G&B: TBPP repeated ground discussion

[George Stolz]

(snip)

Electricity does not seek the path of least resistance to the earth. It seeks all available paths back to it’s source, in proportion to their resistance. The reason that a person gets shocked when touching an ungrounded conductor and the earth is because the neutral of the system is repeatedly connected to earth in a grounded electrical system. The earth becomes part of a return path to the transformer – it’s part of one route back to the source; the earth is not the destination for the electricity.

(end snip)

 

[billyzee]

I like the way you talk, uh-uh...


All except for this...

"the earth is because the neutral of the system is repeatedly connected to earth in a grounded electrical"

I like mustard on my french fried pertaters. uh-uh.

 

[George Stolz]

Nonsense aside, what aspect of the statement do you take issue with?

 

[billyzee]

Reading is Fundimental

Reading is Fundimental

I have to withdraw my issues. You see I was focused on the nonsense and failed to read the entire sentence.

You must forgive me for crying about "repeatedly" grounded neutrals because in the context of the sentence they were rightly blamed for causing problems. But I initially thought the sentence was saying something good and common and helpful about "repeatedly" grounded neutrals.

Anyway, nevermind.

 

[George Stolz]

I have to withdraw my issues. You see I was focused on the nonsense and failed to read the entire sentence.

You must forgive me for crying about "repeatedly" grounded neutrals because in the context of the sentence they were rightly blamed for causing problems. But I initially thought the sentence was saying something good and common and helpful about "repeatedly" grounded neutrals.

Anyway, nevermind.

I generally just think of it as a fact of life, not really a good thing or a bad thing. Why do you see it as a bad thing?

 

[ATSman]

GF Schemes

GF Schemes

I generally just think of it as a fact of life, not really a good thing or a bad thing. Why do you see it as a bad thing?

By definition, the neutral conductor in a GF scheme shall be only be grounded at one point, upstream of the GF sensor(s) for proper operation of the GF system. Someone else can site the NEC code section.

 

[George Stolz]

:-?

Tony, we were talking about the fact that the neutral is repeatedly connected to earth before and at a service. Ground fault protection of equipment wasn't mentioned.

 

[hurk27]

(snip)

Electricity does not seek the path of least resistance to the earth. It seeks all available paths back to it?s source, in proportion to their resistance. The reason that a person gets shocked when touching an ungrounded conductor and the earth is because the neutral of the system is repeatedly connected to earth in a grounded electrical system. The earth becomes part of a return path to the transformer ? it?s part of one route back to the source; the earth is not the destination for the electricity.

(end snip)

Not sure where this is going as I can't detect a question in it?
But you statements are true as have been proved even on here in the "Gary experiments" and have been much substantiated in most electrical writings of the last 15 to 20 years.

It is because we try to bond to earth that make this problem much worse, if all electric systems was isolated from Earth there would not be a shock hazard from these systems BUT!
This would introduce a shock hazard that does reference the Earth as one of it's conductors, "Static voltage buildup" this has to be controlled, and bonding to the Earth is the only known way to do this.

Now my ideal system would be grounding only the HV side of the grid and isolating the drops through shielded winding transformers with the shield bonded to the primary MGN, drop to the house with just 3 conductors using a GFP to cut power if a ungrounded conductor were to fault or a lost neutral, But not going to happen.

All just a dream:roll: