No. It is a jumper that bonds the enclosure to the grounded conductor. The grounded conductor is not always a neutral.Shouldn’t the SBJ be called the syrem grounding conductor since it connect the enclosure to the neutral point there by it being grounded?
Yes ok now read the def. of bondingNo. It is a jumper that bonds the enclosure to the grounded conductor. The grounded conductor is not always a neutral.
What a bonding jumper does is connect the premises grounding system to the service grounded conductor.Shouldn’t the SBJ be called the syrem grounding conductor since it connect the enclosure to the neutral point there by it being grounded?
And Don made that proposal many code cycles ago. At least the title of 250 was changed to grounding and bondingFeel 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.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.
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 bondingI 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.
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 thingsThats 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
But they do play intimately together.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.)