I had a service guy tell me that sometimes electr. boards fail inside
the dryer due to electrical spikes. I wondered if this was BS
because this is a 220 appliance and I didn't think they are as
sensitive to such things. If it is true, can you buy a surge
protector just for the clothes dryer? Thoughts on this...

In article ,
Doug wrote:

I had a service guy tell me that sometimes electr. boards fail inside
the dryer due to electrical spikes. I wondered if this was BS
because this is a 220 appliance and I didn't think they are as
sensitive to such things. If it is true, can you buy a surge
protector just for the clothes dryer? Thoughts on this...

Did the board in your dryer fail, or is this a hypothetical question? If
it did fail, I'd be more suspect of lead-free soldering than a voltage
spike. Circuit boards are not directly line-powered. I think the dangers
of spikes, in general, have been overstated by 3-4 orders of magnitude.
But I don't think a 220 volt unit is any less vulnerable than a 120 volt
unit.

"Doug" wrote in message
...
I had a service guy tell me that sometimes electr. boards fail inside
the dryer due to electrical spikes. I wondered if this was BS
because this is a 220 appliance and I didn't think they are as
sensitive to such things. If it is true, can you buy a surge
protector just for the clothes dryer? Thoughts on this...

Spikes come in on the power lines and don't care about the voltage, so it's
certainly possible that one can damage a 220 volt appliance just like a 120
volt model. Yes, you can buy 220 volt surge protectors -- do a Google
search. Another choice is to wire a surge protector in at the main breaker
and protect the whole house.

Tomsic

I had a service guy tell me that sometimes electr. boards fail inside
the dryer due to electrical spikes. I wondered if this was BS
because this is a 220 appliance and I didn't think they are as
sensitive to such things. If it is true, can you buy a surge
protector just for the clothes dryer? Thoughts on this...


* I believe this to be true. It seems as though microprocessor controlled
appliances fail earlier than their mechanically controlled predecessors.

Steps you can take to help reduce the risk of this is making sure that your
grounding electrode system is in good condition. Check your ground clamps
at the water pipe and ground rods (If visible) for corrosion and tightness.
Here's a photo example from my site of a clean connection:
http://www.mrelectrician.tv/question...ipeGroundClamp

Make sure your water pipes are bonded to each other:
http://www.mrelectrician.tv/question...ho****erHeater

Have a bonding jumper across the water meter:
http://www.mrelectrician.tv/question...eterWithJumper

You should also install a surge suppressor in the main electrical panel.

The grounding and bonding will help protect against lightning strikes and
the surge suppressor will help protect against spikes as a result of other
equipment, particularly those that are motor driven.

Doug wrote:
I had a service guy tell me that sometimes electr. boards fail inside
the dryer due to electrical spikes. I wondered if this was BS
because this is a 220 appliance and I didn't think they are as
sensitive to such things. If it is true, can you buy a surge
protector just for the clothes dryer? Thoughts on this...

Hi,
Sorry to say that your idea is baseless and funny. Board has protection
circuit built-in but when powerful surge(spike) comes down, anythng can
get damaged no matter what protection you have. I often see board
failures caused by heat due to under-rated cheap component or cold
solder joint(s). Repairing is not easy because they use ASIC in
many cases which is difficult to obtain.

On Oct 5, 8:53*am, "John Grabowski" wrote:
I had a service guy tell me that sometimes electr. boards fail inside
the dryer due to electrical spikes. * I wondered if this was BS
because this is a 220 appliance and I didn't think they are as
sensitive to such things. *If it is true, can you buy a surge
protector just for the clothes dryer? * Thoughts on this...

* I believe this to be true. *It seems as though microprocessor controlled
appliances fail earlier than their mechanically controlled predecessors.

Steps you can take to help reduce the risk of this is making sure that your
grounding electrode system is in good condition. *Check your ground clamps
at the water pipe and ground rods (If visible) for corrosion and tightness.
Here's a photo example from my site of a clean connection:http://www.mrelectrician.tv/question...TVGround.html#...

Make sure your water pipes are bonded to each other:http://www.mrelectrician.tv/question...TVGround.html#...

Have a bonding jumper across the water meter:http://www.mrelectrician.tv/question...TVGround.html#...

You should also install a surge suppressor in the main electrical panel.


That's the best and most cost effective solution.
And of course voltage spikes can damage a 240V
dryer with electronics just like a 120V microwave.
Lightning hitting the utilities could sends a 3000V
spike down the lines. 3000V going into something
designed for 240V is just about as bad as it going
into a 120V appliance.

John Grabowski wrote:
I had a service guy tell me that sometimes electr. boards fail inside
the dryer due to electrical spikes. I wondered if this was BS
because this is a 220 appliance and I didn't think they are as
sensitive to such things. If it is true, can you buy a surge
protector just for the clothes dryer? Thoughts on this...


* I believe this to be true. It seems as though microprocessor
controlled appliances fail earlier than their mechanically controlled
predecessors.
Steps you can take to help reduce the risk of this is making sure
that your grounding electrode system is in good condition. Check
your ground clamps at the water pipe and ground rods (If visible) for
corrosion and tightness. Here's a photo example from my site of a
clean connection:
http://www.mrelectrician.tv/question...ipeGroundClamp

Make sure your water pipes are bonded to each other:
http://www.mrelectrician.tv/question...ho****erHeater

Have a bonding jumper across the water meter:
http://www.mrelectrician.tv/question...eterWithJumper

You should also install a surge suppressor in the main electrical
panel.
The grounding and bonding will help protect against lightning strikes
and the surge suppressor will help protect against spikes as a result
of other equipment, particularly those that are motor driven.

Diligent bonding and connections to water pipes is good, but it's not a
substitute for a proper ground, e.g., one or more copper rods driven six
feet or more into the earth. A water-pipe bond is just to prevent the piping
systems in the house from remaining live with voltage if they come in
contact with a live wire.

Doug wrote:

I had a service guy tell me that sometimes electr. boards fail
inside the dryer due to electrical spikes.

True.

If it is true, can you buy a surge protector just for the clothes
dryer? Thoughts on this...

A surge protector for a high-current appliance (like an electric clothes
dryer) is not something that I think would be cost effective as it would
be for something like a TV, stereo or computer.

A better solution would be to trip the breaker supplying power to your
dryer (or unplug the dryer if conveinent) when you're not using it - or
at least when you know a thunderstorm is approaching.

I live in a some-what lightning-prone area, and I unplug many electronic
devices in my home (and trip a few breakers) when I know a thunderstorm
is coming.

On Oct 5, 9:35*am, Home Guy wrote:
Doug wrote:
I had a service guy tell me that sometimes electr. boards fail
inside the dryer due to electrical spikes.

True.

If it is true, can you buy a surge protector just for the clothes
dryer? * Thoughts on this...

A surge protector for a high-current appliance (like an electric clothes
dryer) is not something that I think would be cost effective as it would
be for something like a TV, stereo or computer.

Of course not, because as usual, you're clueless. It has
nothing to do with the current the device draws. It has
everything to do with high-current appliances like dryers
and ovens today having ELECTRONIC COMPONENTS
in them. But it's OK. I won't think all Canadians are
stooopid just because you are.





A better solution would be to trip the breaker supplying power to your
dryer (or unplug the dryer if conveinent) when you're not using it - or
at least when you know a thunderstorm is approaching.

How about you're not home when the thunderstorm is
approaching? Or sleeping? Or it's a surge from something
other than a thunderstorm?





I live in a some-what lightning-prone area, and I unplug many electronic
devices in my home (and trip a few breakers) when I know a thunderstorm
is coming.

Try unplugging your computer and leaving it unplugged.

Older appliances tended to use slightly more costly analog controls,
however they tnded to last forever..

newer appliances use glitzy electronic board controls, that cost less
to build but fail easily, and can be a hassle to replace.....

I have a whirpool dishwasher that got 5 control boards in its first
year of life... the service tech who replaced them said it wasnt me it
was a poor design board......

its sad what has happened to manufacturing

" wrote:

A surge protector for a high-current appliance (like an electric
clothes dryer) is not something that I think would be cost
effective as it would be for something like a TV, stereo or
computer.

Of course not, because as usual, you're clueless. It has
nothing to do with the current the device draws.

How much is a surge protector for an appliance that uses 40 amps @ 220
volts vs a surge protector for an appliance that uses 5 amps @ 120
volts?

A better solution would be to trip the breaker supplying power
to your dryer (or unplug the dryer if conveinent) when you're
not using it - or at least when you know a thunderstorm is
approaching.

How about you're not home when the thunderstorm is
approaching? Or sleeping?

Then you'll pay through the nose for the repair of your appliance when
it gets zapped by lightning because you were too ****ing lazy or
clueless to know that by applying the effort of a few micro-calories you
could have prevented the dammage in the first place.

Or it's a surge from something other than a
thunderstorm?

Maybe the power system in your area is as stable as in some third-world
countries, but where I live it's very rare that a system-fault will
cause a surge bad enough to dammage appliances.

Lightning by far causes the most electrical dammage to consumer
products.

On 10/5/2012 7:02 AM, wrote:
On Oct 5, 8:53 am, "John wrote:
I had a service guy tell me that sometimes electr. boards fail inside
the dryer due to electrical spikes. I wondered if this was BS
because this is a 220 appliance and I didn't think they are as
sensitive to such things. If it is true, can you buy a surge
protector just for the clothes dryer? Thoughts on this...

* I believe this to be true. It seems as though microprocessor controlled
appliances fail earlier than their mechanically controlled predecessors.

Steps you can take to help reduce the risk of this is making sure that your
grounding electrode system is in good condition. Check your ground clamps
at the water pipe and ground rods (If visible) for corrosion and tightness.
Here's a photo example from my site of a clean connection:http://www.mrelectrician.tv/question...TVGround.html#...

Make sure your water pipes are bonded to each other:http://www.mrelectrician.tv/question...TVGround.html#...

Have a bonding jumper across the water meter:http://www.mrelectrician.tv/question...TVGround.html#...

You should also install a surge suppressor in the main electrical panel.


That's the best and most cost effective solution.
And of course voltage spikes can damage a 240V
dryer with electronics just like a 120V microwave.
Lightning hitting the utilities could sends a 3000V
spike down the lines. 3000V going into something
designed for 240V is just about as bad as it going
into a 120V appliance.

I agree a service panel protector is a real good idea.

If you have a strong surge from lightning on the power service it likely
lifts both hot wires above ground. Since the neutral is bonded to ground
and the earthing system at the service I would guess that surges
line-to-line are smaller than line-to-neutral or ground, but they easily
could damage 240V equipment.

If you have no service panel protector and you have a strong surge, at
about 6,000V there is arc-over from the service panel busbars to the
enclosure. After the arc is established the voltage is hundreds of
volts. Since the enclosure is connected the the earthing system that
dumps most of the surge energy to earth. Surge protection at the
equipment is likely to have more problem with a 3000V surge than one
that is much stronger.

On Oct 5, 6:35*am, Home Guy wrote:
Doug wrote:
I had a service guy tell me that sometimes electr. boards fail
inside the dryer due to electrical spikes.

True.

If it is true, can you buy a surge protector just for the clothes
dryer? * Thoughts on this...

A surge protector for a high-current appliance (like an electric clothes
dryer) is not something that I think would be cost effective as it would
be for something like a TV, stereo or computer.

A better solution would be to trip the breaker supplying power to your
dryer (or unplug the dryer if conveinent) when you're not using it - or
at least when you know a thunderstorm is approaching.

I live in a some-what lightning-prone area, and I unplug many electronic
devices in my home (and trip a few breakers) when I know a thunderstorm
is coming.

Depending on the year of your home construction, you may also wish to
consider disconnecting the phone lines to your computers.

On Oct 5, 7:04*am, Home Guy wrote:
...snip....
Maybe the power system in your area is as stable as in some third-world
countries, but where I live it's very rare that a system-fault will
cause a surge bad enough to dammage appliances.

Lightning by far causes the most electrical dammage to consumer
products.

In our rural area, a lightning storm maybe up to two miles away, surge/
sag the AC mains so much that it affects the telephone line too. Our
'digital' phones think there's an incoming call and you get a
standard, single ring.

On Fri, 05 Oct 2012 12:11:25 -0400, wrote:

On Fri, 05 Oct 2012 09:04:29 -0600, bud--
wrote:

If you have a strong surge from lightning on the power service it likely
lifts both hot wires above ground. Since the neutral is bonded to ground
and the earthing system at the service I would guess that surges
line-to-line are smaller than line-to-neutral or ground, but they easily
could damage 240V equipment.

Any decent protector will shunt spikes line to neutral and line to
line. (3 or more MOVs)
In the dryer, they usually connect the motor and the controller board
line to neutral.
I bet this happened when the dryer was off and the only thing
connected was the circuit board.


Repair guy said that most newer dryers were hot wired to timer not
control knob like this older one was. He did say that when it was
off, the power was still going to the control knob so if I understand
you correctly, you sound correct.

On 10/5/2012 10:51 AM, Robert Macy wrote:
On Oct 5, 7:04 am, Home Guy wrote:
...snip....
Maybe the power system in your area is as stable as in some third-world
countries, but where I live it's very rare that a system-fault will
cause a surge bad enough to dammage appliances.

Lightning by far causes the most electrical dammage to consumer
products.

In our rural area, a lightning storm maybe up to two miles away, surge/
sag the AC mains so much that it affects the telephone line too. Our
'digital' phones think there's an incoming call and you get a
standard, single ring.


I've installed hard wired surge arresters on the AC units of customers
in rural areas to prevent blown capacitors and damage to circuit boards.
The move away from relay logic to solid state then microprocessor
controls has made the equipment much more vulnerable to power spikes and
surges. O_o

TDD

On Oct 5, 10:04*am, Home Guy wrote:
" wrote:
A surge protector for a high-current appliance (like an electric
clothes dryer) is not something that I think would be cost
effective as it would be for something like a TV, stereo or
computer.

Of course not, because as usual, you're clueless. *It has
nothing to do with the current the device draws.

How much is a surge protector for an appliance that uses 40 amps @ 220
volts vs a surge protector for an appliance that uses 5 amps @ 120
volts?

Exactly the same price because again, it's a whole
house surge protector that goes at the panel and
it protects both hots and the neutral. It deals with
surges right there, before they get to any appliance
whether 120V or 240V. They can be had for $100-150.

Never having installed or seen one, as usual, you're
clueless. Ever watch Holmes up there in Canada?
He installs them all the time on TV.





A better solution would be to trip the breaker supplying power
to your dryer (or unplug the dryer if conveinent) when you're
not using it - or at least when you know a thunderstorm is
approaching.

How about you're not home when the thunderstorm is
approaching? *Or sleeping?

Then you'll pay through the nose for the repair of your appliance when
it gets zapped by lightning because you were too ****ing lazy or
clueless to know that by applying the effort of a few micro-calories you
could have prevented the dammage in the first place.


The folks here can weigh in on how many of them go
down to the panel to open breakers on every appliance
with each thundestorm. Even walls switches can
have electronics in them today, be it for dimming,
X10, etc. Or CFL lights. With such a strategy, you
might as well just open the main breaker. And with
your approach, you have all the fun of resetting everything
with a clock in it. I don't know anyone that relies on such a
strategy.






Or it's a surge from something other than a
thunderstorm?

Maybe the power system in your area is as stable as in some third-world
countries, but where I live it's very rare that a system-fault will
cause a surge bad enough to dammage appliances.

It's rare here too. So are destructive surges from
lightning and house fires too. That doesn't mean that
it;s a bad idea to install a $125 whole house surge
protector or to buy a fire insurance policy.
The IEEE recommends whole house surge protectors.




Lightning by far causes the most electrical dammage to consumer
products.

Which is why that whole house surge protector is a
mighty fine idea.

I had a service guy tell me that sometimes electr. boards fail inside
the dryer due to electrical spikes. I wondered if this was BS
because this is a 220 appliance and I didn't think they are as
sensitive to such things. If it is true, can you buy a surge
protector just for the clothes dryer? Thoughts on this...


* I believe this to be true. It seems as though microprocessor
controlled appliances fail earlier than their mechanically controlled
predecessors.
Steps you can take to help reduce the risk of this is making sure
that your grounding electrode system is in good condition. Check
your ground clamps at the water pipe and ground rods (If visible) for
corrosion and tightness. Here's a photo example from my site of a
clean connection:
http://www.mrelectrician.tv/question...ipeGroundClamp

Make sure your water pipes are bonded to each other:
http://www.mrelectrician.tv/question...ho****erHeater

Have a bonding jumper across the water meter:
http://www.mrelectrician.tv/question...eterWithJumper

You should also install a surge suppressor in the main electrical
panel.
The grounding and bonding will help protect against lightning strikes
and the surge suppressor will help protect against spikes as a result
of other equipment, particularly those that are motor driven.

Diligent bonding and connections to water pipes is good, but it's not a
substitute for a proper ground, e.g., one or more copper rods driven six
feet or more into the earth. A water-pipe bond is just to prevent the
piping systems in the house from remaining live with voltage if they come
in contact with a live wire.


*I took for granted that the OP had a copper pipe water service from the
street. You are correct that if he didn't, two eight foot ground rods would
provide the necessary lightning protection.

John G

John Grabowski wrote:

Diligent bonding and connections to water pipes is good, but it's
not a substitute for a proper ground, e.g., one or more copper rods
driven six feet or more into the earth. A water-pipe bond is just to
prevent the piping systems in the house from remaining live with
voltage if they come in contact with a live wire.


*I took for granted that the OP had a copper pipe water service from
the street. You are correct that if he didn't, two eight foot ground
rods would provide the necessary lightning protection.


I suggest that no amount of copper pipe is a proper substitute for ground
rods.

What's the reference to lightening protection about?

Home Guy wrote:
" wrote:

A surge protector for a high-current appliance (like an electric
clothes dryer) is not something that I think would be cost
effective as it would be for something like a TV, stereo or
computer.

Of course not, because as usual, you're clueless. It has
nothing to do with the current the device draws.

How much is a surge protector for an appliance that uses 40 amps @ 220
volts vs a surge protector for an appliance that uses 5 amps @ 120
volts?

Um, they should be about the same price. The usual load on a surge protector
is irrelevant to its job of preventing surges.

For example, here are 31 220v surge protectors, all but 5 under $30.

Your average lightning bolt comes in at about 30,000 amps. That's for
negative lightning. Positive lightning is about one magnitude greater
(300,000 amps).

Home Guy wrote:
Doug wrote:

I had a service guy tell me that sometimes electr. boards fail
inside the dryer due to electrical spikes.

True.

If it is true, can you buy a surge protector just for the clothes
dryer? Thoughts on this...

A surge protector for a high-current appliance (like an electric clothes
dryer) is not something that I think would be cost effective as it would
be for something like a TV, stereo or computer.

A better solution would be to trip the breaker supplying power to your
dryer (or unplug the dryer if conveinent) when you're not using it - or
at least when you know a thunderstorm is approaching.

I live in a some-what lightning-prone area, and I unplug many electronic
devices in my home (and trip a few breakers) when I know a thunderstorm
is coming.

I basically have a surge suppressor off my air conditioner breaker, which
is 20 amps X 2 . Putting it on the breaker depends on the breaker and code.
It protects the circuit, and affects all lines in the box, just as if it
had it's own dedicated breaker. Surge supressor was about $40.-$50.

Greg

wrote:
On Fri, 05 Oct 2012 09:37:40 -0400, Home Guy wrote:

Doug wrote:

I had a service guy tell me that sometimes electr. boards fail
inside the dryer due to electrical spikes.

True.

If it is true, can you buy a surge protector just for the clothes
dryer? Thoughts on this...

A surge protector for a high-current appliance (like an electric clothes
dryer) is not something that I think would be cost effective as it would
be for something like a TV, stereo or computer.

A better solution would be to trip the breaker supplying power to your
dryer (or unplug the dryer if conveinent) when you're not using it - or
at least when you know a thunderstorm is approaching.

I live in a some-what lightning-prone area, and I unplug many electronic
devices in my home (and trip a few breakers) when I know a thunderstorm
is coming.

I live in the lightning capital of the world (Florida) and I never
unplug anything.
The answer is the panel protector John spoke of along with additional
protection for some selected equipment, typically things with more
than one input like TVs and computers.
You also want to be sure all of those other services (cable phone etc)
have surge protection and that it shares the same ground electrode
system as the service.
The better your grounding electrode is, the better all of this works.

In addition to whole house, and many suppressers around the house on
various lines, I have a suppressor plugged into the outlet at furnace, I
don't want the board in there to fry. It's a simple inline jack from the
shack.

Greg

On Oct 5, 4:00*pm, "HeyBub" wrote:
John Grabowski wrote:

Diligent bonding and connections to water pipes is good, but it's
not a substitute for a proper ground, e.g., one or more copper rods
driven six feet or more into the earth. A water-pipe bond is just to
prevent the piping systems in the house from remaining live with
voltage if they come in contact with a live wire.

*I took for granted that the OP had a copper pipe water service from
the street. *You are correct that if he didn't, two eight foot ground
rods would provide the necessary lightning protection.

I suggest that no amount of copper pipe is a proper substitute for ground
rods.

What's the reference to lightening protection about?

Lightening is what Michael Jackson did to his skin. You mean
lightning I think!!!

Diligent bonding and connections to water pipes is good, but it's
not a substitute for a proper ground, e.g., one or more copper rods
driven six feet or more into the earth. A water-pipe bond is just to
prevent the piping systems in the house from remaining live with
voltage if they come in contact with a live wire.


*I took for granted that the OP had a copper pipe water service from
the street. You are correct that if he didn't, two eight foot ground
rods would provide the necessary lightning protection.


I suggest that no amount of copper pipe is a proper substitute for ground
rods.


*So in your mind 16' of copper plated iron rod is a better ground than the
copper pipe that runs from a house out to the street and is connected to a
giant web of piping.

What's the reference to lightening protection about?

*The primary purpose of a grounding electrode (Water pipe, ground rod,
ground ring, ufer ground, copper plate, etc.) is for voltage stabilization
and lightning protection.

John Grabowski wrote:
Diligent bonding and connections to water pipes is good, but it's
not a substitute for a proper ground, e.g., one or more copper rods
driven six feet or more into the earth. A water-pipe bond is just
to prevent the piping systems in the house from remaining live with
voltage if they come in contact with a live wire.


*I took for granted that the OP had a copper pipe water service from
the street. You are correct that if he didn't, two eight foot
ground rods would provide the necessary lightning protection.


I suggest that no amount of copper pipe is a proper substitute for
ground rods.


*So in your mind 16' of copper plated iron rod is a better ground
than the copper pipe that runs from a house out to the street and is
connected to a giant web of piping.

Of course.

You may be confusing a proper electrical ground with the grounding of the
plumbing system.


What's the reference to lightening protection about?

*The primary purpose of a grounding electrode (Water pipe, ground rod,
ground ring, ufer ground, copper plate, etc.) is for voltage
stabilization and lightning protection.

Sigh. A water pipe is not a grounding electrode. It may FUNCTION as one, but
using a water pipe is not best practice.

As an aside, how can more than five things be a "primary" purpose?

On Sat, 6 Oct 2012 11:42:02 -0500, "HeyBub"
wrote:

John Grabowski wrote:
Diligent bonding and connections to water pipes is good, but it's
not a substitute for a proper ground, e.g., one or more copper rods
driven six feet or more into the earth. A water-pipe bond is just
to prevent the piping systems in the house from remaining live with
voltage if they come in contact with a live wire.


*I took for granted that the OP had a copper pipe water service from
the street. You are correct that if he didn't, two eight foot
ground rods would provide the necessary lightning protection.


I suggest that no amount of copper pipe is a proper substitute for
ground rods.


*So in your mind 16' of copper plated iron rod is a better ground
than the copper pipe that runs from a house out to the street and is
connected to a giant web of piping.

Of course.

You may be confusing a proper electrical ground with the grounding of the
plumbing system.


What's the reference to lightening protection about?

*The primary purpose of a grounding electrode (Water pipe, ground rod,
ground ring, ufer ground, copper plate, etc.) is for voltage
stabilization and lightning protection.

Sigh. A water pipe is not a grounding electrode. It may FUNCTION as one, but
using a water pipe is not best practice.

As an aside, how can more than five things be a "primary" purpose?


Primary purpose is PROTECTION.

On 10/6/2012 7:35 AM, John Grabowski wrote:
....

*So in your mind 16' of copper plated iron rod is a better ground than
the copper pipe that runs from a house out to the street and is
connected to a giant web of piping.
....

By current NEC requirements, "Yes". One is (properly installed)
Code-compliant while the other (on its own) cannot be made so because it
is expressly not allowed as the sole grounding system. This basic
requirement goes as far back as the 1978 revision of NEC.

Before the days of plastic and other nonconducting plumbing materials it
was allowed but is no longer approved by Code. There's a good chance
that if nothing else there's a insulating connection at the meter and
not necessarily jumpered any longer. And, if the inlet line is plastic
as is now so common, even if the house is copper as soon as it
transitions to the external line, "poof" goes the ground.

Now, _IF_ (the proverbial big if) there is no interruption from the
grounding point back to earth, yes, a metal plumbing system can function
as a grounding electrode but the point is that whether it _can_ doesn't
mean it _should_ or is allowed.

--

On 10/7/2012 10:54 AM, bud-- wrote:
On 10/6/2012 11:48 AM, dpb wrote:
....

Not only is it allowed, it is *required*.

Only three electrodes are *required* to be used as earthing electrodes -
if present.

One is a water service pipe (10 ft ...).

....

The key words there are "if present".

It certainly is _NOT_ part of NEC that there is _REQUIRED_ to be 10-ft
of metallic water service pipe.

What is required is that any metal plumbing system that is present be
bonded _TO_ the earthing system (since 1978) but as noted, a metal
plumbing system of whatever length is NOT, by itself, Code-compliant
(again, since 1978).

--

On 10/6/2012 10:42 AM, HeyBub wrote:
John Grabowski wrote:


*I took for granted that the OP had a copper pipe water service from
the street. You are correct that if he didn't, two eight foot
ground rods would provide the necessary lightning protection.


I suggest that no amount of copper pipe is a proper substitute for
ground rods.

Ground rods are the worst earthing electrode.


*So in your mind 16' of copper plated iron rod is a better ground
than the copper pipe that runs from a house out to the street and is
connected to a giant web of piping.

Of course.

You may be confusing a proper electrical ground with the grounding of the
plumbing system.

You are just confused.

What's the reference to lightening protection about?

*The primary purpose of a grounding electrode (Water pipe, ground rod,
ground ring, ufer ground, copper plate, etc.) is for voltage
stabilization and lightning protection.

Sigh. A water pipe is not a grounding electrode. It may FUNCTION as one, but
using a water pipe is not best practice.

A metal municipal water system will be a far lower resistance to earth
than any other earthing electrode you will have a house.

It certainly is a good earthing electrode, which is why the NEC has
required its use since time began.

On 10/6/2012 11:48 AM, dpb wrote:
On 10/6/2012 7:35 AM, John Grabowski wrote:
...

*So in your mind 16' of copper plated iron rod is a better ground than
the copper pipe that runs from a house out to the street and is
connected to a giant web of piping.
...

By current NEC requirements, "Yes". One is (properly installed)
Code-compliant while the other (on its own) cannot be made so because it
is expressly not allowed as the sole grounding system. This basic
requirement goes as far back as the 1978 revision of NEC.

The NEC requires the resistance to earth for a ground rod to be 25 ohms
or less. Or install 2 and there is no requirement. What happens when you
connect a hot wire to a 25 ohm-to-earth ground rod?

I have seen resistances to earth of 3 ohms and 0.1 ohms as typical for
municipal metal water systems.


Before the days of plastic and other nonconducting plumbing materials it
was allowed but is no longer approved by Code.

Water service pipe, minimum 10 ft metal in the earth, is *required* to
be used as an earthing electrode, just as it has been since time began.

There's a good chance
that if nothing else there's a insulating connection at the meter and
not necessarily jumpered any longer.

Bonding across the meter is *required*, just as it has been since time
began.

And, if the inlet line is plastic
as is now so common, even if the house is copper as soon as it
transitions to the external line, "poof" goes the ground.

Which is, of course, why a "supplemental" electrode is now required.


Now, _IF_ (the proverbial big if) there is no interruption from the
grounding point back to earth, yes, a metal plumbing system can function
as a grounding electrode but the point is that whether it _can_ doesn't
mean it _should_ or is allowed.

Not only is it allowed, it is *required*.

Only three electrodes are *required* to be used as earthing electrodes -
if present.

One is a water service pipe (10 ft ...).

Another is a "concrete encased electrode" (commonly called a Ufer
ground) which is required to be created in most new construction.

The earthing conductor required to connect to a ground rod (which is a
crappy electrode)is #6.
The earthing conductor required to connect to a "concrete encased
electrode" is #4.
The earthing conductor required to connect to a metal water service pipe
goes up with the size of the electrical service and can be as large as 3/0.

Do you suppose there is a reason for that?

bud-- wrote:
On 10/6/2012 10:42 AM, HeyBub wrote:
John Grabowski wrote:


*I took for granted that the OP had a copper pipe water service
from the street. You are correct that if he didn't, two eight
foot ground rods would provide the necessary lightning protection.


I suggest that no amount of copper pipe is a proper substitute for
ground rods.

Ground rods are the worst earthing electrode.


*So in your mind 16' of copper plated iron rod is a better ground
than the copper pipe that runs from a house out to the street and is
connected to a giant web of piping.

Of course.

You may be confusing a proper electrical ground with the grounding
of the plumbing system.

You are just confused.

What's the reference to lightening protection about?

*The primary purpose of a grounding electrode (Water pipe, ground
rod, ground ring, ufer ground, copper plate, etc.) is for voltage
stabilization and lightning protection.

Sigh. A water pipe is not a grounding electrode. It may FUNCTION as
one, but using a water pipe is not best practice.

A metal municipal water system will be a far lower resistance to earth
than any other earthing electrode you will have a house.

It certainly is a good earthing electrode, which is why the NEC has
required its use since time began.


Perhaps this will explain:

"You've probably seen project requirements that call for the grounding of
piping systems and exposed structural steel. Those requirements, although
well intended, miss the mark. The stated intention of such requirements is
nearly always the removal of dangerous voltage on specific types of metal
parts in the event of a ground fault. These metal parts include exposed
structural steel members, electrically conductive metal water piping
systems, metal sprinkler piping, metal gas piping, and other metal piping
systems. But these requirements fail to make that intention a reality.
That's because you remove dangerous voltage on metal parts through bonding,
not through grounding."

and

"The NEC (section 250-81 through 250-83) requires that the electrical system
connected to all of the following, if available for grounding purposes:
* metal frame of building
* concrete encased electrode (rod, pipe, plate, braided wire)
* ground ring and
* metallic water pipe with 10 lineal feet in contact with earth

The NEC has noted that metal piping will corrode over time and possibly lose
its continuity with the soil (i.e. ground) or be replaced by plastic pipe.
Accordingly, should this occur, the NEC has mandated the 3 other paths to
ground be utilized."

In other words, attaching a metal water pipe to an earth ground is used to
protect the user from the plumbing, not to provide a ground for the
electrical system. Using metal water pipe as an electrical ground is
insufficient.

On 10/7/2012 3:01 PM, HeyBub wrote:
bud-- wrote:
On 10/6/2012 10:42 AM, HeyBub wrote:
John Grabowski wrote:


*I took for granted that the OP had a copper pipe water service
from the street. You are correct that if he didn't, two eight
foot ground rods would provide the necessary lightning protection.


I suggest that no amount of copper pipe is a proper substitute for
ground rods.

Ground rods are the worst earthing electrode.


*So in your mind 16' of copper plated iron rod is a better ground
than the copper pipe that runs from a house out to the street and is
connected to a giant web of piping.

Of course.

You may be confusing a proper electrical ground with the grounding
of the plumbing system.

You are just confused.

What's the reference to lightening protection about?

*The primary purpose of a grounding electrode (Water pipe, ground
rod, ground ring, ufer ground, copper plate, etc.) is for voltage
stabilization and lightning protection.

Sigh. A water pipe is not a grounding electrode. It may FUNCTION as
one, but using a water pipe is not best practice.

A metal municipal water system will be a far lower resistance to earth
than any other earthing electrode you will have a house.

It certainly is a good earthing electrode, which is why the NEC has
required its use since time began.


Perhaps this will explain:

"You've probably seen project requirements that call for the grounding of
piping systems and exposed structural steel. Those requirements, although
well intended, miss the mark. The stated intention of such requirements is
nearly always the removal of dangerous voltage on specific types of metal
parts in the event of a ground fault. These metal parts include exposed
structural steel members, electrically conductive metal water piping
systems, metal sprinkler piping, metal gas piping, and other metal piping
systems. But these requirements fail to make that intention a reality.
That's because you remove dangerous voltage on metal parts through bonding,
not through grounding."

No source.

I am not fond of the term "grounding" because you may be talking about
"bonding" or "earthing".
Your quote has that problem. (The NEC has started to clarify which use
is intended.)

The NEC has 3 electrodes that are *required* to be used as earthing
electrodes (where present).
One is metal water service pipe (10 ft...).
Another, in general, is structural steel (because of its connection into
the rebar systems in the concrete foundation).

Your source is incorrect - water pipe and structural steel *must* (in
general) be used as earthing electrodes.

If they are connected as earthing electrodes they are also "bonded".


and

"The NEC (section 250-81 through 250-83) requires that the electrical system
connected to all of the following, if available for grounding purposes:
* metal frame of building
* concrete encased electrode (rod, pipe, plate, braided wire)
* ground ring and
* metallic water pipe with 10 lineal feet in contact with earth

The correct list has electodes that may already be present in a building
and does not include ground rings and everything after "concrete encased
electrode".


The NEC has noted that metal piping will corrode over time and possibly lose
its continuity with the soil (i.e. ground) or be replaced by plastic pipe.
Accordingly, should this occur, the NEC has mandated the 3 other paths to
ground be utilized."

Cite for corrode.
Cite where water pipe has worse corrosion problems that ground rods.

The NEC has NOT mandated that "3 other paths" to earth be utilized.


In other words, attaching a metal water pipe to an earth ground is used to
protect the user from the plumbing, not to provide a ground for the
electrical system. Using metal water pipe as an electrical ground is
insufficient.

The requirement to use water pipes as an earthing electrode is in a
section on the earthing system and the electrodes to be used.
It is in your list of required earthing electrodes, above.

You have bullsiht information and are using a bullsiht source.

(What a surprise.)

On 10/7/2012 9:40 AM, dpb wrote:
On 10/7/2012 10:54 AM, bud-- wrote:
On 10/6/2012 11:48 AM, dpb wrote:
...

Not only is it allowed, it is *required*.

Only three electrodes are *required* to be used as earthing electrodes -
if present.

One is a water service pipe (10 ft ...).

...

The key words there are "if present".

It certainly is _NOT_ part of NEC that there is _REQUIRED_ to be 10-ft
of metallic water service pipe.

Of course not.


What is required is that any metal plumbing system that is present be
bonded _TO_ the earthing system (since 1978) but as noted, a metal
plumbing system of whatever length is NOT, by itself, Code-compliant
(again, since 1978).

For at least 50 years the NEC has required a "supplemental" electrode
for water pipe electrodes *if* the water service pipe was likely to be
replaced by plastic. The 1978 change required a "supplemental" electrode
on all new installations.

If there is a plastic water service, the metal water pipes in the
building must be "bonded" to the electrical system. There are separate
rules for "bonding".

But the basic requirement has not changed - if there is 10 ft of water
pipe in the earth the pipe is *required* to be used (and connected) as
an earthing electrode (not "bonded"). The earthing electrode is always
a "system" which may be one electrode, or several may be required and
others can be added. A metal water service pipe (10 ft...) is one of the
electrodes that is *required* to be included.

If the water pipe is not included as an earthing electrode the
installation is clearly not "code-compliant".

bud-- wrote:


Perhaps this will explain:

"You've probably seen project requirements that call for the
grounding of piping systems and exposed structural steel. Those
requirements, although well intended, miss the mark. The stated
intention of such requirements is nearly always the removal of
dangerous voltage on specific types of metal parts in the event of a
ground fault. These metal parts include exposed structural steel
members, electrically conductive metal water piping systems, metal
sprinkler piping, metal gas piping, and other metal piping systems.
But these requirements fail to make that intention a reality. That's
because you remove dangerous voltage on metal parts through bonding,
not through grounding."

No source.

Sorry. I thought the material was righteous on its face. Evidently not. See:

"Grounding vs. Bonding - Part 10 of 12"
http://ecmweb.com/bonding-amp-ground...ing-part-10-12





The NEC has 3 electrodes that are *required* to be used as earthing
electrodes (where present).
One is metal water service pipe (10 ft...).
Another, in general, is structural steel (because of its connection
into the rebar systems in the concrete foundation).

Your source is incorrect - water pipe and structural steel *must* (in
general) be used as earthing electrodes.

If they are connected as earthing electrodes they are also "bonded".

"Your source is incorrect..."

Giggle




and

"The NEC (section 250-81 through 250-83) requires that the
electrical system connected to all of the following, if available
for grounding purposes: * metal frame of building
* concrete encased electrode (rod, pipe, plate, braided wire)
* ground ring and
* metallic water pipe with 10 lineal feet in contact with earth

The correct list has electodes that may already be present in a
building and does not include ground rings and everything after
"concrete encased electrode".


The NEC has noted that metal piping will corrode over time and
possibly lose its continuity with the soil (i.e. ground) or be
replaced by plastic pipe. Accordingly, should this occur, the NEC
has mandated the 3 other paths to ground be utilized."

Cite for corrode.
Cite where water pipe has worse corrosion problems that ground rods.

Does not exactly satisfy your request, but of interest:
"The NEC has noted that metal piping will corrode over time and possibly
lose its continuity with the soil (i.e. ground) or be replaced by plastic
pipe. Accordingly, should this occur, the NEC has mandated the 3 other paths
to ground be utilized."
http://www.ct.gov/dph/lib/dph/enviro..._Necessity.pdf


The NEC has NOT mandated that "3 other paths" to earth be utilized.

Yes it has. (See above)



In other words, attaching a metal water pipe to an earth ground is
used to protect the user from the plumbing, not to provide a ground
for the electrical system. Using metal water pipe as an electrical
ground is insufficient.

The requirement to use water pipes as an earthing electrode is in a
section on the earthing system and the electrodes to be used.
It is in your list of required earthing electrodes, above.

You have bullsiht information and are using a bullsiht source.

(What a surprise.)

I assume your "non-bull****" source is your own dim remembrance of things
past.

bud-- wrote:
On 10/7/2012 3:01 PM, HeyBub wrote:
bud-- wrote:
On 10/6/2012 10:42 AM, HeyBub wrote:
John Grabowski wrote:


*I took for granted that the OP had a copper pipe water service
from the street. You are correct that if he didn't, two eight
foot ground rods would provide the necessary lightning protection.


I suggest that no amount of copper pipe is a proper substitute for
ground rods.

Ground rods are the worst earthing electrode.


*So in your mind 16' of copper plated iron rod is a better ground
than the copper pipe that runs from a house out to the street and is
connected to a giant web of piping.

Of course.

You may be confusing a proper electrical ground with the grounding
of the plumbing system.

You are just confused.

What's the reference to lightening protection about?

*The primary purpose of a grounding electrode (Water pipe, ground
rod, ground ring, ufer ground, copper plate, etc.) is for voltage
stabilization and lightning protection.

Sigh. A water pipe is not a grounding electrode. It may FUNCTION as
one, but using a water pipe is not best practice.

A metal municipal water system will be a far lower resistance to earth
than any other earthing electrode you will have a house.

It certainly is a good earthing electrode, which is why the NEC has
required its use since time began.


Perhaps this will explain:

"You've probably seen project requirements that call for the grounding of
piping systems and exposed structural steel. Those requirements, although
well intended, miss the mark. The stated intention of such requirements is
nearly always the removal of dangerous voltage on specific types of metal
parts in the event of a ground fault. These metal parts include exposed
structural steel members, electrically conductive metal water piping
systems, metal sprinkler piping, metal gas piping, and other metal piping
systems. But these requirements fail to make that intention a reality.
That's because you remove dangerous voltage on metal parts through bonding,
not through grounding."

No source.

I am not fond of the term "grounding" because you may be talking about
"bonding" or "earthing".
Your quote has that problem. (The NEC has started to clarify which use is intended.)

The NEC has 3 electrodes that are *required* to be used as earthing
electrodes (where present).
One is metal water service pipe (10 ft...).
Another, in general, is structural steel (because of its connection into
the rebar systems in the concrete foundation).

Your source is incorrect - water pipe and structural steel *must* (in
general) be used as earthing electrodes.

If they are connected as earthing electrodes they are also "bonded".


and

"The NEC (section 250-81 through 250-83) requires that the electrical system
connected to all of the following, if available for grounding purposes:
* metal frame of building
* concrete encased electrode (rod, pipe, plate, braided wire)
* ground ring and
* metallic water pipe with 10 lineal feet in contact with earth

The correct list has electodes that may already be present in a building
and does not include ground rings and everything after "concrete encased electrode".


The NEC has noted that metal piping will corrode over time and possibly lose
its continuity with the soil (i.e. ground) or be replaced by plastic pipe.
Accordingly, should this occur, the NEC has mandated the 3 other paths to
ground be utilized."

Cite for corrode.
Cite where water pipe has worse corrosion problems that ground rods.

The NEC has NOT mandated that "3 other paths" to earth be utilized.


In other words, attaching a metal water pipe to an earth ground is used to
protect the user from the plumbing, not to provide a ground for the
electrical system. Using metal water pipe as an electrical ground is
insufficient.

The requirement to use water pipes as an earthing electrode is in a
section on the earthing system and the electrodes to be used.
It is in your list of required earthing electrodes, above.

You have bullsiht information and are using a bullsiht source.

(What a surprise.)

In the old house growing up, I started getting bit in the shower. Dad
called electrician. Water meter strap was breaking contact. Back when the
house was built, 1959, the box was at other end of house, tied to near
water pipe. I don't think there was any other ground rod. After I had the
box updated, guy installed ground rods at that end of house, and ran copper
ground wire tall the way to water pipe in front of water meter. I'm sure
that's how current house is wired.

Greg

On Oct 8, 5:39*pm, "HeyBub" wrote:
bud-- wrote:

Perhaps this will explain:

"You've probably seen project requirements that call for the
grounding of piping systems and exposed structural steel. Those
requirements, although well intended, miss the mark. The stated
intention of such requirements is nearly always the removal of
dangerous voltage on specific types of metal parts in the event of a
ground fault. These metal parts include exposed structural steel
members, electrically conductive metal water piping systems, metal
sprinkler piping, metal gas piping, and other metal piping systems.
But these requirements fail to make that intention a reality. That's
because you remove dangerous voltage on metal parts through bonding,
not through grounding."

No source.

Sorry. I thought the material was righteous on its face. Evidently not. See:

"Grounding vs. Bonding - Part 10 of 12"http://ecmweb.com/bonding-amp-grounding/grounding-vs-bonding-part-10-12



The NEC has *3 electrodes that are *required* to be used as earthing
electrodes (where present).
One is metal water service pipe (10 ft...).
Another, in general, is structural steel (because of its connection
into the rebar systems in the concrete foundation).

Your source is incorrect - water pipe and structural steel *must* (in
general) be used as earthing electrodes.

If they are connected as earthing electrodes they are also "bonded".

"Your source is incorrect..."

Giggle



What specifically in the above that Bud stated is
incorrect?

On 10/8/2012 3:42 PM, HeyBub wrote:
bud-- wrote:


Perhaps this will explain:

"You've probably seen project requirements that call for the
grounding of piping systems and exposed structural steel. Those
requirements, although well intended, miss the mark. The stated
intention of such requirements is nearly always the removal of
dangerous voltage on specific types of metal parts in the event of a
ground fault. These metal parts include exposed structural steel
members, electrically conductive metal water piping systems, metal
sprinkler piping, metal gas piping, and other metal piping systems.
But these requirements fail to make that intention a reality. That's
because you remove dangerous voltage on metal parts through bonding,
not through grounding."

No source.

Sorry. I thought the material was righteous on its face. Evidently not. See:

"Grounding vs. Bonding - Part 10 of 12"
http://ecmweb.com/bonding-amp-ground...ing-part-10-12

You edited out:
"I am not fond of the term "grounding" because you may be talking about
'bonding' or 'earthing'.
Your quote has that problem. (The NEC has started to clarify which use
is intended.)"

Looking at the article I was right. The source talks about "grounding".
What does the source mean by "grounding"? Might mean connecting branch
circuit ground wire (which is how gas pipe is "grounded", at least for
residential). Might mean just earthing. Water pipe and structural steel
do need to be "bonded". That is not a problem, except that structural
steel (usually) and metal water service pipe (always) must be used as an
earthing electrode where there is an electrical service in the building.
And if connected as an earthing electrode the metal is also "bonded".

The source incorrectly shows a "bonding" connection from the service to
a metal water pipe, but the code reference (table 250.66) clearly shows
this is a connection as an earthing electrode. "Bonding" rules are
different.


The NEC has 3 electrodes that are *required* to be used as earthing
electrodes (where present).
One is metal water service pipe (10 ft...).
Another, in general, is structural steel (because of its connection
into the rebar systems in the concrete foundation).

Your source is incorrect - water pipe and structural steel *must* (in
general) be used as earthing electrodes.

If they are connected as earthing electrodes they are also "bonded".

"Your source is incorrect..."

Giggle

Oh how funny. How about a logical argument?


and

"The NEC (section 250-81 through 250-83) requires that the
electrical system connected to all of the following, if available
for grounding purposes: * metal frame of building
* concrete encased electrode (rod, pipe, plate, braided wire)
* ground ring and
* metallic water pipe with 10 lineal feet in contact with earth

The correct list has electodes that may already be present in a
building and does not include ground rings and everything after
"concrete encased electrode".


The NEC has noted that metal piping will corrode over time and
possibly lose its continuity with the soil (i.e. ground) or be
replaced by plastic pipe. Accordingly, should this occur, the NEC
has mandated the 3 other paths to ground be utilized."

Cite for corrode.
Cite where water pipe has worse corrosion problems that ground rods.

Does not exactly satisfy your request, but of interest:
"The NEC has noted that metal piping will corrode over time and possibly
lose its continuity with the soil (i.e. ground) or be replaced by plastic
pipe. Accordingly, should this occur, the NEC has mandated the 3 other paths
to ground be utilized."
http://www.ct.gov/dph/lib/dph/enviro..._Necessity.pdf

Your source has no problem with "bonding" the water pipe inside the
building. If you do that the water pipe will also, in fact, function as
an earthing electrode (with all the awful consequence the source
supposes). That is probably why the NEC "bonding" rules are similar to
the rules for using water pipe as an earthing electrode.


The NEC has NOT mandated that "3 other paths" to earth be utilized.

Yes it has. (See above)

Your source is wrong.

There are 2 separate issues.

One is water pipe. The NEC has required a *single* "supplemental"
electrode since 1978 (as dpb writes) and since long before that in some
cases. It does not require 3.

Second is that the NEC now requires 3 specific electrodes be part of the
earthing system, if present.

Your source rather stupidly says the 3 paths are required as the
supplemental electrode for water pipe when one of the paths is metal
water service pipe. (And the other 2 paths may not exist.)


In other words, attaching a metal water pipe to an earth ground is
used to protect the user from the plumbing, not to provide a ground
for the electrical system. Using metal water pipe as an electrical
ground is insufficient.

The requirement to use water pipes as an earthing electrode is in a
section on the earthing system and the electrodes to be used.
It is in your list of required earthing electrodes, above.

You have bullsiht information and are using a bullsiht source.

(What a surprise.)

I assume your "non-bull****" source is your own dim remembrance of things
past.

My "non-bull****" source is the National Electrical Code.

In b.com,
bud-- typed:
On 10/6/2012 10:42 AM, HeyBub wrote:
John Grabowski wrote:


*I took for granted that the OP had a copper pipe
water service from the street. You are correct that
if he didn't, two eight foot ground rods would
provide the necessary lightning protection.

I suggest that no amount of copper pipe is a proper
substitute for ground rods.

Ground rods are the worst earthing electrode.


*So in your mind 16' of copper plated iron rod is a
better ground than the copper pipe that runs from a
house out to the street and is connected to a giant web
of piping.

Of course.

You may be confusing a proper electrical ground with the
grounding of the plumbing system.

You are just confused.

What's the reference to lightening protection about?

*The primary purpose of a grounding electrode (Water
pipe, ground rod, ground ring, ufer ground, copper
plate, etc.) is for voltage stabilization and lightning
protection.

Sigh. A water pipe is not a grounding electrode. It may
FUNCTION as one, but using a water pipe is not best
practice.

A metal municipal water system will be a far lower
resistance to earth than any other earthing electrode you
will have a house.
It certainly is a good earthing electrode, which is why
the NEC has required its use [ delete: since time began.]

Since NEC rules included it, which originally was not a NEC requrement.
There was not even a mention of it in fact in the first several NECs.

Too many people here (most) are guessing or using what they think is common
sense but without experience/knowledge to back up their claims; obvious in
many of the responses. Also, when the pipe as a ground dd become a
requirement, is was not in that year's NEC.

Apparently The first National Electrical Code is roughly 50 pages long. In
comparison, the 2005 NEC, the 50th edition, consists of nearly 800 pages. I
don't know about most succeeding revisions, but they are iin excess of 800
pages in the latest one.

Like a lot of things, iit seems to have had its beginning at Western
Electric. You may recall from school that WE as the place where they figured
out that different lighting conditions, office areas, etc. changes improved
performance of personnel even when it was changed back to the original
configurations?

http://www.nfpa.org/itemDetail.asp?c...ookie%5Ftest=1
will give you a good look at several related detals that bore the birth of
NEC from the NFPA.

The First Electrical Regulating Body is Formed
a.. The origins of the National Fire Protection Agency can be traced back
to the 1893 World's Fair in Chicago. The 1893 fair was to feature a large
display of electric power and lighting. Unfortunately, the creators of this
display, including Thomas Edison, disagreed on whether Direct Current (DC)
or Alternating Current (AC) were safer for such a large public event.
Because of the disagreements, the fair's insurance company retracted
coverage of the electrical display. A respected Boston electrician named
William Merrill was called in to inspect the lighting and electricity. He
deemed the display to be safe, and the insurance company covered the fair
without incident. Other companies began to ask William Merrill to provide
similar services, and he formed a company known as Underwriters Laboratory
to offer electrical safety certifications on new products.

Forming NFPA
a.. Underwriters Laboratory was an immediate success. During the next few
years, four more similar organizations were started in the U.S. Each focused
on a different branch of fire safety, including electrical and lighting work
as well as sprinkler systems. With five different organizations acting
independently, electrical installers were following five separate codes.
This made uniform systems and connections nearly impossible. On November 6,
1896, representatives from each of these organizations came together at a
meeting in New York to discuss fire, electrical, and sprinkler safety and
uniformity. The meeting was presided over by fire insurance agent Uberto
Crosby. At this meeting, the group drew up articles for a new regulatory
association. Article 1 read "This organization shall be known as the
National Fire Protection Agency." From that time on, the NFPA has led fire
safety efforts in the U.S.

b.. The Origins of the National Electrical Code
a.. One of the first efforts of the newly formed NFPA was to combine the
various electrical codes being used at the time into one uniform standard. A
committee was assembled in spring of 1897. They took the most effective and
fair criteria from each of the 5 codes and created a draft of what was to
become the NEC. This draft was then send to over 1,000 reviewers from all
over the world, who provided comments and suggested additions and changes.
The committee met again in June and incorporated the best of the reviewer
comments. The final result was the National Electrical Code of 1897.

Updates to the NEC
a.. The National Electrical Code is updated every three years. While state
and local governments have no obligation to update their building codes to
reflect changes, they often do stick with the recommendations of the NEC. In
most areas, it takes a few years between the release of a new version of the
NEC and its adoption by the local authorities. This allows the local code
reviewers to incorporate changes gradually to make them reasonable and fair
to builders and homeowners. While some governments may not adopt all
portions of the new NEC as it is released, the NEC is actually the most
universally accepted model code in the country.

Access to the Code
a..
http://www.ehow.com/about_5062903_hi...ical-code.html

b.. According to federal law, an standard that has been signed into law
must be available as public record. This means that copyright protection
does not apply, and free and equal access must be granted. To this end, the
older versions of the NEC are free to access online or at public records
offices (such as your local building permit office). The newer versions of
the code, which are generally not signed into law for several years after
publication, are sold by the NFPA to support future safety efforts and
research. Customers can buy the 1,000 page book or pay for online access to
the electronic version. While newer standards may not have been signed into
law, many builders try to follow the latest applicable NEC version to help
reduce liability and ensure compliance with the law should it change.

I leave further readng to the interested reader to look iinto. The 'net
contains many valid articles on same if you know how to use a search engine.

On 10/8/2012 3:42 PM, HeyBub wrote:
bud-- wrote:


Perhaps this will explain:

"You've probably seen project requirements that call for the
grounding of piping systems and exposed structural steel. Those
requirements, although well intended, miss the mark. The stated
intention of such requirements is nearly always the removal of
dangerous voltage on specific types of metal parts in the event of a
ground fault. These metal parts include exposed structural steel
members, electrically conductive metal water piping systems, metal
sprinkler piping, metal gas piping, and other metal piping systems.
But these requirements fail to make that intention a reality. That's
because you remove dangerous voltage on metal parts through bonding,
not through grounding."

No source.

Sorry. I thought the material was righteous on its face. Evidently not. See:

"Grounding vs. Bonding - Part 10 of 12"
http://ecmweb.com/bonding-amp-ground...ing-part-10-12

You edited out:
"I am not fond of the term "grounding" because you may be talking about
'bonding' or 'earthing'.
Your quote has that problem. (The NEC has started to clarify which use
is intended.) "

Looking at the article that appears to be the problem. The source talks
about "grounding". What does the source mean by "grounding"? Might mean
connecting branch circuit ground wire (which is how gas pipe is
"grounded", at least for residential). Might mean just earthing.
Something else? Water pipe and structural steel do need to be "bonded".
That is not a problem, except that structural steel (usually) and metal
water service pipe (always) must be used as an earthing electrode where
there is an electrical service in the building. And if connected as an
earthing electrode the metal is also "bonded".

The source incorrectly shows a "bonding" connection from the service to
a metal water pipe but the code reference (table 250.66) clearly shows
this is a connection as an earthing electrode. "Bonding" rules are
different.

It should have been a good source. It was partly correct, but did not
(in this article) cover earthing electrodes. The NEC chapter on
grounding is probably the most confusing one that is commonly used. IMHO
a lot of that is confusion over what "grounding" is supposed to do in a
particular instance. That is why I use "earthing", where appropriate.


The NEC has 3 electrodes that are *required* to be used as earthing
electrodes (where present).
One is metal water service pipe (10 ft...).
Another, in general, is structural steel (because of its connection
into the rebar systems in the concrete foundation).

Your source is incorrect - water pipe and structural steel *must* (in
general) be used as earthing electrodes.

If they are connected as earthing electrodes they are also "bonded".

"Your source is incorrect..."

Giggle

Oh how funny


and

"The NEC (section 250-81 through 250-83) requires that the
electrical system connected to all of the following, if available
for grounding purposes: * metal frame of building
* concrete encased electrode (rod, pipe, plate, braided wire)
* ground ring and
* metallic water pipe with 10 lineal feet in contact with earth

The correct list has electodes that may already be present in a
building and does not include ground rings and everything after
"concrete encased electrode".


The NEC has noted that metal piping will corrode over time and
possibly lose its continuity with the soil (i.e. ground) or be
replaced by plastic pipe. Accordingly, should this occur, the NEC
has mandated the 3 other paths to ground be utilized."

Cite for corrode.
Cite where water pipe has worse corrosion problems that ground rods.

Does not exactly satisfy your request, but of interest:
"The NEC has noted that metal piping will corrode over time and possibly
lose its continuity with the soil (i.e. ground) or be replaced by plastic
pipe. Accordingly, should this occur, the NEC has mandated the 3 other paths
to ground be utilized."
http://www.ct.gov/dph/lib/dph/enviro..._Necessity.pdf

Your source doesn't want the water pipe used as an earthing electrode,
but has no problem with "bonding" it to the electrical service. If you
do that the water pipe will also, in fact, function as an earthing
electrode (with all the awful consequence the source supposes). That is
probably why the NEC "bonding" rules are similar to the rules for using
water pipe as an earthing electrode.


The NEC has NOT mandated that "3 other paths" to earth be utilized.

Yes it has. (See above)

Your source is wrong.

There are 2 separate issues.

One is water pipe. The NEC has required a *single* "supplemental"
electrode since 1978 (as dpb writes) and since long before that in some
cases. It does not require 3.

Second is that the NEC now requires 3 specific electrodes be part of the
earthing system, if present.

Your source rather stupidly says the 3 paths are required as the
supplemental electrode for metal water service pipe when one of the
paths is metal water service pipe. And the other 2 may not exist.


In other words, attaching a metal water pipe to an earth ground is
used to protect the user from the plumbing, not to provide a ground
for the electrical system. Using metal water pipe as an electrical
ground is insufficient.

The requirement to use water pipes as an earthing electrode is in a
section on the earthing system and the electrodes to be used.
It is in your list of required earthing electrodes, above.

You have bullsiht information and are using a bullsiht source.

(What a surprise.)

I assume your "non-bull****" source is your own dim remembrance of things
past.

My "non-bull****" source is the National Electrical Code.

(Apologies if this double posts.)