Article 250-64 (b) specifies that conductors No. 4 AWG or greater must be protected if exposed to severe physical damage. But it does not give any details about this protection as it does with conductor of No.6 AWG or less. Is there another section that clarifies the details of this protection?
Protection of conductors No. 4 AWG or greater
- Thread starter corvalan
- Start date
- Status
Re: Protection of conductors No. 4 AWG or greater
Corvalan, this is simply another poorly worded paragraph. The protection would be the same as the #6 and smaller if the the #4 was exposed to severe physical damage.
If it is only exposed to plain ol physical damage you don't need to worry about it.
What is severe physical damage compared to physical damage anyways?
Roger
Corvalan, this is simply another poorly worded paragraph. The protection would be the same as the #6 and smaller if the the #4 was exposed to severe physical damage.
If it is only exposed to plain ol physical damage you don't need to worry about it.
What is severe physical damage compared to physical damage anyways?
Roger
Re: Protection of conductors No. 4 AWG or greater
--
Tom H
[ November 09, 2003, 01:56 PM: Message edited by: hornetd ]
I have taken the phrase Subject to Severe Physical Damage to mean that there is something that is likely to go on in the space that would damage the installation in one event. Examples are materials handling, mechanical landscaping equipment, and motor vehicle traffic. So to my way of thinking the number six Grounding Electrode Conductor that runs down the outside wall of the home in an are that is grass covered is exposed to "Severe Physical Damage". The same GEC run down the wall behind the shrubbery were only hand tools would be used is exposed to physical damage. In the grass covered area the addition of a piece of schedule 80 PVC is not an unreasonable thing for an inspector to ask.Originally posted by roger:
Corvalan, this is simply another poorly worded paragraph. The protection would be the same as the #6 and smaller if the the #4 was exposed to severe physical damage.
If it is only exposed to plain old physical damage you don't need to worry about it.
What is severe physical damage compared to physical damage anyways?
Roger
--
Tom H
[ November 09, 2003, 01:56 PM: Message edited by: hornetd ]
pierre
Senior Member
- Location
- Westchester County, New York
Re: Protection of conductors No. 4 AWG or greater
I cannot see how a grassy area of a dwelling would be subject to severe physical damage, even with the description you presented. Along a driveway yes. This is where this type of situation in the NEC becomes a glaring problem, and different installation methods will be required by installers, just because of different opinions.
Pierre
P.S I believe that severe physical damage is going to be removed from the NEC.
I cannot see how a grassy area of a dwelling would be subject to severe physical damage, even with the description you presented. Along a driveway yes. This is where this type of situation in the NEC becomes a glaring problem, and different installation methods will be required by installers, just because of different opinions.
Pierre
P.S I believe that severe physical damage is going to be removed from the NEC.
Re: Protection of conductors No. 4 AWG or greater
Pierre, ever seen a gas powered trimmer with a brush blade? A 10 inch electric chain saw with an extension pole? Fairly common and GRC would be the minimal resonable defense against damage where one of them might be used to trim near the house. I kind of think that anyplace a homeowner can access with portable powered equipment is likely subject to severe physical damage.
Pierre, ever seen a gas powered trimmer with a brush blade? A 10 inch electric chain saw with an extension pole? Fairly common and GRC would be the minimal resonable defense against damage where one of them might be used to trim near the house. I kind of think that anyplace a homeowner can access with portable powered equipment is likely subject to severe physical damage.
pierre
Senior Member
- Location
- Westchester County, New York
Re: Protection of conductors No. 4 AWG or greater
Jim
That is a reasonable answer, but ... If we had to install our work with people who cannot control themselves, don't you believe that the NEC would be even more restrictive? I have seen what some can do as far as being 'clumsy' :roll: , but I hope we do not have to install to those types of standards.
Pierre
Jim
That is a reasonable answer, but ... If we had to install our work with people who cannot control themselves, don't you believe that the NEC would be even more restrictive? I have seen what some can do as far as being 'clumsy' :roll: , but I hope we do not have to install to those types of standards.
Pierre
Re: Protection of conductors No. 4 AWG or greater
Pierre, I agree. A careless person can tear up an anvil.
The yard man used to tear my GEC off the wall every time he bushhogged next to the house, I even installed it in schd 80, of course I question whether his equipment was to big?
Roger
Pierre, I agree. A careless person can tear up an anvil.
The yard man used to tear my GEC off the wall every time he bushhogged next to the house, I even installed it in schd 80, of course I question whether his equipment was to big?
Roger
hurk27
Senior Member
- Location
- Portage, Indiana NEC: 2008
Re: Protection of conductors No. 4 AWG or greater
[ November 10, 2003, 07:02 PM: Message edited by: hurk27 ]
If i let my grass get high enough that I need a chain saw to trim it I think protecting the GEC would be least of my problems LOL
[ November 10, 2003, 07:02 PM: Message edited by: hurk27 ]
- Status