Conduit

[Alwayslearningelec]

Note #1 says the brounding copnductor needs to be in 1" conduit. Is that requires or ever really installed in conduit?

I think I've always seen it runs bare excpet for maybe a stub-up at the wall. Thanks.

 

[rc/retired]

It's not required by the NEC. Although I have seen the bonding conductor installed in pipe at that location. Usually 1/2" emt.

Ron

 

[David Castor]

Not required by NEC, but required by the drawing.

 

[Alwayslearningelec]

Not required by NEC, but required by the drawing.

Do you mean the horixontal runs as well?

 

[hornetd]

Enclosing a Grounding Electrode Conductor (GEC) in EMT or conduit is only required were the GEC is subject to physical damage. If metal conduit is used the GEC must be bonded to the metal conduit at both ends of the portion of the GEC that it protects.

Tom Horne

 

[electrofelon]

Enclosing a Grounding Electrode Conductor (GEC) in EMT or conduit is only required were the GEC is subject to physical damage. If metal conduit is used the GEC must be bonded to the metal conduit at both ends of the portion of the GEC that it protects.

Tom Horne

But these arent GEC's. This is a bunch of superfluous waste some grounding nutjob drew up who has no idea what he is doing.

 

[hornetd]

But these aren't GECs. This is a bunch of superfluous waste some grounding nutjob drew up who has no idea what he is doing.

May I ask what brought you to the conclusion that the person who specified the bonding conductors shown in that print is "some grounding nutjob" rather than a communications engineer or a communications wireman...?

Tom Horne

 

[tom baker]

Bonding similar to what’s shown is common on cell sites per AT&T standards, for lightning protection. Perhaps the bonding would be of some value for non ether net data. Today with optical fiber and cat 5, etc wiring there is no issue with noise
The egc with the supply ckt is all the code requires. A lot of standards are boiler plate that don’t get updated. Perhaps Hal can comment

 

[hbiss]

Could be some BICSI thing. They are always over the top.

-Hal

 

[hornetd]

The bible for communications site grounding and bonding is Motorola Guidance document R56. Even the military and NASA use it. I never actually qualified as a journeyman communications site installer because I was too busy installing communications shelters. I was only paid when I was working so I couldn't afford to take the time needed for the classes that would have prepared me for the exam. In spite of all that the agency inspectors all liked my work. The US Army Corps of Engineers inspectors; whom I consider to be the most well educated and thorough inspectors I've ever faced; even gave me a couple of compliments. I learned how R56 applied by matching to the noted reference in the plans back to R56 and trying to understand what it actually said. The difficulties was all mine. Once I learned Motorola's way of writing guidance documents they did make good sense. I would always ask any engineer that came to the site the reasons for some of the things they specified and almost all of them were quite generous with their knowledge and time. That said I never found the work to be falling off a log easy. There were a lot of things that were easy to get wrong. Luckily for me I got to use some very well designed and made test equipment and my bed time reading was often the manuals for those instruments. I never figured out why so many of the other workers wouldn't bother to study the whys of what they were doing. The hows were the only thing that they wanted to know.

Tom Horne

 

[electrofelon]

May I ask what brought you to the conclusion that the person who specified the bonding conductors shown in that print is "some grounding nutjob" rather than a communications engineer or a communications wireman...?

Tom Horne

based on the fact that pretty much of what is shown there would already be bonded, the over the top wire sizes, and two decades of seeing over the top bonding and grounding done with pretty much zero justification for it with case studies or even basic electrical theory. IF it was drawn by a "communications engineer" (or any engineer in fact, some of them are the worst with grounding ridiculousness) I would be even MORE skeptical that it serves any purpose We dont know exactly what it is for, but it does not appear to be a cell site room IMO.

 

[MiamiValleyelec]

In the data centers I’ve done the grounding/bonding wire had to be in pvc and metal could not encircle the conduit. Had to use fiberglass strut straps