# Grounding???



## RePhase277 (Feb 5, 2008)

Personally, I'd jump the rods together with one continuous wire, then land it in the meter socket.


----------



## raider1 (Jan 22, 2007)

Where is the service disconnecting means? 

Chris


----------



## Elephante (Nov 16, 2011)

raider1 said:


> Where is the service disconnecting means?
> 
> Chris


The 2 200a panels are the disc.


----------



## Pete m. (Nov 19, 2011)

Why cant you terminate your GEC's in the 320 amp meter socket and call it a day?

Pete


----------



## HARRY304E (Sep 15, 2010)

Elephante said:


> On a 320a service with 2 200a panels and 2 ground rods installed, can you run a grounding conductor from each panel to one ground rod? Or would you just come off one panel connect to both rods and link bond the two panels together?


From the ground rods to the panel with the main disconnect then bond the sub panel like always.


----------



## BuzzKill (Oct 27, 2008)

raider1 said:


> Where is the service disconnecting means?
> 
> Chris


exactly...that's where they go.


----------



## HARRY304E (Sep 15, 2010)

Pete m. said:


> Why cant you terminate your GEC's in the 320 amp meter socket and call it a day?
> 
> Pete


Why not,you can always keep going the next morning..:laughing:


----------



## Pete m. (Nov 19, 2011)

BuzzKill said:


> exactly...that's where they go.


Why?

*250.24 Grounding Service-Supplied Alternating-Current
Systems.*
*(A) System Grounding Connections.* A premises wiring
system supplied by a grounded ac service shall have a
grounding electrode conductor connected to the grounded
service conductor, at each service, in accordance with
250.24(A)(1) through (A)(5).
*(1) General.* The grounding electrode conductor connection shall be made at any accessible point from the load end
of the service drop or service lateral to and including the
terminal or bus to which the grounded service conductor is
connected at the service disconnecting means.

If it were me I would run one properly sized GEC from the water and a #6 from the rods directly to the meter socket, install my MBJ at the panels and call for inspection.

The code permits multiple GEC's sized for the service disconnect but why do you want to increase your labor by running more wire than the code requires?

Pete


----------



## Elephante (Nov 16, 2011)

I was just curious to hear your guys opinion. I haven't done 320a service in over a year. I think Inphase277 said you should consult your power company hand book to make sure it is allowed in the meter. The code is pretty clear on where to put the grounding conductor.Thanks.


----------



## Pete m. (Nov 19, 2011)

Elephante said:


> I think Inphase277 said you should consult your power company hand book to make sure it is allowed in the meter.


Yes, I think that is good advice. Our POCO wouldn't permit it years ago and there are still alot of electricians around here that dont know it is now permitted.

I was simply giving the "NEC" side of things... sometimes (though not often) the book can work in your favor.

Pete


----------



## Roger123 (Sep 23, 2007)

Pete m. said:


> Yes, I think that is good advice. Our POCO wouldn't permit it years ago and there are still alot of electricians around here that dont know it is now permitted.
> 
> 
> 
> Pete


This POCO sounds like O.E. to me Pete. I work in the Akron/Youngstown Area.


----------



## Pete m. (Nov 19, 2011)

Roger123 said:


> This POCO sounds like O.E. to me Pete. I work in the Akron/Youngstown Area.


DP&L

Pete


----------



## BuzzKill (Oct 27, 2008)

> Why?



If the disco(s) is at the two 200 amp panels, then obviously go there like Harry said.


----------



## RePhase277 (Feb 5, 2008)

BuzzKill said:


> If the disco(s) is at the two 200 amp panels, then obviously go there like Harry said.


To me, that is less than ideal, as some neutral current would flow on the GEC between the two panels. The best place is the meter socket. Hell, you could run it up the building and crimp it to the neutral at the weatherhead, and that might be the very best, but not very convenient.


----------



## Awg-Dawg (Jan 23, 2007)

Pete m. said:


> there are still alot of electricians around here that dont know it is now permitted.


 Thanx for the heads up.

Ive done that once so far since you mentioned it.:thumbsup:


----------



## BuzzKill (Oct 27, 2008)

InPhase277 said:


> To me, that is less than ideal, as some neutral current would flow on the GEC between the two panels. The best place is the meter socket. Hell, you could run it up the building and crimp it to the neutral at the weatherhead, and that might be the very best, but not very convenient.


damn good idea! You'd blow an inspector's mind doing that! plus the poco guy!


----------



## aftershockews (Dec 22, 2012)

Here the GEC connects from the ground rod to the meter can where it is bonded with the grounded conductor, then it is also ran to the first disconnect(s) and bonded there as well. Any deviation would fail an install.


----------



## RePhase277 (Feb 5, 2008)

aftershockews said:


> Here the GEC connects from the ground rod to the meter can where it is bonded with the grounded conductor, then it is also ran to the first disconnect(s) and bonded there as well. Any deviation would fail an install.


I don't believe it. I mean maybe that is how you've been told, but I think I'd check to see if that is a written rule or not. Sounds stupid.


----------



## wendon (Sep 27, 2010)

Up here the POCO's won't allow you to connect the ground rods to the meter or CT. We would connect to one panel, make a loop and connect to both ground rods, and then connect the other end to the second panel.


----------



## aftershockews (Dec 22, 2012)

InPhase277 said:


> I don't believe it. I mean maybe that is how you've been told, but I think I'd check to see if that is a written rule or not. Sounds stupid.


I would rather it "sound stupid" and pass rather than argue and it fail.


----------



## chicken steve (Mar 22, 2011)

InPhase277 said:


> To me, that is less than ideal, as some neutral current would flow on the GEC between the two panels. The best place is the meter socket. Hell, you could run it up the building and crimp it to the neutral at the weatherhead, and that might be the very best, but not very convenient.



A good % of GEC's are unintended noodles, some more obvious that others

a good example i've run into quite often are multiple services within one structure utilizing common electrodes

~CS~


----------



## cuba_pete (Dec 8, 2011)

InPhase277 said:


> ...you could run it up the building and crimp it to the neutral at the weatherhead, and that might be the very best, but not very convenient.


Watch it, someone might be listening and make this a requirement. Of course, you would need another conductor run to the panel, meter, water pipe...just to make it safe.:no:

That would mandate all ET's to be state certified in fall prevention and purchase the safety equipment required to access all of the weatherheads. Oh, then you're doing lineman work...more safety training...:laughing:


----------



## BG1229 (Dec 17, 2012)

Come out of each disconnect to both rods.


----------



## Matt Hermanson (Jul 18, 2009)

About 10 years ago, the NESC (The Utility's Code Book) required that the customer's grounding electrode conductor no longer be terminated inside the meter enclosure as the termination needed to be "accessable" to the customer. The idea being that neither the customer nor the customer's contractor should not have access to the inside of the meter enclosure, only the utility should.

So in this installation, we would loop our #4 (I know a #6 would meet code) bare copper from one panel, to the outside, to the first ground rod, to the second ground rod, back inside, to the second panel.

Now if the meter enclosure had the main disconnect inside of it, then of course we would still run the GEC to that enclosure.

Terminating the GEC in both the meter enclosure and in the main panel if they are different boxes would create a parrallel path with the neutral between those two enclosures and would be a code violation. If you have inspectors in your area that would require this, please let me know so that I might correct them. It is possible that there has been some misunderstanding.


----------



## Fibes (Feb 18, 2010)

Matt Hermanson said:


> About 10 years ago, the NESC (The Utility's Code Book) required that the customer's grounding electrode conductor no longer be terminated inside the meter enclosure as the termination needed to be "accessable" to the customer. The idea being that neither the customer nor the customer's contractor should not have access to the inside of the meter enclosure, only the utility should.


 Can you provide a article section from the NESC? 
Now, the accessible angle is total BS and shows how ignorant POCOs can be, what about the other conductors that are landed by the EC? Do the other conductors not need to be accessible? 



Matt Hermanson said:


> So in this installation, we would loop our #4 (I know a #6 would meet code) bare copper from one panel, to the outside, to the first ground rod, to the second ground rod, back inside, to the second panel.


 So now we have a big loop for neutral current




Matt Hermanson said:


> Terminating the GEC in both the meter enclosure and in the main panel if they are different boxes would create a parrallel path with the neutral between those two enclosures and would be a code violation.


 No different than using a metallic nipple between the two.



Matt Hermanson said:


> If you have inspectors in your area that would require this, please let me know so that I might correct them. It is possible that there has been some misunderstanding.


Please cite the article section in violation that you are going to get straightened out.

The meter is the absolute best place to land the GEC, generaly speaking this would keep surges and lightning strikes out side the structure.


----------



## Matt Hermanson (Jul 18, 2009)

The utility is always right. If you don't believe me, just ask them.


----------



## parnellelectric (Dec 23, 2011)

It would be nice to clear this one up. We go to the meter, then we chase in pvc. Alway found this a little odd since if there was a ground fault it would have to go down the grounded conductor to get to the GEC. Please someone with vast knowledge clear this up!


----------



## Fibes (Feb 18, 2010)

parnellelectric said:


> It would be nice to clear this one up. We go to the meter, then we chase in pvc. Alway found this a little odd since if there was a ground fault it would have to go down the grounded conductor to get to the GEC. Please someone with vast knowledge clear this up!


The Grounding Electrode System is not there for clearing "Ground Faults" nor is the GEC there to direct a fault to ground (earth) since the earth will do very little for clearing a fault. 

It is there for;



> *250.4 General Requirements for Grounding and Bonding.*
> The following general requirements identify what grounding and bonding of electrical systems are required to accomplish. The prescriptive methods contained in Article 250 shall be followed to comply with the performance requirements of this section.
> 
> (A) Grounded Systems.
> ...


A fault must go back to the supply source to clear or open an OCPD


----------



## sbrn33 (Mar 15, 2007)

So pete, could I run the wire from the ground rod to the meter and the wire from the water pipe to the panel?


----------



## Matt Hermanson (Jul 18, 2009)

@ Fibes
No I cannot provide the article number from the NESC.

Yes and no for the neutral loop. Yes, the GEC loop could be a parallel path, but the resistance of the 3/0 Cu or 4/0 Al from the panel to the meter socket will be much less than the loop of #6 or #4 PLUS the 3/0 Cu or 4/0 Al from the second panel. It would seem that if each panel had the same neutral current (not likely) that you should have no current flow on the GEC. But you wouldn’t have a “loop” per say, just a parallel path with a much higher resistance.

You are correct that the metallic raceway used between a meter enclosure and a main service panel would be a parallel neutral path, but once again it would be a high resistance path and thus carry far less current.

Please show me where on earth we are required to install both a neutral and an EGC between the meter enclosure and the main service disconnect enclosure. If we’ve got some yahoo thinking we need to make electricians install both AND bond the neutral to ground in both enclosures, we have an issue.

You are correct that the grounding electrode system(s) are not for clearing ground faults. One of the neutral’s many jobs is to take the offending current back to the source to cause the OCPD to open.

And yes, I agree that landing the GEC’s in the meter enclosure is a good idea. I also think that Utilities work extra hard in trying convincing everyone that they are the only ones that know anything and we’ll all darn lucky that they’re around or the electricians would fire everyone. I think they think it helps to justify rate increases without too many questions. Since they can’t dazzle us with their brilliance, they work extra hard to baffle us with their b*******.

@SBRN33:
Yes you “can” but you may not want to do that. I have had situations where the only place you can install the rods is on the other side of the structure near the water main’s entrance. Sometimes not. You would not be allowed to use any reservable splice or tap in the installation.


----------



## Fibes (Feb 18, 2010)

Matt Hermanson said:


> @ Fibes





Matt Hermanson said:


> No I cannot provide the article number from the NESC.


 That's because it's not there




Matt Hermanson said:


> Yes and no for the neutral loop. Yes, the GEC loop could be a parallel path, but the resistance of the 3/0 Cu or 4/0 Al from the panel to the meter socket will be much less than the loop of #6 or #4 PLUS the 3/0 Cu or 4/0 Al from the second panel. It would seem that if each panel had the same neutral current (not likely) that you should have no current flow on the GEC. But you wouldn’t have a “loop” per say, just a parallel path with a much higher resistance.


 No, you would have a loop and remember current takes all paths, not just the path of the lowest impedance














Matt Hermanson said:


> You are correct that the metallic raceway used between a meter enclosure and a main service panel would be a parallel neutral path, but once again it would be a high resistance path and thus carry far less current.


 No, a metallic nipple will probably have a lower impedance than the wire conductor




Matt Hermanson said:


> Please show me where on earth we are required to install both a neutral and an EGC between the meter enclosure and the main service disconnect enclosure. If we’ve got some yahoo thinking we need to make electricians install both AND bond the neutral to ground in both enclosures, we have an issue.


Where did you get the idea that I said anything about an EGC ahead of the Service Equipment?

In the illustration above if a single GEC was run from the meter enclosure to the GES there would be no loop or paralleling


----------



## aftershockews (Dec 22, 2012)

parnellelectric said:


> It would be nice to clear this one up. We go to the meter, then we chase in pvc. Alway found this a little odd since if there was a ground fault it would have to go down the grounded conductor to get to the GEC. Please someone with vast knowledge clear this up!


Crude illustration but this is how we are required to do it.
Edit: They are also bonded in the main panel as well.


----------



## gnuuser (Jan 13, 2013)

on a service that large for residential I would run a continuous ground from the main breaker panel/ disconnect to 2 separate rods placed about 15 to 20 feet apart, and run a ground from the meter head to one of the rods.
any sub panels would be bonded to the main panel
(codes vary from one region to another but this method covers all of them)
rods drove in to full length.

a neat tool for driving these rods is a lite demolition jackhammer.
it will rapidly drive the rods their full length regardless of how dense the ground is:thumbup:


----------



## parnellelectric (Dec 23, 2011)

We are all over the place on this. Thanks for all the info.........


----------



## BG1229 (Dec 17, 2012)

@FibesHow could the resistance of a metal connector be lower than copper?


----------



## gnuuser (Jan 13, 2013)

BG1229 said:


> @FibesHow could the resistance of a metal connector be lower than copper?


many different metals have different condutive properties.
relevant info can be found in ugly's reference books. as well as a few others.
but here is a quick google result on it
http://www.google.com/search?q=cond...gBMXx0gGhlIGgBw&ved=0CDUQsAQ&biw=1242&bih=609


----------



## sbrn33 (Mar 15, 2007)

aftershockews said:


> Crude illustration but this is how we are required to do it.
> Edit: They are also bonded in the main panel as well.


Would this not cause netruel current to flow on the ground? Would this not be a bad thing?


----------



## Matt Hermanson (Jul 18, 2009)

aftershockews said:


> Crude illustration but this is how we are required to do it.
> Edit: They are also bonded in the main panel as well.


Looks like you've got morons for inspectors. Yes, you can tell them I said that as long as you show them your picture.


----------



## Matt Hermanson (Jul 18, 2009)

sbrn33 said:


> Would this not cause netruel current to flow on the ground? Would this not be a bad thing?


Yes, it would.
Yes, it is a bad thing.
Yes, it is a code violation.


----------



## Matt Hermanson (Jul 18, 2009)

gnuuser said:


> many different metals have different condutive properties.
> relevant info can be found in ugly's reference books. as well as a few others.
> but here is a quick google result on it
> http://www.google.com/search?q=cond...gBMXx0gGhlIGgBw&ved=0CDUQsAQ&biw=1242&bih=609


 
Metallic raceways usually can handle more fault current than the copper wire. BUT the the copper wire will have a lower resistance. If that were not true, we would not worry about using a copper EGC in addition the the metallic raceway for power quality.


----------



## BG1229 (Dec 17, 2012)

Exactly my point Matt. I just passed my inspection installing the GEC just as shown in your pic. It's the only way I have ever done it on a 400 amp service with 2 disconnects.


----------



## gnuuser (Jan 13, 2013)

true but i have seen a few raceways bolted together without lock washers 
leaving a poor bond between sections (measurable with ohmmeter)
ive gotten in the habit of keeping a lot of lockwashers on hand to correct that very thing


----------



## BBQ (Nov 16, 2010)

gnuuser said:


> true but i have seen a few raceways bolted together without lock washers
> leaving a poor bond between sections (measurable with ohmmeter)
> ive gotten in the habit of keeping a lot of lockwashers on hand to correct that very thing


The lock washers do absolutely nothing except give you a warm fuzzy feeling.


----------



## A Little Short (Nov 11, 2010)

aftershockews said:


> Crude illustration but this is how we are required to do it.
> Edit: They are also bonded in the main panel as well.


That's not how we do it in Mid Tn.

We used to sleeve an GEC from the rod up to the weatherhead where it gets bonded to the neutral

Now we just run from the rod or CEE to the meter socket.
No GEC from the meter to the panel because it's already bonded to the neutral in the meter.

My personal house has the GEC sleeved up to the weatherhead and bonded to the neutral. Then in the house at the panel, a bond is run to the water pipe.

I think they are telling you wrong down in West Tn.
Or you're hearing it wrong.


----------



## Roger (Jul 7, 2007)

Matt Hermanson said:


> Metallic raceways usually can handle more fault current than the copper wire. BUT the the copper wire will have a lower resistance. If that were not true, we would not worry about using a copper EGC in addition the the metallic raceway for power quality.


That makes no sense at all. 

Roger


----------



## BG1229 (Dec 17, 2012)

Simply copper is more conductive than metal raceways, cabinets, lock washers, or any other part of an electrical system. Unless its made of silver.


----------



## Roger (Jul 7, 2007)

BG1229 said:


> Simply copper is more conductive than metal raceways, cabinets, lock washers, or any other part of an electrical system. Unless its made of silver.


The material is not the question, look at this statement.



> Originally Posted by *Matt Hermanson*
> _Metallic raceways usually can handle more fault current than the copper wire. BUT the the copper wire will have a lower resistance._


In order to handle a larger fault the impedance must be lower.


Now, you may want to spend some time at this website for some in depth information on metallic raceway properties


Roger


----------

