EGC

[electrofelon]

so instead of providing GFCI protection to all of the required protections listed under 210.8, why don't you go and get a 1:1 transformer and begin cleaning up your circuits, and taking away the reference to the earth, on all of your potential electrocution hazards? having them isolated from the earth, would eliminate any shock hazard, right?

Correct. An ungrounded system is better in many ways. Clearly however it is not the topology we have in the states.

 

[tortuga]

.one of the issues in changing a long standing code rule is lack of technical substantiation and testing results. They all know that having a full size EGC in each raceway of a parallel set is not required, but until someone spends the money for testing to prove that you don't need a full size EGC in each raceway, the code will not be changed.

whats interesting is when they upsized the wire sizes in whats now T250.122 1968 there was not much 'technical substantiation' and Canada never followed suit (I think it was proposed there a few times),
If we compare the NEC 250.122 with the one in Canadian electrical code there are a few minor differences like a 14 AWG is allowed as a EGC for a 20A circuit and a 12 for a 30A circuit.
I have long thought it would be better to reconcile and harmonize these equipment grounding tables, as we then it would be easier for cable manufacturers to make one North American cable, then there would not need to be NM-B and NM-D etc.

 

[ActionDave]

so instead of providing GFCI protection to all of the required protections listed under 210.8, why don't you go and get a 1:1 transformer and begin cleaning up your circuits, and taking away the reference to the earth, on all of your potential electrocution hazards? having them isolated from the earth, would eliminate any shock hazard, right? you don't have to worry when that lightning storm rolls through.

(be sure to update everyone, after the first storm how things went)

I'll make a deal with you. You provide the materials and I will do the labor. I'll put my house on an isolated transformer and live stream every time there is a storm and the whole world can see if my home entertainment center blows up.

 

[Master Nater]

Correct. An ungrounded system is better in many ways. Clearly however it is not the topology we have in the states.

you left off the second half of my post. feel free to read it again.

 

[don_resqcapt19]

whats interesting is when they upsized the wire sizes in whats now T250.122 1968 there was not much 'technical substantiation' and Canada never followed suit (I think it was proposed there a few times),
If we compare the NEC 250.122 with the one in Canadian electrical code there are a few minor differences like a 14 AWG is allowed as a EGC for a 20A circuit and a 12 for a 30A circuit.
I have long thought it would be better to reconcile and harmonize these equipment grounding tables, as we then it would be easier for cable manufacturers to make one North American cable, then there would not need to be NM-B and NM-D etc.

Not sure why we increased the size of the EGC for circuits 30 amps or less. I can't imagine that there is any technical reason why the EGC for circuits 30 amps of less has to be the same size as the ungrounded conductors and the EGCs for larger circuits is substantially smaller than the ungrounded conductor.

 

[electrofelon]

you left off the second half of my post. feel free to read it again.

So i read it again, and i guess i am not sure what you are proposing in that thought experiment. You want to use a transformer to serve a device with an ungrounded system? What about equipment grounding, would that remain bonded? You seem to be using system grounding and equipment grounding interchangeably, as we were initially talking about equipment grounding.