Sbj

Status
Not open for further replies.

Djelite

Senior Member
Location
Ny
Occupation
Electrician
Shouldn’t the SBJ be called the syrem grounding conductor since it connect the enclosure to the neutral point there by it being grounded?
 
Shouldn’t the SBJ be called the syrem grounding conductor since it connect the enclosure to the neutral point there by it being grounded?
What a bonding jumper does is connect the premises grounding system to the service grounded conductor.

In most residential panels, all it's usually doing is bonding the enclosure, as well as any EGC's attached to it.

Electrodes are supposed to be connected to the grounded conductor, and not depend on the enclosure bond.

I guess you could call a wire between an EGC bus to a neutral (yeah, I know) bus a system grounding conductor.

Added: Thinking about it more, I think that term better describes a grounding electrode conductor.
 
Feel free to submit a Public Input to make that change for the 2026 code. The system should be open for the submission of changes this fall.

This is a change that I would not support....in my opinion the only conductors that should include the term grounding in their name are conductors that connect directly to a grounding electrode. It is my opinion that equipment grounding conductor should really be equipment bonding conductor.
 
Feel free to submit a Public Input to make that change for the 2026 code. The system should be open for the submission of changes this fall.

This is a change that I would not support....in my opinion the only conductors that should include the term grounding in their name are conductors that connect directly to a grounding electrode. It is my opinion that equipment grounding conductor should really be equipment bonding conductor.
And Don made that proposal many code cycles ago. At least the title of 250 was changed to grounding and bonding
 
Feel free to submit a Public Input to make that change for the 2026 code. The system should be open for the submission of changes this fall.

This is a change that I would not support....in my opinion the only conductors that should include the term grounding in their name are conductors that connect directly to a grounding electrode. It is my opinion that equipment grounding conductor should really be equipment bonding conductor.
I would go even further and put earthing in its own article. It doesn't make any sense to lump grounding and bonding together. It's like putting pipe organs (650) and swimming pools (680) together.
 
I would go even further and put earthing in its own article. It doesn't make any sense to lump grounding and bonding together. It's like putting pipe organs (650) and swimming pools (680) together.
Thats a stretch specially when grounding and bonding go hand in hand. If anything the article should be called effective ground fault current path which would include grounding and bonding
 
Thats a stretch specially when grounding and bonding go hand in hand. If anything the article should be called effective ground fault current path which would include grounding and bonding
What does effective ground fault current path have to do with earthing? Providing a low impedance back to the source to clear faults and system and equipment earthing are completely different topics. That accomplish different things
 
What does effective ground fault current path have to do with earthing? Providing a low impedance back to the source to clear faults and system and equipment earthing are completely different topics. That accomplish different things
But they do play intimately together.
If you have a metal enclosure around a piece of equipment you could provide a low impedance path back to the source to clear some faults be connecting the enclosure to one of the hot conductors. But that would be a really bad idea.
For personnel protection you need to have the enclosure connected to earth, in a way which will also provide a fault clearing path (rather than connecting it to an earth electrode which will both fail to provide a fault clearing path and fail to provide personnel protection.)
 
But they do play intimately together.
If you have a metal enclosure around a piece of equipment you could provide a low impedance path back to the source to clear some faults be connecting the enclosure to one of the hot conductors. But that would be a really bad idea.
For personnel protection you need to have the enclosure connected to earth, in a way which will also provide a fault clearing path (rather than connecting it to an earth electrode which will both fail to provide a fault clearing path and fail to provide personnel protection.)

I agree they are related in that often the same conductor is used for both sourcing and dirting
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top