hillbilly1
Senior Member
- Location
- North Georgia mountains
- Occupation
- Owner/electrical contractor
Our buyer keeps sending 10’ rods, and I keep rejecting them at the supply house! LOL!
Ground rods in sidewalk
- Thread starter Njonescontracting
- Start date
- Status
Njonescontracting
Member
- Location
- Saint Louis, MO
- Occupation
- Electrical Contractor
One AHJ by me requires 10' the others all 8'....some consider water line bonded as part of GEC. Therefore require only one additional rod. Others don't. Real pain in the ass.
However, I was thinking just using 10' rods. However keeping it close to the house could be worse to drive due to over pour on both sidewalk and foundation.
Sent from my SM-G981U using Tapatalk
James L
Senior Member
- Location
- Kansas Cty, Mo, USA
- Occupation
- Electrician
Sounds like what we go through in K.C.
It's impossible to keep up with what they all want.
Njonescontracting
Member
- Location
- Saint Louis, MO
- Occupation
- Electrical Contractor
I'm in St. Louis. So yes. I would assume it is the same..
One thought... Can I go thru the basement floor? May not be much help but atleast it's not a trip Hazzard?
Sent from my SM-G981U using Tapatalk
- Location
- Chapel Hill, NC
- Occupation
- Retired Electrical Contractor
Where does the authority having jurisdiction get off requiring 10' rods? Also how would he know if they are 10' or 8' or even 4' for that matter.
Another possibility is to drive the rod in the basement area if it is unfinished. I don't believe there is any code against that.
- Location
- Chapel Hill, NC
- Occupation
- Retired Electrical Contractor
I just answered your post before you ask the question. LOL
Njonescontracting
Member
- Location
- Saint Louis, MO
- Occupation
- Electrical Contractor
Just saw that too. Sorry. I may just do that. I have wondered about the rod length. Seeing as if you mushroom the end it would need to be cut anyway. It's just an honor system if you ask me. I would be curious how many contractors buy a rod too short and say it is good and/or cut it and install to save $$.
Sent from my SM-G981U using Tapatalk
- Location
- Illinois
- Occupation
- retired electrician
James L
Senior Member
- Location
- Kansas Cty, Mo, USA
- Occupation
- Electrician
That's subjective.
Every water line ground clamp could be considered exposed to physical damage, if simply being uncovered is enough.
LarryFine
Master Electrician Electric Contractor Richmond VA
- Location
- Henrico County, VA
- Occupation
- Electrical Contractor
Absolutely. I've done it. How about horizontally through the basement wall?
synchro
Senior Member
- Location
- Chicago, IL
- Occupation
- EE
If you drive the rod through the basement floor, it might be wise to seal around the rod in case there could be water leaks in a storm.
Also if you drive it very close to the house then you could possibly hit a drain tile. It might be hard for anyone to prove one way or another if this has happened, but I think it's worth considering when driving a rod.
mopowr steve
Senior Member
- Location
- NW Ohio
- Occupation
- Electrical contractor
I’ve actually done that once. It passed.
hillbilly1
Senior Member
- Location
- North Georgia mountains
- Occupation
- Owner/electrical contractor
As long as it’s in permanent moisture, should be fine, though If the inspector is a stickler, I believe the wording is “driven vertically” unless solid rock is encountered, or something along those lines.
LarryFine
Master Electrician Electric Contractor Richmond VA
- Location
- Henrico County, VA
- Occupation
- Electrical Contractor
Well, up to 45 degrees from vertical is allowed.
hillbilly1
Senior Member
- Location
- North Georgia mountains
- Occupation
- Owner/electrical contractor
That’s why I put in “unless” LOL!Well, up to 45 degrees from vertical is allowed.
- Location
- Illinois
- Occupation
- retired electrician
250.53(A) is specific to rod, pipe and plate electrodes. (note that when the code says "pipe" electrode, it is talking about a driven pipe and not about a metal underground water pipe)
- Location
- New Jersey
- Occupation
- Journeyman Electrician
Yup, and for the NEC, protection of the water pipe clamp isn't a concern.
James L
Senior Member
- Location
- Kansas Cty, Mo, USA
- Occupation
- Electrician
250.53(a) is completely irrelevant for making a distinction, because that's not where you find the requirement for protection from physical damage.
250.10 is what pertains to protection from physical damage. And that references a whole host of grounding and bonding attachments.
If an open clamp on a water line is not considered to be subject to physical damage, then neither would a ground rod clamp
- Location
- Illinois
- Occupation
- retired electrician
The reference in 250.53(A)(4) makes compliance with 250.10 MANDATORY for ground rods.
The rule says that the top of the rod must be flush with grade or where it is not flush with grade, you are required to protect it as specified in 210.50.
This language eliminate looking at the "exposed to physical damage" language in 250.10. It clearly requires the exposed rod to be protected by one of the methods in 250.10, even where you do not think it is exposed to physical damage. The language in 250.53(A)(4) is telling you that the end of a rod above grade, is always exposed to physical damage.
Connections to water lines or other grounding electrodes do not enter into this.
James L
Senior Member
- Location
- Kansas Cty, Mo, USA
- Occupation
- Electrician
According to 250.10 every grounding or bonding connection is required to be protected from damage - even exposed water line grounds. But they apparently aren't in any danger
That's why I say that merely being exposed is not enough to say it's in danger of being damaged. And I've never seen an AHJ who thought it's a danger to have a ground rod acorn above dirt, concrete, asphalt, or anything else
- Status