On Thu, 5 May 2005 21:50:17 -0400, "Julie P."
wrote:

The electrical wiring in my house is not grounded, although all the outlets
are three prong. I have a lot of equipment like air conditioners, fax
machines, printers, computers, routers, etc. What would be the easiest way
to ground one or two of my outlets?

Can I string a wire over the grounding prong on the surge protector plug and
then run the wire out of my windows to the ground and then impale the ground
with a coat hanger attached to the wire?

Or can I just wrap the wire around the painted radiator pipe which runs to
the upstairs tenant's radiator? This is close to the outlets.

Thanks!

Julie, just get you a ups for the computer equipment - not the AC,
and forget the ground. It will not be a problem.
A 725 ups should handle it just fine.

If the point was not established by other posters, well,
this
is the bottom line. You are asking for a safety ground.
Earthing does not provide a safety ground. A safety ground
must connect the appliance ground prong to circuit breaker box
safety ground - the neutral bus bar. Below are two solutions
and two taboos.

Worse than no wall receptacle safety ground is to connect
a safety ground to water pipes. All wire connections to
water pipes are to remove electricity. Removing electricity
from water pipes is why a bare copper wire connects city water
pipe to breaker box. When is a human at greatest risk to
electric shock? When wet. Wet human in a shower or bathtub
is why electricity in pipes can be so dangerous. Safer to not
safety ground the computer than to ground it to bathroom and
kitchen plumbing. Code also makes same demand. Common sense
says that plumbing is the last place to dump electricity.

Although no longer considered safe by code, one could run a
12 AWG green wire from wall receptacle to breaker box. That
being minimum grounding one can do for human safety.
Otherwise install a GFCI on that circuit (ie. in the first
wall receptacle on that branch circuit) and apply prerequisite
stickers that read "No Equipment Ground" to each wall
receptacle plate.

Again, this is grounding for human safety. Two possible
solutions are provided above - only one is approved by code.
Two solutions that are completely unacceptable as well as
outright code violations: grounding a wall receptacle to a
separate earth ground rod, or grounding to water pipes.

"Julie P." wrote:
It's not that I don't care about code, it's that this house
already violates so many times, that it would be pointless to
adhere to it anymore.

Jeff Wisnia wrote:
Ron Tock wrote:

Julie P. wrote:

The electrical wiring in my house is not grounded, although all the
outlets are three prong. I have a lot of equipment like air
conditioners, fax machines, printers, computers, routers, etc. What
would be the easiest way to ground one or two of my outlets?

Can I string a wire over the grounding prong on the surge protector
plug and then run the wire out of my windows to the ground and then
impale the ground with a coat hanger attached to the wire?

Or can I just wrap the wire around the painted radiator pipe which
runs to the upstairs tenant's radiator? This is close to the outlets.

Thanks!



That little screw that holds the outlet cover on should be grounded.
You could attach to that.
Or a cold water pipe.


Whether this thread began with a troll or not.....

Do you really think in a house that old you could rely on the boxes
being grounded? I don't think saying "should" was good advice without
teaching her how to establish whether they are or are not grounded.


She asked for a ground. That screw should be grounded.
I said 'should'.
It's up to her to have it tested, just like the cold water
pipe.
Ok?
Now take a chill pill.

Irresponsible to connect wall receptacle ground to a water
pipe. A wet human in a shower, bath, or touching water in a
sink is at greatest risk. And you would dump electricity into
those pipes? Shame on you. It is safer to not ground at all
rather than connect to water pipes. Even the code does not
permit this type connection any more. The only electrical
connection to water pipes is to remove electricity from those
pipes. Never dump electricity into water pipes.

Numerous reasons to never connect AC receptacle ground to
water pipes. Electricity in those pipes is more hazardous
than an outlet without safety ground. Sounds as if previous
owners replaced all two wire receptacles with three wire
receptacles without the necessary safety ground. Therefore
those screws would have no safety ground connection. These
receptacles are only safe (and legal) if powered through a
GFCI. And GFCI was one of two possible solutions provided in
another post.

Meanwhile, any recommendation to connect safety ground to
cold water pipes only creates a potentially greater hazard.

Ron Tock wrote:
That little screw that holds the outlet cover on should be grounded.
You could attach to that. Or a cold water pipe.

w_tom wrote:
Irresponsible to connect wall receptacle ground to a water
pipe. A wet human in a shower, bath, or touching water in a
sink is at greatest risk. And you would dump electricity into
those pipes? Shame on you. It is safer to not ground at all
rather than connect to water pipes. Even the code does not
permit this type connection any more. The only electrical
connection to water pipes is to remove electricity from those
pipes. Never dump electricity into water pipes.

Numerous reasons to never connect AC receptacle ground to
water pipes. Electricity in those pipes is more hazardous
than an outlet without safety ground. Sounds as if previous
owners replaced all two wire receptacles with three wire
receptacles without the necessary safety ground. Therefore
those screws would have no safety ground connection. These
receptacles are only safe (and legal) if powered through a
GFCI. And GFCI was one of two possible solutions provided in
another post.

Meanwhile, any recommendation to connect safety ground to
cold water pipes only creates a potentially greater hazard.

Ron Tock wrote:

That little screw that holds the outlet cover on should be grounded.
You could attach to that. Or a cold water pipe.

w-tom
I realize that we may disagree on this but since the US NEC specifically
requires the use of underground metal water piping as part of a
building's grounding electrode system don't you think it would be
clearer to say "interior metal water piping" when saying metal water
piping should not be used as a ground for an electrical system. The
code specifically permits the equipment grounding conductor that is
installed as a retrofit ground to run to any electrode of the grounding
electrode system vis..

[VII. Methods of Equipment Grounding
250.130 Equipment Grounding Conductor Connections.
Equipment grounding conductor connections at the source of separately
derived systems shall be made in accordance with 250.30(A)(1). Equipment
grounding conductor connections at service equipment shall be made as
indicated in 250.130(A) or (B). For replacement of non–grounding-type
receptacles with grounding-type receptacles and for branch-circuit
extensions only in existing installations that do not have an equipment
grounding conductor in the branch circuit, connections shall be
permitted as indicated in 250.130(C).
(C) Nongrounding Receptacle Replacement or Branch Circuit Extensions.
The equipment grounding conductor of a grounding-type receptacle or a
branch-circuit extension shall be permitted to be connected to any of
the following:
(1) Any accessible point on the grounding electrode system as described
in 250.50
(2) Any accessible point on the grounding electrode conductor
(3) The equipment grounding terminal bar within the enclosure where the
branch circuit for the receptacle or branch circuit originates
(4) For grounded systems, the grounded service conductor within the
service equipment enclosure
(5) For ungrounded systems, the grounding terminal bar within the
service equipment enclosure(copyright 2002 National Fire Protection
Association)]

The point you are making is quite valid. The interior metallic piping
system must not be used as an equipment grounding or bonding conductor.
Having said that I have to take issue with the statement that "any
recommendation to connect safety ground to cold water pipes only creates
a potentially greater hazard." I realize that this is a fine point but
I believe it is important enough to be clear. The US NEC does not offer
any option. When an underground metal water pipe that is twenty or more
feet in length is available on the premise then it must be used as a
grounding electrode vis..

[250.50 Grounding Electrode System.
If available on the premises at each building or structure served, each
item in 250.52(A)(1) through (A)(6) shall be bonded together to form the
grounding electrode system. Where none of these electrodes are
available, one or more of the electrodes specified in 250.52(A)(4)
through (A)(7) shall be installed and used.
250.52 Grounding Electrodes.
(A) Electrodes Permitted for Grounding.
(1) Metal Underground Water Pipe. A metal underground water pipe in
direct contact with the earth for 3.0 m (10 ft) or more (including any
metal well casing effectively bonded to the pipe) and electrically
continuous (or made electrically continuous by bonding around insulating
joints or insulating pipe) to the points of connection of the grounding
electrode conductor and the bonding conductors. Interior metal water
piping located more than 1.52 m (5 ft) from the point of entrance to the
building shall not be used as a part of the grounding electrode system
or as a conductor to interconnect electrodes that are part of the
grounding electrode system. (copyright 2002 National Fire Protection
Association)]

Please note how carefully the Code Making Panel differentiated between
interior and underground water piping.
--
Tom H

One plumber need only replace copper pipe in plastic. The
human taking a shower or bath is then at extreme risk if the
wall receptacle safety ground has been connected to those
pipes.

The connection from breaker box to cold water pipe is
required by code to remove electricity from that pipe. There
is no way that connection can be reliable to a wall receptacle
because copper pipe is often replace with plastic. The only
way a wall receptacle can make a safe connection to the water
pipe is to make the connection adjacent to where that water
pipe also connects to breaker box. The connection authorized
by NEC article 250.

All of this being completely irrelevant to the earth ground
electrode system. Wall receptacles are safety grounded. That
means they must connect to breaker box bus bar. Earthing
electrode or a water pipe in contact with earth does nothing
to provide a safety ground to that wall receptacle.

In places such as Canada, grounding to water pipes is still
permitted by code. But the point is (and I believe HorneTD is
making the same point), that wall receptacle must be grounded
by a method that cannot be 'accidentally' compromised.
Leaving the wall receptacle ungrounded is safer than putting a
human in bathtub at risk.

Again a safer solution is to GFCI the circuit even if or if
not connecting wall receptacle to cold water pipes. The wet
human is the human at greatest risk. So we connect a
potential electric circuit to bathtub pipes? Not smart at
all.

HorneTD wrote:
w-tom
I realize that we may disagree on this but since the US NEC specifically
requires the use of underground metal water piping as part of a
building's grounding electrode system don't you think it would be
clearer to say "interior metal water piping" when saying metal water
piping should not be used as a ground for an electrical system. The
code specifically permits the equipment grounding conductor that is
installed as a retrofit ground to run to any electrode of the grounding
electrode system vis..

[VII. Methods of Equipment Grounding
250.130 Equipment Grounding Conductor Connections.
Equipment grounding conductor connections at the source of separately
derived systems shall be made in accordance with 250.30(A)(1). Equipment
grounding conductor connections at service equipment shall be made as
indicated in 250.130(A) or (B). For replacement of non–grounding-type
receptacles with grounding-type receptacles and for branch-circuit
extensions only in existing installations that do not have an equipment
grounding conductor in the branch circuit, connections shall be
permitted as indicated in 250.130(C).
(C) Nongrounding Receptacle Replacement or Branch Circuit Extensions.
The equipment grounding conductor of a grounding-type receptacle or a
branch-circuit extension shall be permitted to be connected to any of
the following:
(1) Any accessible point on the grounding electrode system as described
in 250.50
(2) Any accessible point on the grounding electrode conductor
(3) The equipment grounding terminal bar within the enclosure where the
branch circuit for the receptacle or branch circuit originates
(4) For grounded systems, the grounded service conductor within the
service equipment enclosure
(5) For ungrounded systems, the grounding terminal bar within the
service equipment enclosure(copyright 2002 National Fire Protection
Association)]

The point you are making is quite valid. The interior metallic piping
system must not be used as an equipment grounding or bonding conductor.
Having said that I have to take issue with the statement that "any
recommendation to connect safety ground to cold water pipes only creates
a potentially greater hazard." I realize that this is a fine point but
I believe it is important enough to be clear. The US NEC does not offer
any option. When an underground metal water pipe that is twenty or more
feet in length is available on the premise then it must be used as a
grounding electrode vis..

[250.50 Grounding Electrode System.
If available on the premises at each building or structure served, each
item in 250.52(A)(1) through (A)(6) shall be bonded together to form the
grounding electrode system. Where none of these electrodes are
available, one or more of the electrodes specified in 250.52(A)(4)
through (A)(7) shall be installed and used.
250.52 Grounding Electrodes.
(A) Electrodes Permitted for Grounding.
(1) Metal Underground Water Pipe. A metal underground water pipe in
direct contact with the earth for 3.0 m (10 ft) or more (including any
metal well casing effectively bonded to the pipe) and electrically
continuous (or made electrically continuous by bonding around insulating
joints or insulating pipe) to the points of connection of the grounding
electrode conductor and the bonding conductors. Interior metal water
piping located more than 1.52 m (5 ft) from the point of entrance to the
building shall not be used as a part of the grounding electrode system
or as a conductor to interconnect electrodes that are part of the
grounding electrode system. (copyright 2002 National Fire Protection
Association)]

Please note how carefully the Code Making Panel differentiated between
interior and underground water piping.
--
Tom H

Dan C wrote:
"Generate their own ground", huh? What a ****ing galoot.

You're as ignorant as the original dumb bitch that started this
idiotic
thread.

Wow. You're ... impressive. I believe the OP may have been a troll, and
perhaps we have all been trolled.

I know for certain the APC Matrix series UPSes need only a single
ground or neutral connection and will generate the missing one
internally, so that the output outlets have a functional ground and
neutral connection. It's in the product's manual. I suspect that some
of their smaller line-interactive units may also do the same. Yes, it's
not a true ground, but probably works as well as adding a GFCI to a
two-wire circuit.

Speaking of, the OP certainly could add a GFCI if she's concerned about
not having a ground on the outlet by the computer. That is cheap and
will provide similar protection.

Actually, just did a little user-manual research. The smaller
line-interactive units will complain. The smallest unit that doesn't
care about having seperate neutral and ground is the Matrix 3000, which
is obviously overkill for most settings - and requires a 208 or 240v
connection anyway. That would of course be why it doesn't need a
neutral seperate from ground, yet can have a functional seperate
neutral and ground on the output plugs.

-Keith

Hi Tom,

Can you explain briefly (technically if needed) why earthing is
not grounding?

My understanding is there are 3 wires, hot, neutral, and ground. Hot
and neutral connects to the utility lines, and ground connects to the
ground. Is it the 'difference' between one ground and the service
panels' ground that might be causing some problems?

You mentioned "A safety ground must connect the appliance ground prong
to circuit breaker box safety ground - the neutral bus bar", if I am
understanding this correctly, you are saying both hot and neutral gets
wired to the neutral line? How can this be right? Won't the ground
then be constantly hot?

If I connect the ground of a receptacle (using a proper ground wire)
to an actual earth ground (and assuming the connection is good, not
flaky), what exactly is the problem? (I understand the concern about
connecting to water pipes and people taking bath....)

Sorry if these questions are too naive for all your troll sensitive
posters. I am just trying to understand this, so if you don't want
to answer, just don't say anything.

Thanks.

Raymond

wrote:
Hi Tom,

Can you explain briefly (technically if needed) why earthing is
not grounding?

Earthing is grounded. Or I should say: "earthing" is UK usage for what
in the US and Canada is called grounding. To say that something is
earthed or grounded implies that it is electrically conductive to
planet earth, which for these purposes we pretend is an infinite sink
for electricity. (In electronics where there is no such thing, the word
"common" is used instead. The "ground" in your car's electrical system
is a "common", since there is no conductance to the earth.)

My understanding is there are 3 wires, hot, neutral, and ground.

Quite right, in a normal North American 120 V circuit or a normal 240 V
circuit elsewhere. Older wiring simply omits the ground.

(In official code books, the neutral is called the "grounded" conductor
and the ground is called the "grounding" conductor. Let's not do that.
Grounding is also called "bonding" because of how all junction boxes
are supposed to be connected to it.)

Hot
and neutral connects to the utility lines, and ground connects to the
ground. Is it the 'difference' between one ground and the service
panels' ground that might be causing some problems?

Neutral and ground are connected together at - and only at - your main
service panel, and that connection is also connected to ground in the
form of a buried rod or something appropriate to the local conditions.

And in fact, I believe the neutral is also connected to a buried ground
rod at the transformer where your power is stepped down to 120 V from
whatever higher voltage the main lines are at. Others may correct me on
that.

You mentioned "A safety ground must connect the appliance ground
prong
to circuit breaker box safety ground - the neutral bus bar", if I am
understanding this correctly, you are saying both hot and neutral
gets
wired to the neutral line? How can this be right? Won't the ground
then be constantly hot?

Not hot and neutral certainly, but ground and neutral yes, which is
probably what you meant.

All the grounds from each circuit go to the ground bus (not the neutral
bus) in your main panel. All the neutrals from each circuit go to the
neutral bus in the panel. Plus, the neutral bus has one connection to
the ground bus, and the ground bus has a big wire going to your buried
ground rod.

With these connections in place, neither neutral nor ground can ever be
hot because they have a (effectively) zero-resistance path to ground.
"Hot" you must understand is a relative term; one thing is electrically
hot relative to another. Normally the reference point is the ground.
Circular but self-consistent.

If your neutral bar became disconnected from ground AND from the
utility's neutral feed, then all the neutrals in your house would be
hot. Things would quit working because the current that feeds them
would have no path to ground. (In fact the "other" hot leg of a North
American two-leg 120/240 service complicates this, but let's ignore
that.)

If your panel's ground bar became disconnected from ground AND neutral
became disconnected from the utility, then all the metal chassis of all
your appliances would become hot, via their ground connection. That's
really bad for anyone touching such a chassis while they're in good
contact with the earth. If you're in slippers on a carpet you're
probably ok but if you're loading dishes from steel sink into a
dishwasher, you're in trouble.

If I connect the ground of a receptacle (using a proper ground wire)
to an actual earth ground (and assuming the connection is good, not
flaky), what exactly is the problem? (I understand the concern about
connecting to water pipes and people taking bath....)

As I understand it, IF you did this "right" and IF the connection is
good, then you're ok, and as I understand it, historically electical
code permitted isolated grounds like this as a means of dealing with
legacy two-prong wiring. But others may correct me on this.

It's the weakness of the "IF" that's the problem. The trouble begins if
your connection is imperfect and has non-zero resistance. Then if your
chassis becomes hot owing to an internal fault, current will flow
through your makeshift ground, maybe not enough to blow the fuse but
maybe enough to overheat your ground wire. And someone near the ground
wire, or even standing on the earth over your buried rod, may be a
better path to ground (perhaps their other foot is in a puddle, or
they're leaning on your meter box, which is well grounded) and the
current will flow through them.

And suppose you've got another circuit "grounded" on the same rod, so
now the chassis of that appliance is made hot because of the fault in
the first one.

So the answer is that the proposal is not prima-facie dangerous, in
that if executed perfectly it would work. The problem is that it's so
hard to execute well it will certainly result in a half-assed mess, so
a better approach is not to try. Code now says that a home has one and
only one connection to ground, via the ground bar in the main service
panel. Even subpanels in the same building - even outbuildings, with
some restrictions - are supposed to have separate neutrals and grounds
and no local ground rod.

Sorry if these questions are too naive for all your troll sensitive
posters. I am just trying to understand this, so if you don't want
to answer, just don't say anything.

I'm confident that my responses will draw at least as many flames as
your questions would.

Chip C

w_tom wrote:
One plumber need only replace copper pipe in plastic. The
human taking a shower or bath is then at extreme risk if the
wall receptacle safety ground has been connected to those
pipes.

The connection from breaker box to cold water pipe is
required by code to remove electricity from that pipe. There
is no way that connection can be reliable to a wall receptacle
because copper pipe is often replace with plastic. The only
way a wall receptacle can make a safe connection to the water
pipe is to make the connection adjacent to where that water
pipe also connects to breaker box. The connection authorized
by NEC article 250.

All of this being completely irrelevant to the earth ground
electrode system. Wall receptacles are safety grounded. That
means they must connect to breaker box bus bar. Earthing
electrode or a water pipe in contact with earth does nothing
to provide a safety ground to that wall receptacle.

In places such as Canada, grounding to water pipes is still
permitted by code. But the point is (and I believe HorneTD is
making the same point), that wall receptacle must be grounded
by a method that cannot be 'accidentally' compromised.
Leaving the wall receptacle ungrounded is safer than putting a
human in bathtub at risk.

Again a safer solution is to GFCI the circuit even if or if
not connecting wall receptacle to cold water pipes. The wet
human is the human at greatest risk. So we connect a
potential electric circuit to bathtub pipes? Not smart at
all.

It does not have to be what either of us believe is smart to be what is
required by law. If the US National Electric Code (NEC) is adopted by
reference as law in your location then you have to use any underground
metal water pipe that is three or more meters in length as part of the
grounding electrode system. It does not matter if in your or my opinion
that imperils someone in the shower or bath. You have never to my
knowledge accepted the point that whether the water piping in the
building is metallic does not effect the requirement to use that
underground metal water piping as a grounding electrode. That
underground metal water piping is for many homes the only effective
earth grounding electrode. I have been doing electrical work for nearly
forty years and I have never encountered a municipal water system with a
resistance to ground of more than twenty ohms. During that same time I
have never had a single or double driven rod electrode of ten feet per
rod or less measure less than fifty ohms. The best grounding electrode
is going to be the one that puts the most conductive surface in contact
with the earth at the deepest level. For many buildings that is the
metal service lateral of the water supply.
--
Tom H

Chip C wrote:

I'm confident that my responses will draw at least as many flames as
your questions would.

Thank you for your detailed reply Chip. It is very helpful.

I am still a bit fuzzy about the ground bar and neutral bar being
'connected' at the service panel. Won't all electricity just goes to
the ground in that case? I know it sounds silly, but what's the
difference between connecting the ground/neutral at the panel vs
connecting them at the receptacle? a wire is a wire right?

I suspected the answer to "why only one ground/grouding rod" is
the big IF part in my post. Thank you for clearifying that part.

let me ask another (not a troll!) question, in many areas, redundancy
is good. if one fails, the other still works. isn't having two
properly done ground rods better than one? If one fails, then the
other should still work? having the code calling for one and only
grounding to be done at the service panel, then the whole system will
be depending on that grounding work correctly. The probability of one
fails is much higher than the probability of both fails right?

I mean redundancy is why I backup my data to CDRs.

So if I understand it correctly, the grounding for the satellite dish
for example, is to connect the metal part of the dish to the ground
bar in the main service panel via a proper ground wire? not to the
earth right under the satellite dish (or roof) which I can dug a hole
and bury the bare copper wire that came with my satellite install kit?
And the reason being the ground at the servie panel will most likely
provide less resistence than my bare wire?

Thanks again.

Raymond

Chip C wrote:

What you can consider, which is code-compliant in the US and Canada and
a safety benefit, is to have the ungrounded outlets replaced with GFCI
receptacles. This does not provide ground but will protect against a
lot of what can go wrong. GFCI's come with stickers that say "no
equipment ground" that you put on the faceplace when you do this.

Are there any down sides to replace all the outlets in one's home with
GFCI's? Would refrigerators cause it to trip under normal operations?

Thanks.

In article , wrote:
Chip C wrote:

What you can consider, which is code-compliant in the US and Canada and
a safety benefit, is to have the ungrounded outlets replaced with GFCI
receptacles. This does not provide ground but will protect against a
lot of what can go wrong. GFCI's come with stickers that say "no
equipment ground" that you put on the faceplace when you do this.

Are there any down sides to replace all the outlets in one's home with
GFCI's?

Expense, for one. Nuisance trips, for another.

Would refrigerators cause it to trip under normal operations?

They can, yes. And that's bad, if you don't catch the problem soon enough.

--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)

Nobody ever left footprints in the sands of time by sitting on his butt.
And who wants to leave buttprints in the sands of time?

Troll

Dan C wrote:

Path: newsdbm06.news.prodigy.com!newsdst02.news.prodigy. com!newsmst01a.news.prodigy.com!prodigy.com!newsco n06.news.prodigy.com!prodigy.net!newshub.sdsu.edu! peer01.west.cox.net!cox.net!p01!lakeread05.POSTED! 53ab2750!not-for-mail
From: Dan C youmustbejoking invalid.lan
Organization: Dunedain
Subject: Easiest way to ground a computer?
User-Agent: Pan/0.14.2.91 (As She Crawled Across the Table)
Message-Id: pan.2005.05.06.11.28.53.524933 invalid.lan
Newsgroups: alt.home.repair
References:
X-OS-Version: Slackware Linux 10.1 (2.6.11.6)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Lines: 24
Date: Fri, 06 May 2005 06:28:53 -0500
NNTP-Posting-Host: 24.254.114.31
X-Complaints-To:
X-Trace: lakeread05 1115378970 24.254.114.31 (Fri, 06 May 2005 07:29:30 EDT)
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 06 May 2005 07:29:30 EDT
Xref: newsmst01a.news.prodigy.com alt.home.repair:716034

On Fri, 06 May 2005 01:14:18 -0400, Julie P. wrote:

First of all, many many homes do not have grounded outlets.

Where do you live?

Second, I've seen other people attach a wire and run it out the
window to the ground.

I would report that to the nearest building inspector, if I ever
saw it.

Third many people attach the wire to a cold water pipe.

That's the proper way to do it.

So I'm looking for solutions, not sarcasm.

So attach a ground bus to the cold water pipe, with solder. Not
the "painted radiator pipe", you ignorant bitch.

-- If you're not on the edge, you're taking up too much space.
Linux Registered User #327951

Troll

Dan C wrote:

Path: newsdbm06.news.prodigy.com!newsdst02.news.prodigy. com!newsmst01a.news.prodigy.com!prodigy.com!newsco n06.news.prodigy.com!prodigy.net!newshub.sdsu.edu! peer01.west.cox.net!cox.net!p01!lakeread05.POSTED! 53ab2750!not-for-mail
From: Dan C youmustbejoking invalid.lan
Organization: Dunedain
Subject: Easiest way to ground a computer?
User-Agent: Pan/0.14.2.91 (As She Crawled Across the Table)
Message-Id: pan.2005.05.06.02.28.16.822792 invalid.lan
Newsgroups: alt.home.repair
References:
X-OS-Version: Slackware Linux 10.1 (2.6.11.6)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Lines: 22
Date: Thu, 05 May 2005 21:28:18 -0500
NNTP-Posting-Host: 24.254.114.31
X-Complaints-To:
X-Trace: lakeread05 1115346534 24.254.114.31 (Thu, 05 May 2005 22:28:54 EDT)
NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 05 May 2005 22:28:54 EDT
Xref: newsmst01a.news.prodigy.com alt.home.repair:715979

On Thu, 05 May 2005 21:50:17 -0400, Julie P. wrote:

The electrical wiring in my house is not grounded, although all the outlets
are three prong. I have a lot of equipment like air conditioners, fax
machines, printers, computers, routers, etc. What would be the easiest way
to ground one or two of my outlets?

Can I string a wire over the grounding prong on the surge protector plug and
then run the wire out of my windows to the ground and then impale the ground
with a coat hanger attached to the wire?

Or can I just wrap the wire around the painted radiator pipe which runs to
the upstairs tenant's radiator? This is close to the outlets.

Thanks!

Were you born stupid, or have you become that way over time?

--
If you're not on the edge, you're taking up too much space.
Linux Registered User #327951

x-no-archive troll

"Matt" wrote:

Path: newsdbm06.news.prodigy.com!newsdst02.news.prodigy. com!newsmst01a.news.prodigy.com!prodigy.com!newsco n02.news.prodigy.com!prodigy.net!news.glorb.com!po stnews.google.com!z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
From: "Matt" mattmorgan64 msn.com
Newsgroups: alt.home.repair
Subject: Easiest way to ground a computer?
Date: 5 May 2005 18:55:51 -0700
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Lines: 3
Distribution: world
x-no-archive: yes
Message-ID: 1115344551.091440.9810 z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com
References:
NNTP-Posting-Host: 70.243.252.18
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1115344556 16280 127.0.0.1 (6 May 2005 01:55:56 GMT)
X-Complaints-To:
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 6 May 2005 01:55:56 +0000 (UTC)
In-Reply-To:
User-Agent: G2/0.2
Complaints-To:
Injection-Info: z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com; posting-host=70.243.252.18; posting-account=FZ87Hg0AAABmE9kQG3Fl8yA4Yu_X_94A
Xref: newsmst01a.news.prodigy.com alt.home.repair:715961

Code prohibits the use of coat hangers for the grounding of more than
one outlet.

"Matt" wrote:

Great advice, Stretch.

Not only did you show your unique ability to be trolled with ease, but
you also just gave out incorrect, dangerous info.

Says a troll who is so full of it, he has to post x-no-archive.





Good job.

Keep it up!


Path: newsdbm06.news.prodigy.com!newsdst02.news.prodigy. com!newsmst01a.news.prodigy.com!prodigy.com!newsco n06.news.prodigy.com!prodigy.net!newsread.com!news-xfer.newsread.com!postnews.google.com!g14g2000cwa. googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
From: "Matt" mattmorgan64 msn.com
Newsgroups: alt.home.repair
Subject: Easiest way to ground a computer?
Date: 6 May 2005 06:47:32 -0700
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Lines: 9
Distribution: world
x-no-archive: yes
Message-ID: 1115387252.193795.59250 g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com
References: 7yBee.1239093$6l.422744@pd7tw2no .com
NNTP-Posting-Host: 70.243.252.18
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1115387256 18557 127.0.0.1 (6 May 2005 13:47:36 GMT)
X-Complaints-To:
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 6 May 2005 13:47:36 +0000 (UTC)
In-Reply-To: .com
User-Agent: G2/0.2
Complaints-To:
Injection-Info: g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com; posting-host=70.243.252.18; posting-account=FZ87Hg0AAABmE9kQG3Fl8yA4Yu_X_94A
Xref: newsmst01a.news.prodigy.com alt.home.repair:716066

wrote:
Chip C wrote:


I'm confident that my responses will draw at least as many flames as
your questions would.


Thank you for your detailed reply Chip. It is very helpful.

I am still a bit fuzzy about the ground bar and neutral bar being
'connected' at the service panel. Won't all electricity just goes to
the ground in that case? I know it sounds silly, but what's the
difference between connecting the ground/neutral at the panel vs
connecting them at the receptacle? a wire is a wire right?

I suspected the answer to "why only one ground/grouding rod" is
the big IF part in my post. Thank you for clearifying that part.

let me ask another (not a troll!) question, in many areas, redundancy
is good. if one fails, the other still works. isn't having two
properly done ground rods better than one? If one fails, then the
other should still work? having the code calling for one and only
grounding to be done at the service panel, then the whole system will
be depending on that grounding work correctly. The probability of one
fails is much higher than the probability of both fails right?

I mean redundancy is why I backup my data to CDRs.

So if I understand it correctly, the grounding for the satellite dish
for example, is to connect the metal part of the dish to the ground
bar in the main service panel via a proper ground wire? not to the
earth right under the satellite dish (or roof) which I can dug a hole
and bury the bare copper wire that came with my satellite install kit?
And the reason being the ground at the servie panel will most likely
provide less resistence than my bare wire?

Thanks again.

Raymond

Raymond

The biggest fallacy in the common understanding of electricity is that
electricity somehow seeks out the earth. That is simply untrue.
Current will flow from a point of higher voltage to a point of lower
voltage if there is a conductive path between them. Given a high enough
voltage almost anything will serve as that conductive path. Lightning
through the air is one example of this. For general public electrical
safety education purposes it is best to think of current as trying to
return to it's source rather than the earth. If one leg of the source
is grounded and the circuit is grounded at other points, as it is in the
US multi grounded neutral system, then the earth will carry part of the
current back to the source. Current does not take the path of least
resistance back to it's source it takes all available paths back to it's
source in proportion to the resistance of the available pathways.

In many main electrical panel enclosure cabinets; that are functioning
as the Service Disconnecting Means enclosure in homes; the neutral buss
bar and the Equipment Grounding (Bonding) buss are the same buss bar.
In some brands of panel, GE comes to mind, that buss bar can be divided
in half and used as two separate buss bars. In other brands, such as
SquareD, if you need a separate ground buss you add it using a buss bar
kit you purchase from the vender. The US NEC requires the neutral
conductor of the supply must be grounded to the earth somewhere between
the demarcation point; that separates your wiring and the utilities
wiring; and the neutral terminal of the service disconnecting means.
This connection is made to make the installation somewhat resistant to
the damage that would be caused by lightning and other high voltage
transient current flows. Lightning, you see, is indeed trying to return
to earth and the opposing atmospheric air mass because that is the
source of the current. The US NEC states it this way.

[Electrical systems that are grounded shall be connected to earth in a
manner that will limit the voltage imposed by lightning, line surges, or
unintentional contact with higher-voltage lines and that will stabilize
the voltage to earth during normal operation.

Non–current-carrying conductive materials enclosing electrical
conductors or equipment, or forming part of such equipment, shall be
connected to earth so as to limit the voltage to ground on these
materials.(copyright 2002 National Fire Protection Association]

So we ground electrical systems to limit the voltage to ground because
that reduces the likelihood of destructive current flows between the
systems components and ground or earth.

Grounding does not play much of a roll in the actual functioning of your
homes electrical system. Aircraft in flight have a perfectly functional
electrical system including regular AC outlets that can be used to power
electric shavers and sometimes passenger owned electronic devices such
as lap top computers. For ease of design, construction, and maintenance
such systems have to have a reference point that can be considered zero
volts. The aircraft's frame is used. Obviously we cannot ground
anything on an aircraft in flight but we still must bond all of the non
current carrying parts of the electrical system back to the source of
supply, just as we do in a buildings electrical system, and to the
aircrafts common point in this case the airframe.

This bonding; the term of art is presently equipment grounding but there
is a proposed amendment that will change this to equipment bonding; is
done to provide a low resistance return path back to the source for
current which has escaped the normal current carrying conductors thus
allowing it to complete it's circuit in a non dangerous and non
destructive manner. The US NEC describes the purpose of this deliberate
interconnection of all non current carrying parts of the electrical
system this way.

[Non–current-carrying conductive materials enclosing electrical
conductors or equipment, or forming part of such equipment, shall be
connected together and to the electrical supply source in a manner that
establishes an effective ground-fault current path.

Electrically conductive materials that are likely to become energized
shall be connected together and to the electrical supply source in a
manner that establishes an effective ground-fault current path.

Electrical equipment and wiring and other electrically conductive
material likely to become energized shall be installed in a manner that
creates a permanent, low-impedance circuit capable of safely carrying
the maximum ground-fault current likely to be imposed on it from any
point on the wiring system where a ground fault may occur to the
electrical supply source. The earth shall not be used as the sole
equipment grounding conductor or effective ground-fault current path.
(copyright 2002 National Fire Protection Association)]

So lets review what we are trying to do. We want to limit the voltage
to ground so as to avoid destructive and dangerous current flows between
the system and the earth. In North American practice the techniques
used to accomplish this are called grounding. We also want to provide a
low resistance pathway back to the source so that any escaped or faulted
current can return to the source in a non dangerous and non destructive
manner. Those techniques are called equipment grounding but soon to be
called bonding.

As to how many different ways you can ground the system the US NEC
requires that any of the electrodes in the list that are present on the
sight must be used to construct the grounding electrode system.

[If available on the premises at each building or structure served, each
item in 250.52(A)(1) through (A)(6) shall be bonded together to form the
grounding electrode system. Where none of these electrodes are
available, one or more of the electrodes specified in 250.52(A)(4)
through (A)(7) shall be installed and used.

A metal underground water pipe in direct contact with the earth for 3.0
m (10 ft) or more (including any metal well casing effectively bonded to
the pipe) and electrically continuous (or made electrically continuous
by bonding around insulating joints or insulating pipe) to the points of
connection of the grounding electrode conductor and the bonding
conductors. Interior metal water piping located more than 1.52 m (5 ft)
from the point of entrance to the building shall not be used as a part
of the grounding electrode system or as a conductor to interconnect
electrodes that are part of the grounding electrode system.

The metal frame of the building or structure, where effectively grounded.

Concrete-Encased Electrode. An electrode encased by at least 50 mm (2
in.) of concrete, located within and near the bottom of a concrete
foundation or footing that is in direct contact with the earth,
consisting of at least 6.0 m (20 ft) of one or more bare or zinc
galvanized or other electrically conductive coated steel reinforcing
bars or rods of not less than 13 mm (½ in.) in diameter, or consisting
of at least 6.0 m (20 ft) of bare copper conductor not smaller than 4
AWG. Reinforcing bars shall be permitted to be bonded together by the
usual steel tie wires or other effective means.

A ground ring encircling the building or structure, in direct contact
with the earth, consisting of at least 6.0 m (20 ft) of bare copper
conductor not smaller than 2 AWG.

Rod and pipe electrodes shall not be less than 2.5 m (8 ft) in length
and shall consist of the following materials.
(a) Electrodes of pipe or conduit shall not be smaller than metric
designator 21 (trade size 3/4) and, where of iron or steel, shall have
the outer surface galvanized or otherwise metal-coated for corrosion
protection.
(b) Electrodes of rods of iron or steel shall be at least 15.87 mm (5/8
in.) in diameter. Stainless steel rods less than 16 mm (5/8 in.) in
diameter, nonferrous rods, or their equivalent shall be listed and shall
not be less than 13 mm (1/2 in.) in diameter.

Plate Electrodes. Each plate electrode shall expose not less than 0.186
m2 (2 ft2) of surface to exterior soil. Electrodes of iron or steel
plates shall be at least 6.4 mm (1/4 in.) in thickness. Electrodes of
nonferrous metal shall be at least 1.5 mm (0.06 in.) in thickness.

Other local metal underground systems or structures such as piping
systems and underground tanks.(copyright 2002 National Fire Protection
Association)]

About your satellite dish. The reason that it is so important to bond
your satellite dish to the buildings electrical grounding electrode
system rather than to a separate isolated ground rod is that separate
ground points can have a difference of potential or voltage between
them. The higher that voltage is allowed to become the more likely a
dangerous or destructive current flow becomes. There is nothing wrong
with having a ground rod directly under the dish. I would in fact argue
that it would be best practice to install one there. The critical thing
is to bond the dishes rod to the rest of the grounding electrode system
so that they all behave electrically as a single electrode.

That is more than enough for one posting.
--
Tom H

"Can you skin Griz?

Well skin that one pilgrim and I'll bring you another."

A GFCI on a refrigerator is actually considered a human
safety threat. Not from electricity. Threat to humans is
from food poisoning. The human might not know how long or
when the electricity had tripped off.

Bedrooms now must use a different type of GFCI on all wall
receptacles. This because fires from things like extension
cords have proven to be a more serious threat. My personal
recommendation is to put an AFGI on the outlet that lights any
live Christmas tree. Others have demonstrated how a Christmas
tree fire leaves the occupants less than five minutes to get
out.

The downside to GFCIs is nuisance tripping due to electrical
appliances that have internal failures - voltage leakages.
For example, the 12 volt DC light was isolated from AC mains
by a transformer. But the chipmunks exposed one of the 12
volt wires to earth. Periodically the GFCI would trip only
because leakage across the transformer was periodically enough
to trip that GFCI. Periodic nuisance tripping because the low
voltage circuit had a problem that was safe but unacceptable.

wrote:
Are there any down sides to replace all the outlets in one's home with
GFCI's? Would refrigerators cause it to trip under normal operations?

Thanks.

You are confusing an underground water pipe replaced in
plastic with something different from what I am discussing.
Plumbers sometimes replace *interior* copper water pipes with
plastic. That would make the bathtub 'hot' if wall receptacle
was safety grounded to cold water pipe that was 'fixed' by the
plumber.

Again, earth ground has nothing to do with the earthing
electrode. They serve different functions. But dumping
electricity into a household cold water pipe system - pipes
inside the house - is unacceptable today because interior
pipes are replaced in plastic.

BTW, in one jurisdiction, a dedicated 6 AWG ground wire
connects every steel bathtub directly to breaker box safety
ground. Same reasoning. The only connection to water pipes
is to remove electricity; not dump electricity into those
household pipes. This has nothing to do with the buried
utility water pipe.

HorneTD wrote:
It does not have to be what either of us believe is smart to be what is
required by law. If the US National Electric Code (NEC) is adopted by
reference as law in your location then you have to use any underground
metal water pipe that is three or more meters in length as part of the
grounding electrode system. It does not matter if in your or my opinion
that imperils someone in the shower or bath. You have never to my
knowledge accepted the point that whether the water piping in the
building is metallic does not effect the requirement to use that
underground metal water piping as a grounding electrode. That
underground metal water piping is for many homes the only effective
earth grounding electrode. I have been doing electrical work for nearly
forty years and I have never encountered a municipal water system with a
resistance to ground of more than twenty ohms. During that same time I
have never had a single or double driven rod electrode of ten feet per
rod or less measure less than fifty ohms. The best grounding electrode
is going to be the one that puts the most conductive surface in contact
with the earth at the deepest level. For many buildings that is the
metal service lateral of the water supply.
--
Tom H

wrote:
Chip C wrote:

I'm confident that my responses will draw at least as many flames
as
your questions would.

Thank you for your detailed reply Chip. It is very helpful.

I am still a bit fuzzy about the ground bar and neutral bar being
'connected' at the service panel. Won't all electricity just goes to
the ground in that case? I know it sounds silly, but what's the
difference between connecting the ground/neutral at the panel vs
connecting them at the receptacle? a wire is a wire right?

A lot of the rules are for what happens if something goes wrong. If you
analyze the rules based on normal operation you get a lot of "what's
that for? that doesn't do anything! that's redundant! that carries no
current!" But many years of analyzing electrocutions, fires and plain
old power failures have given us code rules that cover a vast array of
what-ifs.

HorneTD's response included some excellent fundamental points:
electricity takes ALL routes back to its source, and the US and Canada
use a multi-point grounded neutral system in which the neutral is
grounded at the power company's transformer AND your house. This means
that the ground AND the power company's neutral are both ways to
complete the big circuit back to the generator. I believe that this
fact has implications that I don't really understand, again in the
realm of things that can go wrong in odd circumstances.

I suspected the answer to "why only one ground/grouding rod" is
the big IF part in my post. Thank you for clearifying that part

let me ask another (not a troll!) question, in many areas, redundancy
is good. if one fails, the other still works. isn't having two
properly done ground rods better than one? If one fails, then the
other should still work? having the code calling for one and only
grounding to be done at the service panel, then the whole system will
be depending on that grounding work correctly. The probability of one
fails is much higher than the probability of both fails right?

Redundancy can bite you back. In the case of grounding there is a
phenomenon called "ground loop" caused by natural and other phenomena
(soil chemistry, induced voltages from radio waves, earth's magnetic
field) which can mean that one point in your yard is at a different
electrical potential than another. That means that your two ground rods
are at different voltages and a current will flow from one to the other
via your ground wires. This can induce a voltage on your ground wires,
exactly the opposite of what you want. Effects could range from
nothing, to minor static shocks when you touch plumbing, to
interference with radio and tv reception and other electronic devices,
to constant low-grade currents that promote corrosion in plumbing or
structural steel pieces.

I mean redundancy is why I backup my data to CDRs.

"Verily, he who would be wise sayeth: Put not all thine eggs in one
basket; but I say to you, he who divides his eggs among baskets has
scattered his fortune to the winds, and knoweth not what he hath and
hath not; and I say to you, he who is truly wise shall put all his eggs
in one basket -- AND WATCH THAT BASKET!"

So if I understand it correctly, the grounding for the satellite dish
for example, is to connect the metal part of the dish to the ground
bar in the main service panel via a proper ground wire? not to the
earth right under the satellite dish (or roof) which I can dug a hole
and bury the bare copper wire that came with my satellite install
kit?
And the reason being the ground at the servie panel will most likely
provide less resistence than my bare wire?

I'm going to defer to HorneTD's post for this one.

Any discussion of grounding really ought to mention lightening, too;
but that's a big complication. It helps to remember that lightening
protection, like grounding for masts and lightening rods on the roof,
is never aimed at conducting lightening "safely" to the ground, since
that would require conductors the size of your arm. It's all aimed at
draining off static charge that would otherwise accumulate and attract
lighting by providing a path of ionized air.

Chip C

HorneTD has provided good and detailed descriptions of
grounding. I will describe the same thing from a different
perspective. Take three D batteries (ie inside a flashlight
(torch in UK)). Each 1.5 volt battery adds to apply 4.5 volts
to a light bulb. Which part of that circuit is the ground?
Top of topmost battery? Bottom of bottommost battery? Select
any point. Ground can be arbitrarily defined.

But what is the voltage between topmost battery and earth?
Undefined. No connection exists. Voltage could be anywhere
from 0 to maybe 20,000 volts. Now we earth the bottommost
battery. Topmost battery is 4.5 volts above ground.

Suppose we also have inside that flashlight a 1.5 volt
battery. Convention is to connect 1.5 volt lamp to top and
bottom of bottommost battery so that both lights share one
common point. Arbitrary common point - even if it was not
connected to earth - would be called ground. We will call
this light bulb ground.

So now we have defined two grounds. Light bulb ground and
earth ground. We have put both grounds at the same point.

Let's move the earth ground wire to a point between two other
batteries. Now earth ground is not the same as light bulb
ground. We still have two different grounds. This time two
different grounds are at different locations on the circuit.

Wall receptacles must connect back to the neutral bar inside
the circuit breaker box where power originates. This "safety
ground" must be sufficient to trip a circuit breaker. We just
happen to (for good and well proven reasons) connect
building's earth ground to this same point. A concept is
called single point grounding. Done this way much for the
same reason that stereo components interconnect using single
point grounding (which is a but another ground).

Earth ground and safety ground are two different grounds.
They share common wires. But they remain different grounds
with different purposes.

Why is a building's earth ground so important? The neutral
wire inside the transformer had failed. The house also had no
earth ground connection. To get back to that transformer
ground, household electricity used a gas meter as a neutral
wire connection. Fortunately no one was home when gaskets
failed and the house exploded. Just another reason why earth
ground is so important. It does nothing until that rare time
when it is really needed.

Too many instead will say the lights work just fine without
that ground. Therefore that ground is not necessary. Same
thinking that killed seven Challenger astronauts and seven
Columbia astronauts.

Connecting a wall receptacle to earth does not provide a good
conductive connection to breaker box - to trip the circuit
breaker. That 'safety ground' must carry 15+ amps back to the
breaker box to trip the breaker. Earth ground will not
reliably do same. Wall receptacle must make a good, clean,
predictable, conductive connection to breaker box safety
ground. Wall receptacles must connect to the ground of their
purpose - the main breaker box neutral bar, also called here a
safety ground.

wrote:
Can you explain briefly (technically if needed) why earthing is
not grounding?

My understanding is there are 3 wires, hot, neutral, and ground. Hot
and neutral connects to the utility lines, and ground connects to the
ground. Is it the 'difference' between one ground and the service
panels' ground that might be causing some problems?

You mentioned "A safety ground must connect the appliance ground prong
to circuit breaker box safety ground - the neutral bus bar", if I am
understanding this correctly, you are saying both hot and neutral gets
wired to the neutral line? How can this be right? Won't the ground
then be constantly hot?

If I connect the ground of a receptacle (using a proper ground wire)
to an actual earth ground (and assuming the connection is good, not
flaky), what exactly is the problem? (I understand the concern about
connecting to water pipes and people taking bath....)

HorneTD wrote:

It does not have to be what either of us believe is smart to be what is
required by law. If the US National Electric Code (NEC) is adopted by
reference as law in your location then you have to use any underground
metal water pipe that is three or more meters in length as part of the
grounding electrode system. It does not matter if in your or my opinion
that imperils someone in the shower or bath. You have never to my
knowledge accepted the point that whether the water piping in the
building is metallic does not effect the requirement to use that
underground metal water piping as a grounding electrode. That
underground metal water piping is for many homes the only effective
earth grounding electrode. I have been doing electrical work for nearly
forty years and I have never encountered a municipal water system with a
resistance to ground of more than twenty ohms. During that same time I
have never had a single or double driven rod electrode of ten feet per
rod or less measure less than fifty ohms. The best grounding electrode
is going to be the one that puts the most conductive surface in contact
with the earth at the deepest level. For many buildings that is the
metal service lateral of the water supply.
--
Tom H
w_tom wrote:
You are confusing an underground water pipe replaced in
plastic with something different from what I am discussing.
Plumbers sometimes replace *interior* copper water pipes with
plastic. That would make the bathtub 'hot' if wall receptacle
was safety grounded to cold water pipe that was 'fixed' by the
plumber.

Again, earth ground has nothing to do with the earthing
electrode. They serve different functions. But dumping
electricity into a household cold water pipe system - pipes
inside the house - is unacceptable today because interior
pipes are replaced in plastic.

BTW, in one jurisdiction, a dedicated 6 AWG ground wire
connects every steel bathtub directly to breaker box safety
ground. Same reasoning. The only connection to water pipes
is to remove electricity; not dump electricity into those
household pipes. This has nothing to do with the buried
utility water pipe.

If you would only add the word interior before water pipe when making
statements such as "The connection from breaker box to cold water pipe
is required by code to remove electricity from that pipe" There would be
no disagreement between us. My concern is that some will see your
statements as a reason to not use an underground metal water pipe as a
grounding electrode. My other problem is that the US NEC specifically
allows a retrofit EGC; i.e. bonding conductor; to terminate in several
different places. You always state as an absolute that it must
terminate at the supplying panel's ground bar. That may indeed be best
practice but your insistence on best practice instead of code compliance
will deter the installation of retrofit grounds as specifically
permitted by the US NEC vis..

[The equipment grounding conductor of a grounding-type receptacle or a
branch-circuit extension shall be permitted to be connected to any of
the following:
(1) Any accessible point on the grounding electrode system as described
in 250.50
(2) Any accessible point on the grounding electrode conductor
(3) The equipment grounding terminal bar within the enclosure where the
branch circuit for the receptacle or branch circuit originates
(4) For grounded systems, the grounded service conductor within the
service equipment enclosure
(5) For ungrounded systems, the grounding terminal bar within the
service equipment enclosure]

--
Tom Horne

The reason why I did not use the expression "interior pipe"
was that any connection made to or disconnecting of (ie use of
plastic pipe) buried utility water pipe would not leave
bathtub, etc electrically hot. I saw no need to specify
'interior' pipes since bottom line concept is to not dump
'safety ground' electricity into pipes. But HorneTD makes a
good point. Others may not have understood what I assumed to
be obvious.

To summarize for the benefit of others, it is bad practice
(even if it is legal in Canada) to safety ground a wall
receptacle to household water pipes. Electrical connections
to pipes are to remove electricity from those pipes.
Connection to dump electricity into pipes (water, gas or
sewer) is not desirable.

In the OPs case, putting those receptacles on a GFCI is
strongly recommended (as one of two possible solutions). The
acceptable connection is wire dedicated for that safety
function; connected to circuit box safety ground. Even if it
is no longer acceptable by code (and I believe was a code
change), a separate 12 AWG green colored ground wire is safer
than connecting to household pipes. Dedicated earthing of
wall receptacle (ie throw a wire out the window to a ground
rod) accomplishes little for human safety and would be a code
violation. That ground rod outside the window was simply a
bad idea based in confusion between safety ground verses earth
ground.

HorneTD lists code approved methods of safety grounding that
receptacle. In each case, it is a dedicated connection from
that receptacle safety ground to breaker box safety ground.
The principle: that safety ground must use dedicated
connections back to breaker box safety ground. Interior pipes
are no longer considered dedicated connections. Even if we
ignore code, grounding to interior water pipes can create
serious human safety issues.

HorneTD wrote:
If you would only add the word interior before water pipe when making
statements such as "The connection from breaker box to cold water pipe
is required by code to remove electricity from that pipe" There would be
no disagreement between us. My concern is that some will see your
statements as a reason to not use an underground metal water pipe as a
grounding electrode. My other problem is that the US NEC specifically
allows a retrofit EGC; i.e. bonding conductor; to terminate in several
different places. You always state as an absolute that it must
terminate at the supplying panel's ground bar. That may indeed be best
practice but your insistence on best practice instead of code compliance
will deter the installation of retrofit grounds as specifically
permitted by the US NEC vis..

[The equipment grounding conductor of a grounding-type receptacle or
a branch-circuit extension shall be permitted to be connected to any
of the following:
(1) Any accessible point on the grounding electrode system as
described in 250.50
(2) Any accessible point on the grounding electrode conductor
(3) The equipment grounding terminal bar within the enclosure
where the branch circuit for the receptacle or branch circuit
originates
(4) For grounded systems, the grounded service conductor within
the service equipment enclosure
(5) For ungrounded systems, the grounding terminal bar within
the service equipment enclosure]

--
Tom Horne

Plese give references for your information. You make some pretty bold
statements here which seem to ignore magnitudes and any statistical
information other than rationalization.

Pop

"w_tom" wrote in message
...
A GFCI on a refrigerator is actually considered a human
safety threat. Not from electricity. Threat to humans is
from food poisoning. The human might not know how long or
when the electricity had tripped off.

Bedrooms now must use a different type of GFCI on all wall
receptacles. This because fires from things like extension
cords have proven to be a more serious threat. My personal
recommendation is to put an AFGI on the outlet that lights any
live Christmas tree. Others have demonstrated how a Christmas
tree fire leaves the occupants less than five minutes to get
out.

The downside to GFCIs is nuisance tripping due to electrical
appliances that have internal failures - voltage leakages.
For example, the 12 volt DC light was isolated from AC mains
by a transformer. But the chipmunks exposed one of the 12
volt wires to earth. Periodically the GFCI would trip only
because leakage across the transformer was periodically enough
to trip that GFCI. Periodic nuisance tripping because the low
voltage circuit had a problem that was safe but unacceptable.

wrote:
Are there any down sides to replace all the outlets in one's home with
GFCI's? Would refrigerators cause it to trip under normal operations?

Thanks.

I see nothing 'bold' here. What do you have a problem
with? Are you telling us that live Christmas tree fires are
not that dangerous? Are you suggesting a GFCI on the
refrigerator is acceptable? Are you saying AGFIs are not
required on bedroom circuits? Are you saying chipmunks
chewing into a 12 VDC wire did not cause those intermittent
GFCI trips? What, in very specific detail, do you have a
problem with?

Pop wrote:
Plese give references for your information. You make some pretty bold
statements here which seem to ignore magnitudes and any statistical
information other than rationalization.

Pop

Ahh, I see: You're not here to give valid answers: You're here for
noteriety and disruption. Your first two sentences were reasonable and the
third was where I stopped reading because I realized what you are.

Bye.

"w_tom" wrote in message
...
I see nothing 'bold' here. What do you have a problem
with? Are you telling us that live Christmas tree fires are
not that dangerous? Are you suggesting a GFCI on the
refrigerator is acceptable? Are you saying AGFIs are not
required on bedroom circuits? Are you saying chipmunks
chewing into a 12 VDC wire did not cause those intermittent
GFCI trips? What, in very specific detail, do you have a
problem with?

Pop wrote:
Plese give references for your information. You make some pretty bold
statements here which seem to ignore magnitudes and any statistical
information other than rationalization.

Pop