Grounding Conductor

[hillbilly1]

They also sway the jury with such questions as “to cut costs and not increase safety, you didn’t install a ground wire?” All the jury will hear, right or wrong, you cut corners for profit instead of safety relying only on the continuity of the tubing.

 

[electrofelon]

They also sway the jury with such questions as “to cut costs and not increase safety, you didn’t install a ground wire?” All the jury will hear, right or wrong, you cut corners for profit instead of safety relying only on the continuity of the tubing.

Seems like a simple reference to 250.118 would take care of that. Besides, I worry about getting sued like...well not at all.

 

[hillbilly1]

Facts don’t matter in court anymore, only “feelings” if the lawyers can make the jury use feelings instead of logic and law, they win. You just have to get it to the correct jurisdiction. They say if you are suing a corporation, Alabama is the best place to do it in.

 

[LarryFine]

They also sway the jury with such questions as “to cut costs and not increase safety, you didn’t install a ground wire?” All the jury will hear, right or wrong, you cut corners for profit instead of safety relying only on the continuity of the tubing.

"That is not correct!"

 

[hillbilly1]

"That is not correct!"

Haven’t been in a court room lately? Have you?

 

[LarryFine]

Haven’t been in a court room lately? Have you?

No, but I watched The People's Court while staying at a Holiday Inn Express last night.

I know that I would not answer such a compound question the way opposing counsel wanted me to.

 

[zbang]

"Objection, your Honor! The witness is answering the question I asked."

 

[romex jockey]

I think that it's referenced here:

https://steeltubeinstitute.org/

Mr Ryan Jackson (post#60 video) seems to be taking his software directly from the Steel Tube institute
GEMI, which can be found on their site>>>

https://steeltubeinstitute.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/STI_ConduitTests_March_2020.pdf

https://steeltubeinstitute.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/PT_SteelConduitCircuitAnalysisAndTesting_Final.pdf

Being Mr J is MH's editor, i sense this may be an offering in the future

I don't see 250.109 being addressed , and i can imagine testing every enclosure on the market a sisyphean event.

before 250.109, where we suppose to bond across them all?

~RJ~

 

[romex jockey]

Unfuzz me, is there anything in Chp 9 (like Table 9,chp9) that would give us the R per ft for steel/al conduit, so we can do the math ourselves?


~S~

 

[kwired]

Unfuzz me, is there anything in Chp 9 (like Table 9,chp9) that would give us the R per ft for steel/al conduit, so we can do the math ourselves?


~S~

The fact that art 250 allows use of metal raceways for equipment grounding with pretty much no limitations (other than flexible conduits) probably means it has already been determined there is no reason to include such information, it will have less impedance than any conductor you might pull through it as an EGC.

 

[hillbilly1]

The fact that art 250 allows use of metal raceways for equipment grounding with pretty much no limitations (other than flexible conduits) probably means it has already been determined there is no reason to include such information, it will have less impedance than any conductor you might pull through it as an EGC.

I would say it meets minimum requirements as the reason, remember, code is a minimum standard. Copper is a much better conductor than steel, but steel is sufficient according to code. At long distances, I can see the advantages of steel, because it is not insulated, and if fastened to conductive surfaces, it will have parallel return paths.

 

[kwired]

I would say it meets minimum requirements as the reason, remember, code is a minimum standard. Copper is a much better conductor than steel, but steel is sufficient according to code. At long distances, I can see the advantages of steel, because it is not insulated, and if fastened to conductive surfaces, it will have parallel return paths.

Also remember it only has to carry current long enough to allow operation of overcurrent protection. If it were carrying a continuous load things might be different. Most general use applications it is more than sufficient. If you have special needs you are welcome to go beyond code minimums. If you pull a wire type EGC it is still going to be in parallel with the raceway as well as any other conductive surfaces that may be in intimate contact with bonded items.

 

[hillbilly1]

Also remember it only has to carry current long enough to allow operation of overcurrent protection. If it were carrying a continuous load things might be different. Most general use applications it is more than sufficient. If you have special needs you are welcome to go beyond code minimums. If you pull a wire type EGC it is still going to be in parallel with the raceway as well as any other conductive surfaces that may be in intimate contact with bonded items.

Redundant ground is not a bad thing. I have seen way too many loose locknuts, and equipment and even racking energized because of it.

 

[electrofelon]

Redundant ground is not a bad thing. I have seen way too many loose locknuts, and equipment and even racking energized because of it.

It's a good thing the universe is structured such that loose and poorly installed wire nuts never exist

 

[hillbilly1]

It's a good thing the universe is structured such that loose and poorly installed wire nuts never exist

The likelihood of a loose wire nut is far less than a loose locknut.

 

[electrofelon]

The likelihood of a loose wire nut is far less than a loose locknut.

that has not been my experience. This is why I find the conduit to be a superior EGC. Your experience apparently is different.

 

[electrofelon]

that has not been my experience. This is why I find the conduit to be a superior EGC. Your experience apparently is different.

Been working on a 5000 sq foot renovation, early 80's EMT. I dont recall a single pulled out or loose emt fitting or locknut, but found probably half a dozen very marginal wire nut bundles.

 

[hillbilly1]

that has not been my experience. This is why I find the conduit to be a superior EGC. Your experience apparently is different.

Interesting, in your area, they can tighten set screw connectors, but can’t install wire nuts?

 

[electrofelon]

Interesting, in your area, they can tighten set screw connectors, but can’t install wire nuts?

Installing a wire nut correctly is much more difficult than tightening a setscrew or locknut. Think about a bundle of say 5 wires with a mix of solid and stranded. ITs really not a trivial task. Being experienced, we often forget how difficult it is. Watch a newby try it and you wil probably think differently.

 

[romex jockey]

The fact that art 250 allows use of metal raceways for equipment grounding with pretty much no limitations (other than flexible conduits) probably means it has already been determined there is no reason to include such information, it will have less impedance than any conductor you might pull through it as an EGC.

so how would we then deal with this kwired>>>>?

250.4A(5) Effective Ground-Fault Current Path. Electrical equip‐
ment and wiring and other electrically conductive material
likely to become energized shall be installed in a manner that
creates a low-impedance circuit facilitating the operation of the
overcurrent device or ground detector for high-impedance
grounded systems. It shall be capable of safely carrying the
maximum ground-fault current likely to be imposed on it from
any point on the wiring system where a ground fault may occur
to the electrical supply source. The earth shall not be consid‐
ered as an effective ground-fault current path

~RJ~