Top 3 Mistakes People Make with Grounding & Earthing Projects

Projects where the physical location of the buried grounding system is not even considered when thinking about the future above grade connections that will eventually be needed. Projects where columns and footings that could have been utilized for lightning protection down conductors and grounding electrodes for a few dollars in materials, end up costing the client thousands later just to have ugly external LPS installations with less overall benefit to the client. Projects with extensive steel rebar networks installed in concrete just inches below the floor of robotic factories not being utilized as a low-cost and highly-effective equipotential grid for fractions of the cost of installing an equipotential grid above-grade later. Projects with sensitive electronic systems that could have benefited not only from a dedicated electrode system, but from an isolation transformer, all of which could have easily been cost-effectively installed during original design/construction, but now costs tens of thousands of dollars later. Project where the grounding system must meet an engineering specification such as resistance-to-ground, but the A&E firm did not do their calculations and instead placed the burden on the electrical installer to test and amend the grounding system to meet the specification, resulting in cost overruns, delays, and unnecessary compromises in the sites primary electrical safety infrastructure system: grounding.

1. 250.24(B) 2. 250.28

1. NEC Articles 250.6(B) 2. 250.24(A)(5) HB Notes 3. 250.30 HB Notes “Application Examples 1, 2 and 3” 4. 250.30(A) 5. 250.30(A) HB Notes “Common Misconception” 6. 250.30(A)(1) 7. 250.30(A)(1) Exception #2 8. 250.30(A)(1) Exception #3 (a) and (b) 9. 250.30(A)(5) HB notes 10. 250.32(B)(2)(b) 11. 250.32(B)(1) HB notes 12. 250.142(B) 13. HB Exhibit 250.8