• We will be performing upgrades on the forums and server over the weekend. The forums may be unavailable multiple times for up to an hour each. Thank you for your patience and understanding as we work to make the forums even better.

Transformer XO Bonding

Merry Christmas
Status
Not open for further replies.

bennie

Esteemed Member
Re: Transformer XO Bonding

Don: I agree completely. There is no mention that a transformer have it's own ground electrode.

The code reads separately derived system shall be grounded. This is why I maintain that a transformer is not a separately derived system.
 

don_resqcapt19

Moderator
Staff member
Location
Illinois
Occupation
retired electrician
Re: Transformer XO Bonding

Bennie,
250.30(A)(4) seems to require a grounding electode in the area of the transformer.
Don
 

bennie

Esteemed Member
Re: Transformer XO Bonding

Don: Yes, for a separately derived system. I fail to see the words "transformer" :confused:
 

iwire

Moderator
Staff member
Location
Massachusetts
Re: Transformer XO Bonding

Bennie, I know I come late to all of this and I do not mean any disrespect, but you confusing the heck out of me. :confused:

You obviously have put a lot of thought into this, if you got the chance to change things what do you see as wrong and what would you do about it?
 

bennie

Esteemed Member
Re: Transformer XO Bonding

Bob: I have researched the past history and origin of the separately derived system. I do not agree with the general understanding and illustrations in the Handbook, and the Soares Book.

I have no confidence in the Handbook since Joe McPartland was the author. Some of his technical descriptions have been incorrectly changed.

I have been on a crusade to correct what I believe to be a corruption of electrical science and technology.
 

bennie

Esteemed Member
Re: Transformer XO Bonding

Bob: The origin of a separately derived system was " Alternating-current Systems Without External connections".

In 1956 this title changed to " Separately derived systems to include generators. The other power sources in the definition are not AC sources for premises wiring.

The designation " Separately derived systems" was assigned for technical correctness and not by panel action.

Separately derived systems are premises wiring systems, not the power source. The power source is a component. The grounding requirements are for the premises wiring system not the power source.

When the premises wiring system is properly grounded, the power source will be properly grounded when connected.

There is a violation when grounding a transformer two times at two locations.
 

bennie

Esteemed Member
Re: Transformer XO Bonding

Please read 250.30(6) for substantiation concerning a transformer being a source for a separately derived system.
 

don_resqcapt19

Moderator
Staff member
Location
Illinois
Occupation
retired electrician
Re: Transformer XO Bonding

Bennie,
The transformer itself is not the complete SDS, but it is the source of power for the SDS and is a part of the SDS. The required connection to ground for the SDS must be at a point from the source of power for the SDS to the first OCPD for the system. This requires a grounding electrode connection.
Don
 

bennie

Esteemed Member
Re: Transformer XO Bonding

Don: The first overcurrent device is the premises service. The ground electrode connection is at that point, not at the source, although it can be at the source.

A premises wiring system is all inclusive, it does not say one, or some, of the premises wiring systems.

The code making panel will rule in support of the popular belief that a transformer is a separately derived system, and requires grounding according to 250.30.

This will be a case of the the NEC changing electrical science to meet the explanation, instead of making the explanation meet the definition.

All of the substantiation documentation is in the NEC Archives, of my viewpoint. There is nothing to support the text in the handbook or Soares.

The auto-transformer reference is absurd, fictitous, and fabricated, in someone's imagination.

[ April 03, 2003, 09:34 PM: Message edited by: bennie ]
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top