# grounding main water



## Cletis (Aug 20, 2010)

sorry, but I must critique. Looks great, but, those sharp bends are really bad for electrons to flow. Creates a weak spot in conductor. You need to make nice good looking sweeps


----------



## Tom45acp (Sep 6, 2011)

Offhand, I don't see a problem. You will need to bond the grounding electrode conductor to both ends of the EMT that it is installed in, usually done with grounding bushings. See 250.64(E)


----------



## Nephi (Mar 20, 2010)

Cletis said:


> sorry, but I must critique. Looks great, but, those sharp bends are really bad for electrons to flow. Creates a weak spot in conductor. You need to make nice good looking sweeps


That was the greatest thing posted on this site to date , I hope to god that was a joke


----------



## Roger123 (Sep 23, 2007)

Yes, it is a violation of 250.121 NEC 2011 cycle.


----------



## Nephi (Mar 20, 2010)

Roger123 said:


> Yes, it is a violation of 250.121 NEC 2011 cycle.


My post was about the Rolex being bent on 90s not about the emt being required to be bonded at both ends


----------



## Roger123 (Sep 23, 2007)

Nephi said:


> My post was about the Rolex being bent on 90s not about the emt being required to be bonded at both ends


OK, I responded to the OP's question, not your post.


----------



## oldtimer (Jun 10, 2010)

Nephi said:


> My post was about the Rolex being bent on 90s not about the emt being required to be bonded at both ends


 


Rolex ?????? :001_huh:


----------



## Shockdoc (Mar 4, 2010)

I've done that before however I installed a pull box prior to the panel to let the WM GEC exit . In that box I tapped a #8 EGC for the sub panel. Back in 02' it was code compliant, I'm not sure if still is today.


----------



## bobelectric (Feb 24, 2007)

Cletis said:


> sorry, but I must critique. Looks great, but, those sharp bends are really bad for electrons to flow. Creates a weak spot in conductor. You need to make nice good looking sweeps


 The IEEE green book says to run grounding conductors with loose sweeps,not the nice sharp 90° that everyone likes to do.


----------



## chicken steve (Mar 22, 2011)

makes sense , lightning does take sharp turns....~CS~


----------



## don_resqcapt19 (Jul 18, 2010)

Roger123 said:


> Yes, it is a violation of 250.121 NEC 2011 cycle.


I don't see anything in the original post that would lead to a violation of that section.


----------



## frenchelectrican (Mar 15, 2007)

French Connection.,

Pour autant que je sais que je n'ai pas vu de voilations dans le panneau secondaire du tout.


(As far I know I did not see any voilations in the subpanel at all.)

Merci,
Marc


----------



## Elephante (Nov 16, 2011)

I think it violates 250.64(E). First sentence.


----------

