whirlpool tub

Status
Not open for further replies.
D

dnj12345

Member
how do you ground the motor of the tub if the waterlines are plastic I usually run a #8 to the cold copper waterline now all they use is the plastic pex
 
There is no requirement to run a #8 bonding jumper to the water line since it does not carry circulating water. But just wait, you're bound to here opinions to the contrary. :)
 
You can learn a great deal from just hanging around here for a while. :grin:
Not just from reading answers but from trying to find the answer to a question that you may not know much about simply by looking it up in the NEC. Add in the knowledge provided by the guys here with decades of experience and you can literally learn something new everyday.
 
Just to show Rob has no only learned so much, but he also has ESP, I will give you a "contrary opinion" :grin:

Actually I agree with him in general but add that, although there is no DIRECT Code requirement to do so, I have on a few occasions come across a Jucuzzi brand hydrotub which had manufacturer installation instructions which called for a #8 bond back to the panel.
Under those circumstances, many inspectors would require the bond per NEC 110.3(B).
I have attached a copy of the page that requires the bonds.
For that reason, I suggest you review the manufacturer instructions.

View attachment 4374
 
augie47 said:
Just to show Rob has no only learned so much, but he also has ESP, I will give you a "contrary opinion" :grin:

Actually I agree with him in general but add that, although there is no DIRECT Code requirement to do so, I have on a few occasions come across a Jucuzzi brand hydrotub which had manufacturer installation instructions which called for a #8 bond back to the panel.
Under those circumstances, many inspectors would require the bond per NEC 110.3(B).
I have attached a copy of the page that requires the bonds.
For that reason, I suggest you review the manufacturer instructions.

View attachment 4374
Click to expand...

Yes, the requirements of Article 680 and the manufacturer's instructions that are part of the listing of the product are two different things. It would be nice if both the manufacturer and the NEC were on the same page. :roll:

IMO the #8 back to the panel is ridiculous. If this were really needed we would see the same requirement for a swimming pool.
 
Those instructions date back a few years and I have not seen an actual Jucuzzi brand tub recently, however, EVERY hydrotub I've inspected in the past few years that has a heater, has required (in the instructions) the #8 bond for the heater.
 
augie47 said:
Just to show Rob has no only learned so much, but he also has ESP, I will give you a "contrary opinion" :grin:

Actually I agree with him in general but add that, although there is no DIRECT Code requirement to do so, I have on a few occasions come across a Jucuzzi brand hydrotub which had manufacturer installation instructions which called for a #8 bond back to the panel.
Under those circumstances, many inspectors would require the bond per NEC 110.3(B).
I have attached a copy of the page that requires the bonds.
For that reason, I suggest you review the manufacturer instructions.

View attachment 4374
Click to expand...

" **** or approved local bond."

I would say that it is bonded via the GFCI.

"IMO the #8 back to the panel is ridiculous."

I agree.
 
Swimming pools don't require a #8 back to the panel so why would a hydromassage tub need it. just don't read the mfg instructions.:)
 
jxofaltrds said:
Dennis you are kidding ? Correct?

I ''''''try''''' to use common sense but I never ignore what is in the code or in the mfg. specs.
Click to expand...

I was kidding but I personally, in this case,will never run that #8 back to the panel unless forced into it. No way- waste of money and ,IMO, it is the mfg. trying to cover their butts and have no idea what they are talking about.
 
Dennis Alwon said:
I was kidding but I personally, in this case,will never run that #8 back to the panel unless forced into it. No way- waste of money and ,IMO, it is the mfg. trying to cover their butts and have no idea what they are talking about.
Click to expand...

Dennis

I thought so but with written words we do not always "hear' what the other posters mean.
 
In my humble opinion, the requirement to run a bonding wire back to the panel by some manufacturer should be challenged via e-mail to that company's support. Not only is it a waste of resources, I feel it adds a new path to introduce fault current to an occupant of the tub, as well as (the manufacturer's idea of a) path to remove fault current from the tub, which is already provided by the equipment ground conductor run with the motor circuit. The code wants the area of the tub and all metal close by equal in potential, and the equipment ground run with the tub feeder is the proper path for fault current, not the equapotential protections.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top