ground rod required for small sub panel ?

[Stevenfyeager]

For a small 20 or 30 amp 240 volt subpanel run to the end of a driveway for a gate opener and lighting, I assume a ground rod is required ?

 

[romex jockey]

this should be a good thread Steve

~RJ~

 

[kec]

No

 

[romex jockey]

Some of you might recall the art 225 'light pole w/ disco' debate over an inclusive GE ....

~RJ~

 

[infinity]

Is it fed by a feeder? If so then yes a grounding electrode is required.

 

[tom baker]

If you run a mwbc then a ges is not required. Once you install a surface panel, the rules change for grounding

 

[ptonsparky]

I will up the ante one rod. Make it two.

 

[tom baker]

Some of you might recall the art 225 'light pole w/ disco' debate over an inclusive GE ....

~RJ~

No requirement for disconnect at luminaire pole, there is an exception in the NEC

 

[robertd]

I think two ground rods will do it. If the gate has a footer with rebar, do you need a ufer ground?

 

[SSDriver]

Would you need ground rods if the gate is fed with an old Rigid conduit serving as the EGC.

 

[retirede]

Would you need ground rods if the gate is fed with an old Rigid conduit serving as the EGC.

The fact that the conduit serves as the EGC changes nothing.

 

[wwhitney]

The fact that the conduit serves as the EGC changes nothing.

I think the question is "why doesn't the metallic conduit of the feeder count as a 250.52(A)(8) electrode? That's "Other Local Metal Underground Systems or Structures" It has the advantage of already being bonded to the EGC. : - )

Cheers, Wayne

 

[romex jockey]

No requirement for disconnect at luminaire pole, there is an exception in the NEC

which was born of a debate over it being / not being a 'structure' Tom

that was the extent of 'lectrical theory' applied......

~RJ~

 

[tom baker]

The reason the exception was added for a luminare pole was that debate on if the pole was a structure. So that debate was ended, anyway

 

[romex jockey]

The reason the exception was added for a luminare pole was that debate on if the pole was a structure. So that debate was ended, anyway

More the reason was the definition of 'structure' , than that of the theory of an inclusive GE to a structure is the point Tom

~RJ~