Why stranded wire has 7 or 19 strands - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / general

author: Analog Kid
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 23, 2025, 06:42:16 pm
content: Someone posted something here, I think it was @TimFox but I forget exactly where, pointing out that stranded wire has 7 or 19 strands (or more for larger sizes).Those numbers aren't arbitrary:

author: SteveThackery
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 23, 2025, 07:57:07 pm
content: I'm away from home but I think I have some 16-strand and 24-strand wire as well.

author: TimFox
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 23, 2025, 08:01:43 pm
content: When looking at wire tables and catalog pages, I found that 7 and 19 were the most common for regular stranded wire.

author: jpanhalt
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 23, 2025, 08:17:49 pm
content: INdeed they aren't. You want close packing and somethig that is sort of round (usually).Grok3:QuoteAt some point (e.g., welding cable), I am not sure that sequence makes a difference. I have some 2-0 welding cable. You are free to come to Cleveland and count the number of strands.Google AIQuote

author: themadhippy
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 23, 2025, 08:52:08 pm
content: Quoteyep both are fairly common,16/0.2 as a hook up wire and 24 strand is often flogged for speaker cables

author: TimFox
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 23, 2025, 09:05:08 pm
content: Instead of AI, go to the source: the Belden wire cataloghttps://assets.belden.com/m/1b3bf80994eb0f51/original/Cabling-Solutions-for-Industrial-Applications-Catalog-Belden-09-2020.pdfPage 243 has wire gauges from AWG36 to AWG10 for single wires. The vast majority are either 7 or 19 strands, but there are some with 10, 26, 37, 42, 65, or 105 strands.If you peruse pp 108 to 227 for cables, almost all of the stranded wires in the cables are 7 or 19.In between 227 and 243, you will find "cordage" (power cables) that typically use finer stranding.

author: tooki
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 23, 2025, 09:15:04 pm
content: Quote from: Analog Kid on May 23, 2025, 06:42:16 pmWhile those are certainly the most common, and for good reason, there’s a ton of alternatives.By pure coincidence, I came across this table of AWG stranding last week and bookmarked it. I don’t think I’ve ever seen such a comprehensive one:https://www.maeden.com/en/awg-wire-gauge-chart(Though it appears to be missing AWG 1 and 0, oddly!)

author: tooki
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 23, 2025, 09:22:54 pm
content: Quote from: jpanhalt on May 23, 2025, 08:17:49 pmThe highest strand count wire I’ve ever held was a piece of Stäubli Sili-S 50 (that’s 50mm2(AWG 1) ) with 13,024 strands!https://www.staubli.com/ch/en/electrical-connectors/products/t-m-products/cables-and-multi-strand-wires/silicone-multi-strand-wires/silistrom.html

author: jpanhalt
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 23, 2025, 09:49:01 pm
content: Quote from: TimFox on May 23, 2025, 09:05:08 pmIsn't the real source Pythagoras, Plato, Euclid, Theaetetus, or some other Greek from over 2,000 years ago?Close packing of circles to give a regular polyhedron is hardly a 21st century epiphany.

author: TimFox
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 23, 2025, 09:59:55 pm
content: Quote from: jpanhalt on May 23, 2025, 09:49:01 pmMy comment was "When looking at wire tables and catalog pages, I found that 7 and 19 were the most common for regular stranded wire."That does not imply that other packings are mathematically impossible, just what I can buy from Belden and competitors.

author: Analog Kid
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 23, 2025, 10:07:28 pm
content: Quote from: jpanhalt on May 23, 2025, 09:49:01 pmWell, it was to me.

author: Analog Kid
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 23, 2025, 10:09:25 pm
content: In @Tooki's comprehensive table, all the non-7/19, etc., strand counts are for "bunched" as opposed to "concentric" (i.e., packed) configurations.

author: vk6zgo
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 23, 2025, 11:09:40 pm
content: Quote from: SteveThackery on May 23, 2025, 07:57:07 pmI'm quite sure I can dig up some 3/029, 10/010 or 23/0076 if I look around in my junk box..

author: TimFox
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 23, 2025, 11:13:46 pm
content: I'm sure you can.All the hook-up wire I have bought in the last few years was either 7 or 19 strands, depending on overall diameter, but I have seen finer strandings in my long life.I once bought 1200/50 Litz wire (1200 strands of AWG50), but that was wound in several serves for practical reasons.

author: tooki
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 24, 2025, 10:20:55 am
content: Quote from: Analog Kid on May 23, 2025, 10:09:25 pmYou missed 37 and 61, which are also listed.

author: AVGresponding
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 24, 2025, 12:06:14 pm
content: Quote from: tooki on May 23, 2025, 09:15:04 pmYep, and it progresses as you'd expectQuadrant cables have a different formula, but they follow one too

author: Analog Kid
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 24, 2025, 10:12:43 pm
content: FromThe Art of Electronics: The x-Chapters:Notice the penta-wedge construction, clearly visible.

author: mzzj
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 25, 2025, 09:13:05 am
content: Quote from: Analog Kid on May 24, 2025, 10:12:43 pmWedges are supposedly slightly insulated from each other to reduce eddy current losses.Also known as Milliken Conductor.

author: coppercone2
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 25, 2025, 04:43:39 pm
content: it looks like it milks the power company really good

author: TimFox
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 25, 2025, 05:06:59 pm
content: In a lab course at University of Chicago, I once used the actual apparatus built by Millikan for his oil-drop experiment to measure the electron’s charge, for which he won his Nobel prize.Milliken developed this conductor about 25 years later.

author: JacobPilsen
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: June 09, 2025, 06:23:43 pm
content: BTW, there are DIN VDE 0295 / IEC 60228 too:https://scankab.com/media/1964/din-vde-0295-eng.pdf

author: Vtile
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 01, 2025, 12:35:44 am
content: Well most of the things are answered already.The 7 (or 6+core) and 19 happens to be the "magic number" to form a _tight_ (and roundish) cross sectional pattern with identical diameter strands. This is then important for two reasons first for extrusion process where the sheating (insulation) is formed so the insulation has uniform properties (no slack wires closer to the surface etc.) and for the twisting (if used) where the wire core is given a slight helical twist to increase the bending properties ... again uniformity. Third might be the eyelet drawing if used, there a slack in the bundle would couse issues in form of eg. tension variations and possible lumbs by uneven lenght of wires etc.The poor old wire is highly economically optimised product and also highly standardised one.Every strand has to be laid on the wire bundle in controlled manner in the production (usually tension), this counts for how many machines you do need to the strands, the less is better (more profit).Also the tight (or snugg) lay on the bundle will give more uniform twisting of the wire (more uniform torsion properties).I'm not an expert, but here are some more food for thoughts.

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 01, 2025, 08:21:39 am
content: Quote from: TimFox on May 23, 2025, 09:05:08 pmYes indeed!In times to come that concept will become a useful "touchstone question" that can be used to distinguish experienced professionals from wannabe amateurs - in any field i.e. a simple easy question, the answer to which not only illuminates a wide part of the subject, but also indicates what should be done.

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 01, 2025, 08:27:10 am
content: Quote from: Analog Kid on May 24, 2025, 10:12:43 pmUnderstandingwhyit is "impossible" is illuminating.You can't see the caption because the picture was (unfortunately) attached rather than appended. My apologies for allowing that to make the sub-thread difficult to follow.

author: Analog Kid
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 01, 2025, 07:54:15 pm
content: Quote from: tggzzz on July 01, 2025, 08:27:10 amWell, just ask and ye shall receive:I attached it rather than "appended" it (what is that, a hyperlink?) because I scanned the pic and it exists on my hard drive, not out in "cyberspace".

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 01, 2025, 08:21:28 pm
content: Quote from: Analog Kid on July 01, 2025, 07:54:15 pmWhen creating a post, open the "Attachments and other options" section, browse to select the file, ensure "End-of-post expandable thumbnail" option is selected, and post the message. (The other "inline" options have traditionally been problematic, but seem to be workingat the moment.)Ifyou want the picture to appear in the text, select and copy the thumbnail's link, then "Modify" your message by inserting the (copied) image URL at the desired point, and surround that by the "img" markup. Yes, it is a pain in t'rump for the single creator, but it works reliably and makes it easier for the many readers of the conversation.

author: Analog Kid
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 01, 2025, 08:30:24 pm
content: Quote from: tggzzz on July 01, 2025, 08:21:28 pmI prefer to use the "inline full-size image" choice: is there a problem with using this instead of the one you suggested?It places the image so it doesn't have to be clicked on to see it full size. (And yes, I carefully size the image beforehand so it isn't ridiculously humongous.)

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 01, 2025, 08:37:22 pm
content: Quote from: Analog Kid on July 01, 2025, 08:30:24 pmYes there is a problem. Seehttps://www.eevblog.com/forum/chat/why-stranded-wire-has-7-or-19-strands/msg5964063/#msg5964063Alternatively have a look where I've "Quoted" your message but it has the important bits missing.

author: Analog Kid
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 01, 2025, 09:56:46 pm
content: Quote from: tggzzz on July 01, 2025, 08:37:22 pmSo just to be clear: if you use the "End-of-post expandable thumbnail" option, does that mean the image gets carried forward to replies (unlike "inline full-size image" where it obviously does not)?This I did not know.(Remember, my image is local to my computer, not a URL to an external image.)

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 01, 2025, 10:31:41 pm
content: Quote from: Analog Kid on July 01, 2025, 09:56:46 pmTry "Quoting" a message, and then "Preview".If you can see the image, good.If you can see "(Attachment Link)" then bad.

author: Analog Kid
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 01, 2025, 10:44:11 pm
content: Quote from: tggzzz on July 01, 2025, 10:31:41 pmOK, understood.But I still am confused: inthis post, where I can still see the images when I quote that post, I see the following code for the image attachment:[img width=440]https://www.eevblog.com/forum/chat/why-stranded-wire-has-7-or-19-strands/?action=dlattach;attach=2573398So which attachment option did they use to attach that image?And was that an image local to their computer or something from the Web (in other words, a URL)?

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 01, 2025, 10:51:40 pm
content: Quote from: Analog Kid on July 01, 2025, 10:44:11 pmI've explained that; no point in my repeating myself endlessly.I suggest you learn the component parts of a URL and hence how to "read" URLs. That is a key skill on the web - even if gurgle and farcebook and other social media sites deliberately obscure it so you only see what they want to see.Anyway...experiment with the "Preview" button

author: Analog Kid
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 01, 2025, 11:04:05 pm
content: Quote from: tggzzz on July 01, 2025, 10:51:40 pmHave done that; doesn't help.With my preferred attachment method, which I've already described, the preview only shows[attachimg=1]not the actual attachment.Maybe someone else could help me out here ...

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 01, 2025, 11:47:04 pm
content: Quote from: Analog Kid on July 01, 2025, 11:04:05 pmYes, that's exactly what yourchoicewoulddo.Maybe choose the suggested alternative?

author: Analog Kid
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 02, 2025, 12:20:58 am
content: test

author: Analog Kid
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 02, 2025, 12:24:13 am
content: See my post immediately above, picture attached with "End of post expandable thumbnail" option as you suggested.When quoting this post, the image doesn't get included.If you don't believe me, try it yourself.

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 02, 2025, 12:35:27 am
content: Quote from: Analog Kid on July 02, 2025, 12:24:13 amI explained that before, in posthttps://www.eevblog.com/forum/chat/why-stranded-wire-has-7-or-19-strands/msg5964531/#msg5964531

author: AVGresponding
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 02, 2025, 05:17:14 am
content: Quote from: Analog Kid on July 01, 2025, 10:44:11 pmThe image url is the uploaded attachment url, edited in after the fact. There is, to my knowledge, no other way to do it so that it carries the image over in a quote, and is one of the reasons I do it that way.

author: SteveThackery
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 02, 2025, 11:16:29 am
content: Quote from: tggzzz on July 02, 2025, 12:35:27 amNow I'm confused!@tggzzz: the post you link to that has your explanation doesn't mention quoting; it seems to discuss creating a new message.So, with reference to AK's "test" post: how exactly do I include the picture when I hit the "Quote" button for his message? Right now all I get is this:

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 02, 2025, 12:25:05 pm
content: Quote from: SteveThackery on July 02, 2025, 11:16:29 amYou cannot include someone else's picture in your reply unless the original was attached as "end-of-post expandable thumbnail". If the first message used attach "inline", then the picture is forever lost to the subsequent sub-thread.

author: Zero999
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 02, 2025, 04:12:48 pm
content: Quote from: tggzzz on July 02, 2025, 12:25:05 pmYes you can, but it's not straightforward. Click on the image to enlarge it, right click and copy the image's address. Change the attachimg tag in the quote to [.img] tags (note I added the . because it corrupts the post) and paste in the link. In this case he scaled the attachment down, with width=700, so add that to the image tag.Here's an example.Quote from: SteveThackery on July 02, 2025, 11:16:29 am

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 02, 2025, 04:36:14 pm
content: Quote from: Zero999 on July 02, 2025, 04:12:48 pmSo you can; how bizarre. I suspect that is new behaviour; ISTR looking for such behaviour a few years ago and not finding anything.Nonetheless inlined pictures are a painfor the readercompared with end-of-post attachments.With end-of-post attachments (including when their URL is copied into the message) a reader can see all pictures simultaneously. That is invaluable when comparing them with each other or comparing a schematic with implementation or scope trace.Contrariwise, inlined pictures can only be expanded in separate tabs

author: jpanhalt
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 02, 2025, 05:07:30 pm
content: Quote from: tggzzz link=topicThat's certainly a matter of personal preference. I far prefer inline pictures. In line thumbnails are equally preferrable. End of post is a pain. Do you remember the days when all of the pictures in many books were collated somewhere near the center to save on printing costs? That was a real pain to deal with.

author: tooki
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 02, 2025, 05:15:36 pm
content: Quote from: jpanhalt on July 02, 2025, 05:07:30 pmOne big problem with inline pictures here is size: people often post high-resolution images (and often, that resolution is necessary). This can make it impossible to actually see the whole image. The end of post thumbnails behave FAR nicer in this regard, since they scale to fit.Also, inline images load immediately, causing slower, and annoyingly jumpy page loading behavior on pages with large and/or numerous images.So IMHO, end of post thumbnails are the best, user-friendliest, fastest-loading option.

author: jpanhalt
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 02, 2025, 06:23:06 pm
content: So, throw out the baby with the wash. Educate those who post 24 megapixel, 36" x 24" pictures of their dogs. I try to keep my full size to about 6.5" x 4" and 150/inch. The inconvenience of having to specifically label uploads pictures and referencing them outweighs just skipping the 36 x 24's. Right now we can have it both ways, and I think that is OK. For however long I have been here, fixing the problem of inserting inline has existed.It's not a question of what's better or or preferred by elite users. It a deceptive error that has not been addressed in a very long time. A simple solution would allow a poster to do as currently, then copy the address of the full-size image without having to post it first. An even better solution would allow pasting from clipboard inline -- so far as I know, that limits the 36 x 24 problem -- , as seems to be the case with most other forums of this kind.

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 02, 2025, 06:54:12 pm
content: Quote from: tooki on July 02, 2025, 05:15:36 pmThat's all my preference too.I crop and scale most pictures viciously, sinceveryfew benefit from full size full resolution.On the basis that makes it easier for the many (I hope!) readers, where pictures really "need" to be inline (to be part of the narrative flow) I copy the URL, enclose it in [.img width=600] markdown. That ties in with many of your points.Having said that, I don't know howwhackawhinetapatalk renders them on the back of a fag packet - and I really don't care as perhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fag-packet_calculation

author: tooki
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 03, 2025, 09:45:41 am
content: Quote from: jpanhalt on July 02, 2025, 06:23:06 pmLet’s not be hyperbolic, ok? The problem isn’t pictures of dogs.High resolution is not, as your hyperbolic argument suggests, simply gratuitous. Weneedhigh-resolution images when people post photos/scans of PCBs or service manuals, photos of components or connectors they need to identify, or screenshots of schematics or PCB layouts. Sometimes, people think ahead about image size and scale those down, not realizing they made an unreadable image with insufficient detail. Yes, for schematics and PCB layouts, the best option would often be a proper PDF export from the layout program. And then what? A PDF is always an end-of-post attachment, and then must be downloaded/opened in another window/tab. No inline option there.Big inline images cause various other issues you may not be aware of (for example, on mobile devices, when zoomed in on the main text of a post (i.e. the user name is off screen), large inline images can cause there to be horizontal scrolling within the main text area (separate from page scrolling; it becomes a scrollable div or something), and that in turn can “capture” touch events and make it difficult to scroll the page at all.I wish the forums had sane image handling, from reliable attachment handling to better inline tags. (IIRC Dave has resisted upgrading to a newer version of the forum software for some reason. But I think they really need to look into it, because the longer we stay on this older version, the harder the migration will become… :/ ) But until that happens, I think end-of-post thumbnails are the best solution most of the time.

author: jpanhalt
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 03, 2025, 10:04:09 am
content: Quote from: tooki on July 03, 2025, 09:45:41 amThen don't be:QuoteWhy can't you accept letting posters have a choice? If inline images disturb your viewing habits, ignore them. I am not alone in appreciation inline images of reasonable size and appropriate resolution. However, the system here is not working well, and size is not the only problem.

author: tooki
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 03, 2025, 10:42:32 am
content: Quote from: jpanhalt on July 03, 2025, 10:04:09 amBecause I can’t ignore them.You’re not getting it, are you? Huge inline images disturb basic functionality,like being able to scroll down past the oversize imagewithout difficulty. “Ignore it” is not an option because inline images are forced. That’s the frigging problem with them! You’re telling me to do the very thing that inline images make impossible.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: July 03, 2025, 11:09:30 am
content: Quote from: TimFox on May 23, 2025, 11:13:46 pmMy local Altronics store has 14/0.2 strand "medium duty" hookup wire:https://www.altronics.com.au/p/w2260-14-0.20-red-tinned-medium-duty-hook-up-cable/"light duty" is indeed 7 strandsBut "Heavy duty" is 24/0.2https://www.altronics.com.au/p/w2272-24-0.20-black-tinned-heavy-duty-hook-up-cable/

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 03, 2025, 11:46:41 am
content: Quote from: tooki on July 03, 2025, 10:42:32 amI have to agree; occasionally I come across inline images thatalsoextend sideways off my large monitor screen, so the focal point is nowhere to be seen without my performing unnecessary gymnastics.Where very high resolution picture are necessary, it is better to leave them unexpanded at the bottom of the post, and/or modify the post with them inside a [.img width=800] tag, or host them externally. Any of those mechanisms allows the browser to display/resize the picture "sensibly". Inlining them does not. Synthetic examples from this thread attached, using a stupidly narrow browser window.

author: BILLPOD
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: July 03, 2025, 06:33:24 pm
content: Nice Try Dave, but apparently the subject has changed from 'Stranded Wire' to 'Image Size'.This could go on for several pages, or dozens of pages. I'll stop in tomorrow and see what the thread has evolved into, hopefully it will stay civil

author: tooki
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 03, 2025, 06:33:59 pm
content: Quote from: EEVblog on July 03, 2025, 11:09:30 amWhile fully acknowledging that it is nothing but pedantry, it bugs the heck out of me that they refer to this stranded wire as “cable” in the product name… To me, in the context of electronics, “cable” implies multiple conductors. (The strands in stranded wire don’t count as individual conductors.)

author: TimFox
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 03, 2025, 07:15:38 pm
content: Quote from: tooki on July 03, 2025, 06:33:59 pmIn non-electronic contexts, such as suspension bridges, a “cable” is very like a stranded wire in electronic contexts.

author: johansen
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 03, 2025, 10:57:41 pm
content: For what its worth a friend bought some 105 strand ultra flexible wire for a 3d printer.I counted the strands. 96. Of the right sized wire to meet the 105 strands for the standard awg rating.You get what you pay for lol.

author: tooki
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 04, 2025, 08:25:13 am
content: Quote from: TimFox on July 03, 2025, 07:15:38 pmDuh. I know that, which is why I explicitly said “in the context of electronics”. But I would expect an electronics distributor to use the correct terminology for their industry.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: July 04, 2025, 09:32:21 am
content: Quote from: tooki on July 03, 2025, 06:33:59 pm"Wire" on its own can refer to a single strand solid core. So it's ok to use "cable" in that context IMO, I've seen it many time.Not uncommon to see specifically "multi-core wire" or "multi-strand wire" to differnentiate it from an (implied) single strand wire.If you said "mutli strand cable" then I'd say that's not right, "cable" implies multistrand when you are talking about a single conductor.Digikey call them "single conductor cables" / "hook up wire"https://www.digikey.com.au/en/products/filter/single-conductor-cables-hook-up-wire/474

author: tooki
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 04, 2025, 11:05:27 am
content: Quote from: EEVblog on July 04, 2025, 09:32:21 amYeah, there’s a lot of sloppy use out there. Still doesn’t mean I have to like it, or even really accept it as “acceptable”. To me it’s just incorrect usage. I know what they mean, but I disapprove.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: July 08, 2025, 11:38:26 pm
content: Quote from: tooki on July 04, 2025, 11:05:27 amYet someone in another country might think that's the most common term.Heaps of stuff in our field has different terms depending upon your location/background.Heck, it gets as extreme as the colour used on PSU connectors. Blue/Red anyone?

author: tooki
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 09, 2025, 11:11:33 pm
content: Quote from: EEVblog on July 08, 2025, 11:38:26 pmI’ve lived in multiple countries and use English-language electronics resources from around the world. The vast majority use “cable” to mean “multi-conductor assemblies of individually-insulated wires with an overall insulating jacket”.

author: Analog Kid
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 09, 2025, 11:19:12 pm
content: So I'm curious: who are the outliers here, the ones who use the "wrong" terms here?

author: coppercone2
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 10, 2025, 07:09:47 am
content: you can also professionally refer to it as spaghetti

author: TimFox
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 10, 2025, 02:16:35 pm
content: No: in electronic contexts, “spaghetti” is insulating tubing for bare wires.In other contexts, it has different meanings. Some here want us to ignore other contexts.(Anybody remember varnished cambric tubing?)

author: Analog Kid
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 10, 2025, 09:36:47 pm
content: Quote from: TimFox on July 10, 2025, 02:16:35 pmSure; that's what you'd use on wiring to your 6V6 and 5U4 tube sockets.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: July 12, 2025, 12:49:26 am
content: Quote from: tooki on July 09, 2025, 11:11:33 pmThere's a lot of countries.And then there is pesky case of say "banana cables" or "hookup cable" where the "wire" magically becomes a "cable" because you soldered a connector on the ends.

author: tooki
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 12, 2025, 09:13:13 am
content: Quote from: EEVblog on July 12, 2025, 12:49:26 amYeah, that’s a good point: once connectors are attached, we do tend to say “cable”!

author: AVGresponding
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 13, 2025, 11:46:46 am
content: Wouldn't surprise me if the modern definitions of electrical wire and cable are related in some way to themarinenautical definitions. Fleets of merchant and military ships were still the principal tool of empire at the time the Industrial Revolution was happening, and to some degree when the Second Industrial Revolution/Technological Revolution was happening.

author: themadhippy
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 13, 2025, 11:51:06 am
content: if a wire is 1/10 of a nautical mile long then its a cable,anything else is electric string

author: AVGresponding
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 13, 2025, 11:58:32 am
content: Quote from: themadhippy on July 13, 2025, 11:51:06 amI was referring to the terminology of thickness, not length; I should have made that clear.