10 Ground ran free air

Status
Not open for further replies.
I was trying to find where it might not be legal to run #10 ground wire in free air in a drop ceiling, but couldn't. Only article I found was NEC 2008 250.120(C). As long its not subject to physical damage I guess it's legal.

I thought it had to be in raceway or cable, if I'm over looking something let me know. I guess I may not like it, but its acceptacle. I dont want some 'hack' cutting it for no reason, Ive seen this happen before!!

This is for bonding of panels emergency and normal in a hospital.

Would 250.102(E) be the violation??
 
Last edited:

LEO2854

Esteemed Member
Location
Ma
I was trying to find where it might not be legal to run #10 ground wire in free air in a drop ceiling, but couldn't. Only article I found was NEC 2008 250.120(C). As long its not subject to physical damage I guess it's legal.

I thought it had to be in raceway or cable, if I'm over looking something let me know. I guess I may not like it, but its acceptacle. I dont want some 'hack' cutting it for no reason, Ive seen this happen before!!

This is for bonding of panels emergency and normal in a hospital.

Would 250.102(E) be the violation??

Read 517.62 and 501.30
 

iwire

Moderator
Staff member
Location
Massachusetts
Explain why it would not, this a 'bonding' conductor according to 517.4. NEC 250.102(E) deals with the installation of bonding jumpers.

The entire section you point out (250.102) is specifically for 'equipment bonding jumpers' that are intended to carry fault current it tells how to size them and install them.

The conductor you are talking about more closely resembles the bonding conductor around a pool that is used to keep all items at equal potential.

Would you say 250.102 applies to the bonding jumper at a pool?

What do you see as the electrical safety issue running it 'free air' just like a GEC is run in many cases?
 

raider1

Senior Member
Staff member
Location
Logan, Utah
The entire section you point out (250.102) is specifically for 'equipment bonding jumpers' that are intended to carry fault current it tells how to size them and install them.

The conductor you are talking about more closely resembles the bonding conductor around a pool that is used to keep all items at equal potential.

Would you say 250.102 applies to the bonding jumper at a pool?

What do you see as the electrical safety issue running it 'free air' just like a GEC is run in many cases?

I agree with Bob.

The bonding conductor required by 517.14 is to limit voltage gradients between the different electrical systems in a hospital.

The bonding conductor is not there to carry fault current.

Chris
 
The entire section you point out (250.102) is specifically for 'equipment bonding jumpers' that are intended to carry fault current it tells how to size them and install them.

The conductor you are talking about more closely resembles the bonding conductor around a pool that is used to keep all items at equal potential.

Would you say 250.102 applies to the bonding jumper at a pool?

What do you see as the electrical safety issue running it 'free air' just like a GEC is run in many cases?

I do not believe that section 250.102 is limited to just 'fault current' bonding jumpers. just because a section lists a sizes etc.. doen't mean it doesn't deal with others that are not, so I believe its dealing with BOTH fault current bonding jumpers and non current carrying jumpers. As we have bonding jumpers serve 'both' the purposes.

Bonding (bonding jumper and ebj) is clearly defined in NEC 2008 100. NEC 2008 90.3 states that chapters 1-4 apply except as amended by chapters 5,6, and 7. NEC 2008 517.14 does not omit 250.102(E) nor have I found any other section of 517 that would, if anything it was more 'strict' rather than less lenient. 517.14 tells what size (#10 copper insulated conductor) to run because this 'bonding' jumper is not part of a 'circuit' as if it were, then you would size it accordingly to 250 becuase it would 'still' be the default section. 250.102(D). Therefore one would have to default to that section dealing with bonding jumpers on how to install them as 90.3 states.

I understand perfectly the difference in 'equalizing potential' and using something to open a breaker/fuse for overcurrent (egc). I know this bonding here is just to keep the potential/voltages the same for the normal and emergency panels and circuits serving patient vicinity areas.

The safety issue I have is that sometimes Ive seen where people have 'spliced' into this bonding wire (its suppose to be continous per 517.14) with wire nuts for 'other circuits' :( a HACK!! . Also, sometimes they run it in a plenum celieing and the wire is not rated for that enviroment (heat exchange etc..).

This is to help protect a patient/person when they tend to be more vulnerable (in a hospital of all places), and if 250.120 would require a 'egc' (yes I know the difference between an 'egc' and 'bonding')smaller than #6 to be protected, how much more so for a patient care 'bonding' conductor.

I appreciate the responses though, I still read that article differently. Also for the pool, I always seen 'a grid' and the bonding jumpers were no smaller than #8 and they were never over six feet long when connecting to the grid and metal around a pool. Maybe i just havent seen enough pools built.
 

iwire

Moderator
Staff member
Location
Massachusetts
Brother ignore my answers, I am just an electrician.

However Chris is an inspector, a plans examiner and a big wheel in the IAEI, I think you would be foolish to ignore what he has to say.
 
Brother ignore my answers, I am just an electrician.

However Chris is an inspector, a plans examiner and a big wheel in the IAEI, I think you would be foolish to ignore what he has to say.

No one is 'ignoring' your answers bob or anyone elses. I suppose you didn't see my 'appreciation for the responses. I just have a difference of opinion in how the NEC is written on this particular issue and now Im being called foolish. Maybe the wording can be written more clearly in the NEC in particular case to avoid any issue like other wordings.

You tend to seem to 'attack' me (from private messages to public post)alot concerning some of my post, and maybe this one will be 'deleted as well' (even though it is electrically answering the question), but maybe you can just ignore them and not answer any of them if you take offense to any of my opinions.

Have a good day.
 

hurk27

Senior Member
I will try to shed a little light on why many will have a misunderstanding of what the NEC requires.

First we must look at article 90.3 to understand how the NEC is layed out, and also how articles can affect other articles:

90.3 Code Arrangement.
This Code is divided into the introduction and nine chapters, as shown in Figure 90.3. Chapters 1, 2, 3, and 4 apply generally; Chapters 5, 6, and 7 apply to special occupancies, special equipment, or other special conditions. These latter chapters supplement or modify the general rules. Chapters 1 through 4 apply except as amended by Chapters 5, 6, and 7 for the particular conditions.

So we can see that chapters, 5, 6, and 7 can supplement or modify requirements of chapters 1-4 we see this in the equal potential bonding of a pool, similar to the subject at hand.

Do we have to follow 250.102(E) for pool bonding? no because 680 is allowed to modify it, this is the same misunderstanding that you have with 517.14, it has its own requirements and modifies the requirement in chapter 2.


We must remember we are all here to learn, we must keep an open mind when we read these pages, the responses might not always be the correct one, but if you do the research (look up the answers) and present additional questions in the post, you can achieve the ultimate goal of finding the real answer. many of us try to get members to look things up on their own to better their learning rather then just give them an answer, it helps the answer to stick better into the brain.

But you must also approach all questions and answers with an open mind, always keep in the back of your mind what you have always thought was right might just not be, I hear the statement "we have done it that way for over 25 years" well it just means you may or may not have done it wrong over 25 years.

I have been on this board for a long time, I still get called out on opinions I have, and request to back it up, I don't get upset with this just because I know I can be wrong and it is a good method for me to learn the truth to the real answer.

Open Minds are a learning mind.
Closed minds have been blocked from learning anything more.
Which do you want to be?

Just a little note that I hope it can help some one down the line with learning.
 
Last edited:

raider1

Senior Member
Staff member
Location
Logan, Utah
I do not believe that section 250.102 is limited to just 'fault current' bonding jumpers. just because a section lists a sizes etc.. doen't mean it doesn't deal with others that are not, so I believe its dealing with BOTH fault current bonding jumpers and non current carrying jumpers. As we have bonding jumpers serve 'both' the purposes.

A big problem with trying to use 250.102 is that the title of 250.102 is "Equipment bonding jumpers". Nowhere in 517.14 is the conductor used to connect the the panelboards together refer to as an equipment bonding jumper.

Bonding (bonding jumper and ebj) is clearly defined in NEC 2008 100. NEC 2008 90.3 states that chapters 1-4 apply except as amended by chapters 5,6, and 7. NEC 2008 517.14 does not omit 250.102(E) nor have I found any other section of 517 that would, if anything it was more 'strict' rather than less lenient. 517.14 tells what size (#10 copper insulated conductor) to run because this 'bonding' jumper is not part of a 'circuit' as if it were, then you would size it accordingly to 250 becuase it would 'still' be the default section. 250.102(D). Therefore one would have to default to that section dealing with bonding jumpers on how to install them as 90.3 states.

Here is the definition of equipment bonding jumper.

Bonding Jumper, Equipment. The connection between two
or more portions of the equipment grounding conductor

I don't see where the conductor in 517.14 is part of the equipment grounding conductor.

The safety issue I have is that sometimes Ive seen where people have 'spliced' into this bonding wire (its suppose to be continous per 517.14) with wire nuts for 'other circuits' :( a HACK!! . Also, sometimes they run it in a plenum celieing and the wire is not rated for that enviroment (heat exchange etc..).

That violation is already taken care of in the text of 517.14

This is to help protect a patient/person when they tend to be more vulnerable (in a hospital of all places), and if 250.120 would require a 'egc' (yes I know the difference between an 'egc' and 'bonding')smaller than #6 to be protected, how much more so for a patient care 'bonding' conductor.

I appreciate the responses though, I still read that article differently. Also for the pool, I always seen 'a grid' and the bonding jumpers were no smaller than #8 and they were never over six feet long when connecting to the grid and metal around a pool. Maybe i just havent seen enough pools built.

If you feel this is an issue I would recommend submitting a proposal for the 2014 code.

Chris
 
517.12 Wiring Methods. Except as modified in this article, wiring methods shall comply with the applicable requirements of Chapter 1 through 4 of this Code.
This is in conjunction with 90.3.

517.14 requires an insulated, continuous copper conductor installed between the panelboards, connecting the equipment grounding terminal buses. Notice the term 'connected', prior to '08, the term was 'bonded'. The change in the term is to align the wording with the new definition of Bonded.

Notice that 517.14 does not specify how the conductor is to be installed.
If we wanted to make a large stretch, possibly 300.3(B)??????

I also checked several Standards and found no reference to the method required.

**Just for the record, I also see no relation to the 250.102 reference in regards to 517.14.
 
"Bonding Conductors" actually have 3 purposes in the NEC

1. Continuity of the grounding system, keeping all metallic parts as close to zero potential with the earth.

2. Bonding of metallic parts together, forming an "effective ground fault current path, helping to facilitate the opening of the overcurrent protective device.

3. Creating an equipotential bonding grid (plane) so that no portion of the grid/plane will have a potential of difference.


Understanding which purpose the NEC intends based on the different sections is what gives us an idea of how to apply the NEC. Understanding the principle of Grounding and Bonding becomes easier once we can sort these principles. ;)
 

jusme123

Senior Member
Location
NY
Occupation
JW
A big problem with trying to use 250.102 is that the title of 250.102 is "Equipment bonding jumpers". Nowhere in 517.14 is the conductor used to connect the the panelboards together refer to as an equipment bonding jumper.



Here is the definition of equipment bonding jumper.



I don't see where the conductor in 517.14 is part of the equipment grounding conductor.


That violation is already taken care of in the text of 517.14



If you feel this is an issue I would recommend submitting a proposal for the 2014 code.

Chris

would you run an unprotected # 10 thhn insulated conductor 200', above a drop ceiling of a hospital, to satisfy the requirement ?
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top