Bob's Spot the violation(s) Part 999

Status
Not open for further replies.
iwire said:
Welcome to the forum. :smile:

You may well be correct, in this case there is a copper EGC bonding it all.
Click to expand...

Not likely , but should there be a fault in the nipple contraption fitting, the bond wire does nothing to ease the concern , that those fittings have not been tested for the purpose of bonding


Western Section IAEI 101​
st Annual Meeting​

September 19-21, 2005​

3. Is a rigid coupling with two chase nipples a suitable raceway or nipple between two panels or 2
boxes?​



Answer:
No, the chase nipple is listed to attach to a box with a locknut not be screwed into a​


conduit coupling which depends on a wrench-tight connection also Part 5 to Article 250 requires the
bonding to provide a low impedance path suitable for carrying the fault current. 250.​
​
Click to expand...


​

Mark Ode says; A chase nipple screwed into a coupling from inside a panelboard (from both sides) would certainly not be
a positive bonding for either the raceway or the enclosure based on 250.92(B).
Chase nipples were intended and listed for use with a locknut and not listed with the intent to screw it into a rigid
coupling, in my opinion. Could it act as a path for fault current? Yes, however, we would not have tested it for the path of
current from the panel metal in contact with the chase nipple into the rigid coupling, through the coupling and into a chase
nipple on the other side to a panel or box. Too many questions about acceptable grounding paths and the fault path levels.
How much impedance would be introduced through arcing at each point of contact. Mark​
Click to expand...

​
 
M. D. said:
Not likely , but should there be a fault in the nipple contraption fitting, the bond wire does nothing to ease the concern , that those fittings have not been tested for the purpose of bonding
Click to expand...


M.D., this is from the same folks that say reducing washers are suitable for grounding. :roll:

IMO if a thin reducing washer can be an adequate bonding means then a rigid coupling and chase nipple will do even better.

It comes down to 'not being tested for' vs 'not being safe'.

I am not saying we should ignore the rules, this was not my install and I would have done it differently. :)
 
Last edited:
I'll agree that it almost impossible to trace the conductors,but, what is up with the 'C' or yellow phase? It looks like the line side is connected to the bottom of the meter socket and the other two phases are going through the nipple to the top of the socket.
 
iwire said:
M.D., this is from the same folks that say reducing washers are suitable for grounding. :roll:

IMO if a thin reducing washer can be an adequate bonding means then a rigid coupling and chase nipple will do even better.

It comes down to 'not being tested for' vs 'not being safe'.

I am not saying we should ignore the rules, this was not my install and I would have done it differently. :)
Click to expand...

I hear what you are saying ,..I was just giving folks stuff to think about.
 
peter d said:
What exactly is this setup for anyway?
Click to expand...

It's a strip mall in CT they split a tenant space in half and needed an additional metered 200 amp feeder. There where no available spaces left in the switchgear on the left side.
 
Remember Crazy Straws?

Remember Crazy Straws?

peter d said:
My eyes hurt just trying to follow the path of the wires.
Click to expand...

From the disco.
Through the meter.
Into the panel.
Back to the meter lugs, top.
Out of the bottom lugs.
Back to the panel.
The long way around.
And then back into the meter
And up the mast?

Whew, I'm dizzy. :smile:
 
Bob, looks like a violation of 250.148 in the picture.

250.148 Continuity and Attachment of Equipment Grounding Conductors to Boxes
 
What about sealing locknuts or myers hubs where we have the conduits (couplings/chase nipples) above the wire connections in the meter and panel ?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top