Why? What would be the advantage of welding?That's stunning to me. I would think each piece of rebar should be welded together at a minimum.
Then again I am known for over thinking things and pissing people off in the process...and not just w/ electrical theory.
I have this uncanny ability to piss off both Democrats and Republicans, but I digress, lol.
Again, why?
Nothing about a piece of steel tie wire seems lacking to you compared to a solid weld? You must be of the generation that used to tell me to cut the bare copper conductor off the light fixture because it's unnecessary, lol
With all due respect, I don't understand how you put those two side by side and not see a difference.
If you feel that the rebar tied together isn't good enough you could always skip connecting to the rebar and install your own 20' piece of bare #4 copper as the CEE.Nothing about a piece of steel tie wire seems lacking to you compared to a solid weld? You must be of the generation that used to tell me to cut the bare copper conductor off the light fixture because it's unnecessary, lol
Granted, I admit my understanding, especially as a mostly residential electrician, isn't exactly quantitively scientific. I could speculate that the hold is stronger because you wouldn't use steel wire ties for load bearing structural work, but you would use welding for such. I could also speculate that a weld is going to give a greater surface area of contact.
There's also the rhetoric of the NEC, which I would argue clearly places certain types of welding in a stricter category than steel wire ties.
I mean for me, just visually and rhetorically welding looks and sounds like it would create a more solid connection that a piece of a steel tie wire.
Perhaps there is data out there, I honestly don't know. Would be interesting to see if there is, but I'm not diving into that tonight, lol.
I know of no rhetoric in the NEC clearly placing certain types of welding in a stricter category than steel wire ties. I do know in 250.52 a continuous length of steel is considered equal to multiple pieces connected together by the usual steel tie wires. I also know you can place 20' of #4 copper wire in the foundation footing, not connect it to the rebar at all, and in the eyes of the NEC you are at an equivalent level of compliance and therefore safety as attaching a #4 copper wire to a 20' continuous piece of rebar or multiple pieces connected together by the usual steel tie wires.Nothing about a piece of steel tie wire seems lacking to you compared to a solid weld? You must be of the generation that used to tell me to cut the bare copper conductor off the light fixture because it's unnecessary, lol
Granted, I admit my understanding, especially as a mostly residential electrician, isn't exactly quantitively scientific. I could speculate that the hold is stronger because you wouldn't use steel wire ties for load bearing structural work, but you would use welding for such. I could also speculate that a weld is going to give a greater surface area of contact.
There's also the rhetoric of the NEC, which I would argue clearly places certain types of welding in a stricter category than steel wire ties.
I mean for me, just visually and rhetorically welding looks and sounds like it would create a more solid connection that a piece of a steel tie wire.
Perhaps there is data out there, I honestly don't know. Would be interesting to see if there is, but I'm not diving into that tonight, lol.
Very true. There are other options. And on that note, that one could just "move on" and employ a different methodology... I just want to clarify that my criticisms of the steel wire tie methodology is not a personal attack on anyone who feels that methodology is sufficient. I try to remain mindful of the fact that many of you are more experienced than I am, but simultaneously try to not to be so meek as to not contribute at all to the ideas of civil discourse and debate.
The primary purpose of the rebar is for concrete shear strength as far as I'm aware.. it serving as a grounding electrode would be a secondary purpose. But I don't see how this would serve to support or negate the effectiveness of steel wire ties as a grounding electrode connection method...
I'm not a masonry guy or a structural engineer, so as far as steel wire ties being installed for the purpose of concrete shear strength, I can't really comment... but the intensity and depth of NEC grounding and bonding requirements forces me to question them as a means of a grounding electrode connection method... especially if the means of extending/splicing the GEC are so limited, it would stand to reason that an extension of the GE itself would also be extremely limited and specific... and steel wire ties, to me, just seem like a slapdash solution.
In the broader context of the grounding electrode system as a whole, that is the GE and the GEC, the NEC specifies very specific and limited methodologies when extending/splicing the GEC. It would stand to reason that the same logic should apply to extending/splicing/bonding various pieces of rebar together to form a single GE, IMO.
Yes, I am aware of those differences.
Your going to spoil your local inspectors then they will want to see that on all jobs even though it's not required.
Your going to spoil your local inspectors then they will want to see that on all jobs even though it's not required.
You can blaspheme the NEC all you want, you won't hurt my feelings. You can't even get close to ten percent of the disdain and cynicism I feel for it in its current incarnation.
I was going to say something similar. If the resistance and reliability of the grounding electrode was actually super important (like the NEC implies it is with all of it's dumb outdated non fact based requirements) then maybe it would be worth making a "better" UFER. It really doesn't matter. I have seen countless installations with one rod or no rods at all and they have been fine for 70 years. If you are served with an MGN distribution system the MGN will have far lower resistance than you will ever achieve (granted there may be some arguments for a "local" electrode). Seems like a more sensical thing to hand-wring over would be the NEC's lack of scientific based grounding requirements.
