Why not call it EBC instead of EGC?

Status
Not open for further replies.
mbrooke said:
You proved my point :D Bonding provides a fault path and keeps objects at the same potential. Grounding is so lightning can be dissipated to earth. Grounding can also help with incidental contact at high voltages on the utility side by giving a path through the earth.
Click to expand...

An EGC provides a fault path back to the source thru the n-g connection, yes? Bonding keeps two objects at the same potential, yes? Regardless of if the EGC is used for bonding, those two statements are generally true, yes?

I know grounding doesn't do squat for clearing faults. Tying a circuit to Earth does basically zip.
 
kwired said:
Though it has been fairly standard practice to connect the negative to the chassis there can be instances where positive was connected to the chassis.

I didn't call it ground, but calling it chassis can be just as confusing for some. They may think current is trying to get to chassis - which it sort of is, but they need to realize it is trying to get to the supply terminal that is bonded to the chassis and that chassis is just a conductor to complete that path. No different with "grounded" items in a premises wiring system. Difference being with those low voltage automotive systems the open circuit voltage isn't ordinarily considered much of a hazard as with systems that operate over 50 volts.
Click to expand...


How can it be confusing? Chassis is where you are connecting too. 'Sir, what is chassis on a motor vehicle' A: 'that would be your ground' or ' the metal frame of the car which acts as an electrical return to the negative terminal of the battery'


ggunn said:
How about the verbs "to film" and "to tape" referring to the making of visual and auditory recordings where neither film nor tape is used? Audio recordings are still called "albums" long after the music industry moved away from vinyl first to CD's and then away from physical media altogether. And yes, I know that you can still get vinyl for some recordings.

I remember using electrical simulation software a few years ago that called component databases "decks", a term that comes from computers that used stacks (decks) of punched cards back in the 60's.
Click to expand...

Yup- called movies now and frequently so. But its still easier to explain the origins of film and tape then why the NEC uses the term grounding for just about everything including up to what is really bonding.

Look at it like this. Say I had plastic coming in from the street and after the water meter. What exact section says I need to bond to the pipe in a home?
 
JFletcher said:
An EGC provides a fault path back to the source thru the n-g connection, yes? Bonding keeps two objects at the same potential, yes? Regardless of if the EGC is used for bonding, those two statements are generally true, yes?
Click to expand...


Yes, Yes and Yes:happyyes:

I know grounding doesn't do squat for clearing faults. Tying a circuit to Earth does basically zip.
Click to expand...


Which is why we should not be calling it EGC because extending earth or soil to the frame of the appliance does nothing for the intended purpose of having an EGC.
 
ActionDave said:
How are we going to ensure our children can learn the important and necessary things in life when the go to school each day worrying their dryer in not in enough dirt to make sure it's grounded.
Click to expand...

Simple, get rid of the bureaucracy and sugar coating. Use the right terms. Education would rank #1 in the world if it could do that.
 
"Ground" and "earth" are false terms and should be eliminated. Bonding conductor and circuit protective conductor are good alternatives that should become mainstream.
 
jap said:
See how easy that is?

Just like saying a speed square is technically a triangle.

Jap>
Click to expand...

Come reality, not really. You don't look like an expert or knowledgeable when you are saying a 150 year old respected organization is wrong or dated. We can cure so much disease, predict hurricanes, entangle particles... everything looks so right and so perfect- its the best time to be alive in history- and here is one person saying the very codes that aid human civilization are wrong.
 
ActionDave said:
I think nutrition plays a big part. What about kids in urban districts? How do we make sure their education is well grounded?
Click to expand...

Nutrition is improving, people are waking up to everything. A wealth of knowledge is at everyone finger tips. But we still use an incorrect term when we know better despite so many other industries changing theirs are discoveries take place.
 
mbrooke said:
How can it be confusing? Chassis is where you are connecting too. 'Sir, what is chassis on a motor vehicle' A: 'that would be your ground' or ' the metal frame of the car which acts as an electrical return to the negative terminal of the battery'
Click to expand...
But it doesn't have to be connected to the negative terminal of the battery, just like a "grounded conductor" isn't always a neutral conductor. You can bond/ground any conductor of the source, but you can't bond more then one conductor or sometimes more then one place along that conductor or you possibly have current flowing where you hadn't intended it to flow during normal conditions.

peter d said:
"Ground" and "earth" are false terms and should be eliminated. Bonding conductor and circuit protective conductor are good alternatives that should become mainstream.
Click to expand...
I agree those names are likely better, don't agree it will remove all confusion though.
 
mbrooke said:
Come reality, not really. You don't look like an expert or knowledgeable when you are saying a 150 year old respected organization is wrong or dated. We can cure so much disease, predict hurricanes, entangle particles... everything looks so right and so perfect- its the best time to be alive in history- and here is one person saying the very codes that aid human civilization are wrong.
Click to expand...

Yes, we can do all those great things, even with the literature that's been in place all these years.

No need to change it for the one person that thinks if it's not human civilization will cease to exist.

With that being said, if the wording did change, it wouldn't make much difference to me.


Jap>
 
peter d said:
"Ground" and "earth" are false terms and should be eliminated. Bonding conductor and circuit protective conductor are good alternatives that should become mainstream.
Click to expand...
You bring up an interesting point.

Everyone else gets to use the term ground without fear- well grounded idea, groundless accusations, stand your ground, standing on solid ground, above ground, underground network, grounded in truth, driven into the ground...

But, somehow, electricians do not stand a chance of understanding how to make an electrical system safe as long as the term ground is used in the NEC.
 
mbrooke said:
Simple, get rid of the bureaucracy and sugar coating. Use the right terms. Education would rank #1 in the world if it could do that.
Click to expand...
If people in the US would be less concerned with how well their kids compete with others in the US and more concerned about how ALL the kids in the US compete with those in the rest of the world, education in the US would be much better. Higher Ed should be cheaper and teachers should be better paid, and paying for it should be a higher priority than a lot of what is now publicly funded.
 
I am supportive of changinger EGC to EBC, however there is another real confusing thing in 250 that needs to be resolved: I wold split it up into two articles, grounding and bonding. Grounding would cover system grounding, and equipment grounding (earthing/dirt). Bonding would be bonding. I think that lumping system grounding in with fault clearing makes absolutely no sense, they are totally different things. As it is now would be like putting article 650, pipe organs and article 680, pools, together in the same article.
 
electrofelon said:
I am supportive of changinger EGC to EBC, however there is another real confusing thing in 250 that needs to be resolved: I wold split it up into two articles, grounding and bonding. Grounding would cover system grounding, and equipment grounding (earthing/dirt). Bonding would be bonding. I think that lumping system grounding in with fault clearing makes absolutely no sense, they are totally different things. As it is now would be like putting article 650, pipe organs and article 680, pools, together in the same article.
Click to expand...

You know, I fully agree now that I think about it :happyyes::happyyes:
 
ggunn said:
If people in the US would be less concerned with how well their kids compete with others in the US and more concerned about how ALL the kids in the US compete with those in the rest of the world, education in the US would be much better. Higher Ed should be cheaper and teachers should be better paid, and paying for it should be a higher priority than a lot of what is now publicly funded.
Click to expand...

I agree- we should compare ourselves to the rest of the world and not to older version of the NEC. Canada moved to bonding conductor a while back- and as already mentioned earlier in the thread the UK calls it a "circuit protective conductor".

Now- the interesting part. Most countries around the world actually refer to EGCs as "earthing conductors", but in those case there is a justifiable reason. In most of these countries the earth is actually used to clear faults (in conjunction with an RCD {GFC}) and there is no main bonding jumper at the service. The neutral is indeed 100% isolated from the building's grounding system. Google "TT earthing system"
 
electrofelon said:
I am supportive of changinger EGC to EBC, however there is another real confusing thing in 250 that needs to be resolved: I wold split it up into two articles, grounding and bonding. Grounding would cover system grounding, and equipment grounding (earthing/dirt). Bonding would be bonding. I think that lumping system grounding in with fault clearing makes absolutely no sense, they are totally different things. As it is now would be like putting article 650, pipe organs and article 680, pools, together in the same article.
Click to expand...
But what you are asking for is already split into subsections of 250, the key ones you mentioned are:


II System grounding
III Grounding electrode system

V Bonding
VI Equipment grounding
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top