Grounding electrode conductor continuous or not

Status
Not open for further replies.
jaggedben said:
Either way it still isn't the NEC that requires the ufer to be installed. For new construction it will almost certainly exist, but only because some other code(s) require(s) it.
Click to expand...
Ok we are in agreement that the NEC doesn't require rebar be installed in a footing, I never thought that. I was just saying that their WILL be rebar in the footing and you thus you HAVE TO use it as a GE.
 
NC did the right thing and amended 250.50 back to the 2002 wording as soon as it changed.

Present wording

AMENDMENT 250.50

250.50 Grounding Electrode System. All grounding electrodes as described in 250.52(A)(1) through (A)(7) that are available at each building or structure served shall be bonded together to form the grounding electrode system. Where none of these grounding electrodes exist, one or more of the grounding electrodes specified in 250.52(A)(4) through (A)(8) shall be installed and used.
 
retirede said:
I don’t see the words “new construction” in the code. You can’t wire a building that doesn’t “exist.”

I agree that what you are saying is the intent of the code, but in a literal sense, that’s not what it says.
Click to expand...
My mentioning of "new construction" wasn't quoting anything in code but rather is interpretation of how this impacts us in majority of cases.
 
roger said:
NC did the right thing and amended 250.50 back to the 2002 wording as soon as it changed.

Present wording

AMENDMENT 250.50

250.50 Grounding Electrode System. All grounding electrodes as described in 250.52(A)(1) through (A)(7) that are available at each building or structure served shall be bonded together to form the grounding electrode system. Where none of these grounding electrodes exist, one or more of the grounding electrodes specified in 250.52(A)(4) through (A)(8) shall be installed and used.
Click to expand...
So does majority of buildings not utilize the CEE that is likley there simply because it was covered in concrete before the electricians ever got to the site? That is what NEC was trying to prevent when they made this change AFAIK. I myself never made a connection to a CEE before this change in 2005 simply because it wasn't available by the time I came to the site.
 
kwired said:
So does majority of buildings not utilize the CEE that is likley there simply because it was covered in concrete before the electricians ever got to the site? That is what NEC was trying to prevent when they made this change AFAIK. I myself never made a connection to a CEE before this change in 2005 simply because it wasn't available by the time I came to the site.
Click to expand...
No, the majority do utilize a CEE, but if it got covered for some reason and is not available no big deal, you wont have to start chipping concrete. Unless you are trying to meet some performance standard or level the GES is greatly over rated.
 
roger said:
No, the majority do utilize a CEE, but if it got covered for some reason and is not available no big deal, you wont have to start chipping concrete. Unless you are trying to meet some performance standard or level the GES is greatly over rated.
Click to expand...
Until the 2005 change came about pretty much nobody was utilizing a CEE around here, other than metal framed buildings where a CEE it might have had more of a natural connection to the building steel. But nobody was directly connecting to a CEE on those projects.
 
jaggedben said:
Either way it still isn't the NEC that requires the ufer to be installed. For new construction it will almost certainly exist, but only because some other code(s) require(s) it.

I think we've had this discussion before: If a ufer is installed as part of new construction or remodel, but the concrete is poured in such a way that makes it inaccessible, does the NEC require you to disturb the concrete or does the exception apply because the building is now 'existing'? I guess it depends on the mood of the inspector.
Click to expand...
In WA if you don't make the connection you have to chip out the concrete to connect to rebar or use a ground ring
 
The poor guy that simply asked does a grounding conductor need to be continuous...:confused:


Got to love all the many rules our wonderful industry has .. and the best part, it typically changes every 4 years.
 
jaggedben said:
Yup that section definitely does not say that a ufer is required, only that it must be used if it exists. Not sure what you're trying to say here. As far as the NEC says, I can build a new house and use the water pipe and two rods for the GES. (Or just two rods if there's no water service or the water pipe is plastic, say.) Any requirement to install a ufer must come from some other code or local enforcement, not the NEC.
Click to expand...

So on 200A service if there is plastic water pipe 2 ground rods with #6 conductor is sufficient?
 
jaggedben said:
Yup. And the amperage of the service has zilch to do with which electrodes are required in the NEC.
Click to expand...

So why we need to run #4 to water pipe if entrance of pipe is plastic and remaining of pipe inside house IF COPER is not connected to any thing and no contact to ground ???
 
Malywr said:
So why we need to run #4 to water pipe if entrance of pipe is plastic and remaining of pipe inside house IF COPER is not connected to any thing and no contact to ground ???
Click to expand...
Because a metal water piping system is still required to be bonded to the electrical system.
 
Malywr said:
So why we need to run #4 to water pipe if entrance of pipe is plastic and remaining of pipe inside house IF COPER is not connected to any thing and no contact to ground ???
Click to expand...
Because it's so conductive, and so exposed near electrically-grounded points, that it presents a great hazard if accidentally energized, thus intentionally bonding it is safer.
 
LarryFine said:
Depends on the service size. 200a = #4 cu.
Click to expand...
Nope, we're talking about a pipe that's not an electrode, so it's based on 250.122 not 250.66, and #6 is fine. Plus, it's based on 'the circuit that is likely to energize the piping'. So unless you actually have a 200A feeder running alongside the piping somewhere, that leaves it open to be even smaller.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top