WO2014154191A1

WO2014154191A1 - Copper alloy

Info

Publication number: WO2014154191A1
Application number: PCT/DE2014/000084
Authority: WO
Inventors: Hark Schulze; Dirk Rode
Original assignee: Kme Germany Gmbh & Co. Kg
Priority date: 2013-03-26
Filing date: 2014-03-04
Publication date: 2014-10-02
Also published as: DE102013005158A1

Abstract

Copper alloy having proportions in % by weight of silicon (Si) of 0.10‑2.0, nickel (Ni) of 0.50‑4.0 and also 1.1) sulphur (S) of 0.10‑0.80 or 1.2) tellurium (Te) of 0.10‑1.00 or 1.3) sulphur (S) of 0.10‑0.80 and tellurium (Te) of 0.10‑1.00, where the alloy is in each case free of beryllium (Be) and lead (Pb), and optionally contains phosphorus (P) of max. 0.05, aluminium (Al) of max. 0.50, boron (B) of max. 0.50, chromium (Cr) of max. 0.50, iron (Fe) of max. 0.50, magnesium (Mg) of max. 0.50, Manganese (Mn) of max. 0.80, silver (Ag) of max. 0.50, zirconium (Zr) of max. 0.50, zinc (Zn) of max. 2.50, tin (Sn) of max. 2.50, balance copper (Cu) and smelting-related impurities.

Description

copper alloy

The invention relates to a copper alloy with the features in the preamble of claim 1 and the use of such a copper alloy with the features of claim. 9

As a per se, soft metal copper is appreciated in particular because of its good alloyability. Copper alloys with, for example, improved strength properties are also used where high demands are placed on current and / or thermal conductivity and corrosion resistance. Therefore, it is usually several requirements to meet simultaneously.

Since copper, with the exception of silver, has the lowest electrical resistance of all known metals, copper alloys are preferred and used for electrical contact components merely because of the frequency of copper and the associated price advantage over silver.

Such contact components include, for example, mechanically connectable and separable fasteners and crimp connections.

Copper alloys such as CuNi1, 5Si (C19010), CuNi2SiZn (C64725) and CuNi3Si (C70250) are primarily used for plug-in contacts, as these have a high relaxation resistance. In contrast, the aforementioned copper alloy have a poor machinability, so that they are not or only poorly suited for the production of contact components by machining.

CONFIRMATION COPY On the other hand, good machinability is achieved when using known copper alloys such as CuSP, CuTeP or CuSMn. Since this is non-hardenable and only very slightly solid solution hardening having alloys, but they have only a low relaxation resistance.

The alloys used in the prior art also sometimes contain components of lead (Pb) or beryllium (Be), so that these copper alloys can not be safely used for all applications due to the known toxicity of these alloying elements.

Against this background, the composition of copper alloys and their use in terms of their respective material properties still has room for improvement.

The invention has for its object to provide a both relaxation-resistant and machinable copper alloy available, which is free of the alloying elements beryllium and lead. Furthermore, the use of such a relaxation-resistant and machinable as well as lead and beryllium-free copper alloy for products to be produced from it is to be shown.

The solution of this problem consists according to the invention in a copper alloy with the features of claim 1 and their use with the features of claim 9.

Unless otherwise indicated, all information on alloying elements is in weight percentages.

A copper alloy is proposed, with proportions in weight%

Silicon (Si) 0.10 - 2.0

Nickel (Ni) 0.50 - 4.0. In order to achieve the required machinability, fractions are still involved in the formation of chip-breaking phases

1.1) sulfur (S) 0.10 - 0.80

or

1.2) Tellurium (Te) 0.10 - 1.00

or

1.3) Sulfur (S) 0.10 - 0.80

Tellurium (Te) 0.10 - 1.00 contained in the alloy of the invention. The alloy is free of beryllium (Be) and lead (Pb) to avoid toxic properties.

Thus, depending on the base used for the copper alloy, sulfur (S) or tellurium (Te) may be added alone or in combination within the stated limits. The alloy is free of beryllium (Be) and lead (Pb) to avoid toxic properties.

Optionally, the copper alloy contains to improve the respective required properties:

Phosphorus (P) max. 0.05

Aluminum (AI) max. 0.50

Boron (B) max. 0.50

Chrome (Cr) max. 0.50

Iron (Fe) max. 0.50

Magnesium (Mg) max. 0.50

Manganese (Mn) max. 0.80

Silver (Ag) max. 0.50

Zircon (Zr) max. 0.50

Zinc (Zn) max. 2.50

Tin (Sn) max. 2.50. The above group are optional alloying elements. If necessary, they can be included individually or in combination within the specified limits.

The alloy contains copper (Cu) as the remainder and may contain common impurities caused by melting.

The copper alloy according to the invention combines good machinability and high relaxation resistance. Especially with respect to lead (Pb), it has been found that its addition of not more than 0.1% does not improve the machinability. When lead is added, the risk of hot cracking predominates due to lead smelting on the grain boundaries of the crystallites. The machinability of the copper materials known in the art is usually due to the addition of lead (Pb) in metallic form.

The present deliberate abandonment of lead (Pb) therefore the addition of sulfur (S) and / or tellurium (Te) is proposed, optionally, but also in particular in combination with manganese (Mn). The addition of sulfur (S) and / or tellurium (Te) has the effect that span-breaking phases can be formed even without lead (Pb).

Manganese (Mn) acts as a hardening agent and serves as a deoxidizer within the copper alloy. Furthermore, by manganese (Mn), the grain of the copper alloy can be refined.

Sulfur (S) improves the machinability of the copper material. Manganese (Mn) prevents or reduces the phase formation of sulfur (S) with other alloying elements.

In addition to the improved machinability and relaxation resistance, the copper alloy according to the invention has a good electrical conductivity, which ranges from 24 MS / m for example CuNi3SiS or CuNi3SiTe to 32 MS / m for example CuNMSiS or CuNMSiTe depending on the investigated composition. Advantageous developments of the inventive concept are the subject of the dependent claims 2 to 8.

Hereinafter, the alloy components of the above group, if added, may be contained in a range of 0.01 - 2.50 wt% each with respect to zinc (Zn) and tin (Sn).

Manganese (Mn) may be contained in a range of 0.01-0.80%.

Furthermore, the proportions of aluminum (Al), boron (B), chromium (Cr), iron (Fe) and magnesium (Mg), silver (Ag) and zirconium (Zr) can each be 0.01% -0.5% ,

Phosphorus (P) may be included in a range of 0.001% -0.05%.

The addition of phosphorus (P) and / or boron (B) as needed serves to counteract the hydrogen disease. The oxygen dissolved in the copper mixed crystal is bound thereto by the addition of phosphorus (P) and / or boron (B). When hydrogen is absorbed in the material, no water vapor can form, which loosens up the microstructure. Phosphorus (P) and / or boron (B) act as deoxidizers.

Furthermore, the addition of phosphorus (P) prevents the oxidation of individual alloying elements. Moreover, the flow properties of the copper alloy during casting can also be improved by the addition of phosphorus (P).

By adding aluminum (AI) according to the invention, the hardness of the copper material and its yield strength can be increased without reducing the toughness. Aluminum (Al) is an alloying element which can improve the strength, machinability and wear resistance of the copper alloy at high temperatures. Incidentally, this also applies to an improvement in the oxidation resistance of the copper alloy by the addition of aluminum (Al). The addition of chromium (Cr) and magnesium (Mg) also serves to improve the oxidation resistance of the copper alloy at high temperatures. Particularly good results are observed in this context when chromium (Cr) and magnesium (Mg) are added in combination with aluminum (Al). In this way, an advantageous synergy effect of these components can be achieved.

Iron (Fe) generally serves to increase the corrosion resistance of the copper alloy.

Zircon (Zr) can improve the hot workability of the copper material according to the invention.

In particular, in the case of an at least partial tin-plating of the copper alloy, it is proposed to add in a proportion of zinc (Zn) in a range from 0.01 to 2.50%. Zinc (Zn) improves the adhesion of the tin-plating or improves the resistance to the peel-off behavior of peelings.

Tin (Sn) can further increase the solid solution hardening of the copper alloy according to the invention.

Sulfur (S) and / or tellurium (Te) as chip breakers may preferably be combined with manganese (Mn). Sulfur and manganese form manganese sulfides, which increase the machinability towards copper sulfides.

The copper alloy preferably has, for the alloying elements Si, Ni, S, Te and Mn, the following alternative compositions, each with the remainder of copper and melting-related impurities: A)

Silicon (Si) 0.13-1.5

Nickel (Ni) 0.70-3.2, with alternatives 1.1) to 1.3):

1.1) sulfur (S) 0.15-0.70

1.2) tellurium (Te) 0.15-0.85

1.3) Sulfur (S) 0.15-0.70

Tellurium (Te) 0.15-0.85 and each optionally with

Manganese (Mn) 0.05 - 0.70.

B)

Silicon (Si) 0.15-1.2

Nickel (Ni) 0.80 - 3.0, with alternatives 1.1) to 1.3):

1.1) sulfur (S) 0.20-0.60

1.2) Tellurium (Te) 0.20-0.80

1.3) Sulfur (S) 0.20 - 0.60

Tellurium (Te) 0.20 - 0.80 and optionally with

Manganese (Mn) 0.06-0.60.

C)

Silicon (Si) 0.17-1.0

Nickel (Ni) 0.90 - 2.6, with alternatives 1.1) to 1.3):

1.1) sulfur (S) 0.22-0.57

1.2) Tellurium (Te) 0.25-0.75

1.3) Sulfur (S) 0.22-0.57

Tellurium (Te) 0.25-0.75 and optionally with

Manganese (Mn) 0.07-0.55.

D)

Silicon (Si) 0.20 - 0.8 Nickel (Ni) 1.00-2.4, with alternatives 1.1) to 1.3):

1.1) sulfur (S) 0.25-0.55

1.2) Tellurium (Te) 0.30-0.7

1.3) Sulfur (S) 0.25-0.55

Tellurium (Te) 0.30-0.70 and each with optional

Manganese (Mn) 0.08-0.50.

e)

Silicon (Si) 0.22-0.7

Nickel (Ni) 1.20-2.2, with the following being true for alternatives 1.1) to 1.3):

1.1) sulfur (S) 0.28-0.52

1.2) Tellurium (Te) 0.35-0.65

1.3) Sulfur (S) 0.28-0.52

Tellurium (Te) 0.35 - 0.65 and optionally with

Manganese (Mn) 0.09-0.45.

F)

Silicon (Si) 0.25-0.60

Nickel (Ni) 1.40-2.0, with alternatives 1.1) to 1.3):

1.1) sulfur (S) 0.30-0.50

1.2) Tellurium (Te) 0.40 - 0.60

1.3) Sulfur (S) 0.30-0.50 Tellurium (Te) 0.40 - 0.60

and optionally with

Manganese (Mn) 0.10 - 0.40.

The present invention will be explained in more detail below with reference to the figures and tables, in particular as a distinction from the prior art. Show it:

Figure 1 Steel Iron Test Sheet (SEP) 1178-90 for analogous evaluation of

Chip forming class of the copper alloy according to the invention;

FIG. 2 Examination results on the copper alloys CuSP, CuTeP and CuSMn with a view to the chip forming classes by mechanical processing in the form of external longitudinal rotation with variation of the cutting speed;

FIG. 3 shows the examination results on the materials from FIG. 2 with respect to the chipform classes in the case of variants of the depth of cut;

FIG. 4 shows the results of the chipforming classes of FIGS. 2 and 3 in FIG

Dependence on the respective feed in the mechanical processing;

Figure 5 is a tabular overview of the material properties of individual im

Prior art known copper alloys with a copper alloy according to the invention;

FIG. 6 shows a microsection through the microstructure of the copper alloy CuSP known in the prior art;

FIG. 7 shows a microsection through the microstructure of the copper alloy CuTeP known in the prior art; FIG. 8 shows a further microsection through the microstructure of the copper alloy CuSMn known in the prior art;

FIG. 9 shows a microsection through the microstructure of the copper alloy CuNi2.5Si known in the prior art;

FIG. 10 shows an illustration of the mechanical processing of the

Prior art known copper alloy resulting from Figure 9 chip formation;

11 shows a microsection through the microstructure of an inventive

Copper alloy CuNil, 5Si0.2S0.35;

FIG. 12 shows an illustration of the chip formation resulting from the mechanical processing of the copper alloy according to the invention from FIG. 11;

FIG. 13 Diagram for variation of the Ni and Si contents at a constant content of the chipbreaker S or S + Mn and / or Te and

FIG. 14 Diagram for varying the contents of the chipbreaker S or S + Mn and / or Te at a constant content of the base elements Ni and Si.

In order to explain the positive properties and differences of the copper alloy according to the invention compared to the copper alloy known in the prior art, a group of the known copper alloys CuSP (CW114C), CuTeP (CW118C, C14500) and CuSMn (C14750) were first examined in more detail.

FIG. 1 shows a steel-iron test sheet 1178-90 in order to relate the chip configurations of the chips resulting from machining to the group investigated in the present case. The resulting chip image was classified into one of eight chipforming classes (1 - 8), as can be seen in the first column, to the left of the chips shown schematically. The individual chip images are associated with appropriate terminology according to their design, ranging from "band chips" to "shavings".

In the column to the right of the chip forming classes, the chip space number R is listed, which indicates the relationship between the space requirement of a disordered chip quantity (V _span ) and the material volume of the same chip quantity (V). A small chip space number R suggests small chips, which require little space in their spatial design. Thus, these are much easier to handle compared to large chips. In contrast, a large number of chip spaces R makes it possible to close a large space requirement of the chips, so that their handling is made considerably more difficult due to the expanding volume.

The chipforming classes and the respective chip space numbers R are given a judgment in the rightmost column in FIG. 1, the chipforming classes 7 and 8 having their respective chip space number R being classified as "usable" while the chipforming classes 5 and 6 are combined with their respective chip space numbers R are judged to be "good". On the other hand, the remaining chip forming classes 1 to 4 in connection with their respective chip space number R are classified as "unfavorable", with a smooth transition to "good" occurring in chipform classes 3 and 4.

Figure 2 shows the results of mechanical working of the examined group of known copper alloys with respect to the resulting chip forming classes in external longitudinal turning of a workpiece thereof.

The results presented in FIG. 2 are based on a constant cutting depth a _p of 1.5 mm and a feed f of 0.2 mm. The respective cutting speed V _c was varied from 450 m / min (v _c1 ) to 150 m / min (v _c2 ). As can be seen, the respective chip form classes of the materials from the group (CuSP, CuTeP and CuSMn) are all between 3 and 5. The resulting chip images are also shown schematically in the present table. For better clarity, they are each assigned a single line for 20mm as a reference in order to be able to better estimate the results in the form of the chip sizes set during the examination.

FIG. 3 shows the results of further processing steps of the group from FIG. 2. At a constant cutting speed v _c of 450 m / min, the respective cutting depth a _p of 1.5 mm (a _p i) after 0.75 mm (a _P 2 ) varies. As in the case of the previous examination, which was evident in relation to their results in FIG. 2, a constant feed rate of f = 0.2 mm was also observed here.

From FIG. 3, it can be seen that the variation of the depth of cut (a _p ), particularly in the case of the materials CuSP and CuTeP, leads to a change in the chipforming class, wherein an increase in the cutting depth a _p indicates a deterioration of the chipforming class. In contrast, the chipforming class of CuSMn remains constant during the variation of the cutting depth a _p , as was otherwise the case with the variation of the cutting speed v _c (see FIG. 2).

As can be seen, the chip form class, in particular of the copper alloy CuSMn, thus remains constant both in the case of variation of the cutting speed and in the case of variation of the cutting depth in the respectively present areas.

Furthermore, the group of investigated copper alloys also moves with variation of the cutting depth a _p in a range of chipforming classes 3 to 5.

From Figure 4, the result of the variation of the feed f in their effect on the chip forming class of the respective copper alloys from the examined group out. As can be seen, the chipforming class of the group deteriorates with decreasing feed f as a whole. In the resulting from the figures 2 and 3 feed f of 0.2 mm, however, all three copper alloys of the test group are close to each other. Only the copper alloy CuSMn improves its chipbreaker class with increasing feed f, which was tested to 0.3 mm in the present case. The respective resulting chip forms also result from the diagrams shown schematically in combination with the present table.

The results obtained in this way and compiled in FIGS. 2 to 4 were then compared with the test results for the present copper alloy according to the invention.

The reference value used was the well-known copper alloy CuZn39Pb3, which is considered to be the main alloy for machining, especially in Germany. Said copper alloy is used everywhere, where it increasingly depends on a cutting and cutting shaping. In connection with the CuZn39Pb3 copper alloy used herein as reference, its machinability is assumed to be 100%.

In contrast, pure copper material achieves a stress index of 20% to a maximum of 30%. These types of copper are low-alloyed and hardenable copper materials that do not contain chip-breaking elements such as sulfur (S), tellurium (Te), sulfur (S) and manganese (Mn), and lead (Pb).

Between these two copper materials, the group investigated here is such that CuSP has a stress index of 70%, while CuTeP has a stress index of 80%. Finally, CuSMn achieves the highest stress index in the group of 90%. FIG. 5 shows a tabular comparison of the materials contained therein with respect to their respective material properties.

In addition to the materials listed below each other in the left-hand column, their corresponding sizes can be found on the right next to each other, starting with the 0.2% proof stress R _p0 , 2- Right next to this there is the tensile strength R _m and elongation at break A.

In the following right column, the respective Brinell hardness (HBW) is given and in the right following column, the conductivity of the individual materials. The last two columns on the far right show qualitatively the respective relaxation and the machinability in the form of the stress index in%.

The present table in FIG. 5 is constructed in such a way that it reflects the approximate production costs of the individually listed materials, starting with the cheapest material at the top.

In the bottom line is the copper alloy according to the invention with the orders of magnitude of their individual alloy components listed there again, more specifically CuNM, 5Si0.2S0.35.

As can be seen, this copper alloy has a high 0.2% proof strength and tensile strength R _m in direct comparison with the other materials. This also applies to the Brinell hardness HBW, which at 175 is almost twice as high as in the CuZn39Pb3 copper material with HBW 90 selected as the reference and contained in the uppermost row of the table from FIG. 5.

According to the invention, the alloy according to the invention has a very high relaxation resistance, which is indicated in the table by "+++" and thus is usually clearly superior to the particular relaxation resistance of the other materials listed similarly good relaxation resistance, however, has a significantly poorer machinability of only 25% compared to the copper alloy according to the invention CuNM, 5Si0.2S0.35 on.

It is conspicuous that the materials listed in the first four lines have a similarly good and with 100% CuZn39Pb3 correspondingly higher cutting index, however, in their respective relaxation resistance of the copper alloy CuNi1, 5Si0.2S0.35 of the invention clearly subject.

The values listed here for the respective stress index of the materials known in the prior art were taken in part from the information print i18 of the German copper institute "Guidelines for the Machining of Copper and Copper Alloys".

The determination of the mechanical characteristic values for the present table was carried out according to DIN ISO 6892-1. The respective sample shape corresponded to the form A according to DIN 50125. The respective conductivity was determined using a Sigmatester from Förster. The respective relaxation behavior was extrapolated on the basis of internal measurements on the related materials, which, however, compared to the copper alloy of the invention contained no chip-breaking elements according to the invention.

FIGS. 6 to 9 each show a micrograph of the microstructures from the group of individual copper materials underlying the investigations.

FIG. 6 shows the material CuSP with its arrangement of the chip-breaking elements. Its microstructure shows in part closely spaced and each dark copper sulfides, which serve here as a chip breaker. In contrast, FIG. 7 shows the material CuTeP, which in its microstructure contains darkened copper cell fluorates as chip breakers. These are in their arrangement largely isolated and further apart.

FIG. 8 shows the microstructure of the material CuSMn, which contains manganese sulphides as a chip breaker. As already shown in the results in FIGS. 2 to 4 and in row four of the table from FIG. 5, CuSMn has a high cutting index with a mostly good chipforming class, which is due to the uniform distribution of its chipbreakers shown in FIG.

For comparison, FIG. 9 shows the etched microstructure of this standardized material CuNi2.5Si (C1800) without chip-breaking phases.

In addition to the copper mixed crystal, isolated nickel silicides are present. The nickel silicides have no chipbreaking effect. When machining the material unfavorably long chips (Fig. 10) which can wrap around the chip tools and can cause the stoppage of a lathes.

FIG. 11 shows the microstructure of the material according to the invention CuNi1, 5Si0.2S0.35. This also has copper sulfide as a chip breaker. As can be seen, this one of the copper material CuSMn shown in Figure 8 has similar good distribution of its chip breaker, which manifests itself in a good machinability.

Its production was based on continuous casting, with a diameter of 273 mm and a diameter of 28 mm. Furthermore, the production involved the pulling of diameter 28 mm to diameter 24 mm. This was followed by curing at 440 ° C for 16 hours in ambient air. FIG. 12 shows the chip formation after the mechanical processing of the copper material CuNi1, 5Si0.25S0.35 according to the invention from FIG. 9. On the basis of the microstructure of FIG. 9 and the chipform class of the present material CuNM, 5Si0.25S0.35 in comparison with the investigations on the previous ones Materials CuSP, CuTeP and CuSMn can be concluded to a Zerspannungsindex greater than 70%.

Depending on the requirement profile, it is thus possible to select suitable combinations of properties from the machinable copper alloys according to the invention. A special feature of the copper alloy is that a processability with conventional manufacturing and processing machines is possible. Advantageously, the copper alloy according to the invention has both a sufficient cold workability and a very good hot workability.

In the present case, the invention is also directed to the use of such a copper alloy for the production of a product to be machined according to claim 9.

Furthermore, the invention is directed to the use of such a copper alloy for the production of a non-cutting to be manufactured semi-finished product according to claim 10. This may in particular be a rolled, pressed, drawn, forged or cast product. For example, rods and wires can be delivered from press and pull sequences as semi-finished products.

From the bars and wires, for example, the following products can be produced by machining: plug contacts, crimping sleeves, crimp connectors, drilled shank nails, motor parts, screws, locating pins, clamps, welding nozzles, cutting torch nozzles, valves, fittings, nuts, fittings, contraelectrons, contact pins. FIG. 13 shows a diagram for varying the contents of Ni and Si at a constant content of the chipbreaker S or S + Mn and / or Te, and FIG. 14 shows a diagram for varying the contents of the chipbreaker S or S + Mn and / or Te at constant Content of the basic elements Ni and Si.

From this the mutual interactions of the alloying elements can be read off.

Claims

Patent claims

1. Copper alloy, with proportions in % by weight

Silicon (Si) 0.10 - 2.0

Nickel (Ni) 0.50 - 4.0,

as well as

1.1) Sulfur (S) 0.10 - 0.80

or

1.2) Tellurium (Te) 0.10 - 1.00

or

1.3) Sulfur (S) 0.10 - 0.80

Tellurium (Te) 0.10 - 1.00,

whereby the alloy is free of beryllium (Be) and lead (Pb) and optionally

Phosphorus (P) max. 0.05

Aluminum (AI) max. 0.50

Boron (B) max. 0.50

Chromium (Cr) max. 0.50

Iron (Fe) max. 0.50

Magnesium (Mg) max. 0.50

Manganese (Mn) max. 0.80

Silver (Ag) max. 0.50

Zirconium (Zr) max. 0.50

Zinc (Zn) max. 2.50

Tin (Sn) max. 2.50

contains,

Rest of copper (Cu) and impurities caused by melting.

2. Copper alloy according to claim 1, characterized in that at least one of the following alloying elements is optionally contained in the following proportions in% by weight:

Phosphorus (P) 0.001 -0.05

Aluminum (AI) 0.01 - 0.50

Boron (B) 0.01 - 0.50

Chromium (Cr) 0.01 - 0.50

Iron (Fe) 0.01 - 0.50

Magnesium (Mg) 0.01 - 0.50

Manganese (Mn) 0.01 - 0.80

Silver (Ag) 0.01 - 0.50

Zircon (Zr) 0.01 - 0.50

Zinc (Zn) 0.01 - 2.50

Tin (Sn) 0.01 - 2.50.

3. Copper alloy according to claim 1 or 2, characterized by

the following proportions in% by weight:

Silicon (Si) 0.13-1,

5

Nickel (Ni) 0.70 - 3.2,

whereby the following applies to alternatives 1.1) to 1.3) of claim 1:

1.1) Sulfur (S) 0.15-0.70

1.2) Tellurium (Te) 0.15-0.85

1.3) Sulfur (S) 0.15-0.70

Tellurium (Te) 0.15-0.85

and each optionally with

Manganese (Mn) 0.05-0.70. Copper alloy according to claim 1 or 2, characterized by the following proportions in% by weight:

Silicon (Si) 0.15-1.2

Nickel (Ni) 0.80 - 3.0,

whereby the following applies to alternatives 1.1) to 1.3) of claim 1:

1.1) Sulfur (S) 0.20-0.60

1.2) Tellurium (Te) 0.20-0.80

1.3) Sulfur (S) 0.20-0.60

Tellurium (Te) 0.20-0.80

and each optionally with

Manganese (Mn) 0.06 - 0.60.

Copper alloy according to claim 1 or 2, characterized in the following proportions in% by weight:

Silicon (Si) 0.17-1.0

Nickel (Ni) 0.90 - 2.6,

where the following applies to alternatives 1.1) to 1.3) of claim 1:

1.1) Sulfur (S) 0.22-0.57

1.2) Tellurium (Te) 0.25-0.75

1.3) Sulfur (S) 0.22 - 0.57

Tellurium (Te) 0.25 - 0.75

and each optionally with

Manganese (Mn) 0.07 - 0.55.

6. Copper alloy according to claim 1 or 2, characterized by the following proportions in% by weight:

Silicon (Si) 0.20 - 0.8

Nickel (Ni) 1.00-2.4,

where the following applies to alternatives 1.1) to 1.3) of claim 1:

1.1) Sulfur (S) 0.25-0.55

1.2) Tellurium (Te) 0.30-0.7

1.3) Sulfur (S) 0.25-0.55

Tellurium (Te) 0.30-0.70

and each optionally with

Manganese (Mn) 0.08 - 0.50.

7. Copper alloy according to claim 1 or 2, characterized by the following proportions in% by weight:

Silicon (Si) 0.22 - 0.7

Nickel (Ni) 1.20-2.2,

where the following applies to alternatives 1.1) to 1.3) of claim 1:

1.1) Sulfur (S) 0.28-0.52

1.2) Tellurium (Te) 0.35-0.65

1.3) Sulfur (S) 0.28-0.52

Tellurium (Te) 0.35-0.65

and each optionally with

Manganese (Mn) 0.09 - 0.45.

8. Copper alloy according to claim 1 or 2, characterized by the following proportions in% by weight:

Silicon (Si) 0.25 - 0.60

Nickel (Ni) 1.40-2.0,

where the following applies to alternatives 1.1) to 1.3) of claim 1:

1.1) Sulfur (S) 0.30-0.50

1.2) Tellurium (Te) 0.40-0.60

1.3) Sulfur (S) 0.30-0.50

Tellurium (Te) 0.40 - 0.60

and each optionally with

Manganese (Mn) 0.10-0.40.

9. Use of a copper alloy according to one of the preceding claims 1 to 8 for the production of a product to be machined.

10. Use of a copper alloy according to one of the preceding claims 1 to 8 for the production of a non-machining semi-finished product, in particular in the form of a rolled, pressed, drawn, forged or cast product.