Antenna mast grounding question - AVS Forum

AVS Forum > HDTV > HDTV Technical > Antenna mast grounding question

HDTV Technical

Keizer's Avatar Keizer
06:22 PM Liked: 11
post #1 of 39
06-15-2013 | Posts: 323
Joined: Dec 2009
My antenna is mounted on my detached garage roof, and the mast comes down through the roof and into the attic where it is braced up really well. I have a 200 amp main service panel out front, then sub panels in my pump house, garage, and home. I have two ground rods at the house, two at the garage, two at the 200 amp service, and two more at the pump house. These are all basically bonded together through the 200 amp service panel. Can I just go up in the garage attic and run a 10 gauge copper wire off the mast, and connect it to the ground bar in the garage sub panel?

What would be the difference between doing this, and continuing outside and actually connecting it to the ground rods outside the garage? The heavy gauge copper wire that connects the two garage ground rods is staring me right in the face in the garage sub panel. So why not just connect it to the same ground bar in the sub panel?
AntAltMike's Avatar AntAltMike
06:28 PM Liked: 29
post #2 of 39
06-15-2013 | Posts: 3,598
Joined: Nov 2001
Quote:
Originally Posted by Keizer View Post

...Can I just go up in the garage attic and run a 10 gauge copper wire off the mast, and connect it to the ground bar in the garage sub panel?

No.
Quote:
...What would be the difference between doing this, and continuing outside and actually connecting it to the ground rods outside the garage? The heavy gauge copper wire that connects the two garage ground rods is staring me right in the face in the garage sub panel.

Electrically. there would be no difference
Quote:
So why not just connect it to the same ground bar in the sub panel?

Because doing so is not permitted by the code.

FWIW, I saw a version of the proposed 2014 code, and as I read it, masts will no longer have to be grounded if the antenna is less than three feet wide, which would exempt nearly all modern Yagi and Log periodic combo antennas that are tuned to channels 7 and above.
holl_ands's Avatar holl_ands
07:41 PM Liked: 65
post #3 of 39
06-15-2013 | Posts: 3,733
Joined: Jun 2004
Ground Wires should be run OUTSIDE where they will cause the least amount of damage as they vaporize when you get a direct lightning hit.

There are very few Hi-VHF Antennas with dimensions under 3-ft, such as a Folded Dipole, Circular Loop and the Antennas-Direct C5. The small RCA ANT-751 makes it at 30.5-in Long x 35.3-in Wide, but ONLY if you don't count (or chopped off) the rear mounting stub....but even then it still wouldn't fit within a 3-ft diameter sphere or circular hoop, depending on how they (with assistance from A-D????) write the rules:
http://www.toptenreviews.com/i/rev/prod/ce/52987-rca-ant751-box.jpg

Maybe you meant Ch14 and above (UHF only).
Keizer's Avatar Keizer
07:55 PM Liked: 11
post #4 of 39
06-15-2013 | Posts: 323
Joined: Dec 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by AntAltMike View Post



FWIW, I saw a version of the proposed 2014 code, and as I read it, masts will no longer have to be grounded if the antenna is less than three feet wide, which would exempt nearly all modern Yagi and Log periodic combo antennas that are tuned to channels 7 and above.

So the Winegard HD 7698P would be exempt?
Keizer's Avatar Keizer
07:57 PM Liked: 11
post #5 of 39
06-15-2013 | Posts: 323
Joined: Dec 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by AntAltMike View Post


Electrically. there would be no difference

That's what I thought. It's nothing more than a glorified splice directly into the ground rods.
AntAltMike's Avatar AntAltMike
08:46 PM Liked: 29
post #6 of 39
06-15-2013 | Posts: 3,598
Joined: Nov 2001
HD7694D width 35.5"

http://www.winegarddirect.com/viewitem.asp?p=hd7694p&d=Winegard-HD-7694P-High-Definition-VHFUHF-HD769-Series-TV-Antenna-(HD7694P)&post=


HD7695D width 36"

http://www.solidsignal.com/pview.asp?p=hd7695p&d=winegard-hd-7695p-high-definition-vhf%2Fuhf-hd769-series-tv-antenna-(hd7695p)


HD7696D width 36"

http://www.winegard.com/kbase/upload/hd7696p.pdf


I bet that if you trimmed down the oddball long directors on the HD7697 and HD7698, you wouldn't notice the difference
AntAltMike's Avatar AntAltMike
08:58 PM Liked: 29
post #7 of 39
06-15-2013 | Posts: 3,598
Joined: Nov 2001
2014 NEC draft:

http://www.nfpa.org/Assets/files/AboutTheCodes/70/70-A2013-ROPDraft.pdf

I haven't tried to manipulate or store it. is there any copy, edit, or storage protection incorporated into it?
holl_ands's Avatar holl_ands
11:15 PM Liked: 65
post #8 of 39
06-15-2013 | Posts: 3,733
Joined: Jun 2004
There is a paragraph (sec 820.3) referencing different requirements sections for antennas larger and less than 1 meter (39.37 inches) in diameter. However the requirement to ground antenna masts is found in the earlier sec 810, which MAY OR MAY NOT apply to ALL size OTA Antennas....it's AMBIGUOUS. BTW: I also looked at EVERY occurrence of "antenna" and "mast" throughout the document. Writing, reviewing and testing conformance to Technical Specifications used to be a big part of my job as a Comm Engineer, so I developed an eye for spotting and avoiding ambiguities.

From 2014 NEC Draft:

Article 810 Radio and Television Equipment:

Sec 810.1 SCOPE: ".....This article covers antennas such as wire-strung type, multi-element, vertical rod, flat, or PARABOLIC exceeding 1 m (39.37 in.) in diameter or across and also covers the wiring and cabling that connects them to equipment....." [AMBIGUOUS....it could exclude ALL Antennas or ONLY PARABOLIC antennas less than 1 m in diameter.]

Sec 810.3 Other Articles: "....For antennas exceeding 1 m (39.37 in.) in diameter or across coaxial cables that connect antennas to equipment shall comply with Article 820. For antennas 1 m (39.37 in.) or less in diameter or across, coaxial cables that connect antennas to equipment shall comply with Article 840....." [Note that this section did NOT limit to PARABOLIC ONLY.]

[So PARABOLIC and maybe ALL outdoor antennas less than 1 meter diameter are EXEMPT from following Sec 810.15 requirements:]

Sec 810.15 "Grounding. Masts and metal structures supporting antennas shall be grounded in accordance with 810.21."

Sec 810.21 "Bonding Conductors and Grounding Electrode Conductors — Receiving Stations. Bonding conductors and grounding electrode conductors shall comply with 810.21(A) through (K)."
"(E) Run in Straight Line. The bonding conductor or grounding electrode conductor for an antenna mast or antenna discharge unit shall be run in as straight a line as practicable."

Sec 820 CATV Systems: The usual ground and bonding requirements for Cable Networks. [Don't be mislead by the term: CATV = Community Antenna TV Network...clearly this does not apply to OTA and SAT Dish systems.]

Sec 840 Premises-Powered Broad-Band Communications Systems: ...."that provide any combination of voice, video, data, and interactive services....such as fibre optic and PARABOLIC antenna systems....includes Premises-Powered CATV wiring network [i.e. interior wiring & equipments]".

840.93 Grounding or Interruption. "Non–current-carrying metallic members of optical fiber cables, communications cables or coaxial cables entering buildings or attaching to buildings shall comply with 840.93(A), (B) or (C), respectively." "(B) Communications Cables. The grounding or interruption of the metallic sheath of communications cable shall comply with 800.93."

800.93 Grounding or Interruption of Metallic Sheath Members of Communications Cables. "Communications cables entering the building or terminating on the outside of the building shall comply with 800.93(A) or (B)." [ONLY discusses grounding of the cable shield....no mention of antennas or antenna masts.]

OTA Antennas and Sat Dishes still have to use a grounding block and associated grounding connection. In Sec 810.1 Scope, it appears that Direct Broadcast Systems (DirecTV, Dishnet, et.al.) were granted an exemption from grounding the actual PARABOLIC (if less than 1 meter diameter)....but this section COULD be (mis?) interpreted to also exempt small OTA antennas (it's AMBIGUOUS), by being EXCLUDED from the subsequent Sec 810.15 & 810.21 requirements to ground the "Masts and metal structures supporting antennas".
Tschmidt's Avatar Tschmidt
01:22 PM Liked: 10
post #9 of 39
06-16-2013 | Posts: 304
Joined: Jul 2009
Interesting discussion of the 2014 NEC, thanks for posting the draft.

I'm surprised any "large chunk of metal" inside or outside is exempt from low impedance bonding/grounding.

A reminder for those playing along at home the NEC specifies minimum requirements. There is nothing preventing you from exceeding them.

To Holl_ands complaint about ambiguities I agree.

"810.18 Clearances — Receiving Stations.
(A) Outside of Buildings. Lead-in conductors attached to buildings shall be installed so that they cannot swing
closer than 600 mm (2 ft) to the conductors of circuits of 250 volts or less between conductors, or 3.0 m (10 ft)
to the conductors of circuits of over 250 volts between conductors, except that in the case of circuits not over
150 volts between conductors, where all conductors involved are supported so as to ensure permanent
separation, the clearance shall be permitted to be reduced but shall not be less than 100 mm (4 in.). The
clearance between lead-in conductors and any conductor forming a part of a lightning protection
system
shall not be less than 1.8 m (6 ft). Underground conductors shall be separated at least 300
mm (12 in.) from conductors of any light or power circuits or Class 1 circuits."

I infer from this section that grounding and bonding conductors do not constitute part of a lightning protection system.

/tom
holl_ands's Avatar holl_ands
01:48 PM Liked: 65
post #10 of 39
06-16-2013 | Posts: 3,733
Joined: Jun 2004
I'm not surprised to see the small Parabolic Satellite dishes being exempt from grounding requirements, after all they are usually mounted on the lower roof eaves, rather than sticking up above the top of the roof (but not always) and are no more of a lightning rod than other metal objects sticking out above the roofline, such as steel rebar reinforced chimneys (your PRIMARY lightning rod), rotating metal fans venting the attic, skylights, heater & hot water smoke vents, plumbing system vent pipe, support masts for Power and CATV entry cables, etc. Obviously an OTA Antenna mounted well above the roofline will attract lightning with much greater efficiency than any of these other objects. Hence it would make a lot more sense to exempt OTA Antennas if their height is so many feet UNDER the highest point on the roof line, rather than simply by it's size.
Keizer's Avatar Keizer
02:35 PM Liked: 11
post #11 of 39
06-16-2013 | Posts: 323
Joined: Dec 2009
Since my antenna is installed on my detached garage, can't I just keep the grounding separate from my home? Can I just pound a few ground rods in the ground next to the garage and attach a 10 gauge copper wire and call it done? Instead of connecting it to the ground rods that are all bonded together through my 200 amp service. It seems like it would be safer for my home if the mast is on it's own separate ground. Why would I want to risk a lighting strike traveling through all the sub panels in my house and out buildings?
AntAltMike's Avatar AntAltMike
03:51 PM Liked: 29
post #12 of 39
06-16-2013 | Posts: 3,598
Joined: Nov 2001
Quote:
Originally Posted by holl_ands View Post

...Don't be mislead by the term: CATV = Cable Antenna TV Network...clearly this does not apply to OTA and SAT Dish systems.]...

I thought the letters stood for Community Antenna Television system. As I recall, under earlier versions of the code, section 810 only explicitly required mast grounding but electrical inspectors commonly construed the coax grounding requirement under 820 to apply to broadcast TV antenna downleads... the English language notwithstanding. We industry professionals used to have a lot of serious discussions about grounding a decade or so, but most of us stopped participating in grounding threads, and I personally stopped scrutinizing code revisions, because no one is known to have ever been held liable for consequential damages emanating from a failure to ground an installation according to code, whereas I personally know THREE people who have won large state lottery prizes ($500,000 to $4 million... and all three were well to do before they won).

The most important reason - and to me, the only reason - for a satellite installer to ground according to code is so that he will not be penalized by his employer - who has contracted with him to install to code - for failing to do so. Grounding to a copper water pipe more than five feet beyond where that pipe enters the building establishes a reliable ground path even though it doesn't meet code. I can ground that way with impunity because I work for myself.
AntAltMike's Avatar AntAltMike
03:57 PM Liked: 29
post #13 of 39
06-16-2013 | Posts: 3,598
Joined: Nov 2001
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tschmidt View Post

...I'm surprised any "large chunk of metal" inside or outside is exempt from low impedance bonding/grounding. ...

I'm not. We don't ground pots and pans or bicycle frames.
Tschmidt's Avatar Tschmidt
06:21 AM Liked: 10
post #14 of 39
06-17-2013 | Posts: 304
Joined: Jul 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by AntAltMike View Post

I'm not. We don't ground pots and pans or bicycle frames.
That is true but they are also not connected to building power/communication wiring.
Colm's Avatar Colm
08:19 PM Liked: 89
post #15 of 39
06-17-2013 | Posts: 4,652
Joined: Aug 2002
Quote:
Originally Posted by Keizer View Post

Since my antenna is installed on my detached garage, can't I just keep the grounding separate from my home? Can I just pound a few ground rods in the ground next to the garage and attach a 10 gauge copper wire and call it done? Instead of connecting it to the ground rods that are all bonded together through my 200 amp service. It seems like it would be safer for my home if the mast is on it's own separate ground. Why would I want to risk a lighting strike traveling through all the sub panels in my house and out buildings?
No, all the ground rods have to be bonded. If they aren't you are setting up the situation where one part of your electrical system can have a very different ground reference from the rest (the earth is not a very good conductor, electricity doesn't magically disappear into the ground, it tires to get back to where it started from), possibly resulting in fire, shock, or electrocution.
Keizer's Avatar Keizer
10:42 AM Liked: 11
post #16 of 39
06-18-2013 | Posts: 323
Joined: Dec 2009
Okay guys, thanks for all the information, and interesting code facts. From what I gather, this is what I need to do....or at least think I need to do. I will go up in the garage attic and attach a #10 copper wire to the antenna mast. I will run it down the wall and outside so I can attach it to the ground rod outside the garage sub panel? Or, should I pound in an additional ground rod to connect the #10 copper wire to, then use #6 copper wire to bond to the existing ground rod outside the garage sub panel?

I'm not sure if running the #10 copper wire inside the wall would be a fire hazard or not during a lighting strike. My problem is the antenna is at the peak of the garage roof out in the middle. If I keep the ground wire outside, then it's going to be laying on my roof before it gets to a point where I can bring it down to the ground rod/s. A cleaner, more out of sight installation would be to connect to the mast where it is braced up inside the attic, and do like I mentioned above.
Wendell R. Breland's Avatar Wendell R. Breland
01:19 PM Liked: 57
post #17 of 39
06-18-2013 | Posts: 4,408
Joined: Sep 1999
Quote:
Originally Posted by Keizer View Post

A cleaner, more out of sight installation would be to connect to the mast where it is braced up inside the attic, and do like I mentioned above.

How is your coax cable (and rotor wire, if used) run to your antenna? As in, it goes through the roof close to the antenna mast or runs along the roof line on the outside, etc.
Wendell R. Breland's Avatar Wendell R. Breland
01:50 PM Liked: 57
post #18 of 39
06-18-2013 | Posts: 4,408
Joined: Sep 1999
For the OP, the info in the graphic may be of some use. Click on it for a larger view or download the PDF for much better resolution.



PR-9032-0005.pdf 95k .pdf file
Attached: PR-9032-0005.pdf (95.3 KB) 
ProjectSHO89's Avatar ProjectSHO89
02:28 PM Liked: 71
post #19 of 39
06-18-2013 | Posts: 2,679
Joined: Feb 2009
Wow, that one is out of date! Several things jump out.

1) Putting four feet of the mast in the ground doesn't meet code.
2) Code doesn't require that the mast be grounded with #8 wire, it permits a lighter gauge depending on the material of the grounding wire.
Quote:
I'm not sure if running the #10 copper wire inside the wall would be a fire hazard or not during a lighting strike.

The code explicitly permits it to be either inside or outside. Since the NFPA is supposed to be setting minimum standards for fire safety, you'd think they've evaluated the risk before putting something like this into the code. FWIW, actual lightning protection systems also explicitly permit such routing of the wiring of the grounding conductors.


As another user pointed out, the code sets minimum requirements. One is always free to exceed them if they wish.
Keizer's Avatar Keizer
04:25 PM Liked: 11
post #20 of 39
06-18-2013 | Posts: 323
Joined: Dec 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by ProjectSHO89 View Post

Wow, that one is out of date! Several things jump out.


The code explicitly permits it to be either inside or outside. Since the NFPA is supposed to be setting minimum standards for fire safety, you'd think they've evaluated the risk before putting something like this into the code. FWIW, actual lightning protection systems also explicitly permit such routing of the wiring of the grounding conductors.


As another user pointed out, the code sets minimum requirements. One is always free to exceed them if they wish.

That makes sense when you think about the miles of copper ground wire in all the walls of a whole house electrical system.
Keizer's Avatar Keizer
04:46 PM Liked: 11
post #21 of 39
06-18-2013 | Posts: 323
Joined: Dec 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wendell R. Breland View Post

How is your coax cable (and rotor wire, if used) run to your antenna? As in, it goes through the roof close to the antenna mast or runs along the roof line on the outside, etc.

I'm including a pic of my set up on my detached garage roof. Keep in mind I still have to add my antenna mast and antenna. Basically I have a 2.375" tube braced up in the attic that goes through a rubber flashing boot in the roof. Because I have a rotator, and the upper TB-105 Support Bearing, had to add a smaller 1.625" pipe to accommodate the clamps on the rotator and TB-105 Support Bearing. My coaxial cable, and rotator wire goes underground from the house to the garage. Both go into the garage wall, and up into the garage attic. They both are secured to the top cord of one of the trusses where they travel over to the main 2.375" antenna mast. I drilled two different holes in the main 2.375" antenna mast where it is braced up in the attic. I used rubber grommets on the holes and fed the rotator wire through one hole, and the coaxial cable through the other. They then come out of the same type of holes holes up on the roof. In the photo you can see both cables coming out of the large 2.375" pipe, and connecting to my preamp and rotator.

Wendell R. Breland's Avatar Wendell R. Breland
05:48 PM Liked: 57
post #22 of 39
06-18-2013 | Posts: 4,408
Joined: Sep 1999
Quote:
Originally Posted by Keizer View Post

I'm including a pic of my set up on my detached garage roof. Keep in mind I still have to add my antenna mast and antenna.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ProjectSHO89 View Post

The code explicitly permits it to be either inside or outside. Since the NFPA is supposed to be setting minimum standards for fire safety, you'd think they've evaluated the risk before putting something like this into the code. FWIW, actual lightning protection systems also explicitly permit such routing of the wiring of the grounding conductors.

This is not a suggestion but if it were mine then I would run the mast ground wire on the inside and connect it to one of the ground electrodes installed by your power company and/or electrician.

I try to follow code but sometimes one has to wonder about the sensibility of the folks responsible for the NEC. For example, the change in requirement that the ground pin be placed UP when installing duplex outlets is about as dumb as dirt. The supposed reason was it would provide some protection if a metallic object fell on the plug. Dumb, the plug should be fully inserted therefore no pins should be exposed. What is the ratio of 2 pin vs. 3 pin plugs in use?

When I moved to my current address one of the first things I noticed was the whirlpool ground was connected to the copper HOT water pipe and the breaker panel ground was also connected to the copper HOT water pipe. And this house had passed inspection! I moved both grounds to the copper COLD water pipe. Does it really make any difference, most likely not. I grounded my 1M satellite dish, LNB and Sirius antenna coax ground blocks to the copper cold water pipe with one No 10 copper wire. Does it meet NEC code, probably not but it meets mine. I know that there will not be ant static build up and or surges from close by strikes and that is all that really matters to me. Protection from a direct strike can be expensive.


AntAltMike's Avatar AntAltMike
06:35 PM Liked: 29
post #23 of 39
06-18-2013 | Posts: 3,598
Joined: Nov 2001
I know of no company in the antenna business that has included more recklessly written technical tutorial information in their product packages and catalog product descriptions than Winegard over the years. They have written product descriptions that interchangeably substitute dB of signal power for dB of signal level, that refer to unreferenced dB when they should be saying dBmV, that publish maximum input and output ratings for amplification products without specifying the reference channel load or what arbitrary benchmark (sync compression, IMD) that those rating thresholds denote, they take old NEC code references to twin lead static discharge protection and merge them with the more current mandates for coax outer conductor grounding that have superseded them, they have said that 10 gauge aluminum wire can be used for mast grounding when, for the 30 years I have been obligated to observe the NEC, that has never been the case, and like ChannelMaster, when the marketplace began requesting IMD information (which we master antenna system installers never gave a damn about because we generally didn't cascade amplifiers and would therefore never likely have exceeded the IMD thresholds before we had already violated some other threshold), they both conveniently "discovered" that their signal levels that had previously denoted the maximum permissible before exceeding the sync compression limits were exactly the same as those that would develop -40dBc of intermodulation.
AntAltMike's Avatar AntAltMike
06:56 PM Liked: 29
post #24 of 39
06-18-2013 | Posts: 3,598
Joined: Nov 2001
Quote:
Originally Posted by ProjectSHO89 View Post

''''1) Putting four feet of the mast in the ground doesn't meet code.

Back a dozen years ago, there were more "old timers", some now deceased, who insisted that once upon a time, the code did permit earth penetration of the mast to satisfy the mast grounding requirement. When a requirement in the code is changed, there is no official explanation given of why it was changed, but the consensus was that it was determined that mast penetration was deemed unreliable because of the likely effect of oxidation of a ferric mast and its effect on conductivity, as well as the likelihood that an installer would not strip the paint off a mast but insist that he had, leaving compliance unverifiable.
Quote:
2) Code doesn't require that the mast be grounded with #8 wire, it permits a lighter gauge depending on the material of the grounding wire.

Last time I checked, the mast could be grounded with 8 gauge aluminum, 10 gauge copper or 17 gauge copper clad steel, solid or stranded, insulated or uninsulated.
Quote:
The code explicitly permits it to be either inside or outside. Since the NFPA is supposed to be setting minimum standards for fire safety, you'd think they've evaluated the risk before putting something like this into the code. FWIW, actual lightning protection systems also explicitly permit such routing of the wiring of the grounding conductors.

That one rankles a lot of people. You would think that, with the grounding of the outer conductor and the mast, there would at least be a mandated preference to make the connection outside, like "unless it is impractical to do so".
Keizer's Avatar Keizer
10:26 PM Liked: 11
post #25 of 39
06-18-2013 | Posts: 323
Joined: Dec 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wendell R. Breland View Post


This is not a suggestion but if it were mine then I would run the mast ground wire on the inside and connect it to one of the ground electrodes installed by your power company and/or electrician.

Do you mean just run the 10 gauge copper wire from the mast in the attic down to the garage sub-panel and connect it to the ground bar? See, to me that's not code, but with the ground rods just three feet away and connected to the same ground bar.......why not? It's doing the same damn thing as connecting it directly to the ground rods.
ProjectSHO89's Avatar ProjectSHO89
06:47 AM Liked: 71
post #26 of 39
06-19-2013 | Posts: 2,679
Joined: Feb 2009
Attaching the mast ground to the bus bar in the panel won't meet the requirements of the code (not a permissible means of grounding). However, using a listed split bolt/nut and connecting it to the heavy ground wire that goes from that bus bar to the ground rod(s) is an example of one of the many permissible grounding means.
Wendell R. Breland's Avatar Wendell R. Breland
06:51 AM Liked: 57
post #27 of 39
06-19-2013 | Posts: 4,408
Joined: Sep 1999
Quote:
Originally Posted by Keizer View Post

Do you mean just run the 10 gauge copper wire from the mast in the attic down to the garage sub-panel and connect it to the ground bar? See, to me that's not code, but with the ground rods just three feet away and connected to the same ground bar.......why not? It's doing the same damn thing as connecting it directly to the ground rods.
No, I would connect to the ground electrode. ground electrode = ground rod. >>Why not?<<, because IIRC, NEC states there are to be no splices in the ground wire between the mast and ground electrode. I would also use my own ground wire clamp (available at Home Depot, Lowe's, Ace, etc.) to the ground electrode.


AntAltMike's Avatar AntAltMike
07:30 AM Liked: 29
post #28 of 39
06-19-2013 | Posts: 3,598
Joined: Nov 2001
To be functionally "as good as code" without meeting the letter of the code, you do need to drive the 8 foot grounding rod, and from there, you could bond the rod to the system in a non-compliant manner at the sub panel, but if I were doing that, like if I had a busybody customer who was watching me install and kept insisting I had to ground according to code, I'd connect to the subpanel but I wouldn't penetrate the box with my ground wire. I'd either ground to the box itself or clamp it to the raceway, which is the name commonly used to describe the conduit that sources the subpanel, using a clamp like the one shown above.

If you ground it to the box, you are NOT allowed to use a cover screw for attachment of any ground wire, as any attachment terminal must be for that ground wire only. There are doo-dads that can be screwed to the box that cost less than two dollars. One kind is a corner clamp that does not require driling a pilot hole in the box, the other is a tab that you attach to the side of it using a sheet metal screw.

My preference would be to use one of those water pipe clamps to attach to the raceway.

Back when the code was originally written, home electric services has a small box with two big cartridge fuses in it. I think I've seen 50 and 70 amp cartridge fuses, but bigger houses than the ones I've lived in could well have had larger ones. And that box was the service entrance and while it was technically permissible to backbond to that box because it was considered to be a part of the ground electrode system whereas the main fuse box, with its screw-in glass fuses, was not. Then the breaker box that combined the functions of those two boxes became the product that all new homes used, but the code didn't immediately come up with a name for that which distinguished it from a box that just provided the initial, full circuit protection only, and it didn't explicitly say whether a back bond to the ground electrode system could be made to that multifunction box or panel. One would need a shelf full of successive editions of the NEC, issued every three years, to see how their terminology lags the products we deal with in the field.
Keizer's Avatar Keizer
10:26 AM Liked: 11
post #29 of 39
06-19-2013 | Posts: 323
Joined: Dec 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by AntAltMike View Post

To be functionally "as good as code" without meeting the letter of the code, you do need to drive the 8 foot grounding rod,

In my county we have to pound in two 6' ground rods and attach them with #6 copper wire, then connect to the ground bar in the sub panel. I think they do this because of all the rocks that are in the soil and they know you would never get an 8' ground rod all the way in the ground. With two 6' rods, you have a better chance of getting enough rod into the ground.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AntAltMike View Post

My preference would be to use one of those water pipe clamps to attach to the raceway.

All the raceways on my panels are plastic electrical conduit.
Keizer's Avatar Keizer
10:39 AM Liked: 11
post #30 of 39
06-19-2013 | Posts: 323
Joined: Dec 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by AntAltMike View Post

To be functionally "as good as code" without meeting the letter of the code, you do need to drive the 8 foot grounding rod, and from there, you could bond the rod to the system in a non-compliant manner at the sub panel, but if I were doing that, like if I had a busybody customer who was watching me install and kept insisting I had to ground according to code, I'd connect to the subpanel but I wouldn't penetrate the box with my ground wire. I'd either ground to the box itself or clamp it to the raceway, which is the name commonly used to describe the conduit that sources the subpanel, using a clamp like the one shown above.

If you ground it to the box, you are NOT allowed to use a cover screw for attachment of any ground wire, as any attachment terminal must be for that ground wire only. There are doo-dads that can be screwed to the box that cost less than two dollars. One kind is a corner clamp that does not require driling a pilot hole in the box, the other is a tab that you attach to the side of it using a sheet metal screw.

I don't understand why you would want to attach the ground to the outside of the box instead of going into the box and connect to the ground bar in the panel? Wouldn't that be better?

So would this procedure be functionally "as good as code" without meeting the letter of the code? Pound in a new 8' ground rod outside the garage. Connect the ground rod to the sub panels ground bar with a #6 copper wire. Run the #10 antenna mast copper wire out to the new ground rod using the above mentioned clamps. Attach the coaxial ground bar copper wire to the same ground rod. Done......all grounded.

Reply HDTV Technical

Subscribe to this Thread

Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3