GFCI protection for electric water heaters

[iwire]

If I bond one end of this to the equipment grounding bar and apply a voltage to the other end will the both ends be at the same potential?

That is what you are asking of water and in this thread we have learned water is a poor conductor. I am willing to bet the minerals that it would take to make it a conductor on par with copper or aluminum are rarely found in home tap water.

 

[mbrooke]

If I bond one end of this to the equipment grounding bar and apply a voltage to the other end will the both ends be at the same potential?

That is what you are asking of water and in this thread we have learned water is a poor conductor. I am willing to bet the minerals that it would take to make it a conductor on par with copper or aluminum are rarely found in home tap water.

I never said anything about water. My point was that if the water heater become energized, the voltage between the metal piping in the home and everything else like the bonded UFER would be close to zero.

 

[iwire]

I never said anything about water. My point was that if the water heater become energized, the voltage between the metal piping in the home and everything else like the bonded UFER would be close to zero.

Oh, I missed that you were stating the obvious.

I think the OPs concern is with energized water.

 

[mbrooke]

Oh, I missed that you were stating the obvious.

I think the OPs concern is with energized water.

The OPs concern had migrated to piping as well which other members addressed as can be seen above my comment and it seems somehow I am the one who is at fault adding my 2 cents to that.

I somehow get the feeling Im not liked as much (on this site) anymore after I started questioning the NEC. Oh well, Ill take it like a man for stating the earth is round rather than flat

 

[ActionDave]

.....I somehow get the feeling Im not liked as much (on this site) anymore after I started questioning the NEC. Oh well, Ill take it like a man for stating the earth is round rather than flat

Puuhhhhllllleeeeessssse! Are you straight up trying to say other regular participants don't question the NEC or are you just trolling for some sympathy?

 

[kwired]

The OPs concern had migrated to piping as well which other members addressed as can be seen above my comment and it seems somehow I am the one who is at fault adding my 2 cents to that.

I somehow get the feeling Im not liked as much (on this site) anymore after I started questioning the NEC. Oh well, Ill take it like a man for stating the earth is round rather than flat

Unless piping, water heater, and anything else in contact with water is completely electrically isolated, it won't take too much conductivity to shunt any potential that may be introduced in the water heater away from the user in a shower. Even a good element possibly introduces some potential into the water in the tank via capacitive coupling. But a bonding the tank to the EGC will shunt current away from the user at the shower.

I must say I don't agree on all your challenges to the NEC, but I like to see some of NEC content challenged as well as they for years have slowly been adding more "design requirements" that otherwise contradict the NEC's own stated purpose in 90.1, but our lawsuit happy world has kind of made that necessary as well.

 

[edlee]

Let's be clear here. AS moderator moderates. This does not necessarily mean we know more than anyone else around here. Truth in fact is that Don is one of the more knowledgeable members of this forum.

Water in general is a terrible conductor. Have you ever read stories about basements in New Orleans being underwater from Katrina and the service panel was still energized? Well it happened. If water was a good conductor I doubt those breakers would have held.

I was on a job in a house right by water's edge in San Fran Bay Area a number of years ago. There was flooding due to seriously heavy rain and the receptacle outlets on the first floor were submerged for a number of hours. None of the breakers tripped.

 

[mbrooke]

Puuhhhhllllleeeeessssse! Are you straight up trying to say other regular participants don't question the NEC or are you just trolling for some sympathy?

I just question it harder than most

Unless piping, water heater, and anything else in contact with water is completely electrically isolated, it won't take too much conductivity to shunt any potential that may be introduced in the water heater away from the user in a shower. Even a good element possibly introduces some potential into the water in the tank via capacitive coupling. But a bonding the tank to the EGC will shunt current away from the user at the shower.

I must say I don't agree on all your challenges to the NEC, but I like to see some of NEC content challenged as well as they for years have slowly been adding more "design requirements" that otherwise contradict the NEC's own stated purpose in 90.1, but our lawsuit happy world has kind of made that necessary as well.

I agree. But the way I see it Handyman screw ups should not play a role in the CMP processes. Hence my rants... :angel:

 

[iwire]

I just question it harder than most

I don't think anyone cares if you question the NEC or not I know I don't. At the same time you seem to feel questioning it makes you some sort of visionary. :blink:

What I find entertaining and sometimes irritating is when folks (not just you) think they have more knowlege / better ideas than the thousands of other people over the course of over a century of code development have come to be.

I am not talking about the small ideas to keep up with technology and safety but the grandiose ideas that turn things on their head.

As far as taking it 'like the man saying the earth is round' rather than flat' that is certainly your choice but it also tells me you have convinced yourself that all your thoughts and ideas are correct and it is the thousands of engineers, tradesmen and other knowledgable and trained people before you have it wrong.


Of course I could be all wrong, reading people's ideas vs hearing them talk about their ideas can provide a totally different perspective of someone's tone.

 

[don_resqcapt19]

... I agree. But the way I see it Handyman screw ups should not play a role in the CMP processes. Hence my rants... :angel:

That is just part of the overall dumbing down of everything...no one is expected to think or be responsible for their actions...everywhere, not just in the NEC.

 

[tom baker]

.... and water conducts electricity!

Water is not a conductor, I have a picture of Mike Holt drinking from a metal water picture with an energized plug strip submerged in the water.

 

[mbrooke]

I don't think anyone cares if you question the NEC or not I know I don't. At the same time you seem to feel questioning it makes you some sort of visionary. :blink:

Where did I say I was a visionary? If perusing knowledge to better my job makes me a visionary then great. If you have an issue with that well then it speaks on your behalf.

What I find entertaining and sometimes irritating is when folks (not just you) think they have more knowlege / better ideas than the thousands of other people over the course of over a century of code development have come to be.

And according to you how would those people appear?

I can guarantee you those thousands of people who advanced our trade started off questioning what was already in place.

I am not talking about the small ideas to keep up with technology and safety but the grandiose ideas that turn things on their head.

Grandiose ideas like? :blink: It was you who was getting all worked up over AFCIs claiming they don't reduce dwelling fires (and I agree), but I could just as easily say you are turning that on its head going against thousands having more experience then me and everyone on this forum without substantiation to back it up.

As far as taking it 'like the man saying the earth is round' rather than flat' that is certainly your choice but it also tells me you have convinced yourself that all your thoughts and ideas are correct and it is the thousands of engineers, tradesmen and other knowledgable and trained people before you have it wrong.

Nope never said that, and FWIW thousands of engineers who drafted the IEC and CEC share some of the same views as me. But yes, they sound off the wall because they are different from the NEC.

No different than Mike Holt saying ground rods do not clear faults contradicting what many text books claim to be true to this day. Yet Mike's tenacious personality has been a god send to our trade.

Of course I could be all wrong, reading people's ideas vs hearing them talk about their ideas can provide a totally different perspective of someone's tone.

Forget the tone, I suck at English, everyone knows that. :lol: Look at the physics/intentions behind them.

 

[mbrooke]

That is just part of the overall dumbing down of everything...no one is expected to think or be responsible for their actions...everywhere, not just in the NEC.

Exactly my point, and I think its wrong, not sure why it makes me grandiose.