It’s not quite “bend, fold or mutilate” but this project comes close– it actually manufactures a spring clip for [Super Valid Designs] PETAL light system. In the video (embedded below) you’ll see why this tool was needed: by-hand manufacturing worked for the prototype, but really would not scale.
Two examples of the spring in question, embedded in the 3D printed light socket. There’s another pair you can’t see.
The lights themselves might be worthy of a post, being a modular, open source DMX stage lighting rig. Today though we’re looking at how they are manufactured– specifically how one part is manufactured. With these PETAL lights, the lights slot into a base station, which obviously requires a connection of some sort. [Super Valid Designs] opted for a spring connector, which is super valid.

It’s also a pain to work by hand: spring steel needed to be cut to length, hole punched, and bent into the specific shape required. The hand-made springs always needed adjustment after assembly, too, which is no good when people are giving you money for objects. Even when using a tent-pole spring that comes halfway to meeting their requirements, [Super Valid Designs] was not happy with the workflow.

Enter the press: 3D Printed dies rest inside a spring-loaded housing, performing the required bends. Indeed, they were able to improve the shape of the design thanks to the precision afforded by the die. The cutting step happens concurrently, with the head of a pair of tin snips mounted to the jig, and a punch finishes it off. All of this is actuated with a cheap, bog simple , hand-operated arbor press. What had been tedious minutes of work is reduced to but a moment of lever-pushing.

It great story about scaling and manufacturing that may hopefully inspire others in their projects. Perhaps with further optimization and automation, [Super Valid Designs] may find himself in the market for a modular conveyor belt design.

While this process remains fundamentally manual, we have seen automation in maker-type businesses before, like this coaster-slinging CNC setup. Of course automation doesn’t have to be part of a business model; sometimes it’s nice just to skip a tedious bunch of steps, like when building a star lamp.

youtube.com/embed/Mt4FLgW4n4o?…

hackaday.com/2025/06/11/compou…

They say that if you let a million monkeys type on a million typewriters, they will eventually write the works of Shakespeare. While not quite the same thing [bbenchoff] (why does that sound familiar?), spent some computing cycles to generate random data and, via heuristics, find valid Atari 2600 “games” in the data.

As you might expect, the games aren’t going to be things you want to play all day long. In fact, they are more like demos. However, there are a number of interesting programs, considering they were just randomly generated.

Part of the reason this works is that the Atari has a fairly simple 6502-based CPU, so it is straightforward to evaluate the code, and a complete game fits in 4 K. Still, that means there are, according to [Brian], 10¹⁰¹⁵⁹ possible ROMs. Compare that to about 10⁸⁰ protons in the visible universe, and you start to see the scale of the problem.

To cut down the problem, you need some heuristics you can infer from actual games. For one thing, at least 75% of the first 1K of a ROM should be valid opcodes. It is also easy to identify code that writes to the TV and other I/O devices. Obviously, a program with no I/O isn’t going to be an interesting one.

Some of the heuristics deal with reducing the search space. For example, a valid ROM will have a reset vector in the last two bytes, so it is possible to generate random data and then apply the small number of legal reset vectors.

Why? Do you really need a reason? If you don’t have a 2600 handy, do like [Brian] and use an emulator. We wonder if the setup would ever recreate Tarzan?

hackaday.com/2025/06/11/random…

"L’interruzione delle relazioni istituzionali ha un valore più politico che economico. Di fatto significa che i rappresentanti delle regioni, a partire dai presidenti, non potranno incontrare diplomatici israeliani e che non potranno essere organizzati eventi in collaborazione con istituzioni israeliane".

ilpost.it/2025/06/11/toscana-b…

This week Jonathan and Aaron chat with Ben Meadors and Garth Vander Houwen about Meshtastic! What’s changed since we talked to them last, where is the project going, and what’s coming next? Listen to find out!

• meshtastic.org/
• flasher.meshtastic.org/
• meshtastic.com/

youtube.com/embed/hYm_2iVpN4c?…

Did you know you can watch the live recording of the show right on our YouTube Channel? Have someone you’d like us to interview? Let us know, or contact the guest and have them contact us! Take a look at the schedule here.

play.libsyn.com/embed/episode/…

Direct Download in DRM-free MP3.

If you’d rather read along, here’s the transcript for this week’s episode.

Places to follow the FLOSS Weekly Podcast:

• Spotify
• RSS

Theme music: “Newer Wave” Kevin MacLeod (incompetech.com)

Licensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 4.0 License

hackaday.com/2025/06/11/floss-…

The original DOOM is famously portable — any computer made within at least the last two decades, including those in printers, heart monitors, passenger vehicles, and routers is almost guaranteed to have a port of the iconic 1993 shooter. The more modern iterations in the series are a little trickier to port, though. Multi-core processors, discrete graphics cards, and gigabytes of memory are generally needed, and it’ll be a long time before something like an off-the-shelf router has all of these components.

But with a specialized distribution of Debian Linux called Proxmox and a healthy amount of configuration it’s possible to flip this idea on its head: getting a desktop computer capable of playing modern video games to take over the network infrastructure for a LAN instead, all with minimal impact to the overall desktop experience. In effect, it’s possible to have a router that can not only play DOOM but play 2020’s DOOM Eternal, likely with hardware most of us already have on hand.

The key that makes a setup like this work is virtualization. Although modern software makes it seem otherwise, not every piece of software needs an eight-core processor and 32 GB of memory. With that in mind, virtualization software splits modern multi-core processors into groups which can act as if they are independent computers. These virtual computers or virtual machines (VMs) can directly utilize not only groups or single processor cores independently, but reserved portions of memory as well as other hardware like peripherals and disk drives.

Proxmox itself is a version of Debian with a number of tools available that streamline this process, and it installs on PCs in essentially the same way as any other Linux distribution would. Once installed, tools like LXC for containerization, KVM for full-fledged virtual machines, and an intuitive web interface are easily accessed by the user to allow containers and VMs to be quickly set up, deployed, backed up, removed, and even sent to other Proxmox installations.

Desktop to Server

The hardware I’m using for Proxmox is one of two desktop computers that I put together shortly after writing this article. Originally this one was set up as a gaming rig and general-purpose desktop computer running Debian, but with its hardware slowly aging and my router not getting a software update for the last half decade I thought I would just relegate the over-powered ninth-generation Intel Core i7 with 32 GB of RAM to run the OPNsense router operating system on bare metal, while building a more modern desktop to replace it. This was both expensive not only in actual cost but in computer resources as well, so I began investigating ways that I could more efficiently use this aging desktop’s resources. This is where Proxmox comes in.

By installing Proxmox and then allocating four of my eight cores to an OPNsense virtual machine, in theory the desktop could function as a router while having resources leftover for other uses, like demon-slaying. Luckily my motherboard already has two network interfaces, so the connection to a modem and the second out to a LAN could both be accommodated without needing to purchase and install more hardware. But this is where Proxmox’s virtualization tools start to shine. Not only can processor cores and chunks of memory be passed through to VMs directly, but other hardware can be sectioned off and passed through as well.

So I assigned one network card to pass straight through to OPNsense, which connects to my modem and receives an IP address from my ISP like a normal router would. The other network interface stays with the Proxmox host, where it is assigned to an internal network bridge where other VMs get network access. With this setup, all VMs and containers I create on the Proxmox machine can access the LAN through the bridge, and since the second networking card is assigned to this bridge as well, any other physical machines (including my WiFi access point) can access this LAN too.

Not All VMs are Equal

Another excellent virtualization feature that Proxmox makes easily accessible is the idea of “CPU units”. In my setup, having four cores available for a router might seem like overkill, and indeed it is until my network gets fully upgraded to 10 Gigabit Ethernet. Until then, it might seem like these cores are wasted.

However, using CPU units the Proxmox host can assign unused or underutilized cores to other machines on the fly. This also lets a user “over-assign” cores, while the CPU units value acts as a sort of priority list. My ninth-generation Intel Core i7 has eight cores, so in this simple setup I can assign four cores to OPNsense with a very high value for CPU units and then assign six cores to a Debian 12 VM with a lower CPU unit value. This scheduling trick makes it seem as though my eight-core machine is actually a ten-core machine, where the Debian 12 VM can use all six cores unless the OPNsense VM needs them. However, this won’t get around the physical eight-core reality where doing something like playing a resource-intense video game while there’s a large network load, and this reassignment of cores back to the router’s VM could certainly impact performance in-game.
A list of VMs and containers running on Proxmox making up a large portion of my LAN, as well as storage options for my datacenter.
Of course, if I’m going to install DOOM Eternal on my Debian 12 VM, it’s going to need a graphics card and some peripherals as well. Passing through USB devices like a mouse and keyboard is straightforward. Passing through a graphics card isn’t much different, with some caveats.

The motherboard, chipset, and processor must support IOMMU to start. From there, hardware that’s passed through to a VM won’t be available to anything else including the host, so with the graphics card assigned to a VM, the display for the host won’t be available anymore. This can be a problem if something goes wrong with the Proxmox machine and the network at the same time (not out of the question since the router is running in Proxmox too), rendering both the display and the web UI unavailable simultaneously.

To mitigate this, I went into the UEFI settings for the motherboard and set the default display to the integrated Intel graphics card on the i7. When Proxmox boots it’ll grab the integrated graphics card, saving the powerful Radeon card for whichever VM needs it.

At this point I’ve solved my initial set of problems, and effectively have a router that can also play many modern PC games. Most importantly, I haven’t actually spent any money at this point either. But with the ability to over-assign processor cores as well as arbitrarily passing through bits of the computer to various VMs, there’s plenty more that I found for this machine to do besides these two tasks.

Containerized Applications

The ninth-gen Intel isn’t the only machine I have from this era. I also have an eighth-generation machine (with the IME disabled) that had been performing some server duties for me, including network-attached storage (NAS) and media streaming, as well as monitoring an IP security camera system. With my more powerful desktop ready for more VMs I slowly started migrating these services over to Proxmox, freeing the eighth-gen machine for bare-metal tasks largely related to gaming and media. The first thing to migrate was my NAS. Rather than have Debian manage a RAID array and share it over the network on its own, I used Proxmox to spin up a TrueNAS Scale VM. TrueNAS has the benefit of using ZFS as a filesystem, a much more robust setup than the standard ext4 filesystem I use in most of my other Linux installations. I installed two drives in the Proxmox machine, passed them through to this new VM, and then set up my new NAS with a mirrored configuration, making this NAS even more robust than it previously was under Debian.

The next thing to move over were some of my containerized applications. Proxmox doesn’t only support VMs, it has the ability to spin up LXC containers as well. Containers are similar to VMs in that the software they run is isolated from the rest of the machine, but instead of running their own operating system they share the host’s kernel, taking up much less system resources. Proxmox still allows containers to be assigned processor cores and uses the CPU unit priority system as well, so for high-availability containers like Pihole I can assign the same number of CPU units as my OPNsense VM, but for my LXC container running Jelu (book tracking), Navidrome (streaming music), and Vikunja (task lists), I can assign a lower CPU unit value as well as only one or two cores.

The final containerized application I use is Zoneminder, which keeps an eye on a few security cameras at my house. It needs a bit more system resources than any of these other two, and it also gets its own hard drive assigned for storing recordings. Unlike TrueNAS, though, the hard drive isn’t passed through but rather the container mounts a partition that the Proxmox host retains ultimate control over. This allows other containers to see and use it as well.
A summary of my Proxmox installation’s resource utilization. Even with cores over-assigned, it rarely breaks a sweat unless gaming or transferring large files over the LAN.
At this point my Proxmox setup has gotten quite complex for a layperson such as myself, with a hardware or system failure meaning that not only would I lose my desktop computer but also essentially all of my home’s network infrastructure and potentially all of my data as well. But Proxmox also makes keeping backups easy, a system that has saved me many times.

For example, OPNsense once inexplicably failed to boot, and another time a kernel update in TrueNAS Scale caused it to kernel panic on boot. In both cases I was able to simply revert to a prior backup. I have backups scheduled for all of my VMs and containers once a week, and this has saved me many headaches. Of course, it’s handy to have a second computer or external drive for backups, as you wouldn’t want to store them on your virtualized NAS which might end up being the very thing you need to restore.

I do have one final VM to mention too, which is a Windows 10 installation. I essentially spun this up because I was having an impossibly difficult time getting my original version of Starcraft running in Debian and thought that it might be easier on a Windows machine. Proxmox makes it extremely easy to assign a few processor cores and some memory and test something like this out, and it turned to work out incredibly well.

So well, in fact, that I also installed BOINC in the Windows VM and now generally leave this running all the time to take advantage of any underutilized cores on this machine for the greater good when they’re not otherwise in use. BOINC is also notoriously difficult to get running in Debian, especially for those using non-Nvidia GPUs, so at least while Windows 10 is still supported I’ll probably keep this setup going for the long term.

Room for Improvement

There are a few downsides to a Proxmox installation, though. As I mentioned previously, it’s probably not the best practice to keep backups on the same hardware, so if it’s your only physical computer then that’ll take some extra thought. I’ve also had considerable difficulty passing an optical drive through to VMs, which is not nearly as straightforward as passing through other hardware types for reasons which escape me. Additionally, some software doesn’t take well to running on virtualized hardware at all. In the past I have experimented with XMR mining software as a way to benchmark hardware capabilities, and although I never let it run nearly long enough to ever actually mine anything it absolutely will not run at all in a virtualized environment. There are certainly other pieces of software that are similar.

I also had a problem that took a while to solve regarding memory use. Memory can be over-assigned like processor cores, but an important note is that if Proxmox is using ZFS for its storage, as mine does, the host OS will use up an incredibly large amount of memory. In my case, file transfers to or from my TrueNAS VM were causing out-of-memory issues on some of my other VMs, leading to their abrupt termination. I still don’t fully understand this problem and as such it took a bit of time to solve, but I eventually both limited the memory the host was able to use for ZFS as well as doubled the physical memory to 64 GB. This had the downstream effect of improving the performance of my other VMs and containers as well, so it was a win-win at a very minimal cost.

The major downside for most, though, will be gaming. While it’s fully possible to run a respectable gaming rig with a setup similar to mine and play essentially any modern game available, this is only going to work out if none of those games use kernel-level anticheat. Valorant, Fortnite, and Call of Duty are all examples that are likely to either not run at all on a virtualized computer or to get an account flagged for cheating.

There are a number of problems with kernel-level anti-cheat including arguments that they are types of rootkits, that they are attempts to stifle Linux gaming, and that they’re lazy solutions to problems that could easily be solved in other ways, but the fact remains that these games will have to be played on bare metal. Personally I’d just as soon not play them at all for any and all of these reasons, even on non-virtualized machines.

Beat On, Against the Current

The only other thing worth noting is that while Proxmox is free and open-source, there are paid enterprise subscription options available, and it is a bit annoying about reminding the user that this option is available. But that’s minor in the grand scheme of things. For me, the benefits far outweigh these downsides. In fact, I’ve found that using Proxmox has reinvigorated my PC hobby in a new way.

While restoring old Apple laptops is one thing, Proxmox has given me a much deeper understanding of computing hardware in general, as well as made it easy to experiment and fiddle with different pieces of software without worrying that I’ll break my entire system. In a very real way it feels like if I want a new computer, it lets me simply create a virtual one that I am free to experiment with and then throw away if I wish. It also makes fixing mistakes easy. Additionally, most things running on my Proxmox install are more stable, more secure, and make more efficient use of system resources.

It’s saved me a ton of money since I nether had to buy individual machines like routers or a NAS and its drives too, nor have I had to build a brand new gaming computer. In fact, the only money I spent on this was an arguably optional 32 GB memory upgrade, which is pennies compared to having to build a brand new desktop. With all that in mind, I’d recommend experimenting with Proxmox for anyone with a computer or similarly flagging interest in their PC in general, especially if they still occasionally want to rip and tear.

hackaday.com/2025/06/11/networ…

This Saturday, June 14th, there will be nationwide “No Kings” protests, protesting the current administration and the overreach of federal powers.

In the United States of America, we have no kings.

While many Pirates have already expressed their desire to attend their local No Kings protest, which you could find here.

In addition to attending, representatives from the Arizona Pirate Party will be tabling at the No Kings protest at Reid Park in Tucson, AZ

Speaking of No Kings, check out the Illinois Pirate Party Captain’s speech from the 50501 “No Kings” protest from May 17th in Quincy, IL here.

Back on Pan-American Day weekend, members of the US Pirate Party held tabling events and passed out flyers promoting the need for the United States being a good neighbor. That flyer is now available on our website and is available to read, download and print here.

uspirates.org/icymi-no-kings-a…

Magnetic tape storage is something many of us will associate with 8-bit microcomputers or 1960s mainframe computers, but it still has a place in the modern data center for long-term backups. It’s likely not to be the first storage tech that would spring to mind when considering a relay computer, but that’s just what [DiPDoT] has done by giving his machine tape storage.

We like this hack, in particular because it’s synchronous. Where the cassette storage of old just had the data stream, this one uses both channels of a stereo cassette deck, one for clock and the other data. It’s encoded as a sequence of tones, which are amplified at playback (by a tube amp, of course) to drive a rectifier which fires the relay.

On the record side the tones are made by an Arduino, something which we fully understand but at the same time can’t help wondering whether something electromechanical could be used instead. Either way, it works well enough to fill a relay shift register with each byte, which can then be transferred to the memory. It’s detailed in a series of videos, the first of which we’ve paced below the break.

If you want more cassette tape goodness, while this may be the slowest, someone else is making a much faster cassette interface.

youtube.com/embed/3r_vtB9umZ4?…

hackaday.com/2025/06/11/this-r…

What happens when you build the largest machine in the world, but it’s still not big enough? That’s the situation the North American transmission system, the grid that connects power plants to substations and the distribution system, and which by some measures is the largest machine ever constructed, finds itself in right now. After more than a century of build-out, the towers and wires that stitch together a continent-sized grid aren’t up to the task they were designed for, and that’s a huge problem for a society with a seemingly insatiable need for more electricity.

There are plenty of reasons for this burgeoning demand, including the rapid growth of data centers to support AI and other cloud services and the move to wind and solar energy as the push to decarbonize the grid proceeds. The former introduces massive new loads to the grid with millions of hungry little GPUs, while the latter increases the supply side, as wind and solar plants are often located out of reach of existing transmission lines. Add in the anticipated expansion of the manufacturing base as industry seeks to re-home factories, and the scale of the potential problem only grows.

The bottom line to all this is that the grid needs to grow to support all this growth, and while there is often no other solution than building new transmission lines, that’s not always feasible. Even when it is, the process can take decades. What’s needed is a quick win, a way to increase the capacity of the existing infrastructure without having to build new lines from the ground up. That’s exactly what reconductoring promises, and the way it gets there presents some interesting engineering challenges and opportunities.

Bare Metal

Copper is probably the first material that comes to mind when thinking about electrical conductors. Copper is the best conductor of electricity after silver, it’s commonly available and relatively easy to extract, and it has all the physical characteristics, such as ductility and tensile strength, that make it easy to form into wire. Copper has become the go-to material for wiring residential and commercial structures, and even in industrial installations, copper wiring is a mainstay.

However, despite its advantages behind the meter, copper is rarely, if ever, used for overhead wiring in transmission and distribution systems. Instead, aluminum is favored for these systems, mainly due to its lower cost compared to the equivalent copper conductor. There’s also the factor of weight; copper is much denser than aluminum, so a transmission system built on copper wires would have to use much sturdier towers and poles to loft the wires. Copper is also much more subject to corrosion than aluminum, an important consideration for wires that will be exposed to the elements for decades.
ACSR (left) has a seven-strand steel core surrounded by 26 aluminum conductors in two layers. ACCC has three layers of trapezoidal wire wrapped around a composite carbon fiber core. Note the vastly denser packing ratio in the ACCC. Source: Dave Bryant, CC BY-SA 3.0.
Aluminum has its downsides, of course. Pure aluminum is only about 61% as conductive as copper, meaning that conductors need to have a larger circular area to carry the same amount of current as a copper cable. Aluminum also has only about half the tensile strength of copper, which would seem to be a problem for wires strung between poles or towers under a lot of tension. However, the greater diameter of aluminum conductors tends to make up for that lack of strength, as does the fact that most aluminum conductors in the transmission system are of composite construction.

The vast majority of the wires in the North American transmission system are composites of aluminum and steel known as ACSR, or aluminum conductor steel-reinforced. ACSR is made by wrapping high-purity aluminum wires around a core of galvanized steel wires. The core can be a single steel wire, but more commonly it’s made from seven strands, six wrapped around a single central wire; especially large ACSR might have a 19-wire core. The core wires are classified by their tensile strength and the thickness of their zinc coating, which determines how corrosion-resistant the core will be.

In standard ACSR, both the steel core and the aluminum outer strands are round in cross-section. Each layer of the cable is twisted in the opposite direction from the previous layer. Alternating the twist of each layer ensures that the finished cable doesn’t have a tendency to coil and kink during installation. In North America, all ACSR is constructed so that the outside layer has a right-hand lay.

ACSR is manufactured by machines called spinning or stranding machines, which have large cylindrical bodies that can carry up to 36 spools of aluminum wire. The wires are fed from the spools into circular spinning plates that collate the wires and spin them around the steel core fed through the center of the machine. The output of one spinning frame can be spooled up as finished ACSR or, if more layers are needed, can pass directly into another spinning frame for another layer of aluminum, in the opposite direction, of course.

youtube.com/embed/TVdOpiER8Xc?…

Fiber to the Core

While ACSR is the backbone of the grid, it’s not the only show in town. There’s an entire beastiary of initialisms based on the materials and methods used to build composite cables. ACSS, or aluminum conductor steel-supported, is similar to ACSR but uses more steel in the core and is completely supported by the steel, as opposed to ACSR where the load is split between the steel and the aluminum. AAAC, or all-aluminum alloy conductor, has no steel in it at all, instead relying on high-strength aluminum alloys for the necessary tensile strength. AAAC has the advantage of being very lightweight as well as being much more resistant to core corrosion than ACSR.

Another approach to reducing core corrosion for aluminum-clad conductors is to switch to composite cores. These are known by various trade names, such as ACCC (aluminum conductor composite core) or ACCR (aluminum conductor composite reinforced). In general, these cables are known as HTLS, which stands for high-temperature, low-sag. They deliver on these twin promises by replacing the traditional steel core with a composite material such as carbon fiber, or in the case of ACCR, a fiber-reinforced metal matrix.

The point of composite cores is to provide the conductor with the necessary tensile strength and lower thermal expansion coefficient, so that heating due to loading and environmental conditions causes the cable to sag less. Controlling sag is critical to cable capacity; the less likely a cable is to sag when heated, the more load it can carry. Additionally, composite cores can have a smaller cross-sectional area than a steel core with the same tensile strength, leaving room for more aluminum in the outer layers while maintaining the same overall conductor diameter. And of course, more aluminum means these advanced conductors can carry more current.

Another way to increase the capacity in advanced conductors is by switching to trapezoidal wires. Traditional ACSR with round wires in the core and conductor layers has a significant amount of dielectric space trapped within the conductor, which contributes nothing to the cable’s current-carrying capacity. Filling those internal voids with aluminum is accomplished by wrapping round composite cores with aluminum wires that have a trapezoidal cross-section to pack tightly against each other. This greatly reduces the dielectric space trapped within a conductor, increasing its ampacity within the same overall diameter.

Unfortunately, trapezoidal aluminum conductors are much harder to manufacture than traditional round wires. While creating the trapezoids isn’t that much harder than drawing round aluminum wire — it really just requires switching to a different die — dealing with non-round wire is more of a challenge. Care must be taken not to twist the wire while it’s being rolled onto its spools, as well as when wrapping the wire onto the core. Also, the different layers of aluminum in the cable require different trapezoidal shapes, lest dielectric voids be introduced. The twist of the different layers of aluminum has to be controlled, too, just as with round wires. Trapezoidal wires can also complicate things for linemen in the field in terms of splicing and terminating cables, although most utilities and cable construction companies have invested in specialized tooling for advanced conductors.

Same Towers, Better Wires

The grid is what it is today in large part because of decisions made a hundred or more years ago, many of which had little to do with engineering. Power plants were located where it made sense to build them relative to the cities and towns they would serve and the availability of the fuel that would power them, while the transmission lines that move bulk power were built where it was possible to obtain rights-of-way. These decisions shaped the physical footprint of the grid, and except in cases where enough forethought was employed to secure rights-of-way generous enough to allow for expansion of the physical plant, that footprint is pretty much what engineers have to work with today.

Increasing the amount of power that can be moved within that limited footprint is what reconductoring is all about. Generally, reconductoring is pretty much what it sounds like: replacing the conductors on existing support structures with advanced conductors. There are certainly cases where reconductoring alone won’t do, such as when new solar or wind plants are built without existing transmission lines to connect them to the system. In those cases, little can be done except to build a new transmission line. And even where reconductoring can be done, it’s not cheap; it can cost 20% more per mile than building new towers on new rights-of-way. But reconductoring is much, much faster than building new lines. A typical reconductoring project can be completed in 18 to 36 months, as compared to the 5 to 15 years needed to build a new line, thanks to all the regulatory and legal challenges involved in obtaining the property to build the structures on. Reconductoring usually faces fewer of these challenges, since rights-of-way on existing lines were established long ago.

The exact methods of reconductoring depend on the specifics of the transmission line, but in general, reconductoring starts with a thorough engineering evaluation of the support structures. Since most advanced conductors are the same weight per unit length as the ACSR they’ll be replacing, loads on the towers should be about the same. But it’s prudent to make sure, and a field inspection of the towers on the line is needed to make sure they’re up to snuff. A careful analysis of the design capacity of the new line is also performed before the project goes through the permitting process. Reconductoring is generally performed on de-energized lines, which means loads have to be temporarily shifted to other lines, requiring careful coordination between utilities and transmission operators.

Once the preliminaries are in place, work begins. Despite how it may appear, most transmission lines are not one long cable per phase that spans dozens of towers across the countryside. Rather, most lines span just a few towers before dead-ending into insulators that use jumpers to carry current across to the next span of cable. This makes reconductoring largely a tower-by-tower affair, which somewhat simplifies the process, especially in terms of maintaining the tension on the towers while the conductors are swapped. Portable tensioning machines are used for that job, as well as for setting the proper tension in the new cable, which determines the sag for that span.

The tooling and methods used to connect advanced conductors to fixtures like midline splices or dead-end adapters are similar to those used for traditional ACSR construction, with allowances made for the switch to composite cores from steel. Hydraulic crimping tools do most of the work of forming a solid mechanical connection between the fixture and the core, and then to the outer aluminum conductors. A collet is also inserted over the core before it’s crimped, to provide additional mechanical strength against pullout.

youtube.com/embed/QD7_7t4SeVY?…

Is all this extra work to manufacture and deploy advanced conductors worth it? In most cases, the answer is a resounding “Yes.” Advanced conductors can often carry twice the current as traditional ACSR or ACCC conductors of the same diameter. To take things even further, advanced AECC, or aluminum-encapsulated carbon core conductors, which use pretensioned carbon fiber cores covered by trapezoidal annealed aluminum conductors, can often triple the ampacity of equivalent-diameter ACSR.

Doubling or trebling the capacity of a line without the need to obtain new rights-of-way or build new structures is a huge win, even when the additional expense is factored in. And given that an estimated 98% of the existing transmission lines in North America are candidates for reconductoring, you can expect to see a lot of activity under your local power lines in the years to come.

hackaday.com/2025/06/11/recond…