CEE Rebar Stub Out? I don't think so.

[wasasparky]

Not reaching at all. Is it a GEC? No. Is it an electrode? No. ...

Why would the stub not be called an electrode?...it's just not concrete encased at that point...

I think it meets the art 100 definition of a grounding electrode.
250.68 talks about connecting to GE's, not waterpipes, CEE's, building steel...

You do however, make a good point in expecting clearer wording as to where to connect (like within 5' for waterpipe, etc.)...good luck with your proposal for the next code cycle.

 

[crossman]

Why would the stub not be called an electrode?...it's just not concrete encased at that point...

Crap! I thought I was done here.:smile:

Wasasparky, your question is the crux of the argument. Some of us believe that 250.52(A)(3) says that for a rebar to be an electrode, it must be encased in concrete. Others believe the section says that it is okay for part of the rebar not be encased.

I'll let you make the call for yourself.:smile:

 

[cschmid]

crossman thanks for the compliment and to tell the truth I believe I have to side with you on the current wording that the connection needs to be encased..Yet connecting to the rear even not knowing how it is encased will be excepted in more jurisdictions then not..

 

[crossman]

crossman thanks for the compliment

You are very welcome!

Yet connecting to the rear even not knowing how it is encased will be excepted in more jurisdictions then not..

Agreed. And I can live with that. I think tryinghard and e57 have the right idea about revamping the requirements so that the electrician must play a larger role in installing the electrode.

 

[e57]

Oh don't bow out yet...... Round 34 is about to start.... :grin: :roll:

I hope this will be my last post in this thread. ~ I have been trying to be completely objective and ascertain what the code literally says. Of course it may contain my personal bias and interpretation of the code. ~

I hope this to be my last too. And I feel the same...

First, 250.70 says that ?the grounding conductor or bonding conductor must be connected to the grounding electrode?? and then gives the methods in which it may be connected. The point is, a GEC or bonding conductor must be attached to the electrode.

Now, 250.52 contains descriptions of the various types of electrodes. These descriptions impact the permitted locations where a GEC or bonding conductor may be attached.

250.52(A)(1): This is the description of the waterpipe electrode.

1. A metal underground waterpipe
2. In direct contact with earth for at least 10 feet
3. Electrically continuous to the connection of the GEC/Bonding conductor
4. No grounding system connections can be made more than 5 feet from the point of entrance into the building.

So the actual electrode is the underground portion of the waterpipe. The GEC can be connected directly to the underground electrode. But the code also allows the GEC to be attached away from the electrode by stipulation #3 above, as long as it is within 5 feet of the entrance into the building, stipulation #4. This could certainly be above ground outside or inside the building.

Neither 250.52, 53, 68, or 70 actually say where to connect - much like 250.52(A)3 does not. And 250.70 says (as you mention) that the connection be made to the electrode - of which is not above ground.

There is a touch of confusion correlating 250.70 with the metal underground waterpipe. However, the waterpipe language above eases the restriction in 250.70 by stating that the GEC connection can be on any part of the waterpipe as long as it is electrically continuous and within 5 feet of the entrance to the building.

The electrically continuous language is for purposes of going around things like water meters and filtering devices that may have dielectric properties or otherwise insulate the connection from the electrode - it makes no stipulation about whether or not that point of connection be above or below ground. And the use of the word "interior" - is likewise not stipulating above or below ground.

250.52(A)(2): This is a description of the building steel electrode.

1. The metal frame of the building that is connected to earth as detailed in this section.

So the entire steel frame is the electrode. Therefore, a GEC connection can be made to any point on the building steel. No issue with 250.70 here. Make the connection to the steel wherever is convenient.

250.52(A)2 uses the words "where effectively grounded" - Funny - in most situations this would require a CEE, and that CEE be connected as an electrode for the electrical system (often grounded simply by its anchors in the foundation... Otherwise it would need to have a connection to it, and every isolated piece of supporting steel as well.

250.52(A)(4): This is a description of a rod or pipe electrode.

1. Shall be at least 8 feet in length
2. If of pipe, shall not be less than 3/4"
3. If a rod, shall not be less than 5/8? diameter, if listed, can be 1/2?

So the entire pipe or rod if the electrode and the GEC connection can be made anywhere on the electrode. No issues with 250.70 here. The entire pipe or rod is the electrode, not just the buried portion. Sure, 250.53 talks about how much must be buried, but that does not change the fact that 250.52 says the entire pipe or rod is the electrode. So, connect to the rod or pipe wherever you want to.

I see absolutely no language to the effect that the entire rod or pipe is the electrode anywhere in any code - especially 250.52.... Please explain this.... Please compare these sentances: (Each give only a min. length and ref. to the material)

A metal underground water pipe in direct contact with the earth for 3.0 m (10 ft) or more

Rod and pipe electrodes shall not be less than 2.5 m (8 ft) in length and shall consist of the following materials.

consisting of at least 6.0 m (20 ft) of one or more bare or zinc galvanized or other electrically conductive coated steel reinforcing bars or rods

consisting of at least 6.0 m (20 ft) of bare copper conductor not smaller than 4 AWG.

None say anything about the fact that they can not be longer than the min. - and as mentioned none of the codes these were pulled from - say anything about where to connect to them...

Now we come to 250.52(A)(3). 250.70 says the connection must be made to the electrode. So what is a rebar electrode by 250.52(A)(3)?

Well, the code says it is rebar encased in concrete. Period.

It also says a water pipe is underground, period.

It also says rods, pipes, plates, and rings are underground, period.

~250.70 says the GEC must be connected to the electrode, therefore the GEC connection must be made in the concrete.

And so would all connections to water pipes, rods and pipes, plates and rings - be made underground. That is where the electrode is in this thinking.... No where in 250.52 does it say otherwise for any of these....

~~This section gives no provisions for a GEC connection away from the electrode as the waterpipe language does.

It does not.... With water pipes it says - not be used as an electrode - beyond that 5'... Or as a conductor to the electrode or interconnection to others - beyond that 5' interior to the building.

Interior metal water piping located more than 1.52 m (5 ft) from the point of entrance to the building shall not be used as a part of the grounding electrode system or as a conductor to interconnect electrodes that are part of the grounding electrode system.

If you have 5' underground inside, and 5' outside underground - that is your electrode. if you 10' outside underground - - that is your electrode - and 5' of pipe above ground that is extending away from your electrode. Where do you connect to??????? I hope underground - that is where the electrode is in this thinking....

 

[iwire]

Thanks all, it has been good. :smile:

I really appreciate everyones posts and the time spent. :smile: I only started this shindig, crossman picked up the torch and ran with it. If I was not sure before crossman removed any doubt.

Sorry Mark, I just don't see what you do. :smile:

 

[George Stolz]

I continue to disagree with Crossman and Bob's position. I wish I had the time to participate in this discussion before it's sunset, but I'd like to pitch in a word here.

There is no permission to connect to a water pipe outside of dirt. I know this has been mentioned, and refuted, but it's simply matter of reading the NEC applying the rules that 90.5 give us.

If you are perfectly fine with connecting to a water pipe electrode outside of dirt, but have a beef with connecting to a CEE outside of concrete, then you are not being rational, IMO.

I don't know what everybody's ax is to grind here, but I am going to need Tums after sifting through this. I am glad somebody enjoyed it.

That is what my one small voice in the deafening roar of this discussion has to say.

iwire 59
crossman 57
e57 47
tryinghard 30
cschmid 23
chevyx92 19
mivey 12

 

[iwire]

There is no permission to connect to a water pipe outside of dirt. I know this has been mentioned, and refuted, but it's simply matter of reading the NEC applying the rules that 90.5

We will remain in disagreement.

I don't know what everybody's ax is to grind here, but I am going to need Tums after sifting through this. I am glad somebody enjoyed it.

I don't recall anyone forcing you to read it.

 

[cschmid]

I also agree the electrician needs to play a greater role in the CEE electrode..George we are not saying that contacting to the outside is not going to happen we are just interpreting what the code has in it..it needs clarification on the CEE..I think we can all agree on this..

So who is going to write the proposal change and I look forward to reading it..I have never done one new territory for me and no time right now..

 

[e57]

Thanks all, it has been good. :smile:

I really appreciate everyones posts and the time spent. :smile: I only started this shindig, crossman picked up the torch and ran with it. If I was not sure before crossman removed any doubt.

Sorry Mark, I just don't see what you do. :smile:

I do not think anything is settled.... (No ones mind has been changed - that I know of...)

I am sure this one will be beat to death a few more times - till we meet again - and we will.... :wink:

 

[brother]

Just so i can be part of the history for the longest thread on mike holt. I decided to give an opinion. lol

Yes, its an CEE.

 

[acrwc10]

since the electrician should be running the "CEE" and conductors attached there to, maybe all of the building steel that becomes part of that system should be installed by the electrician. Just so we can be sure it is Electrically continuous, after all we can not be sure that the Iron workers a capable of torquing the bolts to the correct specifications, and the rebar mat in the footers may not get tied correctly either unless done by properly trained electricians......................Dare we risk not doing this work ourself, and trusting "non-electricians" to make such difficult connections without us ? It could be risky.


Maybe mine will be the last word in this mile long thread.

 

[Minuteman]

since the electrician should be running the "CEE" and conductors attached there to, maybe all of the building steel that becomes part of that system should be installed by the electrician. Just so we can be sure it is Electrically continuous, after all we can not be sure that the Iron workers a capable of torquing the bolts to the correct specifications, and the rebar mat in the footers may not get tied correctly either unless done by properly trained electricians......................Dare we risk not doing this work ourself, and trusting "non-electricians" to make such difficult connections without us ? It could be risky.


Maybe mine will be the last word in this mile long thread.

How can we be sure that there is 20' of rebar?

Or, like this home addition we are starting this week, where the new panel is moving to the west wall (utility room) and the turned up rebar is in the southeast corner (bedroom). Need I run 70-80' of #4 from the west to the southeast? Or just drive a ground rod next to the panel?

 

[e57]

Maybe mine will be the last word in this mile long thread.

Get in line buddy.... I really hope thats not what everyone was shooting for - or I would have used shorter posts... :grin:

 

[gndrod]

Cee

Cee

It is interesting to me after over 35+ years of installing UFER grounds stubbed up, can become a violation in the NEC as a matter of choosing loose descriptions for such a simple proven method. rbj

 

[iwire]

It is interesting to me after over 35+ years of installing UFER grounds stubbed up,

You have been installing NEC compliant concrete encased electrodes for 35 years? That is pretty darn surprising. :-?

 

[gndrod]

Surprising for sure.

Surprising for sure.

1972 permitted, Nevada, Placer, Sacramento, Ca. Well they were locally compliant then and still are outside the NEC version. rbj

 

[iwire]

They were unheard of out here until required.

 

[gndrod]

I think that is just about how long it takes to get a politician's attention.

 

[iwire]

I think that is just about how long it takes to get a politician's attention.

LOL :grin:

No action till it's required, yeah and even then no firm decisions. :grin: