Indian Journal of Science and Technology
Year: 2011, Volume: 4, Issue: 5, Pages: 516-519
B. J. Kwaha and O. M. Durodola*
Department of Physics, University of Jos, Nigeria
A comparative analysis of 5 different aluminum cable types tagged J1, J2, J3, J4 and J5, from 5 different cable manufacturing companies was carried out using 2 different test methods namely- x-ray fluorescence spectrometry (XRFS) and resistivity test with the main objective of ascertaining why some cables of the same gauge fail under the same load levels. Purity levels, resistivity and conductivity checks were performed. Equal dimensions of 5 cable brands were sampled and ground to fine powder. The percentage purity of each sample was determined through XRFS test. One set of similar samples was subjected to resistivity test. XRFS result shows that J1 had purity of 99.30%, J2, 99.10%, J3, 98.50%, J4, 99.20% and J5, 98.80%. The cable types also had resistivity and conductivity values respectively as for J1 [2.324x10-9 Ω m & 430.29x106 (Ωm)-1], J2 [3.921x10-9 Ω m & 255.04 x 106 (Ωm)-1], J3 [2.689 x 10-9 Ω m & 371.89 x 106 (Ωm)-1], J4 [2.614x10-9 Ω m & 382.56x106 (Ωm)-1], and J5 [2.890x10-9 Ω m & 346.60 x 106 (Ωm)-1]. Comparing these values to the standard resistivity value of pure aluminum [2.82 x 10-8 Ω m] it would be seen that these results are in agreement with theoretically computed values. The XRFS test used in this research could be used to test the purity of aluminum before stretching into cables. It can also be used to determine the standard of aluminum products. The electrical resistivity test could be used to determine and set a standard resistivity and conductivity requirements to be met by different cable brands and types used in electric power distribution so as to curb the menace of cable failure and electric hazards.
Keywords: Qualitative analysis, aluminum, cable types.
Subscribe now for latest articles and news.