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

The electrician, whom I would like to kill, left me with a PE cable (LGY 10mm2) from GSW. Since in the house design I have a ring earth electrode and a lightning arrester (not yet done), I would like to ask whether this wire should be connected outside the building with the hoop iron in the nearest control connector or introduce the hoop iron and connect it to the GSW.
I will add that the cable is laid loose without a conduit, and I have to prepare this part of the floor for screeds.

You can introduce the hoop iron into the building or lead the PE conductor outside and connect it to the hoop iron there. The problem is aesthetics and more importantly, in the event of a failure (it's better not to), the second solution is better.

It can add this tape, leave the LGY wire. Make a double connection.

It shouldn't be a problem with a crash. In the case of "W" GSW is about 1.5 m from the entrance to the garage, on the internal wall, which will eventually be insulated.

Greggy77 wrote:

Because in the house design I have a ring earth electrode and a lightning rod (not done yet)

And this is where the partisanship begins. Is this designer licensed? Probably yes, but some forest grandfather-stamp slapper. Look at the stamp and write from which year he is licensed.
The tape for GSW should be led out under the board.
Take the best photo or scan and post it on the forum because it's hard to judge the situation from your words.

WojcikW wrote:

Can the ring earthing be called bungling?

The foundation earth electrode should be made ... But really, first you should familiarize yourself with the project.

Or maybe there is no earthing or lightning protection yet, only the PE wire led out from the rail called GSW outside the building.

WojcikW wrote:

what partnership are you talking about?

Designing the ring earth electrode on the new facility is a mess for me. I write about it and I cannot understand that you do not know about it.

WojcikW wrote:

And most importantly, has your colleague seen the project?

I didn't see that, so I wrote:

opornik7 wrote:

Take the best photo or scan and post it on the forum because it's hard to judge the situation from your words.

Greggy77 wrote:

whether this wire should be connected outside the building with the hoop iron in the nearest control joint or insert the hoop iron and connect it to the GSW.

Put the hoop iron on the GSW, connect it to the earth electrode directly in the ground and not on the control joint. This hoop iron should be prepared in advance, preferably from the foundation earth electrode. From the GSW lead the cable to the switchgear on the PE rail.
The participants in the construction process and the electrician were at fault.

WojcikW wrote:

The ring earth electrode is the best solution for lightning protection in any facility, old or new.

What?? you so serious??

WojcikW wrote:

Seriously. And what do you think?

fundamental.

Modern earthing installations in buildings

Advantages of using artificial foundation earth electrodes
o Artificial foundation earth electrodes of buildings can successfully replace the network of metal water pipes currently used for power earthing purposes.
o Making a foundation earth electrode during building construction is generally cheaper and less labor intensive than making a ring earth electrode outside the building. A properly made foundation earth electrode has practically unlimited durability.
o Grounding resistance of the foundation earth electrodes usually meets the requirements for additional earthing of the power network and is almost independent of weather conditions. Foundation earth electrodes have a positive effect on the distribution of potential on the floors of the lower storeys of the building - together with equipotential bonding - they ensure a high level of safety when using electrical devices.
o Performing artificial foundation earth electrodes allows to avoid objections of construction services regarding the negative impact of earth currents on the mechanical strength of building structures.
o It is advisable to use the German experience concerning the execution of artificial foundation earth electrodes and introduce requirements similar to those contained in DIN-VDE standards and regulations to the standards and regulations in force in Poland.

WojcikW wrote:

The foundation earth electrode is not the best earth electrode for a lightning protection system. As I wrote, the ring earth electrode is the best. The ring earth electrode does not exclude the foundation earth electrode, on the contrary, in the case of the building's lightning protection system, both earth electrodes should be used: the ring earth electrode for the lightning protection system and the foundation earth electrode for the power system. Ring and foundation earth electrodes should be connected in GSW. It is also permissible to connect both earth electrodes in the ground.

My comment for readers:
This is a private opinion Colleague, professional literature and scientists say otherwise, however, since there is freedom of expression, holding such views is not punishable.

There is no foundation earth in the project. The "team" that was making the foundation, if they were to make a foundation earth electrode, they would definitely botch it.
In addition, the design includes a ring earth electrode and a lightning arrester. I am not an electrician, since the project is made by an authorized person and, in addition, the adaptation was approved by another electrician, I will not say what should and what should not.

There is GNP for this and it has to be done according to the design.

"EQUALIZATION
In the room where all the installations meet, a main ground bus should be installed. The main earthing bus should be connected to the central heating, water and gas installations and the PE bus from the TB table"

My board is located in the passage between the garage and the living area.
The leveler rail is in the garage very close to the board. The ABB switchgear for 72 modules was really hard to cram in and connect the whole thing. Even if a hoop iron was brought there, it would have to be connected with a cable with PE terminals that are included in the equipment of the switchgear

Central heating installation made entirely of PEX, hot water installation made of PP, gas installation with PE pipe from the box.
Valves, sediment/strainers, brass or alloy manifolds.

Greggy77 wrote:

There is no foundation earth in the project.

But it's probably written to be made by a separate design.

Greggy77 wrote:

The team ", which was making the foundation, if they were to make a foundation grounding, they would definitely botch it.

This should be done by an electrician (at least be there), not a foundation team.

WojcikW wrote:

I even think that the foundation earth electrode is not suitable as an earth electrode for a lightning protection system. Anyone who has not seen a chimney blown apart by lightning and electrical installation not connected anywhere, torn out of the plaster, is not aware of the forces to which the foundation will be subjected in the event of a lightning strike.

This is your friend's private opinion, which is not entirely in line with the achievements of technology
What about a windmill chimney?

Let's refer to the PN EN 62305-3:2009 standard:

"5.4.2.2. Type B layout
This type of arrangement includes either a ring earth electrode laid outside the structure to be protected and in contact with the ground for at least 80% of its total length, or foundation earth "

WojcikW wrote:

Anyone who has not seen a chimney blown apart by lightning and electrical installation not connected anywhere, torn out of the plaster, is not aware of the forces to which the foundation will be subjected in the event of a lightning strike.

Hmm, but the surge current from the ground discharge and its destruction will only be at the point of its impact (vertical or horizontal fuse) there may be some destruction. For example, it pulls out the air terminals from the fastenings. So I don't know how the foundation can be destroyed, it's already a long way to go as soon as the lightning current is discharged.
In addition, where there are poor sandy soils, only the foundation earth electrode can go down even below 5?.
I happen to have a ring earth electrode, but as an electrician in the fall, he checked the resistance of my earth electrode (7.3 ? using the technical method, he said that he had previously made a foundation earth electrode, they lowered the resistance to 2?.

There is a video on youtube somewhere, I don't remember if it's DEHNa or some research institute in Germany, how the lightning protection system is properly made, there is no potential difference, everything done with art is to lead the lightning to the ground, it's like water running off a duck. There was even no sparking, which is common when the lightning protection system is poorly made. Sparking is probably due to the potential difference.

I have quoted from the standard. What answer I got:

TWK wrote:

Is the message helpful? + -1 -

If anyone has arguments against this standard, please provide them. I would like to remind you that this is the standard referred to in the regulation on the conditions to be met by buildings and their location.

WojcikW wrote:

I even think that the foundation earth electrode is not suitable as an earth electrode for a lightning protection system. Anyone who has not seen a chimney blown apart by lightning and electrical installation not connected anywhere, torn out of the plaster, is not aware of the forces to which the foundation will be subjected in the event of a lightning strike.

First of all - the chimney is not reinforced concrete with earthing elements embedded in it. Secondly, the plaster covering the installation is also not concrete, and the installation is not an earth electrode. In both cases, it is necessary to ensure that the discharge current does not flow there.

And thirdly - when comparing the ring earth electrode with the foundation earth electrode, it is worth looking at the durability of both. Have you ever dug up an earth electrode placed in the ground, e.g. 50 years ago? Have you forged reinforced concrete made at a similar time? Of course, concrete, not a "concrete-like product".
Did you see the difference? If not, I'll give you a hint - rods and hoop irons pulled out of the ground are in the middle of the cross-section or more, it's just rust, most of it broke off when trying to pull it out by force.
Meanwhile, bars forged from concrete have a cross-section and surface in the same condition as they left the steelworks. Plain bare rods, no zinc plating, no stainless steel, no duperels... Well, even that specific slightly bluish color was preserved!

Now show me the superiority of the rim over the foundation in the next 50 years and what will happen to them when discharging the discharge current.

It may not be complicated, but it's not entirely unexplored. The test was at 2 million volts and 200kA. As far as I know, 200kA ground discharges do not occur in Poland and even 100kA is a rarity. Hmm, 500 degrees already in the foundation earth electrode? Yes, if we discharge the lightning current with small cross-sections, let it be 2.5-4mm^2, there may even be an explosion / evaporation of copper, but after all, all air terminals and leads to the earthing are 50mm^2 for hot-dip galvanized or copper-plated steel wire. There is a table by Prof. Owls and his tests. I even pasted this table several times on the forum. With a wire diameter of 8mm, which is a standard today, and with a lightning current of 200kA, such a wire will heat up to a maximum of 211 degrees, and at 100kA, which is also rare in Poland, to only 37 degrees.
Who is rich and can afford to buy fully copper or aluminum wire, the temperatures are very low in general.



As for the author's topic, his LgY 10m ^ 2 and the connection with the hoop iron should not be a H07V-R(LY) cable with a minimum of 16mm ^ 2, i.e. the diameter of the wires in the cable should be between 1.4-1.7mm. Apart from the fact that the hoop iron should be delivered directly to GSW.

WojcikW wrote:

In fact, dynamic and wave phenomena can cause, for example, 90% of the lightning current to pass through concrete with a small area, causing the temperature in this place to increase to, for example, 500°C. In addition to thermal phenomena, there are also electrodynamic forces. It is these forces that pull the electrical wires out of the plaster. Much can be written about it.

You can write, although scientists have long summarized their research:

Quote:

Lightning discharge currents have much higher values and are therefore able to break down electrically weak contacts between rebars, reducing their resistance. With low resistance and short flow times of lightning surge currents, thermal effects are not dangerous for foundations.

It's from the link I already posted. So why should we write? You have a different opinion, like the supporters of the Smolensk birch, which jumped up with obvious consequences. This is not punishable, but it does not bring anything new, so let's end this idle exchange.

Hello colleagues

I must admit that if I am not mistaken about the person, I had the opportunity to meet my friend WojcikW. They may be a bit presumptuous in conversation, but they are knowledgeable about the subject. He attended ILPC seminars and was among the most active and knowledgeable participants. So he belonged to the elite of the most versed electricians in the subject of lightning protection.
Therefore (if I am not mistaken about the person) I read with some disbelief what my colleague WójcikW wrote about the foundation grounding. What was the purpose of it? Show that you have a different opinion? And it can scare investors or builders (ladies in the subject of lightning protection) to avoid using this earth electrode. After all, the comparison to this chimney may appeal to them, although it is absurd for an informed person.

That is why my colleague, opornik7, rightly stated that we are dealing with bungling at the design stage. The foundation earth electrode should be designed here.

WojcikW wrote:

In fact, dynamic and wave phenomena can cause, for example, 90% of the lightning current to pass through concrete with a small area, causing the temperature in this place to increase to, for example, 500°C.

I am interested in wave phenomena, I participated in various computer simulations of the field distribution in the case of a discharge current flow. Sometimes it was "seen" how some elements (e.g. floor mesh) fell into resonance. And that's why I can safely write - in the case of a properly made foundation earth electrode of a detached house, it is not possible to obtain a high local current density at the foundation-environment boundary and thus obtain any extremely high temperatures. Of course, you can consider some nuances and compare the electrical and dynamic properties of the foundation and ring earth electrodes - and for specific objects it may be important. But not for the cottage. So:

A properly made foundation earth electrode is the best solution - durability exceeding the ring earth electrode - comparable to the durability of the building.

kiss
-DAREK-

WojcikW wrote:

The foundation earth electrode is not the best earth electrode for a lightning protection system. As I wrote, the ring earth electrode is the best. The ring earth electrode does not exclude the foundation earth electrode, on the contrary, in the case of the building's lightning protection system, both earth electrodes should be used: the ring earth electrode for the lightning protection system and the foundation earth electrode for the power system. Ring and foundation earth electrodes should be connected in GSW. It is also permissible to connect both earth electrodes in the ground.

I am also surprised by this post.
However, when analyzing such a design - what if - 3? foundation earth electrode, 7 ? ring earth electrode parallel to it - common connection on the GSW busbar - does your colleague not think that the flow of surge currents will largely not take place through the GSW to the foundation earth electrode?