sub panel for Hot Tub

[infinity]

The Bonding language found in 680.74 in both the 2005 and the 2002 NEC books is there to establish a local equipotential plane the # 8 only bonds those items to each other .

(Thanks a lot George)

2002 680.74 was more inclusive than the 2005 680. 74

So you agree with me?

 

[M. D.]

I must say Trevor , I find it hard to understand your posts sometimes ,
though I enjoy reading them. I think we might disagree on what items require bonding , I think we do agree as to what bonding items together is to accomplish .

 

[infinity]

I must say Trevor , I find it hard to understand your posts sometimes ,
though I enjoy reading them. I think we might disagree on what items require bonding , I think we do agree as to what bonding items together is to accomplish .

Somehow we always end up with 680.74. As I have said before the only thing required to be bonded is metal parts in contact with the circulating water. You're right we do agree that bonding every piece of metal around the hydromassage tub won't hurt, but it isn't required. And I enjoy reading your posts too. Even when we don't agree.

 

[M. D.]

Somehow we always end up with 680.74. As I have said before the only thing required to be bonded is metal parts in contact with the circulating water..

Grounded metal parts in contact with the circulating water and all metal piping systems are required to be bonded .

 

[LarryFine]

jwelectric

I do not see much sense in requiring a insulated equipment ground where the feeder penetrates the outside wall to the disconnect, so you think it would be a safer job to run romex up to the outside wall and then change the wiring method for the last 12 inches to an insulated ground, makes no sense to me, I agree with pierre.

What I am seeing is ?In the interior of? so the second that I penetrate the finish of the wall I am no longer on the in the interior of the building.

Now I content that calling the conductors that are the same size installed with two overcurrent devices when it is obvious that the second is the same size as the first, is in a two circuit can and being used solely as a disconnecting means, ?feeders,? would make just about as much sense as installing an insulated conductor through the wall.

I agree that they are feeders as defined in Article 100 but I also agree that an insulated equipment grounding conductor is required to exit the building.

Wouldn't this discussion be identical to the NM-cable-into-the-A/C-disconnect issue?