96085

CABLE SIZING - AVOID SHORTCUTS AND DO IT RIGHT

Donn K. Kelly
Parsons Power Group
2675 Morgantown Road
Reading, PA 19607
5,610-855-2001fax
610-855-351
Joseph R. Jancauskas
Parsons Power Group
633 Chestnut Street, Suite 400
Chattanooga, TN 37450
423-757-8029, 423-266-0922fax

accommodatethese new materials. Further, the regular revision

ABSTRACT
The task of selecting power cable and wire types along with
the sizing of the conductors for specii5c applications is a very
important part of the design of any electrical system.
Unfortunately, this is a task that is often performed with a
minimum of effort and with little consideration for all of the
relevant design issues. The resulting tragedy is that improper
selection and sizing can easily increase the installed cost of a
facility while also reducing the reliability of the complete
system. This paper outlines some of the considerations that
should be applied to cable selection each and every time. It then
suggests the design for a computer based tool which will
facilitate the selection process without resorting to
simplifications. The conclusion is that cable and wire can be
readily sized properly if the power of present day personal
computers are used to evaluate the various criteria and economic
options.
OBJECTJVE OF CABLE SELECTION AND SIZING
When selecting and sizing cable and/or wire for a power
distribution system there are a large number of criteria to be
considered. These include criteria to ensure that the conductor
sue is sufficient to avoid the overheating of the conductor and
the terminals of connected equipment as well as criteria to
ensure that the voltage drop will not be excessive. In addition,
there is the ever present objective to " i z e cost. In some
cases this will be the total life cycle cost which includes the
projected value of losses; in other cases the objective will be to
minimize only the cost of material and installation.
The variety of wire and cable materials, along with the many
types of raceways and ambient conditions, makes the proper
selection complex. The constant increase in the choice of
materials requires that the selection process be able to easily
of the various applicable codes and standards also requires a
flexible evaluation and selection process.
At the same time that the number of choices is increasing and
the codes are changing, there is the constant pressure on the
design organizationto prepare the complete design more quickly
and at a lower cost. These pressures have lead many design
organizationsto reduce the selection and sizing process to the
use of a few application tables based on past experience and a
simplification of the many criteria. These simpfications r e d m
the cost of the design, but can result in errors and/or a life cycle
cost that is higher than necessary. Selection tables are
convenient, but the built-in assumptions are almost always
overlooked.
Thus the objective is to develop a process for cable and wire
selection and sizing that will ensure that all the performance,
regulatory, and economic factors have been considered while
minimizing the engin- design cost.
The major areas that need to be evaluated are:
1. Ampacity Considerations
2. Voltage Drop Considerations
3. Short Circuit Considerations
4. Overcurrent Protective Device Considerations
5. Economic Considerations
6. Insulation Material Considerations
1. AmDacitv Considerations
The true objective of all ampacity evaluation is to ensure that
the operating temperature of the conductors remains below the
design limit for the insulating material. As a practical matter
these evaluations typically become an exercise in the correct
application of a series of table values and rules established by
the National Electric Code (NEC) and by other industry
standardsand guides.

2341 0-7803-3547-3-7116 $4.00 0 1996 IEEE

 By far the most common method is to utilize the ampacity
tables 310-16through310-19 fromtheNEC. Simpleas thismay
be, what is often overloaked are some of the necessary
adjustments required to these values. This includes derating for
more than three cment-carryingconductors such as countmg the
neutral conductor when there is a majority of high harmonic
current drawing loads. E any portion of the circuit is in an area
where the ambient temperature is above 3OoC(83T) derating
factors must be applied. An additional common mistake when
utilizing 90 “C cable is to choose the ampcity value in the
column for 90 “C cable when the maximum allowable value
should actually be selected from the 60 “C or75 O C column based
on the ratings of the terminations in the equipment being
connected. This requitement is somewhat hiddenin Section
110-14(c)of the NEC which invokes the ratings of any listing
agencies such as those contained in Underwriter’s Laboratories
“Yellow Book.
The above paragraph lists just some of the more common
oversights. The task becomes even more complicated by the
variety of possible raceway configurations,wire and cable types,
and ambient conditions greatly complicates the problem. As a
result it is first necessary to define considerable information
about each branch circuit or feeder in order to determine the
applicable criteria and tables. To further complicate the issue,
the NEC recognizes that there are configurationsof raceways and
cable types that are beyond the scope of the tables provided. For
these cases the NEC requires an evaluation by a quahfied
engineer. This reference is equivalent to a requirement for
evaluations in accordance with the various IPCEA and IEEE
standards that presently exist.
A significant advance in the state of the art is the publication
of IEEE standard 835-1994, “Standard Power Cable Ampacity
Tables”, which provides a necessary update of PCEA Standard
P46-426, (AIEE S-135-1 and S-135-2). This standard provides
a voluminous amount of data on cable mpacities, particularly
for cables in various duct bank configurations. An important
addition is the inclusion of a separate ampacity column for
conductors exposed to the sunlight These tables are based on
rigorous technical analysis such as the Neher-NcGrath method,
as opposed to the NEC which no longer has a d e f d b l e basis
for its values other than tradition. This results from the original
values being determined by tests of rubber insulated cables in
black painted pipe, which is a far cry from a typical installation
of today.
So in order to properly evaluate a conductor size for
ampacity, the following informationmust be known:
Load Characteristics
0 Maximum continuous current.
* Harmonic content of the load current.
Wire/Cable Characteristics
0 The tvpe of wire or cable such as single conductor,
triplexed singles, or multi-conductor cable.
e The Insulation temperature rating.
0 Conductor material (copper or aluminum).
2342
0 Whether the slueld for medium voltage cables will
be grounded at one or both ends.
Raceway Characteristics
0 The type such as conduit, tray, duct bank,or direct
burial..
The number of power carrying conductors in an
individual conduit or the design “fill” for a cable
tray.
Whether the conduits or trays are “banked” or can
be considered thermally independent.
0 The use of fire stops or other penetration barriers.
Ambient Considerations
Ambient air and/or soil temperature for the entire
circuit route, including isolated “hot spots”.
0 Soil thermal resistivity (for duct banks or direct
burial).
0 Exposure to heating by solar radiation (or some
other idfared radiation source).
Once all of the above characteristic have been determined, it
is then possible to idenm the applicable tables and criteria. In
many cases a single branch circuit or feeder will be exposed to
several diEerent set of conditions. Each of these sets needs to be
evaluated and the ampacity for various conductor sizes
determined. Once these various ampacities have been
determined and compared to the maximum continuous current
that the branch circuit or feeder will carry,a “mini”” cable
size for ampacity can be defined.
The NEC and other industry standards provide some specific
criteria for duct banks of various configurations Ideally, it
should be possible to perform the necessary heat transfer
computations for configurationsof duct banks not covered by the
standards, but the authors have not found this to be economically
feasible at ttus tme. Even wth the commercially available
software which can perform these calculations, the large amount
of variables defining the physical construction of the cable whlr;h
must be collected and input is prolubitive.
The NEC provides some cnteria for the ampacity of cables in
cable tray. However, there are some design practices used in
some industries that are not covered directly by the code. In
particular, other industry standads such as ICEA P-54-440/
NEMA WC 51, “Ampacities of Cables in Open-top Cable Trays”
and the on& heat transfer theory need to be used in the
following situations:
Trays carrying power trays have tight covers for distances of
more than a few feet.
Trays are to be designed to carry many small power cables
installed in a “random lay” fashion.
0 Trays are to be installed in a bank (in close proximity) with
other trays carrying (heat producing) power cables
Thus a PC based tool needs be able to apply a variety of
Maent type of criteria and equations to evaluate ampacity.
These include some that reqwre the solution of some rather
complex heat transfer equations. However, having ths
capability permits the use of codigurations that may be very cost
effective, but are not easily evaluated using the limited criteria of
the NEC.
2. Voltacle Drop Considerations
If you were to ask ten engineers to solve the same voltage
drop problem, it is likely that each would use a different solution
method with a different set of simplifjmg assumptions. For such
a basic technical function it seems odd that there has not been
any standardized solution method. Even the numerous
simplifying nomograms are not similar, and some even resort to
giving solutions in non-real world units such as “amperes per
hundred feet”. Just selectmg the criteria for voItage drop is
mostly dependent on the policies of individual designers.
While the NEC provide some general criteria, the application
of these criteria to specific design problems can result in
different design solutions. For example, the total drop allowed
in a feeder and branch circuit combination is 5%, with no more
than a 3% maximum in each (NEC articles 210-19, FPN 4 and
215-2, FPN 2). It is rare to come a cross written project criteria
where the specific allocation of voltage drop is defined. This
becomes a problem when there is more than one circuit between
the supply and the load. There could be a power feed from a 480
V untt substation to a motor control center, tiom the motor
control center to a 480 V power panel, and then from the power
panel to the load. The allowable 5% would need to be split up
among each of these three circuits.
The NEC criteria might not be stringent enough on a large
project that includes several levels of voltage transformation.
Even if the transformer tap settings are optimized, the voltage
drop caused by the transformer impedances may require the use
of more restrictive critexia than that dictated by the NEC to
ensure adequate voltage is supplied to critical equipment under
worst case conditions.
The normal design approach consists of several steps. The
fEst is to ensure that the circuit voltage drop (under steady state
design load conditions) meets the applicable criteria (NEC or
other project criteria). If the circuit feeds a load such as a motor
with an in-rush current, the next step is to evaluate the voltage
drop during this in-rush. The third step is to model the entire
system with a load-flow program to determine the voltage at the
terminals of critical motors and other loads under both steady
state and transient conditions. This last step is ofien neglected
because of the engineering effort (cost) involved. However, it is
the only way that any assurance can be provided that critical
loads will fimction and not be damaged by “worst case”
conditions. What is often overlooked is that under worst case
low voltage conditions the full load current draw of a constant
kVA load such as a motor will increase, which canhave a
significant impact cm cable and protective device sizing.
The NEC does not provide any criteria for evaluating voltage
drop during transients such as motor starting. Standard motors
are rated to start (with loads of maximum rated inertia) with a
minimum of 90% of nameplate voltage at the motor terminals in
accordance withNEMA MG-1-12.44.2. This seems odd because
90% of nameplate voltage is the same cntena in NEMA MG-I-
2343
12.44.1for continuos operation. This is not as limiting as it
sounds because the power factor during inrush for standard
motors is about 0.20. As a result, when the voltage drop in the
cable is subtracted vectorially from the source voltage, the
resultant voltage is much higher than is the absolute value of the
voltage drop in the cable would imply. NEMA MG-1 does go an
to state that the only way that you can really tell if a motor will
start is to perform a detailed transient motor starting analysis
which will require obtaining the speed-torque curves for both the
motor and the loads as well as the inertias of each. Given that
obtaining this data for relatively small motor loads is often not
practical, ensuring that a voltage of over 90% is supplied during
motor starting is a way to provide reasonable engineering
assurance that the design is adequate.
In order to perform these various evaluations the following
information must be determined:
0 The conductor material and the preliminary size.
The resistance and reactance of the preliminary size and
type of wire or cable.
0 The steady state design load current and power factor.
0 The design inrush (starting)current and power factor.
The computation for voltage drop is somewhat more difficult
because an “exact” solution requires an iterative computation.
The voltage drop depends upon the load current, but the load
current depends of the voltage at the load terminals, but this
voltage depends upon the voltage drop that is being calculated.
In the past equations that provide a conservative approximation
have typically been used. With a FY based tool an exact solution
can be obtained with the use of appropriate tools that can
perform the necessary iterativecomputations.
Once again, the evaluation of wire and cable selection for
steady state and inrush voltage drop is relatively easy once the
necessary information has been determined. However, it is
important to remember that the only way to fully determine that
voltage drop is not excessive to perform a series of load flow
studies. Just performing a single load study for the nominal
design conditions is not enough. Variations in the source voltage
and impedance should be investigated, as well as major
variations in operating loads which are expected A good
example would be the difference seen during full load conditions
as compared to startup Conditions.
3. Short Circuit Considerations
In addition to the standard concerns for ampacity, good
engineering practice includes ensuring that wire and cable is
sized so that the conductor insulation is not damaged in the event
of a short circuit. This is particularly important for large cables
protected by large circuit breakers that require several cycles to
open in response to a fault. During these several cycles the
temperature of the conductor can increase to a very high
temperature as the result of the resistive heating from the fault
current.
The various conductor insulation materials have an
emergency temperature rating, in addition to the more commonly
recognized continuous temperature limit. These emergency
temperature limits can be obtained form the wire or cable
manufacture or can be estimated based on available industry
literature. For example, typical EPR insulation rated for a
continuous conductor temperature of 90°C has an emergency
temperature rating of 250°C.
In order to evaluate a specific wire or cable selection it is
necessary to know the following information:
The conductor material and the (preliminary) size.
* The emergency temperature rating of the conductor
insulation material.
The maximum available short circuit current.
The time required for the circuit breaker (or other device
protecting the circuit) to clear the postulated fault.
Unfortunately, determining some of these values is not as
simple as it might appear at first glance. ”here are several
possible values for the “maximum short circuit current.” The
fxst question that must be answered is whether the value is to
correspond to a fault postulated to the load end of the circuit or
at the source end. Many designers consider that the appropriate
value to use is for a fault at the load end of the circuit. Their
argument is that there is no value in protecting the conductor
insulation for faults that could OCCUT along the length of the cable
since the fault itself can only occur if there is major damage to
the cable. However, other designers argue that the short circuit
value correspondingto the source end of the cable should be
used. By using this value the possibility of peripheral damage
from burning of the conductor insulation is avoided. In addition,
it is often economically important to be able to repair fault
damage and return an existing circuit to service, without
replacing the complete circuit. For example, it is common
practice to repair the damage that OCCUTS from “dig-ins’’ to direct
buried cables. By using the fault current value for the source end
of the circuit, the fault damage can generally be limited to the
immediate location of the fault. The f i l choice is thus left to
the individual designer and the perception of the economics
applicable to a part~culardesign situation.
The next problem is to select the appropriate values for the
fault current. It is common practice to use the symmetrical fault
current value that is typically provided by short circuit analyses
used for checking circuit breaker ratings. Unfortunately, this
value is not really applicable since individual conductorswill see
significantly higher currents due to the asymmetrical offset and
the decay of the current that can occur between the initial value
and the calculated value that applies at the time of breaker
interruption. For (small) half-cycle breakers it is best to use the
instantaneous or “momentary” value. For larger breakers which
require several cycles, the asymmetrical current at the first half
cycle is a good compromise value. Remember the objective is to
select a value that will allow a good estimate of the heating
effect on the individual circuit conductors.
Determining the time for the protective device to the clear
the fault is relatively easy. Tlus information is normally
available from the device manufacturer. However, this value can
not be used directly unless the protective devices is activated by
an “instantaneous” ovacurrent element. For large feeder circuits
2344
the protective device is often actuated by protective relays or
direct acting elements that include a delay mechanism. This
delay is used to provide device coordination so that a minimum
amount of the electncal disb.ibution system is deenergized in
the event of a fault on a particular branch circuit. Thus the
length of these coordination delays must be included in the time
that the cable must withstand the fault without damage.
Udortunately, wire or cable for these feeder circuits must often
be selected long before the “coordination studies” have been
performedand the exact values of the delay are know.
Therefore, it is common practice to conservativelyestimate the
coordination time delay for these feeder circuits. Again the
choice is left to the individual designer to select a suitable value.
Once the vatious values have been selected, the computation
of the estimated conductor temperature is a relatively simple
process. The formulationscan be found in many standard
references. These references commonly also include graphs or
nomograms to facilitate the manual evaluation of conductors
sizes. However, with today’s PC based tools the equations are of
more interest. The equations are based on basic physical models
and the assumption that none of the heat produced in the
conductor is dissipated into the conductor insulation, which is a
reasonable approximation for an event that has a length of a few
cycles. The most important aspect of the equations is the
recognition that the rate of heating increases as the conductor
temperature increases. This occurs because the fault current is
not significantly reduced by the increased resistance (in the
circuit) but the losses are directly proportional to this increasing
resistance.
In summary, given the necessary data and preferences,
evaluating the size of wire and cable to ensure that the insulation
will not be damaged by a short circuit is easy. The process is
even easier if a PC based tool is used. In order to provide this
prokction it IS common in medium voltage circuits to choose a
minimum conductor size such as 4/0. What is more a c u l t is to
make the determination ifit will be economicallyjustifiable to
provide the larger cable sizes necessary to prevent short circuit
damage €or all low voltage circuits.
4. Overcurrent Protective Device Considerations
Ideally it should be possible to select a wire or cable size
based on the load and environmental conditions and then to
provide a matchug overcurrent protective device (setting).
Unfwtunatly, the existing rules in the NEC and other standards
are sufficiently complex that it is possible to have a branch
circuit or f& circuit where the conductor size must be
increased because of the (setting of) the overcurrent protective
device. This occurs most often when using molded case breakers
that have a fmed ratmg. In general, the NEC requires that the
wire or cable ampacity be at least equal to the “next smaller
standard device r a m . ”
Thus another feature needed in a cable sizing tool is the
ability to check the cable ampacity against the long time setting
(or continuous current r a w ) of the circuit overcurrent protective
device.
5. Insulation Material Considerations As is the case for other evaluation, data is needed in order to
In most projects there are no special restrictions on the choice proceed. For an economic evaluation the following must be
of wire or cable insulating materials. So long as the material is known:
recognized by the applicable standards, the choice can be based 4 The cost of energy, includmg some estimate of the change in
on economics. However, the following types of installations will this cost over time.
restrict the choice of materials: 4 The expected load (current) on the circuit and the number of
Where the insulation is exposed to the effects of weather hours per year that the load will be operating.
and direct solar radiation (such as an outdoor cable tray or a 4 The length on the circuit.
pole line). 4 The cost of the alternative materials per unit length. This
Where the insulation is subject to periodic or continuous includes both the wire or cable and the raceway alternative.
immersion in water (such as in a duct bank or direct burial). 4 The method of installation, the type of raceway, and the
Where the conductor insulation or cablejacket will be difficulty of installation includmg the height or difficulty of
exposed of oil or petroleum vapors. access. Thls can very with both the type and size of wire
Where the circuits will be routed through a cable tray (or and the type of raceway.
other open support structure) within an ventilation plenum. e The labor effort associated with the method of installation
Where certainmaterials are restricted to avoid major and difjkulty on installation.
economic consequences in the event of a fre. For example, e The cost and productivity of labor for the project location.
many power generation facilities and computer centers As is obvious from the length of the a b v e list, making an
restrict the use of PVC cable insulation because of the economic evaluation can be difficult and expensive. As a result
corrosive vapors that result when the material is burned. these evaluations are usually only made for large feeder circuits.
These special situation normally do not require any specific However, if a good PC based tool is available and the data has
analysis, but it is important to ensure that they have been been collected for those large circuits, smaller circuits can often
considered when selecting the type of wire or cable and type of be evaluated for a reasonable amount of effort in data collection.
raceway or support. One of the functions of a good PC based
tool is the formal documentation that these factors have been DESIGN OF COMPUTER BASED TOOL
considered. The best way to start the development of any computer based
tool is to define the output that the tool is to produce. This
6. Economic Considerations output is what provides value. Focusing on this output will focus
The objective of any economic evaluation depends to some on the real requirements for the tool.
extent on wfio is paying for the study and who is paying for the During the author's work on the development of a PC based
actual wire and cable. Ideally, studies should be aimed at tool, the needs of different type of projects defined the need for
minimizing the life cycle cost of a project. Thus the study should several different types of output. The following is a summary of
include the cost of the material (wire and cable), the cost of the types of projects and the nature of the printed outputs that
installation, and the cost of the energy lost in the cables over the
life of the facility. Simple commercial A list of the feeder circuits with
Tlus last consideration,the cost of the energy lost, is often facilities: the sue of wire for the type of
left out of evaluations. There are several reasons for this. First, wire insulation selected for the
the designer is often placed in a commercial position where there project. Branch circuits sizes are
is an economic incentive to "izethe construction cost with based simply on the panel board
no incentive to minimize the ultimate operating cost. In breaker r a m .
addition, it is often difficult to define a meanin@ operating cost Industrial facilities A list of the feeder and large
different between two alternatives. For example, consider a and large branch circuits with wire or cable
branch circuit that feeds receptacles used primarily for commercial projects: sue and a brief indication of the
incandescent lighting. Increasing the conductor size for this basis for the selected sue.
branch circuit will reduce the losses in the circuit; however, the Where alternatives are
total epergy used by the circuit may actually increase very considered these can be listed
slightly because incandescent lamps are essentially constant separately.
resistance devices. Further how do you estimate the amount and Power generation, The same listing described for
type of lights that will actually be connected to a circuit that government, and industrial facilities supplemented
feeds convenience receptacles? On the other hand, branch specialty projects: with a worksheet for each circuit
circuits that supply fixed VA loads such as permanently installed that defines all of the evaluations
motors can be evaluated and the results are sometimes performed by the computer and
surprising. the results of these evaluations.

2345
 The design of the outputs is presently in progress has taken a
considerable effort. There is a constant conflict between the
need for brevity and simplicity and the need to inform users of
the details of the process used for the wire or cable selection.
One of the solutions available with the PC is to provide some of
the detailed information as a screen display so that the user can
understand details of the evaluation, while still keeping the
printed output in a .summary form.
Once the nature and content of the outputs have been defined
it is possible to determine the data that must be provided to the
program to produce the required output. In order to design a tool
that is usable by a variety of types of projects, the authors have
suMvided the data into the following categories:
0 Project options including the codes and standards that
apply, the preferred materials, default values for criteria
such as allowable percent of voltage drop, and whether
economic evaluations are to be included.
Library data including the requirements of the various d e s
and material characteristics
0 Circuit specific data which can be further subdivided as
follows:
0 ’Loaddata
0 Circuit physical design data such as length
0 Environmental factors and raceways which can
include “many” d&rent combinationsof conditions
applicable to one circuit.
The third aspect of the tool design is the definition of the
general environment and the development tools to be used.
Because of the current popularity of Windows= the authors have
elected to this environment. The authors have also concluded
that all data, both input and results, should be stored in a
common database format. l h s decision is based on the previous
experience of the developers which has repeatedly shown this
approach to have many benefits and few disadvantages. The two
main advantages are the convenience of moving to a new
“plafform” when an existing “plafform becomes obsolete and the
ability to link the results of applications together.
The choice of development tools has been more difficult.
The use of a standard database tool such as Microsoft AccessTM
has the advantage of permitting easy development of output
reports and data input screen forms. The use of a more general
purpose programming tool such as Microsoft Visual BasicTM
provides more flexibility and better performance (speed). The
use of a mathematics engine such as Mathcadm has the
advantage of simplifyinsthe programming of complex
computations, especially those that require iterative solutions.
At this time the authors have not yet settled on a choice of
development tools since the design of the tool is just being
completed.
One of the challenges that the authors hope to address in the
design is the ability to allow the definition of the various
evaluations without changq the actual progm code. This is
very desirable because of the ever changing nature of the various
2346
d e s and standards that apply to the process of wire and cable
selection. If a suitable design can be developed the cost of
maintaining the tool w ill be greatly reduced since program
changes will not be required for each new edition of a code or
standard. A M e r incentive for the authors is that their
company is providq designs throughout the world and a rule
based design will allow the quick incorporation of the rules for
individual counties, as well as the differences in mm2cable sizes
utilized by the various countries.
CONCLUSIONS
In assembling this paper it has been the authors’ intent to
bring together in one place a clear definition of the many diverse
criteria that should be applied when selecting wire and cable for
electrical power distribution systems. A further purpose of
defining these criteria has been to defme the characteristics of a
PC based tool that is under development to facilitate the
selection of wire and cable. Without such a tool today’s system
designer cannot practically perform all the evaluations necessary
to properly perform wire and cable selection.
Perhaps a larger reveiation in assembling this paper has been
the lack of any type of comprehensive guide to performing such a
basic task as cable sizing. The sheer number of simplifying
tables that are available has been overwhelming. Having to
investigate the details and design basis behind these tabies
which has made the authors realize how much has usually been
taken for granted.
In the interest of minimizing cost during the design phase of
a project, m p l e tables and nomograms are hard to beat, and the
authors are not suggesting that they need to be completely
eliminated. With the type of pc-based tool described above,
homogenous areas of a project can be fully evaluated, and then a
simple table of applicable cable sizes for given loads can be
handed to the designers who are routing the circuits. The critical
difference is that the simplified sizing table has a detailed
calculationlevaluationbehind it that adequately defines all of the
relevant design issues.
Perhaps just as important as hamg someone perform the
detailed evaluations is “gsure that all personnel involved
with cable selection are adequately indoctrinated into the
complete design process. This will enable the users of the
simplified tables to be able to identify circuits which do not fall
within the parameters and assumptions of the simplified tables
and have the necessary special evaluations performed.
In today’s environment of mobile technical personnel, it
seems that each person performs cable sizing the way he did it at
his last job. This can lead to design mors, cost inefficiencies,
and operational problems. It is time to utilize the tools that are
available to stop taking shortcuts and do it right - for such a basic
technical function as cable sizing the time is long overdue.