In 250.66 (A) is not the largest gec connected to a rod going to be a #6. Why would you run #4?
solid grounding electrode conductor inside of a conduit a violation?
- Thread starter apbart
- Start date
- Status
In 250.66 (A) is not the largest gec connected to a rod going to be a #6. Why would you run #4?
John120/240
Senior Member
- Location
- Olathe, Kansas
New residential construction. 200 amp service. You need to run #4 copper to the
water line. So you might as well run 10 ft of #4 to the ground rod. Just not
practicle to stock a roll of #6 copper for ground rods. Charge accordingly.
kwired
Electron manager
- Location
- NE Nebraska
Last sentence of 250.53(G):
No specific depth is mentioned just needs to be protected from physical damage.
Right next to a house you never know if owner/occupants will have a flower garden or something like that so I like to get it down at least a foot so if they are tilling or digging for gardening purposes they will not disturb it.
renosteinke
Senior Member
- Location
- NE Arkansas
No. 4 solid, in pipe, allthe way to theground rod ..... that's just been local ammendments / practice / the way I was taught, etc. I always thought of it as 'exceeding' code. This thread has opened the possibility that I was violating it.
How did the practice arise? A little history is in order.
In the late 70's, the IAEI magazine stated a campaign that focused on damage to EGC's. I guess they needed a new 'cause' after the aluminum wiring fracas. In any event, every issue carried pictures of EGC's that were hamaged by things like weed-whackers. As a result, communities started wanting us to use bigger wires and solid wires [on the theory they would be harder to damage].
The early 80's saw a spike in copper prices- with the result that the exposed portions of EGC's were being removed and sold for scrap. So, communities added on a requirement that the EGC now be run in pipe. The earlier requirement for a solid No. 4 wire remained in place.
How did the practice arise? A little history is in order.
In the late 70's, the IAEI magazine stated a campaign that focused on damage to EGC's. I guess they needed a new 'cause' after the aluminum wiring fracas. In any event, every issue carried pictures of EGC's that were hamaged by things like weed-whackers. As a result, communities started wanting us to use bigger wires and solid wires [on the theory they would be harder to damage].
The early 80's saw a spike in copper prices- with the result that the exposed portions of EGC's were being removed and sold for scrap. So, communities added on a requirement that the EGC now be run in pipe. The earlier requirement for a solid No. 4 wire remained in place.
It still has to meet 300.5 (d)(1), correct? (18" depth where it comes out of the ground) 250.53 seems to just talk about the rod and not the GEC depth.
Thanks for clarification.
kwired
Electron manager
- Location
- NE Nebraska
Grounding electrodes and conductors are not specifically addressed in 300.5.
A ground ring or plate electrode needs to be 30" deep 250.58(F) and (H). Obvoiusly the connection to these would be at that depth also
250.58(G) for rods and pipes just says 8 feet of length need to be in contact with soil. If rod or pipe is longer than 8 feet then the connection to the electrode would not even need to be underground if protected or not subject to physical damage (250.10)
If you have a horizontal underground section of electrode conductor following 300.5 is a good idea but not specifically mentioned either.
- Location
- New Jersey
- Occupation
- Journeyman Electrician
renosteinke
Senior Member
- Location
- NE Arkansas
Bonding the EMT that I use to enclose the #4 solid is not that difficult. There's actually a connector made for just this purpose.
The connector has on one end a clamp for attaching to the ground rod, and a threaded hub at the other to accept pipe, or a connector. Between the two is a circular trough with a screw and a large washer. The idea is to bend the #4 to fit into the trough, then use the washer to clamp down.
Sometimes difficult? You bet. Code 'technicalities' aside, it's routine for some of the work to be done before the raceway is completely assembled. For example, I usually make that 'ring' in one end of the wire before I even try pushing it through the pipe. Likewise, the end of that solid wire tends to catch on the connector at the panel; the box offset seems to encourage this.
But, as the boss used to say ..... I didn't have to LIKE it, I just had to do it.
The connector has on one end a clamp for attaching to the ground rod, and a threaded hub at the other to accept pipe, or a connector. Between the two is a circular trough with a screw and a large washer. The idea is to bend the #4 to fit into the trough, then use the washer to clamp down.
Sometimes difficult? You bet. Code 'technicalities' aside, it's routine for some of the work to be done before the raceway is completely assembled. For example, I usually make that 'ring' in one end of the wire before I even try pushing it through the pipe. Likewise, the end of that solid wire tends to catch on the connector at the panel; the box offset seems to encourage this.
But, as the boss used to say ..... I didn't have to LIKE it, I just had to do it.
- Location
- Bremerton, Washington
While its what the AHJ might like to see, there is no color code requirement for the GEC or bonding jumpers.
dana1028
Senior Member
- Location
- San Francisco Bay area
Around here a lot of the electricians are obstinate enough to say, "I'd like to see that code you're referencing....Mr. Inspector....sir."
- Location
- Chapel Hill, NC
- Occupation
- Retired Electrical Contractor
It is one thing to choose to put green tape on a GEC but it is another thing to require it. I could almost understand marking it in the panel but at the electrode???? pretty obvious in my eyes.
- Status