GEC entering panel

[rbalex]

...

IF, you wish, the NFPA can be solicited for a formal interpretation , most likely Jeff Sargent or similar icon will accommodate your query
...

~RJ~

FYI “Formal Interpretations” don’t come from Staff. They are very painful to get.

 

[kwired]

from 250.64(E)(1)

Ferrous metal raceways and enclosures
shall be bonded at each end of the raceway or enclosure to the
grounding electrode or grounding electrode conductor to
create an electrically parallel path.

~RJ~

So where is this "other end" when you enter at one point and never leave at another point that myself and others have asked about?

If you ran a GEC through an aux gutter or wireway, entered one end and exited the other - makes sense to bond at "each end". If you enter any enclosure but never leave again - how do you bond "both ends" when there is only one end to bond?

That said the GEC is typically landed in a lug that is bonded to the enclosure anyway, but somewhere in the "middle" of the enclosure.

 

[wwhitney]

Otherwise, how could you bond both ends of a cabinet, such as a meter base cabinet, or panel cabinet?

While I'm not sure where I stand on this whole issue, on this part at least I have an opinion: it makes perfect sense to bond the GEC to the enclosure at each end. One end of the GEC is where it terminates, I believe that termination naturally bonds it to the enclosure. The other end is where the GEC exits the enclosure.

Think of it as the two ends of the GEC/enclosure overlap. Or the two ends of the state of the GEC being enclosed by ferrous metal, either due to the GEC itself ending, or the enclosure ending.

Cheers, Wayne

 

[kwired]

While I'm not sure where I stand on this whole issue, on this part at least I have an opinion: it makes perfect sense to bond the GEC to the enclosure at each end. One end of the GEC is where it terminates, I believe that termination naturally bonds it to the enclosure. The other end is where the GEC exits the enclosure.

Think of it as the two ends of the GEC/enclosure overlap. Or the two ends of the state of the GEC being enclosed by ferrous metal, either due to the GEC itself ending, or the enclosure ending.

Cheers, Wayne

I may buy that, but is there any significant difference in choke effect if you don't bond it to the point where it leaves the enclosure?

 

[romex jockey]

This is only my opinion!
I think the use of the word "enclosure" may be throwing some off here. I don't think they are referring to a cabinet, box, etc. I'm thinking of something that encloses the conductors. They use the term "enclosure" right along with raceway. A raceway being a complete conduit system. A short piece would be a sleeve. A sleeve could be an enclosure and maybe what they are referring to.
Otherwise, how could you bond both ends of a cabinet, such as a meter base cabinet, or panel cabinet?

With a "sleeve" being an "enclosure" you could and should bond both ends if it is made of ferrous metal.
It makes zero sense to say to bond both ends of a cabinet. Especially since the conductor only enters the cabinet but does not exit it!

I'm big on troff's

Some are below service equipment

The GEC enters it AND is terminated to it as in the pix below, and fan off from said termination (usually a larger G bar vs. the lug shown) to serv equipment mounted above it

~RJ~

 

[romex jockey]

I may buy that, but is there any significant difference in choke effect if you don't bond it to the point where it leaves the enclosure?

How one quantifies Mother nature escapes me Kwired.

If there is a 780 EE in the forum perhaps some insight could be gained?

In my opinion, the code requires us to mitigate the possibility of any choke effect via parallel path installs, simply because we are not qualified to 'do the math'

~RJ~

 

[roger]

I'm big on troff's

Some are below service equipment

The GEC enters it AND is terminated to it as in the pix below, and fan off from said termination (usually a larger G bar vs. the lug shown) to serv equipment mounted above it

~RJ~

Steve, notice each raceway and wireway in that illustration has an entrance and an exit, what we are talking about is a cabinet with only an entry.

Nobody has disputed that the ferrous examples in the illustration need to be bonded on each end.

Roger

 

[romex jockey]

I can print me one of them up in ten minutes with the software I have on this computer........ Or conversely , I could pay the annual fee to IAEI and get one of the "Official" ones. This is the joke of the century. Shameful actually.

No, you'll need to sit for one of their three tests to be a 'certified member' Mr Mac

Certification Programs

Advocated by Mr Mike Holt himself
Electrical Inspector Exam Preparation

Shameful is your degrading of it in his forum

thx

~RJ~

 

[romex jockey]

Steve, notice each raceway and wireway in that illustration has an entrance and an exit, what we are talking about is a cabinet with only an entry.

Nobody has disputed that the ferrous examples in the illustration need to be bonded on each end.

Roger

In fairness 312.5(C) examples apply to cables (not conductor) entering meters Roger

So for the sake of debate, let's use a simple resi meter , and say we've applied all 7 conditions of 312.5(C)

What we have is an OH ser ent cable entering w/o a bond, and traveling an entire 4" until it's bonded to the meter shell.

Knowing many strikes come via OH poco lines , do we not have a divided path for service conductors ? Or is it the 'earth return' that is important here?

~RJ~

 

[jwelectric]

This is only my opinion!
I think the use of the word "enclosure" may be throwing some off here. I don't think they are referring to a cabinet, box, etc. I'm thinking of something that encloses the conductors. They use the term "enclosure" right along with raceway. A raceway being a complete conduit system. A short piece would be a sleeve. A sleeve could be an enclosure and maybe what they are referring to.
Otherwise, how could you bond both ends of a cabinet, such as a meter base cabinet, or panel cabinet?

With a "sleeve" being an "enclosure" you could and should bond both ends if it is made of ferrous metal.
It makes zero sense to say to bond both ends of a cabinet. Especially since the conductor only enters the cabinet but does not exit it!

Personally I could care less about this discussion but to fulfill the letter of the code I think we are trying to explain away the definition of the word enclosure as defined by this very book we are discussing
Enclosure.

The case or housing of apparatus, or the fence or walls surrounding an installation to prevent personnel from accidentally contacting energized parts or to protect the equipment from physical damage.



Informational Note: See Table 110.28 for examples of enclosure types.

The meter pan is an enclosure as defined by the NEC. Try to add what you would like to the verbiage it does not change the facts. Now let's start investing in the clamps before the next lightning strike

Edited to add:
You go romex jockey

 

[kwired]

I still doubt there is many people that have ever said "this wouldn't have happened if a kenny clamp had been used", I still think it is a solution for a problem that doesn't exist.

 

[ActionDave]

I still doubt there is many people that have ever said "this wouldn't have happened if a kenny clamp had been used", I still think it is a solution for a problem that doesn't exist.

It's a solution to a problem of not selling enough of your product.

 

[wwhitney]

Nobody has disputed that the ferrous examples in the illustration need to be bonded on each end.

If the (ferrous) wireway in romex jockey's picture is electrically continuous with the two segments of (ferrous) metallic raceway, is there any point, physics-wise, in directly bonding the GEC to the wireway itself?

It seems to me that if the GEC is bonded at the open ends of the two metallic raceways, then the GEC is bonded at both ends of the choke, and that is enough. Code language wise, if you read the phrase "raceway or enclosure" to mean "an assembly consisting of raceways and/or enclosures" then you'd only need to bond at the two open ends, not at the enclosure in the middle.

Cheers, Wayne

 

[MAC702]

In this picture, one of the bonding points occurs well away from the actual point of departure of the enclosure, indeed it's fairly close to the center of the enclosure. So, you'd be satisfied with just a second chair lug pretty much anywhere in a panel?

Also, one of the ferrous raceways is bonded several inches away from its actual end. Does this affect performance of the bond? Or is it "negligible?" Who decides?

 

[kwired]

It's a solution to a problem of not selling enough of your product.

Exactly, if I were making that product I would be telling you why I think you need it. And the more I mention code that may apply the more convincing I will be to some.

 

[peter d]

Now let's start investing in the clamps before the next lightning strike

No, absolutely not. I steadfastly refuse to do something that is not required by the NEC. I will continue to use the 1/4" holes as I always have.

Secondly, I have brought up repeatedly that NEC GEC's are not UL listed lightning protections systems and offer no substantial protection to the structure from lightning strikes. Why do you and others who are pro-Kenny clamp continue to ignore this? If you want genuine lightning protection, you need a genuine LPS installed by an actual LPS contractor according to UL standards. Pounding two ground rods and connecting it with #6 to a residential panelboard is not a lightning protection system. How many times do I have to repeat this before you and others get it?

 

[kwired]

No, absolutely not. I steadfastly refuse to do something that is not required by the NEC. I will continue to use the 1/4" holes as I always have.

Secondly, I have brought up repeatedly that NEC GEC's are not UL listed lightning protections systems and offer no substantial protection to the structure from lightning strikes. Why do you and others who are pro-Kenny clamp continue to ignore this? If you want genuine lightning protection, you need a genuine LPS installed by an actual LPS contractor according to UL standards. Pounding two ground rods and connecting it with #6 to a residential panelboard is not a lightning protection system. How many times do I have to repeat this before you and others get it?

I also agree with that.

GES is not for lightning protection, it will take transients at times that maybe originated because of lightning. It is not intended to meet any performance criteria in a direct hit type of incident

 

[mbrooke]

No, absolutely not. I steadfastly refuse to do something that is not required by the NEC. I will continue to use the 1/4" holes as I always have.

Secondly, I have brought up repeatedly that NEC GEC's are not UL listed lightning protections systems and offer no substantial protection to the structure from lightning strikes. Why do you and others who are pro-Kenny clamp continue to ignore this? If you want genuine lightning protection, you need a genuine LPS installed by an actual LPS contractor according to UL standards. Pounding two ground rods and connecting it with #6 to a residential panelboard is not a lightning protection system. How many times do I have to repeat this before you and others get it?

Which is why we have this:


http://www.nfpa.org/codes-and-stand...s/list-of-codes-and-standards/detail?code=780


At no point does the NEC talk about lightning protection in its intent.

 

[jwelectric]

Secondly, I have brought up repeatedly that NEC GEC's are not UL listed lightning protections systems and offer no substantial protection to the structure from lightning strikes.

At no point does the NEC talk about lightning protection in its intent.

Could either of you explain 250.4(A)(1)

250.4(A) Grounded Systems.
(1) Electrical System Grounding. Electrical systems that are grounded shall be connected to earth in a manner that will limit the voltage imposed by LIGHTNING, line surges, or unintentional contact with higher-voltage lines and that will stabilize the voltage to earth during normal operation.

 

[peter d]

Could either of you explain 250.4(A)(1)

250.4(A) Grounded Systems.
(1) Electrical System Grounding. Electrical systems that are grounded shall be connected to earth in a manner that will limit the voltage imposed by LIGHTNING, line surges, or unintentional contact with higher-voltage lines and that will stabilize the voltage to earth during normal operation.

So I'm supposed to believe that 2 ground rods and #6 are going to limit this voltage? Are you serious? :huh::lol: Just because the NEC states something does not make it infallible. AFCI's are in the NEC, after all.

Why does an entirely separate NFPA standard exist (as pointed out by mbrooke) for the design and install of LPS? Have you ever seen an installed LPS?