On Sep 27, 11:36 am, (Doug Miller) wrote:
False. If metal water pipe is present, it is *required* to use it as a
grounding electrode in addition to the other electrodes.

It metal water pipe is present, it is *required* to be bonded.
Interior metal water pipes must be bonded if the underground pipe is
plastic or metal. Makes no difference whether the water pipe does or
does not also do earthing. 1) it still must be bonded. 2) the water
pipe earth ground is considered so inferior that some other earth
ground electrode must be installed.

We must remove electricity (electrical faults) from pipes by bonding
pipes to breaker box safety grounds. Some jurisdictions also want gas
pipe bonded. All water pipes must be bonded so that electricity is
not flowing in those pipes. Bonding is essential to human safety.
Some jurisdictions so worry about electricity in the plumbing as to
require a dedciated bond to steel bathtubs. Are we earthing the
bathtub? No. We are bonding it so that electric fault currents will
trip a circuit breaker. That also has nothing to do with earthing.

When the water pipe is bonded 'less than 5 feet' from earth, then it
also acts as an earth ground. But code says the building is still not
properly earthed. The building is not earthed until some other
earthing electrode is installed. Code still says that water pipe is
an earthing electrode (paragraph one). Code also says that water pipe
earthing electrode is not sufficient. Some other earthing (from
paragraphs two through seven) must be installed so that the building
is sufficiently earthed.

That cold water pipe must be bonded even if the water pipe makes no
earthing connection. Why? We connect to pipes to remove electricity
- for human safety.

Folks:

"He who argues with a fool makes two"

For everybody's benefit but the silly goose's, the reason we must now
supplement the water-pipe ground with a driven electrode is because
the city might use plastic pipe or dielectric unions. An all-metal
city water system, miles of metal pipe full of water buried in damp
ground, is a very very very good ground, but we can't always depend
on it staying that way.

G P

In article .com, w_tom wrote:
On Sep 27, 11:36 am, (Doug Miller) wrote:
False. If metal water pipe is present, it is *required* to use it as a
grounding electrode in addition to the other electrodes.

It metal water pipe is present, it is *required* to be bonded.

Isn't that what I just said?

Restoring the part that you just snipped, you wrote:
" If using any other earthing electrode, then
a water pipe earthing electrode is not required. "

That's what I said is false. And it is. You got it right the second time
around.

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

It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.

In article .com,
John Ross wrote:


It seems my city doesn't have one competent
electrician!

Yeah, there's one. He's so busy that he doesn't do any advertising, has
an unlisted number, and doesn't even paint a sign on his truck. He works
alone because every time he's tried to hire someone, the guy didn't live
up to expectations.

Keep asking everyone you know, you'll find the guy eventually.

If the water pipe entrance to your house is metal, it must be part of the
grounding electrode system. If it's plastic, obviously not. Any internal
sections of piping likely to become energized, must be bonded to the
grounding system. The code requires only one ground rod, however it requires
you prove with a special meter, the quality of that rod. If you don't have
one of these meters, you can just drive the second rod. In this NG there is
a newer post about ground rods and Tom Horne pasted the Code section 250.50
which spells this out


"John Ross" wrote in message
oups.com...


RBM remove this wrote:
John, the thing you're not getting is that it's a grounding electrode
system. Everything that is part of it is connected together and becomes
one.
If your outlet ground was connected to the panel or the water pipe (first
5
feet) or a ground rod, it's all the same, as they are interconnected

I think one thing that throws me off is that when they built these
houses, they just connected to the nearest water pipe to the panel
(which is on the opposite side of house where water pipe enters). I
had an electrician come out and told me he would drive a ground rod
and just leave the pipe bond alone (since it is "already connected").
I asked about the 5 foot thing and as EVERY electrician in this town I
have talked to, get a blank look or a "I never heard of that." You can
see why I am going crazy.

But back to your comment about the "grounding electrode system." I
thought that 5 foot rule was because of people replacing pipes with
plastic. OK, so that makes sense if you look at it as a ground to
earth. In other words, if someone adds a plastic pipe past the 5 foot,
you now have the earth ground, but I thought the idea of "bonding"
pipes was to (also) protect the pipes from becoming energized if a hot
wire touches one. So wouldn't you want a requirement to have it bonded
to other parts beyond the 5 foot also?

Another thing: Not one electrician has told me anything about 2 ground
rods; they just say one. Is that a requirement, or just something you
think is better?

Thanks for the patience It seems my city doesn't have one competent
electrician!

--
John

Tell me you don't wear a tin foil hat




"w_tom" wrote in message
ups.com...
On Sep 26, 10:04 pm, "RBM" rbm2(remove wrote:
Virtually everything you wrote is baseless incoherent gibberish,
otherwise
you'd be able to produce some NEC documentation to back it up

An intelligent reply would have cited what you have problems with.
But since you post insults, citing code numbers would not change your
mind. Shame on RBM for not even knowing what can and cannot be
conductors. Code is specific about what can be conductors. Pipes are
no longer permitted. Those who are still living in 1970s would not
know that pipes are not acceptable electrical conductors.

If spending more time reading, then your responses would be devoid
of insults. Profanity identifies one who typically finds reading
difficult - who do not know. It explains why RBM knows pipes are
acceptable as conductors. Profanity does not change the fact. Water
pipes are no longer approved for electrical conductors. RBM should
know that if posting recommendations here. Instead he posts profanity
- will not even state which parts he has problems with. Note to
self. Don't take RBM seriously. His intelligence is defined by his
reasoning - insults rather than facts.

On Sep 27, 12:34 pm, wrote:
On Thu, 27 Sep 2007 08:51:05 -0700, w_tom wrote:
Using water pipes as conductors is not acceptable.
http://esteroriverheights.com/electrical/ground.jpg
250.21 from the 2002 handbook

Ahh, but that picture is not using pipes as a conductor. That 'less
than five feet' is where the pipe is an earthing electrode according
to code. Code defines a difference between an electrode and a
conductor. To be an electrode, the connection to that pipe must be
"less than 5 feet". If connecting the breaker box to earth via a
cold water pipe anywhere inside the building, then those pipes are
being used a conductors - not legal.

Some jurisdictions will reject your picture IF those ground
connections are not together. Others may reject it altogether; want
the ring ground (halo ground) or ground rod 6 AWG wire to be attached
directly to the 6 AWG wire from breaker box with a split bolt or
something that connects those wires together without the pipe.

All jurisdictions will reject that connection if the various grounds
do not connect 5 feet from earth. If the pipe is being used as a
conductor - if the pipe connected between those various clamps is many
meters apart - then it is not legal. Since those wires bond adjacent
to each other, then most jurisdictions will consider that pipe an
electrode - not a conductor. From that pictu "Connection made
within 5 ft of point of entrance of pipe." At that point, the pipe
is considered an electrode - not a conductor.

Using pipes as a conductor to connect a ground rod to breaker box is
not acceptable. In John Ross's situation, the breaker box was earthed
to a pipe much more than 5 feet from where pipe contacts earth.
Therefore the pipe (as an earthing connection) was being used as a
conductor - no longer acceptable. That connection was sufficient for
bonding pipes to the breaker box. But it is no longer acceptable as
an earth ground. IOW from the perspective of code. John Ross had no
earth ground until the electrician connected a ground rod to breaker
box (again, a connection not made using his pipes).

For the pipe to be an electrode, code says that pipe connection must
be less than five feet from earth. Electrode conductors can merge on
one electrode. Connection to earth on pipes farther than 5 feet means
the pipe is being used as a conductor. Yes, some jurisdictions may
permit merging connections from various electrodes on one pipe too far
from earth. Others may not if the pipe is not considered an
electrode. But that picture clearly shows connection made adjacent
where the pipe is a earthing electrode; is not a conductor.

On Sep 27, 12:40 pm, (Doug Miller) wrote:
It metal water pipe is present, it is *required* to be bonded.

Isn't that what I just said?

Restoring the part that you just snipped, you wrote:
" If using any other earthing electrode, then
a water pipe earthing electrode is not required. "

That's what I said is false. And it is. You got it right the second time
around.

"If using any other earthing electrode" is not even a valid "IF"
here. Replace "If using" with "Required is using" any other
earthing electrode. Does not matter whether the water pipe is or is
not an earthing electrode to breaker box. The error was that the
state of the water pipe (if or if not an electrode) is completely
irrelevant. The code now says some other earthing electrode from
paragraphs two through seven MUST be installed. Yes exceptions
exist. But those exceptions do not apply here. John had no earthing
electrode. What John considered an earth ground was not connected
'less than 5 feet' from earth; therefore was not an earthing
electrode. He must install one that meets current codes. That is
what one electrician would have done if connecting a earth ground rod
directly to breaker box - no other changes.

Relevant in John Ross's situation: John had no earthing electrode.
His breaker box was earthed by using pipes as a conductor. John has
no choice. His breaker box needs an earthing electrode that connects
to breaker box via 6 AWG wire; not connected via pipes.

Connecting a ground rod to his pipe where pipe is an electrode still
would not meet code. Both pipe and ground rod electrode would still be
using pipes as a conductor. Not acceptable. He must connect a new
earth ground rod to breaker box only via approved conductors such as 6
AWG bare copper wire.

w_tom wrote:


That '5 foot' requirement is for numerous reasons. One is due to
currents existing outside the building. A water pipe entering the
building must be bonded to the breaker box safety ground where those
currents would enter the building. Those currents would only travel
inside the builiding on less than 5 feet.

Obviously high on drugs when he wrote this.
And as Roy suspects, w_ protects himself with these:
http://zapatopi.net/afdb/


I am appauled that you would have Bud do any electrical work. He is
a salesman - all about presentation and severely short on electrical
knowledge. His knowledge comes only from reading books and taking
seminars. He is a promoter - a snake oil salesman - has been exposed
lying.

I am an electrical engineer and master electrician **** head. What are
your qualifications for pontificating on the electrical code? In this
thread you are arguing against at least 2 electricians and an electrical
inspector. Plus others. Plus a cast of thousands in your previous
idiotic posts on this subject.

And it is you who regularly posts lies. Like in this thread.

--
bud--

w_tom wrote:

Does not matter whether the water pipe is or is
not an earthing electrode to breaker box. The error was that the
state of the water pipe (if or if not an electrode) is completely
irrelevant. The code now says some other earthing electrode from
paragraphs two through seven MUST be installed.

Only for new installations. Adding ground wires for receptacles is not
likely to trigger installation of a “supplemental” electrode.

Yes exceptions
exist. But those exceptions do not apply here. John had no earthing
electrode.

John has a water service pipe electrode.

What John considered an earth ground was not connected
'less than 5 feet' from earth; therefore was not an earthing
electrode.

What John has was code compliant when it was installed. There is no
requirement to change the connection unless he changes the service.

He must install one that meets current codes.

Bullcrap. He also doesn’t have to bring his whole house up to the
current electrical code.

Your stupidity is breathtaking.

--
bud--

In article . com, w_tom wrote:
On Sep 27, 12:40 pm, (Doug Miller) wrote:
It metal water pipe is present, it is *required* to be bonded.

Isn't that what I just said?

Restoring the part that you just snipped, you wrote:
" If using any other earthing electrode, then
a water pipe earthing electrode is not required. "

That's what I said is false. And it is. You got it right the second time
around.

"If using any other earthing electrode" is not even a valid "IF"
here. Replace "If using" with "Required is using" any other
earthing electrode. Does not matter whether the water pipe is or is
not an earthing electrode to breaker box. The error was that the
state of the water pipe (if or if not an electrode) is completely
irrelevant.

And now you've gone and gotten it wrong again. Metal water pipe is *required*
to be used as a grounding electrode. You said it's not. That's not true.


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

It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.

bud-- wrote:
w_tom wrote:

Does not matter whether the water pipe is or is
not an earthing electrode to breaker box. The error was that the
state of the water pipe (if or if not an electrode) is completely
irrelevant. The code now says some other earthing electrode from
paragraphs two through seven MUST be installed.

Only for new installations. Adding ground wires for receptacles is not
likely to trigger installation of a "supplemental" electrode.

Yes exceptions
exist. But those exceptions do not apply here. John had no earthing
electrode.

John has a water service pipe electrode.

What John considered an earth ground was not connected
'less than 5 feet' from earth; therefore was not an earthing
electrode.

What John has was code compliant when it was installed. There is no
requirement to change the connection unless he changes the service.

He must install one that meets current codes.

Bullcrap. He also doesn't have to bring his whole house up to the
current electrical code.

Your stupidity is breathtaking.

--
bud--

Even though I probably don't *have* to to it, I assume adding the
ground rod would be a good idea since the added cost is minimal--I
assume you agree? One thing on that aspect: this area generally has
hardpan soil condition. Is that good or bad news?

But as far as these wire sizes everyone is throwing around: is that
required or suggested? I hear this size 6 mentioned. Is that the code
from the rod to the panel or is that just suggested. Also, does that
change with the size of the service (this is 100 amp)? I think this
latest electrician said something about size 10 or 8.

And, if it is bonded correctly to the first five feet of pipe, what
size of wire is require for that (that would be around a 30 foot run)?

I never would have imagined trying to ground a receptacle would turn
into such an ordeal! And, like I said, not one of these electricians
know what I am talking about when I qquote the NEC codes you guys
mention. Scary...Had I not asked in here, I would have gone with that
one guy who had the isolated ground rod that made no sense now that it
was explained to me here.

BTW, I thought I was clever and called the electrical supply places
for a recommendation for an electrician. They were of no help. Can
anyone think of another source that would know a good electrician?

--
John

On Fri, 28 Sep 2007 06:02:49 -0700, John Ross
wrote:

BTW, I thought I was clever and called the electrical supply places
for a recommendation for an electrician. They were of no help. Can
anyone think of another source that would know a good electrician?

They probably didn't want to risk the loss of future business from all
possible electricians by appearing to endorse one over the others.

I get all my best contractor references from friends and colleagues;
works every time. Ask around. Or tell us your location, and someone
here might be able to recommend someone local to you.

John Ross wrote:


But as far as these wire sizes everyone is throwing around: is that
required or suggested? I hear this size 6 mentioned. Is that the code
from the rod to the panel or is that just suggested. Also, does that
change with the size of the service (this is 100 amp)? I think this
latest electrician said something about size 10 or 8.


Connecting ground rods minimum #6.

Services - depends on service conductors.
Generally 100A #6 is minimum used (can be #8 but the requirements on
installation are very restrictive).
200A service #4
#4 may be used instead of #6 because #6 also has some limitations on use
without 'protection'.


I never would have imagined trying to ground a receptacle would turn
into such an ordeal! And, like I said, not one of these electricians
know what I am talking about when I qquote the NEC codes you guys
mention. Scary...Had I not asked in here, I would have gone with that
one guy who had the isolated ground rod that made no sense now that it
was explained to me here.

It should be noted that comments are based on the National Electrical
Code. The NEC has authority only as adopted by entities that have
control over electrical installations - states, cities, ... The NEC is
the basis for the local code everywhere I know of, but can (and is)
modified by many jurisdictions. The inspector can also allow variances.
In your case, the jurisdiction or inspector allows connecting the added
receptacle ground wires anywhere on the water pipe while the NEC now
allows that connection only to the first 5 ft of the water pipe. [If the
wire from electric service to water pipe electrode is not in the first 5
ft, as was permitted in the past, it does not make sense to connect
added ground wires in the first 5 ft. And the added ground wires can
usually be more conveniently connected elsewhere in the electrode system.]

The NEC chapter on grounding is probably the most confusing of the
commonly used chapters.

--
bud--

On Sep 27, 3:40?pm, "RBM" rbm2(remove wrote:
Tell me you don't wear a tin foil hat

"w_tom" wrote in message

ups.com...



On Sep 26, 10:04 pm, "RBM" rbm2(remove wrote:
Virtually everything you wrote is baseless incoherent gibberish,
otherwise
you'd be able to produce some NEC documentation to back it up

An intelligent reply would have cited what you have problems with.
But since you post insults, citing code numbers would not change your
mind. Shame on RBM for not even knowing what can and cannot be
conductors. Code is specific about what can be conductors. Pipes are
no longer permitted. Those who are still living in 1970s would not
know that pipes are not acceptable electrical conductors.

If spending more time reading, then your responses would be devoid
of insults. Profanity identifies one who typically finds reading
difficult - who do not know. It explains why RBM knows pipes are
acceptable as conductors. Profanity does not change the fact. Water
pipes are no longer approved for electrical conductors. RBM should
know that if posting recommendations here. Instead he posts profanity
- will not even state which parts he has problems with. Note to
self. Don't take RBM seriously. His intelligence is defined by his
reasoning - insults rather than facts.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

your better off using 2 ground rods because during wet weather one
might pass the resistance check but not during a dry spell. in
addition all grounds for things like telephone NID and satellite
dishes must be joined together to meet code.

On Sep 28, 9:02 am, John Ross wrote:
I never would have imagined trying to ground a receptacle would turn
into such an ordeal! And, like I said, not one of these electricians
know what I am talking about when I qquote the NEC codes you guys
mention. Scary...Had I not asked in here, I would have gone with that
one guy who had the isolated ground rod that made no sense now that it
was explained to me here.

Minimum that was required was an earth ground rod near breaker box
and connected direct to breaker box. Your description implies no
proper earthing existed. A ground rod connected as close as possible
to the breaker box is the only upgrade required and serves other
useful purposes beyond what is addressed by code. Other utilities
(cable and telephone) should connect to that same ground so that those
utilities provide minimally sufficient electronics protection (as
hallerb suggests elsewhere). That suggested to meet current code even
though other marginal earthing is not required to be upgraded.

I no longer rememeber if this recommendation was posted. Other
simplest corrections to consider for human safety were summarized by
volts500 in alt.home.repair entitled "Grounding Rod Info" on 12 July
2003 at
http://tinyurl.com/hkjq
Those recommendations are so simple, so easy, so inexpensive, and so
improve human safety issues as to also be performed - to upgrade basic
safety grounding closer to what current code requires.

The only thing you do not have (according to your description) and
that you must correct is earthing of AC electric. Those additions to
safety grounding inside the house (from volts500) and the tying of all
incoming utilities to a common ground are required by current code;
not necessary for you to upgrade; but should be performed anyway
because those little improvements provide significant human safety
improvements for so little effort.

What size should a ground wire be? That varies based on things
such as the amperage of electric service as summarized by gfretwell.
Standard used in most all homes is 6 AWG. Ground wire is usually
larger than what is required by code. 6 AWG copper is an industry
default standard for residential electric.

On Sep 28, 8:06 am, (Doug Miller) wrote:
And now you've gone and gotten it wrong again. Metal water pipe is *required*
to be used as a grounding electrode. You said it's not. That's not true.

Code only requires water pipe must be bonded. That 'bonding' to
remove fault currents from pipes. Code does not require water pipe to
be used as an earth ground. However code is written so that a water
pipe may also be an earthing electrode - albeit insufficient. If
water pipe is used as an earthing electrode, that still in not
sufficient to meet code requirements for earthing as stated in article
250.52(D).

Earthing must be provided by any one of items listed in article
250.52(A) paragraphs two through seven. Paragraph one defines how a
water pipe might be an earthing electrode. Code requires any one of
those other earthing electrodes - in paragraphs two through seven - to
exist. Code says an earthing electrode must exist AND lists the only
valid six electrodes that meet that requirement.

In article . com, w_tom wrote:
On Sep 28, 8:06 am, (Doug Miller) wrote:
And now you've gone and gotten it wrong again. Metal water pipe is *required*
to be used as a grounding electrode. You said it's not. That's not true.

Code only requires water pipe must be bonded. That 'bonding' to
remove fault currents from pipes. Code does not require water pipe to
be used as an earth ground.

False.

"All grounding electrodes as described in 250.52(A)(1) through (A)(6) that are
present ... shall be bonded together to form the grounding electrode system.
... 250.52(A)(1) Metal underground water pipe."

If it's there, Code requires it to be used "to form the grounding electrode
system" i.e. as an earth ground.

However code is written so that a water
pipe may also be an earthing electrode

Wrong -- it MUST be a grounding electrode if it's present.

- albeit insufficient. If
water pipe is used as an earthing electrode, that still in not
sufficient to meet code requirements for earthing as stated in article
250.52(D).

True -- but not relevant to the question of whether using it is optional or
required. If it's present at all, its use as part of the grounding electrode
system is MANDATORY.

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

It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.

bud-- wrote:
John Ross wrote:


But as far as these wire sizes everyone is throwing around: is that
required or suggested? I hear this size 6 mentioned. Is that the code
from the rod to the panel or is that just suggested. Also, does that
change with the size of the service (this is 100 amp)? I think this
latest electrician said something about size 10 or 8.


Connecting ground rods minimum #6.

Services - depends on service conductors.
Generally 100A #6 is minimum used (can be #8 but the requirements on
installation are very restrictive).
200A service #4
#4 may be used instead of #6 because #6 also has some limitations on use
without 'protection'.
snip
The inspector can also allow variances.
In your case, the jurisdiction or inspector allows connecting the added
receptacle ground wires anywhere on the water pipe while the NEC now
allows that connection only to the first 5 ft of the water pipe. [If the
wire from electric service to water pipe electrode is not in the first 5
ft, as was permitted in the past, it does not make sense to connect
added ground wires in the first 5 ft. And the added ground wires can
usually be more conveniently connected elsewhere in the electrode system.]/snip

I spoke with the electrician today and he said he would use #8 wire
(he said that was for 100 amp panel). Not sure what you meant by "very
restrictive" in using that, I doubt he would do anything different.

Also, I am not so sure anymore that my city does allow the water pipe
connection for add on grounds. In any event, did I understand you
correctly that since the original "bonding" to the pipe was not
required to be 5 foot from entrance, and since it is still all metal,
it doesn't make sense to redo it to within 5 feet (if not required)
i.e. just leave that alone until plastic pipe enters the picture?

I hope this doesn't open up a new can of worms, but I remembered that
the way they did these houses, they didn't have a ground bar in the
panel--the grounds are connected to the neutral bar. I asked him about
that and he said he would just connect the new ground connections to
the neutral bar also and "that was legal." Do you see a problem with
that?

--
John

Doug Miller wrote:
In article . com, w_tom wrote:
On Sep 28, 8:06 am, (Doug Miller) wrote:
And now you've gone and gotten it wrong again. Metal water pipe is *required*
to be used as a grounding electrode. You said it's not. That's not true.

Code only requires water pipe must be bonded. That 'bonding' to
remove fault currents from pipes. Code does not require water pipe to
be used as an earth ground.

False.

"All grounding electrodes as described in 250.52(A)(1) through (A)(6) that are
present ... shall be bonded together to form the grounding electrode system.
.. 250.52(A)(1) Metal underground water pipe."

If it's there, Code requires it to be used "to form the grounding electrode
system" i.e. as an earth ground.

However code is written so that a water
pipe may also be an earthing electrode

Wrong -- it MUST be a grounding electrode if it's present.

- albeit insufficient. If
water pipe is used as an earthing electrode, that still in not
sufficient to meet code requirements for earthing as stated in article
250.52(D).

True -- but not relevant to the question of whether using it is optional or
required. If it's present at all, its use as part of the grounding electrode
system is MANDATORY.

--
Regards,
Doug

Doug, as it is now the only ground is to the water pipe, but back then
they just connected it any convenient place near panel--not within 5
foot of pipe entrance. So if I have the ground rod installed AND leave
the current situation, am I right in that it will still serve as a
earth ground AND a bonding to the pipes. BTW, it is still all metal,
so if not required, I would assume it is ok just to leave that as is.
Does that satisfy what you said above?

--
John

wrote:
On Fri, 28 Sep 2007 06:02:49 -0700, John Ross
wrote:

But as far as these wire sizes everyone is throwing around: is that
required or suggested? I hear this size 6 mentioned. Is that the code
from the rod to the panel or is that just suggested. Also, does that
change with the size of the service (this is 100 amp)? I think this
latest electrician said something about size 10 or 8.

It is really based on the size of the service entrance cables 250.66,
which is usually based on the service disconnect size but that varies
between residential and commercial. Residential generally gets away
with a smaller SE cable because of load diversity.
The other rules refer to the particular electrode used.
You never need more than a #6 to a ground rod/plate, #4 to a UFER.
When you are stringing several electrodes togerther you need the
minimum size for the best electrode down stream up to the 250.66 size.
Water pipes always use the 250.66 size.

250.66 (short version)
SE cable GEC size
copper aluminum Cu Al Res service
2 or smaller 1/0 or smaller 8 6 typical 100a
1 or 1/0 2/0 or 3/0 6 4 typical 150a
2/0 or 3/0 4/0 or 250 4 2 typical 200a

Thanks for the chart, but I have to admit I have no idea what those
abbreviations mean.

I asked the electrician today what size wire would go from ground rod
to panel and he said #8 since it was a 100 amp. It sounds like you are
saying it should be #6?

--
John

John Ross wrote:

bud-- wrote:
w_tom wrote:

Does not matter whether the water pipe is or is
not an earthing electrode to breaker box. The error was that the
state of the water pipe (if or if not an electrode) is completely
irrelevant. The code now says some other earthing electrode from
paragraphs two through seven MUST be installed.
Only for new installations. Adding ground wires for receptacles is not
likely to trigger installation of a "supplemental" electrode.

Yes exceptions
exist. But those exceptions do not apply here. John had no earthing
electrode.
John has a water service pipe electrode.

What John considered an earth ground was not connected
'less than 5 feet' from earth; therefore was not an earthing
electrode.
What John has was code compliant when it was installed. There is no
requirement to change the connection unless he changes the service.

He must install one that meets current codes.
Bullcrap. He also doesn't have to bring his whole house up to the
current electrical code.

Your stupidity is breathtaking.

--
bud--

Even though I probably don't *have* to to it, I assume adding the
ground rod would be a good idea since the added cost is minimal--I
assume you agree? One thing on that aspect: this area generally has
hardpan soil condition. Is that good or bad news?

But as far as these wire sizes everyone is throwing around: is that
required or suggested? I hear this size 6 mentioned. Is that the code
from the rod to the panel or is that just suggested. Also, does that
change with the size of the service (this is 100 amp)? I think this
latest electrician said something about size 10 or 8.

And, if it is bonded correctly to the first five feet of pipe, what
size of wire is require for that (that would be around a 30 foot run)?

I never would have imagined trying to ground a receptacle would turn
into such an ordeal! And, like I said, not one of these electricians
know what I am talking about when I qquote the NEC codes you guys
mention. Scary...Had I not asked in here, I would have gone with that
one guy who had the isolated ground rod that made no sense now that it
was explained to me here.

BTW, I thought I was clever and called the electrical supply places
for a recommendation for an electrician. They were of no help. Can
anyone think of another source that would know a good electrician?

--
John


John
I'll get grief for this but I suggest you call the nearest office of the
International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (IBEW). Numerous people
will now tell you that they will cost too much but that just isn't so.
On average a unionized shop employs twelve electricians. The pricing of
Electrical work is very competitive. The difference between a unionized
shop and a non union shop is not what the customer pays but that more of
what you pay goes to wages and benefits. Better pay attracts better
electricians. A union inside wireman has four years of formal training.
A union residential wireman has at least two years of formal training
and four years of supervised field experience before they can work
unsupervised. I am self employed but I was trained by the Joint
Apprenticeship and Training Program of the National Electrical
Contractors Association (NECA) and the IBEW. The Union local office
will be happy to give you the names of three NECA member contractors
that do residential work. You will then have a better chance of getting
a quality job. No group of electricians is completely free of
dunderheads but using a union shop will at least improve your odds.
--
Tom Horne

John Ross wrote:

bud-- wrote:
John Ross wrote:

But as far as these wire sizes everyone is throwing around: is that
required or suggested? I hear this size 6 mentioned. Is that the code
from the rod to the panel or is that just suggested. Also, does that
change with the size of the service (this is 100 amp)? I think this
latest electrician said something about size 10 or 8.

Connecting ground rods minimum #6.

Services - depends on service conductors.
Generally 100A #6 is minimum used (can be #8 but the requirements on
installation are very restrictive).
200A service #4
#4 may be used instead of #6 because #6 also has some limitations on use
without 'protection'.
snip
The inspector can also allow variances.
In your case, the jurisdiction or inspector allows connecting the added
receptacle ground wires anywhere on the water pipe while the NEC now
allows that connection only to the first 5 ft of the water pipe. [If the
wire from electric service to water pipe electrode is not in the first 5
ft, as was permitted in the past, it does not make sense to connect
added ground wires in the first 5 ft. And the added ground wires can
usually be more conveniently connected elsewhere in the electrode system.]/snip

I spoke with the electrician today and he said he would use #8 wire
(he said that was for 100 amp panel). Not sure what you meant by "very
restrictive" in using that, I doubt he would do anything different.

2005 NEC 250.64-B "Securing and protection against physical damage"
"Grounding electrode conductors smaller than 6AWG [#8} shall be in rigid
metal conduit, intermediate metal conduit, rigid nonmetallic conduit,
electrical metalic tubing, or cable armor."
All of them are a form of pipe (some are light weight pipe) except cable
armor which is a spiral metal protection like BX. If the conductor is
run through ferrous tubing/pipe there are additional requirements that
directly or indirectly bond both ends of the pipe to the grounding
conductor. If you use one of the required protection methods #6 should
be cheaper.

"A 6AWG grounding electrode conductor that is free from exposure to
physical damage shall be permitted to be run along the surface of the
building construction without metal covering or protection where it is
securely fastened to the construction; other wise it shall" use one of
the protective methods above.

"A 4AWG or larger copper or aluminum grounding electrode conductor shall
be protected where exposed to physical damage."


Also, I am not so sure anymore that my city does allow the water pipe
connection for add on grounds. In any event, did I understand you
correctly that since the original "bonding" to the pipe was not
required to be 5 foot from entrance, and since it is still all metal,
it doesn't make sense to redo it to within 5 feet (if not required)
i.e. just leave that alone until plastic pipe enters the picture?

My intent was if the electrode connection to the water pipe is not
within 5 ft of the building entrance, the restriction of connecting your
added receptacle ground wires within 5 ft of the entrance does not make
sense. I would usually split bolt the receptacle ground wires to one of
the heavy grounding electrode wires anyway.

If the electrode connection to the water pipe is not withing 5 ft of the
entrance it is safe as a grounding electrode as long as the metal water
pipe is intact. Your call whether you move the connection.

[Note that when w_ talks about "bonding" the water pipe, it is not for
using it as a grounding electrode, but is the connection required if the
water service is plastic.]


I hope this doesn't open up a new can of worms, but I remembered that
the way they did these houses, they didn't have a ground bar in the
panel--the grounds are connected to the neutral bar. I asked him about
that and he said he would just connect the new ground connections to
the neutral bar also and "that was legal." Do you see a problem with
that?

At the service panel only (not downstream subpanels) the neutral and
ground are connected. The neutral bar is usually insulated from the
enclosure, but they should [almost] always be connected together at the
service panel. The connection is often by a screw that goes through the
neutral bar and screws into the enclosure behind - not at all obvious.

The neutral-ground connection at the service is part of providing a low
resistance metal path for short circuit currents to trip breakers. The
path is ground wire to neutral-ground bond to service neutral to
transformer.


--
bud--

Doug Miller wrote:
In article . com, w_tom wrote:
On Sep 28, 8:06 am, (Doug Miller) wrote:
And now you've gone and gotten it wrong again. Metal water pipe is *required*
to be used as a grounding electrode. You said it's not. That's not true.

Code only requires water pipe must be bonded. That 'bonding' to
remove fault currents from pipes. Code does not require water pipe to
be used as an earth ground.

False.

"All grounding electrodes as described in 250.52(A)(1) through (A)(6) that are
present ... shall be bonded together to form the grounding electrode system.
.. 250.52(A)(1) Metal underground water pipe."

If it's there, Code requires it to be used "to form the grounding electrode
system" i.e. as an earth ground.


As I'm sure you are aware, this has been pointed out by numerous people
in numerous threads. It is incredible how someone could be so stupid to
say water pipe is not required to be an electrode. The code, as you
quote it, is absolutely clear.

--
bud--

In article .com, John Ross wrote:


Doug Miller wrote:
In article . com, w_tom
wrote:
On Sep 28, 8:06 am, (Doug Miller) wrote:
And now you've gone and gotten it wrong again. Metal water pipe is
*required*
to be used as a grounding electrode. You said it's not. That's not true.

Code only requires water pipe must be bonded. That 'bonding' to
remove fault currents from pipes. Code does not require water pipe to
be used as an earth ground.

False.

"All grounding electrodes as described in 250.52(A)(1) through (A)(6) that
are
present ... shall be bonded together to form the grounding electrode system.
.. 250.52(A)(1) Metal underground water pipe."

If it's there, Code requires it to be used "to form the grounding electrode
system" i.e. as an earth ground.

However code is written so that a water
pipe may also be an earthing electrode

Wrong -- it MUST be a grounding electrode if it's present.

- albeit insufficient. If
water pipe is used as an earthing electrode, that still in not
sufficient to meet code requirements for earthing as stated in article
250.52(D).

True -- but not relevant to the question of whether using it is optional or
required. If it's present at all, its use as part of the grounding electrode
system is MANDATORY.

Doug, as it is now the only ground is to the water pipe, but back then
they just connected it any convenient place near panel--not within 5
foot of pipe entrance. So if I have the ground rod installed AND leave
the current situation, am I right in that it will still serve as a
earth ground AND a bonding to the pipes.

No, not unless the connection to the water pipe is within 5 feet of the
entrance.

BTW, it is still all metal,
so if not required, I would assume it is ok just to leave that as is.
Does that satisfy what you said above?

Ground rod, and connection to the metal water pipe within 5' of the point at
which it enters the building.

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

It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.

In article , wrote:
On Sat, 29 Sep 2007 03:43:23 -0700, John Ross
wrote:



wrote:
On Fri, 28 Sep 2007 06:02:49 -0700, John Ross
wrote:

But as far as these wire sizes everyone is throwing around: is that
required or suggested? I hear this size 6 mentioned. Is that the code
from the rod to the panel or is that just suggested. Also, does that
change with the size of the service (this is 100 amp)? I think this
latest electrician said something about size 10 or 8.

It is really based on the size of the service entrance cables 250.66,
which is usually based on the service disconnect size but that varies
between residential and commercial. Residential generally gets away
with a smaller SE cable because of load diversity.
The other rules refer to the particular electrode used.
You never need more than a #6 to a ground rod/plate, #4 to a UFER.
When you are stringing several electrodes togerther you need the
minimum size for the best electrode down stream up to the 250.66 size.
Water pipes always use the 250.66 size.

250.66 (short version)
SE cable GEC size
copper aluminum Cu Al Res service
2 or smaller 1/0 or smaller 8 6 typical 100a
1 or 1/0 2/0 or 3/0 6 4 typical 150a
2/0 or 3/0 4/0 or 250 4 2 typical 200a

Thanks for the chart, but I have to admit I have no idea what those
abbreviations mean.

I asked the electrician today what size wire would go from ground rod
to panel and he said #8 since it was a 100 amp. It sounds like you are
saying it should be #6?

You never need to be bigger than 250.66 so if you have a typical 100a
service #8 copper is OK. If you upgraded the service you would have to
upgrade the GEC
SE = Service Entrance Cable
GEC = Ground Electrode Conductor (wire to the rod or water pipe)
Cu = copper
Al = Aluminum

And...
2, 1, 1/0, 2/0, 3/0, 4/0, and 250 are wire sizes.
"1/0" "2/0" etc are pronounced one-aught, two-aught, etc.

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

It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.

On Sep 30, 11:15 am, (Doug Miller) wrote:
No, not unless the connection to the water pipe is within 5 feet of the
entrance.
...

Ground rod, and connection to the metal water pipe within 5' of the point
at which it enters the building.

Code demands that the AC electric have a proper connection to earth
ground. Any one of the electrodes in paragraphs two through seven are
sufficient. The electrode defined in paragraph one (water pipe) is
not sufficient.

Assume that John Ross was correct - that ALL earthing electrodes must
be connected. Then every steel I-beam concreted in earth must be
bonded to the breaker box. Water well casing must be bonded to AC
breaker box. All rebar inside concrete footing must be bonded. Rebar
inside any concrete basement floor must be bonded. Any steel plate
buried in earth must be bonded. Any "other local metal underground
system or structure such as piping systems and underground
tanks" (quoted from paragraph seven) must also be connected to breaker
box. According to John, if any of those six items exist, then they
also must be bonded to the breaker box.

Why are bonding wires not attached to every of six items? Because
Doug Miller is wrong. The breaker box only needs one earthing
electrode that conforms to paragraphs two through seven. Code says
that any electrode used for earthing must be bonded together to form a
single earth grounding system. Any of those other six electrodes not
being used for earthing need not be connected to the breaker box - in
direct contradiction to Doug Miller and the naive salesman Bud.

Code says that any electrode connected for earth must also be bonded
to the breaker box. If used to earth the telephone line protector,
then that electrode must also be bonded to AC electric box. If cable
TV is earthed to any of those electrodes, then that electrode also
must bond to breaker box. Any electrode used as earth ground must be
bonded together. Listed are six earthing electrodes that would not be
connected to breaker box because nothing was using them for earth
ground. According to Doug Miller, all six of those electrodes also
must be connected by 6 AWG wire.

If you want to bond the 'first five feet of water pipe' to breaker
box, then by all means do so. But that is beyond what code would
require of John Ross. What is most clearly required: a connection
from breaker box to any other earthing electrode used to ground
telephone, cable TV, satellite dish, TV antenna, etc. Those
connection are required by code so that all 'being used electrodes'
are bonded into one earthing system. Yes, the phone line and cable TV
earthing electrodes also must earth the AC breaker box because those
electrodes are being used to earth telephone and cable - as also
required by code.

A metal underground tank is an earthing electrode according to
paragraph seven. But if not being used by anything as an earth
ground, then AC breaker box also need not be bonded to that
underground tank ... in direct contradiction to what Doug Miller and
naive salesman Bud have posted.

On Sep 30, 8:00 pm, w_tom wrote:
According to John, if any of those six items exist, then they
also must be bonded to the breaker box.

Correction. This should have read "According to Doug Miller, if
any of those six tiems exists, then ..."

In article .com, w_tom wrote:
On Sep 30, 8:00 pm, w_tom wrote:
According to John, if any of those six items exist, then they
also must be bonded to the breaker box.

Correction. This should have read "According to Doug Miller, if
any of those six tiems exists, then ..."

Correction: according to the National Electrical Code.

I even quoted the relevant portions of it.

Here, I'll do it again. Pay attention this time.

"All grounding electrodes as described in 250.52(A)(1) through (A)(6) that are
present at each building or structure served SHALL BE bonded together to form
the grounding electrode system." [2005 NEC, Article 250.50]


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

It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.

In article .com, w_tom wrote:
On Sep 30, 11:15 am, (Doug Miller) wrote:
No, not unless the connection to the water pipe is within 5 feet of the
entrance.
...

Ground rod, and connection to the metal water pipe within 5' of the point
at which it enters the building.

Code demands that the AC electric have a proper connection to earth
ground. Any one of the electrodes in paragraphs two through seven are

Actually, it's one through six: 250.52(A)(1) through 250.52(A)(6).

sufficient. The electrode defined in paragraph one (water pipe) is
not sufficient.

Code *also* demands that all of those electrodes be bonded together.

Assume that John Ross was correct - that ALL earthing electrodes must
be connected.

They must be, per Article 250.50 -- you really ought to read it some time.

Then every steel I-beam concreted in earth must be
bonded to the breaker box.

False. Code requires the "metal frame of the building or structure" to be
bonded to the grounding electrode system. It does not require every individual
component of the frame to be so bonded.

Water well casing must be bonded to AC breaker box.

False. There is no requirement that it be bonded separately from the pipe(s)
it is connected to.

All rebar inside concrete footing must be bonded. Rebar
inside any concrete basement floor must be bonded.

False. Rebar less than 1/2" in diameter, or less than 20' in length, is not
required to be bonded. There also is no requirement that individual pieces of
rebar be separately bonded to the grounding electrode system; Code
specifically permits them to be bonded to _each_other_ "by the usual steel tie
wires or other effective means."

Any steel plate buried in earth must be bonded.

False. Again, as with rebar, there are size requirements of which you appear
completely ignorant.

Any "other local metal underground
system or structure such as piping systems and underground
tanks" (quoted from paragraph seven) must also be connected to breaker
box.

Ahh, finally you got one correct.

According to John, if any of those six items exist, then they
also must be bonded to the breaker box.

According to the NEC.

Why are bonding wires not attached to every of six items?

Probably because you, or someone who listened to your ignorant ravings,
installed the grounding electrode system.

Because
Doug Miller is wrong. The breaker box only needs one earthing
electrode that conforms to paragraphs two through seven.

Try again, bozo. Yes, one such electrode is sufficient. But if there are *two*
such electrodes present, they must *both* be used as grounding electrodes.

Code says
that any electrode used for earthing must be bonded together to form a
single earth grounding system. Any of those other six electrodes not
being used for earthing need not be connected to the breaker box - in
direct contradiction to Doug Miller and the naive salesman Bud.

Absolutely false. You simply do not have the first clue what you are talking
about. Code specifically and clearly says that ALL such electrodes that are
present SHALL BE bonded together. If one of those electrodes is present and
*not* being used for grounding, that's a clear Code violation.

Now go get yourself a copy of the 2005 Code, read Article 250.50, and STFU.

Code says that any electrode connected for earth must also be bonded
to the breaker box. If used to earth the telephone line protector,
then that electrode must also be bonded to AC electric box. If cable
TV is earthed to any of those electrodes, then that electrode also
must bond to breaker box. Any electrode used as earth ground must be
bonded together. Listed are six earthing electrodes that would not be
connected to breaker box because nothing was using them for earth
ground. According to Doug Miller, all six of those electrodes also
must be connected by 6 AWG wire.

No, not according to me. According to the National Electrical Code.

Try reading it some time.

If you want to bond the 'first five feet of water pipe' to breaker
box, then by all means do so. But that is beyond what code would
require of John Ross.

False again. Metal water pipe is required to be bonded as part of the
grounding electrode system. Water pipe more than 5' from the point at which it
enters the building is not permitted to be used as part of the grounding
electrode system -- therefore, the bonding must be within the first five feet.

What is most clearly required:

What is most clearly required is for you to read the Code, before you try to
talk about what it means.

A metal underground tank is an earthing electrode according to
paragraph seven. But if not being used by anything as an earth
ground,

... then it's a Code violation: it's present, but it's not bonded.

then AC breaker box also need not be bonded to that
underground tank ... in direct contradiction to what Doug Miller and
naive salesman Bud have posted.

What part of "ALL ... that are present ... SHALL BE BONDED TOGETHER" are you
having such a hard time understanding??

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

It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.

bud-- wrote:
John Ross wrote:

bud-- wrote:
John Ross wrote:

I spoke with the electrician today and he said he would use #8 wire
(he said that was for 100 amp panel). Not sure what you meant by "very
restrictive" in using that, I doubt he would do anything different.

2005 NEC 250.64-B "Securing and protection against physical damage"
"Grounding electrode conductors smaller than 6AWG [#8} shall be in rigid
metal conduit, intermediate metal conduit, rigid nonmetallic conduit,
electrical metalic tubing, or cable armor."
All of them are a form of pipe (some are light weight pipe) except cable
armor which is a spiral metal protection like BX. If the conductor is
run through ferrous tubing/pipe there are additional requirements that
directly or indirectly bond both ends of the pipe to the grounding
conductor. If you use one of the required protection methods #6 should
be cheaper.
It will need protection where it is located. The cable armor sounds
the easiest (to bend), does that contain ferrous?
snip

If the electrode connection to the water pipe is not withing 5 ft of the
entrance it is safe as a grounding electrode as long as the metal water
pipe is intact. Your call whether you move the connection.

If it HAS to be moved, did you or someone say it has to be one
contiuous wire all the way back to panel? I'm not sure how he could do
that without wall damage. Can it be clamped to the point where it
currently is at pipe and then jumpered to within 5 feet of entrance?

I hope this doesn't open up a new can of worms, but I remembered that
the way they did these houses, they didn't have a ground bar in the
panel--the grounds are connected to the neutral bar. I asked him about
that and he said he would just connect the new ground connections to
the neutral bar also and "that was legal." Do you see a problem with
that?

At the service panel only (not downstream subpanels) the neutral and
ground are connected. The neutral bar is usually insulated from the
enclosure, but they should [almost] always be connected together at the
service panel. The connection is often by a screw that goes through the
neutral bar and screws into the enclosure behind - not at all obvious.

The neutral-ground connection at the service is part of providing a low
resistance metal path for short circuit currents to trip breakers. The
path is ground wire to neutral-ground bond to service neutral to
transformer.

This panel (there is only one at house) has NO ground bar--grounds and
neutrals are on the "neutral" bar. So he is proposing just adding
these new ground connections there as well. Is that OK? If they are
bonded together anyway, I can't see how it could hurt, but as you know
this is all new to me.

--
John

Doug Miller wrote:
In article .com, John Ross wrote:


Doug Miller wrote:
In article . com, w_tom
wrote:
On Sep 28, 8:06 am, (Doug Miller) wrote:
And now you've gone and gotten it wrong again. Metal water pipe is
*required*
to be used as a grounding electrode. You said it's not. That's not true.

Code only requires water pipe must be bonded. That 'bonding' to
remove fault currents from pipes. Code does not require water pipe to
be used as an earth ground.

False.

"All grounding electrodes as described in 250.52(A)(1) through (A)(6) that
are
present ... shall be bonded together to form the grounding electrode system.
.. 250.52(A)(1) Metal underground water pipe."

If it's there, Code requires it to be used "to form the grounding electrode
system" i.e. as an earth ground.

However code is written so that a water
pipe may also be an earthing electrode

Wrong -- it MUST be a grounding electrode if it's present.

- albeit insufficient. If
water pipe is used as an earthing electrode, that still in not
sufficient to meet code requirements for earthing as stated in article
250.52(D).

True -- but not relevant to the question of whether using it is optional or
required. If it's present at all, its use as part of the grounding electrode
system is MANDATORY.

Doug, as it is now the only ground is to the water pipe, but back then
they just connected it any convenient place near panel--not within 5
foot of pipe entrance. So if I have the ground rod installed AND leave
the current situation, am I right in that it will still serve as a
earth ground AND a bonding to the pipes.

No, not unless the connection to the water pipe is within 5 feet of the
entrance.

BTW, it is still all metal,
so if not required, I would assume it is ok just to leave that as is.
Does that satisfy what you said above?

Ground rod, and connection to the metal water pipe within 5' of the point at
which it enters the building.

Doug, I understand what you are saying about current code. My point
was that in 1960 they didn't care where on the pipe it was located. As
it is now, it IS the ground for the house, but probably nowhere near 5
feet from entrance.

My understanding is that rule was simply because of worry of plastic
pipes being used in repairs etc. So what I was saying was that IF they
don't require the current code for that if installing a ground rod, I
still will have a ground to earth through the pipes since it is still
all metal. Someone said there were "other" reasons to do with stray
currents in the first 5 feet etc. and you ridiculed him. So I assume
that code or no code, just adding a ground rod won't magically make my
present pipe earth ground disappear. Agree?

--
John

In article .com, John Ross wrote:

Doug, I understand what you are saying about current code. My point
was that in 1960 they didn't care where on the pipe it was located. As
it is now, it IS the ground for the house, but probably nowhere near 5
feet from entrance.

Yes, but new work needs to be done to current code. Check with your local
electrical inspection authority to be sure -- but I imagine they'll construe
that to require you to bond the water pipe within 5' of the entrance.

My understanding is that rule was simply because of worry of plastic
pipes being used in repairs etc. So what I was saying was that IF they
don't require the current code for that if installing a ground rod, I
still will have a ground to earth through the pipes since it is still
all metal. Someone said there were "other" reasons to do with stray
currents in the first 5 feet etc. and you ridiculed him.

Nope, not me. That was someone else. Better go back and check that again.

So I assume
that code or no code, just adding a ground rod won't magically make my
present pipe earth ground disappear. Agree?

Quite true. Just make sure that they *are* bonded together -- preferably
within 5' of where the pipe enters the building -- to make sure that they are
at the same potential.

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

It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.

Doug - why is that underground tank not connected to breaker box?
It completely meets paragraph seven as an' earthing electrode. Using
your reasoning, then that underground tank must be connected to
breaker box. But nothing is using the tank as an electrode.
Therefore it does not exist - is not 'present' - as an earthing
electrode. It exists only as a tank even though it 'could' become an
earthing electrode according to code. Please learn what that
paragraph really says.

If we drive a ground rod into earth and don't connect anything to
it, then according to Doug Miller's interpretation, we must connect
that rod to breaker box with a 6 AWG wire. Obviously not. It 'could'
be an earthing electrode. But it is not because nothing else is using
it for earthing. Therefore - and in direct contradiction to what Doug
has posted - we need not connect it to the breaker box.

The phrase is "that is present". That underground tank and that
isolated ground rod are not 'present' because nothing is using it as
an earthing electrode.

If we earth an overhead TV antenna (as required by code), then that
ground rod must also connects to the earthing system being used by AC
breaker box. Why? That TV antenna ground rod is 'present'. It now
exists as an earthing electrode and therefore must be interconnected
to other earth grounds.

Code only requires John Ross to have one earthing electrode.
Minimum to meet that requirement is one earth ground rod located and
connected as short as practicable to breaker box. Being earthed by a
wire as short as possible is also a code requirement. For other
reasons, we want that wire to be 'less than 10 feet' and routed
separated from other wires. That one earth ground then meets a
minimum code requirement for earthing.

If John Ross is using some other earth ground for telephone or cable
TV, then that earthing electrode is 'present' - must also connect to
the breaker box. Code also says those other utilities must connect
less than 20 feet to the earth ground. Just another reason why all
incoming utilities should enter at a common service entrance - since
all must use the same earthing 'system'.

Doug - please learn that what code paragraph says. You keep quoting
it and do not understand what it is saying. Accroding to you, then
every underground tank also must be connected by 6 AWG wire to the
breaker box. Any steel plate buried in earth must be connected.
Obviously that is not true. Your interpretation obviously is in
error.

On Sep 30, 8:45 pm, (Doug Miller) wrote:
In article On Sep 30, 8:00 wrote:
According to John, if any of those six items exist, then they
also must be bonded to the breaker box.
Correction. This should have read "According to Doug Miller, if
any of those six tiems exists, then ..."

Correction: according to the National Electrical Code.

I even quoted the relevant portions of it.

Here, I'll do it again. Pay attention this time.

"All grounding electrodes as described in 250.52(A)(1) through (A)(6) that are
present at each building or structure served SHALL BE bonded together to form
the grounding electrode system." [2005 NEC, Article 250.50]

John Ross wrote:

bud-- wrote:
John Ross wrote:
bud-- wrote:
John Ross wrote:
I spoke with the electrician today and he said he would use #8 wire
(he said that was for 100 amp panel). Not sure what you meant by "very
restrictive" in using that, I doubt he would do anything different.
2005 NEC 250.64-B "Securing and protection against physical damage"
"Grounding electrode conductors smaller than 6AWG [#8} shall be in rigid
metal conduit, intermediate metal conduit, rigid nonmetallic conduit,
electrical metalic tubing, or cable armor."
All of them are a form of pipe (some are light weight pipe) except cable
armor which is a spiral metal protection like BX. If the conductor is
run through ferrous tubing/pipe there are additional requirements that
directly or indirectly bond both ends of the pipe to the grounding
conductor. If you use one of the required protection methods #6 should
be cheaper.
It will need protection where it is located. The cable armor sounds
the easiest (to bend), does that contain ferrous?

Never used it.

I hope this doesn't open up a new can of worms, but I remembered that
the way they did these houses, they didn't have a ground bar in the
panel--the grounds are connected to the neutral bar. I asked him about
that and he said he would just connect the new ground connections to
the neutral bar also and "that was legal." Do you see a problem with
that?
At the service panel only (not downstream subpanels) the neutral and
ground are connected. The neutral bar is usually insulated from the
enclosure, but they should [almost] always be connected together at the
service panel. The connection is often by a screw that goes through the
neutral bar and screws into the enclosure behind - not at all obvious.

This panel (there is only one at house) has NO ground bar--grounds and
neutrals are on the "neutral" bar. So he is proposing just adding
these new ground connections there as well. Is that OK? If they are
bonded together anyway, I can't see how it could hurt, but as you know
this is all new to me.

That is standard in service panels.

--
bud--

w_tom wrote:
On Sep 30, 11:15 am, (Doug Miller) wrote:


No, not unless the connection to the water pipe is within 5 feet of the
entrance.

I disagree with Doug on this point. If the connection to the water pipe
was code compliant when installed - connection used to be allowed other
than within 5 ft - the installation is OK now unless modifications are
made that trigger new construction requirements.

And on to the village idiot.


Code demands that the AC electric have a proper connection to earth
ground. Any one of the electrodes in paragraphs two through seven are
sufficient. The electrode defined in paragraph one (water pipe) is
not sufficient.

As Doug points out, the village idiot rewrites the code. The code says
paragraph *1-6*. Paragraph *1* is water pipe - required by code to be
used as a grounding electrode. When reality conflicts with the beliefs
of the village idiot, he tries to change reality.


Assume that John Ross was correct - that ALL earthing electrodes must
be connected. Then every steel I-beam concreted in earth must be
bonded to the breaker box.

The steel frame of a commercial buildings is one of the lowest earth
resistance electrodes. As Doug points out, the frame (generally) must be
used as a grounding electrode. It does not apply to each member. Anyone
who can read and think could figure that out from the NEC.

All rebar inside concrete footing must be bonded. Rebar
inside any concrete basement floor must be bonded.

Completely idiotic statement. The NEC does not required rebar be used at
all - a length of copper wire can be used. And only required for new
construction. And does not apply to floor.

Any steel plate
buried in earth must be bonded.

If the village idiot would read the NEC, this applies to a plate that is
specifically buried to be used as an earthing electrode.


Any "other local metal underground
system or structure such as piping systems and underground
tanks" (quoted from paragraph seven) must also be connected to breaker
box.

This is “paragraph 7". The NEC does not require these items be used as
grounding electrodes. Only w_’s renumbering includes “7".


According to John, if any of those six items exist, then they
also must be bonded to the breaker box.

Not according to Doug, according to the NEC.



Why are bonding wires not attached to every of six items? Because
Doug Miller is wrong.

Because w_ is unable to read and understand what the NEC really
requires. Truly incomprehensible misrepresentations.

The breaker box only needs one earthing
electrode that conforms to paragraphs two through seven.

The electrical system needs only one earthing electrode *system* than
conforms to paragraphs *1-6*.
The NEC says “All grounding electrodes... that are present”, not just
your favorite one.

Listed are six earthing electrodes that would not be
connected to breaker box because nothing was using them for earth
ground.

They are used as earthing electrodes because they improve the connection
of the electrical system to earth. It is totally irrelevant whether the
6 electrode types are used by phone or other utilities.

According to Doug Miller, all six of those electrodes also
must be connected by 6 AWG wire.

Where did Doug say that? “Concrete encased electrode” is #4. Water pipe
and structural steel the size of the conductor goes up with the service
size reflecting their superior connection to the earth.


If you want to bond the 'first five feet of water pipe' to breaker
box, then by all means do so.

For those without a mental impairment, water pipe (10 ft ....) is
*required* to be used as an earthing electrode.


A metal underground tank is an earthing electrode according to
paragraph seven. But if not being used by anything as an earth
ground, then AC breaker box also need not be bonded to that
underground tank ... in direct contradiction to what Doug Miller and

I never said underground tank must be used as a grounding electrode
because the NEC does not say the tank must be used.

naive salesman Bud have posted.

To quote w_ "It is an old political trick. When facts cannot be
challenged technically, then attack the messenger." Not able to compete
on facts, w_ has to try to discredit those who challenge his bullcrap.

Poor w_ seems to have a significant mental impairment. Virtually
everything he said was wrong. Perhaps the institution should limit his
use of the internet.

–-
bud--

In article . com, w_tom wrote:
Doug - why is that underground tank not connected to breaker box?

Because the installer was listening to you, instead of reading the Code.

It completely meets paragraph seven as an' earthing electrode. Using
your reasoning, then that underground tank must be connected to
breaker box.

No, not using "my reasoning" -- using the plain language of the Code.

But nothing is using the tank as an electrode.

Then that's a Code violation.

Therefore it does not exist - is not 'present' - as an earthing
electrode.

You have a peculiar understanding of "present".

It exists only as a tank even though it 'could' become an
earthing electrode according to code. Please learn what that
paragraph really says.

I'm perfectly well aware of what that paragraph says, but it appears that you
are not. The Code says, simply, that if the items are present, then they must
be bonded together to form the grounding electrode system.

If we drive a ground rod into earth and don't connect anything to
it, then according to Doug Miller's interpretation, we must connect
that rod to breaker box with a 6 AWG wire. Obviously not. It 'could'
be an earthing electrode. But it is not because nothing else is using
it for earthing. Therefore - and in direct contradiction to what Doug
has posted - we need not connect it to the breaker box.

What part of 250.50 "ALL ... that are present ... SHALL BE BONDED TOGETHER..."
are you having such a hard time understanding?

The phrase is "that is present". That underground tank and that
isolated ground rod are not 'present' because nothing is using it as
an earthing electrode.

What, you mean they're not there?

What part of 250.50 "ALL ... that are present ... SHALL BE BONDED TOGETHER..."
are you having such a hard time understanding?


If we earth an overhead TV antenna (as required by code), then that
ground rod must also connects to the earthing system being used by AC
breaker box. Why? That TV antenna ground rod is 'present'. It now
exists as an earthing electrode and therefore must be interconnected
to other earth grounds.

What part of 250.50 "ALL ... that are present ... SHALL BE BONDED TOGETHER..."
are you having such a hard time understanding?


Code only requires John Ross to have one earthing electrode.
Minimum to meet that requirement is one earth ground rod located and
connected as short as practicable to breaker box. Being earthed by a
wire as short as possible is also a code requirement. For other
reasons, we want that wire to be 'less than 10 feet' and routed
separated from other wires. That one earth ground then meets a
minimum code requirement for earthing.

What part of 250.50 "ALL ... that are present ... SHALL BE BONDED TOGETHER..."
are you having such a hard time understanding?

If John Ross is using some other earth ground for telephone or cable
TV, then that earthing electrode is 'present' - must also connect to
the breaker box. Code also says those other utilities must connect
less than 20 feet to the earth ground. Just another reason why all
incoming utilities should enter at a common service entrance - since
all must use the same earthing 'system'.

What part of 250.50 "ALL ... that are present ... SHALL BE BONDED TOGETHER..."
are you having such a hard time understanding?

Doug - please learn that what code paragraph says.

Tom - please don't attempt to lecture me on what the Code says, when you
clearly don't understand it yourself.

You keep quoting
it and do not understand what it is saying.

You keep *not* quoting it, and *not* understanding it.

Accroding to you, then
every underground tank also must be connected by 6 AWG wire to the
breaker box.

What part of 250.50 "ALL ... that are present ... SHALL BE BONDED TOGETHER..."
are you having such a hard time understanding?

Any steel plate buried in earth must be connected.

As I've already pointed out to you, this is not true.

Obviously that is not true. Your interpretation obviously is in
error.

What part of 250.50 "ALL ... that are present ... SHALL BE BONDED TOGETHER..."
are you having such a hard time understanding?

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

It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.

In article , bud-- wrote:
w_tom wrote:
On Sep 30, 11:15 am, (Doug Miller) wrote:


No, not unless the connection to the water pipe is within 5 feet of the
entrance.

I disagree with Doug on this point. If the connection to the water pipe
was code compliant when installed - connection used to be allowed other
than within 5 ft - the installation is OK now unless modifications are
made that trigger new construction requirements.

IMO local inspection authority is likely to regard the installation of a
second grounding electrode as a mod that will trigger new construction
requirements -- but the OP should check with local inspection authority.

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

It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.

In article , (Doug Miller) wrote:
In article . com, w_tom
wrote:
Doug - why is that underground tank not connected to breaker box?

Because the installer was listening to you, instead of reading the Code.

It completely meets paragraph seven as an' earthing electrode. Using
your reasoning, then that underground tank must be connected to
breaker box.

No, not using "my reasoning" -- using the plain language of the Code.

But nothing is using the tank as an electrode.

Then that's a Code violation.

Woops, my mistake -- I thought that was (A)(6) and required to be part of the
system; actually, it's (A)(7). You did get this part right: underground tanks
aren't required to be bonded into the grounding electrode system.

You got everything else wrong.

Therefore it does not exist - is not 'present' - as an earthing
electrode.

You have a peculiar understanding of "present".

It exists only as a tank even though it 'could' become an
earthing electrode according to code. Please learn what that
paragraph really says.

I'm perfectly well aware of what that paragraph says, but it appears that you
are not. The Code says, simply, that if the items are present, then they must
be bonded together to form the grounding electrode system.

If we drive a ground rod into earth and don't connect anything to
it, then according to Doug Miller's interpretation, we must connect
that rod to breaker box with a 6 AWG wire. Obviously not. It 'could'
be an earthing electrode. But it is not because nothing else is using
it for earthing. Therefore - and in direct contradiction to what Doug
has posted - we need not connect it to the breaker box.

What part of 250.50 "ALL ... that are present ... SHALL BE BONDED TOGETHER..."
are you having such a hard time understanding?

The phrase is "that is present". That underground tank and that
isolated ground rod are not 'present' because nothing is using it as
an earthing electrode.

What, you mean they're not there?

What part of 250.50 "ALL ... that are present ... SHALL BE BONDED TOGETHER..."
are you having such a hard time understanding?


If we earth an overhead TV antenna (as required by code), then that
ground rod must also connects to the earthing system being used by AC
breaker box. Why? That TV antenna ground rod is 'present'. It now
exists as an earthing electrode and therefore must be interconnected
to other earth grounds.

What part of 250.50 "ALL ... that are present ... SHALL BE BONDED TOGETHER..."
are you having such a hard time understanding?


Code only requires John Ross to have one earthing electrode.
Minimum to meet that requirement is one earth ground rod located and
connected as short as practicable to breaker box. Being earthed by a
wire as short as possible is also a code requirement. For other
reasons, we want that wire to be 'less than 10 feet' and routed
separated from other wires. That one earth ground then meets a
minimum code requirement for earthing.

What part of 250.50 "ALL ... that are present ... SHALL BE BONDED TOGETHER..."
are you having such a hard time understanding?

If John Ross is using some other earth ground for telephone or cable
TV, then that earthing electrode is 'present' - must also connect to
the breaker box. Code also says those other utilities must connect
less than 20 feet to the earth ground. Just another reason why all
incoming utilities should enter at a common service entrance - since
all must use the same earthing 'system'.

What part of 250.50 "ALL ... that are present ... SHALL BE BONDED TOGETHER..."
are you having such a hard time understanding?

Doug - please learn that what code paragraph says.

Tom - please don't attempt to lecture me on what the Code says, when you
clearly don't understand it yourself.

You keep quoting
it and do not understand what it is saying.

You keep *not* quoting it, and *not* understanding it.

Accroding to you, then
every underground tank also must be connected by 6 AWG wire to the
breaker box.

What part of 250.50 "ALL ... that are present ... SHALL BE BONDED TOGETHER..."
are you having such a hard time understanding?

Any steel plate buried in earth must be connected.

As I've already pointed out to you, this is not true.

Obviously that is not true. Your interpretation obviously is in
error.

What part of 250.50 "ALL ... that are present ... SHALL BE BONDED TOGETHER..."
are you having such a hard time understanding?


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

It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.

On Oct 1, 12:58 pm, (Doug Miller) wrote:
Tom - please don't attempt to lecture me on what the Code says, when you
clearly don't understand it yourself.

So those millions of fuel oil tanks buried outside homes to provide
fuel for winter heat - all tanks are code violations? How curious
that electrical inspectors did not see them as code violations.
According to Doug Miller, all those fuel oil tanks are code violations
because a 6 AWG wire does not connect them to the breaker box. Doug -
you don't do this stuff, do you? You are assuming a layman's
interpretation of the word 'present'. A tank that meets paragraph
(A)(7) as an electrode also is not 'present' according to the code.

If word definitions were so obvious, then explain why a rope does
not bond two items together. Code says two items must be bonded.
They look bonded together to me. We cannot pull them apart.
Therefore they must be bonded - by a rope. Clearly that meets code
since the meaning of bonding is obvious to any layman. Or maybe words
have context. Obvious is that millions of household oil tanks are not
in code violation as you have just posted. Please learn the code
before lecturing others.