# GEC protection outside structure



## Inspector 102 (Jan 25, 2013)

I seem to recall provisions in the NEC and IRC that a GEC that runs from the main disconnect to the ground rods did not have to be protected from physical damage if sized #4 or larger. A #6 GEC did require physical protection. Am I dreaming or are these provisions still in the code someplace that I cannot find?


----------



## north star (Jan 25, 2013)

*& - - - -*

See Article 250.64(B) in the `08 NEC.

*& - - - -*


----------



## steveray (Jan 25, 2013)

SECTION E3510 GROUNDING ELECTRODE CONDUCTORS

E3510.1 Installation.

A grounding electrode conductor or its enclosure shall be securely fastened to the surface on which it is carried. A 4 AWG or larger conductor shall be protected where exposed to severe physical damage. A 6 AWG grounding 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 and securely fastened to the construction; otherwise, it shall be in rigid metal conduit, intermediate metal conduit, rigid nonmetallic conduit, electrical metallic tubing or cable armor. Grounding conductors smaller than 6 AWG shall be in rigid metal conduit, intermediate metal conduit, rigid nonmetallic conduit, electrical metallic tubing or cable armor.


----------



## Gregg Harris (Jan 25, 2013)

2011 NEC 250.64

(B) Securing and Protection Against Physical Damage. Where exposed, a grounding electrode conductor or its enclosure shall be securely fastened to the surface on which it is carried. Grounding electrode conductors shall be permitted to be installed on or through framing members. A 4 AWG or larger copper or aluminum grounding electrode conductor shall be protected if exposed to physical damage. A 6 AWG 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 if it is securely fastened to the construction: otherwise, it shall be protected in rigid metal conduit (RMC), intermediate metal conduit (IMC), rigid polyvinyl chloride conduit (PVC), reinforced thermosetting resin conduit (RTRC), electrical metallic tubing (EMT), or cable armor. Grounding electrode conductors smaller than 6 AWG shall be protected in RMC, IMC, PVC, RTRC, EMT, or cable armor


----------



## Dennis (Jan 25, 2013)

I don't see either as needing protection if not exposed to damage.  If the copper is strapped to the building what harm can come of it.  We never have had to protect #6 to the rod.


----------



## north star (Jan 25, 2013)

*= = =*



Dennis, the [ potential ] damage could come from weedeating or

landscaping activities......Landscaping such as when Springtime

rolls around and the owners want a tilled flower bed.....That

tiller could go a tad stray and nick / damage / cut the gec.

Weedeaters with those metal blades attached to the weedeater

head.

*+ + +*


----------



## TJacobs (Jan 25, 2013)

How about your dog or other animal doing damage?


----------



## ICE (Jan 25, 2013)

> A 6 AWG 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 if it is securely fastened to the construction


What about the last 12" the stretches from the building to the rod?  Every now and then I come across an electrician that says, "It is a #6 secured to the building so I don't have to protect it".  I ask them to picture a housewife with a shovel.


----------



## jwelectric (Jan 26, 2013)

I always ask the inspector to show me the dog or other animal, the wife with a shovel, the landscapers, weedeater or what ever else the inspector can think of. If it aint there when they are then they aint inspecting they are expecting which is not allowed.

Maybe we should change their titles to electrical expectors instead of electrical inspectors.

Now that we have changed their title I have a question for the expectors. Mr. Expector what is you opinion of wall street? Should I invest today or wait till tomorrow?


----------



## jwelectric (Jan 26, 2013)

Sorry but I can't help but ask a question, are some of these people getting paid or what?


----------



## ICE (Jan 26, 2013)

jwelectric said:
			
		

> I always ask the inspector to show me the dog or other animal, the wife with a shovel, the landscapers, weedeater or what ever else the inspector can think of. If it aint there when they are then they aint inspecting they are expecting which is not allowed.


The entire electrical code is based on expectations.

You follow the code or you can expect a dire outcome.

Little of what the code addresses will happen immediately and some will never happen at all.

With no expectation, why bother.

It's kinda like sports...sometimes you win..sometimes you lose..sometimes you get rained out..but you suit up for all of them.


----------



## ICE (Jan 26, 2013)

jwelectric said:
			
		

> Sorry but I can't help but ask a question, are some of these people getting paid or what?Maybe we should change their titles to electrical expectors instead of electrical inspectors.
> 
> Now that we have changed their title I have a question for the expectors. Mr. Expector what is you opinion of wall street? Should I invest today or wait till tomorrow?


Why be that way?

You lose respect when you place yourself on high.

Lose the attitude.

You pollute the forum.

Fewer people participate when there is a jerk wad loose.


----------



## gfretwell (Jan 26, 2013)

The expectation of physical damage is always the inspector or the AHJs call. It varies widely about what different jurisdictions consider "exposed to damage" and whether it is "severe" or not. Neither are really defined in Article 100.

Maybe it is based more on EXperience than EXpectation. Guys who see lots of damaged EGCs are more likely to want more protection.


----------



## jwelectric (Jan 26, 2013)

ICE said:
			
		

> Why be that way?  You lose respect when you place yourself on high.


 EXcuse me? Be what way? Disagreeing with an inspector or wondering how one got to be an inspector is putting me on high????????????? No, not at all. It is a serious question like it or not. Maybe if we stop and do some serious thinking about what some inspectors are saying we might just find that a lot inject opinion into their jobs. They sure do on these discussion forums. Are they the same as what you are saying about me?

I too am an electrical inspector as well as a certified instructor of electrical inspectors.

As an inspector I look at the installation to the letter of the code, which in my case is the NEC with amendments, and leave my opinion completely out of the job.

In the class room I teach to inspect by the code not opinion. Never inspect a job with a “what if” thought that comes to your mind.

Case in point is this thread. I am surprised that someone didn’t come out with, “what if we have an earth quake” or “what if the moon goes flying out into space”

Maybe we should ask our self this question, “what if the Maya calendar expires?”

The code, both NEC and ICC, says routed close to the building no other protection required. All this other stuff is nothing more than what if. If installed by the letter of the code, I personally could care less what anyone else thinks about the installation including a house wife with a shovel, a stray dog, the kids on their toys, a weed eater or anything else.

The power company installs a lateral to my home which is outside the scope of any inspector then the man comes to install a new line to my septic system.

What if he digs through those wires that are underground? Maybe they should have been installed in a lead lined concrete duck with walls three feet thick.

I can’t help but wonder “what if” every inspector in the world today inspected by their adopted codes. Would there be any need for the internet?


----------



## ICE (Jan 26, 2013)

jwelectric said:
			
		

> I can’t help but wonder “what if” every inspector in the world today inspected by their adopted codes. Would there be any need for the internet?


I'm not so sure that Al Gore invented the Internet only for electrical inspectors.


----------



## ICE (Jan 26, 2013)

jwelectric said:
			
		

> In the class room I teach to inspect by the code not opinion. Never inspect a job with a “what if” thought that comes to your mind.


If you can teach them not to think, can you can teach them what not to think?


----------



## ICE (Jan 26, 2013)

jwelectric said:
			
		

> EXcuse me? Be what way? Case in point is this thread. I am surprised that someone didn’t come out with, “what if we have an earth quake” or “what if the moon goes flying out into space”
> 
> Maybe we should ask our self this question, “what if the Maya calendar expires?”


The answer to your question is right there in front of you.


----------



## ICE (Jan 26, 2013)

jwelectric said:
			
		

> I personally could care less what anyone else thinks


Obviously I am too wrong to ever be right...better that I wait to hear from you from now on.


----------



## ICE (Jan 26, 2013)

jwelectric said:
			
		

> Case in point is this thread. I am surprised that someone didn’t come out with, “what if we have an earth quake” or “what if the moon goes flying out into space”
> 
> Maybe we should ask our self this question, “what if the Maya calendar expires?”
> 
> ...


You out did Goofy.


----------



## jwelectric (Jan 26, 2013)

ICE said:
			
		

> I'm not so sure that Al Gore invented the Internet only for electrical inspectors.


 Yes sir he did, he got on the TV and said that the earth was getting real hot so he invented the internet just for electrical inspectors so they could turn down all those kilowatts.





			
				ICE said:
			
		

> If you can teach them not to think, can you can teach them what not to think?


 My major problem is finding one who knows how to think. This is also true for electricians.





			
				ICE said:
			
		

> The answer to your question is right there in front of you.


 My mommy always said I had a problem sitting still. I have moved from where I was so it is no longer in front of me.





			
				ICE said:
			
		

> Obviously I am too wrong to ever be right...better that I wait to hear from you from now on.


 Well you aren’t the only one, ever hear of E F Hutton?



 Thank you for those kind words (said as I take my bow)


----------



## ICE (Jan 26, 2013)

jwelectric said:
			
		

> My major problem is finding one who knows how to think. This is also true for electricians.


Perhaps I have you figured wrong and it's not really a labor of love.


----------



## jwelectric (Jan 26, 2013)

ICE said:
			
		

> Perhaps I have you figured wrong and it's not really a labor of love.


1.	la•bor

/ˈlābər/

Noun

Work, esp. hard physical work: "manual labor".

Verb

Work hard; make great effort.

I never break a sweat for any reason. This has caused me problems in the past when I would bring a hand held fan to the sauna.

I hate it when I have to breathe hard. For this reason I do not labor.

I watch my heart rate. I allow no more than 84 beats per minute. NO! No labor.

You are correct when you say you had me figured wrong if you was figuring any labor in the equation. It sure wouldn’t have been pretty if I had been born a woman cause there is no labor allowed in my little world therefore I would not have had any heirs.


----------



## Dennis (Jan 27, 2013)

north star said:
			
		

> *= = =*
> 
> Dennis, the [ potential ] damage could come from weedeating or
> 
> ...


I have seen thousands of bare grounding electrode conductor's to the ground rod and I have never seen one destroyed from a week eater.  Put it in PVC and it will do nothing to protect the wire if the weedeater is the issue.


----------



## jwelectric (Jan 27, 2013)

Dennis, on a side note what do you think the value of ground rods are in the first place?

I know this get thrown around a lot and being you sit in a chair that it is discussed quite often what is your opinion of their value as an electrode.


----------



## Dennis (Jan 27, 2013)

Mike I have not used rods in a long time with new construction as I am a believer that the CEE is, without a doubt, 10 times better than a rod.  A rod may help with small surges but I even doubt that.  I have installed 2 rods at a site that had 89 ohms using a 3 point tester.  Sane site I had a concrete encased electrode  and I had 13 ohms on that-- you tell me.


----------



## jwelectric (Jan 27, 2013)

Yes I agree that they are about as useful as dentures are for a chicken.

We played around on this little 17 acre plot with up to as many as 5 eight foot rods at a time before even getting close to 25 ohms. I have a CEE for my service and it tested over a 90 day period twice a week for an average of 7.3 ohms.

During our remodel it was good having friends with the same interest as I have and I really enjoyed the labor of love although you must know that I did not ever sweat and the pulse never exceeded 84 which means I mostly watched.


----------



## ICE (Jan 27, 2013)

jwelectric said:
			
		

> Yes I agree that they are about as useful as dentures are for a chicken.As an inspector I look at the installation to the letter of the code, which in my case is the NEC with amendments, and leave my opinion completely out of the job.


Whichever way the wind blows.


----------



## jwelectric (Jan 27, 2013)

ICE said:
			
		

> Which ever way the wind blows.


 How much research have you done on ground rods? Any?

I don't believe any mention of code rules was involved in the question asked or the answer given by either poster. It was a direct question to one’s opinion and not a question about a code.


----------



## gfretwell (Jan 28, 2013)

If you can get the rod down in the ground water here they work pretty well but if it is just a rod in the sand, you don't have much.

I have been involved in engineering studies on ground rods at toll booths and radio stations. Both are lightning targets and they take extra effort to get them well grounded.

Those guys were using 40' rods and radials. Although we couldn't say it out loud, the duct banks under the road were probably the best electrodes at the toll booths. They were full of steel and bonded to the GECs about 10 feet down and almost 100 feet long end to end, connecting all the booths to the admin building. They still drove 40' rods on the corners of the plaza and everything was CadWelded together with fat bonding conductors. (1/0 as I recall)

Guv'mint work. Cost was no object.


----------



## jwelectric (Jan 28, 2013)

I spent some time at Cocoa Beach while I was in Fl. back in the early 90s watching and studying the grounding systems they were installing and the effects of a direct lightning strike on an eight foot ground rod at the Clearwater testing site.

I have done my own rod testing here on this little strip of land where I have an electric fence to contain my horses. I suppose my tests are very unprofessional but something that was needed in order to keep from chasing horses up and down the road.

My grounding system for my electric fence consists of three 10 foot rods installed in a Delta pattern and spaced 10 feet apart per the instructions. After doing several three point test on the system the average resistance was 30 plus ohms.

See this http://www.iaei.org/magazine/2011/01/grounding-resistance-and-spacing-of-ground-rods/ by the IAEI.

There is much information on the internet from many different testing labs concerning ground rods and just how useless they are during a lightning strike.

Looking closely at 250.104(A)(1) of the NEC we find that there is only four reasons that we connect our systems to earth or ground them. One of these reasons and the main reason is lightning. If the rod is not going to do an effective job of dissipating this high voltage/high current event I would think that people would be searching for something better.


----------



## jwelectric (Jan 28, 2013)

If you have a membership IEEE has some real good stuff on ground rods.


----------



## globe trekker (Jan 28, 2013)

jwelectric,

If you and others are so against the viability of the use of grounds, why are

they still an allowable method of grounding (by the letter) in the NEC?

Also, what do you use on "post tensioned cables" type foundations?

.


----------



## jwelectric (Jan 28, 2013)

globe trekker said:
			
		

> jwelectric,If you and others are so against the viability of the use of grounds, why are
> 
> they still an allowable method of grounding (by the letter) in the NEC?
> 
> ...


Don’t assume, I didn’t say that I was against anything. The codes is what they is.Any connection to earth be it an 8 foot rod or even a gutter nail is better than nothing. All I am saying is that based on the information available to anyone interested in searching there is not much difference between the 8 foot rod and the gutter nail for the purpose of the installation (lightning).

As an inspector I would be looking for either a test sheet by a licensed PE or two rods at least 6 feet apart and grass growing on top of them.

As an electrician if I can’t get to the footer before it is poured then two rods no less than 10 feet apart with at least 9 feet of depth. Got to get her low enough for the burial of the #6 going out there, right?

Look at some of the other earthing requirements found in 250.66. If we are using items such as metal water pipes (250.52(A)(1),  building steel (250.52(A)(2), or even a buried oil drum in the back yard (250.52(A)(8)) we must size the grounding electrode conductor based on the SE conductors. It is possible for these three items to require a 3/0 copper conductor while the same service where none of the electrodes are found we can install two rods and a #6 copper wire.

Now I admit that I am not the brightest bulb in the fixture but the difference in current between a 3/0 and a #6 will equal an amp or two don’t you think? This makes a statement in and of itself or at least let me say it gets what little brain I have to working hard.

Other than bridges I am not very familiar with the tension cables in foundations so therefore I will stay silent.


----------



## gfretwell (Jan 28, 2013)

"Ground" itself is a very over rated thing. I have seen spikes as big as 35-40 volts between the building steel of buildings that were very well "grounded". I think the whole concept was developed when the whole city was connected together by metal water pipes. If you are counting on dirt as your ground plane, expect wide variations from place to place.

This will become very apparent to you when you start stringing data cables between buildings.


----------



## jwelectric (Jan 28, 2013)

No, no, no. We connect to earth not as a plane but we connect to earth for four reasons and for these four reasons only.

These reasons are outlined in 250.4(A)(1). How our systems work has nothing at all to do with the earth connection.

The earth connection has nothing at all to do with how the system operates, how good or how bad. It has nothing at all to do with clearing faults large or small.

Here are the four reasons we connect to earth

250.4 General Requirements for Grounding and Bonding.

The following general requirements identify what grounding and bonding of electrical systems are required to accomplish. The prescriptive methods contained in Article 250 shall be followed to comply with the performance requirements of this section.

 (A) Grounded Systems.

(1) Electrical System Grounding. Electrical systems that are grounded shall be connected to earth in a manner that will limit the voltage imposed by

1 lightning,

2 line surges,

3 or unintentional contact with higher-voltage lines

4 and that will stabilize the voltage to earth during normal operation.

The rest of Article 250 tells us how to get this job done.

Our electrical systems will work just fine without any type of earth connection. The bonding of the EGC to the neutral in the service equipment will clear faults.

It is the earth connection requirements that cause problems with communication equipment. We have different systems operating at different frequencies that cause the problems with communication equipment.

These problems will happen if there are different communication systems with no AC power connected.


----------



## Inspector 102 (Jan 28, 2013)

On my original post, I would have had no idea that a simple question could raise such a battle between members. I apologize for any anomousities that have been displayed here. As an inspector, I have been asked more times than not "What do you want to see" by electricians. My responce is the minimum required by code or better. I do not try to place my opinion in the formula, however if asked, I might tell them minimum requirements and then how I would do it if it were my home. I basically visit this site on a daily basis and have always enjoyed the spirited comments by the members. Although I might not agree with all the statements, I consider another persons point of view or interpretation and respect that. If different than my interpretation, then I am the one that has to answer for the call and be able to back it up. Some areas have their own amendments to code issues which adds another level of opinions. As Patrick Swayze said in Roadhouse - Be Nice.


----------



## gfretwell (Jan 28, 2013)

> No, no, no. We connect to earth not as a plane but we connect to earth for four reasons and for these four reasons only.These reasons are outlined in 250.4(A)(1). How our systems work has nothing at all to do with the earth connection.
> 
> The earth connection has nothing at all to do with how the system operates, how good or how bad. It has nothing at all to do with clearing faults large or small.


That is fine as long as you have a self contained building electrical system.

You really only want to "bond" everything and provide a way to bleed off transients, although that may not happen instantly.

"Grounding" becomes a factor when you connect multiple buildings and we found the ONLY way you can trust it is to bond the buildings together with copper. I learned this the hard way at IBM and saw it in practice by someone else inspecting toll booths.

The earth may average zero volts but from point to point, you can have wide variations.


----------



## karmann33 (Feb 4, 2013)

ICE said:
			
		

> Why be that way?  You lose respect when you place yourself on high.
> 
> Lose the attitude.
> 
> ...


That's what I've thought reading some of your posts from time to time. Spend less time busting somebody else's nuts and try and do the best at your job and let them fail if that's what is meant to be be. Your not going to like everything that people post on here but, don't go throwing stones in glass houses. I don't post on here much because of the dipsticks on here that have negative stuff to say when you do make a comment and to that I say you know they wouldn't talk like that to you in person so why do it on here?


----------

