GEC in conduit

Status
Not open for further replies.
Pierre C Belarge said:
I have never seen this happen, and it is not the purpose of the GEC of premises wiring systems.

It may happen, I could only see that as a very rare coincidence.
Click to expand...
I suspect that events like a tree pulling down a drop and peeling a point of attachment and service entrance off the side of a building will have a percentage that break the neutral first.
 
Pierre C Belarge said:
I have never seen this happen, . . .
Click to expand...
I keep thinking of 250.4(A)5

Awhile back, the Metro had a major Plains storm come through. I went to a home with a 100 A 120/240 V service. This one was in EMT and had the mast yanked off the side of the house by a tree.

The meter and socket were still on the house, and the meter socket hub was broken. I watched as a jiggle shorted one of the hot legs at the broken hub, a small arc occurred, and the neighborhood went dark as the transformer OCP operated. When I put my hand on the #6 GEC that went from the service off to the municipal water service at the other end of the house, it was still uncomfortably warm 2 or 3 minutes later.
 
Last edited:
thanks jwjrw

thanks jwjrw

jwjrw said:
In NC we are required to run #4. Not to many cases where it would be subject to damage. He is sleeving it to hide it only I think.
Click to expand...

Every one says I am wrong to use #4 , all that is required is #6 by the NEC and my ahj is also wrong. I am close to you in GA and I might still be correct with the #4 if Ga has the same ammendment . Every place Ive been in GA required the #4 .
Read the post "how many ground rods " to see how I got pounded
 
Last edited:
jetlag said:
Well I got flagged for that and the AHJ said I was parallelling the ground, that I had to take the emt off or use pvc.
Click to expand...

Leaving the 250.64(E) coversation for a minute, ask the inspector what's wrong with paralleling a GEC and where is it prohibited. This is one case where as many paths as possible can be an advantage and Soares even show examples of it.

Now back to 250.64 (E), you would have had to make the 37 mile trip anyways.

As far as using PVC, that is what I do and if there is a question of physical damage protection you can use sched 80.

Roger
 
Last edited:
jetlag said:
I see it comming , debate over #4 in NC . I Will be checking on the outcome of that :grin:
Click to expand...

Nope, no need to debate, you can read all the NC amendments to the NEC by clicking HERE and you will only find one amendment to article 250 which is

AMENDMENT 250.50

Delete NEC 2008 text and replace with:
250.50 Grounding Electrode System. If available on premises at each building or structure served, each item in 250.52(A)(1) through (A)(6) shall be bonded together to form the grounding electrode system. Where none of these electrodes are available, one or more of the electrodes specified in 250.52(A)(4) through (A)(7) shall be installed and used.
Click to expand...


Roger
 
roger said:
Leaving the 250.64(E) coversation for a minute, ask the inspector what's wrong with paralleling a GEC and where is it prohibited. This is one case where as many paths as possible can be an advantage and Soares even show examples of it.

Now back to 250.64 (E), you would have had to make the 37 mile trip anyways.

As far as using PVC, that is what I do and if there is a question of physical damage protection you can use sched 80.

Roger
Click to expand...

I would not have had to go back because he didnt flag me for the bond ,he either doesnt know the code or didnt care if the other end was bonded , he want the EMT gone. He flagged me for wrong violation. You are correct , to start an argument I would have had to go back and bond the other end, I wish I had done that now .
 
jetlag said:
I would not have had to go back because he didnt flag me for the bond ,
Click to expand...

Jetlag, just because an inspector doesn't flag you or incorrectly flags you for an infraction doesn't relieve you of your responsibility of doing a propper installation and by not bonding both ends of the ferous raceway you had a violation.

Roger
 
jetlag said:
...to start an argument I would have had to go back and bond the other end, I wish I had done that now .
Click to expand...
There's been more than once that an inspector has misstated what problem he had with the installation he did not pass. Better to have a good conversation about the installation over the phone, establish what is in each guy's head, and then make the 37 mile drive once. :)

Edit to add: If you had driven over there, bonded the raceway per code, and the inspector returned to find the conduit still there, you know you would have failed again. Know what I mean?
 
al hildenbrand said:
I watched as a jiggle shorted one of the hot legs at the broken hub, a small arc occurred, and the neighborhood went dark as the transformer OCP operated. When I put my hand on the #6 GEC that went from the service off to the municipal water service at the other end of the house, it was still uncomfortably warm 2 or 3 minutes later.
Click to expand...

I'm guessing that the neutral had already broken and the fault current traveled through the metal water pipes to a neighbors house and back to the transformer through their neutral.

Jason
 
jetlag said:
Good work jumper, I had a bonding lock nut at the top but didnt dream the code would require both ends bonded . Seems to me one end bonds both
Click to expand...

Jet,
The 'bonding' at both ends forms a Faraday Shield of the Capacitive type,
which passes high frequency pulses (lightning) towards the earth with minimum impedance.

Bonding only at the top will form an Inductive type Faraday sheild, which will buck the lightning pulse.

:)
 
lakee911 said:
I'm guessing that the neutral had already broken and the fault current traveled through the metal water pipes to a neighbors house and back to the transformer through their neutral.

Jason
Click to expand...
As I recall, the neutral was intact. The transformer was down the alley two spans, however.

But you're right about the current path. The current took all available paths, and these were multiple neighbor's neutral/GEC/water pipes, all connected to the same transformer, so they were all in parallel. IMO, that low parallel impedance plus the water pipe/GEC at the house with the short at the meter hub will have half, or more, of the fault current, when the grounded service conductor is intact, and the transformer is a ways down PoCo #4 hard drawn Cu open conductor secondary.
 
jetlag said:
Every one says I am wrong to use #4 , all that is required is #6 by the NEC and my ahj is also wrong. I am close to you in GA and I might still be correct with the #4 if Ga has the same ammendment . Every place Ive been in GA required the #4 .
Read the post "how many ground rods " to see how I got pounded
Click to expand...
In this part of Georgia inspector passes #6, Georgia Power ok, but EMC requires #4. They say that they're on a different code than us, I've heard them mention the "Life Safety Code." I don't know if that's true, just that it's their answer.
 
readydave8 said:
In this part of Georgia inspector passes #6, Georgia Power ok, but EMC requires #4. They say that they're on a different code than us, I've heard them mention the "Life Safety Code." I don't know if that's true, just that it's their answer.
Click to expand...

This would have nothing to do with NFPA 101 (AKA The Life Safety Code).

Roger
 
readydave8 said:
In this part of Georgia inspector passes #6, Georgia Power ok, but EMC requires #4. They say that they're on a different code than us, I've heard them mention the "Life Safety Code." I don't know if that's true, just that it's their answer.
Click to expand...

The EMC are the ones that started wanting the # 4 from the rod to pass through the disco and the meter with out being broken , it had to be pulled through the ground bar and up the mast out the weather head. It was a royal pain to wire it . It went on a few years before they were forced to stop requiring it. They were parallelling the neutral . They EMC requires #4 here also and that is what caused me to start using it on GA power. I forgot GA power goes by the NEC , EMC sets their own rules sometimes
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top