3 ms·
> Er, what? It's any/all of the neutral-ground bonds that make the system grounded. The misconception is that cutting the neutral-ground bond at the service en
by jcalvinowens 4y ago
> Er, what? It's any/all of the neutral-ground bonds that make the system grounded.
The misconception is that cutting the neutral-ground bond at the service entrance makes the system ungrounded, which isn't true. You can cut that, and nothing will change under normal operating conditions.
> The more ground connections, the more redundancy and lower impedance
That isn't true in the US. The only permitted neutral-ground bond in a house is at the service entrance.
- mindslight 4y ago> The misconception is that cutting the neutral-ground bond at the service entrance makes the system ungrounded, which isn't true That's a better way of putting it. I agree with that. > That [more ground connections] isn't true in the US. The only permitted neutral-ground bond in a house is at the service entrance. I was talking about the US. By multiple ground connections I mean one for the transformer plus one at each service panel.
- amluto 4y agoIn the US, if everything else is wired correctly but you disconnect the neutral-ground bond, you may end up with rather high ground impedance. Those two ground rods, 6 feet apart, that satisfy code could easily have quite a few ohms in dry weather. This, in turn, could allow a live (120V to ground) wire to short to an equipment ground, drawing only a few amps and making every grounded object in your house quite dangerous indefinitely. Since the NEC does not require any form of residual current detection except for some branch circuits unless you have a huge service, nothing really protects against this type of failure.
- jcalvinowens 4y agoI didn't mean to suggest the bond is useless, just that breaking it won't cause problems unless there is a fault.