Chemical Treatment of Grounding Electrode

Status
Not open for further replies.
S

stevee

Member
When chemically treating the soil to reduce the resistance of a grounding system being installed, is it required that you notify the AHJ or the customer?

The reason I ask is because, as we all know, chemically treating the soil is not permanent. At some point in the future the resistance of the grounding system would need to be tested again to ensure it still meets specifications.

I would think, as a contractor, it would be in your best interest to inform the customer of what you have done.

Also, does anyone know what type of life expectancy you could expect from chemically treating the soil? I know that there are a lot of factors that contribute to it's life. I'm asking because I've never had to chemically treat a grounding system and was wondering if anyone has had experience in that area.
 
No reason to notify AHJ, they could careless what the impedance is as it is not a safety/operation issue, nor is there any requirement for an impedance. Tree huggers might have a problem depending on what chemical you are talking about.

Only one who might care is the company/client if they have some maximum requiremt they have to meet. Otherwise the impedance is of no importance.
 
dereckbc said:
No reason to notify AHJ, they could careless what the impedance is as it is not a safety/operation issue, nor is there any requirement for an impedance. Tree huggers might have a problem depending on what chemical you are talking about.

Only one who might care is the company/client if they have some maximum requiremt they have to meet. Otherwise the impedance is of no importance.
Click to expand...

Chemical tratments would lis if they are EPA approved or not. :grin: But hey, just do your reading after a good thunderstorm and you get better readings that any chemical tratment would provide...:D
 
The use of "chemical rods" or other maufatured products intended for specialized grounding purposes is beomming more and more popular in the technologies industries. Hence the addition of 250.52(A)(6) to the 2008 NEC.

I would require the grounding system being installed to be identified on the submittal documents (plans). Of course, they must be installed per the manufacturer's instructions and any other listing and labeling reuqirements. In the case of "maintenance required" systems, those details are between the owner and the contractor and not of my concern.
 
Bentonite

Bentonite

One of the tools we use in the UK and for international work is Bentonite (Google), its a type of clay that swells when water is added. It is usually installed into the ground in a hole larger than the intended earth rod. Check out http://www.furse.com/elp/pdf/scagents.p for one manufactueres detail, they sell a product they call Marconite. We would normall expect the earth rod to be tested annually for high risk installations like server farms and 5 yearly for normal commercial installations. Our supply companies (RECs) would not expect to be involved in evaluating the earth, we would normally expect to record the earth loop imedance on the installation test certs at the end of the job. Our IEE wiring regulations are now based on the international CENELEC Harmonising documents.
 
andinator said:
I assume you are treating the soil to lower resistance...but why??? Drive two and be done.
Click to expand...

Some times it's a customer speck.

We had a building built here in town and the customer wanted 1 ohm to ground or less.

Don't know why.
 
Chemical treatments would list if they are EPA approved or not. But hey, just do your reading after a good thunderstorm and you get better readings that any chemical treatment would provide...
Click to expand...

But this would not provide consistently low impedance over extended periods of time, which many of the chemically enhanced electrodes claim they can do.

In my expierence in normal times (not torrential rain after an extended droughts) rain has little impact on ground test.
 
brian john said:
In my expierence in normal times (not torrential rain after an extended droughts) rain has little impact on ground test.
Click to expand...

In my experience, earth resistance has very little to do with quality of service or protection from surging events.

The surge impedance of the typcial grounding system will not be greatly affected by a variance as great as 100 ohm or more.

The benefit of obtaining consistent ground resistance of under 5 ohms for the life of the system does not out weigh the cost of trying to accomplish the feat.

One would be much better off with a few surge prtoection devices and some luck...
 
Pierre C Belarge said:
I can understand the lower resistance requirements for cell towers and such.
How/why would this really be necessary for IT locations that are installed in the "bowels" of a building???
Click to expand...
Good question Pierre, and I think I can shine some light on that. For the most part it is over-engineering left over from the days of old when IT systems used grounded signal conductors like coax and RS-232. With ethernet and optical it is not warranted now days.

However there are occasions where it is still needed in some form that depends on how signals enter/leave the facility. For example they might use microwave radio, or copper twisted pairs such as T1 span lines. You don't see a lot of that as most use fiber, but it still pops up from time-to-time in remote areas.
 
brian john said:
Bryan



I did not state anywhere it did I was merly commenting on the rain statement.
Click to expand...

Sorry Brian,

I didn't intend for my post to imply I ws refuting something you were stating.

I completely agree with all your comments on this topic...

...I intended it to look as if I was completing your statement with additional information.
 
Last edited:
There is a product called GEM by Erico that I have used. Its a fine powder, used to lower grounding resistance.
Don't know if it works, never tested after installed...
 
THere is a nice article in the latest edition of the NEC Digest on the "National Electrical Grounding Research Project", which I feel is just a big waste of time and effort. Most of the results are a no big suprise.

At the same time, check out the article on Grounding on page 70. I completey respect Mr. Caloggero and his expertise, but I find the article a little confusing and possibly misleading.
 
I used to work with an municipal fire alarm tech, on a 120V DC call box system. The system would go to ground if one of the wires went bad, if on a test, the ground would not work, he would pee on the ground rod.
Perhaps some male dog scent would attract other dogs.
There is so much misunderstanding on low resistance grounds, 1 ohm, 5 ohm, they are specifed but no one knows why.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top