Definition

[charlie]

Re: Definition

The NEC does not have the authority to change the English language.

Sure it does, my wife knows what it means to say something is within sight; however, the Code has a different definition than she does. Is either one wrong?

Bennie, I wish you the best.

 

[bennie]

Re: Definition

Charlie: Your wife is correct, just like mine, even when wrong

[ March 22, 2003, 10:11 AM: Message edited by: bennie ]

 

[Len_B]

Re: Definition

A code is a set of laws, and a legal document when adopted by a jurisdiction. A legal document with improper words is not legal

Bennie,
I share your frustration with the butchering of our language. However, almost every law and contract has a "survivability clause" which includes provisions for items such as errors in language, usage, etc. not affecting the enforceability or detracting from the legal purpose of the document/contract. Most State's adoption of the NEC and other codes contains language to this effect.
If laws and language did not require interpretation there would be no jurys, lawyers, judges, etc. In the final analysis, if the Court's opinion is that "wacking his wife" is synonymous with murder, then Blake will not get a tee time with OJ.

edit: It is my opinion that if meaning of a word is established by agreement or consent(in this case the very act of reading the document), that its usage becomes legitimate, especially for purposes related directly to the scope of the document.

Len

[ March 22, 2003, 11:25 AM: Message edited by: Len_B ]

 

[bennie]

Re: Definition

LenB: Excellent writing. You are probably correct.

I am accustomed to government specs. Correct word use is imperative.

A common nail is... Bulkhead retaining pin

 

[roger]

Re: Definition

Don, I guess I should have said, "let's forget the code period", not just 647.

Now the definition of grounded per 100 is definately wrong if we go to the dictionary, even if "grounded" were recognized. If a conductor or system is not anyway earthed how can the word ground or any derivitive of the word be used?

with very few exceptions, a 120 volt ungrounded system is a code violation.

I know that. Read the first three words of my earlier post. But then again, per article 100 it is grounded. Also, I did say "phase to XO", not an isolated system, as in 60v 60v.

How could we call it a "return conductor" in an AC system?

Ok let's change it to "The conductor that is not intended to carry voltage to a load, but intended to carry current away from the load back to the source per what we know as Kirchoff's laws".

This is just for fun too. Well maybe.

Roger

[ March 22, 2003, 02:14 PM: Message edited by: roger ]

 

[don_resqcapt19]

Re: Definition

Roger,

Now the definition of grounded per 100 is definately wrong if we go to the dictionary ...

See the scope of Article 100. We don't use a common dictionary for any words that are defined in Article 100. The definition that appears there is the only legally correct definition of that word or term used in the NEC. This in no different from many legal document where the definition of a word or term used in that specific document is defined within the document.

If a conductor or system is not anyway earthed how can the word ground or any derivitive of the word be used?

Look at the definition of grounded in Article 100.

Grounded. Connected to earth or to some conducting body that serves in place of the earth.

"The conductor that is not intended to carry voltage and / or current to a load, but intended to carry voltage and / or current away from the load back to the source per what we know as Kirchoff's laws".

This still implies a 'one way' current flow.
Don

 

[roger]

Re: Definition

Don, you said

Look at the definition of grounded in Article 100

I had already said

But then again, per article 100 it is grounded.

Now, I do appologize for editing other parts of my post while you were typing or posting. As my grandson would say, Ohhh Welll.

Roger

[ March 22, 2003, 05:31 PM: Message edited by: roger ]

 

[karl riley]

Re: Definition

Hey guys! The first part of these posts made it very clear why the verb "ground" is misleading when it does not mean to go to earth. When it actually means to go directly by metallic conductor back to the transformer.

Bennie, you are playing a very helpful role in forcing us to clarify the obvious.

If we are shifting now to other points, it might be better to start another thread.
Karl

 

[hurk27]

Re: Definition

Ok I have to say somthing even if it does sound dumb. LOL

 

[bennie]

Re: Definition

Hurk: I agree with your opinion. I too understand ground conductors have more than one purpose and function. A name does not limit its use.

In the beginning of my career, I trained at the Naval Technical Training Center.

I also attended Stanford University, a contract school for the military.

Many of the existing grounding and bonding procedures were developed by and for the military.

Definition of "Bonding" in basic specification, the well known MIL-I-6181.

Bonding: Electrical bonding is a fixed union between two metallic surfaces resulting in a low impedance connection.

The electronic engineering community will never permit this definition to be otherwise.

 

[charlie b]

Re: Definition

Why don?t we adopt the British way of speaking? We could use ?Earth,? ?Earthed,? and ?Earthing,? when speaking of connections to our home planet. We could then restrict the use of the word ?Bond? to spy novels.

 

[bennie]

Re: Definition

Good idea. What two surfaces does James Bond connect?

The research station, in Antarctica, is on a ten thousand foot ice cap.

I worked on the installation of new generator units for the site at the South Pole. The question was asked about grounding. I suggested flying in buckets of dirt

My suggestion created second thoughts about my credibility, until the others realized I was trying to be funny.

Ground plane, is a proper definition. There is no reason to change any of the present wording or definitions. More education is the answer.

 

[mikeackley]

Re: Definition

Flying in buckets of earth to the South Pole!