Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Equipment Bonding Jumper verses Equipment Grounding Conductor

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Equipment Bonding Jumper verses Equipment Grounding Conductor

    The way I understand it the EGC is the basic effective ground fault current path and the EBJ is in addition to the EGC.
    Two questions I had were:
    Is the EBJ optional? Engineered in to provide a more effective ground fault current path?
    Is the EBJ a EGC?

    #2
    I like this question because it will probably get answers that clarify alot of misunderstanding...
    Im only stating my understanding.
    A bonding jumper is the connection between 2 things making thing nechanically conplete.
    Bonding jumpers have to happen for it to be complete..The confusion for me was a bonding jumper can be the screw that connects a lug assembly to the enclosure like in a service disconnect,,,,still i see a wire type jumper from that lug assembly to the enclosure all the time even when rhe green screw in installed. Also it could be the ground stinger from a device to the box...It depends on the grounding method when they are necessary..
    At the service the ground bushing will be there alomg with a wire bonding jumper as safe guard that it is all connected..im sure those who know will clarify it..
    The hardest faults to clear are mine

    Comment


      #3
      The NEC definition is:

      Bonding Jumper, Equipment.

      The connection between two or more portions of the equipment grounding conductor

      One example that comes to mind would be a jumper installed between connectors on a piece of Flexible Metal Conduit to continue the ground path.
      In that case, IMO, the EBJ would be also acting as an EGC.

      In some cases the EBJ is required such as in the example above (see 501.30), but I guess you are always welcome to add one when not required.


      Last edited by augie47; 02-21-15, 03:40 PM.
      At my age, I'm accustomed to restaurants asking me to pay in advance, but now my bank has started sending me their calendar one month at a time.

      Comment


        #4
        Originally posted by vergeront View Post
        Is the EBJ a EGC?
        To me they are because they are there to make sure a fault gets cleared.

        An EGC is usually thought of as wire or metal conduit while an EBJ is added to make sure the fault gets to the EGC so the fault gets cleared.
        If Billy Idol is on your playlist go reevaluate your life.

        Comment


          #5
          EBJ verses EGC

          Thank you and keep the replies coming
          I instruct 3rd year IBEW apprentices and your input is helping me to answer their questions.
          I have been teaching this grounding and bonding for 20 years and alot of changes have happened to Article 250.
          Thank you for your assistance in this EBJ verses EGC.

          Comment


            #6
            Originally posted by vergeront View Post
            The way I understand it the EGC is the basic effective ground fault current path and the EBJ is in addition to the EGC.
            Two questions I had were:
            Is the EBJ optional? Engineered in to provide a more effective ground fault current path?
            Is the EBJ a EGC?
            I think it can be a little murky as to the difference, if there is one, in some situations. Consider a 4 square box with a receptacle mounted on a raised cover with dimpled corners. No jumper is required from the box to the recep. IF you install one, what is it called? BJ, EBJ, and EGC all seem to work as a definition IMO. Another example: consider two metal raceway systems without a wire EGC, with a nonmetallic conduit between them (box on each end with the wire EGC in the nonmetallic raceway bonded to the box at each end). Is that wire EGC in fact an EBJ? Again I dont think its clear, or its both. I would have to think about it a little more to be sure, but I think we could get by without the term EBJ, just having BJ and EGC.
            Ethan Brush - East West Electric. NY, WA. MA

            "You can't generalize"

            Comment


              #7
              Originally posted by electrofelon View Post
              ...but I think we could get by without the term EBJ, just having BJ and EGC.
              I think that we would be better served by getting rid of the term EGC and replacing it with the term EBJ. (I submitted proposals for the for the 2005 code. The proposals were accepted by a majority of the members of CMP 5, but were one vote short of the 2/3s majority that is required to report a proposal as accepted.)

              The use of the word grounding in the term EGC leads many to believe that the function of that conductor is to make a connection to the earth, but that is not the function of the EGC. It is function is to bond the non-current carrying parts of the electrical system back to the main or system bonding jumper.
              Don, Illinois
              (All code citations are 2017 unless otherwise noted)

              Comment


                #8
                Originally posted by don_resqcapt19 View Post
                I think that we would be better served by getting rid of the term EGC and replacing it with the term EBJ. (I submitted proposals for the for the 2005 code. The proposals were accepted by a majority of the members of CMP 5, but were one vote short of the 2/3s majority that is required to report a proposal as accepted.)

                The use of the word grounding in the term EGC leads many to believe that the function of that conductor is to make a connection to the earth, but that is not the function of the EGC. It is function is to bond the non-current carrying parts of the electrical system back to the main or system bonding jumper.
                That is a separate discussion, but yes I am totally in agreement with you on that.
                Ethan Brush - East West Electric. NY, WA. MA

                "You can't generalize"

                Comment


                  #9
                  wow....thanks for all the response

                  Thanks for all the response this should keep me and my electrical apprentices busy for awhile.
                  yours
                  LV

                  Comment


                    #10
                    Originally posted by vergeront View Post
                    Thank you and keep the replies coming
                    I instruct 3rd year IBEW apprentices and your input is helping me to answer their questions.
                    I have been teaching this grounding and bonding for 20 years and alot of changes have happened to Article 250.
                    Thank you for your assistance in this EBJ verses EGC.
                    Do you think teaching 250 is easier given the changes or harder?
                    If Billy Idol is on your playlist go reevaluate your life.

                    Comment


                      #11
                      Originally posted by don_resqcapt19 View Post
                      I think that we would be better served by getting rid of the term EGC and replacing it with the term EBJ. (I submitted proposals for the for the 2005 code. The proposals were accepted by a majority of the members of CMP 5, but were one vote short of the 2/3s majority that is required to report a proposal as accepted.)

                      The use of the word grounding in the term EGC leads many to believe that the function of that conductor is to make a connection to the earth, but that is not the function of the EGC. It is function is to bond the non-current carrying parts of the electrical system back to the main or system bonding jumper.
                      We've gone round and round on this more than once, but you fired first this time, so here I go.....

                      I think the term "grounded" is where the confusion stems. As soon as put "equipment" and "grounded" together you get "equipment grounding conductor" and the distinction is easily understood. We do it all the time on this forum already. I can explain proper equipment grounding to a farmer and he will get it.

                      Right now in this thread we have an instructor asking about EBJ vs. EGC. They serve the same purpose. Has 250 been made better by sprinkling in bonding here and there when what is being done is equipment grounding? I don't think so.
                      If Billy Idol is on your playlist go reevaluate your life.

                      Comment


                        #12
                        You would think that being able to sort though all the parallel paths of verbiage...(little humor ) we would be highly paid to sort through it all or be the first to realize that an effective path (understanding ) would be priority
                        The hardest faults to clear are mine

                        Comment


                          #13
                          Originally posted by electricalist View Post
                          You would think that being able to sort though all the parallel paths of verbiage...(little humor ) we would be highly paid to sort through it all or be the first to realize that an effective path (understanding ) would be priority
                          And you would hope that that those who don't make it a priority to get clear on that understanding would be sent off to join the concrete crew.
                          If Billy Idol is on your playlist go reevaluate your life.

                          Comment


                            #14
                            NEC 2014 Article 250 eaiser or harder to teach

                            Article 250 has always been a challenge to teach. Its kind of like bible studies; there are so many interpretations of the rulings, and then the exceptions to the rulings. Don't even get me started on the interpretations of the OSHA and 70E changes and rulings. I teach those as well.
                            I want my electrical journeymen and apprentices as safe as possible that my bottom line.
                            And all these rulings are just minimum requirements that's a grade "C"
                            I love the history of the CMP please give me more of the background of the changes proposed and the history of our EGC and EBJ
                            Thank you all for helping me out
                            yours
                            LV

                            Comment


                              #15
                              Originally posted by ActionDave View Post
                              And you would hope that that those who don't make it a priority to get clear on that understanding would be sent off to join the concrete crew.
                              I hope my comment wasnt taken as trash talking.. It wasnt. I was trying to show the humor of parallel paths and the irony that the language reads like they are parallels. Prority in understanding I think starts with nec. No disrespect to any person in this trade, yet there are many 10 yr or more guys who don't fully grasp what to bond where to bond how to bond including myself. If it wasn't for you guys and my 2014 handbook I'd be sent to the concrete crew.
                              Without examples all things are open to interpretation. The only other way to know is to ask the author,be the author,or through inspection which is even more an interpretation factor....
                              To the op good luck best wishes to the students
                              The hardest faults to clear are mine

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X