Polished Technical Report: Resistance Efficiency of Bolted Copper Busbar Connections


01/02

2026

This article is part of: Laminated Busbar

Bolted connections critically impact busbar system performance. This focused report provides the calculation methods and design principles needed to overcome key joint design challenges.


Executive Summary

This report consolidates design guidance and calculation procedures for bolted joints in copper busbar systems, providing essential insights into how to optimize busbar connections for electrical efficiency and reliability. It covers bolt material selection, thermal effects, stress constraints, recommended bolt layouts, and connection efficiency. Worked examples demonstrate how overlap length, bolt count, and contact pressure influence joint resistance relative to an equal length of straight busbar. Illustrative diagrams and tables are provided for quick reference, making this a practical guide for electrical engineers and busbar designers.

1. Bolt Selection

Galvanized steel bolts are common, but copper alloy bolts (e.g., aluminum bronze CW307G) are recommended for copper busbar joints.

Copper alloy bolts have thermal expansion closer to copper, supporting stable contact pressure and reducing galvanic corrosion risks. Due to less distinct yield behavior, tightening torque must be controlled; bolt stress should remain below 95% of the elastic limit across the operating temperature range.

Table 1. Comparison of Elastic Limit and Thermal Expansion Coefficient

 
 
MaterialElastic Limit (MPa)Thermal Expansion (per °C)
CopperAnnealed: 50; Hardened: 34016.5×10⁻⁶
High-strength steel70011.1×10⁻⁶
316 Stainless steel41415.9×10⁻⁶
Aluminum bronze (CW307G)40016.2×10⁻⁶
304 Stainless steel20717.2×10⁻⁶
Silicon bronze (C651000)36517.8×10⁻⁶

2. Temperature Effect

Temperature rise (ΔT) induces an increment of bolt tensile force (F_supp) that depends on the difference in thermal expansion coefficients (α_a - α_b), the elastic moduli of bolt and busbar, and dimensions of the joint assembly. When α_a and α_b differ significantly—as with high-strength steel versus copper—the bolt tension can increase markedly under heating.

In the formula:

αₐ — Thermal expansion coefficient of the busbar conductor

αᵦ — Thermal expansion coefficient of the bolt

Aᵦ — Cross-sectional area of the bolt

Eᵦ — Elastic modulus of the bolt

Eₐ — Elastic modulus of the busbar

t — Thickness of the washer

a — Thickness of the busbar

A_w — Apparent area under the washer

Aₐ — Apparent area of the joint overlap region

The variation in bolt stress is directly proportional to the difference in thermal expansion coefficients (αₐ − αᵦ).
For example:

If high-strength steel bolts are used, the difference in thermal expansion coefficients is large (Δα = 5.5×10⁻⁶/°C), causing a significant increase in bolt tension.

If CW307G aluminum bronze bolts are used, the difference is very small (Δα = −0.3×10⁻⁶/°C), so the bolt tension will only decrease slightly.

3. Bolt Stress and Use of Belleville Washers

Design must ensure the maximum tensile force at any operating temperature remains below 95% of the bolt yield strength. If this limit is exceeded, the bolt may undergo plastic deformation, ultimately leading to joint loosening and failure.

When calculating bolt stress, the tensile stress area of the bolt (refer to Table 1 for specific values) should be applied, instead of the nominal bolt area.

Table 1 Typical Thread Characteristic Parameters

Nominal Size

Basic Major Diameter (D) (mm)

Nominal Shank Area (A) (mm²)

Pitch (p) (mm)

Pitch Diameter (d) (mm)

Minor Diameter Area (A) (mm²)

Tensile Stress Area (Aₜₛ) (mm²)

M6

6

28.274

1

5.3505

17.894

20.123

M8

8

50.265

1.25

7.1881

32.841

36.609

M10

10

78.54

1.5

9.0257

52.292

57.99

M12

12

113.1

1.75

10.863

76.247

84.267

M14

14

153.94

2

12.701

104.71

115.44

M16

16

201.06

2

14.701

144.12

156.67

M20

20

314.16

2.5

18.376

225.19

244.79

M22

22

380.13

2.5

20.376

281.53

303.4

M24

24

452.39

3

22.051

324.27

352.5

M27

27

572.56

3

25.051

427.09

459.41

M30

30

706.86

3.5

27.727

518.99

560.59

M33

33

855.3

3.5

30.727

647.19

693.55

M36

36

1017.9

4

33.402

759.28

816.72

 

 
 

Use tensile stress area—not nominal diameter—when calculating bolt stress. If high-strength steel bolts are mandated, incorporate Belleville (conical spring) washers to limit thermal force increments by providing compliant displacement under expansion.

4. Slot Optimization in Overlap Region

Introducing longitudinal slots in the lap joint can reduce contact resistance by 30–40% by improving pressure uniformity and effective contact area.

The reduction in electrical resistance is attributed to this design’s ability to improve the uniformity of contact pressure at each branch of the joint, thereby increasing the contact area.

5. Recommended Bolt Arrangement and Torque

For single-sided lap joints, long-practiced layouts provide a sound starting point. Recommended torques typically apply to Grade 8.8 steel or aluminum bronze fasteners with standard coarse threads, normal surface roughness, and no added lubrication.

6. Connection Efficiency and Governing Formulas

Connection efficiency (η) is the ratio of the resistance of the conductor section including the joint (R_j) to the resistance of an equal length of straight busbar (R_b). Joint resistance comprises the streamline-effect resistance due to current path distortion and the contact resistance at the mating surfaces.

Contact resistance per unit area: R_i = Y / (a · l), where Y depends on contact pressure, a is busbar width, and l is overlap length.

Total joint resistance: R_j = R_streamline + R_i
Efficiency: η = R_j / R_b, with R_b as the straight busbar resistance for the same length.

7. Worked Examples

Example A — 50 mm × 10 mm busbar, overlap 70 mm, 2 × M12 bolts: contact pressure ≈ 10.7 N/mm², Y ≈ 3000 μΩ·mm², resistance ratio e ≈ 0.55, resulting efficiency η ≈ 1.12 (joint slightly higher resistance than straight busbar).

Example B — Redesign with 90 mm overlap and 3 × M12 bolts: contact pressure ≈ 12.5 N/mm², Y ≈ 2600 μΩ·mm², e ≈ 0.52, yielding η ≈ 0.91 (joint resistance lower than straight busbar).

8. Notes and Assumptions

The figures provided are illustrative and not drawn to scale.

The pressure–resistance curve in Figure 1 is synthetic for visualization; use laboratory or vendor data for design-critical calculations.

All formulas and values are derived from the attached source material on copper busbar joint design.

9. FAQ: Common Questions on Copper Busbar Joint Design

Q1: What is the best bolt material for copper busbar connections?
A: Aluminum bronze (CW307G) is recommended due to its similar thermal expansion to copper, which helps maintain stable contact pressure and reduces galvanic corrosion.

Q2: How does temperature affect bolt tension in busbar joints?
A: Temperature rise can increase bolt tension if the bolt and busbar have different thermal expansion coefficients. Using materials with matched coefficients minimizes this effect.

Q3: How can I reduce contact resistance in a bolted busbar joint?
A: Introducing longitudinal slots in the overlap region can improve pressure distribution and reduce contact resistance by 30–40%.

Q4: What is connection efficiency and how is it calculated?
A: Connection efficiency is the ratio of joint resistance to the resistance of an equivalent straight busbar. It is influenced by overlap length, bolt count, and contact pressure.

 

Contact our engineering team to collaborate on ensuring your Copper Busbar Connections are safe, efficient, and reliable.

 

 

Enter your information for download

If you are interested in our products, please contact us as soon as possible!

Submit
%{tishi_zhanwei}%