ECN Electrical Forum - Discussion Forums for Electricians, Inspectors and Related Professionals
ECN Shout Chat
Top Posters(30 Days)
Potseal 11
Recent Posts
600 KW 120/208 3 Phase Y protection
by Yooperup. 07/21/17 09:27 AM
1913 American Electrician's Handbook
by gfretwell. 07/20/17 01:08 PM
Green House wiring
by ghost307. 07/20/17 09:10 AM
Permit Snafus...AHJs and Contractors Jump in
by HotLine1. 07/18/17 08:06 PM
New in the Gallery:
SE cable question
Popular Topics(Views)
239,193 Are you busy
174,588 Re: Forum
167,018 Need opinion
Who's Online Now
2 registered members (cableguy619, NORCAL), 39 guests, and 7 spiders.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Rate This Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2
#84815 - 05/07/03 01:20 PM Bonding Around Reducing Washers  
dana1028  Offline
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 163
San Carlos, CA
Don - I thought I'd throw this at you since you are a wealth of information about the minute details of the code.

In the Mike Holt forum it was stated: "Also bonding is required around reducing washers if the metal raceway is used as an EGC per 250.118".......which led to "Reducing washers to not allow the low impedance path as required in 250.4(A)(3)."

My question: Where is the documentation, code recital, UL or other Standard that supports such a claim?

I have read in Mike Holt's 'Ground & Bonding' and in Soares ' Book on Grounding' that "reducing washers are not suitable for bonding and should always be bonded around"

HOWEVER - neither of these books cite or footnote a study, report, document, or standard that reducing washers do not meet a 'low impedance' criteria.

The reason I bring this up is that both of these books usually refer to studies, standards or the code, etc. in supporting such a statement......AND - how would an inspector be able to support such a requirement to the electrician in the field with 'Soares says so in his book'.?

I know some devices/materials are not tested by UL and as such automatically do not satisfy a standard - but I don't know where to look further to satisfy this curiosity I have around this reducing washer issue.

Thank you for any information you may be able to provide on this subject.

2017 / 2014 NEC & Related Books and Study Guides

#84816 - 05/07/03 02:04 PM Re: Bonding Around Reducing Washers  
txsparky  Offline
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 552
Magnolia,.Texas U.S.A.
Are reducing washers listed for grounding ?


#84817 - 05/07/03 02:29 PM Re: Bonding Around Reducing Washers  
dana1028  Offline
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 163
San Carlos, CA
that's the question! I've looked around the UL! Haven't found anything (not like the UL is real easy to find your way around)... looked on the box from the manufacturer, nothing.

Soares shows various tests using different conduit fittings when clearing faults but don't show any tests for reducers.

ultimately I figure this is a 'listing' issue but haven't found anything in UL.

#84818 - 05/07/03 07:48 PM Re: Bonding Around Reducing Washers  
George Corron  Offline
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 717
Lorton, Va USA
Exactly the point, UL does not list them for grounding purposes, never did, at least for a long time. Article 250 supports bonding around all weak points, and that is why they also must be bonded around, which is the 2nd point.

Soares quotes an IEEE testing procedure, and that is acceptable not only for enforcement with USBC standards, but NFPA documents as well. It was not enforced around here for a long time, but did finally catch up with us.

#84819 - 05/07/03 08:20 PM Re: Bonding Around Reducing Washers  
Bjarney  Offline
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 2,527
West-Southern Inner-Northeast ...
Stamped sheet-metal reducing washers would probably be OK for PVC male adapters with locknuts.

#84820 - 05/07/03 08:21 PM Re: Bonding Around Reducing Washers  
harold endean  Offline
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 2,233
Boonton, NJ
It would fall under sec. 110-3(b) of the NEC (1999)

#84821 - 05/08/03 03:35 PM Re: Bonding Around Reducing Washers  
resqcapt19  Offline
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 2,148
I'm not aware of any specific document that says reducing washers are not suitable for grounding, but I'm also not aware of any document that says they are suitable. I'd require bonding based on 250.4(A)(5) and if the contractor doesn't agree, then he can provide me with a document from a NRTL that says they have been tested and found suitable for grounding.


#84822 - 05/09/03 07:16 AM Re: Bonding Around Reducing Washers  
Redsy  Offline
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 2,056
Bucks County PA
Reminded once again that the NEC provides MINIMUM acceptable requirements. Why the hesitancy to install a bushing that will ENSURE electrical continuity, due to it's listing. (See 250.96 (A))
The potential arcing due to a loosely connected grounding path creates a fire and/or electrocution hazard in the event of a fault.
Do it to it. [Linked Image]

[This message has been edited by Redsy (edited 05-09-2003).]

#84823 - 05/09/03 10:32 AM Re: Bonding Around Reducing Washers  
Creighton  Offline
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 59
Hayward, CA
All reducing washers are subjected to a Resistance Test and a Current Test by UL. These tests are in the test standard UL 514B, and also in UL 467. All reducing washers currently Listed by UL have been subjected to these tests. Creighton.

#84824 - 05/09/03 01:15 PM Re: Bonding Around Reducing Washers  
resqcapt19  Offline
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 2,148
Thanks Creighton. How do they insure contact with the enclosure? Is the installer required, by 250.95(A), to remove the enclosure paint before installing the reducing washers? I really can't imagine reducing washers providing the required low impedance fault clearing path, but if the NRTL says they do, I guess we'll have to accept them. If they are not listed to provide contact through the paint, I would require that the paint be removed. I would expect it would be cheaper to install a grounding bushing, than to remove the paint.


Page 1 of 2 1 2

Member Spotlight
Levittown, PA
Posts: 810
Joined: April 2004
Show All Member Profiles 

2017 NEC and Related
2017 NEC
Now Available!

Shout Box
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.6.0
Page Time: 0.015s Queries: 15 (0.003s) Memory: 0.8182 MB (Peak: 0.9932 MB) Zlib enabled. Server Time: 2017-07-22 04:33:43 UTC