is less than
where
(Jpn) =Jv _< ( 14)
- (dP) (dP2) (d3) ...
ra, rq may be factored out giving
r6 -the amplitude of fP
Now from equation 6, the magnitude
In phasor terms, the distance from con- or scalar values of the left-hand side of jr
dpq rt I(dp _ein6 (23)
ductor p to the origin at the center of the equation 14 is seen to be equal to dp,67.
circle is Thus the GMD from p to q is the nth and as n approaches infinity, the value
ip dp e'° = dp,
-
(8) root of the magnitude of the right-hand of the fraction approaches zero, the mag-
side, or nitude of the radical approaches unity,
and the phasor distances from p to each
of the n elements of conductor q become d i9= d,n_L,,*,
; =/'/ dpn-rei"'l
v
(15) and in the limit

dpl =4p- Now since dpQ=rq (if rq>dp) (24)

JV2 dwV-d2
dpn dip -ad'n (9)
the subtractions being performed using
complex numbers.
Now the distance from p to 1 is the
amplitude of the phasor or complex
quantity 41i, or
dpi Ip |;, =| dp'-all
=
(10)
where the parallel bars signify that the
magnitude is to be determined. Similar
expressions apply to d42, dp8 ... dps.
Thus the GMD from p to q can be ex-
pressed by substituting the values from
equation 10 and similar expressions for
the other n-I elements of q into equation
6.
Now consider the equation
dp - e" o (11)
in which dp, is considered unknown. As
this is an equation of the nth degree, there
must be n roots. Transposing and taking
the nth root gives
ei"'=cos nO j sin n6
(16)
substituting in equation 15, separating
real and imaginary parts, and taking the
square root of the sum of the squares give
2 is equal to the radius of the circle of
dp= dp "+ra"' 2dp7rq" cos n0 (17)
as the GMD from the single conductor p
to the composite conductor q made up of
n elements. Cote's theorem in trigonom-
etry is a special case of this expression
for 9=2kr/n.
The value of cos nO runs from 1 to -1.
At each of the limiting values, the ex-
pression under the radical can be factored.
Thus the liits for dpq become
;/dnn_ r"n E<dp < Vdpn+ren (18)
the lower limit applying when
2rw
n the radius of conductor p is finite. To
and the upper limit wben
(2r+l)w
n (0
Thus the GMD from any round con-
ductor to a layer of spiralled strands is
equal to the distance from the center of
the layer to the center of the conductor, if
the conductor is outside the layer, and
centers of the layer, if the conductor is
inside.
If the conductor p were made to co-
incide with one of the n elements, say n,
dp would be equal to rq, 0 would be zero,
and the expression for dpq would become
zero. However, this results from the fact
that this process would make dp,, the
distance from conductor p to strand n,
zero. However, if p and n become co-
incident, the quantity required is not the
physical distance from p to n, which be-
comes zero, but the GMD from con-
ductor p to itself, or the geometric-mean
(19) radius of conductor p, which is not zero if
evaluate this situation, the distance dD1
may be eliminated from the product
(20)
and later replaced by dr,, the GMD
from p to itself. Let 0 be 0, and divide

1192 Lewis, Tuttle-The Resistance and Reactance of A CSR F^EBRUARY 1959

equation 14 by d' = p n. For 0 = 0,
dp=dv, 4ra E-rq, and the result is
d n-r n circumscribing circle, and the radius of a
(dpl) (dP2) (dpa) ... (dp(n_ ) p single strand can be developed from Fig.
dp rq
=dV-i+r Qdpn+2r2dn-3+.I +
+rd
ren-2dp+r5"-1
the latter result being obtained by long
division.
If now conductor p moves to the loca-
tion of element n, dp becomes equal to r,
and the right-hand side of equation 25
becomes a series of n equal terms. If p is
replaced by n in the subscripts on the left,
to show that p has taken the place of n,
and if only the magnitudes are taken, be-
cause the phase angle on the right is zero
for this special case, the result is
(dn) (dn2) (dn3) ... (dn(n-i)) =nrq1n-
which gives an expression for the product
of the (n-1) distances from an element n
to the other (n-1) elements of conductor
q. This relation was first derived by C.
E. Guye." If, now, equation 26 is
multiplied by dpp, which now becomes d,r,
the GMD of element n from itself, and the
nth root is taken, the result will be the
GMD from one of the n elements to all
of the n elements of conductor q. Since
this same value will apply to each of the n
elements, it is also the GMD of the n ele-
ments of conductor q from themselves, or
the GMD from conductor q to itself, or
the geometric-mean radius of conductor
q, dqq. It then becomes
dge~Vnraql ldnn
With the aid of equations 22,24, and 27,
the GMD from any stranded conductor
to itself can be built up. However, con-
siderable simplification can be intro-
duced by making use of certain geometric
properties.
First, if each element of a layer is a
round, solid conductor, the GMD from
the element to itself is given by22
dnn = 0.7788ri
where r, is the radius of the round, solid
element, that is, of a single strand. If
the strands are hollow tubes, as have
sometimes been used in expanded copper
conductors, the factor 0.7788 will be re-
placed by a larger value, but less than
unity, which depends upon the wall thick-
ness of the tube. However, tubular con-
struction has not been used in commercial
aluminum conductors and ACSR, so that,
for the actual case of aluminum conduc-
tors and ACSR, equation 28 applies.
For conductors of concentric stranding,
having all strands, including a single-
strand central core, of the same diameter,
FiEBRUARY 1959
the relations between the radius of centers
of the strands of a layer, the radius of the 30
24
18
2. It is seen that each layer surrounding 12
the central core has a number of strands
6
(25) that is a multiple of six, the number of
strands in each succeeding layer being
six greater than the number in the pre-
ceding layer. The first layer surround-
ing the single-strand core has six strands.
From the figure it is easily seen that
rq n
ri 3
rn= +1 (29)
ri 3
where
(26) rq=the radius of centers of a layer of n
strands Fig. 2. Relations of a concentricAtrnded
rn =the radius of the circumscribing circle conductor composed of wires of same diameter
around a layer of n strands
r =the radius of one strand r1= radius of one strand
n =the number of strands in the layer rq=radius of circle of centers
fn= radius of circumscribing circle
Checks against the dimensions of many n=number of strands in layer
sizes and types of ACSR show that the
relations of equations 29 are very closely
valid for all layers having five or more solid strands, the identifying subscript t
strands, whether the number of strands may be used. Then from equations 30
in the layer is a multiple of six or not, and 29, the value of k, for a single layer of
and whether the strands of the steel core n strands is
are the same diameter as the aluminum
strands or not. Thus, as a very close
kps 7'n=aa_ n+3
+ 3;/64 (32)
approximation, equations 29 will be
assumed to apply to any single layer of n and
aluminum strands in an ACSR conductor,
when n is five or more. n 1
(27) logto kgg -log1o n+3
-3+- logio 2.3364
n
Substituting equations 28 and 29 in
equation 27 shows that the GMD from zlog1o nn 0.36855
a layer of n strands to itself, that is, (33)
n+3 n
the GMD of the layer, is given by
If k0a, for any conductor a, is sub-
d~= Vn~Inri 0.7788 --3-ntr stituted in equation 5, the internal react-
ance is expressed by
X= -0.0046566f logio koa (34)
=rq ;/4 = n+3 V2.3364 (30)
and if equation 5 is substituted in equa-
It is often desirable to express the ratio tion 4, the conductor component of re-
(28) of the geometric-mean radius of a con- actance for a round conductor is given by
ductor to some physical dimension of the
conductor. For round conductors, the Xa =0.0046566f logio -+
rn
physical dimension most convenient for
the purpose is the radius of a circle which Xt (ohms per mile) (35)
just circumscribes the conductor. For a Now for a tubular conductor consisting
stranded layer of n strands, this is identi- of a single layer of n nonmagnetic strands,
fied as rn. If the ratio is called ks,, with a with no effect of a steel core included, the
further subscript to identify the type of internal reactance is given by sub-
conductor, then in general stituting d,,q, as given by equation 30 for
daa a layer of n strands, for daa in equation
kga = daa
fn(a)
(31) 5, since d,a is the GMD from the con-
ductor being investigated to itself or by
where the subscript a is changed to apply substituting kog from equation 32 for kg.
to different conductors. For a tubular in equation 34. The result is, for a single
conductor comprising a single layer of layer,
Lewis, Tuttle-The Resistance and Reactance of A CSR 1193
Xim -0.0046566fX ratio of the current in that member to
the total current, and 2. the GMD be- 1091dt,ern 4(n-3)' log,o n+
log0k92gtg,
3n'-12n

logio + - log 2.33641 tween each two members of the composite (n - 6)2
conductor raised to an exponent that is 4(n3) 2logio (n -6) -log1o(n+3) +
= 0.0046566f [3ogo
n +3 _ 0.36855] twice the product of the fractions of the 0.36855 (41)
n n total current carried by each of the two
members. This may be illustrated for a 2(n-3)
(ohms per mile for a single layer
of n strands) composite conductor of 3 member con- (for two layers of strands)
(36) ductors carrying currents il, i2, and is to
give a total current ia. The GMD from By extending the process, the results
It is to be noted that the internal re- conductor q to itself is given by for 3- and 4-layer conductors become
actance for a single-layer conductor, com-
posed of solid round strands, depends only logo kglogo d, ,5n 36n
rl 9(n-6) n
on the number of strands in the layer.
The conductor component of reactance,
=fX
( di16
111112
2)
LI-1-3
)
2(d22t)) (d31(f) )
!1-21-3 (n-6) (n-10) log,o (n-6)+
X., for a single-layer aluminum con- d12 tq2 da fq2 du '91 (37) 9(n -6)'
ductor, with no core effect included, is
then given by substituting the result in
It is easily shown that if il, i2, and ia are
(n -12)'
9(n-6)'
log,o (n-12) -

equal, the result is the same as that given

equation 35, which, for a fixed number of
strands, now varies only with the radius
of the circumscibing circle. Of course,
this radius should be expressed in feet
for substitution in equation 31.
This process may be extended to tu-
bular stranded conductors of any number
of layers. The GMD of each layer to
itself can be determined by equation 30.
From equation 24, the GMD from any
layer of n strands to any s rand inside the
layer is the radius of centers to the layer
of n strands. Since the same value ap-
plies to each and every strand of an
inner layer, it applies to any combination
of inner strands and therefore to an inner
conductor of any shape whatever. There-
fore, the GMD between any two con-
centric layers of strands is the radius of
the circle of centers of the outer of the two
layers.
To avoid confusion when two or more
layers are being considered in the same
conductor, n will be used to identify the
number of strands in the outermost layer
only, and the number of strands in inner
layers will be expressed in terms of n,
(n - 6) being used in place of n in the
next to outer layer, and so on.
The basic concept of GMD assumes
that each of the member elements of a
composite conductor carries the same
current. Then the GMD for a composite
conductor of n elements to itself can be
expressed as the n' root of the product of
n' terms obtained by multiplying to-
gether the GMD from each of the n ele-
ments to every element (including itself).
However, if the elements do not carry
equal currents, the process may be modi-
fied by giving each factor a weighting ex-
ponent. As shown in Appendix I, the
GMD from a composite conductor to it-
self can be obtained by multiplying to-
gether: 1. the self-geometric-mean dis-
tances of every member to itself raised
to an exponent which is the square of the
by the simple formula.
To utilize to best advantage the results
already obtained, the member conductors
of a multilayer stranded tubular conductor
will each consist of a single layer. Then,
since each strand of the same diameter is
assumed to carry the same current, the
fraction carried by each layer will be the
ratio of the number of strands in that layer
to the total number of strands.
This method may now be applied to a
2-layer conductor having n strands in the
outer layer and n-6 in the inner, all of the
same diameter. From equation 30, the
GMD from each layer to itself are given
by
dt tr 2. .3 (for th e outer)
3 stitution of these values of kg for kp, in
d(t- i ,(-i)= (n-6)r,
(.-a
3
V l.3364 (for the
inner) (38)
and the GMD between t]he two layers isos
nrl
3 (39)
from equations 29 and 24L
The total strands are 2In -6.
Thus the GMD of a 2-layer tubular
conductor to itself, the geometric-mean
radius of a 2-layer cond [uctor, each layer
consisting of solid strand S, is
/n 2 -2
3n2-12n
-- { -6 2
=r n (2n-6) 2(n-6) 2n tJ
3
X
2.33642n-
The logarithm of the r atio of this GMD
to the radius of the circ.umscribing circle
(around the outer layeer of n strands)
is then obtained, using equations 29 for
rn,, as
log,o (n +3) +0-36855
(for three layers of strands)
dt,, 7n2-72n
log,o k44t = log,, rd= 16(n 7, log,o n +
5n'-96n+396 log1o (n -6) +
16(n-9)2
3(n-16) (n-12) log,o (n-12) +
16(n -9) 2
l18)2)log'O (n-)
(n- 8)-
o
- 2
log,, (n +3) + 0385(42)
4(n-9)
(for four layers of strands).
In all of these expressions, n is the num-
ber of strands in the outer layer. By sub-
equation 34, the internal reactance, Xi,
can be found for any stranding pattern,
and by substitution of that value in equa-
tion 35, the conductor component of
h olayers
reactance, X., can be found for any
particular conductor as a function of the
outside radus (in feet). Since the values
of kg and X, depend only on the strand-
ing arrangement, they can be calculated
once and for all, and tabulated. This
has been done in Table I, the values of Xi
being given for the standard frequency of
60 cps, and the table covering the range
of stranding that may reasonably be ex-
n-a pected.
(2n -6) X The same methods may be used to
2n(n- ) determine ko and X, for concentric-
dt(g-i) stranded conductors, built up about a
single strand as a core, and about a 3-
strand layer as a core. For the single
1 strand, the GMD from this strand to itself
(40) is given by equation 28. For a 3-strand
layer, the physical distances can be deter-
mined from the geometry of a cross sec-
tion, and the geometric-mean radius can
then be worked out. If the effect of
spiralling on the cross section is neglected,
so that a section may be assumed to

1194 Lewis, Tuttle-The Resistance and Reactance of A CSR FIEBRUARY ] 959

 e~~~~~~t
0
O~~~~~~1 00001-
#)
ON
0 00
;
a ~ ~~~~~~~
cocoem
CnO
ao C; ; C; 0
c,

e 1~~~~~~,
ooo-44 o-

.~~~~~~~~~~0
o
o~~~~~~~~~0
a
co
*
...
t oe oo
... - -
4

C)
:to::
eq
C- LO

N~~~~~~O
°i oo ooogoo 000
t- DL o
g 00
o~~~~~~~~~~Y
3 °qo o o 8 0 m m q q q % aq N N
04 _ coooo 0 000 ooo oo(

e~~~~~~
S oo eq t-Iox
bs e~~~~~~~~~~~~C 0
_ a o0
be vt_o
0C0 (M xes 00 u: 2
U la o 000 - O00 0 000 0 0
c G W ~~~~~~~0 C;a)_ C;Usro O'
C; C; co+

-, r~~~~~~~~~~~~~~b t- °4 8-4 0 e0 t
X2 00 00
la -
"a rZ t, - r. - t. t4 r.
C o C; a _ ;o

O ^ g @ .. ea~~~~. N 04 C Ntn M C0 Co M M i

_~~~~~~~~~~~~~~0 CO 00 eq0000
..- 000 00040 0 0000
O3 ._ Lo Co.0000.t- 00 000 0000 000000

@~~~~~~~~~~~~~ -4 - a..0 9 V g
b. to UO eq -4 t 0) 00 0
r O o ... O- -s~ ~ ~ ~ ~ c o= 0000 We- o eOcor
_C _ l ... 0~~~~~~~~0 0000000 O~~~~~~ ) . A
C000 0000 0006C C ;C
b q.
s~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~0 -4°t CW oo Od 0 o +N8
-t Lo a

5~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~C
@V X oo ooo ooo
8 oooj
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~8 m
C)
t- IV - 1. co V. La
- - -o-ooo
U2
W a
O a- . cse so _escot u:<or~~~~~~C)0 c8ta
0oc
e~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~C C ZX ... . .... ... co.
@~~~~~~~~~~~~~C
z t; cs o C) o t OOD a ccsso 0 Co
oo C

I to Z v oo~~~~~~t co es m o -W 0 Co ao vo eW Vef04 m t NX
'C i-0 0 0000 00 °00 co 0 000 ,O
00
D0 o o Ooo;)o O
ooo ooo 000c; o ooo °o °

0 f cl qAno tioooo_ eq coo k42

W o_s
er
(0X
o oWtoe

&- I cI ° M M Og LO LO LO tO CO O o- 1 co O0 O °°°

z v *... f
W~~~~~~~~~~~
O 46
o r- Cq 0> s:m-l
cq---4-
aw - lccsXo
c"o 0 :Cot- 0 oo azk sc
Co -N
c:ec *0 co Oa ce
g~~~~~~~~M m m: N q --D c"
La
A ,q'q m'494-4-0a t co to -4 se
N * C h
_ .q , '- '- - '~ :- . :,
-4= 1-
I~~~~~~~~~ ~C(t9 C! C!Co
C! C! 0 1: (: CSIP0 C!0 C! C!CD CCO Ct ID 0 estc,
CO 0
o 0 a 000
a CD C) 0 0 0 OOC 000 0 0 000 8$go 0.8 °888 C;
C O
'

"~~~~~

I0 cq 00 t-l 00 cq to 0 to oN n s80
m t- O t- V co -4 0 0 00 ce ..Vw
L1
Z~~~~~~~~~~~0 O kAl co v MOM9-t- wtow +nGooet4et10 . ..t- co Ir
wQ O . O <.D n O o C7~~(
Q 1* bo0 o t- ut. K o
fD o Lo o) o o w t o OOO sIK3
>~~~~~~~~~~0 0 C; 0O'
00 0O
P~~~~~~~~~
0 O' C; .:::: O' o 0O:
0OO .
0O .: . . ..
o'O
0:O °a
a"'

> i b oX 8 X a
tO
b X cc
m oo
t-
X st4 b o N o0
mo*
x- 0
m 11 I-
oeq
LO m-4t- m Lo 0
> b > 8 Z 00 00
-4
@w b< 00 00 a) ab o
l Eo . ]_ e e soo i o- o toQ>Vco o>k8 es Nm eq cq CqC mm 00. .. s|ot Lo 0 b1
t; co t- r-1 a co00
00 00 00 m (mC t= b0 c

FEBRUARY~~~~~~
195 Hose utCretCryn .aact of . .S . .195 .......
consist of three conductors of circular in-
stead of slightly elliptical cross section,
each in contact with the other two, the
center-to-center distance between any
two strands become 2rj, where r, is the
radius of one strand. The center of the
conductor is at a distance of 0.57735X
2r- 1.1547r, from the center of each
strand, and the radius of the circumscrib-
ing circle is 2.1547ri. The GMD from
the 3-strand layer to itself is then
du= /V0.7788(2) (2) r = 1.4605r, (43)
and from this
1.4605
~~=0.6778 -
kg(32.1547
log1o kg(a) 0.16889
Xi=0.0046566f logio kg-
=0.00078645f (ohms per mile) (44)
The values of kg, -log1Okc,, and Xi
at 60 cps for such conductors are also
tabulated in Table I.
So long as the current may be assumed
uniformly distributed among the strands,
the value of Xi is directly proportional to
the frequency, so that Xi for any fre-
quency other than 60 cycles per second
may be found by multiplying the 60-
cycle value by the ratio of the desired
frequency to 60 cycles, or the value of
log1Okg for the appropriate stranding may
be substituted in equation 34.
Thus, by using the values of Table I,
the inductive reactance of multilayer
ACSR, of stranded aluminum conductors,
and of any other nonmagnetic conduc-
tors, for any of the stranding arrange-
ments listed, may be easily computed by
substituting the value of Xi for the
stranding and the radius of the circum-
scribing circle, r,, in feet, in equation 35.
The values of inductive reactance of
multilayer ACSR computed in this way
have been found to agree very closely
with the test values determined earlier by
W. R. Work, in a series of tests performed
for Aluminum Company of America.
The comparison has been published.23
The agreement with the results of the
present series of tests is also quite close,
as indicated in Appendix II.
The tabulated values are applicable to
almost every conceivable conductor de-
sign, where the portion of the conductor
considered to carry current is made up
entirely of nommagnetic strands all of the
same size and resistance, arranged in full
layers of strands, so that each layer has
six less strands than the layer imme-
diately outside it, or finally a single central
strand, for the concentric pattern only.
In some cases it may be desirable to
1196 Lewis, Tuttle-The Resistance and Reactance of A CSR
deviate from this arrangement, by using
strands in some of the layers having a
different radius from those in other
layers, by having some of the strands
that might be present in some of the
inner layers replaced by paper twine or
other nonconducting material, as is the
practice in expanded ACSR used for the
highest voltages, or for other reasons. A
similar situation has been encountered
with copper conductors, where one ex-
panded design has used a twisted copper
I-beam as a core, about which one or
more layers of strands have been spiralled.
In another expanded design, hollow tubes
have been used in place of some or all
of the strands in one or more of the inner
layers. For all such conductors the
methods already given can be used, but
the final formulas and tabulated values
are, of course, not applicable.
There are two methods of procedure
that are advantageous in such cases.
The one most appropriate will depend
upon conditions of the individual case.
The first method is more appropriate
for an individual design, the geometric
pattern of which is not likely to be used
for other conductor sizes. In this proc-
ess, the geometric-mean radius of the
conductor is built up successively by add-
ing one layer at a time. If the conductor
has a conducting, nonmagnetic core, such
as an I-beam or hollow tube, its geometric-
mean distance to itself is determined,
from tables or formulas applicable to the
particular central conductor. If the
innermost conducting layer is a partial
layer of strands, its GMD to itself is
determined. If the strands do not form a
full layer, but are uniformly spaced
around a circle of centers, the self-
geometric-mean distance is given by
equation 27, and d4. is given for a single
solid strand by equation 28.
It is assumed that the central core or
layer will be surrounded by a layer of
strands which may be partial or complete
and may consist of solid or tubular strands,
spiralled with relation to the central core
or layer. Even if two or more layers are
spiralled in the same direction, the spiral-
ling will be effective in averaging out the
variations of GMD between the two
layers so long as the pitch of the two
spirals is even slightly different.
The geometric-mean radius of this first
surrounding layer is determined as for
any other layer, in general by means of
equation 27, or if the layer is completely
filled by solid strands so arranged that
equations 29 are applicable, it may be
found from the relation
daa koarn(.) (45)
where
rn(a) = the radius of the circumscribing circle
of the layer
kga is taken from Table I, for the number of
strands in the layer
The GMD between the innermost con-
ductor and the first surrounding layer of
strands is of course given by equation 24,
as the radius of the circle of centers of the
surrounding layer.
Then the geometric-mean radius of these
two elements, combined into a single
conductor, is given by applying equa-
tion 37, written for two elements only as
dqa = (di, il+' ) (d22 (i'+) ) X
slt2
2
od2 (rh+t2)
or
logo dqq /~~~~,+) X
i logo d,iI+ (
logio d22+ . )2 log,o duc (46)
where
dqq =now the GMD to itself of the innermost
two elements combined
Now the same procedure may be re-
peated to add the next surrounding layer.
Since the GMD from any central conduc-
tor to a surrounding layer is the radius of
centers of the strands of the surrounding
layer, the same value is applicable both
to the first two elements combined into a
single conductor and to both of these first
two elements separately. Thus the com-
bination of the two innermost elements
adds no complication to the determina-
tion of the geometric distances between
elements.
By proceeding a layer at a time, the
GMD of a conductor of any number of
layers may be built up. The fraction of
current carried by each element is propor-
tional to the area of that conductor ele-
ment, whether it be a single layer or a
combination of two or more elements,
assuming that all elements have the same
conductivity. When the elements have
different conductivity, the current ratios
will not be proportional to the areas, but
the method will usually give good results,
so long as the current-carrying elements
are nonmagnetic, if the current division
is assumed to be, as for direct current,
directly proportional to the conductance
of each element. In this way the method
can be used, if necessary, for composite
conductors having different nonmagnetic
materials in succeeding layers.
The advantage of proceeding from the
center out is that no extra steps are needed
to determine the geometric-mean distance
FEBRUARY 1959
 Table 11. Internal Mutual Reactance with Internal Core for Stranded Tubular Conductors
Single-Layer Tubular Conductor Two-Layer Tubular Conductor Three-Layer Tubular Conductor Four-Layer Tubular Conductor
Number of Number of Number of
Strands Strands Strands
XIm, In Xim, In Xim, In XIm,
Number Ohms/ Outer Ohms/ Outer Ohms/ Outer Ohms/
of Mile at Layer Mile at Layer Mile at Layer Mile at
Strands km - logis km 60 Cps Total n km - logio km 60 Cps Total a km -logio km 60 Cps Total n km - logso km 60 Cps

5 .. 0.6250 ..0.20412 ..0.0570
6O.. .0.6667 ..0.17609 ..0.0492
7.. .0.7000 ..0.15490 ..0.0433
8. .0.7273 ..0.13830 ..0.0386
9 . . 0.7500 ..0.12494 ..0.0349
10 . . 0.7692 ..0.11394 ..0.0318
11. .0.7857 ..0.10474 ..0.0293
12.. .0.8000 ..0.09691 ..0.0271
13.. 0.8125..0.09018. .0.0252
14.. 0.8235 ..0.08432 ..0.0236
15.. 0.8333..0.07918. .0.0221
16 . .0.8421 ..0.07463 ..0.0208
17.. .0.8500 ..0.07058 ..0.0197
18.. .0.8571 ..0.06695 ..0.0187
19.. 0.8636 ..0.06367 ..0.0178
20.. 0.8696 ..0.06070 ..0.0170
21.. 0.8750 ..0.05799 ..0.0162
22.. .0.8800 ..0.05552 ..0.0155
23.. .0.8846 ..0.05324 ..0.0149
24... 0.8889 ..0.05115 ..0.0143
25.. .0.8929 ..0.04922 ..0.0138
26. .0.8966 ..0.04742 ..0.0133
27.. .0.9000 ..0.04576. .0.0128
28.. .0.9032 ..0.04420. .0.0124
29.. .0.9062..0.04275 ..0.0120
30.. 0.9091 ..0.04139 ..0.0116
31... .0.9118. .0.04012. .0.0112
32... .0.9143. .0.03892. .0.0109
33... .0.9167. .0.03779. .0.0106
34... .0.9189. .0.03672. .0.0103
35... .0.9210. .0.03572. .0.0100
36.. .0.9231. .0.03476. .0.0097
16.... .11 .. 0.6141 ..0.21174 ..0.0592
18... 12.. .0.6350 ..0.19725 ..0.0551
20....13.. .0.6542 ..0.18427 ..0.0515
22....14. .0.6719 ..0.17270 ..0.0483
24....15.. .0.6881 ..0.16238 ..0.0454
26.... .16.. .0.7028 ..0.15314 ..0.0428
28....17.. .0.7164 ..0.14485 ..0.0405
30... 18.. .0.7288 ..0.13738 ..0.0384
32.....19... 0.7402 ..0.13062 ..0.0365
34....20 .. .0.7508 ..0.12448 ..0.0348
36... 21 .. .0.7605.. 0.11888. .0.0332
38.... .22 . . 0.7696 ..0.11375 ..0.0318
40....23 .. .0.7780 ..0.10904 ..0.0305
42... .24.. .0.7858 ..0.10470 ..0.0293
44.... .25.. .0.7931 ..0.10068 ..0.0281
46.... .26.. .0.7999 ..0.09696 ..0.0271
48.... .27.. 0.8063 ..0.09351 ..0.0261
50.... .28.. 0.8123 ..0.09029 ..0.0252
52.... .29.. .0.8179 ..0.08728 ..0.0244
54....30.. .0.8233..0.08446 ..0.0236
56....31 .. .0.8283 ..0.08182 ..0.0229
58.... .32.. 0.8330 ..0.07934 ..0.0222
60.... .33.. .0.8375 ..0.07701 ..0.0215
62... 634 .0.8418 ..0.07480 ..0.0209
64.... .35 . .0.8458..0.07272 ..0.0203
66.... .36.. 0.8497 ..0.07075 ..0.0198
33....17 .. .0.6108 ..0.21413 ..0.0598
36... .18.. 0.6235 ..0.20516 ..0.0573
39 .... .19.. 0.6362. .0.19644 ..0.0549
42....20.. .0.6484 ..0.18813 ..0.0526
45.... 221...0.6602 ..0.18030 ..0.0504
48.... .22.. .0.6715 ..0.17296 ..0.0483
51.... .23 . . 0.6822 ..0.16610 ..0.0464
54....24.. .0.6923 ..0.15969 ..0.0446
57.....25.. .0.7019 ..0.15372 ..0.0429
60.... .26.. 0.7110 ..0.14814 ..0.0414
63... .27... 0.7196..0.14292. 0.0399
66....28.. .0.7277...13803 ..0.0386
69.... .29.. 0.7354 ..0.13346 ..0.0373
72....30... 0.7427 ..0.12916 ..0.0361
75.... .31.. 0.7497 ..0.12512 ..0.0350
78.... .32.. 0.7563 ..0.12132 ..0.0339
81.... .33.. 0.7626 ..0.11773 ..0.0329
4.... .34.. 0.7685 ..0.11434 ..0.0319
87.... .35.. 0.7742 ..0.11114 ..0.0310
90....36. .0.7796 ..0.10811 ..0.0302
56 ... 23.. .0.6079 ..0.21620 ..0.0604
60....24 ... .0.6180 ..0.20905 ..0.0584
64... .25.. 0.6270 ..0.20276 ..0.0566
68.... 26 .. .0.6360 ..0.19651 ..0.0549
72 ... 27. .0.6450 ..0.19041 ..0.0532
76 ... 28.. .0.6538 ..0.18452 ..0.0516
80 ... 29. .0.6624..0.17887..0.0500
84 ... 30.. .0.6707 ..0.17347 ..0.0485
88... 31.. .0.6787 ..0.16832 ..0.0470
92 ... 32.. .0.6864 ..0.16341 ..0.0457
96....33 .. 0.6938. .0.15874 ..0.0444
100 ... 34.. .0.7010 ..0.15430 ..0.0431
104 ... 35.. .0.7078 ..0.15008 ..0.0419
108... .36 .. .0.7144 ..0.14606 ..0.0408

Notes:
X,m -0.046566f logio km(ohms/mile)
dc
- (ratio of radii)
km - rn
Xsm = internal mutual reactance between tubular conductor and any internal core conductor
deq = geometric mean distance between tubular conductor and surrounded core, feet
rn - outer radius of conductor, feet

from the elements already combined to two or more layers to any internal element core from each layer is the radius of centers
the next surrounding layer. An example or core should be expressed as a ratio to a of that layer. When the two layers are
of this method, as applied to an expanded conductor dimension, and, as in the case combined, the GMD from the combina-
ACSR, is given in Appendix LI. If step- of the geometric-mean radius of a multi- tion to a central core must be the weighted
by-step combination from the outer layer conductor, the most convenient ref- product of these two distances, the weight-
layers inward were attempted, each com- erence is r., the radius of the circumscrib- ing exponents being the ratio of the cur-
bination would require a rather complex ing circle for the outer layer of n strands. rent in the layer to the total, in each
determination of the GMD from the Let dcq be the GMD from a surrounding case. Because the strands in these
layers already combined to the next inner multilayer conductor to an inner layer of outer layers
are assumed uniform, the
one. strands or a central core, and let the ratio current in each layer is proportional to
Many conductors to which the method of this distance to r7 be defined as ki, the number of strands in the layer.
just given is applicable have a central where Since there are n strands in the outer
element of perhaps one or two layers dc layer and (n- 6) in the next layer, this
which do not follow the regular pattern, km (47) gives, for two layers
rn
and the surrounding one or more layers n-6 n
follow the regular pattern. For such If the outer conductor were a single def = 6)2f-s
2n 'Inix
3
cases, proceeding a layer at a time is layer, dcq would be simply the radius of
unnecessarily laborious. If the GMD centers of the strands, and ki, with an n-s n
7"I
from the layers of regular pattern to any added subscript t to denote one tubular _62 i ((49)
layer or element within can be deter- layer, becomes
=

it+3
mined, then all these layers may be com- making use of equations 29, (n-6) being
bined with the inner elements in a single km:= (for a single layer) (48) substituted for n in the formula for rg for
step. n+3 the inner layer. Then, substituting in
To do this most conveniently, the in accordance with equations 29. equation 47 gives km29 for two surround-
GMD from a composite conductor of For two layers, the GMD to a central ing layers as

FEBRUARY 1959 Lewis, Tuttle -The Resistance and Reactance of A CSR 1197
 n-6 11
k.2t (n -6) in -6
-
21 -
6(n +3)
n-6
logio km28 = 2(n -3) log,o (n-6) +
2(n-3) logio n-logjo (n+3) (50)
(for two surrounding layers).
Similariy, for three and four layers,
logio km03=-6
3(n-6) log1o
(n-12) +
1 ~~~n
-logo (n-6) + 3(n-6)
_6loglo n-
3 cept that km:g instead of k0t appears.
log1o (n +3)
(for three surrounding layers)
log1o km =
Mt=4(nz-9) logio (n -18) +
no-12
n-6
9)logio (n -12) +
4(n -9)
4(n-9) logio n-logio(n+3) (51)
(for four surrounding layers)
where n is of course the number of strands
in the outermost layer.
If, now, the central core, or partial
layers combined into a single conductor,
which is inside the full layers just treated,
has a geometric-mean radius d,,, the value
of koa for the total combined conductor is
given by
logjokga= ic I loglod-c+ -- X
(ic +iV) rn (c +ja)2
log1ok+ 2ici logokm (52)
where
r= the radius of the circumscribing circle
around the outer layer of n strands
taken as kg6 from equation 32 or 33, or
kg
as k,29 from equation 41, or as kgs5 or
k04 from equations 42, depending on
whether there are one, two, three or
four layers in the surrounding tubular
conductor
k.,,, similarly taken as k,,1, from equation 48,
as kms from equations 50, or as
k,,,,$ or km4t from equations 51, de-
pending on whether there are one,
two, three or four layers in the sur-
rounding tubular conductor
ic and ia= the currents in the core and in the
combined layers, respectively
To facilitate the use of this method, the
values of km are tabulated in Table I.
Substitution of the result of equation 52 in
equation 34 gives Xi, the internal react-
ance of the complete composite conductor.
If the substitution is carried out, the
expression for Xi, denoted now by Xt(.),
to indicate the entire conductor, be-
comes
1198 Lewis, Tuttle-The Resistance and Reactance of A CSR
C 0.0046566f logo1 - + If the central core has a suitable refer-
Xi(a) =
ence dimension, such as the radius of a
i_2_ 2icig circumscribing circle, in terms of which
the internal reactance of this central con-
(ic +io)2 king (ios+ip) 2m
ductor can be expressed, the first term
0.0046566f logio km: (ohms per mile) (53) may also be expressed in reactance terms.
Let r,,(,) be the radius of this circum-
when the value of Xi for the tubular con-
ductor q, Xi(,,), is substituted, based on scribing circle (or other reference dimen-
equation 34 applied to kg0. The value of sion), and Xi(,) be the internal reactance
Xj(6) may be taken directly from Table I of the central conductor based upon r1(,).
Then the logarithmic expression for the
for the surrounding tubular conductor.
The last term contains an expression first term may be written
that is similar in form to equation 34, ex-
0.0046566f logio - =0.0046566f log,o L(¢) +
dcc dsc
This suggests that a mutual internal re-
actance be defined to represent the 0.0046566f log10 -r (SS)
mutual effect between an inner core and rn (c)
a surrounding tubular conductor. For
this purpose, let us then define Xim, the
By comparing the first term on the
right with equation 5, it may be seen
mutual internal reactance between a that it is simply the internal reactance
tubular surrounding conductor and any of the internal or core conductor, with
inner conductor, as reference to its own circumscribing circle
Xim = -0.0046566f log1o km j (54) of radius rn(c), and may be denoted by
where
Xi(,). The remaining term now repre-
sents the reactance resulting from the
kmt=kM , km2t, krnM$ or km4t, depending on flux that may be considered external to
whether the surrounding tubular the inner conductor but internal to the
conductor has one, two, three, or four outer or surrounding tubular conductor,
layers
that is, a ring of flux about the inner con-
The values of Xim are also tabulated in ductor that is still internal so far as the
Table II, for 60 cps, and the expected over-all composite conductor is concerned.
range of stranding patterns. To make maximum use of this relation-
Table Ill. Internal Ring Reactance for Stranded Tubular Conducton, Xi,
Ohms per Mile dt 60 Cycles per Second
Ratio
of
Radii 0.00 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07 0.08 0.09
1.O.. .0.0000.. .0.0012.. .0.0024.. .O.0036... .0.0048... .0.0059. .0.0071.. .0.0082.. .0.0093.. .0.0105
1.1.. .0.0116.. .0.0127.. .0.0138... .0.0148... .0.0159... .0.0170.. .0.0180.. .0.0191.. .0.0201.. .0.0211
1.2.. .0.0221... 0. 0231... 0. 0241.. .0. 0251. . . .0261. .. O. 0271... 0. 0280... . .0290... 0. 0300.. .0. 0309
1.3.. .0.0318.. .0.0328.. .0.0337.. .0.0346... .0.0355.. .0.0364... .0.0373... .0.0382.. .0.0391... .0.0400
1.4.. .0.0408... 0.0417. ...0425.. .0.0434.. .0.0442.. .0.0451.. .0.0459.. .0.0467...0.0476.. .0.0484
1.5.. .0.0492... .0.0500. ...0508.. .0.0516.. .0.0524.. .0.0532... .0.0540.. .0.0547.. .0.0555.. .0.0563
1.6.. .0.0570.. .0.0578 ... 0.0585.. .0.0593.. ..0600.. ..0.0608.. .O.0615...0.0622...O.0630.. ..0637
1.7.. .0.0644.. .0.0651.. .0.0658... .0.0665.. .0 .0672... .0.0679.. .0.0686... .0.0693.. .0.0700.. .0.0706
1.8.. .0.0713... .0.0720.. .0.0727.. .0.0733.. .0.0740... .0.0746.. .0.0753... .0.0760. ..0.0766.. .0.0772
1.9.. .0.0779.. .0.0785.. .0.0792... .0.0798.. .0.0804.. .0.0810... .0.0817... .0.0823.. .0.0829.. .0.0835
2.0.. .0.0841 ... .0.0847.. .0.0853... .0.0859.. .0.0865... .0.0871... .0.0877.. .0.0883... .0.0889... .0.0894
2.1.. .0.0900.. .0.0906.. .0.0912.. .0.0917.. .0.0923.. .0.0929.. .0.0934.. .0.0940.. .0.0946... .0.0951
2.2.. .0.0957.. .0.0962.. .0.0968.. .0.0973.. .0. 0979.. .0.0984.. .0.0989.. .0.0995.. .0.100.. .0.1005
2.3.. .0.1011.. .0.1016.. .0.1021.. .0.1026.. .0.1032.. .0.1037... 0.1042.. .0.1047.. .0.1052.. .0.1057
2.4.. .0.1062.. .0.1067.. .0.1072.. .0.1077.. .0.1082.. .0.1087.. .0.1092.. .0.1097.. .0.1102.. .0.1107
2.5.. .0.1112.. .0.1117.. .0.1121.. .0.1126.. .0.1131.. .0.1136... 0. 1141.. .0.1145.. .0.1150.. .0.1155
2.6...0.1159...0.1164.. .0.1169...0.1173...0.1178...0.1183...0.1187...0.1192...0.1196...0.1201
2.7.. .0.1205.. .0.1210.. .0.1214.. .1219.. .0.1223.. .0.1227.. .0. 1232.. .0.1236.. .0.1241... .0. 1245
2.8.. .0.1249.. .0.1254.. .0.1258.. .0.1262.. .1267.. .0.1271.. .0.1275.. .0.1279.. .0.1284.. .0.1288
2.9.. .0.1292.. .0.1296.. .0.1300.. .1304.. .0.1309.. .0.1313... .0.1317 .... 1321.. .0.1325... .0.1329
3.0.. .0.1333.. .0.1337.. .0.1341.. .0.1345.. .O.1349.. .0.1353.. .0.1357... .0.1361.. .0.1365... .0.1369
3.1.. .0.1373... .0.1377.. .0.1381.. .1385.. .0.1388.. .0.1392.. .0.1396... .0.1400.. .0.1404.. .0.1408
3.2.. .0.1411.. .0.1415.. .0. 1419.. .0.1423.. .0.1426.. .0.1430.. .0.1434.. .0.1438.. .0.1441... .0.1445
3.3.. .0.1449.. .0.1452.. 0.1456... .0.1460.. .0.1463.. .0.1467... .0.1471.. .0.1474.. .0.1478... .0.1481
3.4.. .0.1485.. .1489.. .0.1492.. .0.1496.. .1499.. .0.1503.. .0.1506.. .0. 1510.. .O.1513.. .0. 1517
3.5.. .0.1520.. .0.1524.. .0.1527.. .0.1530.. .0.1534... .0.1537.. .0.1541... .0.1544.. .0.1548.. .0.1551
3.6.. .0.1554.. .0.1558.. .0.1561.. .0.1564.. .0.1568. ..O.1571.. .0.1574.. .0.1578 ...0.1581. ..0.1584
3.7.. .0.1588.. .0.1591.. .0.1594.. .0.1597.. .0.1601.. .0.1604... .0.1607.. .0.1610.. .0.1613.. .0.1617
3.8.. .0.1620.. .0.1623.. .0.1626.. .0.1629.. .O.1633.. .0.1636.. .0.1639.. .0.1642.. .0.1645.. .0.1648
8.9.. .0.1651.. .0.1655.. .0.1658... .0.1661.. .O.1664.. .0.1667.. .0.1670.. .0.1673.. .0.1676.. .0.1679
4.0.. .0.1682.. .O.1685.. .0.1688.. .0.1691... .0.1694.. .0.1697.. .0.1700.. .0.1703.. .0.1706.. .0.1709
FEBRUARY 1959
ship, it is desirable to define an internal
ring reactance, caused by this flux, as Xi7,
where
Xir=0.0046566f logio _Ln (ohms per mile)
t'n (G)
(56)
The values of Xir, as a function of
the ratio rn/rn(,), for 60 cps, are tabu-
lated in Table III. Since the values
are proportional to a logarithm, they are
tabulated in a similar manner, and inter-
polation for intermediate values can be
treated in the same way.
Substituting these quantities in equa-
tion 53 gives, as the internal reactance of
a composite conductor consisting of a
surrounding tubular conductor and a
central or core conductor
jC2
Xi(a) (Xi(c) +X1r) +
(ic 2
xi() + 2ciq
+) tXm (57)
where
X(,)= the internal reactance of the central
or core conductor, with reference to
its own circumscribing radius
Xi, = the ring reactance for the flux between
the circumscribing radius of the
inner conductor and the circumscrib-
ing radius, r., of the composite con-
ductor, determined from Table III
X=(q)= the internal reactance of the outer
tubular stranded conductor, from
Table I
Xtm =the mutual internal reactance, from
Table II
ic = the current in the inner or core conductor
if = the current in the outer tubular con-
ductor
If both conductors have equal conduc-
tivities, it is assumed that the currents
will be proportional to their areas. If
the conductivities are different, the cur-
rents will be taken as proportional to the
conductances.
Once Xi has been determined, Xe can
be found by substituting in equation 35.
An example, using this method to deter-
mine the value of Xa for an expanded
ACSR, is given in Appendix II.
The method described earlier, for build-
ing up the GMD of a composite conductor
a layer at a time, can also be adapted to
the use of reactance quantities, with some
saving. However, since that method is
not likely to be used if the outer layers
form a stranded tubular conductor for
which tabulated reactance values are
available, the details will not be given.
The methods outlined are sufficient for
the determination of the reactance of all
multilayer and expanded ACSR, and are
believed to represent a considerable sim-
plication over methods previously pub-
lished. With additional data on the
FEBRUARY 1 959 Lewis, Tuttle- The Resistance and Reactance of A CSR
inductive reactance of I-beams, tubular
strands, or other special shapes of con-
ductors that may be used as cores, the
same methods can be readily adapted to
the accurate calculation of the inductive
reactance of expanded conductors of all
tvpes.
Il. Skin Effect Resistance Factors
for Hollow Tubes and for ACSR
As is well known, in conductors for
alternating current, cognizance must be
taken of the phenomenon known as "skin
effect." The true ohmic resistance of a
conductor applies when the current den-
sitv is uniform throughout the cross
section. For alternating current, the
current density is not uniform but is
greater near the outside surface of the
conductor (for single conductors). This
result may be explained briefly as follows.
In any conductor of regular cross sec-
tion and having its current flow parallel
to the axis of the conductor, that is,
parallel to the hypothetical longitudinal
filaments composing the conductor, the
voltage drop must be the same along
any filament bounded by the same two
cross sections. Or, any cross-sectional
plane must be an equipotential surface.
With alternating current, the voltage
drop along any filament comprises not
only a resistance drop, but also an in-
duced voltage resulting from the changing
magnetic field. The induced voltage in a
filament near the surface of the conductor
will be less than that in a filament near
the axis, since the former filament is
linked by fewer lines of magnetic flux.
Obviously then, to have the same total
voltage drop, the current density must
be greater in the portions of the conductor
more remote from the axis. Both the
cause and effect of this nonuniform cur-
rent distribution are lumped in the term
skin effect. The net result is to increase
the "effective" resistance of the conductor
and decrease its internal reactance.
These two results are approximately of
the same magnitude (as ratio or percent-
age), but whereas the effective resistance
of the conductor is a whole paramneter in
itself, the internal reactance of a conduc-
tor is usually a very small part of the total
reactance, especially in open wire con-
struction, and the skin-effect correction as
a proportion of the total reactance is
even smaller. Consequently, for prac-
tical purposes, skin effect in its applica-
tion to reactance can be totally neglected,
and the reactance can be calculated as
if skin effect did not occur, as in section I.
Aluminum conductors with steel rein-
forcing, because of the large differences in
conductance between the steel core and
the aluminum outer layers, may be con-
sidered as tubular conductors. The
formula for skin effect in tubular, as
distinct from solid, conductors is some-
what different because the current dis-
tribution is different. The curves pre-
sented here extend from the solid case
to conductors that are thin-walled tubes.
The rigorous solution of the problem
of skin effect involves a Bessel equation
for the determination of current distribu-
tion 1, 16 Although the solution is known
with the Bessel functions expressible in
terms of infinite series, the amount of
labor to evaluate the result is tremendous.
Curves based on such computation were
presented by Dwight5 l5 and have been
reproduced many times. The only ob-
jection is that, while these curves are
clear for large conductors or high fre-
quencies or both, the area generally
associated with transmission line con-
ductors is crowded so that, using the
same scale, difficulty is experienced in
picking off accurate values.
To avoid the laborious evaluation of
the Bessel functions, many attempts have
been made to approximate the series.
Probably the best known are the formulas
given by Arnold,24 which are remarkably
accurate. However, with the advent
of large automatic digital computers, a
means is at hand for the accurate deter-
mination of the Bessel values with a
minimum of time and labor. The
Mathematics Services Section of Alu-
minum Company of America undertook to
recompute the skin-effect curves of
Dwight (considered the best form of
presentation) using the Bessel-function
equations set up by Dwight and per-
forming the task on the Remington Rand
Univac.
Dwight's equations were rearranged to
permit convenient programming and the
results for the power-transmission region
are shown in Fig. 3. Extensions of the
curves to a resistance ratio of about 1.6
were computed but are not presented
here since such values are of little interest
in power transmission-line design. A
brief outline of the manipulation of the
equations for computer use is given in
Appendix III.
The skin-effect ratio for any size and
type of ACSR having two or more
layers of aluminum can be picked off the
curves simply by using the diameters of
the circumscribing circle of the core and
of the complete cable to determine t (half
the difference of the diameters) and d
(equal to the larger diameter). This
equivalent tube is assigned the same d-c
resistance as the cable and the resistance
1199

Rae 1.061/ N -I-T
R _
.0
1.04 5 netization is so nearly neutralized that
1.05
t-
1.01
1.020
available.
I0 10 1
MJ P, il
dc
ratio for a given frequency is then picked
off the appropriate curve, or interpolated
if a curve for the required ratio is not
available.
Since the skin-effect data here presented
are related to the d-c resistance of the
cable, the simple measurement of the
quantity at a known temperature over a
length sufficient to secure good accuracy
is all that is required for an existing cable.
The resistance at the desired tenpera-
ture may then be calculated, using the
temperature coefficient of resistance. If
the problem is the determination of the
resistance of a new stranding, the d-c
resistance must perforce be computed.
For most accurate results, this should be
done taking into account the true length
of the strands in a mile of conductor.
The resistance of one wire is calculated
from the resistivity and adjusted for the
desired temperature. Since normally the
wires of conductor metal are all of the
same diameter, this need be done only
once. If not known, the length of lay for
stranded alunum or ACSR can be
assumed on the basis of ASTM B231 or
B232,8 9 respectively. The range will be
seen to be fairly broad, with a value of
11 to 13 times the outside diameter of the
layer in question being a median value.
Since the spiralling adds only about 2%
to the wire length, quite a large variation
1200
Fig. 3. Skin-effect
curves for round solid
and tubular conduc-
tors
.-T"'TV
l
1 the core. The tests of Appendix II dem-
0.10
0.09
-
0.06
0.07
t= 1+ (2r
40
2 0.04
50
from the assumed lay will not change the
result appreciably. Then if r~ is the mean
radius of the layer in question, that is,
the radius of the circle of centers of the
strands and s is the lay or pitch in the
same units, then the increase in length due
to spiralling is given by the factor
Thus in a mile of cable, the length of one
wire in a layer of mean radius r and pitch s
will be I miles as given. If the n.u-
ber of wires in a layer, the resistance
per mile of wire, and the actual length
of a wire of the layer per mile of con-
ductor are known, the resistance of that
layer is easily found. The combined
resistance of all the layers in parallel is
then computed.
The question may arise as to the effect
of the helical lay (or spiralling) upon the
a-c resistance. Zaborszky"3 has shown
theoretically that it decreases the a-c
resistance and increases the internal re-
actance very slightly with respect to the
stranded but unspiralled conductor.
This correction is small enough to neglect.
Thus, with the d-c resistance known, the
a-c resistance of multilayer conductors
can be found immediately from the skin-
effect curves.
If the pitch is not known accurately,
Lewis, Tuttle-The Resistance and Reactance of A CSR
the nominal resistance, equal to the d-c
resistance of a rod of the same area of
cross section and one mile in length, in-
creased by the per-cent allowance of two
per cent or other value, as specified in
ASTM B-232,9 may be used.
For ACSR having an even number of
aluminum layers, multiplying the test or
calculated values of d-c resistance at any
specifiedtemperaturebytheskin-effectfac-
tor will give the a-c resistance to a good
accuracy. When there are three layers
of aluminum, the agreement between
the calculated value obtained in this way
and the test value is not as close. The
one factor not included in the analysis is
core loss resulting from magnetization of
onstrate that, when the number of layers
is odd, this factor is significant, and when
the number of layers is even, the mag-
the additional loss can not be positively
identified.
For conductors having a single layer of
alujminum wires stranded over a steel core,
the skin-effect corrections presented here
do not alone enable the a-c resistance of
the conductor to be determined. This is
because, with the strands spiralled in the
same direction, there is no neutraliza-
tion of magnetization and there is
appreciable magnetic flux in the core.
The resulting hysteresis and eddy-current
losses require a correction much greater
than that of skin effect to give the a-c
resistance. The presence of the flux
also substantially modifies the reactance.
Procedure for reasonably accurate cal-
culation of the resistance and reactance
of single-layer conductors is given in
section III.
m. The Resistance and Reactance
of Single-Layer ACSR
In section I, concerned with the re-
actance of multilayer conductors, the
longitudinal flux in the center of the con-
ductor, resulting from the fact that the
strands of each layer, spiralled about the
center, form a long solenoid, was neg-
lected. This was done because, in over-
head conductors, succeeding layers are
spiralled in opposite directions. There-
fore, one layer would tend to produce flux
in one direction and the next layer in the
opposite direction. Any resultant flux in
the center would cause a different volt-
age drop in the different layers. Since
successive layers are in contact, any volt-
age difference would tend to cause a re-
distribution of current among the layers
or leakage between strands that would
change the total magnetization, and result
FEBRUARY 1959
in a very small longitudinal flux. For two
layers, one spiralled in each direction, it
seems entirely reasonable that the effect
be negligible. For three layers, two
spiralled in one direction and one in the
other, it is reasonable to expect that the
two layers would predomninate and pro-
duce a small but noticeable resultant flux.
If any correction is needed, it is quite
small, and can, if necessary, be made
empirically.
When there is only a single layer of
spiralled strands, the neutralizing effect
of layers spiralled in opposite directions is
absent. Then, if the current follows the
strands, the solenoid formed by the spiral-
ling will produce a longitudinal flux that
will increase the reactance and the voltage
drop in the conductor. This flux also
produces a slight circumferential voltage
which tends to cause leakage between
strands in a direction to nullify the mag-
netization and cause the total current to
flow longitudinally instead of following
the spiral. However, the area of contact
between strands is small, the contact and
surface resistances will be appreciable, and
the resistance of this leakage circuit is
therefore relatively high. Thus, a sub-
stantial part of the current may be ex-
pected to follow the strands around the
spiral. Since the contact and surface
resistances will vary with conductor ten-
sion and surface condition, the leakage
may be expected to vary somewhat in
service. Therefore the effect of spiralling
cannot be determined precisely. The
effect of spiralling in a 7-strand non-
magnetic conductor, consisting of a layer
of six strands spiralled about a single-
strand core, has been investigated theoreti-
cally by Dwight.25 The results show
that the effect on the reactance is negligi-
bly small, at least at power frequencies,
and so is not taken into account in react-
ance calculations for such conductors.
For hollow stranded conductors, consist-
ing, say, of a single layer of strands sur-
rounding a twisted I-beam, or a hollow
tube, the effect may be appreciable, al-
though certainly not large.
When, however, the core is magnetic,
as in single-layer ACSR, the flux is greatly
increased, and produces a significant in-
crease in reactance. Also the alternating
flux in the core produces both hysteresis
and eddy-current losses in the core, which
are reflected as additional loss in the con-
ductor, and thus increase the effective
resistance of the conductor to alternating
current. The following method of anal-
ysis provides formulas for the approxi-
mate calculation of these effects, using
test data for the characteristics of the
core material.
FRBRUARY 1959 Lewis, Tuttle-The Resistance and Reactance of A CSR
When the core consists of a single steel
strand, the problem is reasonably well
defined. When the core consists of sev-
eral strands, a rigorous analysis is vir-
tually impossible, because eddy currents
in the core tend to flow circumferentially,
particularly in the outer layer of the
core, following a complex path from strand
to strand. This path is similar to that of
strand-to-strand leakage among the
strands of the conductor and depends
upon the contact and surface resistance
at the line of contact between adjacent
strands of the core. Because of the
high resistance of this path, it has seemed
reasonable to assume that the strand-to-
strand eddy currents can be neglected,
and only the eddy currents circulating in
each strand need to be considered. On
that basis, if the effect of the spiralling
of the steel strands about each other is
also ignored, both the real and reactive
power absorbed by a core of several steel
strands, and reflected as additional resist-
ance and reactance of the conductor, are
simply the product of the values for one
strand, for the actual condition of mag-
netization, by the number of strands. If
these assumptions are reasonably valid,
tests can be made on core samples consist-
ing of one or several strands, of core
material of several sizes, and these results
may be used to calculate the increase in
resistance of ACSR using cores of these
strands.
The pitch of the spiral of strands in a
conductor layer is specified by stating the
lay of the strands, that is, the longitudinal
distance for the strands to make one com-
plete revolution. The number of turns of
the layer around the core in unit length is
therefore the reciprocal of the lay, ex-
pressed in the same units as the length.
The current which leaks between
strands of the conductor and thus flows
longitudinally along the conductor, con-
tributes nothing to the magnetization of
the core. If the fraction of the current
that follows the spiral of strands around
the core is denoted by c8, the magnetic
intensity produced by a current I be-
comes
H=J--(ampere-turns per unit length) (59)
where s is the lay.
The unit of length used for H may be
selected to suit convenience. In much
design work involving magnetic circuits
the inch is used. Since the lay s is usually
expressed in inches, the inch will be con-
venient both for H and s and will be used
here. The values of current may be
instantaneous or rms, giving instan-
taneous or rms value of H, respectively.
In the present treatment, sinusoidal cur-
rents are assumed, so that a definite ratio
between crest and rms values will always
exist. As total current carried is reg-
ularly given as rms, rms values of I and H
will be used.
Let now P1 and Q, be the average values
of real and reactive power losses in one
strand of core material, for magnetization
H rms ampere turns per inch, for a unit
of length for which Ra and X, are being
determined. Since a length of one mile
is being used as a unit for resistance and
reactance determinations, the values of
Pi and Qi will be given for one mile. To
supply these losses in a core of nc strands,
the apparent resistance and reactance of
the conductor must be increased by
amounts AR. and AXa, such that
IPARa = ncPi (watts)
IPAX = nfcQs (vars) (60)
or, substituting from equation 59 gives
ARa = nc &C ( - (ohms per mile)
AXa n=nc ( - -(ohms per mile)
(61)
Now P1 and Q, are experimentally
determined functions of H, and the value
so determined can be divided by H2.
Thus the incremental resistance and re-
actance of a single strand may be defined
by
AR, =- (ohms per mile)
H2
AX1 = - (ohms per mile) (62)
and in these terms the values of incre-
mental resistance and reactance for any
conductor become
ARa, = nc AR1 (ohms per mile)
X
AXa =
(-' AX, (ohms per mile) (63)
The total value of Ra is determined by
adding AR, to the resistance of the
whole conductor, as determined by a d-c
measurement, or by calculation, includ-
ing the conventional allowance for strand-
ing. It is improbable that the correction
for skin effect will be appreciable for any
single-layer overhead conductor, but if
needed a skin effect correction factor, from
section II, may be applied to the cal-
culated resistance of the aluminum be-
fore AR& is added.
In a similar fashion the total value of
Xa is determined by adding AX. to the
value of Xa for the layer of aluminum
1201
 winding the small toroids were approxi-
0
z mately the same as those of spiralling
41
I--
the strands of the core about each other.
o I1.00
a
_ _ _ _
Therefore the data from the small toroids
z were used directly whenever the ACSR
0
-I 90 _ _ - ________ _ 1- STRAND CORE had a core of more than one strand. For
-j
0 .90 a single-strand core, the steel strand is the
I.
I-
z
central core and is not spiralled about the
w other strands as are all but one of the
*0 ;O7-STRANDE
9 D C
strands in a multistrand core. There-

So0L Xz
0
U.
44
Ii.
0 10 to 30 40
I/s-GROSS MAGNETIZING FORCE-AMPERE TURNS PER INCH
Fig. 4. Approximate Fraction oF
strands alone. This value should be
determined by the methods of section I,
and no correction for the spiralling of the
single layer is needed, since essentially all
of the longitudinal flux is included in AXa.
The tests to determine AR, and AX1 are
described in a companion paper by L. W.
Matsch and W. A. Lewis.'7 It was found
in these tests that the real and reactive
power losses, Pi and Ql, are affected by
temperature and by the degree of me-
chanical stress to which the steel has been
subjected. The principal series of tests
was made on toroidal samples in which
samples of the core material were wound
into toroids of small diameter, about
which exciting and measuring windings
were wound. The real and reactive losses
100 C
so sO 7O
current that Follows spiral oF strands oround
were determined for these toroids over a
wide range of temperature conditions, in
a closely controlled oven. To determine
the effect of mechanical stress, tests were
also made on toroids of much larger
diameter, approximating the diameter
of the coil of natural "set" of the steel
strands, as obtained from the mill.
Since these toroids were too large to insert
in the oven, tests could be made only at
room temperature. Thus the correction
for mechanical stress has been determined
only for limited conditions, and has
been estimated for other conditions.
In comparing calculated results using
these core data with test results of meas-
ured resistance and reactance, it has been
assumed that the stresses resulting from
fore it is not subjected to the bending and
twisting stresses that are present in a
multistrand core. It was assumed that
the stress effects would be much more
nearly represented by the testing condi-
tions of the larger toroids which were sub-
so jected to very little stress. Since the
data on the large toroids were not com-
core plete enough to develop a full set of
characteristics, they were used to estab-
lish approximate correction factors by
which the data for the stressed condition,
from the tests on the small toroids, could
be multiplied to apply to the unstressed
condition, and the results were at least
partially verified by comparing calculated
values of resistance and reactance, using
the correction, with the test values of the
over-all characteristics. It was found
that the correction factors developed for
resistance actually applied more ac-
curately to the correction for reactance
than did the factors developed directly
from the core data for reactance. There-
fore the resistance correction factors were
used for both resistance and reactance
corrections when the ACSR had only a
single-strand core.
Finally by comparing all of the
tests of each type of conductor with cor-
responding calculations, values of the

1.2~~~~~~5 0.0703 DIAMETER STRAND STRESSED

0.0703 DIAME7
1.0 In__l
50C
_________~,,
W Soc

-j

w
2

S; 2
I
' 0

4
Eu~~~~~~~~~115

0 20 Eo so lov iZu lqva

H-AMPERE TURNS PER INCH
H-AMPERE TURNS PER INCH

Fig. 5. Incremental resistance For 0.0703-Inch-diameter core strand, Fig. 6. Incremental reactance for 0.0703-inch-diameter core strand,
strened stressed

1202 Lewis, Tusttle-The Resistance and Reactance of A CSR FEBRUARY 1959

 50, 75, or 100 C (degrees centigrade), the
pitch of the spiral of aluminum strands
5.0 s must be known and the value of c.
w
-J
c 0.1878 DIAMETEER STRAND STRESSED must be determined, in order to determine
____ the corresponding value of H. Approxi-
mate values of cJ can be determined from
____ Fig. 4, depending on the number of
(I)
strands in the core, as a function of 1/s.
I
___ Then the values of AR, and AX, are read
from the curve for the desired tempera-
ture, in the figure for the applicable core
strand diameter. If the core has more
than one strand, the values of AR1 and
0 20 40 60 60 100 120 140 ISO I160 20 220 240 AX1 read from the curves are used
H-AMPERE TURNS- PER INCH directly in equations 63 to calculate AR.
and AXa for the conductor. If the core
Fig. 7. Incremental resistance for 0.1878-inch-diameter core strand, stressed has only a single strand, the values of
2.0 M e __ l _
AR1 and AX1 must first be multiplied by
the correction factor for the reduced stress
1.0 __ _ _ condition, k,, taken from the curves of
ER STRAND STRESSED Fig. 9. The upper curve applies to the
-i 0 20i 40 60 SO 100 120 040 1r0 largest and the smallest diameter core
w strands in regular use, 0.0661 and 0.1878
a: inch diameter, respectively, and the lower
U, curve applies to an intermediate size,
0.1299 inch in diameter. For other sizes,
intermediate between 0.0661 and 0.1299
I-
I tinch | } diameter, or between 0.1299 and
0.1878 inch diameter, the correction factor
| is to be interpolated depending upon the
0 40 60 100 120 140 160 SOo 200 220 240 relative of the diameter relative
__ position

H-AMPERE TURNS PER INCH

Fig. S. Inaemental reactance for 0.1 878-Inch-dIametef core strand, stressed
factor c,, which nominally represents the
fraction of the current following the spiral
of aluminum strands around the core,
were determined empirically. By select-
ing the values which gave the best average
fit of both resistance and reactance com-
parisons, a set of curves was drawn to be
used in actual calculations. Although
these factors undoubtedly depend upon
many considerations, such as the contact
resistance between strands, the size of the
steel core and its relation to the size and
number of aluminum strands, conductor
tension, surface condition, and perhaps
other phenomena, it was found that satis-
factory results could be obtained by
to the limiting sizes shown. These curves
have been reproduced from the companion
paper.17
Calculations of this type have been
The data fo: r determining AR, and AX1 made for the various sizes of ACSR tested
are given in the companion paper. 17 which had a single layer of aluminum sur-
From the cc)mposite data developed, rounding the core. The results are sum-
curves of AR1 and AX1 can be derived for marized in Appendix IV, where they are
a core strand c )f any diameter in the usual compared with the test results for the
range, as a Ifunction of the net mag- ame conductors. It may be seen from
netizing force H, given by equation 59. Table XI, see Appendix IV, that in
Typical curv es for two different core- most cases the agreement is good. For a
strand sizes Xare given in Figs. 5-8 in- few points the difference exceeds 3% but
clusive. To iuse these curves to deter- for 113 out of a total of 126 comparisons
mine AR1 and AX1 for a specified current the difference is less than 3% of the test
and any one c If the four temperatures 25, value. In most of the cases involving
CORRECTION FACTOR WHEN
CORE 1 UNSTRESSED

plotting one curve for each nutmber of

strands used in the core, that is, one curve w
for a one-strand core, another for the 7- 0

I1.4
strand core, and a third for the 19-strand 4

core, each as a function of the gross

z
0

magnetizing force, that is, the current

in the conductor divided by the pitch of 0
I n A% a 9 Inlna
FOR 0.06416 0.146 IMNCH DIAMETER
0.12911r INCH DIAMETER
FOR n

the spiral of aluminum strands. Thus

for determining the fraction of current
that follows the strands, the value of the
fraction has been plotted as a function of 1.0
zo2 40 so so loo ISO 140 IS IG 200so
the magnetizing force that would exist H-AMPERE TURNS PER INCH
if the entire current followed the strands. Fig. 9. Correction factor for incremental resistance and incremental reactance when core is
These curves are shown in Fig. 4. unstressed

FEIBRUARY 1959 Lewis, Tuttle-The Resistance and Reactance of A CSR 1203

 the larger differences, the resistance or
reactance is changing rapidly as a func-
tion of current, and only a slight shift in
current will give a calculated value of the
quantity equal to the test value. Thus
the calculated value is almost always well
within the range of the test values, but the
shape of the calculated curve of variation
of the quantity with current differs some-
what from the shape of the test curve.
In view of the variations in magnetic
properties from sample to sample, differ-
ences of this sort must be expected.
All of the conductors tested were new.
Therefore, the possible effects of weather-
ing on the characteristics have not been
fully determined. The greatest effect of
weathering may be in causing a coating of
oxide and other compounds to form on
each strand which would darken the color
and tend to insulate the strands from each
other. The insulation might tend to in-
crease the fraction of current that follows
the spiral of the strands. Nevertheless,
with the conductors in tension, the strands
of aluminum are likely to be in contact,
and subject to slight rubbing as the con-
ductor is moved by the wind. Thus it is
probable that the electrical contact
between strands will be more or less main-
tained, and therefore that no great change
in the fraction of current following the
strands will occur as a function of weather-
ing. However, the change in surface and
color will affect heat dissipation and
therefore will result in gradually changing
combinations of temperature and tension
for a given current.
To approximate the effect of weathering
in darkening the conductor surface, one of
the two samples of each size tested was
266,800 CIR. MIL. 6/7 ACSR AT 60 CPS
0.t;
hi
w 50 C
hIi
-X''
U,
a
w
0 0.2~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~2
z w
A 0
0.1
hi
0
0,
100 200
^^ . ^
CURRENT-AMPERES
1204 Lewis, Tuttle-The Resistance and Reactance of A CSR
painted black, the other being tested in
its initial bright condition. The cal-
culated values of the characteristics were
evaluated in the same way for both test
conductors, the resistance and reactance
being computed in each case for the cur-
rent required to produce the selected
temperature. No consistent relation
could be found connecting the percentage
difference between the calculated and test
values and the type of conductor sur-
face. It may therefore be concluded that
in most cases painting the conductor sur-
face had no substantial effect on the leak-
age current from strand to strand.
In the analysis, c, has been defined as
the fraction of the total current that
follows the strands around the spiral of
the conductor. However, the values
of c, used to plot the curves of Fig. 4 were
determined by comparing calculated
values of resistance and reactance, using
a series of values of c8, with corresponding
test values of resistance and reactance,
and selecting those values of c, which,
while fitting smooth curves, gave on the
average the best fit between calculation
and test. Thus actually c, is an empir-
ical correction factor which includes not
only the effect of current leakage from
strand to strand but also all other errors
and deviations. Experimental errors, in-
accuracies in plotting the test points and
reading the test values from curves for
the desired current and temperature, and,
perhaps most important, the deviations
of magnetic properties of the core strands
from those assumed are all included in
the evaluation of c,. Some of these de-
viations may be caused by differences of
the individual core sample from the com-
Fig. 10 (left). Resistance of 266.8 MCM, 6/7 ACSR Owl, for 60 cps.
LAY T.91 IN.
Fig. 11(below). Reactance oF 266.8 MCM, 6/7 ACSR Owl, at one-
0.5 to ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~C~ ~7
-J
J
CLI 0.4
0
I
0 0
z
.4
4:
.^
boo
posite, and others may be the result of
stress effects not being the same as for the
tested toroids. The differences between
calculated values and test values, as
recorded in Table XI, represent the com-
bined effects of all deviations and in-
accuracies, and there is no way of deter-
mining from the data whether it is a varia-
tion in the fraction of the current which
follows the strands or in one or more of
the other factors present that is responsi-
ble for the actual difference found in any
selected comparison. The curves for
cores of 7 and 19 strands are derived from
rather limited data, and may be subject
to appreciable modification when more
extensive tests on conductors of these
types are available. Furthermore, the
assumption that c, is a function only of
l/s may be subject to substantial modi-
fication when more complete analysis and
more extensive test data permit refine-
ments in the procedure. Thus the rela-
tively small differences between test and
calculated values in Table XI are more an
indication of the relative consistency
among the conductors tested than they
are a confirmation that the values of c,
actually represent the true fraction of
current that follows the strands.
To obtain some further information,
two additional test samples of 159 MCM
(thousand circular mils) ACSR, having 12
aluminum strands around a core of 7 steel
strands, were prepared and tested. For
one of these, the aluminum strands were
coated in advance with a high quality in-
sulating coating, to insulate the strands
from each other, and thus to try to insure
that all the current followed the spiral of
strands. Tests indicated that there were
Lay=7.91 inches
foot spacing, for 60 cps. Lay = 7.91 Inches
266,B00 CIR MIL. 6/7 ACSR AT 60 CPS
0 100 200 300 400 500 5oo
CURRENT-AMPERES
FEBRUARY 1959

hi
01
I a.
CL
a.
n
0 C.)
hi
u
z 4
4
I-
co
CURRENT-AMPERES
some breaks in the insulation which would
allow some leakage between strands, but
the insulation should result in higher
values of c, than for uninsulated strands.
The other test conductor was provided
with a series of tie-wire bands, short-cir-
cuiting the layer of aluminum strands
every 3 inches along the test length, and
was painted black so that its surface con-
dition was similar to that of the conductor
with insulated strands. For this con-
ductor the values of c, producing agree-
ment between test and calculation should
be substantially smaller. This conductor
was tested both with the tie-wire bands
in place and with these bands removed
(and the paint touched up). Since the
lay was appreciably different from the
value for the previously tested conductor
of the same size, it was not possible to
make a direct comparison of these tests
with the earlier tests on the same size.
When these tests were compared with
corresponding calculations, it was found
that the values of c, producing agreement
between calculation and test for the con-
ductor with insulated strands were several
per cent higher than the corresponding
values from the curve of Fig. 4, as ex-
pected. Also, for the conductor with
short-circuiting bands, the values of c,
were substantially smaller than the values
of Fig. 4, again as expected. However,
when the second conductor was tested
with the bands removed, the results w ere
almost identical with those of the con-
ductor having insulated strands. Thus,
for this case, it appeared that the coating
of black paint had produced almost as
much insulation between strands as the
complete coating of individual strands.
This result seemed to indicate that the
paint coating had more complete penetra-
tion between strands than had been
characteristic of previous painted con-
ductors. As there was no duplicate un-
FIEBRUARY 1959 Lewis, Tuttle-The Resistance and Reactance of A CSR
4/0-6/1 ACSR AT 6OCPS
-h
i LAY-7.32 IN.
0._
hir 100 C
~~--= ""'~ 75 C
%-.-.
2:4Z::- 50 c
0 0.5
z
4r
I-
0.'
0 100 200 300 400 500 goo
CURRENT- AMPERES
Fig. 12 (left). Resistance oF 4/0 6/1 ACSR Penguin, for 60 cps.
Lay = 7.32 inches
Fig. 13 (above). Reactance oF 4/0 6/1 ACSR Penguin, at one-foot
spacing, for 60 cps. Lay= 7.32 Inches
painted conductor of exactly the same core on the resistance and reactance of the
materials and lay, the effect of the paint- conductor depends substantially upon
ing alone could not be specifically isolated the lay, another variable is introduced
in this case. when the values of resistance and react-
For the conductor with insulated ance for a particular conductor are taken
strands the values of c, that produced from a table of values for one value of lay
agreement for resistance and for reactance and the actual conductor has a different
were appreciably different at the higher value of lay. In some cases for ACSR
currents, showing that some other effects having 7- or 19-strand cores, the differ-
than leakage between strands were pres- ence from this cause may be greater
ent. However, the average of the values than the maximum differences shown in
for corresponding resistance and reactance Table XI. To obtain accurate values of
falls consistently between 0.85 and 0.90. resistance and reactance for a particular
Thus either the defects in the individual conductor without actual tests on a sample
strand insulation permitted something of that conductor, the lay must be known
more than 10% of the current to leak from and the values determined for the actual
strand to strand, or other effects than lay. This is particularly true for con-
strand-to-strand leakage reduced the ductors with unusually large cores, such
value of c, by the 10 to 15%. Since the as those intended for use as ground wires
conductor strand insulation was imper- or high-strength conductors intended for
fect, giving leakage paths between long spans. For the smaller conductors,
strands, it is probable that much of the particularly those having a single-strand
reduction in c, was the result of current core, the total effect of the core is rela-
flowing between strands. Therefore, in tively smaller, and the variations in lay
this one case at least, the combination will usually not cause important changes
of other factors than strand-to-strand in resistance and reactance.
leakage must account for less than the 10 For general use, values may be given
to 15% reduction in c.. On the basis of for the preferred lay. Since both resist-
this limited evidence, c, is reasonably close ance and reactance vary with current
to the fraction of current following the as well as temperature, it is not con-
strands, and other factors do not pre- venient to tabulate the values, as is reg-
dominate in establishing its value. This ularly done for multilayer ACSR and
result also serves to confirm, at least to other conductor types. The most con-
some degree, the assumption that the venient method is to provide a curve of
effects of stress on the magnetic proper- of R. and Xa for each of the selected tem-
ties of the strands in multistrand cores peratures, as a function of current in the
are not greatly different from the effects conductor. Families of such curves for
of stress on the small toroid samples two popular sizes of ACSR are given in
tested. Figs. 10-13 inclusive. Figs. 10 and 11
In the manufacture of single-layer give R. and Xa for a 266.8 MCM ACSR
ACSR, the lay of the aluminum layer de- identified by the code word Owl, having
pends upon the gear ratios available in the six strands of aluminum around a 7-
stranding machine used and the conditions strand steel core. The core-strand data
of manufacture. Since the effect of the are given in Figs. 5 and 6. Figs. 12 and
1205
13 give Ra and X. for 4/0 ACSR identi-
fied by the code word Penguin having
six strands of aluminum around a single-
strand steel core. The core strand data
are given in Figs. 7 and 8. The d-c resist-
ance has been computed on the basis of
the maximum resistivity specified by
ASTM specifications."0 The core wires
have been ignored and the increment for
spiralling has been added in accordance
with ASTM specifications for ACSR.'9
To these values the incremental resist-
ance for the effect of the core have been
added. Similar curves, of course, can be
prepared for any size ACSR.
For other values of lay than the pre-
ferred lay, the resistance and reactance
will be different. Since the variation
with lay is a complex relation, no simple
percentage limits can be given. How-
ever, it is not expected that the variation
in lay will exceed h5% in regular produc-
tion. For this range of variation, the
deviations of the actual characteristics
from those of the curves will not be large,
but the possible range of error, resulting
from the use of values uncorrected for the
actual lay, will of course be substantially
greater than for the multilayer ACSR
treated earlier in the paper.
For any given conductor the current
carried will cause heating which will in-
crease the temperature. Since, however,
the actual temperature depends upon the
ambient temperature and the conditions
of ventilation, as well as the current car-
ried, it is not feasible in general to asso-
ciate particular values of current with
particular temperatures. For practical
application the temperature of the con-
ductor must be estimated or computed for
known or assumed ambient conditions and
known or assumed ventilation conditions.
Since such calculations involve the resist-
ance of the conductor, it becomes neces-
sary to assume initially a value of resist-
ance, for an estimated conductor tem-
perature, and then check to determine
whether the computed temperature agrees
with that initially assumed. If not,
another trial must be made and the com-
putation repeated until agreement is ob-
tained. Because ventilation conditions,
particularly wind velocity, which has a
predominant effect on conductor cooling,
are so variable and uncertain, accurate
temperature calculations for an actual
instalation may hardly be expected. For
this reason it is general practice to assume
a conductor temperature based upon as-
sumed limiting conditions, and then, for
general use, simply select the resistance
for that temperature. Therefore, it is
believed that the presentation of the
resistance and reactance for selected
1206 Lewis, Tuttle-The Resistance and Reactance of A CSR
temperatures, as given in Figs. 10-13, is
most convenient for general use. It is
expected that similar curves will be pro-
vided later for each size of ACSR in
common use, and a set of such curves
can be calculated for any new or special
size that may be needed. If desired,
the data can also be utilized to provide
curves of resistance and reactance for any
specified variation of temperature with
current or for various temperatures at
constant current, but such curves would
ordinarily be limited to a special applica-
tion.
Conclusions
This paper has covered both theoretical
and practical aspects of the reactance and
a-c resistance of stranded conductors for
use on overhead transmission lines.
While much of the theory, especially that
of section I, is applicable to stranded
conductors of any type, emphasis has been
given to aluminum conductor with steel
reinforcing, since this type is now by far
the most widely used for the purpose.
In section I, a thorough development of
the GMD method for determining re-
actance has been made, beyond an ele-
mentary exposition, to the point where
certain unique relationships are estab-
lished. These relationships result in the
development of tabular data from which
the reactance of any multilayer stranded
conductor, with a self-core or with a core
of other material or shape, can be sys-
tematically extracted. Corroborative
test data relative to ACSR are presented
and discussed in Appendix II.
In section II, a short discussion of the
role of skin-effect on the reactance and
a-c resistance of electric conductors has
been given. The chief contribution here
is the presentation of a completely re-
calculated set of skin-effect curves, based
on Dwight's formulas, with special refer-
ence to the region of most interest to the
transmission engineer. The use of these
results to determine a-c resistance is
shown, and a comparison with test values
is made, in Appendix II. The modifica-
tion of the equations for determination
of the new curves by digital computer
techniques is outlined in Appendix III.
Section III has discussed resistance and
reactance variations peculiar to single-
layer ACSR and has developed a method
of attack that results in the computation
of acceptable values for general use over a
wider range of conditions than can be
readily covered by tests on sample con-
ductors. These calculations utilize test
data for the magnetic characteristics and
active and reactive losses of steel core
wires. The tests on core samples and
the development of basic curves which
make the data applicable to any sizes of
core strands are described in the com-
panion paper by Matsch and Lewis."1
Finally, typical curves are presented for
the a-c resistance, R., and the reactance
at one foot spacing, X4, for 60 cps, for
popular sizes of ACSR having a single
layer of aluminum strands around the
steel core. These curves give the desired
quantity as a function of conductor cur-
rent, for selected temperatures of 25, 50,
75, and 100 C as parameters, and for the
preferred lay of the aluminum layer.
From these curves it is readily possible to
interpolate for intermediate temperatures.
Similar curves can be provided by the
same methods for any desired sizes of
ACSR, and for any specified values of lay.
It is anticipated that these curves will be
used in place of the usual tables of resist-
ance and reactance of single-layer ACSR.
Indications of the accuracy of the cal-
culated results when the lay is known are
given in Appendix IV. For conductors
having unusually large steel cores, such
as those intended for ground wires and
special high-strength conductors intended
for long spans, the effect of lay is appre-
ciable, and calculations must be made for
the actual lay if accurate values are
needed. Since the normal variations in
lay are not great, and the more precise
values are needed in only a few cases,
general curves for the preferred lay may
be applicable even for these conductors.
Thus it is hoped that one set of curves for
resistance and another for reactance of
each conductor size will take care of all
the usual needs.
Nomenclature
SuBSCRIPrS OR IDENTIFICATION SYMBOLS
a = General conductor designation
b = General conductor designation
c= Conductor used as a core of a surround-
ing tubular conductor
m = An individual conductor element
n= Designates a stranded layer or the nth
strand in a layer of n strands, or a
single strand to be used in a stranded
layer
p = General conductor designation for a
single conductor or one whose ele-
ments are not separately identified
q = Composite conductor composed of a
multiplicity of parallel elements
r =Composite (return) conductor composed
of a multiplicity of parallel elements
t = Tubular conductor, usually stranded.
The combinations 2t, 3t, 4t, etc. in-
dicate stranded tubular conductors of
2, 3 or 4 layers, etc. The combina-
tion (t-1) denotes the next to the
outer layer of a stranded tubular con-
ductor, etc.
y = An individual conductor element
FIEBRUARY 1959
SYMBOLS FOR PHYSICAL OR
MATHEMATICAL QUANTITIES
a = A distance. Also used as a radius
B = Magnetic flux density
cs = Fraction of current which follows the
spiral of strands around the core of
a stranded conductor, instead of
leaking longitudinally from strand
to strand
d= Diameter
d= (with two or more subscripts) GMD. If
two subscripts are the same, a self-
GMD, or geometric-mean radius, is
represented. If two subscripts are
different, a distance between two
conductors is represented. When
two subscripts are separated by a
number, such as t31, a tubular con-
ductor of more than one layer,is repre-
sented, the number denoting the num-
ber of layers
D=Radius to boundary of magnetic field
(becomes infinite)
f-Frequency
h=Length of conductor
H=Magnetic intensity
i, I= Current. Lower case denotes in-
stantaneous or d-c values. Upper
case denotes rms values
kg=(with or without additional subscripts)
Geometric-mean ratio. The ratio of
the self-GMD of a conductor, or its
geometric-mean radius, to the radius
of its circumscribing circle. Addi-
tional subscripts may identify the
particular conductor or type of con-
ductor
km = (with or without additional subscripts)
Mutual geometric-mean ratio. The
ratio of the GMD, from a tubular
conductor to an internal core, to the
radius of the circumscribing circle of
the tubular conductor. Additional
subscripts may identify the particular
conductors or types of conductor
I = Length
n = General integer. The number of strands
in a layer of a stranded conductor,
specifically, the number of strands
in the outer layer
n = Number of parallel elements in conductor
q intensity H is constant and lies in a direction
nc The number of strands in the core of a
conductor, specifically the number of
steel strands in the core of an
ACSR
p=Total number of parallel conductor ele-
ments
P1- Active power loss, per unit length,
in one strand of core material (of
ACSR)
Q= Reactive power loss, per unit length, in
one strand of core material (of
ACSR)
r -Radius
r = (as an exponent) Any integer
r.= Radius of the circumscribing circle
about a layer of n strands, in a
stranded conductor
r= Radius of the circle of centers of the
strands, for a layer of a stranded con-
ductor
r Radius of one strand of a stranded con-
ductor
R = Resistance
Rac Resistance to alternating current of a
designated frequency, per-unit length
Rdc=Resistance to direct current, per-unit
length
FEBRUARY 1 959 Lewis, Tuttle-The Resistance and Reactance of A CSR
Ra =Resistance of one conductor, per-unit
length
ARe =Increment in Ra resulting from
active power loss in core of ACSR
conductors, per-unit length
AR1 =Increment in resistance, per unit
length, for a single strand of core
s = Number of parallel elements in conductor
r ductors that the flux linkages about every
s =Lay of spiral for a stranded conductor.
The longitudinal distance for the
spiral of strands to make one com-
plete revolution
t=Thickness (of tubular conductor)
X = Reactance
Xa = Conductor or self-component of re-
actance, or reactance of a conductor
with one-foot spacing to return con-
ductor, per unit length
Xd = Separation component of reactance, per
unit length, to be added to X. when
spacing to return differs from one foot
X¢= Earth-return component of reactance,
per unit length, used in calculating
reactance of ground-return or zero-
sequence circuits.
X= Internal reactance of a conductor, per
unit length, resulting from flux within
the radius of the circumscribing circle
about a conductor cross section
Xim = Mutual internal reactance, per unit
length, the reactance between a
tubular conductor and an inner core
conductor, resulting from flux within
the radius of the circumscribing
circle about the tubular outer con-
ductor
Xi, Ring (mutual) reactance, per unit
length, resulting from flux external
to a central or core conductor but
internal to a surrounding tubular
conductor
Xj=Single-phase or positive sequence re-
actance of a long straight uniform
conductor, per unit length, and from
conductor to neutral, or per phase
for polyphase systems
AXa = Increment in Xe, resulting from
reactive power loss in core of ACSR
conductor, per unit length
AX1 = Increment in reactance, per unit
length, for a single strand of core
6 = Angle
X = Flux linkage
1Ar-Permeability of free space
p = Resistivity
Appendix 1. Weighted
Geometric-Mean Distances
The concept of GMD is applicable to a
series of parallel round conductors, con-
sidered as finite sections of conductors of
infinite length. The conductors may be
divided into two or more groups, but all
the members of each group are usually
considered to have the same diameter and
the same resistance per unit length. These
two restrictions are not necessary but they
represent an important special case.
Let us consider a group of p parallel
conductors, as described, in air, remote
from magnetic material or other con-
ductors, but with the understanding that
each may have its own diameter and re-
sistance. The conductors will be identified
as 1, 2, 3, etc. to p, and the currents carried
will be denoted as ii, i2, is, etc. to ip. Let us
consider that this system of currents is
complete in itself. That is, if the direction
of positive current in each conductor is
the same, the sum of the entire group of
currents will be zero at every instant.
Further, the set of conductors is assumed
to be so remote from any other set of con-
member conductor, caused by any and all
currents except those in the p parallel
conductors are negligible. Further, the
current in any conductor of the group is
assumed to be uniformly distributed over
the cross section of that conductor, so that
skin and proximity effects within individual
conductors are considered to be negligible.
Under these assumptions the flux lines
produced by each current, acting alone,
will be circles, about the center of the
conductor carrying the current as their
center. Each time a line of flux surrounds
the current in a conductor, it produces a
flux linkage of that conductor. Since the
conductors will be expected to have finite
cross section, there will be some flux lines
that link only a portion of the current in
the conductor. In such a case a fractional
flux linkage of the conductor results, the
fraction being equal to the fraction of the
current linked.
In a nonmagnetic region, as assumed,
the total field resulting from all the currents
may be regarded as the superposition of
the fields produced by each current acting
alone, and the total flux linkages about
any conductor will be the sum of the flux
linkages computed for that conductor for
each of the individual currents. In taking
the sum, a flux linkage is treated as positive
if the flux line surrounds the conductor in
the same direction as the flux lines pro-
duced by positive current in that conductor,
but as negative if the directions are oppo-
site, and the sum is taken algebraically.
Under the assumption that the reference
directions of all currents are the same, all
flux linkages produced by positive currents
are positive in this case.
Along a circular flux line, produced by
a single current, acting alone, the magnetic
tangent to the circle. The line integral
of the magnetic intensity around such a
circle is then the product of the magnitude
of the magnetic intensity and the circum-
ference of the circle. This is the magneto-
motive force of the circle which is equal,
in the meter-kilogram-second rationalized
or Giorgi system of units, to the current
surrounded. Thus, if r is the radius of the
circle and the path of the flux is outside the
conductor producing it, so that the entire
current in the conductor is surrounded,
the magnetic intensity for a typical con-
ductor m is
Hm =
27rrm,
(ampere-turns per meter) (64)
and the flux density in a plane perpendicular
to the circle at the point of intersection is
Bm (webers per square meter) (65)
2 TTm
where A,r is the permeability of free space.
In this appendix, distances are understood
to be expressed in meters.
The flux linkages of any conductor y,
for a length h, resulting from the current
1207
in in conductor m, are the integral of the
flux density for all the flux lines that link
conductor y in the length h. Since all the
conductors are uniform sections of con-
ductors of infinite length, the field resulting
from any current is uniform longitudinaUy.
The integral longitudinally is obtained
simply by multiplying the flux density by
the length h. All flux of radius greater
than the distance from the center of m to
the remote surface of conductor y will link
iy, and produce a flux linkage for each flux
line. Flux lines which intersect conductor
y produce fractional linkages, and flux
lines of radius less than the distance to the
near surface of conductor y contribute no
flux linkages. It can be shown"' that
when the flux density varies in accordance
with equation 65, and the current in the
linked conductor is uniformly distributed,
the total of the fractional flux linkages of
a conductor like y is the same as if all the
current in y were concentrated along its
center line, so that flux lines of radius equal
to the distance between conductor centers,
d.y or greater, may be considered to link
all the current, and flux of smaller radius
to link none of the current. Then the flux
linkages of conductor y resulting from
current i,,m, in the length h, become
itohim f Dm drm
)fl#m =
2r dmy rm
isuwhim
2- [ln Dm-In din] (weber turns)
(66)
where D. is the outer limit of the field
produced by im and will ultimately become
infinity, and ln denotes natural logarithm.
When the flux linkages of a conductor
caused by its own current are being de-
termined, a special case is encountered,
because when the circular flux path lies
inside the conductor, not only do fractional
linkages result, because only part of the
current is linked, but also the flux density
is reduced by the fact that the path sur-
rounds only part of the current, and there-
fore the magnetomotive force is reduced in
proportion to the fraction of the current
surrounded. When these phenomena are
included, the flux linkages are the same"'
as if the conductor had no internal flux
but had a radius equal to its self-GMD
drm, given by equation 28 as
dm =0.7788 rm(meters) (67)
where rm is the radius of conductor m.
When the integration is carried out, the
flux linkages of m become
Xmm = 2 [ln Dm-ln dmm] (weber turns)
(68)
By making use of equations like 66 and
68, the flux linkages about conductor y
resulting from all the currents become
m~P
>at = vm
X 2X
2m-p n-p
[ imln Dm Z imln dvm (69)
m_1
M Im-1
1208 Lewis, Tuttle-The Resistance and Reactance of A CSR
where m in turn has each value from 1 to
p inclusive, including y. When the sub-
scripts are different, dm is the center-to-
center distance between conductors y and
m, and when m = y, dy,y is given by equation
67, evaluated for conductor y. The values
of Dm may be chosen initially as a very
large distance sufficient to include nearly
all the field of every conductor, and may
be taken as the same for every conductor
as m takes on the values from 1 to p.
Then the first term in brackets may be
written
mn=p m= p
Z im In Dm =nlnD im
rn=o m-l
But when all the currents are included,
the summation on the right must be zero,
according to one of the basic assumptions,
and therefore, so long as D is finite, the
right side is zero. If, now, D is allowed
to approach infinity, the right side will
remain zero because of the physical fact
that a flux line of infinite radius surrounds
no net current, and therefore the flux
density at that radius is zero. Thus
extending the limit of integration to
infinity will not add any flux linkages.
Therefore the first term of the bracket of
equation 69 may be dropped to give
m=P
>'v 2i rnlnd,m
rn=i
as the expression for the flux linkages of
conductor y in the length h resulting from
all the currents.
Now let us suppose that the first n of
these p conductors are connected in parallel
at both ends to form a composite conductor
q having n parallel elements, and that the
remaining (p-n)=s conductors are con-
nected in parallel at both ends to form a
composite return conductor r, having s
parallel elements.
The total current in conductor q is
ig = il +i2 +iS+ *. +in
and the total current in conductor r, in
the same direction, is
ir = - i+ = in+ 1 +in+ 2 +in+ 3 +
Now in considering the flux linkages of
conductor q, it must be remembered that
each of the n member conductors carries
only a fraction of the total current iq,
and therefore the linkages of each member
conductor become only partial linkages of
the composite conductor. To determine
the total linkages of conductor q, the
linkages of each of the n members must
be multiplied by the fraction of the current
carried and then added. Thus the total
linkages of q become
v=n v=n m=p
7 iv X ,uw ~h ii I
AU=iq 27r S q
I= Vl1 M-
The second summation may be broken into
two parts, the first to include the n mem-
bers of q and the second the s members of
r, from m = n+ 1 to m =p. Then multiply-
ing and dividing the first sum by iq and the
second sum by 4r gives
v-n r n -
Xa~~-
-1M -E 1
tt I w
M8h -'j
7m
E nni
.
2 ir tnI
E rn-n .vmInd (75)
4
V=l m-n+l
The first expression on the right repre-
sents all the contributions to the flux
linkages of conductor q resulting from the
elements of its own current in the n parallel
branches, and the second expression on the
right represents all the contributions
(70) resulting from the elements of current ir
divided into the s branches of composite
conductor r.
Now let the generalized GMD of con-
ductor .q to itself, d4q, be that distance
whose logarithm could replace the first
double summation on the right, and the
GMD from conductor r to conductor q,
de,, be that distance whose logarithm could
replace the second double summation on
the right. Then the flux linkages become
X,ff [ih
2T-
In dqq+ir ln d5rl (76)
It may now be noted that equation 76
has the same form equation 71 would
assume if it were written for only two
conductors q and r. Thus the substitution
(71)
of the generalized GMD allows the flux
linkages of composite conductors to be
written in the same form as the correspond-
ing expression for two simple round con-
ductors. The geometric-mean distance of
conductor q to itself (the self-GMD of
conductor q, or the geometric-mean radius
of conductor q) can be determined from
v-n m-n
log dq _ EEv--i log dy.1 (77)
v-i rn=i S1q
and the GMD from conductor q to con-
ductor r can be determined from
(72) v-n rn-p
log d7= E . .mlogdym (78)
V-1 m-M+I
+ip (73) In equations 77 and 78 log is used
generally to denote logarithms on any
base, since natural logarithms or logarithms
to base 10 or to any other base can be used
equally well, so long as the same base is
used throughout.
Thus the GMD of conductor q to itself
can be determined as that distance whose
logarithm is the sum of the logarithms of
the geometric-mean distance from every
element of q to every element of q, including
itself, each multiplied by the product of
the fractions of the total current carried
by each of the two elements connected by
the distance. When both y and m have
dy_ n
the same value, the GMD from that
element to itself is taken and the fraction
of the current is then squared. The
geometric-mean distance from q to r may
(74) be similarly stated.
To make these definitions useful it must
be possible to determine the fraction of the
current in each element. With alternating
current the true division of current depends
upon the flux linkages, so that the current
fractions cannot be determined inde-
FEBRUARY 1959
 Table IV. Comparison of Calculated and Test Values of Reactance for Multilayer ACSR

Conductor
Reactance-Xa, Ohms per Mile Difference
Area of Stranding Layers Outside Reactance 0.27940 from
Code Word
Aluminum,
MCM Aluminum Steel
of Alu-
mlnum
Diam,
Inches
1/r0,
Units/Foot
Xi
Ohms/Mile logi. rn Calculated
Test, Average
and Range
Average
Test, %
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12)

+0.003
Partridge ...... 266.8.. 26
..... ....... 7. 2. 0.642 .... 37.383 .... 0.0253 .... 0.4394 ....... 0.465 ... 0O. 465-0 .003. . O. 00
+0. 001
0.465 . 0.466-0.002 .,.... 0.21
+0.002
Lark .......... 397.5 ...... ..07.
2302 0. . 806 ....,.29.777 .... 0.0231 ... 0.4118 .... 0.435 ... 0. 434-0 .001.......O. 22
+0.003
0.435 ...,.0. 434-0 .003. 0.22
+0.001
Peacock ....... 605 ....... 24 .... 7 2
. ....... 0.953 . 25.184 ... 0.0266 .... 0.3915 .... 0.418 .... 0. 417-0 .002 ... 0.24
+0.002
0.418 ...,.0.417-0.001 . 0.24
+0.002
Condor........ 795 ....... 7
4 ..... ....... 1.093 . 21.958 ...O.0.0256 .... 0.3748 .... 0.400 .... O.402-0 . 004 ...O. 50
+0.003
0.400.. 0.402-0.004 . 0.
+0.002
5Q1
Drake ......... 795 ....... 26 .... 7 .2....... 1.108 . 21.661 .. 0.0253 ... 0.3732 . ... 0.399 .... 0.400-0.001 ... 0.25.
+0.001
0.399 .. 0.400-0.001 . 0.2&
+0.001
Mallard ....... 795 30.
....... 19. 2. 1.140. 2..21.053 .... 0.0231.... 0.3697. ...0.393. 0.397-0.001.1..
.. . I .01
+0.001
0.393 . 0.397-0.001 . 1.01
+0.002
Curlew ... 1,033.5 ....... 54 .... 7. 3. 1.246 . 19.262 .. 0.0256 .... 0.3589 .... 0.385 .... 0.387-0.002 ... 0.52
+0.001
0.385 ....... 0.388-0.003... 0.77
+0.001
Bunting .... 1,192 .. 5....... 3....3..7.31.. 302 ...,.18.433. 0.0280 ... 0.3536 .... 0.382 . ... 0.386-0.003 ....... 1.04
+0.002
0.382 . 0.386-0.002 . 1.04
+0. 003
Falcon ... 1,590 ....... 54 . 19.
19 3. 1.545 .. 15.534 .. 0.0256 .... 0.3328 .... 0.358 .. 0.360-0.002 ....... 0.56
+0.002
0.358 . 0.360-0.002 . 0.56
+0.000
Emu . 3,364 ... ........... 37 . 4. . 295... 10.458.... 0.0 236.. 0.2848 ....... 0.308 ... 0.308-0.001...... 0.00

pendently of the flux linkages. However,

with alternating currents of relatively low
frequency, the current division may be
assumed to be that for direct current.
The error thus introduced into the calcula-
tion of inductance is often negligibly small,
although its magnitude depends upon the
relative arrangement of the member con-
ductors. When the elements are the
strands of a stranded conductor, the errors,
as verified by test, are negligibly small
(when no magnetic material is involved).
When the conductors have steel cores, one
of the basic assumptions of this appendix
is no longer valid, and some modifications
may be needed, as discussed in the text.
For direct current, the current divides
inversely as the resistances of the elements,
or, if all member conductors have the same
resistivity, directly as the areas. Then
the fractions needed in equations 77 and
78 can be readily determined.
For the simplest case each member of
each composite conductor has the same
resistance (and perhaps also the same
diameter). Then each fraction of iS be-
comes simply l/n and each fraction if
, becomes l/s. For these conditions
equations 77 and 78 become
v-n m=n
1s
log d55= - , log dy.,
v m - n+s
log dqr=J- 2 logdvm
V-l m=n+l
or the geometric-mean distances may be
written directly as
2
(d11)(d12) (dig) . .. (din) (d21) (d22) * *
daa * (dnl)(dn2) ... (dna)
d = (di(n+ 1)) (di(x+ s)) .. . (dip) (d2(n+ 1))
(dn(n+i)). . .(dxp) (80)
Equations 79 and 80 express the simple
or basic GMD usually intended, but the
more general concepts of equations 77 and
78 may be used to advantage when the
resistances of the member conductors differ.
As mentioned earlier, the symbols for
dimensions of radius, spacing, length, etc.
used in this appendix are in meters, because
the equations are fundamental equations
derived from basic principles, expressed in
mks or Giorgi units. However, in the final
equations for GMD, equations 77, 78, 79,
and 80, the distances can be in any units,
provided all are the same, and the results
will then be in the same unit.
In actual practice, the elemental con-
ductors may comprise three or more
groups, instead of the two used, with
corresponding modifications in the analysis.
However, the final expressions for each
GMD between composite conductors will
involve only the distances among the
elements of the composite conductors con-
cerned, and so will be the same as those
given. Therefore it is not necessary to in-
(79) vestigate more general cases to establish ex-
pressions for the GMD.
Appendix 11. Multilayer ACSRI
Comparison of Calculations with
Tests
Reactance
In tbe more recent series of tests con-
ducted in the preparation of this paper
several sizes of ACSR have been tested
having two, three or four layers of alumi-
num strands surrounding the steel core.
All the sizes are conductors that are actually
in use by the power industry and are
familiarly known by code names where
assigned.
The inductive reactances of all of these
conductors have been calculated by the
methods of section I. In nearly every
case, the sample of conductor was tested
first in the new condition, as manufactured,
and then after coating with black paint to
simulate the temperature-rise conditions
of weathered and blackened conductors.
Since the black paint would not be expected
to have any direct or major effect on the
reactance, all the results have been grouped
in a single table, Table IV, the test results
for both bright and painted conductors
being compared with the same calculated
value. The first of the two tests listed is
for the bright conductor and the second
for the painted. Only one set of tests is
available for the 4-layer size, this set being
for a bright or new conductor.
The calculated values are based on
equation 35, for f=60 cycles per second.
For this frequency 0.0046566 f is 0.27940.

FEBRUARY 1959 Lewis, Tuttl-The Resistance and Reactance of A CSR 1209

Table V. Dimensions oF 1,414 MCM
Expanded ACSR
Layer, O.D. of
From Core or Diam. of
Center Strands, No. Layer- Centers,
Out and Diameter Inches Inches
Core .19 steel X 0.0977.... 0. 4885
inch
1 . 2 aluminum X ......0 .8193 .... 0.6539
0. 1654 inch
8 paper
2 . 2 aluminum X ...... 1.150 .....0.9847
0. 1654 inch
12 paper
3 . 26 aluminum X 1.450 ..... 1.300
0. 1500 inch
4 . 32 aluminum X ... 1.750. 1.600
0. 1500 inch
Table VI. Geometric-Mean Radius of Single
Strands
Strand Diameter, Geometric-Mean
Inches, Radius,d.n, Feet
0.1654 ... 0.005367
0. 1500 ... 0.004868
The value of 1//r,,, with rn in feet, derived
from the diameter in inches is tabulated
in column 7 of Table IV. The value of
XI, taken from Table I, corresponding to
the number of layers and total number
of strands of aluminum, is listed in column
8. The value of the first term of equation
35, for each conductor, is tabulated in
column 9. The calculated value of Xa is
then simply the sum of columns 8 and 9,
and is listed in column 10.
The test values for the conductors
tested are listed in column 11, with the
average value for each conductor being
shown, and with the upper and lower
limits of the test results for that conductor,
over a wide range of currents and tempera-
tures, being indicated. Although the test
values of reactance for the conductors vary
over a small range, as indicated, no regular
pattern of variation as a function of current
or temperature, or both, could be identified,
so all test values for each sample have
been averaged together.
In column 12 of Table IV the per-cent
differences between the calculated value
and the average test result are given. It
is to be noted that the difference exceeds
0.8% in only four cases, and barely exceeds
1.0% in those four. In nearly every case
the calculated value falls within the range
of the test values, and only for the Mallard
and Bunting conductors dos the difference
between the calculated and average test
values exceed the range of the test values.
The values of reactance are for one-foot
spacing. For the spacings used in prac-
tice, the separation component Xd is of
the same order of magnitude as Xa, so
that the per-cent differences between the
test and calculated values of reactance per
phase, obtained by adding the same values
of Xd to the calculated and test values
of Xa, will be approximately half as large.
Therefore, it is reasonable to conclude
that the calculated values of the reactance
of lines using multilayer ACSR, for the
usual spacings, will be in etror by well
1210 Lewis, Tuttle-The Resistance and Reactance of A CSR
under 1.0%, and in most cases the error Table VIl. GMD For Single Layers
will be less than 0.4%.
For the 2-layer conductors the errors For One LAyer To Inner Layer
are usually smaller, and the calculated (Geometric-Mean (Geometric-Mean
value is sometimes more and sometimes Radius) Distance)
Layer,
less than the test value. For the 3-layer
conductors, the errors are, on the average, No. Feet Logi, Feet Logic
somewhat greater and the test values are
always greater than the calculated value. 1 .... 0.01707 ....2.23223*..0.02725.. .2.43537
This leads to the possible conclusion that, 2.....0.02099.. .2.32201 ....0.04103 ....2.61310
with two layers spiralled in one direction, 3 .... o.C5596 ....2.74788 ....0.05417 ....2.73376
4 ....0.06846 ...2.83544 ... 0.06667 ....2.82393
and only one layer spiralled in the other,
a small net magnetization of the core * Logi 0.01707 -2.23223 8.23223-10.
occurs, which increases the reactance
slightly.
Next, the reactance of expanded ACSR as the logarithm of the geometric mean
will be illustrated by example. The first radius of the inner 30 strands of aluminum,
method of developing the reactance of a arranged in layers of 2, 2, and 26 strands.
composite conductor, adding a layer at a When this is combined with the outer
time from the center out, will be illustrated layer, the nominal current division is in
by applying it to a 1,414 MCM expanded the ratio
ACSR, having an outside diameter of 1.75
inches. This conductor has the dimensions ir 0.69443 0.69443
given in Table V. $2 32X(0.1500)2 32X0.022500
For an individual aluminum strand the (84)
geometric-mean radius or self-GMD is
given by equation 28. For the sizes used and
the values are given in Table VI.
From Table VI, the geometric-mean sl 0.69443
radius of each aluminum layer, by equation il ii=s 1.41443 -0.49096
+it 1.41443
27, and the GMD to each layer within, by
equation 24, are given by Table VII. t2 0i072000 =0.50904 (85)
For the first two layers together the
combination is made according to equations
46. Since each of these layers is composed Again applying equations 46 gives
of two conducting strands of the same size,
logi0 dq0 = (0.49096) IX2.73661 +
and the current is assumed to divide in
proportion to the area, i,=i2=(1/2)(ij+i2) (0.50904)'X2.83544+2X
and equations 46 give 0.49096 XO.50904 X2.82393
(86)
=2.80586
logo0 d,-44 X2.23223 +-4 X2.32201 +
where dqq is now the geometric mean radius
of all the aluminum strands. Since the
2 X2.61310
- effect of the steel core can be neglected in
determining the reactance of multilayer
=2.44511 (81) conductors, the reactance can be calculated
from this value of d0q. Then by using
as the logarithm of the geometric-mean equations 45, 34, and 35,
radius of the four inner aluminum strands.
These four strands may be considered dqq =0.063953 (foot) =0.76744 (inch)
as a core for the surrounding two full
layers. When these are combined first
with the surrounding layer of 26 aluminum
k, =0.76744 X2 0.87707
1.75
strands, the differences in strand diameter
must be taken into account. If the current X= -0.27940 log1o 0.87707 =-0.27940 X
divides in proportion to the area, as as- 1.94303
sumed, the current division will now be
-0.27940X0.05697=0.0159 (ohm per
il 4 X (0. 1654) 2 4 X0.027357 mile)
i2 26X(0.1500)2 26X0.022500
12
0.10943 Xa =0.27940 logic -875+0.0159-
0.58500 0.334 (ohm per mile) (87)
l =0.10943 0.15758
il +i2 0.69443
If Xi is not needed, X. may be found
more directly from equation 3, by sub-
stituting log,o d,, already found in equation
i2 0.58500 082282 86 to give
i +i2 0.69443 = (82)
Xa =0.27940 logo-= 0.27940 X
when ii is now the current in the four inner dqq
strands and i2 is the current in the 26-
strand layer. Again applying equations 2.80586 =0.27940 X 1,19414
46 gives -0.334 (ohm per mile) (88)
log0o dva = (0.15758) 2X2.44511 + The test values for the two samples
(0.84242) 2 X2.74788+2 X0.15758 X were found to be
0.84242X2.73376
Xa.=0.336±0.001 (ohm per mile for new
= 2.73661 (83) conductor) (89)
FIEBRUARY 195Y
 Table ViII. Resistance of 4-Layer ACSR and equation 57 now gives
Xt(a) = (0.07737) 2(0.0657+0.0509) +
Resistance, Ohms/Mile Skin-Effect Factor (0.92263) 2X0.0142+2 X
Difference
Current, Tempera- For D-C, For 60 Cps, |f From Test from Test, 0.07737 XO.92263 XO.0222
Amperes ture, C Rd-a Ra_oa Rd- a Curves Ra- o/Rd-a % =0.0160 (ohm per mile) (96)
886 . 45.8 ..O.0.0294 ... 0.0342 ... 45.18 .. 1.154* .. 1.163 .. 0.77 which compares with 0.0159 ohm per
1788 . 80.6 . 0.0331 .. 0.0376 .. 42.58 . 1.128 ...... 1.136 .. 0.70 mile from the third of equations 87. When
2412 . 123.3 . 0.0376 .. 0.0420 .. 39.95 . 1.102 . 1.117 . 1.34 this is combined with the reactance of
2712 . 139.3 . 0.0394 .. 0.0437 .. 39.02 . 1.093 . 1.109 . 1.44 external flux, as in the fourth of equations
3008 . 167.8 . 0.0424 .. 0.0464 .. 37.62 . 1.081 ...... 1.094 .. 1.19
87, the resulting value of Xa, rounded to
* Estimated, as it is outside the range of the figure. three significant figures, is identical.
In this treatment, the two methods
have made use of some calculations in
Table IX. Resistance oF 3-Layer ACSR common, so that a comparison cannot be
made immediately. However, comparison
Resistance, Ohms/Mile Skin-Effect Factor of two completely separate calculations
_ ' -__ - , - - Difference will show that the second method is sub-
Current, Tompera- For D-C, For 60 Cpa,
f
Ftrom Test from Test, stantially shorter. Any difference in the
Amperes ture, C Rd-c Ra-o Rd-a Curves R..o/Rd-a % result is due simply to rounding off dis-
crepancies, since the underlying theory is
New Conductor the same. As the result in either case is
200 ........ 21 . 0.0578 .... 0.0622 .... 32.25 ... 1.052 .. 1.076 .. 2.23 valid to one more figure than is usually
600 ........ 36 . 0.0612 .... 0.0662 .... 31.31 ... 1.047 .. 1.082 .. 3.23
justified for expressing the values of X.-
1000 ........ 65 . 0.0679 .... 0.0736 .... 29.75 ... 1.038 .. 1.084 .. 4.24
1450 ........ 112 . 0.0788 .... 0.0856 .... 27.59 ... 1.028 .. 1.086 .. 5.34 there should never be an appreciable
1800 ........ 168 . 0.0918 .... 0.0990 .... 25.57 ... 1.021 .. 1.078 .. 5.29 difference in Xa.
2120 . 226 . 0.1053 ... 0.1127 ... 24.88 .. 1.019 .. 1.070 . 4.v
Painted Conductor Resistance
400 ........ 26 . 0.0584 ... 0.0627 ... 32.03 .. 1.051 .. 1.074 .. 2.14
800 ........ 42 . 0.0621 ... 0.0669 ... 31.08 ...l.1.045 .. 1.077 .. 2.97
1200 ........ 63 . 0.0670 ... 0.0722 ... 29.93 .. 1.039 .. 1.078 .. 3.62 The availability of the new skin-effect
1600 ........ 95 . 0.0742 ... 0.0806 ... 28.44 .. 1.032 .. 1.086 .. 4.97 curves of Fig. 3, having good accuracy and
2000 ........ 130 . 0.0823 ... 0.0898 ... 28.00 .. 1.030 .. 1.091 .. 5 .59 readability in the range needed for over-
2400 ........ 177 . .0.0932 ... 0.1012 ... 25.37 .. 1.021 .. 1.086 .. 5.99
head conductors, makes it possible to
determine whether the differences between
a-c and d-c resistance of multilayer con-
and and the iMternal ring reactance, from Table ductors can be explained on the basis of
III, interpolating for 1.5217, is skin effect in the aluminum strands. As a
Xa = 0.337+0.001 (ohm per mile for first example, the 4-layer ACSR design
-0.000 Xir =0.0509 (ohnm per mile) (93) will be studied. The resistance for direct
painted conductor) (90) The internal self-reactance of the two layers, current and for alternating current, as a
from Table I, is function of current and temperature during
The differences from test are 0.60 and the test, are tabulated in Table VIII.
0.89% respectively. As previously pointed Xj=0.0142 (ohm per mile) (94) For this conductor, d=2.295 inches and
out, the addition of the separation com- In making use of equation 57, i4 is the t= (2.295-0.883)/2 = 0.706 inch, from
ponent of reactance Xd to both calculated current in the internal 4 strands and ia is which t/d= 0.308. From the d-c resistance,
and test values will reduce the error in the the current in the two layers totalling 58
reactance per phase to about half the per- the values of Vf/,Rd-c are calculated and
strands. The current ratios, based upon listed, as shown. Then the calculated
cent values given. uniform current density, taking into account
In the second method for finding the values of the skin-effect factor are inter-
the strand diameters, are polated from Fig. 3, for t/d=0.308. The
reactance of expanded conductors, as given
in section I, the first step is the same, to ic 4X0.027357 0.10943 results are tabulated as the calculated
skin-effect factor for comparison with the
i- 58X0.022500 1.30500 =008385
=
obtain the geometric-mean radius of the
inner four strands as given by equation 81. test value taken as the ratio R.-C/Rd-c. It
Then the internal reactance of the 4-strand ic 0. 10943 may be noted that the average difference
conductor, by equation 5, is =±0.4
1.41443 0.07737 is about 1% and the maximum 1.44%.
ic+iq This difference includes allowance for all
X(c) = -0.27940 log1o dec 4'2 1.30500 approximations involved as well as experi-
rn(c) =+- .444 = 0.92263 (95) mental errors.
The largest 3-layer conductor tested is
=0.27940 logio rn(c) -0.27940 logio dcc
1.150 -
Table X. Resistance oF 2-Layer ACSR
=0.27940(logio 2X 122.44511 Resistance, Ohms/Mile Skin-Effect Factor
=0.27940 (2.68040-2.44511) ,_____ -_____ -_____ -__ Difference
Current, Tempera- For D-C, For 60 Cps, . From Test from Test,
-0.27940X0.23529 Amperes ture, C Rd-o R.-oa Rd-_ Curves Ro. c/Rd-c %
=0.0657 (ohm per mile) (91) New Conductor
The ring reactance, produced by the 160 . ...... 26 0.1162 ... 0.1175 ... 22.73 ... 1.012 .. 1.011 .. 0.10
300 ....... 31 . 0.1186 ... 0.1200 ... 22.52 .... 1 .012 .. 1.012 .. 0.00
flux surrounding the four core strands but 500 . ...... 52 0.1282 ... 0.1295 ... 21.65 1.010 .. 1.011 ...O.0.10
within the radius of the entire conductor, 800 ..... 91 . 0.1464 .. 0.1479 .. 20.26 .. 1.008 . 1.010 .. 0.20
is to be found for the ratio, from the 1100 . 152 . 0.1742 ... 0.1759 ... 18.56 .. 1.005 .. 1.010 ...,.0.50
1350 . 225 . 0.2074 ... 0.2092 ... 16.99 .. 1.004 .. 1.009 .. 0.50
tabulated data for the conductor, 1.750/
1.150=1.5217. Then from Table II, the Painted Conductor
300 . 29 . 0.1162 ... 0.1176 ... 22.73 .. 1.012 .. 1.012 .. 0.00
internal mutual reactance for the two 500 . 41. 0.1214... 0.1228... 22.21 .. 1.011 .. 1.012 .. 0.10
layers of 26 and 32 strands, or a total of 800 . 68 . 0.1336 ... 0.1352 ... 21.19 ...1. 009. . 1.012 .. 0.30
58 strands, is found to be 1200 . 118 . 0.1562 ... 0.1590 ... 19.61 .. 1.007 .. 1.018 .. 1.08
1500 . 170 . 0.1797 ... 0.1828 ... 18.27 .. 1.005 .. 1.017 .. 1.18
Xr,c =0.0222 (ohm per mile) (92) 1800 . 228 . 0.2056 ... 0.2102 ... 17.07 .. 1.004 .. 1.022 ... 1.76

FEBRUARY 1959 Lewis, Tuttle-The Resistance and Reactance of A CSR 1211

 Table Xl. Comparison oF Test and Calculation Resistance and Reactance of Single-Layer ACSR
ARi, AR., R., ax,, AX,, X.,
Tern-
Ohms/
Mile
Ohms/
Mile,
Rd-at
Ohms/
Ohms/
hule
R.,
Ohms/
Ohms/
Mile
Ohms,
Mile,
Ohms/
Mile
I.,
Ohms!
perature, Current, cat km, from Equa- Mile Calcu- Mile Differ- from Equa-63 Calcu- Mile Differ-
C Amperes Fig.4 n,c,'/s' Fig. 9 Curve tion 63 Test lated Test ence, % Curve tlon lated Test ence, %
19-Strand Core
203.2 MCM -16X>( .1127-Diameter Alumninum -19X 0.0977-Diameter Steel -OD-=0.714 Inch -s -7.36 Inches -Xa (of Aluminum Only) - 0.441 Ohm/Mile

25.....80...0.812.... .0.2314.... .1.0 . ...

Brisht Surface
.0.120.... .0.028....0.401... .0.429...0.422... .1.7 . ....0.30.... .0.081... .0.522...0.538....3.1.0
50.....205...0.755... .0.2000.... .1.0 ...
0.672.... .0.134.... .0.441.. .0.575....0.586... .1.9 . ... .0.725... .0.145.'.. .0.586...0.610....3. .9
75.....257....0.734.... .0.1891.... .1.0 ... .1.44.'.0.272 ... .0.480.. .0.752...0.740.... .1.6 ....1.03...0.195... .0.636....0.650....2. .2
100.....295....0.722... .0.1829... .1.0 .... .2.01...0.368.... .0.520...0.888....0.870... .2.1
Black Surface
... .1.28....0.234.... .0.675....0.669.. -.0. 9
25.....90....0.807.... .0.2285... .1.0 ... .0.143... .0.033.... .0.393.... .0.426 ..0.409.... .4.2 .... .0.360... .0.082.... .0.523....0.530 .1.... .3
50.....218...0.715... .0.1974... .1.0 ... .0.78. 0.153.... .0.432....0.585 ...0.599.... .2.3 .. ..0.782.... .0.154.... .0.595...0.612...2. 8
75.....287....0.724.... .0.1839.... .1.0 .. .1.64 ... .0.302.... .0.472... .0.774 ...0.771.... .0.4 .... .1.13 .... .0.208... .0.649...0.643....0. .9
100.....347...0.708.... .0.1759.... .1.0 ... .2.16 .... .0.380... ... .1.44 ... .0.253.... .0.694....0.660...5. .2
.0.571.... .0.891. .0.895.... .0.5
7-Strand Core
266.8 MCM -6XO0.2109-Diameter Aluminum -7 XO.0703-Diameter Steel -OD-0.633 Inch -s -7.41 Inches -Xa (of Aluminum Only) -0.473 Ohm/Mile
Bright Surface
25.....77....0.863.... .0.0949.... .1.0 ... .0.066.... .0.006... .0.342.... .0.348... .0.347.... .0.3 . ... .0.191.... .0.018... .0.491...0.492...0.2
50.....227...0.83 ... .0.0878. .. .1.0 .... .0.600.... .0.058... .0.377.... .0.435...0.463... .6.1 ... .0.533... .0.047.... .0.52,0...0.533....2.4
75.....308....0.82 ... .0.0857.... .1.0 .... .1.13 ..'.0.097.... .0.409.... .0.506.... .0.507.... .0.2 .... .0.847 ....0.073 ...0.546..i ...0.551....0.9
100.....374...0.814... .0.0845.... .1.0 .... .1.04 .... .0.088... .0.443.... .0.531.... .0.522... .1.7 .. ..1.04 .....0.088... .0.561...0.559...0.4
Black Surface
25.....170 ....0.83.... .0.0906.... .1.0 ....0.220.... .0.020.... .0.338... .0.358.... .0.368... .2.7 ... .0.297.... O.0.27... .0.500...0.507...1.4
.50.....297...0.82 ... .0.0857.... .1.0 .. ..0.93 ... .0.080.... .0.372... .0.452.... .0.475.... .4.8 .. .0.711... .0.061.... .0.534....0.549...2.7
'75.....392...0.813.... .0.0843.... 1.0 .. ..0.948.... .0W.08... .0. 406.... .0.488.....0.488.... .0.4 .. ..0.978.... .0.082... .0.555...0.555. 0.0..
100.....472....0.81 ....0.0836....1.0 .. .. 0.765.ob..0.064 .... 0.438 .... 0.502 .... 0.502....0.0 ...1.00 ....0.084....0.557....0.553....0.7
159 MCM - 12X 0.1 151-Diameter Alumninum -7X 0.1 151-Diameter Steel - OD -0.576 Inch - s-=6.96 Inches - Xa (of Aluminum Only) - 0.471 Ohm/Mile
Bright Surface
25.....60....0.866... .0.1084.... .1.0 .... 0.16 ... .0.017.... .0.529... .0.546.... .0.542.... .0.7 ... .0.47 .... .0.051.... .0.522....0.502...4.0
50.....162....0.84 .... .0.1020.... .1.0 ... .0.77 ... .0.079.... .0.581.... .0.660.... .0.665.... .0.8 -. ..0.885.... .0.090.... .0.561....0.578...2.9
75.....222... .0.829.... .0.0993.... .1.0 .... 1.90 .. ..0.189 ....0.634... .0.823... .0.829... .0.7 -....1.355....0.135.... .0.606....0.616...1.6
100.....268....0.822.... .0.0976.... .1.0 ... .2.64 ... .0.258.... .0.685.... .0.943.... .0.932.... .1.4 .... .1.71 .... .0.166... .0.637...0.637....0.0
Black Surface
25.....80...0.862.... .0.1074.... .1.0 .... .0.22 ... .0.024... .0.525.... .0.549... .0.535... .2.6 .... 0.50 .... .0.054.... .0.525...0.520....1.0
50.....200...0.833... .0.1002.... .1.0 .... 1.16 ...0.117.... .0.576.... .0.693.... .0.690.... .0.4 .....1.11 ... .0.111.... .0.582....0.586, ..0. 7
75.....272...0.822... .0.0976.1.0.O .... .2.29 .....0.224 ... .0.630.... .0.854.... .0.837.... .2.03.... .1.58 ... .0.154... .0.625....0.627....0.3
100.....330...0.816... .0.0962.... .1.0 .. ..2.70 ... .0.260.... .0.681.... .0.941.... .0.931.... .1.1 ... .1.94 ... .0.187.... .0.658...0.650...1.2

of the type identified as Falcon having a
cross section of 1,590 MCM. The same
type of comparison is shown in Table IX.
For this conductor d =1.545 inches and
= (I. 545 -0.515)/2 =0. 515 inch, from
which tld = 0.333.__From the d-c resistance,
the values of V-f/Ra, are calculated and
listed, as shown. Then the calculated
values of the skin-effect factor are inter-
polated from Fig. 3, for tid =0.3333. The
results are tabulated for comparison with
the test values, Ra-c/Rd,g
The relatively large per-cent differences
indicate that, for 3-layer conductors, skin
effect in the aluminum strands is insuffi-
cient to account for the differences found,
and some other factor must have an im-
portant influence on the a-c resistance.
The small discrepancies already noted in
the reactance of 3-layer conductors have
suggested that conductors having two layers
spiralled in one direction and only one in
the other may not have complete cancella-
tion of magnetizing force, so that the core
may be partly magnetized. This could
give rise to active and leactive power
losses in the core which would appear as
increases in reactance and a-c resistance,
and partially account for the differences
found.
When the core is magnetized, the voltage
drop in layers spiralled in one direction is
increased, and in layers spiralled in the
other direction is decreased. Yet the total
voltage drop in each layer must be the
same. To compensate for- the differences
in voltage drop caused by core flux, cir-
culating currents among the layers must
be developed which will tend to neutralize
the magnetizing force of the core, but at
the same time increase the resistance losses
in the aluminum. At equilibrium, some
core flux must remain to maintain some
circulating current, yet the core flux and
consequent losses are substantially reduced.
The resultant total active and reactive
losses in the core and in the strands must
appear as apparent increments in resistance
and reactance. In limited previous tests
on smaller conductors, analyzed with less
accurate skin-effect curves, an appreciable
effect was not clearly isolated. In the
present tests, however, a substantial effect
of this type is definitely indicated.
The largest 2-layer conductors tested
had a cross section of 795 MCM of alumi-
num. Two types were tested, one having
30 strands of aluminum ov'er 19 strands of
steel, identified by the code word Mallard,
and the other having 26 strands of alumi-
num over 7 strands of steel, identified by
the code word Drake. Since the Mallard
sample showed the greatest irregularities
on the reactance test, that type is less
likely to be typical, and the Drake con-
ductor has therefore been selected to
illustrate typical comparison between cal-
culated and test values of resistance for
2-layer conductors. The tabulation for
this conductor is given in Table X.
For this conductor d = 1. 108 inches and
It=(1.108 -0.408)/2=0.35 inch from
which t/d =0.3159. From_the d-c re-
sistance, the values of 'Vf/Rd-C are calcu-
lated and tabulated as shown. Then the
calculated values of the skin-effect factor are
interpolated from Fig. 3, for t/d =0.3159.
The results are listed for comparison with
the test values. It may be noted that for
this conductor again the errors are all small,
the maximum difference being about 1.8%,
and most of the errors being less than 0.5%.
With allowance for discrepancies in dimen-
sions, manufacturing irregularities and
experimental errors, the calculated values
are about as close to test values as could
be expected for this type of calculation.
Comparing the results of the 2-layer and
4-layer conductors with those for the 3-
layer conductors shows that the differences
between the calculated and test values of
a-c resistance are small enough, when the
number of layers is even, to be attributed
to inaccuracies in data, variations in manu-
facture, and experimental error, but this
is not true when the number of layers is
odd. When the number of layers is even,
with half the layers spiralled in each
direction, the magnetizing focce on the
core is much more nearly neutralized, so
that a much smaller circulating current
would be expected, with smaller core
losses and smaller circulating current
losses. Thus, at least qualitatively, the
results are consistent with the suggested
explanation, which is now believed to be
the correct one.
Pending development of at least semi-
rational correction methods, purely inter-
polated correction factors, based on existing
tests, may be used to calculate the total
a-c resistance. When the number of layers
is even, a factor of 1.00 to 1.01 would appear
to apply. For three layers, or a higher
odd number of layers, a factor as much as
1.05 or even larger may be needed. How-
ever, it should be noted that, even without
the use of these proposed corrections, the
skin-effect factors taken directly from the
curves will give results that are satisfactory,

1212 1212 ~~~~~~Lewzis, Tuttle-The Resistance and Reactance of A CSRFEUAY15 FIEBRUARY 1959
 Table XI (Continued)
AAR1, AR&, Rs, AXi AX&, XL
Ohms/ Ohms/ Rd-o, Ohims/ R,, Ohms/ Ohms/ Ohms/ Xs,
Tem- Mile Mile Ohmns/ Mile Ohms/ Mile from Mile Oma
perature, Current, CB, ke, from Equa- Mile Caicu- Mile Differ- from Equa- Calcu- Mile Differ-
C Amiperes Fig. 4 UecCm/5 Fig. 6 Curve tion63 Test late d Test once, % Curve tion 63 lated Test once, %7.

Single-Strand Core
4/0-5 X 02062-Diameter Aluminum-1 X0.1450-Diameter Steel -OD-=0.557 Inch -s£ 7.35 Inches -Xa (of Aluminum Only) = 0.493 Ohm/Mile
Bright Surface
25.....93....0.92 .... .0.0157.... .1.34.... .0.44 .... .0.009.... .0.426.... .0.435.... .0.435.... .0.0 .... .0.855.... .0.018... .0.511...0.514...0.8
50.....209....0.92 ..0.0157.... .1.56.... .1.97 ... .0 048.., .0.469.... .0.517.... .0.518.... .0.2 .. .1.73 .... .0.042.... .0.535...0.526...1.7
75.....276...0.92 .... .0.0157.... .1.46.... .3.18 .... .0.073... .0.510.... .0.583.... .0.580... .0.5 .... .2.19 ....0.050... .0.543..0.546. 0.6..
100.....330....0.915.... .0.0155. .... .1.37.... .3.70 ... .0.079 ... .0.552.... .0.631.... .0.630.... .0.2 .... .2.53 ... .0.054.... .0.547...0.559....2.2
Black Surface
25 ....85...0.925.... .0.0158.... .1.34.... .0.40 .. ..0.009.... .0.424... .0.433... .0.430.... .0.7 .. ..0.838.... .0.018... .0.511...0.510....0.2
50.....238...0.92 ... .0.0157.... .1.53... .2.43 . ... .0.058.... .0.466.... .0.524.... .0.522.... .0.4 .....1.89 . ... .0.045.... .0.538...0.540...0.4
75.....325...0.915.... .0.0155.... .1.39.... .3.36 ... .0.072.... .0.508.... .0.580... .0.576... .0.7 ... .2.36 .... .0.051.... .0.544....0.555....2.0
100.....396...0.915... .0.0155.... .1.31.... .3.51 ... .0.071.... .0.550.... .0.821.... .0.816.... .0.8 .... .2.73 ... .0.055... .0.548....0.565...3.0
4/0 -6 X0. 1878-Diameter Aluminum - IXO0.1878-Diameter Steel -OD - 0.563 Inch - s-7.14 Inches -Xa (of Aluminum Only) - 0.487 Ohm/Mile
Bright Surface
25.....53 ....0.926.... .0.0168.... .1.28.... .0.44 ... .0.009... .0.421.... .0.430.... .0.430.... .0.0 .... .1.19 ... .0.026.... .0.513....0.506...1.4
50.....183....0.920 ... .0.0166.... .1.67.... .2.38 .. .0.066.... .0.463.... .0.529... .0.532.... .0.6 .. ..2.36 . ... .0.065... .0.552...0.535....3.2
75.....254...0.917... .0.0165.... .1.56.... .4.17 .... .0.107.... .0.507.... .0.614... .0.608 ... .1.3 .. ..2.94 ... .0.076... .0.563....0.548....2.7
100.....316....0.916 ...0.0165.... .1.43.... .4.88 .... .0.115.... .0.549.... .0.684.... .0.662... .0.3 .. ..3.18 ... .0.075.... .0.562...0.558....1.1
Black Surface
25.....102...0.922... .0.0167.... .1.47.... .0.93 .... .0.023... .0.415.... .0.438... .0.430.... .1.9 .. ..1.42 ... .0.035.... .0.522....0.513....1.8
50.....226....0.920... .0.0166.... .1.83. ...3.17 ... .0.086.... .0.456.... .0.542.... .0.549... .1.3 .. ..2.84 .. ..0.071 ... .0.558...0.544...2.8
75.....312....0.917.... .0.0165.... .1.44.... .4.49 ... .0.107... .0.498... .0.605.... .0.610.... .0.8 .... .3.10 .... .0.074... .0.561...0.552...1.8
100.....383....0.915.... .0.0164.... .1.35.... .4.93 ....0.109.... .0.538.... .0.847.... .0.650... .0.5 .. ..3.43 .... .0.076... .0.563...0.558...0.9
1/0 - 6 X 0. 1327- Diameter Aluminum - 1 X 0. 1327-Diameter Steel - OD = 0.398 Inch - s 5. 10 Inches - Xa (of Aluminum Only) -0.529 Ohm/Mile
-

Bright Surface
25.....34....0.926... .0.0330.... .1.17.... .0.18 .... .0.007.... .0.849.... .0.858 ... .0.856....0.0 .... .0.61 ... .0.024.....0.553...0.551...0.4
50.....123...0.920.... .0.0325... .1.47.... .1.25 .... .0.060.... 0.0933.... 0.0.93.... .0.991.... .0.2 ... .1.30 .. ..0.062.... .0.591....0.593...0.3
75.....167....0.917... .0.0323.... .1.46.... .2.81 .... .0.123.... .1.018 ... .1.139.... .1.143.... .0.4 .... .1.82....0.086.... .0. 615.0... 629....2. 2
100.....204....0.915.... .0.0322... .1.39.... .3.29 .... .0.147.... .1.099.... .1.246.... .1.235... .0.9 . ... .2.19 .... .0.099... .0.828...0.645...2.6
Black Surface
25.....39...0.926.... .0.0330... .1.20.... .0.21 ... .0.008... .0.847.... .0.855... .0.853.... .0.2 . ... .0.82 ... .0.025.... .0.554...0.551....0.5
50.....142....0.918.... .0.0324.... .1.48.... .1.65 ... .0.079.... .0.931.... .1.010... .1.026.... .1.6 .... .1.47 ...0.071.... .0.600...0.611...1.2
75.....196...0.917.... .0.0323.... .1.40.... .2.89 ... .0.131.... .1.015... .1.148.... .1.148.... .0.2 .... .2.00 ... .0.091.... .0.820...0.636...2.6
100.....240....0.1915... .0.0322... .1.33... .3.24 . . .0.139.... .1.099.... .1.238... .1.219... .1.6 . .. .2.37 ... .0.101.... .0.630....0.649....2.9
2-7X0.0974-Diameter Aluminttm-i XO.1299-Diameter Stecl-OD-0.325 Inch-s-4.14 Inches-Xe (of Aluminum Only) -0.551 Ohm/Mile
Bright Surface
25.....15....0.930.... .0.0505.... .1.10.... .0.090... .0.005... .1.330.... .1.335.... .1.335.... .0.0 ... .0.55 .... .0.031.... .0.582....0.584...0.3
50.....91...0.920.... .0.0494....1.43 ...1.02 .... .0.073,... .1.483.... .1.536.... .1.530.... .0.4 .. .1.14 .. .0.081... .0.632...0.632. 0.0..
75.....125...0.918.... .0.0492.... .1.45.... .2.35 . .. .0.168.... .1.595.... .1.763.... .1.760.... .0.2 ... .1.68 .... .0.120.... .0.871...0.687....2.3
100.....157...0.917 ... .0.0491.... .1.40.... .3.12 ... .0.214.... .1.725.... .1.939... .1.919.... .1.0 .... .2.05 . ... .0.141.... .0.692....0.724....4.4
Black Surface
50.....109....0.919... .0 0493.... .1.46.... .1.49 ...0.102... .1.462.... .1.564.... .1.566... .0.1 .... .1.36 .... .0.098.... .0.849....0.875...3.9
75.....148....0.917... .0.0491... .1.42.... .2.69 .... .0.187.... .1.595.... .1.782.... .1.7866... .0.9 .... .1.87 . ... .0.131.... .0.682...0.720....5.3
100 ... 18..N...0.916.... .0.0490.... .1.34.... .3.22 ... .0.211.... .1.726... .1.937.... .1.897... .2.1 .. ..2.25 . ... .0.148.... .0.899....0.732....4.5
2-6X 0.1052-Diameter Aluminum-i1 XO0.1052-Diameter Steel -OD -0.318 Inch -s-=4.16 Inches - Xe (of Aluminum Only) = 0.558 Ohm/Mile
Bright Surface
25.....30....0.930.... .0.0500.... .1.23.... .0.109.... .0.007.... .1.343.... .1.350.... .1.353... .0.2 .... .0.393... .0.024.... .0.582....0.577....0.9
50.....90....0.920.... .0.0489.... .1.52.... .0.68 .... .0.050... .1.474.... .1.524.... .1.530.... .0.4 ... .0.775.... .0.058.... .0.616....0.616....0.0
75....123...0.918... .0.0487.... .1.56.... .1.75 ... .0.133... .1.604.... .1.737.... .1.728.... .0.5 .. ..1.22 ... .0.093.... .0.651.0...670....2.8
100.....150...0.917.... .0.0486.... .1.48.... .2.40 ... .0.172... .1.738 ... .1.908... .1.882.... .1.4 ... .1.58 .... .0.114... .0.672...0.691....2.8
Black Surface
25.....39...0.925.... .0.0494.... .1.28.... .0.153.... .0.010.... .1.338.... .1.348.... .1.349.... .0.1 .. .0.41 .... .0.026.... .0. 584.0... 575. 1- -.5
50.....109...0.920... .0.0489.... .1.56... .1.06 .... .0.081.... .1.473.... .1.554. .... .1.555.... .0.1 .. .0.98...0.075.... .0.633....0.633.0..0-
75.....149....0.917... .0.0486... .1.49 ... .2.08 . ... .0.151.... .1.817.... .1.768... .1.722.... .2.7 .. .1.42 ... .1.103.... .0.681....0.879....2.7
100.....183...0.916.... 0.004R95... 1 39 ...2 32 .... .0.156 ... .1.740.... .1.896.... .1.853.... .2.3 .... .1.82 .... .0.123.... O.WR .... .0.694...1.9

in the majority of cases, from the practical Rac R' Z/A C+BD
point of view.then-=Rdc
=Real
RR
-
~ ~A2+B2
=

By a process of repeated rationalization, (ber'mq) (ker'm q) + (bei'mq) (kei'mq)

Appendix Ill. Skin Effect in one finally obtains the form- (ker' mq) 2 +(kei' mq) I
Tubular Conductors (2- q2) (KN -ML) (tid=s0.5),
Rac -mr For the case of the solid wire
Rdc 2 72 M2+N2 the equation is
From Dwight's development as given in
ta saeal ig e'm
reference 14 the following equation for ta saeal oporm ig
oporm
a r(e
mbrm
rbi r-e rbr rbr
e
r r

tubular conductors may be deduced: N =J+ bei' mr Rdc 2 (ber' mr) I+ (bei' mr) 2
Z'J
R
Lm(r
2\r2
~) = H4bei mr
K=G+ber mr
The ber, bei, ker, kei functions and their
derivative functions were calculated from
(C+jD) f= F ker' mr+E kei' mr the infinite series forms. The arguments
(ber mr +j +X
bei mr)± I= E ker' mr -F kei' mr mr and mq were obtained from the rela-
(A +jB) H= F ker mr+E kei mr tions:
(ker mr-ij kel mr) G=E ker mr-F kei mr f r(r2-q2)fXl1'X0.3937
(ber' mr+j bei' mr)+(C+jD ) X AD-BC Rdc p 63360
(A±+jB) F=
(ker' mr+j kei' mr) A2+B2 82f(r)2
and Mt
h C+jD (ber' mq +j bei' mq) _ (ker'mq) (bei' mq) -(kei'mq) (ber mq) P
A +jB (ker' mq+j kei' mq) (ker' mq)2+(kei' mq) 2 whence

FEBRUARY 1 959 Lewis, Tuttle-The Resistance and Reactance of A CSR 1213


mt =
iRdc
,r+q 109XO.3937
-q 8r X63360
r
and since mt mr mq, values of the
=
arguments were obtained for selected tld
and Vf/1Rde. In the above, r, q, and t
are in centimeters, p in absolute units, f
in cycles per second, Rd, in ohms per mile
and m is defined by
M=87r2f
p function of current and of temperature,
Appendix IV. Single-Layer
ACSR; Comparisons oF
Calculations with Tests
Tests are available on two samples each
of eight different sizes of ACSR having a
single layer of aluminum surrounding the
core. Of these, five had a single-strand
core, two a 7-strand core, and one a 19-
strand core. Of the two samples of each
size, one was tested as delivered with a
bright surface and the other with the
surface painted black to simulate the
discoloration caused by weathering.
Each of the 16 samples was tested over a
wide range of currents in a closed room, so
that the temperature increased as the
current was raised, and readings were
taken after equilibrium was reached.
Since the method of calculation is adapted
particularly to determine the resistance
and reactance at four temperatures, namely,
25, 50, 75, and 100 C, comparisons were
made at these temperatures. For each of
the samples tested, the current correspond-
ing to each of the selected temperatures
was read from a curve of total temperature
versus current. Of course, different values
of current were obtained for the bright and
for the painted conductor at the same
temperature. The calculated values of
resistance and reactance were then deter-
mined for the corresponding values of
temperature and current, in accordance
with the methods of section III. The
measured value of conductor resistance,
as determined by a d-c test, was read from
the curve of resistance versus temperature,
then the value of APa, calculated for the
temperature and current, was added, and
the result compared with the test value of
a-c resistance, as read from the curve of
a-c resistance versus temperature. Thus
Discussion
Earl Hazan and L. F. Roehmann (Kaiser
Aluminum and Chemical Corporation,
Spokane, Wash.): This paper dealing with
the theoretical approach of determining
resistance and reactance of ACSR is ex-
tremely well done and worthwhile. Al-
though the theory may not be nearly as
simple to the lay engineer as to the authors,
nevertheless the information is all here and
the methods of calculation provide a
simplified method for obtaining a reliable
1214 Letwis, Tuttle-The Resistance and Reactance of A CSR
the calculation was limited to the determi-
nation of the incremental resistance for
the effect of the core, and any manufactur-
ing variations in conductivity did not
enter into the comparison of test and cal-
culated values. The reactance of the single
layer of aluminum strands was calculated
by the methods of section I, and the
incremental reactance for the effect of the
core was calculated and added. The
result in each case was compared with
the measured reactance as read from the
curve of reactance vs. current. Because
the properties of the core depend upon
temperature, the reactance varies both as a
and therefore both must be specified to
fix the value of reactance. The results of
these comparisons are shown in Table XI,
and are discussed in section III.
In all of the calculations of incremental
resistance and reactance the lay of the
layer of aluminum strands enters promi-
nently. To have available precise values,
the actual lay of each conductor tested
were measured, and this value was used in
the calculations. The value measured is
shown as s in Table XI, as a part of the
description of each conductor. In general
these values differ somewhat from the
preferred lay used as a basis of design.
Therefore the resistance and reactance
values obtained are not exactly typical
for the sizes listed, and should be used
with caution.
ReFerences
1. ELECTRICAL CHARACTERISTICS oF A.C.S.R.
(pamphlet). Aluminum Company of America,
Pittsburgh, Pa., revised edition, May 1946.
2. ELECTRICAL TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION
REFERENCE BOOK (book), Central Station Engi-
neers. Westinghouse Electric Corporation, East
Pittsburgh, Pa., fourth edition, 1950, chap. 3.
3. REACTANCE OF STRANDED CONDUCTORS, H. B.
Dwight. Electrical World, New York, N. Y.,
vol. 61, Apr. 1913, p. 828.
4. THE SELF- AND MUTUAL-INDUCTANCE OF
LINEAR CONDUCTORS, E. B. Rosa. Technical
News Bulletin, National Bureau of Standards,
Washington, D. C., vol. 4, no. 2, 1908, p. 301.
5. ELECTRICAL COnLS AND CONDUCTORS (book),
H. B. Dwight. McGraw-Hill Book Company,
Inc., New York, N. Y., 1945, p. 129.
6. ELBCTRICAL ELEMEIINTS OF POWnaR TRANS-
MSSION LINES (book), H. B. Dwight. The Mac-
millan Company, New York, N. Y., 1954.
7. INDUCTANCE CALCULATIONS (book), Frederick
W. Grover. D. Van Nostrand Company, Inc.,
Princeton, N. J., 1946.
8. CONCENTRIC-LAY STRANDED ALUMINUM CON-
DUCTORS, HARD-DRAWN AND TRRBE-QUARTER
HARD DRAWN. ASTM Specification B231-55,
- v~~~
answer. The vast amount of effort involved
in such an investigation can only be appre-
ciated by other investigators familiar with
the subject. We believe the authors should
be congratulated on an excellent paper.
As far as a-c/d-c resistance ratios are
concerned, we would like to rephrase the
authors' results in broad terms: in the
medium size, 2-layer ACSR conductors, the
magnetizing ampere-turns from the two
oppositely stranded layers tend to cancel.
The a-c/d-c ratio will, therefore, be very
close to unity. In the larger size, 3-layer
conductors, there is a decided resistance
American Society for Testing Materials, Phila-
delphia, Pa., 1955.
9. CONCENTRIC-LAY STRANDED ALUMnNUM CON-
DUCrORS, STEEL-REINFORCED (ACSR). ASTM
Specification B232-55T.
10. HARD-DRAWN ALuImNUM WIRE FOR E1 LEC-
TRICAL PURPOSES. ASTM Specification B230-55.
11. SKIN-EFFECT RESISTANCE MEASUREMENTS OP
CONDUCTORS AT RADIO FREQUENCIES UP TO
100,000 CYCLES PER SECOND, A. E. Kenne1ly, H.
A. Alfel. Transactions, Institute of Radio Engi-
neers, New York, N. Y., 1916, p. 523.
12. EXPERIMENTAL RESEARUCEES ON SKIN EPFECT
IN CONDuCTORS, A. B. ennelly, F. A. Laws, P. H.
Pierce. AIEE Transactions, vol. 34, pt. 2, 1915,
pp. 1953-2021.
13. SKIN AND SPIRALINO EFFECT IN STRANDBD
CONDUCTORS, J. 7aborszky. Ibid., vol. 72, pt.
III, Aug. 1953, pp. 599-603.
14. SKIN EFFrCT IN TUBULAR AND FLAT CON-
DUCTORS, H. B. Dwight. Ibid., vol. 37, pt. II,
1918, pp. 1379-1403.
15. Sir?N EFPBCT AND PROX1MITY EFFECT IN
TUBULAR CONDUCTORS, Herbert Bristol Dwight.
Ibid., vol. 41, 1922, pp. 189-98.
16. MEASUREMENT OF RBSISTANCE AND REACT-
ANCE OF EXPANDED ACSR, Joel Tompkins, B. L.
Jones, P. D. Tuttle. Ibid., vol. 74, pt. III, June
1955, pp. 368-75.
17. THE MAGNETIC PROPERTIES OF ACSR CORE
WrEs, L. W. Matach, W. A. Lewis. Ibid., see pp.
1178-89 of this issue.
18. TnE TRANSMISSION OF ELECTRIC POWER,
VOL. I (book), W. A. Lewis. Illinois Institute of
Technology Bookstore, Chicago, Ill., lithoprinted
edition, 1948.
19. SYMMETRICAL COMPONENTS (book), C. F.
Wagner, R. D. Evans. McGraw-Hill Book Com-
pany, Inc., New York, N. Y., 1933, chapt. VII;
App. VII.
20. THn TRANSMISSION OF ELECTRIC POWVER,
VOL. II (book), W. A. Lewis. Illinois Institute
of Technology Bookstore, Chicago, Ill., litho-
printed edition, 1948.
21. SUR LA MOYENNE DISTANCE GEOMETRIQUE
DES ELEMRNTS D'UN ENSEMBLE DES SURFACE8
ET SoN APPLICATION AU CALCUL DES COBFFICIENTS
d'INDUCTION, C. B. Guye. Comples Rendus,
L'Academie des Sciences, Paris, France, vol. 118,
1894, pp. 1329-32.
22. ELBCTRICrTY AND MAGNETISM (book), James
C. Maxwell. Clarendon Press, Oxford, England,
third edition, 1891; reprint, Dover Edition,
Dover Publications, Inc., New York, N. Y., 1954,
Vol. II, Articles 691-693.
23. Discussion by W. A. Lewis of reference 16*
p. 374.
24. TEE ALTERNATING-CURRENT RESISTANCE OF
TUBULAR CONDUCTORS, A. H. M. Arnold. Journal,
Institution of Electrical Engineers, London,
England, vol. 78, Jan.-June 1936.
25. TRANSMISSON LINEB FORMLAs (book), H. B.
Dwight. D. Van Nostrand Company, Inc.,
Princeton, N. J., second edition, 1925, chapt.
XVIII.
26. CURRENT-CARRYINO CAPACITY OF ACSR,
H. E. House, P. D. Tuttle. AIEE Traxsactions,
see pp. 1169-77 of this issue.
increase due to skin effect. In addition
there are added core losses from the un-
compensated ampere-turns of the third
layer. In the very large, 4-layer con-
ductors, ampere-turn cancellation is effec-
tive but considerable skin effect losses are
present.
For the small single-layer ACSR skin
effect is practically absent, but there
should be a pronounced increase in a-c
resistance because all magnetizing ampere-
turns are uncompensated, thus producing
considerable losses in the steel core.
Data are given for several single-layer
FIEBRUARY 1959