ECN Forum Forums Code Related Discussion NEC & other Code issues Structural Steel

George,since we all seem to agree isolated sections of pipe are not the "metal water piping system" I would look at 250.104(B). That is more appropriate if you can make the case that they may become energized. Actually I bet the Insta'hot does ground the hubs where the pipes screw in, via the EGC.
I even have the compressed air piping in my garage bonded. My guess was that it would probably be a 20a circuit that "may" energize it but I went with a #8 anyway.

ShortC

If you want to bond every metal item in a building go ahead.

An inspector can not, under the NEC force it to be done.

I give up. This is ridiculous. Wood posts. Now you're really reaching. Good god. PLEASE post some pictures of your work. I have to see all this bonding.

[This message has been edited by Electricmanscott (edited 02-15-2005).]

This is kind of fun to see that not only in the area I work in, but all over confusion is apparent.
In regards to inspections, only the minumum can be enforced. Any additional work that is beyond the code and still compliant is fine.


Bob, I took some pictures of different types of structural metal that I would like to post for discussion of this topic. How do I get them here, or to you so they can be posted?
I have dialup - could I send you a disk with the pics?

Pierre

250.52(A)(2) of the 2005 NEC has been revised to add language to clarify criteria for determining grounding (and bonding?) of the metal frame of a structure or building.

I have a copy of the analysis of the change, but can't scan and post it. Maybe one of the moderators can help?

shortcircuit

Shortcircuit, 250.52(A)(2) has absoulutely nothing to do with what we are discussing here. That tells you the conditions that have to be met to use building steel as a grounding electrode conductor.

electricmanscott...I must admit that my interpretations of bonding of structural steel were out of line with the intent of the NEC. I also DO have a misunderstanding of parts of section 250...but, I bet 6 out of 10 electricians also struggle with understanding grounding. When taking code classes we are taught how to apply the code rules and most of the time not why we have to bond structural steel for instance.

In my 1st post on this issue I said that parts of 250.104(C)are "vague" and I attribute this to the code language.

In my last post I mentioned the change to 250.52(A)(2) language which does bring some clarity to me of the intent of the NEC when applying article 250 to structural metal of a building.

In class I used to sit and just listen. Now I ask questions so as to try to have a better understanding of why we do what we do.

ECN is a valueable resource and I want to thank all who respond to my(sometimes thickheaded) posts.

shortcircuit

ShortC

I agree 250 is a lot to digest, I have learned a lot myself from ECN and other forums.

Bob

They say the only stupid question is the one not asked. I have asked a stupid question or two so I know that is not true. Anyway hopefully everyone who reads this stuff gets something out of it. I know I do. Group hug!

BACK OFF JACK!