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

[iwire]

Come on bob you not that is not the same as 20 being tied together in a footing. Of course you can't do that but the stub out is an extension of the 20 feet not an add on.

I have laid out what I know from the NEC.

Your right that I don't really believe I can tie steel together outside the footing. Just like I don't believe I can use the steel stubbed outside the concrete as a GEC.

 

[iwire]

No, nobody leaves that laying around anymore.

Thanks Chris. :roll:

 

[chris kennedy]

I know that is how it's done but IMO the NEC does not support that either.

The steel that you catching is not the CEE so your using the steel as the GEC until it gets to the bottom of the footing.

This sure reads like you have to hit a 20' bar.

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 of not less than 13 mm (? in.) in diameter

 

[iwire]

This sure reads like you have to hit a 20' bar.

No, not at all. All you have to do is hit some steel that actually qualifies as the CEE, the qualifying steel might be 20 - 1' sections tied together.

But the only place qualifying steel is located is horizontally at the bottom of the footing or vertically in a section of the footing or foundation in direct connect with the earth.

 

[nakulak]

I don't see what the problem with this is. They can leave a small section stubbed out or unpoured at the bottom, and finish pouring it later. What's the big deal.

 

[iwire]

What's the big deal.

Only the words in the code book. :grin:

 

[acrwc10]

Only the words in the code book. :grin:

You had a lot of time to think about this ( please don't become a building inspector in my area :grin: ) If you have a rebar stub out and it became this big of a bone of contention you could always grab a sack of concrete and encase the stub out . That will make it much better.

 

[iwire]

It's all about the words, I am not an inspector but I do care about how the code is written. :smile:

If you have a rebar stub out and it became this big of a bone of contention you could always grab a sack of concrete and encase the stub out .

On a performance note, a buried exposed rebar is going rot away long before the life span of the CEE inside the footing.

 

[acrwc10]

It's all about the words, I am not an inspector but I do care about how the code is written. :smile:




On a performance note, a buried exposed rebar is going rot away long before the life span of the CEE inside the footing.

I should qualify my statement, all the rebar stub outs I have seen come up INSIDE the structure, so they are not exposed to the elements. I was thinking if you were to fill a stud bay with concrete after the rebar to copper connection was made. Amy one putting a rebar stub out exposed to the weather or coming out below grade Will have a rotted piece of rebar in a very short time.
That said just how long do you think a copper clad ground rod driven into the earth lasts ? 10, 20, 30 years ? There are many area's I would guess the ground rod wouldn't last even 10 years due to the corrosive nature of the ground they are driven into.

 

[iwire]

That said just how long do you think a copper clad ground rod driven into the earth lasts ?

I don't know, not as long as the building it serves.

But don't you think that was one of the big reasons for going to CEEs, they will last as long as the structure itself.

 

[acrwc10]

I don't know, not as long as the building it serves.

But don't you think that was one of the big reasons for going to CEEs, they will last as long as the structure itself.

Absolutely agree....I will take a CEE over a ground rod any chance I get. I have had a few job in the last couple of years where the "UFER" / CEE was missed or done wrong and the inspectors ( combo inspectors ) don't catch it on the footing inspection. This leaves me in the situation of having to "Bond" the steel in the foundation to a ground rod. How would you treat this situation?

 

[iwire]

I have had a few job in the last couple of years where the "UFER" / CEE was missed or done wrong and the inspectors ( combo inspectors ) don't catch it on the footing inspection. This leaves me in the situation of having to "Bond" the steel in the foundation to a ground rod. How would you treat this situation?

I am in MA read the last sentence of the last paragraph of this handout.


.
.

 

[acrwc10]

I am in MA read the last sentence of the last paragraph of this handout.

That would only happen to a contractor ONCE and he would never make that mistake again.

Many of the houses I work on have basements that are done in two pours (the slab then the walls) and they are completely isolated from earth by a water proof membrane. Many GC's don't seem to get the idea that the "C" in the CEE needs to actually be in contact with the dirt. They run the steel up and think it is done, the inspectors see it and think "with all that steel it must be good" and sign off on it. Then we come in 3 months later and have to deal with it, we could just connect to it and walk away ( unethical ) and as far as the inspectors know it is fine. Instead I will add a ground rod to it or try and get a CEE into any smaller footer that has not yet been poured like a porch or some other area. I would love to see the building dept. around here take a more aggressive approach like your area has as it would reduce my having to deal with this reoccurring so often.

 

[e57]

Bob so in the context of stubs - would a stubbed rod - or the portion of a water line between the GEC, and another electrode also be a GEC.

I too have a pet peev about conductors as CEE - At which point is it a CEE and no longer a GEC or vice versa - that is if they are the same unspliced conductor.... Without a splice the CEE is an "Electrode" for it's whole length IMO....

 

[iwire]

Bob so in the context of stubs - would a stubbed rod - or the portion of a water line between the GEC, and another electrode also be a GEC.

I would say that is specifically allowed and limited to within 5'.

I too have a pet peev about conductors as CEE - At which point is it a CEE and no longer a GEC or vice versa - that is if they are the same unspliced conductor.... Without a splice the CEE is an "Electrode" for it's whole length IMO....

Another good question.

 

[wbalsam1]

I too have a pet peev about conductors as CEE - At which point is it a CEE and no longer a GEC or vice versa - that is if they are the same unspliced conductor.... Without a splice the CEE is an "Electrode" for it's whole length IMO....

It's ONLY a CEE when it is encased in concrete. A stub coming out is not a CEE. IMHO, Bob is correct, bigtime. :smile:

 

[don_resqcapt19]

I see Bob's point and the stub out is being used as a GEC. Rebar does not qualify as a GEC per 250.62, however the code does permit building steel to serve as a bonding conductor between various grounding electrodes and I don't see this as being much different, other than it is not permitted by the existing code rules. It is, in some areas, a very common practice and maybe it should be addressed in the 2011 code.

 

[tom baker]

Oregon has in its specialty code, a drawing showing a rebar stub as a CEE connection

 

[wirebender]

So if you used 20' of 4 AWG copper as the CEE, the stub out wouldn't be considered part of the electrode? It would be the GEC? So, you would have to be sure and leave enough stubbed out to reach the service equipment and pray it is still there when you need it? Good Luck!

 

[iwire]

So if you used 20' of 4 AWG copper as the CEE, the stub out wouldn't be considered part of the electrode?

IMO Once it gets within 2" of the surface and is outside the pour it can not by NEC definition still be a concrete encased electrode.