Do we have to ground meter bases now? - Page 2 - Electrician Talk - Professional Electrical Contractors Forum
CLICK HERE AND JOIN OUR COMMUNITY TODAY, IT'S FREE!
Go Back   Electrician Talk - Professional Electrical Contractors Forum > Electrical Trade Topics > Canadian Electrical Forum


Like Tree19Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 01-30-2019, 08:50 PM   #21
Mensa Player
 
HackWork's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: -
Posts: 33,697
Rewards Points: 565
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Navyguy View Post
I think the issue is that we use a lot of PVC services up here and the metal meter socket "floats" in between the PVC stack and the portion of the pipe going to the panel where the ground and the bond and the neutral meet.

In theory, the meter socket could become energized and not fault because the neutral block is not always attached to the meter socket; sometimes it is isolated.

A good example of that is our multi-gang meter sockets, where you have to ground, bond and connect the neutral in the meter socket because the neutral is isolated and you do not want multiple grounding connections (one in each of the panels) to be present.

Cheers
John
Down here, when using multi gang meters the neutral is always bonded to the meter base just like a single gang meter. We also bond the neutral to ground in each disconnect.
HackWork is online now   Reply With Quote
Join Contractor Talk

Join the #1 Electrician Forum Today - It's Totally Free!

ElectricianTalk.com - Are you a Professional Electrical Contractor? If so we invite you to join our community and see what it has to offer. Our site is specifically designed for you and it's the leading place for electricians to meet online. No homeowners asking DIY questions. Just fellow tradesmen who enjoy talking about their business, their trade, and anything else that comes up. No matter what your specialty is you'll find that ElectricianTalk.com is a great community to join. Best of all it's totally free!

Join ElectricianTalk.com - Click Here JOIN FOR FREE


Warning: The topics covered on this site include activities in which there exists the potential for serious injury or death. ElectricianTalk.com DOES NOT guarantee the accuracy or completeness of any information contained on this site. Always use proper safety precaution and reference reliable outside sources before attempting any construction or remodeling task!

Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 01-30-2019, 09:01 PM   #22
Cow
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Eastern Oregon
Posts: 2,915
Rewards Points: 4,666
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by HackWork View Post
Looking at it from a theoretical standpoint, what’s the difference between the meter base and a junction box inside of the house?

So what necessitates the change? If someone wants to change something, there should be some statistical evidence that there IS an issue, and this is why we're changing it.



Quote:
Originally Posted by HackWork View Post
As we know, we should avoid bonding neutral to ground anywhere else other than the main panel.


Sure, downstream from the main bonding jumper, one should expect to be able to remove an equipment grounding conductor without worrying about the potential for it to carry current.


I just don't know what any of this has to do with electrical enclosures and equipment on the line side of the service disconnecting means though.


The only thing I get from your argument is:


"It's probably better because then there is less likely to be current on the meterbase, and so it's probably a good idea. Although I haven't seen any data to show it is actually needed after decades of being installed this way in millions of homes."


If you know of a report or some statistics that shows it's a better/safer/etc install, then maybe I'll be on board with you.
Cow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2019, 09:07 PM   #23
Mensa Player
 
HackWork's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: -
Posts: 33,697
Rewards Points: 565
Default

It makes sense to me. I never thought it made sense to have neutral bonded to ground in the meter base for the reasons I stated.

The idea seems to be agitating you, but I’m just giving my opinion. I don’t have any argument here, I simply made an assumption and said that it makes sense. There’s no plans for that change here in the US as far as I know so you don’t have to worry.
HackWork is online now   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 01-30-2019, 09:19 PM   #24
Cow
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Eastern Oregon
Posts: 2,915
Rewards Points: 4,666
Default

No worries, I'm not agitated.


More just wanted to see your reasoning behind why you think the change may be necessary.


Like you said, it's Canada. I also don't see it happening with the NEC down here...
Cow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2019, 09:37 PM   #25
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Canada
Posts: 5,129
Rewards Points: 7,520
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Navyguy View Post
I thought I read somewhere that Ontario was not going to do that until further notice...

Trying to find it now, but don't remember where I saw it. In fact I think it was a discussion on here too.

Cheers
John

Found it... https://www.esasafe.com/assets/files...nal.pdf#page=3

From this thread... https://www.electriciantalk.com/f31/...2018-a-265896/
In that link it says “for now” esa will be accepting the old way, as in, until the new code comes out. The new amendments to the 2018 code are on the ESA website and there is nothing about that code in them so as of May it looks like it’s a go in Ontario
eddy current is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2019, 09:40 PM   #26
Mensa Player
 
HackWork's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: -
Posts: 33,697
Rewards Points: 565
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cow View Post
No worries, I'm not agitated.


More just wanted to see your reasoning behind why you think the change may be necessary.


Like you said, it's Canada. I also don't see it happening with the NEC down here...
I assume that the only reason it is the way that it is today is because itís been like that since before they grounded anything.

If they had to reinvent the whole standard over again right now, donít you think they would have the meter pan and service entrance raceways separated from the neutral conductor like all the other parts of the electrical system in the house? It just seems to make sense that way.

I agree that there is no issue or big reason to go and change it. But if they did change it, itís not something I would be against either.
HackWork is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2019, 09:42 PM   #27
Senior Member
 
CoolWill's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2019
Location: SC
Posts: 2,170
Rewards Points: 2,622
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cow View Post
So what necessitates the change? If someone wants to change something, there should be some statistical evidence that there IS an issue, and this is why we're changing it.







Sure, downstream from the main bonding jumper, one should expect to be able to remove an equipment grounding conductor without worrying about the potential for it to carry current.


I just don't know what any of this has to do with electrical enclosures and equipment on the line side of the service disconnecting means though.


The only thing I get from your argument is:


"It's probably better because then there is less likely to be current on the meterbase, and so it's probably a good idea. Although I haven't seen any data to show it is actually needed after decades of being installed this way in millions of homes."


If you know of a report or some statistics that shows it's a better/safer/etc install, then maybe I'll be on board with you.
The code specifically calls out objectionable current caused by parallel neutral currents and tells us we should avoid that, but then demands that every service disconnect be bonded to neutral even if a metal conduit becomes a parallel path to the neutral bonded at the meter. The NEC doesn't allow you to avoid it. If you use a meter socket with the neutral bonded to the can, and use a metal nipple, you STILL have to bond the neutral again at the disconnect. For the sake of minimising unbalanced fields and harmonizing with other codes about objectionable current, the Canadian change makes sense.
CoolWill is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2019, 09:44 PM   #28
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Canada
Posts: 5,129
Rewards Points: 7,520
Default

I think the reason is that our meter bases rot due to the weather. If the neutral bar connection, (which is just a 10/32 bolt that is not rated for bonding by the way) came loose due to rust then the metal base could be energized.

Just a guess, but I have seen many rotted bases.
Kevin_Essiambre likes this.
eddy current is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2019, 10:17 PM   #29
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Welland, Ontario Canada
Posts: 2,198
Rewards Points: 4,106
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by eddy current View Post
In that link it says ďfor nowĒ esa will be accepting the old way, as in, until the new code comes out. The new amendments to the 2018 code are on the ESA website and there is nothing about that code in them so as of May it looks like itís a go in Ontario
It is probably a good question to ask when I see the inspector next.

Cheers

John
__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Navyguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2019, 11:21 PM   #30
Beam Me Up Scotty
 
Kevin_Essiambre's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 813
Rewards Points: 162
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CoolWill View Post
The code specifically calls out objectionable current caused by parallel neutral currents and tells us we should avoid that, but then demands that every service disconnect be bonded to neutral even if a metal conduit becomes a parallel path to the neutral bonded at the meter. The NEC doesn't allow you to avoid it. If you use a meter socket with the neutral bonded to the can, and use a metal nipple, you STILL have to bond the neutral again at the disconnect. For the sake of minimising unbalanced fields and harmonizing with other codes about objectionable current, the Canadian change makes sense.
I've done multiple multi-gang services where the bond connection is done in the meterbase, and the bonding screw is removed from the disconnects. The inspector will check to make sure the bonding screw is removed around here for those instances. The ones that come to mind are 3 and 4 gang services.

Sent from my SM-G920W8 using Tapatalk
__________________
"If the women don't find you handsome, they should at least find you handy!"

Last edited by Kevin_Essiambre; 01-30-2019 at 11:22 PM. Reason: Autocorrect
Kevin_Essiambre is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2019, 11:24 PM   #31
Beam Me Up Scotty
 
Kevin_Essiambre's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 813
Rewards Points: 162
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by eddy current View Post
I think the reason is that our meter bases rot due to the weather. If the neutral bar connection, (which is just a 10/32 bolt that is not rated for bonding by the way) came loose due to rust then the metal base could be energized.

Just a guess, but I have seen many rotted bases.
I've seen my fair share of meterbases, and some of them use more than just the 10/32 bolt... some of them use 2 of them...

But I have seen and done the bond connection in the meterbase before.

The neutral terminal is held on with a large bolt, and then either 2 or 4 screws to the pan.

If the inspector has an issue, I'm sure you can get a kit to properly do the bond connection.

Sent from my SM-G920W8 using Tapatalk
__________________
"If the women don't find you handsome, they should at least find you handy!"
Kevin_Essiambre is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2019, 11:46 PM   #32
Senior Member
 
CoolWill's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2019
Location: SC
Posts: 2,170
Rewards Points: 2,622
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevin_Essiambre View Post
I've done multiple multi-gang services where the bond connection is done in the meterbase, and the bonding screw is removed from the disconnects. The inspector will check to make sure the bonding screw is removed around here for those instances. The ones that come to mind are 3 and 4 gang services.

Sent from my SM-G920W8 using Tapatalk
Stupid NEC won't let us do that. If you have a service disconnect, it must be bonded to the neutral. So the neutral gets bonded in a service trough, and then again at each meter, and then again in the service disconnect. So neutral current is all over the place.
CoolWill is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-31-2019, 07:21 AM   #33
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Canada
Posts: 5,129
Rewards Points: 7,520
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevin_Essiambre View Post
I've seen my fair share of meterbases, and some of them use more than just the 10/32 bolt... some of them use 2 of them...

But I have seen and done the bond connection in the meterbase before.

The neutral terminal is held on with a large bolt, and then either 2 or 4 screws to the pan.

If the inspector has an issue, I'm sure you can get a kit to properly do the bond connection.

Sent from my SM-G920W8 using Tapatalk
With the new code, if you decide to run your ground from the base you will have to also bond the neutral to the base with a bond wire because the screws are not rated.
eddy current is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to eddy current For This Useful Post:
Funksparky (02-02-2019), Kevin_Essiambre (01-31-2019)
Old 02-07-2019, 12:30 AM   #34
Junior Member
 
Code Man's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2019
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 7
Rewards Points: 2
Default

The intent is to create single point grounding. If you use a rigid service conduit, then you have created a parallel neutral path, and you will have “objectionable” current on your bonding path. Also, multi point grounding can create stray voltage issues when thee is a difference in potential between two grounding points. Lastly, the code requires all non current carrying metal parts to be bonded to ground, not bonded to neutral. This code change is cleaning up some bad practices in the way we used to ground our neutrals at services.
Code Man is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-07-2019, 05:29 AM   #35
Elderly Member
 
jelhill's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Location: The Volunteer State
Posts: 549
Rewards Points: 1,090
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cow View Post
Why is everything in Canada so complicated?


The rest of the world buys meterbases with an internal bonding screw or jumper already installed, so we don't have to do anything except bring our service conductors in/out of the meterbase.


Done.
Yeah ! Like their plastic switch boxes that have metal bonding straps in them?

Oh yeah... and cost $8.00/ea. !!
Kevin_Essiambre likes this.
__________________
....

Last edited by jelhill; 02-07-2019 at 05:32 AM.
jelhill is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Ground Current brian john General Electrical Discussion 13 05-22-2018 10:46 AM
60V on HDMI? canbug Structured Wiring 7 01-05-2018 12:14 PM
Water line used as system ground. ELECTRICK2 Residential Electrical Forum 92 05-22-2017 06:48 PM
Meters Bases, Meter Mains (Power to a Garage) guitarchitect Canadian Electrical Forum 12 02-27-2017 02:56 PM
Looking for old 60/100 amp round meter bases sameo416 Canadian Electrical Forum 6 05-26-2016 08:26 PM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:40 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.1
vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity v2.2.2 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Our Pro Sites Network
ContractorTalk.com | DrywallTalk.com | HVACSite.com | PaintTalk.com | PlumbingZone.com | RoofingTalk.com