Seperate UFER for cold water and sprinkler sys.

Merry Christmas
Status
Not open for further replies.
Y

Yota Master

Member
Location
So Cal, Ramona CA
Is it ok to add a seperate ufer just for cold water and sprinkler bonds in lieu of main service ufer. The cold water and sprinkler were 20 feet from the main gear so instead of making the bond there they decided to just add another ufer. What do yah think?
 
That makes no sense whatsoever. All that stuff needs bonded to the service by some means. Burying another Ufer will not do that for you.
 
Maybe someone mis-understood or is playing a silly - costly trick?

I have taken the unfer out of a foundation in two places instead of just at the panel for things like that - but not two 'seperate' ones.....
 
You guys are good, I don't even understand the question. Yota could you explain in a little more detail?
 
infinity said:
You guys are good, I don't even understand the question. Yota could you explain in a little more detail?
Click to expand...

they're talking about an ufer ground; what they've done is put the cold water and sprinkler on a separate ground w/o bonding to the main.
 
What if Yota's friend (yeah, sure :grin:) means he accessed two different points on the building steel and/or foundation rebar? Wouldn't that qualify as a proper bonding?
 
Yota Master said:
Is it ok to add a seperate ufer just for cold water and sprinkler bonds in lieu of main service ufer. The cold water and sprinkler were 20 feet from the main gear so instead of making the bond there they decided to just add another ufer. What do yah think?
Click to expand...

The electrode (ufer) and bonding really do have separate purposes. The electrode is "connected to earth in a manner that will limit the voltage imposed by lighting, line surges, or unintentional contact with higher-voltage lines", 250-4(A)(1). The electrode is not in place to route fault current (shorts) for the operation of overcurrent devices (breakers).

Bonding is in place to "connect together [non-current-carrying conductive materials] to the electrical supply source in a manner that establishes an effective ground-fault path", 250-4(A)(3). The bonding is in place to route fault current (shorts) for the operation of overcurrent devices (breakers). Faults are not looking for earth they are looking for source and this is usually the XO of the source transformer.

Either way we cannot use "the earth for the effective ground-fault current path", 250-4(A)(5)

With all this said adding another ufer doesn't accomplish anything, keep in mind all electrodes must bond together, 250-50, they cannot be separate in this fashion.
 
LarryFine said:
What if Yota's friend (yeah, sure :grin:) means he accessed two different points on the building steel and/or foundation rebar? Wouldn't that qualify as a proper bonding?
Click to expand...

I agree Larry that is what has happened but no one can see that the rebar is continuous in the footer so they just took for granted that there are two rebars.
 
LarryFine said:
What if Yota's friend (yeah, sure :grin:) means he accessed two different points on the building steel and/or foundation rebar? Wouldn't that qualify as a proper bonding?
Click to expand...

That's only good practice if it's a ground mat application, and without as-builds or the benefit of a visual it's unknown.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top