Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

MC connector

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

    #31
    I agreed that the article is better off using the standard terminology, i.e Armor grounding wire instead of cable armor in the context, for less confusing. My point is that even if a legitimate Armor Grounding Wire was used for GEC, and only the bare copper wire was clamped to the grounding electrode, then it is a violation. Only when the steel armor and the copper wire were clamped together at both ends – bonding the armor to the copper wire – then this is compliant.

    NEC says:
    1) Armor grounding Wire: the steel armor must be bonded to the copper wire at both ends
    2) GEC with steel conduit: the steel conduit must be bonded to the copper wire at both ends

    Comment


      #32
      Originally posted by Brian Dang View Post
      My point is that even if a legitimate Armor Grounding Wire was used for GEC, and only the bare copper wire was clamped to the grounding electrode, then it is a violation.
      A violation of what? Please cite chapter and verse.

      Originally posted by Brian Dang View Post
      Only when the steel armor and the copper wire were clamped together at both ends – bonding the armor to the copper wire – then this is compliant.
      And where is this written in the NEC specifically with respect to Armored Grounding Wire?

      Originally posted by Brian Dang View Post
      NEC says:
      1) Armor grounding Wire: the steel armor must be bonded to the copper wire at both ends
      Please provide actual citations from the NEC instead of a paraphrase.
      Another Al in Minnesota

      Comment


        #33
        Originally posted by Brian Dang View Post
        I agreed that the article is better off using the standard terminology, i.e Armor grounding wire instead of cable armor in the context, for less confusing.
        "standard terminology" . . . i.e. what you claim it should mean. I understand that you want different words in the NEC than are there. But the words that are there are the legally adopted and enforceable words. . . period.

        What you are being shown is what I understand as a "Code silence". Armored Grounding Wire, KDER, is not spoken of with respect to bonding of armor to conductor or to enclosure, either DO or NOT DO.
        Another Al in Minnesota

        Comment


          #34
          A picture is worth a thousand words.

          http://www.mvpllc.org/mvp99.html

          Why people went through the trouble of making this clamp and bonding the steel armor to the conductor if not needed?
          Attached Files

          Comment


            #35
            Originally posted by Brian Dang View Post
            A picture is worth a thousand words.

            http://www.mvpllc.org/mvp99.html

            Why people went through the trouble of making this clamp and bonding the steel armor to the conductor if not needed?
            Kerney connectors are made too, but aren't needed or required.
            Just because something is made doesn't mean it's required.
            Tim
            Master Electrician
            New England
            Yesterday's Technology at Tomorrow's Prices

            Comment


              #36
              Originally posted by Brian Dang View Post
              A picture is worth a thousand words.

              http://www.mvpllc.org/mvp99.html

              Why people went through the trouble of making this clamp and bonding the steel armor to the conductor if not needed?
              As Al has requested please cite the NEC section you feel requires this.

              Comment


                #37
                Talk about making a mountain out of a molehill. I've only encountered this armored ground conductor once and I used a regular MC cable clamp for it. Thankfully it's extremely uncommon in my area and really serves no purpose.

                Comment


                  #38
                  1)
                  http://www.ospmag.com/issue/article/032012-McCarty
                  From NEC 2011, 250.64 Grounding Electrode Conductor Installation.
                  “ it shall be protected in rigid metal conduit (RMC), intermediate metal conduit, (IMC) rigid polyvinyl conduit (PVC), reinforced thermosetting resin conduit (RTRC), electrical metallic tubing (EMT), or cable armor.”

                  2)
                  https://www.mikeholt.com/videodispla...hp?pageid=4139
                  (E) Enclosures for Grounding Electrode Conductor. Ferrous (iron/steel) raceways, boxes, and enclosures containing the grounding electrode conductors must have each end of the ferrous metal raceway, box, and enclosure bonded to the grounding electrode conductor [250.92(A)(3)]. Figure 250.115

                  From (1) I interpret cable armor as an enclosure for GEC. And (2) says it must have each end bonded to the GEC.

                  Enough to satisfy everyone? For me I think this is more than enough to say that Al's Armored Grounding Wire must have each end of the armor bonded to GEC, unless Al can show that said armored grounding wire assembled at the factory already having each end of the steel armor bonded to the inside conductor.

                  Comment


                    #39
                    Originally posted by Brian Dang View Post
                    1)
                    http://www.ospmag.com/issue/article/032012-McCarty
                    From NEC 2011, 250.64 Grounding Electrode Conductor Installation.
                    “ it shall be protected in rigid metal conduit (RMC), intermediate metal conduit, (IMC) rigid polyvinyl conduit (PVC), reinforced thermosetting resin conduit (RTRC), electrical metallic tubing (EMT), or cable armor.”

                    2)
                    https://www.mikeholt.com/videodispla...hp?pageid=4139
                    (E) Enclosures for Grounding Electrode Conductor. Ferrous (iron/steel) raceways, boxes, and enclosures containing the grounding electrode conductors must have each end of the ferrous metal raceway, box, and enclosure bonded to the grounding electrode conductor [250.92(A)(3)]. Figure 250.115

                    From (1) I interpret cable armor as an enclosure for GEC.
                    Please read the Article 100 Definition of "Enclosure". I have already shown you the NFPA Glossary definition of "Cable". . . you are absolutely grasping at straws and need to settle into the fundamental definitions.

                    Originally posted by Brian Dang View Post
                    And (2) says it must have each end bonded to the GEC.
                    Yes (2) does say that for boxes, enclosures and raceways, NONE of which is Armored Grounding Wire, KDER.

                    Originally posted by Brian Dang View Post
                    Enough to satisfy everyone? For me I think this is more than enough to say that Al's Armored Grounding Wire must have each end of the armor bonded to GEC, unless Al can show that said armored grounding wire assembled at the factory already having each end of the steel armor bonded to the inside conductor.
                    All the Code you are struggling with is old and settled. Armored Grounding Wire, KDER, is an old and understood product. There is a reason the Code is silent. The Armor and the bare Grounding wire, TOGETHER, are Grounding and Bonding Equipment. As a case in point of that, your reference to the MVP99 clamp includes the instructions:

                    11. No need for Armor removal from the wire.
                    Another Al in Minnesota

                    Comment


                      #40
                      "[COLOR=#333333]The [/COLOR]Code is silent about bonding the armor of Armored Grounding Wire to the wire contained in the armor."

                      The code was not created to deal with a brand device. The code says all ferrous metallic enclosure must be bonded at each end to the GEC, regardless if General Electric or Lockheed made the enclosures. The AHJ is there to decide your Armored Grounding wire was properly bonded or not. We can do it right the first time, or fix it the next time.

                      Comment


                        #41
                        Originally posted by Brian Dang View Post
                        The code was not created to deal with a brand device.

                        Armored Grounding Wire, KDER, is NOT a "brand device".
                        Another Al in Minnesota

                        Comment


                          #42
                          Al,

                          Do you have a datasheet showing the Armored Grounding Wire already have each end of the armor bonded to the inside copper conductor, or the armor is not ferrous metal? If not then it's just a GEC inside a ferrous enclosure.

                          Comment


                            #43
                            Originally posted by Brian Dang View Post
                            Al,

                            Do you have a datasheet showing the Armored Grounding Wire already have each end of the armor bonded to the inside copper conductor, or the armor is not ferrous metal? If not then it's just a GEC inside a ferrous enclosure.
                            Grasping at straws. Did you go to 110.28 and to Table 110.28?

                            You are making up your own definitions.
                            Another Al in Minnesota

                            Comment


                              #44
                              Originally posted by Brian Dang View Post
                              Al,

                              Do you have a datasheet showing the Armored Grounding Wire already have each end of the armor bonded to the inside copper conductor, or the armor is not ferrous metal? If not then it's just a GEC inside a ferrous enclosure.
                              Brian, can you not accept the fact that, under the UL product description the KDER is armored wire, not cable with armor? It is a different category and may therefore be treated differently. Now if the wire inside the armor were insulated (i.e. if the product were in fact cable) then I might reach a different conclusion.

                              Comment


                                #45
                                Originally posted by GoldDigger View Post
                                Brian, can you not accept the fact that, under the UL product description the KDER is armored wire, not cable with armor? It is a different category and may therefore be treated differently. Now if the wire inside the armor were insulated (i.e. if the product were in fact cable) then I might reach a different conclusion.
                                I'm not trying to argue with anyone here. I'm here to learn and to share. I could be total wrong, but the code below was not talking about cable with armor. I read it as a special enclosure to house the GEC inside. If not, what exactly the "cable armor" the code talking about?

                                [COLOR=#333333]From [/COLOR]NEC 2011, 250.64 Grounding Electrode Conductor Installation.
                                “ it shall be protected in rigid metal conduit (RMC), intermediate metal conduit, (IMC) rigid polyvinyl conduit (PVC), reinforced thermosetting resin conduit (RTRC), electrical metallic tubing (EMT), or cable armor.”

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X