The grounding/bonding thing

[ryan_618]

I have been told that the Technical Correlating Comittee will be proposing several hundred changes to the NEC, in an effort to clarify the differences between grounding and bonding.

What I am being told is that the TCC will propose to change all definitions, terms and code sections with the words ground, grounding, grounded, bond, bonding, bonded, etc.

It will be interesting to see where this goes.

 

[charlie]

Re: The grounding/bonding thing

Ryan, I think the proposals will come from a task group that was formed after the TCC held the issue over until this cycle.

 

[bphgravity]

Re: The grounding/bonding thing

I just hope they don't wimp out and take half measures as to not freak out the traditionalists. Go all the way and make it right or don't do anytihng at all.

 

[charlie b]

Re: The grounding/bonding thing

They'll probably handle it by showing both versions, like "luminaires (fixtures)" or like "mm (inches)." It will be "equipment grounding (bonding) conductor" and "main bonding (grounding) jumper" for at least one cycle.

 

[iwire]

Re: The grounding/bonding thing

Originally posted by charlie b:
They'll probably handle it by showing both versions.....

AAAAARRRRGGG!

I sure (certainly) hope (wish) not , the book (manuscript) is long (extended) enough (sufficiently) already (previously).

[ October 10, 2005, 05:57 PM: Message edited by: iwire ]

 

[sandsnow]

Re: The grounding/bonding thing

What a task that must have been!!!! Much praise to the people who undertook it.

 

[George Stolz]

Re: The grounding/bonding thing

Originally posted by charlie b:
It will be "equipment grounding (bonding) conductor" and "main bonding (grounding) jumper" for at least one cycle.

Now that would be a stroke of clarity.

 

[pierre]

Re: The grounding/bonding thing

Bob
"I sure (certainly) hope (wish) not , the book (manuscript) is long (extended) enough (sufficiently) already (previously)."

That is very clever, I got a good laugh from that .

 

[gndrod]

Re: The grounding/bonding thing

Hi ryan & charlies, Is there a way of getting in touch with the key people working on the specific areas of grounding and bonding. I have been working on revising Art 250 by making 'V.Bonding' into a new Art. 251. This change also reverts the title of 250 back to 'Grounding' and changes all subsequent Sections 250.4 through 250.86 that use bond, bonding, and bonded out of context when referring to grounding. I also have proposed adding to Art. 100 defining Electrical Bond as "The faying surface connection between metal or semi-conductive parts that allow a safe current-carrying capacity through a circuit or ground pathway."

I need editing help in streamlining the NEC method that requires limiting proposals by one proposal for each Section at a time with a separate form copy. This is not easy to do with what is being changed and I'd like to get some help from the Standards Council. Maybe someone in our great forum can help get me in touch with involved personnel to expedite a way to do this before Nov. 4. The markups are complete for the 250 revisions, all that is needed is a way to edit it digitally. I've requested S/W over 2 weeks ago and no response from NFPA.

Thanks in advance. rbj, Seattle

 

[iwire]

Re: The grounding/bonding thing

Originally posted by gndrod:
I also have proposed adding to Art. 100 defining Electrical Bond as "The faying surface connection between metal or semi-conductive parts that allow a safe current-carrying capacity through a circuit or ground pathway."

rbj, IMO that definition is far from clear and helpful to most NEC users.

faying surface connection

I have to admit I had no idea what that meant, I had to do a bit of searching for a definition of that phrase.

Faying Surface

That surface of a member that is in contact with another member to which it is joined.

Science & Engineering Encyclopaedia

Whats is wrong with this existing definition of bonding?

Bonding (Bonded). The permanent joining of metallic parts to form an electrically conductive path that ensures electrical continuity and the capacity to conduct safely any current likely to be imposed.

 

[George Stolz]

Re: The grounding/bonding thing

Originally posted by iwire:
rbj, IMO that definition is far from clear and helpful to most NEC users.

...I have to admit I had no idea what that meant, I had to do a bit of searching for a definition of that phrase.

...Whats is wrong with this existing definition of bonding?

 

[George Stolz]

Re: The grounding/bonding thing

Originally posted by gndrod:
[QB]I have been working on revising Art 250 by making 'V.Bonding' into a new Art. 251.

This sounds like the sort of sweeping change that required a task group to intensively review the entire article, holding it over a cycle.

In my mind, the two concepts are intrinsically linked, making sense for them to reside in the same article. To separate them sounds like a lot of work for what in the end could be marginal gain.

It sounds like you have a lot of work done. Can you show us an example of what you have?

This change also reverts the title of 250 back to 'Grounding' and changes all subsequent Sections 250.4 through 250.86 that use bond, bonding, and bonded out of context when referring to grounding.

I could be wildly mistaken (as I only have what I see here to go by, no inside scoop on things) but I think this is what the task group was doing.

I need editing help in streamlining the NEC method that requires limiting proposals by one proposal for each Section at a time with a separate form copy. This is not easy to do with what is being changed and I'd like to get some help from the Standards Council.

On this thread I have a copy of one of my homegrown proposals. I worked on the sheet, making it look similar to the PDF one from the NFPA. After I was close, I entered my personal information in the first rows, the information that wouldn't change from proposal to proposal. I then saved it as a "template".

A "template" (as it's called on my Mac) opens to an exact copy of the actual file, and requires you to save it under another file name.

This saved me time, as all I had to do was take my proposals, copy them from the source (this forum), paste them into my form, change the fonts and sizes to match, and then save and print.

The markups are complete for the 250 revisions, all that is needed is a way to edit it digitally.]

On the same thread above, there is a MS Word version of the proposal form. Does that help?

[ October 15, 2005, 10:18 AM: Message edited by: georgestolz ]

 

[peter d]

Re: The grounding/bonding thing

First, I totally support these changes to the NEC. They should be pushed through no matter what.

The major problems that I see are mass confusion in the field and classrooms of the trade. There is allready enough confusion as it is with grounding and bonding concepts using the current code language. The solution? A massive education campaign on all levels, from apprentice training to continuing education to seminars, to teach grounding and bonding principles correctly once and for all. Is that a pipe dream? Probably.

 

[Leitmotif]

Re: The grounding/bonding thing

Given the definition
Bonding (Bonded). The permanent joining of metallic parts to form an electrically conductive path that ensures electrical continuity and the capacity to conduct safely any current likely to be imposed.

In my opinion it is a perfectly good definition.

I don't see why there is any training needed for this. We do it all the time - for example
1. Joint two wires (sorry coductors) with wire nuts split bolts cad weld etc.
2. Connect bus bar in switchgear with nuts and bolts
3. Plug an appliance into an outlet (or is that a receptacle -- lessee which NEC chapter do I gotta read to figure that out?

I think the trade has gotten more complicated.

Writing standards and procedures for a wide and varied population is the pits. That is one of many reasons I have gotten out of the safety and industrial hygiene business. I do not envy anyone involved in revising the NEC. What a thankless frustrating task.


I think a picture is worth a thousand words. There should be more drawings in NEC. I think these should be typical or "most common" that will fit and apply to most applications.

 

[peter d]

Re: The grounding/bonding thing

Originally posted by Leitmotif:

I don't see why there is any training needed for this.

I'm not talking about talking about teaching wiring skills. I'm talking about an intesive training effort to teach the theory and principles of grounding and bonding, which I think is sorely lacking in the trade.

 

[gndrod]

Re: The grounding/bonding thing

Thankyou all for the responses. I can see that an explanation would be in order for what is being proposed but I have a lot of data and only 2 weeks to get in a qualified proposal.

I'll re-iterate the need to get in touch with the TCC, NFPA, or whomever in order to get approval of a blanket change of Art 250 under a single Proposal Form for all the Sections mentioned in the prior post. I also need a 2005 NEC CD for digital editing in the blanket format. Maybe there is an easier way.

I thank Bob, Peter, Dan, George, and everyone for my realization that this is a big undertaking that requires a lot of help. I am beginning to think this is a journey for a demented mind. George, I have a book on NM Wiring for you if you can give me a PM address.

Regards, rbj