Material tool
CCS weight and copper-saving calculator
Compute CCS conductor weight per kilometre from diameter and copper volume fraction, against the solid-copper build at the same gauge, with densities from the IACS definition (8.89 g/cm³) and the steel table value (7.85 g/cm³).
Floor 10% per ASTM B452.
Anchors: copper density 8.89 g/cm³ (IEC 60028, the IACS definition); steel 7.85 g/cm³ (physical table value); stranded builds ≈40% lighter than solid copper at equivalent gauge (verified site data).
Result
CCS weight (kg/km)
-
Solid copper (kg/km)
-
Copper saved
-%
| Diameter | Solid Cu (kg/km) | CCS 10% (kg/km) | Saving (%) |
|---|---|---|---|
| 0.50 mm | 1.7 | 1.6 | 10.5 |
| 1.00 mm | 7.0 | 6.2 | 10.5 |
| 2.00 mm | 27.9 | 25.0 | 10.5 |
| 3.00 mm | 62.8 | 56.2 | 10.5 |
| 4.00 mm | 111.7 | 100.0 | 10.5 |
Weight saving from cladding alone is real but modest, because steel is only slightly lighter than copper. The large verified saving is constructional: stranded CCS runs about 40% lighter than solid copper at equivalent gauge.
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)
Where do the densities come from?
Copper's density of 8.89 g/cm³ at 20 °C is part of the IACS definition itself (IEC 60028). Steel's 7.85 g/cm³ is the standard physical table value. Composite weight is the volume-weighted blend of the two. Pure arithmetic, no fitted factors.
How does volume fraction change the saving?
The blend density is 7.85 + 1.04·v g/cm³ (v = copper volume fraction), so at the 10% floor CCS is about 10.5% lighter than solid copper at the same gauge. The saving then shrinks as the copper fraction rises, because steel is only slightly lighter than copper. The big structural saving is constructional: 7/19/37 stranded builds run about 40% lighter than solid copper at equivalent gauge in our verified stranded data.
Is weight per kilometre the right unit for my case?
For spans, catenaries and harness runs it converts directly to structure loading and shipping weight. For reels, multiply by length and add the spool. The tool keeps it per kilometre so diameters and grades compare cleanly.
Why compare against solid copper rather than aluminium?
CCS substitutes for copper duty (grounding, messenger, coaxial centers) where aluminium's connection reliability and strength fall short. The saving that matters to a copper specifier is against the copper build they would otherwise buy.
What about conductivity per unit weight?
That is the honest next question: CCS carries less current per metre than solid copper at equal gauge. The saving here is weight and cost per metre of mechanical duty done. The DC resistance calculator on this site gives the electrical side, so you can weigh both.
Want the weight case for your run?
Send the gauge, grade and construction (solid or 7/19/37 stranded). We quote the weight and the saving on real stock, with an MTC on the spool.