The Electrical Contractor Network

ECN Electrical Forum
Discussion Forums for Electricians, Inspectors and Related Professionals

Books, Tools and Test Equipment for Electrical and Construction Trades

Register Now!

Register Now!

We want your input!

Featured:
   

2017 NEC and Related
2017 NEC
Now Available!

   
Recent Posts
Sprinklered equipment 26-008
by bigpapa
Yesterday at 04:24 PM
On Delay Relay with Auto Reset
by Potseal
12/01/16 09:59 AM
Wow, that was close!
by jraef
11/28/16 07:06 PM
Earthquake in New Zeeland
by RODALCO
11/27/16 11:25 PM
Calling all Non-US members!! (Non-US only)
by Tjia1981
11/27/16 06:33 AM
New in the Gallery:
12.5A through 0.75mm flex (just out of curiosity)
Shout Box

Top Posters (30 Days)
gfretwell 15
HotLine1 10
Trumpy 8
Texas_Ranger 8
sparkyinak 7
Who's Online
0 registered (), 215 Guests and 4 Spiders online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Page 1 of 2 1 2 >
Topic Options
Rate This Topic
#95458 - 09/15/05 06:21 AM Service Conduit Bonding
OVES Offline
Junior Member

Registered: 09/15/05
Posts: 1
Loc: Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
Recently, an inspector wanted to turn us down for incorrectly bonding metal service conduits. We ran a 3/0 bare copper through the grounding bushing lugs of 8 conduits, then landed the ground wire. Inspector said that 250.102(C) requires each conduit to be bonded independently, not daisy-chained. If they are to be daisy-chined, then the ground wire must be increased to equal the sum of all of the conduits. Sounds crazy and I can't get that out of the text. Has anyone else run into an inspector with similar views?

Top
2014 / 2011 NEC & Related Books and Study Guides
#95459 - 09/15/05 06:37 AM Re: Service Conduit Bonding
iwire Offline
Moderator

Registered: 01/05/03
Posts: 4343
Loc: North Attleboro, MA USA
The inspector knows their stuff.

Part of 250.102(C)
 Quote:
Where the service-entrance conductors are paralleled in two or more raceways or cables, the equipment bonding jumper, where routed with the raceways or cables, shall be run in parallel. The size of the bonding jumper for each raceway or cable shall be based on the size of the service-entrance conductors in each raceway or cable.


It makes sense, if a ground fault happens in one raceway the fault current will be coming at the fault through both directions.
_________________________
Bob Badger
Construction & Maintenance Electrician
Massachusetts

Top
#95460 - 09/15/05 08:41 AM Re: Service Conduit Bonding
eprice Offline
Member

Registered: 08/07/03
Posts: 64
Loc: North Logan, Utah, USA
No, I don't see it that way. From the opening post, It seems to me that the bonding jumper in question is not being routed "with" the conduits, but merely "to" the conduits. The fault path that runs "with" the conduits is the conduit itself. The largest bonding jumper ever required by table 250.66 is 3/0. In my opinion, if individual bonding jumpers were to be run to each conduit, and if the equivalent conductor size in each conduit were 1100 kcmil or less, then there might be an argument for using the section of code that iwire quoted to downsize those jumpers to something less than 3/0.

Notice the significant differance in sizing rules for parallel conduits on the line side of the disconnect as opposed to section 250.122(F)(1) for conductors on the load side of the disconnect.

Top
#95461 - 09/15/05 09:22 AM Re: Service Conduit Bonding
iwire Offline
Moderator

Registered: 01/05/03
Posts: 4343
Loc: North Attleboro, MA USA
I will give it another shot.

 Quote:
250.102(C) Size — Equipment Bonding Jumper on Supply Side of Service. The bonding jumper shall not be smaller than the sizes shown in Table 250.66 for grounding electrode conductors. Where the service-entrance phase conductors are larger than 1100 kcmil copper or 1750 kcmil aluminum, the bonding jumper shall have an area not less than 12½ percent of the area of the largest phase conductor except that, where the phase conductors and the bonding jumper are of different materials (copper or aluminum), the minimum size of the bonding jumper shall be based on the assumed use of phase conductors of the same material as the bonding jumper and with an ampacity equivalent to that of the installed phase conductors. Where the service-entrance conductors are paralleled in two or more raceways or cables, the equipment bonding jumper, where routed with the raceways or cables, shall be run in parallel. The size of the bonding jumper for each raceway or cable shall be based on the size of the service-entrance conductors in each raceway or cable.

The bonding jumper for a grounding electrode conductor raceway or cable armor as covered in 250.64(E) shall be the same size or larger than the required enclosed grounding electrode conductor.


This is how I see it, if you run separated bonding conductors for 'each raceway' each of those conductors will be sized based on just that one raceway.

 Quote:
The size of the bonding jumper for each raceway or cable shall be based on the size of the service-entrance conductors in each raceway or cable.


However if you daisy chain them nothing changes the bonding jump still has to be based on the size of the service-entrance conductors in each raceway or cable.

Not separately all of them, with them daisy chained you will have count all eight sets of conductors add them up and use that figure with 250.66

Bob
_________________________
Bob Badger
Construction & Maintenance Electrician
Massachusetts

Top
#95462 - 09/15/05 09:38 AM Re: Service Conduit Bonding
jes Offline
Member

Registered: 07/12/02
Posts: 103
Loc: CT
Latest edition of Soares agrees w/iwire.
So do I.

Top
#95463 - 09/15/05 09:54 AM Re: Service Conduit Bonding
eprice Offline
Member

Registered: 08/07/03
Posts: 64
Loc: North Logan, Utah, USA
Ok, now that I understand better what iwire is saying, I agree as well. That is why I said that if seperate bonding jumpers were run to each conduit, there may be an argument for downsizing the jumper to something less than 3/0. I guess we need to know what size phase conductors are in each conduit.

Top
#95464 - 09/15/05 10:06 AM Re: Service Conduit Bonding
Ryan_J Offline
Moderator

Registered: 08/19/03
Posts: 1355
Loc: West Jordan, Utah, USA
Daisy chaining on the supply side is not even an option. Compare carefully the language of 250.102(C) and 250.102(D) (second paragraph). You will see that (C) gives no such allowance.
_________________________
Ryan Jackson,
Salt Lake City

Top
#95465 - 09/15/05 10:16 AM Re: Service Conduit Bonding
iwire Offline
Moderator

Registered: 01/05/03
Posts: 4343
Loc: North Attleboro, MA USA
Ryan I respectfully disagree, I do see the difference in language but I do not see that anything in 250.102(C) prohibits daisy changing.

Bob
_________________________
Bob Badger
Construction & Maintenance Electrician
Massachusetts

Top
#95466 - 09/15/05 10:20 AM Re: Service Conduit Bonding
jw electric Offline
Member

Registered: 09/08/05
Posts: 108
Loc: Asheboro, NC
 Quote:
Originally posted by jes Latest edition of Soares agrees w/iwire.
So do I.


I concur also.
_________________________
Mike

Top
#95467 - 09/15/05 10:25 AM Re: Service Conduit Bonding
Ryan_J Offline
Moderator

Registered: 08/19/03
Posts: 1355
Loc: West Jordan, Utah, USA
How is the bonding jumper installed in parrallel when there is only one?
_________________________
Ryan Jackson,
Salt Lake City

Top
Page 1 of 2 1 2 >



ECN Electrical Forums - sponsored by Electrical Contractor Network - Electrical and Code Related Discussion for Electrical Contractors, Electricians, Inspectors, Instructors, Engineers and other related Professionals