Why the name change?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: Why the name change?

The problem is that the word grounding is used in the NEC for both bonding and grounding creating much confusion in the field.
Click to expand...
Yes, I know about that, and have been following with interest your proposal for changes to it.

What I was referring to was the change in the name of this section of the forum.

Ed
 
Re: Why the name change?

Since both grounding and bonding are distinct but related, "Grounding and Bonding" seemed like a perfectly good name for the discussion area to me.

Book title or not, I don't see the need for the change. Oh well. :roll:
 
Re: Why the name change?

Well OK. It was my suggestion to Mike, its his book and his site. Most of use misuse the term grounding. "The box is not grounded". If you can, attend one of Mike Holts Grounding versus Bonding seminars. You will not regret it. At least buy his new Grounding versus Bonding text.
 
Re: Why the name change?

Oh man, I didn't mean anything personal Tom. If I knew it was your idea I would have been less, direct, about my comments. :eek:
 
Re: Why the name change?

Thats OK. Whats interesting is how many persons noticed!
Seriously, thanks to Don G (moderator) who made the proposals to change equipment grounding conductor to equipment bonding conductor, all the CMP's now know that the term grounding has been used improperly. However, the some new language in the NEC uses the term bonding correctly instead of the incorrect grounding. see 2005 314.30(D) It uses the term bonding for a handhole enclosure lid. Grr :mad: I can't paste the text from the 2005 NEC electronic PDF.
 
Re: Why the name change?

I agree with Don's proposals for the most part. I don't think he's going far enough really, but if it were up to me things would probably be worse rather than better. I think it is true that there are four types of conductors and not just three though and a different labeling scheme would help.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top