Above Ground on Ground Pool Bonding

Status
Not open for further replies.
J

jot30

Member
Occupation
Electrician/Electrical Inspector
I have a question regarding NEC 680.26 the adopted cycle we are enforcing at this time is 2017 NEC 680.26 equipotential bonding. My question is this: Is the perimeter bond around the pool (18"-24"/4"-6")for above ground (on-ground) pools required for pools that only have resin support members, but DO have a stainless section and seam tying the (coated non-conductive) corrugated steel shell together? This seam is the only point for a bonding lug attachment. From this point you can attach to other applicable conductive parts or surfaces. My thoughts and interpretation of 680.26 is Yes, because, although there aren't 4 equal points available...there is exposed steel on the pool, and bonding all conductive parts plus a perimeter, would appear to satisfy the perimeter bond requirement and eliminate possible areas of voltage potential differences. I would be glad to email additional pictures and additional information if needed. Now as an inspector and having been on both sides of the "coin", I always try to explain the why behind code sections to better inform contractors, but also to eliminate surprises in the field. I am familiar with the feeling of failing an inspection and not getting a clear answer or direction as to why
🙂
I don't want to be "that guy"
 
The 4 point bonding of the pool does not cover the required perimeter bonding. You can use the perimeter bonding and just tie on to it at the 4 corners with short pieces of your bond wire--#8. Does this answer your question?
 
Hey Dennis... thanks for the quick response...What manufacturer's are doing now is just one section of stainless with a bolted seam. The rest is resin... only one attachment point for the lug.
 
Here is a picture
 

Attachments

  • Screenshot_20230710-175827.png
    Screenshot_20230710-175827.png
    764.3 KB · Views: 29
It appears to me that the pool in question meets the definition of a "storeable pool" and Part II of Article 680 does not apply.
 
I believe it would be considered storeable only if the water depth is less than 42".

I have a similar problem. I also have a coated corrugated steel wall but my uprights and coping are coated steel. I too can bond the wall only at the bolted seem.

None of the uprights are connected to the pool wall nor each other (Megohms between them). I don't understand what good it does to tie the insulated uprights at 4 equidistant points around the pool to the 8AWG perimeter bonding wire. Can someone make sense of this for me?
 
bobbyt said:
I believe it would be considered storeable only if the water depth is less than 42".

I have a similar problem. I also have a coated corrugated steel wall but my uprights and coping are coated steel. I too can bond the wall only at the bolted seem.

None of the uprights are connected to the pool wall nor each other (Megohms between them). I don't understand what good it does to tie the insulated uprights at 4 equidistant points around the pool to the 8AWG perimeter bonding wire. Can someone make sense of this for me?
Click to expand...
Taking this one step further, what is the point of the 8AWG perimeter wire if nothing connects to it except for the pool surround at the seam and the pump, ladder, etc.
 
Yes but the only components tied to the perimeter ring are within a 10 degree arc, right around the pump. The rest of the ring is not tied to anything.

Is the idea to keep the ground around the pool at the same potential? This is the only rationale I can come up with.
 
don_resqcapt19 said:
It appears to me that the pool in question meets the definition of a "storeable pool" and Part II of Article 680 does not apply.
Click to expand...
Hey Don, thanks for the response, it is a standard above ground pool - not storable that you can typically bond at the min four points and then to the perimeter bonding conductor. My question is though, if you actually only have one bonding attachment point at the pool, does it satisfy the code intent to still require a perimeter bond that you connect that one bonding point to along with the additional applicable conductive parts...pump, water, heater, etc. IMO, based on my interpretation of 680.26, the perimeter bond is still required because of the exposed steel on the pool structure. The one attachment point is the confusing issue and not addressed specifically in the code.
 
There's never a case, other than storable pools) where the perimeter ring/grid is not required. What's not required is bonding the pool walls to the perimeter ring if the pool has a non-conductive shell, or vinyl lining.
As to the only spot on the walls that is metal, I suppose you could put a lug on one of the bolts that holds the panel and bond to the ring. You also have to have a water bond.
 
Thank you Bill for your response. I understand the requirement and will comply with my installation.

Jot30, I apologize for jumping on your thread but it seemed closely related to what I've been wrestling with for some time now.

Do either of you, or anyone else, understand the theory behind the requirement for the perimeter ring when it is only connected to other equipment at one or two closely spaced points?
 
As stated already, it's to bring everything conductive in and around the pool to the same potential so there are not any potential difference between two points that could cause a shock. It has been studied and some think the single #8 used for a perimeter ring is not sufficient, at least not as good as 12"x12" perimeter grid. Theory is the same for both methods, just one method is more effective, according to the studies.
 
The theory is equipotential bonding, to prevent shock by eliminating any voltage differences among any surfaces a person can touch. In this sense, bonding is more important than grounding (earthing).
 
Yes, I understand that, especially for the case of 4 point, 90 degree around the ring pool bonding. But if there isn't anything connected to the ring for 320 degrees, as is the case for a single point pool surround connection near the pump equipment, what good is the rest of the ring doing? Equalizing the ground potential? There is nothing over there that a person could touch that is connected to the ring.

Thanks for your patience. I'll stop after this round!
 
bobbyt said:
Yes, I understand that, especially for the case of 4 point, 90 degree around the ring pool bonding. But if there isn't anything connected to the ring for 320 degrees, as is the case for a single point pool surround connection near the pump equipment, what good is the rest of the ring doing? Equalizing the ground potential? There is nothing over there that a person could touch that is connected to the ring.

Thanks for your patience. I'll stop after this round!
Click to expand...
As long as the pool water is bonded, there should be no potential between the water and the perimeter surface. The fact that the pool has a limited amount of conductive metal to bond to does not change anything.
 
don_resqcapt19 said:
As long as the pool water is bonded, there should be no potential between the water and the perimeter surface. The fact that the pool has a limited amount of conductive metal to bond to does not change anything.
Click to expand...
Thanks Don, so if I am understanding you correctly... your interpretation is also that even if there is only one point of attachment to the pool conductive metal...you still connect to a perimeter bonding conductor.
 
jot30 said:
Thanks Don, so if I am understanding you correctly... your interpretation is also that even if there is only one point of attachment to the pool conductive metal...you still connect to a perimeter bonding conductor.
Click to expand...
That is assuming that there is only one point on the pool shell that has conductive metal.
 
bobbyt said:
Thank you Bill for your response. I understand the requirement and will comply with my installation.

Jot30, I apologize for jumping on your thread but it seemed closely related to what I've been wrestling with for some time now.

Do either of you, or anyone else, understand the theory behind the requirement for the perimeter ring when it is only connected to other equipment at one or two closely spaced points?
Click to expand...
No problem...and we were asking the same question. Little bills response is my interpretation too... always need the perimeter bond and Dons last response is what I also believed to be an interpretation of the codes intent - attach the available point on pool - (if only available point) to the perimeter. Hopefully future cycles will address this situation.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top