# Grounding flexible gas line?



## kevjob (Aug 14, 2006)

Had a call tonight from my electrician about a builder complaining the other sparky did't ground the flexible yellow gas line, I thought that wasn't supposed to be grounded?


----------



## mickeyco (May 13, 2006)

kevjob said:


> Had a call tonight from my electrician about a builder complaining the other sparky did't ground the flexible yellow gas line, I thought that wasn't supposed to be grounded?


I thought those yellow flexi gas lines were coated with some type of pvc or plastic. I don't think you ground a gas line you bond it.


----------



## Celtic (May 23, 2007)

http://www.charmeck.org/Departments/LUESA/CodeEnforcement/Electrical/CSST+Bonding.htm



> Required Bonding of CSST Piping
> 
> Due to a recent class action lawsuit involving the installation of CSST piping, the manufacturers of the products now require additional bonding above the minimum requirements of the NEC.


Here is a thread from another forum:
http://www.iccsafe.org/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=11;t=001234

...from another forum:
http://forums.mikeholt.com/showthread.php?t=84103

...a pdf:
http://www.pddocs.com/csst/documents/Titeflex_technical_bulletin.pdf


You may want to contact the City and see how that particular local is handling this.


----------



## kbsparky (Oct 14, 2007)

There was a class action lawsuit over this issue, and as a result, the manufacturers are now requiring that the flex gas lines be bonded. Something about the flex line rupturing when struck by lightning, and causing fires. Bonding is accomplished by use of a solid fitting, and not directly on the flex portion of the line.

There may be some confusion over the terms _grounding_ and _bonding_, since they are sometimes used interchangeably. But the proper term in this instance is _Bonding_.

Edit: Looks like Celtic beat me to the punch on this one.


----------



## Celtic (May 23, 2007)

here is that class action:

http://www.pddocs.com/csst/



> Summary​ A nationwide class action has been filed on behalf of any and all persons and/or entities who own structures in the United States in which CSST manufactured by Titeflex, Ward, OmegaFlex or Parker Hannifin was installed as of September 5, 2006. Plaintiffs allege that CSST poses an unreasonable risk of fire due to lightning strikes. The Settling Defendants deny these allegations and assert that their CSST is safe if properly installed in accordance with local codes and the manufacturers’ instructions. The Proposed Settlement is a compromise of disputed claims and does not mean the Settling Defendants are liable.


----------



## Magnettica (Dec 19, 2006)

How bout banning this type of gas pipe to any building equipped with an electrical system. I believe it's a stupid idea to bond both gas and electrical systems. Whats next, bonding water supplies?


----------



## Celtic (May 23, 2007)

Magnettica said:


> How bout banning this type of gas pipe to any building equipped with an electrical system. I believe it's a stupid idea to bond both gas and electrical systems.



250.104(B) says otherwise.
Of course you are free to write a proposal to change that NEC article :blink:



Magnettica said:


> Whats next, bonding water supplies?


Close...bonding pool water.


----------



## firemike (Dec 11, 2005)

*Question along the same lines*

On a project recently, it involved a service change. The inspector red-tagged it because the hot water heater wasn't properly "grounded". My electrician didn't know what the inspector wanted, called him up, this is what the require now in that jurisdiction, bonding the hot, cold, and gas lines at the heater. Is this something new? Seems kind of dangerous to me, or am I just "old school" and it is better?


----------



## Magnettica (Dec 19, 2006)

Celtic said:


> 250.104(B) says otherwise.
> Of course you are free to write a proposal to change that NEC article :blink:


Ok, fine.

So why are we bonding it twice?


----------



## Magnettica (Dec 19, 2006)

firemike said:


> On a project recently, it involved a service change. The inspector red-tagged it because the hot water heater wasn't properly "grounded". My electrician didn't know what the inspector wanted, called him up, this is what the require now in that jurisdiction, bonding the hot, cold, and gas lines at the heater. Is this something new? Seems kind of dangerous to me, or am I just "old school" and it is better?


Judging from that picture, it appears that the metal water piping system isn't grounded at all. Looks like you're missing either a #6 or #4 grounding electrode conductor back to your main disconnect. The jump from hot to cold is to assure no interuption of any fault current that may flow in the event the hot water is being changed or for some reason is missing. I don't know of any missing hwh's though, do you?


----------



## firemike (Dec 11, 2005)

Magnettica said:


> Judging from that picture, it appears that the metal water piping system isn't grounded at all. Looks like you're missing either a #6 or #4 grounding electrode conductor back to your main disconnect. The jump from hot to cold is to assure no interuption of any fault current that may flow in the event the hot water is being changed or for some reason is missing. I don't know of any missing hwh's though, do you?


 
When the electrician installed the new panel, he ran a #6 back to the water meter (and jumpered it) and to the two ground rods outside. I guess I am curious (electrician is to, the inspector didn't give a reason, just said it had to be there on the HWH.) I can see your reasoning for bonding between the hot and cold because if the dielectric couplings or removal (although almost surely temporary) of the HWH, but bonding everything to the gas line too? Sounds like an accident waiting to happen somewhere.


----------



## JohnJ0906 (Jan 7, 2007)

The thing to remember, and the reason the CSST bonding got upgraded, is lightning induced voltage. Lightning does not need to directly strike a building to induce a voltage on metal systems. Without a path back to planet earth (grounding for real) this can remain as a capacitive charge, until a path is created for discharge. If that path is through a person....


----------



## JohnJ0906 (Jan 7, 2007)

As far as the hot-cold-gas jumper at the water heater, thats where I did it, just because it was a common place for all three, and the first place an inspector would look for it.

Almost never see copper piping these days though.


----------



## JamesNLA (Jun 2, 2006)

We are not allowed to use stranded here, only solid. But that bonding is correct. All 3 are to be bonded together. Another reason is if the home owner has a water softener or some filtration system, the plumbing remains grounded in the event of servicing or removal.

And tell your plumber to get those die-electrics out of their. Biggest rust generator you can buy. Use brass and by the looks of it, it will piss a leak from those nipples, before the bottom gets pin holes. I know they are allowed, but they are absolute garbage. As far as bonding the gas too, it is not dangerous at all. As John said "Without a path back to planet earth (grounding for real) this can remain as a capacitive charge, until a path is created for discharge."

That is different than CSST. CSST issues are the actual line blowing open in the event of a direct lightning hit. Bonding it (to me) will do nothing, except get a few people and a bunch or lawyers rich.


----------



## Celtic (May 23, 2007)

Magnettica said:


> Ok, fine.
> 
> So why are we bonding it twice?


We are not bondng it twice...we are creating an equal potential.


----------



## Magnettica (Dec 19, 2006)

Normally the equipment grounding conductor bonding the gas piping on a residential-type furnace is #12 AWG at best based on 250.104(B). what size EGC will be required for the flex?


----------



## Celtic (May 23, 2007)

Magnettica said:


> what size EGC will be required for the flex?


All the info is in the links provided.


----------



## JohnJ0906 (Jan 7, 2007)

JamesNLA said:


> That is different than CSST. CSST issues are the actual line blowing open in the event of a direct lightning hit. Bonding it (to me) will do nothing, except get a few people and a bunch or lawyers rich.


Actually, I think this suit arose from indirect strike damage. The charge would arc from the CSST to another system with a different potential, causing leaks. Let me see if I can find that file....


----------



## JohnJ0906 (Jan 7, 2007)

I have a pdf file I would like to attach, but it is too large. Is there a host site I could use? (like photobucket for pictures)

How do you guys do it? :sad:


----------



## JohnJ0906 (Jan 7, 2007)

http://www.snapdrive.net/files/507790/csst_lightningconcerns.pdf

Lets see if this works....

Hey it works! Check out the Overview (1.1) in this report. It says it's *Indirect* strikes this bonding is trying to mitigate.

I don't see any way that CSST could take a direct strike, bonding or not.


----------



## 747 (Jan 21, 2005)

I say thats kind of a funky set up but i guess it wil fly. Mines not grounded. Also i have never seen a hotwater heater with so many water shut off values. I count four. Main cold water then the one coming off the T then the one on the funky elbow then the one just on top of heater. Mine only has two. Main cold water shut off and shutoff to boiler. Also its kind of a funky duct vent set up on it also the way it runs out that wall. Mine the duct does a 90 to the boiler and uses its vent to duct the fumes.


----------



## JamesNLA (Jun 2, 2006)

JohnJ0906 said:


> http://www.snapdrive.net/files/507790/csst_lightningconcerns.pdf
> 
> Lets see if this works....
> 
> ...


 
Well, this document address both direct and indirect. I read the entire complaint and the resulting settlement and what stuck in my mind was the event of a direct strike. Without wasting away my Sunday, I'll refrain from re-reading it and assume the legel document covered both direct and indirect. 

I will say this, I wouldn't be opposed to making CSST not be allowed to be exposed to the elements. There have been times where from a saftey standpoint I have gone iron pipe simply to avoid anyone messing with it. While you won't find anyone who loves this stuff more than me, I do think it has its limits as far as applications with respect to being exposed to the elements. This whole lightning issue is IMO B.S. But than again I don't live in an area where extreme lightning stormes happen. I guess I am of the thinking if a direct strike does happen, it won't matter if it's sch. 40 or CSST. I do however question if I am qualified to make that ASSumption.

But it this really is a great topic for those who enjoy thinking!!


----------



## MSSI (Mar 25, 2006)

The gas flex itself does not get bonded.. You bond the ridgid manifold or one end of whatever the flex is attached..The Gas manifold has been the easiest for me. I have been able to jump from water main to gas main in most cases.


----------

