ECN Forum Forums General Topics of the Trade General Discussion Area Grounding Electrode Conductor Connector?

The long url sending us to the Square D site for a catalog is why the width is excessive.

You cannot change that message.

Glenn,

I edited the page Link in one of the posts. That seemed to help some. If you highlight just the text in the boxes and choose "Print" then "Selection" it should just print the text and it will fit on a regular page width.

First, a weep hole is supposed to be used to discharge condensation!

I would cite 110.2, and also base my decision on the following NFPA Codes 70 and 70B that give me a reason that will help to support my rejection.

This would be easy to explain to anyone who is involved in electrical installations.

NEC 2002, 555.11 Circuit Breakers, Switches, Panelboards, and Marine Power Outlets.

Circuit breakers and switches installed in gasketed enclosures shall be arranged to permit required manual operation without exposing the interior of the enclosure.

All such enclosures shall be arranged with a weep hole to discharge condensation.

70B, 21-4.3.4

On an outdoor busway, a visual check should be made to ascertain if weep hole screws have been removed in accordance with the manufacturer’s instructions.

3.11.2

Circuit breakers and switches installed in gasketed enclosures shall be arranged to permit required manual operation without exposing the interior of the enclosure.

All such enclosures shall be arranged with a weep hole to discharge condensation.



[This message has been edited by Joe Tedesco (edited 09-17-2002).]

So, then I should open all of the 1/4" KO's to allow for weeping of the condensation?

Thanks for the concise answer, Joe, and GWZ, thank you as well for your input.

My synopsis: since there's no listed connector for bare solid copper #6 or #4 wire without armor, then a raceway must be used.

The weep holes (if that is what they indeed are) need to be opened to allow drainage, but somehow must also comply with 110.12(A)...

Does this sound reasonable?

Personally, I don't like weep holes that are large enough to allow bees and wasps to enter, but hey, code is code.

[This message has been edited by sparky66wv (edited 09-17-2002).]

Yes, I agree.

Also, the following proposal has been sent to NFPA for the next 2005 NEC.

"Proposal for NFPA: 70

Section/Paragraph: 110.11

Recommendation: Enclosures installed in wet or damp locations shall be arranged with weep holes to discharge condensation, and shall not be used for any other purpose.

Substantiation: Although used for many years, "weep holes" are not designed to be used for the grounding electrode conductor.

The subject of "weep holes" is included in the 2002 NEC in Article 555, and in NFPA 70B.

Change Recommends: New Text

Original Material: Yes

Joe Tedesco
www.joetedesco.com

Thanks Joe!

I'm done thrashing this deceased equestrian!



Anyone can chime in if they have something to add, however...

The weep holes are the small holes that are already open when you buy the product. They are not the 1/4" or other size KOs.
Don

Joe,
Is it your position that the 1/4" KOs are the weep holes and that they must be knocked out when installing a 3R enclosure in a wet location? I've never seen an enclosure that was rated only as a 3R without small holes in the back corners of the bottom. The picture in Sparky66wv''s post of 9/14 at 9:57PM is a perfect example of this type of enclosure. The weep holes are open and there is a 1/4" KO for other use. The weep holes are open when the enclosure is shipped and are too small to be used for the grounding conductor. I have worked on some dual rated enclosures that came with instructions to remove a screw from the weep holes when used as a 3R enclosure.
Don

yes... the GE's & GEC are for voltage gradient & lightning /HV discharge.

as you know....

what are the effects/pro's/con's of a captivated GEC vs. one loose in the
*GEC hole i.e.-choke coil effect?

*as it's apparently not a weep hole...

Adding an opinion here. I thought it was clear, at least from Square D, that the hole is intended (can we assume investigated?) for use by a GEC. It is trade practice to use it as such. I've done it, and seen it done for a pretty good while now.

Has anyone ever had a problem with this? With all the eyes and ears out there, can we come up with a picture of one damaged? An accident report? I've never seen arcing evidence, and I've done a lot of fire jobs, anyone else?

Unless someone offers evidence to the contrary, as an inspector, I would allow the practice.