likely to become energized

Status
Not open for further replies.

infinity

Moderator
Staff member
Location
New Jersey
Occupation
Journeyman Electrician
In my book the word likely means that there is a very good possibility that it will happen. In the real world I don't see much that is likely to become energized unless it's intentional.
 

Ponchik

Senior Member
Location
CA
Occupation
Electronologist
IMO, Gas piping, A/C ducting, water pipes are likley to become energized.

Of course if the EGC is present the breaker will open and clear the fault.
 

don_resqcapt19

Moderator
Staff member
Location
Illinois
Occupation
retired electrician
CMP 5 says "likely to become energized" means the same as "may become energized". Any conductive object "may become energiezed" but few conductive objects are "likely to become energized"
 

don_resqcapt19

Moderator
Staff member
Location
Illinois
Occupation
retired electrician
IMO, Gas piping, A/C ducting, water pipes are likley to become energized. ...
In my opinion those things are not "likely to become energized". Is it possible that they will become energized, sure it is, but just because it is possible, does not make it likely.
 

Ponchik

Senior Member
Location
CA
Occupation
Electronologist
The way that I see it:
"Likely to become energized" refers to a piping or ducting that is part of a system that is connected to a voltage source. for example, gas piping that is connected to a furnace, ducting that is connected to a furnace, gas piping that is connected to a stove with an electric ignitor.


The gas piping system that is connected to a water heater only, is not likely to become energized.
 

SG-1

Senior Member
Soares states on page 27 of the Tenth Edition of Soares Book on Grounding & Bonding that the term is included in Annex B of the NEC Style Manual as a standard term meaning "failure of insulation on."
 

infinity

Moderator
Staff member
Location
New Jersey
Occupation
Journeyman Electrician
As best I can tell "likely to become energized" in the NEC means there is a remote chance of it happening.

I would call that "unlikely" to become energized. :)

IMO the phrase likely to become energized, as used by the NEC, is completely inaccurate as to what it's intended meaning is.
 

don_resqcapt19

Moderator
Staff member
Location
Illinois
Occupation
retired electrician
I would call that "unlikely" to become energized. :)

IMO the phrase likely to become energized, as used by the NEC, is completely inaccurate as to what it's intended meaning is.
Older editions of the NEC used the term "may become energized". That is the intent of the code rule and it should have never been changed from "may become energized" to "likely to become energized".
 

don_resqcapt19

Moderator
Staff member
Location
Illinois
Occupation
retired electrician
Soares states on page 27 of the Tenth Edition of Soares Book on Grounding & Bonding that the term is included in Annex B of the NEC Style Manual as a standard term meaning "failure of insulation on."
That makes even less sense. The items that are likely to become energized and require bonding by the code rules are typically not objects that are insulated.
 

Dennis Alwon

Moderator
Staff member
Location
Chapel Hill, NC
Occupation
Retired Electrical Contractor
The way that I see it:
"Likely to become energized" refers to a piping or ducting that is part of a system that is connected to a voltage source. for example, gas piping that is connected to a furnace, ducting that is connected to a furnace, gas piping that is connected to a stove with an electric ignitor.


The gas piping system that is connected to a water heater only, is not likely to become energized.

That is how the cmp members at our yearly meeting in Raleigh explain it. Yet we would still have to bond the water pipes even if it is only connected to a gas water heater
 

suemarkp

Senior Member
Location
Kent, WA
Occupation
Retired Engineer
That makes even less sense. The items that are likely to become energized and require bonding by the code rules are typically not objects that are insulated.
I think what they are trying to say is a motor or pump is likely to have insulation failure at some point in its life. This motor or pump is well connected to metal ducts, housings, pipes, etc so they are likely to become energized.

In order to properly bond some of these items, you need to know the size of the circuit likely to energize it. With a pump or motor, it is obvious. But if someone laid a bunch of cables over a pipe, duct run, or metal rack, are those cables likely to abrade and touch the metal? Do I need to check the breakers on all of those cables to find the largest one so I can bond per 250.122?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top