Pool Bonding

Then you did not read it slow enough. I posted the whole paragraph from the article.
OK but the meaning of
it is not intended a ground-fault return path
is by itself it not so, but as per 250, it require connection to supply in manner effective ground fault current path result
 
What you're missing is that the fault may not be from the pools source, it could be from the utility or a property down the street. The EGC connected to the pools source would not clear that fault. However the bonding grid would bring all components to the same potential which is it's intended purpose.
 
What you're missing is that the fault may not be from the pools source, it could be from the utility or a property down the street. The EGC connected to the pools source would not clear that fault. However the bonding grid would bring all components to the same potential which is it's intended purpose.
No. see this:
the high fault current may comprromise grid integrity if not removed fast
So it electrical pool designer responsibility mitigate it. How they do it?
 
Last edited:
My assertion if primary ground fault path compromised, the low resistance bonding grid connected to egc other ways serve as effective ground path
And you are wrong. The bonding grid is not an Equipment Ground in any way. It is specifically stated in the NEC that any connection to the pool equipment ground buss is not required.
 
And you are wrong. The bonding grid is not an Equipment Ground in any way. It is specifically stated in the NEC that any connection to the pool equipment ground buss is not required.
I not say the bonding grid an equipment ground and your 'It is specifically stated in the NEC that any connection to the pool equipment ground buss is not required' correct because it already connected to egc in other ways
 
Equipotential not fail-safe
Neither is a circuit breaker or fuse. Nothing is. It's also why some jurisdictions require annual testing. The equi-potential bonding grid in a pool has nothing to do with clearing a fault. I realize you are not going to concede this point. I'm only responding to your posts to make it clear to anyone else who reads this thread that you are wrong and posting incorrect information.
 
Neither is a circuit breaker or fuse. Nothing is. It's also why some jurisdictions require annual testing. The equi-potential bonding grid in a pool has nothing to do with clearing a fault. I realize you are not going to concede this point. I'm only responding to your posts to make it clear to anyone else who reads this thread that you are wrong and posting incorrect
I said equipotential fail-safe high ground fault current flowi aspect, not maintenance aspect.
You say 'The equi-potential bonding grid in a pool has nothing to do with clearing a fault' consider 680.26 only
But I also consider 250 require bonding to be grounded
 
Please elaborate on how this relates to the last sentence of 680.26 (B)
Do you read the last sentence to exempt a pool grounding grid that say for example in your opinion is likely to become energized exemption from 250.4(A)(5)? I think falls short of that.
 
Top