Why is it so hard to understand

roger

Moderator
Staff member
Location
Fl
Occupation
Electrician
In the last few weeks I have run into two licensed electricians and a so called engineer (I pretty sure he's lying) that think parallel paths and loops are a problem in EGC's.

I tried to explain to the self proclaimed engineer that multiple paths for fault clearing is not a problem and in fact desired, I pointed out that he is confusing this with current loops due to multiple bonding of the neutral and at that point, the proverbial "deer in the headlight look" appeared.

I know we discuss this a lot here on the forum but, that should not be necessary for people with some basic theory and understanding of fault clearing paths.

We have second year apprentices that understand this so go figure.

Okay, I admit I was just venting.

Roger
 

jumper

Senior Member
The hardest thing for me is that even after it is explained to them and they say they get it, they more often then not go right back to their old misunderstanding the next day. Ugh.

I will be the first to admit that I came to this forum with fistfulls of misconceptions and incorrect interpretations, but I am willing to learn and appreciate the wisdom and experience of the members here.

Sometimes I am bit thick headed and dense, but I usually get it finally. Some people are just all but unteachable IMO. Sad but true. And worse, some do not want to learn.

My rant.:)
 

ActionDave

Moderator
Staff member
Location
Durango, CO, 10 h 20 min without traffic from wing
Occupation
wire pulling grunt
I think jumper has it figured.

I had similar afflictions as him. Over time I learned the basics of grounding and bonding. If I can learn this stuff out anybody can. I'm an ex concrete worker for crying out loud. But there's the rub......It's not hard to teach, it's not hard to learn, but it's impossible to teach somebody who doesn't want to learn.
 

roger

Moderator
Staff member
Location
Fl
Occupation
Electrician
I have one of those Engineers at work. This one is so far out of whack his basic information about common sense stuff is usually wrong
This is way too common of a problem and I don't mean this to be aimed at engineers, as I said in my first post, I think the guy I'm talking about is lying and somehow got his job by doing so.

Welcome to the forums.

Roger
 

jumper

Senior Member
This is way too common of a problem and I don't mean this to be aimed at engineers, as I said in my first post, I think the guy I'm talking about is lying and somehow got his job by doing so.

Welcome to the forums.

Roger
The problem I see is that many companies assign the title engineer to people that do not actually have a real degree or even enough experience and knowledge to be given the rank informally.

I see the title/rank used pretty casually at times and it is frustrating.
 

iwire

Moderator
Staff member
Location
Massachusetts
The problem I see is that many companies assign the title engineer to people that do not actually have a real degree or even enough experience and knowledge to be given the rank informally.
I worked at a fitness club last week, the kid who cleans the pools and washes the windows is the 'engineer' that is his title. :roll:
 

Fulthrotl

~~Please excuse the mess. Sig under construction~~
In the last few weeks I have run into two licensed electricians and a so called engineer (I pretty sure he's lying) that think parallel paths and loops are a problem in EGC's.

I tried to explain to the self proclaimed engineer that multiple paths for fault clearing is not a problem and in fact desired, I pointed out that he is confusing this with current loops due to multiple bonding of the neutral and at that point, the proverbial "deer in the headlight look" appeared.

I know we discuss this a lot here on the forum but, that should not be necessary for people with some basic theory and understanding of fault clearing paths.

We have second year apprentices that understand this so go figure.

Okay, I admit I was just venting.

Roger
i did a data center once where they stipulated the 500 mcm grounds be CADWELDED
to the ground bus.... mounted above the switchgear.... but it gets better....

the ground wires could not turn down onto the 1/4" x 4" x 6' bus, they had to turn UP.
i think this way, in the event of a fault, the electrons will drain back to earth.

for those who've done cadwelding, think about clamping the mold to a vertical bus bar,
with the wire pointing down, and firing a shot..... how fun.

the engineer was adamant that it be done in this fashion.
 

Dennis Alwon

Moderator
Staff member
Location
Chapel Hill, NC
Occupation
Electrical Contractor
I cannot tell you how many electrical contractors I have educated about the purpose of the ground rod. They all think it is there in case the neutral fails. :happysad:
 

Strathead

Senior Member
i did a data center once where they stipulated the 500 mcm grounds be CADWELDED
to the ground bus.... mounted above the switchgear.... but it gets better....

the ground wires could not turn down onto the 1/4" x 4" x 6' bus, they had to turn UP.
i think this way, in the event of a fault, the electrons will drain back to earth.

for those who've done cadwelding, think about clamping the mold to a vertical bus bar,
with the wire pointing down, and firing a shot..... how fun.

the engineer was adamant that it be done in this fashion.
While the concept of having to aim the wires down is odd, two things come to my mind. First, with the VS series Cadweld molds, I don't see where installing the grounds this way would be a problem. And second, lightning protection concerns itself with things like uphill routing of conductors and perhaps that "engineer" had LP on his brain.
 

Carultch

Senior Member
Location
Massachusetts
I cannot tell you how many electrical contractors I have educated about the purpose of the ground rod. They all think it is there in case the neutral fails. :happysad:
I'm confused about the purpose of the ground rod as well. And I often find conflicting explanations. Can you give me a brief overview per your understanding?
 

mcclary's electrical

Senior Member
Location
VA
While the concept of having to aim the wires down is odd, two things come to my mind. First, with the VS series Cadweld molds, I don't see where installing the grounds this way would be a problem. And second, lightning protection concerns itself with things like uphill routing of conductors and perhaps that "engineer" had LP on his brain.

for the life of me, i cannot picture a mold that would allow the wire to go up.
 

construct

Senior Member
The hardest thing for me is that even after it is explained to them and they say they get it, they more often then not go right back to their old misunderstanding the next day. Ugh.

I will be the first to admit that I came to this forum with fistfulls of misconceptions and incorrect interpretations, but I am willing to learn and appreciate the wisdom and experience of the members here.

Sometimes I am bit thick headed and dense, but I usually get it finally. Some people are just all but unteachable IMO. Sad but true. And worse, some do not want to learn.

My rant.:)
I will also say that this forum has been a huge assistance to me as well. The explanations from many quite knowledgable members here have clarified so many wrong perceptions on my part..........particularly "Bonding"
:thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup:
 

kwired

Electron manager
Location
NE Nebraska
I'm confused about the purpose of the ground rod as well. And I often find conflicting explanations. Can you give me a brief overview per your understanding?
It is not as important as many want it to be.

We do need a ground reference for grounded systems, one rod is not going to give us that great of a reference. But if you consider that your separately derived systems are bonded to your service and that your service is bonded to the utility grid grounded conductor and millions of electrodes - we have a pretty good reference there, but it does get complicated with voltage drop on any grounded current carrying conductors in the path.
 

ActionDave

Moderator
Staff member
Location
Durango, CO, 10 h 20 min without traffic from wing
Occupation
wire pulling grunt
It is not as important as many want it to be.

We do need a ground reference for grounded systems, one rod is not going to give us that great of a reference. But if you consider that your separately derived systems are bonded to your service and that your service is bonded to the utility grid grounded conductor and millions of electrodes - we have a pretty good reference there, but it does get complicated with voltage drop on any grounded current carrying conductors in the path.
Yup. That's pretty much it in a nutshell.
 

mayanees

Senior Member
Location
Westminster, MD
P.E.?

P.E.?

In the last few weeks I have run into two licensed electricians and a so called engineer (I pretty sure he's lying) that think parallel paths and loops are a problem in EGC's.

I tried to explain to the self proclaimed engineer that multiple paths for fault clearing is not a problem and in fact desired, I pointed out that he is confusing this with current loops due to multiple bonding of the neutral and at that point, the proverbial "deer in the headlight look" appeared.

I know we discuss this a lot here on the forum but, that should not be necessary for people with some basic theory and understanding of fault clearing paths.

We have second year apprentices that understand this so go figure.

Okay, I admit I was just venting.

Roger

Roger,
The term 'engineer" is used pretty loosely by lots of people, as pointed out in this thread. I think you can somewhat level the playing field by asking if they are registered as a Professional Engineer. A registered engineer working on electrical systems is probably versed at bonding and grounding issues. It's illegal in many states to put the term engineer on your business card unless you're registered, much like an electrical contractor needs to be registered in order to offer electrical services to the public. So my suggestion when someone touts themselves as an engineer is to ask what states they're registered in.
It always pains me when the threads pop up every 3-4 weeks about duma$$ engineers... when the "engineer" is not an engineer at all, but still gives a bad name to those of us who are.
Peace.
John
 

jumper

Senior Member
Roger,
The term 'engineer" is used pretty loosely by lots of people, as pointed out in this thread. I think you can somewhat level the playing field by asking if they are registered as a Professional Engineer. A registered engineer working on electrical systems is probably versed at bonding and grounding issues. It's illegal in many states to put the term engineer on your business card unless you're registered, much like an electrical contractor needs to be registered in order to offer electrical services to the public. So my suggestion when someone touts themselves as an engineer is to ask what states they're registered in.
It always pains me when the threads pop up every 3-4 weeks about duma$$ engineers... when the "engineer" is not an engineer at all, but still gives a bad name to those of us who are.
Peace.
John
Well said.
 
Top