|
|
Sign In | Register Now Why Register? |
||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
IAEI News>Issue Listing>July/August 2001 >Concrete-encased Electrodes and the Grounding Electrode System
Most buildings or structures employ a structural design that includes a concrete footing or foundation, which connects the structure to the earth. For the building to be structurally sound and stable, a substantial foundation must be established to bring the structure out of the ground. Footings and foundations are typically constructed using concrete and reinforcing rods or bars for structural strength. The larger the building, the larger the footings or foundation will need to be to carry the structural load of the building. Concrete footings and foundations can vary from the elementary in design to the very complex. An example would be comparing a simple monolithic slab on grade for a single-family dwelling to a complex concrete and steel foundation for a multi-story high-rise structure. These structures have some commonalities; both include concrete and reinforcing bars, which establish a good structural connection to the earth and are permanent elements required for the construction of either building. The word "permanent" is a substantial word related to something established to be in place for a long period of time. This is a characteristic of the building footings and foundation that are expected to be in place and continue to exist as long as the building is required to remain standing. The
Grounding Electrode System Concrete-Encased
Electrodes
Most entities involved in the electrical industry, either as electrical contractors, designers, engineers or inspectors, agree that it is important to inspection departments and jurisdictions to strive for the most consistency and uniformity possible when enforcing the requirements of the Code. As used in Section 250-50, the word "available" can lead to inconsistency. The Code requires that if an electrode is available, then it must be used as part of the grounding electrode system. Sometimes, depending on how the section is interpreted, the word "available" and the word "existing" work against one another. The word "available" is not enforceable and according to the NEC Style Manual for 2000 should be avoided. The word "available" relative to the coordination of installation concrete encased electrode is a matter of a point in time when the building is being constructed. The issue of the word "available" being replaced with the term "if installed and present" is a concept that definitely is in need of further review. The IEEE papers written by H.G. Ufer confirm the validity and reliability of concrete-encased electrodes. History and data have proven the worthiness of the concrete-encased electrode. Numerous states and municipalities adopt local electrical amendments that amend the NEC by requiring a concrete-encased electrode to be part of the grounding electrode system. A current grounding electrode study has been under way for some time to monitor various grounding electrode connection resistance values to ground from season to season. Perhaps the data gathered from these grounding electrode studies might have an impact on the NEC requirements in future editions. The NEC is generally considered a minimum safety standard containing provisions that are considered necessary for safety. That means electrical installations must be installed at least in accordance with those rules. Many interpret Part C of Article 250 to be a mandatory requirement to include the concrete-encased electrode if the building or structure is constructed with a footing. There are some regions where the effects of frost and frozen earth have some impact on the effectiveness of concrete-encased electrodes. There are also those who contend that lightning strikes can have a destructive effect on concrete-encased electrodes. IAEI is unaware of data that supports not using the concrete-encased electrode because lighting has a destructive effect on the concrete in some conditions or because of frost or frozen earth. Many claim that the impact to current industry practices relative to requiring a concrete-encased electrode on all new installations would create hardships for the construction industry. The word "available" and the word "existing" work against each other where buildings are constructed without installing a concrete-encased electrode in the building footing. An example is where the building construction is started and all footings and foundations are completed before the electrical construction is started or the electrical contractor is onsite to install a concrete-encased electrode. If the footings are poured, then they are existing and no longer available. This appears to be a construction trade coordination problem, although a trade coordination issue in the field should not serve as a basis for allowing it to be installed only when there is availability or access to a foundation of a building or structure that is not poured. If the word "existing" were defined in the Code it might serve to eliminate a gray area between when trying to meet the intent of the word "available." Proposed definitions for the word "existing" have been rejected in previous code cycles. Clearly the intent is not to require that existing building structural footings be disturbed to install a concrete-encased electrode. It should also be noted that in most cases, effectively grounded building steel is effectively grounded through the concrete-encased rebar. The concept of "if installed and present" is a valid one, and should be further studied. The
Code Requirements
Making
the Best Decision Reliability
and Effectiveness "Herbert G. Ufer, in an IEEE Conference Paper, CP-61-978, describes an installation of made ground electrodes on twenty-four buildings in 1942, in Arizona, to meet a 5-ohm maximum value. The resistance values were checked bimonthly over an 18-year period, during which time no servicing was required. "In 1960, the maximum reading was 4.8 ohms and the minimum, 2.1 ohms. The average value of the twenty-four installations was 3.57 ohms. "The installations used 1/2-inch steel reinforcing rods set in a concrete footing. There were at two locations in Arizona. The first was near Tucson, Arizona, which is normally hot and dry during most of the year and has an average annual rainfall of 10.91 inches. The soil is sand and gravel. The second location was near Flagstaff, Arizona, where the soil is clay, shale gumbo and loam with small area stratas of soft limestone. The made electrodes were used as no water piping system was available. "As a result of these installations and the 18-year test period, Mr. Ufer suggested that a No. 4 or larger copper wire be embedded in the concrete footing of a building and that test data be compiled further to verify the effectiveness. Based on this data, CMP-5 accepted a concrete-encased electrode commonly referred to as a "Ufer Ground." The concrete-encased electrode shall consist of at least 20 feet of bare copper not smaller than No. 4 AWG encased in 2 inches of concrete near the bottom of the footing or foundation."3 For additional information on the research and the grounding electrode studies, refer to the IAEI Soares Book on Grounding. Many jurisdictions have local amendments to the National Electrical Code. Check with the local jurisdiction in your region if in doubt as to the requirements. IAEI is very interested in receiving data and documented experiences relative to the destructive effects of lightning on concrete-encased grounding electrodes. IAEI encourages any organization or individual with such information to forward it to the international office. This information is valuable data and serves to develop and revise current codes and standards. 1 NFPA 70, National Electrical Code, 1999 Edition, Section 250-50(c). (Quincy, MA: National Fire Protection Association, Inc.), p. 70 – 88. 2 NFPA 70, National Electrical Code, 1999 Edition, Section 250-50. (Quincy, MA: National Fire Protection Association, Inc.), p. 70 – 88. 3 Soares Book on Grounding, 7th Edition. (Richardson, TX: International Association of Electrical Inspectors), p. 277. Michael J. Johnston is IAEI’s education department manager and an IAEI principal member on CMP-5. Johnston was formerly employed as an electrical field inspections supervisor for the city of Phoenix, Arizona. He is fully certified in many areas. He is a member of the IBEW. He achieved both journeyman E-2 and master electrician E-1 licenses in the state of Connecticut. Additionally, he holds all IAEI certifications. He also holds ICBO Electrical Inspections Certification.
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Home
| Join | Advertising | Seminars | Contact
Us | Privacy
Statement | Legal
Notices |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||