Electrician Talk banner

Gas line bonding, BC

CEC 
4K views 23 replies 12 participants last post by  vhk 
It's not well written, but like most equipotential bonding you have to take a #6 back to your grounding bus in your main distribution. The key here is also that a conductor is always being referenced. No substitute for the conductor is made. There are some random ones where you can just connect to the structure, but that's only for livestock barns. Maybe gas is less used in BC than yee-haw Alberta. Here its the base building electricians job to bond them after the meters since the gas piping for the RTU(AHU)'s is done at that point and a kitchen normally gets in early on a build to ensure they can get the power and gas supply they need. Had some small jurisdictions not even allow the connection indoors, clamp had to be outside after the meter.

For the appendix B 10-700 people are missing the key word in there... tubing. Like NPR mentioned "the stainless flex stuff" or normally here yellow (maybe pvc) coated flexible gas tubing. We don't have to bond that because there is no safe way to do it. A clamp would just crush it. But the tubing will only be between a wall outlet and the kitchen appliance.
First shot sucks, seconds pretty good. Example of what I tried to describe. In both cases the #6 is coming through the wall, it's not just the lines being tied together. Second one is a KFC I did. The base guy was a joke. All his exterior sconces were DAMP rated, couldn't understand why the inspector failed him and was forcing him to install gaskets on all of them. 🤣
 
Care to supply a code reference?



Second last paragraph of 10-700 in Appendix B may be of interest to you.

Maybe you have code amendments on these in British California?
Uhhh code 10-700 through 10-708? It's the lack of a code like 10-614(6) that is my argument.
Couldn't find anything for BC, got: "Rules 10-702 to 10-708 serve as a guideline for bonding non-electrical equipment to ground. To protect against loss of bonding, approved lugs are required for a positive connection. Due to the possibility of damage, a bonding conductor no smaller than No. 6 American Wire Gauge (AWG) copper or No. 4 AWG aluminum should be used." for Alberta.
Again, wording very bad. Look at these wires connected to things waves hands. Ok... what are those wires connected to?

Second last paragraph in a informative(non-mandatory)section of the code book... meaning it's not code and not enforceable. But sure, only have my 2018 on me(and CSA digital at that:cautious: Paragraphs are sometimes difficult to identify. Like is this part of the livestock stuff? But then computer floor...). Second last paragraph:

"Conductive materials used for equipotential bonding need not be wires and can take the form of structural steel, bus, metallic framing and support structures, conductive static mats, or the support structure of a computer room floor. Each of these materials, when adequately interconnected, form and effective equipotential plane."

"when adequately interconnected" is wonderfully grey. Got some engineering papers to clear that up Joe?
That's the crux I guess. I run a #6 from my grounding bus to a clamp on the pipe, there is no question, it's good. Clamp a #6 to the pipe then like screw a lug to some structural steel. Ok now break out your megger and prove it's good enough.


In my searching I did see some bonding of the flexible lines... they just kinda put a clamp on close to the connection and just, what looks like 10 or 12, again... connect it to... something.
 
Probably the same thing others have said mobius. The box can be removed in a reno. With the bond going back to the main distribution it is unlikely to ever be touched again. Similar with the suit panel, the panel can be moved in a reno, but it's unlikely.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top