|
|
|
|
New tool
by SMOKEYBOB - 02/15/21 04:59 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 registered members (Bill Addiss),
23
guests, and 20
spiders. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
 Accessibility of GEC connection
#100677
12/10/06 11:42 AM
|
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 399
OP
Member
|
We are still learning about concrete encased electrodes in the Mid-West.
On metal frame buildings the #4 Cu or a piece of rebar is brought up and connected to the steel. Then they want to sheet rock the area for an office.
Does the connection to the steel have to be accessible ? Any suggestions ?
Alan--
Alan--
If it was easy, anyone could do it.
|
|
|
 Re: Accessibility of GEC connection
#100678
12/10/06 12:11 PM
|
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 272
Member
|
Hey Alan, have you looked at 250.68 (A)? Maybe you could bond the steel at another location so that it would'nt be covered up behind the sheetrock?
Luke Clarke
Electrical Planner for TVA.
|
|
|
|
Re: Accessibility of GEC connection
#100679
12/10/06 12:14 PM
|
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 751
Member
|
In the past, we have placed two-gang tile rings in strategic places (similiar to telephone rough-in) to provide access to GEC connections to the GE on GWB (sheetrocked) walls. Finish work requires a two gang blank cover.
Earl
|
|
|
|
Re: Accessibility of GEC connection
#100680
12/10/06 12:42 PM
|
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 4,287
Member
|
We do the same out here in California (Uferland) as Earlydean suggests.
In residential work, the electrode is normally brought up in an outside wall as close to the service location as is possible.
Mounting the ring facing out with a weatherproof plate rather than in through the drywall can save some headaches when nobody "wants that cover on my beautiful drywall" or goes and installs closed-back cabinetry in front of it.
[This message has been edited by electure (edited 12-10-2006).]
|
|
|
|
Re: Accessibility of GEC connection
#100681
12/10/06 02:05 PM
|
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 9,568
Member
|
|
Greg Fretwell
|
|
|
|
Re: Accessibility of GEC connection
#100682
12/10/06 08:48 PM
|
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 53
Member
|
Here in New Mexico we have to leave the connection available, I do so with a two gang p-ring and blank cover.
As of a couple months ago I also have to supplement the ufer with a rod, does that make any sense?
|
|
|
|
Re: Accessibility of GEC connection
#100683
12/11/06 01:18 AM
|
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 717
Member
|
Highground, that would only "make sense" if the ground rod was allready there. Cause if it was allready there, then you would have to include it.
|
|
|
|
Re: Accessibility of GEC connection
#100684
12/11/06 01:46 AM
|
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 9,568
Member
|
The only advantage I see to adding a rod is it gives the Telco and CableCo a place to bond their Dmark.
Greg Fretwell
|
|
|
 Re: Accessibility of GEC connection
#100685
12/12/06 11:42 AM
|
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 399
OP
Member
|
Thanks everyone.
250.68(A) is what brought this up.
The plaster rings seem to be the direction to go to.
As an aside, some electricians around here are driving the ground rods inside the basement because of the copper thieves.
Alan--
Alan--
If it was easy, anyone could do it.
|
|
|
|
Re: Accessibility of GEC connection
#100686
12/12/06 02:07 PM
|
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 345
Member
|
Alan
You must have a much harder working class of thieves there than I have ever met. The idea that such a low life would do the work needed to get the rod back out of the earth is one I had never considered. Or do they just steal the GEC and leave the rod alone.
--
Tom Horne
[This message has been edited by tdhorne (edited 12-12-2006).]
Tom Horne
"This alternating current stuff is just a fad. It is much too dangerous for general use" Thomas Alva Edison
|
|
|
|
|
