Professional cable manufacturer
Picking a cable by ampacity alone is how feeders survive the load and fail the fault. Here's the full sizing story — I²t withstand, voltage-drop limits and the economic current density that saves you money every year.
Industrial Feeder Sizing & VerificationHere's the uncomfortable truth about cable sizing: ampacity — the table everyone uses — answers only one question ("will it overheat at rated load?"), and it says nothing about the other three questions that actually decide whether a feeder survives its working life. Will it survive the fault? Will the voltage stay within limits at the far end? And is the size economic, or are you paying for years of avoidable losses?
I've lost count of the projects where a feeder sized "correctly" by the ampacity table failed its short-circuit check by a factor of ten, or ran a motor so far from the substation that the motor saw brown-out voltage at full load. The thing is, the check takes five minutes once you know the method — it's just never on the shortcut that procurement hands you.
This guide walks through all four sizing criteria with the equations and worked examples, in the order a competent engineer actually applies them.
Every feeder must pass all four. Ampacity is necessary but never sufficient.
| # | Criterion | It answers | Primary reference |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Ampacity (continuous load) | Will it overheat at rated load? | IEC 60364-5-52 / IEC 60287 |
| 2 | Short-circuit thermal withstand | Will it survive the fault? | Adiabatic equation (I²t), IEC 60949 |
| 3 | Voltage drop | Will the far end stay in limits? | IEC 60364-5-52, BS 7671 |
| 4 | Economic current density | Is this the cheapest size over life? | IEC 60287-3-2 |
| Criteria 2–4 routinely change the size selected. Ampacity gives you a floor, not an answer. | |||
For faults up to about 5 seconds, treat the heating as adiabatic — all the fault energy goes into raising the conductor temperature, and none escapes.
Under a short circuit the conductor must absorb the fault's thermal energy without its temperature rising beyond the insulation's limit. The adiabatic equation puts it in one formula:
where I is the fault current (A), t the fault duration (s), S the conductor cross-section (mm²), and k a constant set by the conductor material and insulation. The check: the cable's withstand (k²S²) must exceed the energy the protective device lets through (I²t).
| Insulation | Copper (Cu) k | Aluminium (Al) k | Copper thermal window |
|---|---|---|---|
| PVC | 115 | 76 | 70°C → 160°C (>300 mm²: 140°C) |
| XLPE | 143 | 94 | 90°C → 250°C |
| k values per IEC 60949 short-circuit calculation practice. The k itself derives from material properties: k = 226·√(ln(1+(θf−θi)/(234.5+θi))) for copper. | |||
A 4 mm² PVC/Cu control feeder, prospective fault 6,000 A, protective device clearing in 0.08 s:
A feeder can be thermally perfect and still starve the load at the far end of a long run.
Voltage drop is the easiest criterion to neglect and the hardest to excuse, because it's pure geometry. For a three-phase feeder:
Design limits vary by national code and client specification — many installations use a 3–5% range (e.g. 4% for feeders, 3% for lighting in some codes), and the governing limit is the applicable national installation code and client specification. Motors are even more demanding — most tolerate 5% at their terminals, but every volt lost at the feeder is a volt the motor doesn't get.
Worked example: 400 V three-phase, 35 mm² copper, 100 A, 200 m run, cosφ 0.8. Working-temperature resistance ≈ 0.6 mΩ/m, reactance ≈ 0.08 mΩ/m:
Step up to 50 mm² (≈0.44 mΩ/m working): Vd ≈ 13.9 V ≈ 3.5% — within limit. Same load, same duty; the 200 m run forces a size the ampacity table never would have.
Once the cable is safe, the economic question takes over: which size is cheapest over its life, including energy losses?
Ampacity and voltage drop pick a minimum. Economics picks the optimum — the size where initial cost plus the present value of I²R losses is lowest. IEC 60287-3-2 formalises this, and it routinely lands one or more sizes above the minimum, because losses are paid in operating hours, year after year.
As a fast engineering rule of thumb, copper feeders are economic around 1.5–3 A/mm² (the classic German/VDE practice band). A feeder drawing 100 A sits economically around 35–70 mm² — while the ampacity minimum might have been 25 mm². The larger size costs a little more today and saves the difference in energy, every year, for the cable's whole life. (Note: for intermittent loads or emergency feeders, economic current density models may not apply — ampacity and voltage drop govern.)
Every sizing calculation is only as good as the data it uses.
| Characteristic | Market commodity | SORIVO grade |
|---|---|---|
| Conductor resistance data | Generic table | Per-lot measured values on request |
| Short-circuit data (k, ratings) | Not supplied | Adiabatic withstand figures in technical data |
| Voltage-drop / reactance data | Not supplied | R and X values per size and construction |
| Certification | Self-declared | Third-party tested (IEC / UL / TÜV where applicable) |
| Engineering support | Datasheet download | Application engineers for sizing verification |
| Sorivo publishes the engineering data engineers actually need and will confirm sizing calculations with our application team. | ||
Need technical data you can calculate with?
Request the Sorivo technical datasheets — resistance, reactance, short-circuit data — and our engineers will help verify your sizing.

Sources & method: Short-circuit thermal withstand calculated via the adiabatic equation per IEC 60949 (Calculation of thermally permissible short-circuit currents, taking into account non-adiabatic heating effects), with k values per IEC 60949 and the tables of IEC 60364-5-54 (Clause 543.1) / BS 7671 Reg. 434.5.2 / 543.1.3. k derivation: k = 226·√(ln(1+(θf−θi)/(234.5+θi))) for copper. Voltage-drop limits per the applicable national installation code (e.g. IEC 60364-5-52 / BS 7671), which vary by jurisdiction; economic sizing per IEC 60287-3-2, with the 1.5–3 A/mm² band as established engineering practice for copper feeders. Worked examples use stated assumptions; verify against your protective-device data and plant conditions.