Connecting UFER to a ground rod

[roger]

Dennis, you said that "Any crimp lug would work if it is rated for outdoor or direct burial." But the code specifically says that it needs to be listed as grounding and bonding equipment. I do not know about acorns, but I do know that none of the crimps I have looked at from Burndy or T&B say that they are listed as grounding or bonding equipment. So that would mean that they are not code compliant, would it not?

Even though the listing may only mention outdoor or direct burial, UL 467 is the standard for "Grounding and Bonding" equipment.

IOW's, if the listing states UL 467 it's done.

https://standardscatalog.ul.com/standards/en/standard_467_10

Roger

 

[KaBoom!]

Even though the listing may only mention outdoor or direct burial, UL 467 is the standard for "Grounding and Bonding" equipment.

IOW's, if the listing states UL 467 it's done.

https://standardscatalog.ul.com/standards/en/standard_467_10

Roger

Perfect, thank you :thumbsup:

 

[kwired]

Dennis, you said that "Any crimp lug would work if it is rated for outdoor or direct burial." But the code specifically says that it needs to be listed as grounding and bonding equipment. I do not know about acorns, but I do know that none of the crimps I have looked at from Burndy or T&B say that they are listed as grounding or bonding equipment. So that would mean that they are not code compliant, would it not?

Burndy on line catalog has completely different section on grounding. If you get into irreversible compression components they have similar catalog number as other components not listed for grounding except there is a "G" in the catalog number.

 

[roger]

Perfect, thank you :thumbsup:

You're welcome.

Roger

 

[Frontman4u]

The first issue here is the incorrect installation of what we can only presume is THHN. I'd suggest looking in to this installation before tying in to it. You might lose your bonding jumper.

 

[infinity]

The first issue here is the incorrect installation of what we can only presume is THHN. I'd suggest looking in to this installation before tying in to it. You might lose your bonding jumper.

Can you be more specific as to where this is in this thread?

 

[Adamjamma]

picture in post 1 shows it.

 

[roger]

picture in post 1 shows it.

How do you know what it is; can you read the print on it? Even if it is it doesn't matter, a GEC can be insulated or bare and the insulation type is not mentioned in Part III of 250.

With that said, if there were a prohibition of a certain insulation just strip it and you're done.

Roger

 

[jaggedben]

How do you know what it is; can you read the print on it? Even if it is it doesn't matter, a GEC can be insulated or bare and the insulation type is not mentioned in Part III of 250.

With that said, if there were a prohibition of a certain insulation just strip it and you're done.

Roger

But it needs to be of sufficient size. Scale is a bit hard to tell from the photo, but it reads to me like it might be 12awg.

 

[roger]

But it needs to be of sufficient size. Scale is a bit hard to tell from the photo, but it reads to me like it might be 12awg.

Of course if it's the wrong size there's a problem but that's a different thread.

The OP was looking for a crimper that would work with #4 so it seems to say the size is correct for a CEE.

Roger

 

[Frontman4u]

Rob I'm only presuming. I cannot read the insulation.

 

[Frontman4u]

Roger would we worry about altering the integrity of the cable by stripping it back maybe loosening the wound and ceasing its conductivity?

 

[roger]

Roger would we worry about altering the integrity of the cable by stripping it back maybe loosening the wound and ceasing its conductivity?

No.

Roger

 

[infinity]

Rob I'm only presuming. I cannot read the insulation.

As Roger stated it can be bare so having insulation of any type would also be permitted. It's not required to be green either, although it's common to use green conductors for bonding jumpers and GEC's.

 

[Rick Mack]

UFER Installation

UFER Installation

As Roger stated it can be bare so having insulation of any type would also be permitted. It's not required to be green either, although it's common to use green conductors for bonding jumpers and GEC's.

I realize I am late to the party on this thread, but I was browsing the Forum
Recap and saw this.

The post appears to show a green insulated conductor coming out of the footing.
This can not be a qualified CEE (UFER). See 2014 NEC Art. 250.52(A)(3). The
UFER conductor "shall be at least 20 feet of --- BARE copper conductor not
smaller than 4 AWG." It also must be encased in at least 2 in. of concrete,
i.e. not closer than 2 in. to the earth. Unless the requirements were documented
during the footing inspection, there is no proof that the conductor doesn't just
go in a few inches and stop.

I realize most of this thread was about making irreversible connections to the
GEC, but I just wanted to put in my 2 cents worth.
For background on UFER, Google UFER and look at the reference to the paper
presented to the IEEE Conference in 1963 by Herbert G. UFER (Wikipedia). This type CEE was added to the 1968 NEC.

Thanks for the forum. Good discussions.

 

[Buck Parrish]

I realize I am late to the party on this thread, but I was browsing the Forum
Recap and saw this.

The post appears to show a green insulated conductor coming out of the footing.
This can not be a qualified CEE (UFER). See 2014 NEC Art. 250.52(A)(3). The
UFER conductor "shall be at least 20 feet of --- BARE copper conductor not
smaller than 4 AWG." It also must be encased in at least 2 in. of concrete,
i.e. not closer than 2 in. to the earth. Unless the requirements were documented
during the footing inspection, there is no proof that the conductor doesn't just
go in a few inches and stop.

I realize most of this thread was about making irreversible connections to the
GEC, but I just wanted to put in my 2 cents worth.
For background on UFER, Google UFER and look at the reference to the paper
presented to the IEEE Conference in 1963 by Herbert G. UFER (Wikipedia). This type CEE was added to the 1968 NEC.

Thanks for the forum. Good discussions.

That's the rebar that should be 20 ft . Not the wire.

20 ft of #4 bare copper wouldn't last long on most slabs under construction. :happyno:

 

[infinity]

A CEE can be either 20' of rebar or 20' of bare copper conductor within the footing. If using the latter better install it right before the pour to keep the thieves at bay.

 

[GoldDigger]

I realize I am late to the party on this thread, but I was browsing the Forum
Recap and saw this.

The post appears to show a green insulated conductor coming out of the footing.
This can not be a qualified CEE (UFER). See 2014 NEC Art. 250.52(A)(3).
...
...
...

On the assumption that the copper is just connecting to the complying rebar in the footing, a strict inspector will have required a look at the copper to rebar connection before the slab was poured. There is, AFAIK, no requirement that the rebar to GEC connection be exposed after the pour.
On the other hand, if no CEE was created before the pour, many jurisdictions will require that rebar be exposed as necessary to connect a GEC to create a functioning CEE.

 

[kwired]

I realize I am late to the party on this thread, but I was browsing the Forum
Recap and saw this.

The post appears to show a green insulated conductor coming out of the footing.
This can not be a qualified CEE (UFER). See 2014 NEC Art. 250.52(A)(3). The
UFER conductor "shall be at least 20 feet of --- BARE copper conductor not
smaller than 4 AWG." It also must be encased in at least 2 in. of concrete,
i.e. not closer than 2 in. to the earth. Unless the requirements were documented
during the footing inspection, there is no proof that the conductor doesn't just
go in a few inches and stop.

I realize most of this thread was about making irreversible connections to the
GEC, but I just wanted to put in my 2 cents worth.
For background on UFER, Google UFER and look at the reference to the paper
presented to the IEEE Conference in 1963 by Herbert G. UFER (Wikipedia). This type CEE was added to the 1968 NEC.

Thanks for the forum. Good discussions.

An insulated conductor can't be the core conductor of the CEE. An insulated conductor emerging from concrete could just be the GEC that ties onto qualifying metal reinforcement within in the concrete.

 

[infinity]

On the assumption that the copper is just connecting to the complying rebar in the footing, a strict inspector will have required a look at the copper to rebar connection before the slab was poured. There is, AFAIK, no requirement that the rebar to GEC connection be exposed after the pour.
On the other hand, if no CEE was created before the pour, many jurisdictions will require that rebar be exposed as necessary to connect a GEC to create a functioning CEE.

Here in NJ you cannot pour the footings without a footing inspection which includes the installation of or connection to the CEE. I've probably mentioned this before but I did have a job where the footing inspector wouldn't allow the pour because there was no connection to the rebar. Turns out the rebar was 3/8" and didn't qualify as a CEE in the first place but he didn't care or didn't know the code. Someone had to run to Home Depot to buy a piece of #8 copper and a rebar clamp and install it before he would sign off. Since the rebar and the #8 were both too small I just left it off when we installed the new 200 amp service. I think that I might have actually cut it off.