EGC of subpanel

Status
Not open for further replies.
buckofdurham said:
The water line ground has to go directly to the main.
To clear a ground fault the electricity will take the quickest path to ground. You don't want it traveling through your sub panel.
The water line is ussually a better ground, too. then the ufer. So it would definetly be used in a ground fault situation.
right on! thanks you guys
 
buckofdurham said:
The water line ground has to go directly to the main.
To clear a ground fault the electricity will take the quickest path to ground. You don't want it traveling through your sub panel.
The water line is ussually a better ground, too. then the ufer. So it would definetly be used in a ground fault situation.

The grounding electrode and GEC has nothing to do with clearing a ground fault.

Read 250.4(A)(1 through 5)
 
In a ground fault, the electricity is seeking to return to source. EGC, to neutral/ground bond at the main service entrance (or SDS) to neutral winding of the XFMR.
 
Okay, what you have is a 200 amp panel (main service) feeding a sub panel. The sub panel must have 4 wires being fed to it and as John said separate the neutrals from the grounds. The main GEC must be run from the water line to the main service unspliced. If there is more than 10 feet of metal water line buried outdoors than you need to be within 5 feet of where the service enters the building.
 
JohnJ0906 said:
The grounding electrode and GEC has nothing to do with clearing a ground fault.

Read 250.4(A)(1 through 5)

In 250.4(A) 5
That tells you "it shall not be considered an effective ground fault current carry path"
I've done service upgrades where the water line ground was better then the utilities ground.
 
JohnJ0906 said:
How do you mean this?
The water line had less resistance than the POCO neutral?

I was doing a service change. Hooking the lines above the weather head to my service. I always do the neutral first.
One time the neutral was arcing until I fastened it good. The hot's we're not hooked up yet.
I was thinking that the nighbors houses with loads on them were actually feeding back through my grounded conductor because I had such a good ground.
What's your thoughts ?
 
buckofdurham said:
I was doing a service change. Hooking the lines above the weather head to my service. I always do the neutral first.
One time the neutral was arcing until I fastened it good. The hot's we're not hooked up yet.
I was thinking that the nighbors houses with loads on them were actually feeding back through my grounded conductor because I had such a good ground.
What's your thoughts ?

You very well might be correct.
You had a better neutral connection than they did, not ground.
Also, if there is municipal metallic water, some of the neighbor's neutral current will flow through your neutral, via the GECs and water pipe, under normal conditions. (And some of your's through theirs)
 
Dennis Alwon said:
...The sub panel must have 4 wires being fed to it and as John said separate the neutrals from the grounds. The main GEC must be run from the water line to the main service unspliced...
But is it non-compliant for the GEC and the EGC to be one and the same?
 
I think the EGC/GEC can't share only because a GEC is to be unspliced. How do you get it to the pipe unspliced without violating a rule?

If the water pipe is just being bonded and is not a ground electrode, what the OP wants to do may be legal. But he'd have to verify that the water pipe outside is non-metallic. If the pipe is just being bonded, I know of no issues for number of splices, wire routing/grouping/sharing, etc that would prevent this. It does have to be large enough the whole length though (and #4 cu would be right).
 
Smart $ said:
But is it non-compliant for the GEC and the EGC to be one and the same?

I believe you know the answer to that question but as mentioned it would be a difficult install. The op didn't appear to be asking that question.
 
Smart $ said:
But is it non-compliant for the GEC and the EGC to be one and the same?

How about if I tap off of the GEC to ground a (previously) un-grounded receptacle?

At that point, the EGC nd GEC are one and the same back to the panel....no?:smile:

I know that this is a different situation than the OP's problem, but... just for argument's sake.

steve
 
buckofdurham said:
I was doing a service change. Hooking the lines above the weather head to my service. I always do the neutral first.
One time the neutral was arcing until I fastened it good. The hot's we're not hooked up yet.
I was thinking that the nighbors houses with loads on them were actually feeding back through my grounded conductor because I had such a good ground.
What's your thoughts ?
The current flow was not because you had a better ground...it was because the metal underground water pipe is in parallel with the utility grounded conductor. In areas with a common metal underground water piping system, it is not uncommon to find 20% or more of the grounded conductor current flowing on the water pipe, however it has nothing to do with the path to earth (ground), it only has to do with the path back to the utility transformer XO terminal.
 
suemarkp said:
I think the EGC/GEC can't share only because a GEC is to be unspliced. How do you get it to the pipe unspliced without violating a rule?
The GEC does not have to be unspliced. However, if it is spliced, it must be of an irreversible type... typically exothermic welding or compression. A barrel sleeve connector butt-splice will do the job!
 
Dennis Alwon said:
...but as mentioned it would be a difficult install.
Not really. See my response to suemarkp...

Dennis Alwon said:
The op didn't appear to be asking that question.
His query is a lot like referencing a dictionary for how to spell a word for which the spelling is uncertain...!!!

Reading "between the lines", I say he's asking what is the easiest, cost-effective way to fix this problem?
 
hillbilly said:
How about if I tap off of the GEC to ground a (previously) un-grounded receptacle?

At that point, the EGC nd GEC are one and the same back to the panel....no?:smile:

I know that this is a different situation than the OP's problem, but... just for argument's sake.

steve
Your argument is sound... at least from my point of view :grin:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top