My Argument with Iwire

[iwire]

And this is the point of the code making panel concerning the rebar.

Unless the metal water pipe, ground rod, rebar (through contact with concrete) is in contact with earth then it is nothing more than a connection point and not the electrode.

In my opinion the five feet of metal water pipe on the inside or the two feet of a 10 foot rod sticking out of the ground and including the rebar that is turned up out to the footing is nothing more that what is described in 250.64(F)(3) and is not the electrode itself. The electrode must be in contact with earth no matter how useless it might be.

So if the rebar sticking beyound the cement is not an electrode (and IMO it is not) what is it?

Is it a GEC or is it a bonding jumper?

And where does the NEC give permission to use steel for either of those uses?

 

[crossman gary]

The point Iwire is making is a valid and I will defend his position all day long.

On the other hand, if the CMP would put a length restriction on the rebar sticking up, similar to what they do with the waterpipe in 250.52(A)(1), then I don't have a problem with it from a practical standpoint.

 

[iwire]

On the other hand, if the CMP would put a length restriction on the rebar sticking up, similar to what they do with the waterpipe in 250.52(A)(1), then I don't have a problem with it from a practical standpoint.

That would be all it would take in my mind as well. The CMP should spell it out. :smile:

 

[cschmid]

are we on semantics again here..because I would agree with bob here; in the practicality area then it is a common everyday bond.

 

[mivey]

...so bare with me...

Ummm...no thanks. But I will bear with you. :grin:










Sorry. I did not get my biscuit yet so I'm being contentious. :smile:

 

[mivey]

So if the rebar sticking beyound the cement is not an electrode (and IMO it is not) what is it?

Part of the connection?

 

[iwire]

Ummm...no thanks. But I will bear with you. :grin:

I started with bear but then switched to bare.

But then again ........ who cares ...... :grin:

 

[jwelectric]

I understand your point and agree that the CMP is making a reasonable adjustement to provide rules which are easily accomplished in the field.

But just for the sake of debate, what if I ran all my GECs from the various electrodes back to the rebar sticking out of the slab, and then ran a single GEC back to the service, in other words, I used the rebar as the connection point described in 250.64(F)(3) as you mention. I don't think that would be good.

Of course, 250.64(F)(3) mentions copper or aluminum, and gives a minimum size, but that is beside the point.

This would not be a compliant installation for the following reasons.

250.64(F) allows the installation of bonding jumpers between ?electrodes? not rebar that is not in contact with earth or encased in concrete.

(1) The grounding electrode conductor shall be permitted to be run to any convenient grounding electrode available in the grounding electrode system where the other electrode(s), if any, are connected by bonding jumpers per 250.53(C).

In 250.52(A) (1) there is an allowance to use the first five feet of uninterrupted metal water pipe as a place to land bonding jumpers and in 250.52(A)(2) any part of a metal building is part of the electrode if it is effectively grounded.

In the response to Mike Holt in Proposal 5-157 Log #3051 the Code Making Panel was very clear about any exposed rebar not being any part of the electrode therefore not allowing the installation you have described above although the will allow the connection of the Grounding Electrode Conductor to this exposed rebar.

 

[jwelectric]

So if the rebar sticking beyound the cement is not an electrode (and IMO it is not) what is it?

Is it a GEC or is it a bonding jumper?

And where does the NEC give permission to use steel for either of those uses?

I agree that is not the electrode but at the same time it is not a grounding electrode conductor either.

The grounded neutral conductor comes in a house from the meter and lands under a terminal. At the bottom of the terminal bar a small white conductor is connected that runs to a receptacle.

Is this metal in between the small white wire and the service conductor the neutral? Is it a wire? It is neither, it is a terminal bar.

The stubbed up rebar is this terminal bar just as the one in the panel. It is neither the electrode nor the electrode conductor.

Permission for the rebar is forth coming in the next code cycle but permission to use steel as a bonding jumper is found in 250.52(A)(2)

 

[wbalsam1]

I agree that is not the electrode but at the same time it is not a grounding electrode conductor either.

The grounded neutral conductor comes in a house from the meter and lands under a terminal. At the bottom of the terminal bar a small white conductor is connected that runs to a receptacle.

Is this metal in between the small white wire and the service conductor the neutral? Is it a wire? It is neither, it is a terminal bar.

The stubbed up rebar is this terminal bar just as the one in the panel. It is neither the electrode nor the electrode conductor.

Permission for the rebar is forth coming in the next code cycle but permission to use steel as a bonding jumper is found in 250.52(A)(2)

This explanation is a good one. Perhaps the CMP could use this logic....

 

[iwire]

Is this metal in between the small white wire and the service conductor the neutral? Is it a wire? It is neither, it is a terminal bar.

A terminal bar is UL listed electrical equipment, rebar is neither listed or electrical equipment.

The stubbed up rebar is this terminal bar just as the one in the panel.

Nope, not even close.

Permission for the rebar is forth coming in the next code cycle but permission to use steel as a bonding jumper is found in 250.52(A)(2)

No book with me so I will have to let that one go till another time.:smile:

 

[chris kennedy]

No book with me so I will have to let that one go till another time.:smile:

You didn't bring a code book on your vacation? I don't really know what to say.

 

[mivey]

You didn't bring a code book on your vacation? I don't really know what to say.

It's a cop-out. We can all access the code oneline. He just doesn't have his cheat-sheets with him. :grin:

 

[iwire]

You didn't bring a code book on your vacation? I don't really know what to say.

I had planned to .......... :smile:

 

[iwire]

It's a cop-out. We can all access the code oneline.

Thats too much of a pain.

He just doesn't have his cheat-sheets with him. :grin:

Now that might be the case .........:grin:

 

[crossman gary]

This would not be a compliant installation for the following reasons

Thank you for helping me make my point.

 

[crossman gary]

No book with me so I will have to let that one go till another time.:smile:

I'll help ya....

250.52(A)(2) gives the circumstances under which the metal frame of the building may be used as an electrode. I see no mention of the term "bonding jumper" in that section. I see no mention of allowing steel to be used as a bonding jumper.

The section only concerns structural metal members and metal frames. Under the circumstances mentioned, the entire metal frame is considered to be the electrode.

I see no implication whatsoever, even with the most liberal and assumptive reading, that this section says a single thing about GECs or bonding jumpers.

 

[jwelectric]

Is this metal in between the small white wire and the service conductor the neutral? Is it a wire? It is neither, it is a terminal bar.

A terminal bar is UL listed electrical equipment, rebar is neither listed or electrical equipment.

I would beg to differ with you in so much as the rebar that is in question being a piece of electrical equipment. It is most certainly part of the grounding electrode system and unless we are going to say that a grounding electrode is not electrical equipment then it must be electrical equipment.
The termination of the grounding electrode conductor is done with a UL listed clamp of some sort therefore the termination is UL approved.

The stubbed up rebar is this terminal bar just as the one in the panel.

Nope, not even close.

I agree that it isn?t the same make up as the terminal bar but the purpose it serves is the same in so much as it is allow (in 2011) to be the point of termination of the grounding electrode conductor

Permission for the rebar is forth coming in the next code cycle but permission to use steel as a bonding jumper is found in 250.52(A)(2)

No book with me so I will have to let that one go till another time.

Then allow me to give a helping hand.

250.52(A) (2) Metal Frame of the Building or Structure. The metal frame of the building or structure that is connected to the earth by any of the following methods:
(1) 3.0 m (10 ft) or more of a single structural metal member in direct contact with the earth or encased in concrete that is in direct contact with the earth
(2) Connecting the structural metal frame to the reinforcing bars of a concrete-encased electrode as provided in 250.52(A)(3) or ground ring as provided in 250.52(A)(4)
(3) Bonding the structural metal frame to one or more of the grounding electrodes as defined in 250.52(A)(5) or (A)(7) that comply with 250.56
(4) Other approved means of establishing a connection to earth

So now I can attach a bonding conductor to any point on the building steel in order to bond another bonding jumper.
From the Handbook

 

[crossman gary]

I would beg to differ with you in so much as the rebar that is in question being a piece of electrical equipment. It is most certainly part of the grounding electrode system and unless we are going to say that a grounding electrode is not electrical equipment then it must be electrical equipment.

And that brings up an excellent point: In states with licensing laws for electricians, only licensed electricians are allowed to install electrical equipment. I agree completely. The reinforcing steel in the slab is electrical work. About time we got this fixed.... more work for me!

Of course, this makes the metal underground waterpipe also within the realm of electrical work. And the building steel too.... metal water well casings... underground metal tanks... other metal piping systems underground.... all of that is electrical equipment.

So now I can attach a bonding conductor to any point on the building steel in order to bond another bonding jumper.

The reason it is allowed to do that isn't because the building steel is a bonding jumper. It is because 250.52(A)(2) says that the entire metal frame of the building is the electrode. yes, even the aboveground portions, all the way up to the roof. If any of the items 1 to 4 are accomplished, the whole thing is an electrode.

 

[jwelectric]

I'll help ya....

250.52(A)(2) gives the circumstances under which the metal frame of the building may be used as an electrode. I see no mention of the term "bonding jumper" in that section. I see no mention of allowing steel to be used as a bonding jumper.

The section only concerns structural metal members and metal frames. Under the circumstances mentioned, the entire metal frame is considered to be the electrode.

I see no implication whatsoever, even with the most liberal and assumptive reading, that this section says a single thing about GECs or bonding jumpers.

See 250.64(F)

(F) Installation to Electrode(s). Grounding electrode conductor(s) and bonding jumpers interconnecting grounding electrodes shall be installed in accordance with (1), (2), or (3). The grounding electrode conductor shall be sized for the largest grounding electrode conductor required among all the electrodes connected to it.

(1) The grounding electrode conductor shall be permitted to be run to any convenient grounding electrode available in the grounding electrode system where the other electrode(s), if any, are connected by bonding jumpers per 250.53(C).

(2) Grounding electrode conductor(s) shall be permitted to be run to one or more grounding electrode(s) individually.
(3) Bonding jumper(s) from grounding electrode(s) shall be permitted to be connected to an aluminum or copper busbar not less than 6 mm ? 50 mm (? in. ? 2 in.). The busbar shall be securely fastened and shall be installed in an accessible location. Connections shall be made by a listed connector or by the exothermic welding process. The grounding electrode conductor shall be permitted to be run to the busbar. Where aluminum busbars are used, the installation shall comply with 250.64(A).

If the steel of a building is the electrode as outlined in 250.52 then a bonding jumper can hit this electrode any where convenient and accessible.

There is nothing to be found except the verbiage in the ROP to say that the exposed rebar can be used as the point of termination but there is verbiage found in 250.52(A)(3) that makes the statement that the rebar must be encased in concrete in order to be the electrode just as in 250.52(A)(1) makes the statement that the first five feet of water pipe that enters a building is not electrode but it gives permission to use it as the point of attachment.