Grounded Conductor required?

Status
Not open for further replies.
transformer bonding 1.jpg

Note in the picture.. a neutral is shiown but not used and for conversation sake it can be removed as it connects to nothing on the disconnect end.
The OP was no neutral load so no neutral needed for operation and there can be no line to neutral fault as there is no neutral.
Lin e to line fault will cause the breaker to open as with any circuit.
In the event of a line to ground fault (as shown).. the fault current path would be from the fault thru the equipment grounding means back to the disconnect panel,
carryiing on through the SUPPLY SIDE BONDING JUMPER ro the transformer where it would bond with the SYSTEM BOND JUMPER carrying the the fault current to XO allowing the overcurrent device to open (follow the green lines)
Nio neutral needed in order for everything to work as it should
 
Last edited:
Dale001289 said:
Its impossible to separate ‘unbalanced loads and harmonics’ from a discussion about grounded systems, neutrals and SDS’s -

If you go back a few of my posts I said the SSBJ would essentially do the same thing as the grounded conductor for corner grounded systems where no line to neutral loads exist. I also said the code still requires a white conductor to be run - from the corner on a grounded delta secondary to the panel or disconnect. I believe article 250.30 supports this.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

How are there harmonics in a grounded conductor in a corner grounded delta system?

Specifically, what part of 250.30 says that the grounded conductor has to be brought to the disconnect?
 
Dale001289 said:
Nice picture I noticed they brought the grounded conductor from the xfmr XO shown as a grey conductor - pretty much as I had stated
Thanks
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

That is what it shows, but is not required. Again, what code section is violated if the grounded conductor is not installed as shown in the picture that Augie posted?
 
Dale001289 said:
Nice picture I noticed they brought the grounded conductor from the xfmr XO shown as a grey conductor - pretty much as I had stated
Thanks


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

You are exasperating stubborn. It happens to be the only picture I had so I used it to enlighten you. Note the neutral conencs to nothing at the disconnect enclosure. It can be REMOVED and everything works. It is not bonded. It is only there as it would be IF there was a neutral load.
 
augie47 said:
You are exasperating stubborn. It happens to be the only picture I had so I used it to enlighten you. Note the neutral conencs to nothing at the disconnect enclosure. It can be REMOVED and everything works. It is not bonded. It is only there as it would be IF there was a neutral load.
Click to expand...

If you go back to my earlier post I stated a fault could occur downstream on the conduit - in your picture it’s an end device - and follows the EGC just like I said it would.
I am not sure what your picture really proves in terms of supporting your argument - in fact if you have a copy of the handbook you’ll note ALL the pictures of SDS’s include the grounded- white conductor



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
The picture shows how a fault to ground uses the supply side biond jumper on a SDS the same was a service uses a neutral.
At this point I accept I have wasted too many hours of my life trying to do what my dear ole dad said can't be done: "fix stupid"
Several knowledgeable folks have pointed out the fault in you thinking and you are unable to support your position by citing Code.
Good luck to you and my sympathy to those who deal with you. I, thankfully, don't need to.
Out !
 
Dale001289 said:
If you go back to my earlier post I stated a fault could occur downstream on the conduit - in your picture it’s an end device - and follows the EGC just like I said it would.
I am not sure what your picture really proves in terms of supporting your argument - in fact if you have a copy of the handbook you’ll note ALL the pictures of SDS’s include the grounded- white conductor
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

His picture proves that you could remove the grounded conductor from the disconnect and the fault would still be cleared by the SSBJ. That is why the grounded conductor is not required at the disconnect.
 
Last edited:
250.30(A)(3) on the Grounded Conductor for an SDS begins "If a grounded conductor is installed, . . ." The clear implication is that there is no requirement to install a grounded conductor.

Cheers, Wayne
 
augie47 said:
The picture shows how a fault to ground uses the supply side biond jumper on a SDS the same was a service uses a neutral.
At this point I accept I have wasted too many hours of my life trying to do what my dear ole dad said can't be done: "fix stupid"
Several knowledgeable folks have pointed out the fault in you thinking and you are unable to support your position by citing Code.
Good luck to you and my sympathy to those who deal with you. I, thankfully, don't need to.
Out !
Click to expand...

Funny I was just thinking how stupid applied to you and your cluster of idiots


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
wwhitney said:
250.30(A)(3) on the Grounded Conductor for an SDS begins "If a grounded conductor is installed, . . ." The clear implication is that there is no requirement to install a grounded conductor.

Cheers, Wayne
Click to expand...

Grounded conductor is not required on a two wire system where no neutral connection exists on the secondary
....this is only reason for this comment - for all others it’s required

Cheers


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Dale001289 said:
Grounded conductor is not required on a two wire system where no neutral connection exists on the secondary
....this is only reason for this comment - for all others it’s required

Cheers
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Do you have a code reference for that requirement?
 
Dale001289 said:
... I also said the code still requires a white conductor to be run - from the corner on a grounded delta secondary to the panel or disconnect. I believe article 250.30 supports this.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
No, it doesn't. Look at the first paragraph of 250.30. It lists a bunch of sections of 250.XX that apply and 250.24 is left off the list. You can require it as a design preference but you cannot site it as a code requirement. Further, there is no need for one if all the loads on the SDS are line to line.
 
Dale001289 said:
Funny I was just thinking how stupid applied to you and your cluster of idiots


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
So this is the best you have to support your position?

How about a diagram showing that a downstream fault won't clear if the SDS is bonded in the transformer.

For the love of all that is good and right in the universe, I am exactly what my profile says, "a wire pulling grunt". I have no formal education in electrical, I can't do math to save my life, I can't complete a sentence without spell check, but I sure as hell know how a fault can be cleared even if there is no grounded conductor in the first disconnect. I don't understand why you can't. And you are the one calling me and idiot????
 
ActionDave said:
So this is the best you have to support your position?

How about a diagram showing that a downstream fault won't clear if the SDS is bonded in the transformer.

For the love of all that is good and right in the universe, I am exactly what my profile says, "a wire pulling grunt". I have no formal education in electrical, I can't do math to save my life, I can't complete a sentence without spell check, but I sure as hell know how a fault can be cleared even if there is no grounded conductor in the first disconnect. I don't understand why you can't. And you are the one calling me and idiot????
Click to expand...

No one on this string has proven the grounded conductor can be omitted or is even optional. EVERY DIAGRAM
in the NEC handbook shows a grounded conductor for SDS under AC grounded systems.
250.30 and 250.102 support the need for the following:
supply side bonding jumper, system bonding jumper, Grounding electrode conductor and grounded conductor.
This is what’s required for grounding and bonding a SDS and yes they are integral with the downstream disconnect or panelboard. Period.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Dale001289 said:
No one on this string has proven the grounded conductor can be omitted or is even optional. EVERY DIAGRAM
in the NEC handbook shows a grounded conductor for SDS under AC grounded systems.
Click to expand...
You do realize that the handbook commentary and illustrations are not code don't you?

Roger
 
Dale001289 said:
Yes I know that. Nonetheless it can be used as a reference.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
OK, so show us the code language that states the grounded conductor "SHALL" be run to the first means of disconnect in an "SDS" and you will have proven your claim, otherwise mark this thread up as an education.

Roger
 
roger said:
OK, so show us the code language that states the grounded conductor "SHALL" be run to the first means of disconnect in an "SDS" and you will have proven your claim, otherwise mark this thread up as an education.

Roger
Click to expand...

“Shall” is not found - possibly due to ungrounded AC systems? Not sure but I will be sure to enter a PI to have this language included for AC grounded systems
- show me where Code states “not required”, “optional” “omitted” etc. Assuming you cannot do this I think my education is just fine as it stands.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Dale001289 said:
“Shall” is not found - possibly due to ungrounded AC systems?
Click to expand...
This is where you need to read 90.5(A) & (B)

Dale001289 said:
Not sure but I will be sure to enter a PI to have this language included for AC grounded systems
Click to expand...
Please do and if it's accepted you can come back and tell us that is required at that time, as of now it isn't.


Dale001289 said:
- show me where Code states “not required”, “optional” “omitted” etc. Assuming you cannot do this I think my education is just fine as it stands.
Click to expand...
This is where you need to read 90.5 (A) & (B) again.

You're welcome

Roger
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top