Grounding Electrode Conductor run on face of joists

[Dennis Alwon]

Why wouldn't a #6 stapled parallel to the bottom of a joist be "along the surface of the building construction"? The code rule doesn't support that argument.

That is exactly my point. IMO, that is not what the code states at all.

 

[Dennis Alwon]

What does 334 mean by this?

(A) To Follow Surface. Cable shall closely follow the surface
of the building finish or of running boards.

Can I staple NM to the bottom of a joist along it's length.

Edit:

I am re-thinking if a #4 is allowed under a joist.

Yes you can staple nm to the bottom of the joist along its length. Show me where it says you can't and don't use authority having jurisdiction discretion because that is open to anything. The bottom of the joist is along the building surface.

 

[K8MHZ]

Yes you can staple nm to the bottom of the joist along its length. Show me where it says you can't and don't use authority having jurisdiction discretion because that is open to anything. The bottom of the joist is along the building surface.

I would say that 300.4(D) prohibits it for cables and raceways unless there is a minimum of 1 1/4" from the edge of the cable to the edge of the framing member. Joists are mentioned as framing members.

I don't feel that 300.4(D) applies to a single GEC.

 

[infinity]

I would say that 300.4(D) prohibits it for cables and raceways unless there is a minimum of 1 1/4" from the edge of the cable to the edge of the framing member. Joists are mentioned as framing members.

I don't feel that 300.4(D) applies to a single GEC.

Since we're talking about an unfinished basement that wouldn't apply.

 

[david]

In 334 it deals with protection from physical damage differently than the section in 250 that is the topic of this thread.

When cables are exposed the section in 334 addresses a need to consider the probability that the surrounding conditions would subject the cable to physical damage.

You have to evaluate the surrounding conditions and decide if you need to step up the level of protection. It is a subjective judgment depending on the environment surrounding the cable.

When it comes to crawl spaces and unfinished basements for cables in 334 some of that subjective judgment is taken away . This section as it pertains to cable is mandated that you step up the protection , and mandates running boards if you choose to run certain size cables at angles to joist.

In the section being discussed when it comes to GEC and framing members it is left to more subjective judgment with- out any mandated language kicking in, dictating that you must step up the level of protection depending on how you install this conductor in relationship to framing members

There is no directive language dictating a more aggressive level of protection depending on what part of the framing member you attach to.
Some may conclude that these two rules are saying the same thing they are not.

The rule in 250 is way more subjective than the rule in 334 when it comes to exposed in unfinished basement.

 

[jxofaltrds]

Yes you can staple nm to the bottom of the joist along its length. Show me where it says you can't and don't use authority having jurisdiction discretion because that is open to anything. The bottom of the joist is along the building surface.

A joist is a framing member.

334.17 Through or Parallel to Framing Members. Types
NM, NMC, or NMS cable shall be protected in accordance
with 300.4 where installed through or parallel to framing
members.

300.4
(D) Cables and Raceways Parallel to Framing Members
and Furring Strips. In both exposed and concealed
locations, where a cable- or raceway-type wiring method is
installed parallel to framing members, such as joists,
rafters, or studs, or is installed parallel to furring strips, the
cable or raceway shall be installed and supported so that the
nearest outside surface of the cable or raceway is not less
than 32 mm (11?4 in.) from the nearest edge of the framing
member or furring strips where nails or screws are likely to
penetrate. Where this distance cannot be maintained, the
cable or raceway shall be protected from penetration by
nails or screws by a steel plate, sleeve, or equivalent at least
1.6 mm (1?16 in.) thick.

 

[david]

shall be protected in accordance
with 300.4 where installed through or parallel to framing
members.

except you have specific rules and language dealing with cables when the are exposed in specific locations

 

[david]

In 334 it deals with protection from physical damage differently than the section in 250 that is the topic of this thread.

When cables are exposed the section in 334 addresses a need to consider the probability that the surrounding conditions would subject the cable to physical damage.

You have to evaluate the surrounding conditions and decide if you need to step up the level of protection. It is a subjective judgment depending on the environment surrounding the cable.

When it comes to crawl spaces and unfinished basements for cables in 334 some of that subjective judgment is taken away . This section as it pertains to cable is mandated that you step up the protection , and mandates running boards if you choose to run certain size cables at angles to joist.

In the section being discussed when it comes to GEC and framing members it is left to more subjective judgment with- out any mandated language kicking in, dictating that you must step up the level of protection depending on how you install this conductor in relationship to framing members

There is no directive language dictating a more aggressive level of protection depending on what part of the framing member you attach to.
Some may conclude that these two rules are saying the same thing they are not.

The rule in 250 is way more subjective than the rule in 334 when it comes to exposed in unfinished basement.

Exhibit 300.2 Nonmetallic sheathed cables adjacent to furring strips in a wood frame structure in accordance with 300.4(D).

if you have access to the Hand book the picture illustration shows NM cable stapled to the bottom of and at angles to the joist using batter boards to provide physical protection. Even the handbook agrees you can staple the cable to the bottom edge o the joist

 

[jxofaltrds]

except you have specific rules and language dealing with cables when the are exposed in specific locations

Exhibit 300.2 Nonmetallic sheathed cables adjacent to furring strips in a wood frame structure in accordance with 300.4(D).

if you have access to the Hand book the picture illustration shows NM cable stapled to the bottom of and at angles to the joist using batter boards to provide physical protection. Even the handbook agrees you can staple the cable to the bottom edge o the joist

We have been talking about stapling to the bottom of the joist NOT across the bottom of the joist.

Only reason that we are talking about 334 is because 'I' brought it up as an example of how I got to an opinion.



In the picture you could staple NM or the GEC to the sill but NOT the bottom of the hoist. Just one example.

I take that back - if you could get it stapled above the cement wall that would pass.

 

[GoldDigger]

Again, unless the bare GEC is somehow considered to be a single wire uninsulated cable, the rules governing a GEC are substantially different from the rules for NM.

And, BTW, some care is needed when stapling to or drilling the web of a wood I-member.

Tapatalk!

 

[david]

We have been talking about stapling to the bottom of the joist NOT across the bottom of the joist.

We have been discussing stapling a # 6 awg GEC to the bottom of the joist both parallel and perpendicular to but on the bottom of the joist. Except the code considers any angle that crosses one or more joist as angle to the joist and does not state as perpendicular to the joist

 

[Dennis Alwon]

Mike, the reason that the NEC requires 1 1/4" from the edge is for nail penetration. Of course if it is drilled then when someone puts sheetrock up it is in danger of being hit but when it is nailed along the bottom of the joist it is protected, IMO, and there is no danger of nails since the grounding electrode conductor would have to be moved.

Again I say to you -- if I use a running board perpendicular to the joist then I can run my cables , grounding electrode conductor or whatever to the bottom of the board. Now how is this any different then the grounding electrode conductor running parallel along the bottom of a joist.

I am sorry you keep quoting code but IMO it is mostly your opinion as to what is being written. Unfortunately it isn't that clear and not everyone sees it as you do. Yes, the protected from damage causes more grief for everyone and is open for the inspector to do as they see fit which, as you know, can be looked at differently by other inspectors.

 

[jxofaltrds]

Mike, the reason that the NEC requires 1 1/4" from the edge is for nail penetration. Of course if it is drilled then when someone puts sheetrock up it is in danger of being hit but when it is nailed along the bottom of the joist it is protected, IMO, and there is no danger of nails since the grounding electrode conductor would have to be moved.

Again I say to you -- if I use a running board perpendicular to the joist then I can run my cables , grounding electrode conductor or whatever to the bottom of the board. Now how is this any different then the grounding electrode conductor running parallel along the bottom of a joist.

I am sorry you keep quoting code but IMO it is mostly your opinion as to what is being written. Unfortunately it isn't that clear and not everyone sees it as you do. Yes, the protected from damage causes more grief for everyone and is open for the inspector to do as they see fit which, as you know, can be looked at differently by other inspectors.

Agree except this: "parallel along the bottom of a joist"

The reason that along the bottom is not allowed is because it is not protected. Plumbers could run a pipe over it, the HVAC could run a duct over it. The bottom of a joist is a nailing (attachment) surface. Anything attached to the bottom is subject to physical damage.The bottom of the joist is subject to physical damage.

 

[Dennis Alwon]

Agree except this: "parallel along the bottom of a joist"

The reason that along the bottom is not allowed is because it is not protected. Plumbers could run a pipe over it, the HVAC could run a duct over it. The bottom of a joist is a nailing (attachment) surface. Anything attached to the bottom is subject to physical damage.The bottom of the joist is subject to physical damage.

Again Mike this is your opinion. Do you agree a running board with wires fastened to the bottom is allowed? If not then you may the only inspector I ever met that would not allow it.

 

[david]

It is your right and actually your responsibility to determine the condition that would subject the GEC to physical damage. And if you are making that judgment then the electrician would perhaps have to install conduit to the bottom of the joist and use that for physical protection.

 

[infinity]

Agree except this: "parallel along the bottom of a joist"

The reason that along the bottom is not allowed is because it is not protected. Plumbers could run a pipe over it, the HVAC could run a duct over it. The bottom of a joist is a nailing (attachment) surface. Anything attached to the bottom is subject to physical damage.The bottom of the joist is subject to physical damage.

You're making a subjective judgment which is your prerogative since the NEC does not define subject to physical damage. Around here it's very common to run on the bottom edge of a joist in an unfinished basement with any type of cable or GEC. Personally I don't see how a #6 copper conductor could easily be damaged if it were nailed to the bottom of a joist.

 

[jxofaltrds]

Again Mike this is your opinion. Do you agree a running board with wires fastened to the bottom is allowed? If not then you may the only inspector I ever met that would not allow it.

I agree.

 

[jxofaltrds]

Would you allow me to install any wire on a joist touching the subfloor?

The basement is unfinished.

 

[infinity]

I'm not seeing how a #6 copper conductor stapled along the bottom edge of a joist is subject to physical damage when I am permitted to staple #8 NM cable perpendicular (across the air gaps) of the same joists.

 

[jxofaltrds]

I'm not seeing how a #6 copper conductor stapled along the bottom edge of a joist is subject to physical damage when I am permitted to staple #8 NM cable perpendicular (across the air gaps) of the same joists.

Doesn't make sense to me either. I'm just debating what I think the code says.

Why do they say it is ok to go through a joist? None of us would have a problem with that but they specifically called it out!

I think any wire on the bottom of a joist is subject to damage even the ones allowed. But if they are allowed to be there my opinion doesn't matter.

I gave an example earlier that shows that I use common sense with the underside of a joist. I just think that the code doesn't want most of them there.