Connection of the PE conductor from the GSW with the ring earthing tape

Greggy77 27735 43

Treść została przetłumaczona

Zobacz oryginalną wersję tematu

Reply | New topic

#31 14747671 05 Jun 2015 18:08

Anonymous Anonymous

Anonymous

» |

Post #31
14747671 05 Jun 2015 18:08

Most of the lightning current will flow to the ground through the coil. In the case of dynamic phenomena, resistance is only one of the elements determining the distribution of current. In some extreme situations, having a resistance of 3? and ?? at its disposal, it will choose a path with an infinite number of ohms. This is not possible with a static approach.
ADVERTISEMENT
#32 14748083 05 Jun 2015 21:03

zbich70 zbich70

Level 43

» | Helpful post? (0)

Post #32
14748083 05 Jun 2015 21:03

Sorry buddy WojcikW but I don't understand what you want to achieve with your entries. So far, you are pushing some thesis that the current will flow through infinite resistance having an easier path and will choose yours anyway. But never mind...

You discredit the foundation earth electrode in favor of the ring earth electrode for reasons unknown to me.
Or maybe known?
Your entries sound as if you are a manufacturer, distributor of stainless, copper-plated, copper, etc. assortment. You don't like melting ordinary steel into concrete so much? Do you have a few tons of stainless steel in stock, and people, contrary to your expectations, do not buy it, because someone "dared" to them that the foundation is an ordinary "naked" ... ???

P.S. You also did not refer to post #23... Which confirms my assumption about your intentions.
#33 14748126 05 Jun 2015 21:21

opornik7 opornik7

Electrician specialist

» | Helpful post? (+1)

Post #33
14748126 05 Jun 2015 21:21

zbich70 wrote:
Sorry Buddy WojcikW, but I don't understand what you want to achieve with your entries.

Me too
I expressed my opinion earlier on the previous page of the thread but I didn't want to mix it up after my last post WojcikW . Maybe, Buddy, you'll finally put your cards on the table and you'll stop wreaking havoc?
ADVERTISEMENT
#34 14748187 05 Jun 2015 21:37

emigrant emigrant

Level 29

» | Helpful post? (+1)

Post #34
14748187 05 Jun 2015 21:37

I have a copper-plated Galmar earth electrode and I am aware that it will simply rot after some time. I bought it at RST Bialystok, even they said it would rot in 20-30 years or maybe sooner. Only the joints are A2 stainless steel, although correctly the joints should be welded. Never mind. In my case, the tapestry lies at a depth of 120cm, the deeper the less oxygen, so the slower the oxidation of copper, if such a process will take place at 120cm. If there are these stray currents (I could be mistaken with something here), it will rot at an express pace.
Reinforcement poured in concrete even in 100 years will be in an unchanged form, like brand new. The electrician said that in retrospect the resistance might increase 1.5-2?, so almost nothing.
ADVERTISEMENT
#35 14748238 05 Jun 2015 21:58

opornik7 opornik7

Electrician specialist

» | Helpful post? (+1)

Post #35
14748238 05 Jun 2015 21:58

A wise man worth reading and listening to
For those who think differently, I recommend works on demolition of structures in order to determine the technical condition of footing and foundation reinforcement.
And what the ring earth electrode looks like after a few/over a dozen years, the measurement specialists know perfectly well.
It's over, period, amen from me.
ADVERTISEMENT
#36 14748566 06 Jun 2015 00:00

Łukasz-O Łukasz-O

Admin of electroenergetics

» | Helpful post? (+1)

Post #36
14748566 06 Jun 2015 00:00

opornik7 wrote:

And what the ring earth electrode looks like after a few/over a dozen years, the measurement specialists know perfectly well.
It's over, period, amen from me.

It is me who, in addition to the above post, will illustrate what the excavated ring looks like after about eight years:

In this photo you can see a 4mm tape cut with a normal spade while digging:

Today's quality of zinc is not comparable to that of several decades ago.
#37 14752526 07 Jun 2015 19:52

Anonymous Anonymous

Anonymous

» |

Post #37
14752526 07 Jun 2015 19:52

I am not discrediting the foundation earth electrode. I believe that the ring earth electrode is better in terms of the effectiveness of lightning protection. It is not without reason that the rim should be made at a distance of at least 1 m from the building. A modern foundation earth electrode is not modern because such earth electrodes were made 40 years ago and probably even earlier. The fact that steel embedded in concrete does not corrode was known before the war, it is not a recent discovery. The fact that galvanized steel placed in the ground will corrode is also not a new discovery. The durability of the foundation earth electrode, made in accordance with the recommendations on Elektroda, will not exceed the durability of the ring earth electrode. And maybe I will add a drawing illustrating the situation where the lightning current will choose a path of infinite resistance (break on electrode B), and a small part of the lightning current will flow through the path of 3? resistance.
#38 14752677 07 Jun 2015 20:31

opornik7 opornik7

Electrician specialist

» | Helpful post? (+1)

Post #38
14752677 07 Jun 2015 20:31

WojcikW wrote:
The durability of the foundation earth electrode, made in accordance with the recommendations on Elektroda, will not exceed the durability of the ring earth electrode.

You forgot to write that ...... in my opinion.
Because the opinion of other colleagues, including mine, is different.
#39 14752755 07 Jun 2015 20:52

TWK TWK

Electrician specialist

» | Helpful post? (0)

Post #39
14752755 07 Jun 2015 20:52

opornik7 wrote:
Because the opinion of other colleagues, including mine, is different.
Some time ago I was at the dismantling of a reinforced concrete foundation that had been in the ground for some 20-30 years. The vast majority of the reinforcement showed no trace of corrosion. The cooper laid next to this foundation was all ore. So I'm also of the opinion that the foundation earth electrode has a much greater durability.
#40 14752833 07 Jun 2015 21:15

Anonymous Anonymous

Anonymous

» |

Post #40
14752833 07 Jun 2015 21:15

opornik7 wrote:

WojcikW wrote:
The durability of the foundation earth electrode, made in accordance with the recommendations on Elektroda, will not exceed the durability of the ring earth electrode.

You forgot to write that ...... in my opinion.
Because the opinion of other colleagues, including mine, is different.
To be clear, a foundation earth electrode made contrary to the advice on Elektroda can be much more durable than a ring earth electrode. I wrote about the effectiveness of lightning protection, it is something else than the high durability of the installation, in the case of a properly made installation I do not deny it.
#41 14752855 07 Jun 2015 21:18

TWK TWK

Electrician specialist

» | Helpful post? (0)

Post #41
14752855 07 Jun 2015 21:18

WojcikW wrote:
To be clear, a foundation earth electrode made contrary to the advice on Elektroda can be much more durable than a ring earth electrode.
Which advice reduces its durability compared to other solutions?
#42 14753007 07 Jun 2015 21:58

Anonymous Anonymous

Anonymous

» |

Post #42
14753007 07 Jun 2015 21:58

Today's cement is the same chemistry, ashes, etc. Even when the anti-corrosion properties of concrete have been reduced 10 times, it is still instead of 2,000. years will be 200 years, which is long enough. Unfortunately, the same cannot be said about the place where the hoop iron is led out of the concrete foundation, i.e. at the concrete-air interface. There, the zinc will last 1 year and begin to corrode the steel. I wouldn't believe in anti-corrosion paints, etc., chemistry will do its job. The only way out is to run an insulated copper wire.
#43 14753118 07 Jun 2015 22:32

Łukasz-O Łukasz-O

Admin of electroenergetics

» | Helpful post? (0)

Post #43
14753118 07 Jun 2015 22:32

What are installation inspections for?
In addition, the places where tapes are projected on professional construction sites are secured. The same as the guide lines around the style with the ground.
You're looking for a hole in the fence, and you're still wrong.
#44 14753234 07 Jun 2015 23:12

zdzisiek1979 zdzisiek1979

Level 39

» | Helpful post? (0)

Post #44
14753234 07 Jun 2015 23:12

WojcikW wrote:
The only way out is to run an insulated copper wire.

And here I would question such an idea, and even more so underground. Capillary phenomenon. I suspect that even more intense than on the removal of the hoop itself.

As for the zinc itself, I suspect that it has a lot to do with mechanical treatment. Brief scratches and cracking of the coating when bending corners.

Added after 2 [minutes]:

Łukasz-O wrote:

In addition, the places where tapes are projected on professional construction sites are secured.

Even reinforcement welds made for grounding purposes are protected against corrosion and then poured with concrete. I omit photo albums of these works as proof of work.
Create an account, log in and become active in a forum and ads will not appear. You will receive points by participating in discussions.
Join this discussion.

Install the application

Reply | New topic

Report a violation of the law

Topic summary

The discussion revolves around the proper connection of a PE conductor (LGY 10mm2) from a Grounding and Surge Protection System (GSW) to a ring earthing tape in a residential setting. Participants debate whether to connect the PE wire outside the building to the hoop iron or to introduce the hoop iron inside and connect it to the GSW. Key considerations include aesthetics, safety during potential electrical failures, and adherence to design specifications. The importance of a ring earth electrode for effective lightning protection is emphasized, with suggestions to connect both the ring and foundation earth electrodes at the GSW. The conversation also touches on the durability and effectiveness of different earthing systems, including the potential corrosion of materials used in grounding installations.
Summary generated by the language model.