|
| Ek's Home | Forum | Chat | Electrical Links | |
| Subject - Neutral to ground continuity | |
| Electricrulez247 |
I have a question on checking for continuity between the neutral and ground of branch circuits in the main distribution panel. I will describe what happened recently on a new residential project that brought this to my attention. Our company practice was, on the finish out of the job, for the last thing to be done on the job to be cutting in the panels. In this order on main distribution panel, check bonding jumper, strip all romex sheaths while labeling conductors, connect all grounding conductors, before connecting neutral conductors to the same bar as grounding conductors check for continuity to grounding conductors (each neutral with no neutral connected to bar) then connect neutral conductors once they all checked to be open, then connect ungrounded conductors to breakers. We had been doing this for several years until recently when the following happened. When the electrical was completed on the job we called for a final electrical inspection. The inspector came out and left a note with the following written on it "neutrols down in panel". The general contractor called to tell me our inspection had failed and read me the note. I having never heard that terminology before called the inspector to ask what he meant by "neutrols down in panel". He told me in a not so friendly way that we should have checked for continuity between neutral and ground before calling for a final inspection and when he finds continuity he stops his inspection and will not inspect any further until it is clear. I explained to him our practice and how when we checked they were all open. He angrily told me they were not. I went back to the job site disconnected all the neutral conductors at one time from the neutral/ground bar, checked each one all showing to be open to ground, then reconnected all neutral conductors. At this point I call the inspector back. Politely tried to tell him I could not find any neutral conductors with continuity to ground. He angrily told me there was. I was mad but keep my cool, and told him that I did not read continuity to ground on any neutral conductors. He simply said "OK". I called and scheduled a reinspection for the next day. I wanted to be at the job site when he was but I missed him. He had left a note that said "neutrols down stop inspection". I immediately called him. He was very short with me in telling me that he had already told me once that he would not inspect any further until I fixed the neutral continuity to ground. I told him again that I had checked and it showed to be open. I asked him which one had he checked. He said he did not know but it had to be fixed before he would even look at anything else. We hung up and I opened the panel cover. One of the white neutral conductors had a small red ink dot on it. I removed that one from the bar checked with my meter to ground and sure enough continuity to ground. I then traced back that neutral to a 3 gang switch box with two circuits in it. With the neutrals from both circuits wire nutted together. I then realized he was taking one neutral at a time from under a terminal checking it then reconnecting it before checking the next. Because those two branch circuit neutrals were together he was reading through back to the panel where the neutral and ground are bonded. Where as I was disconnecting all branch circuit neutrals then checking one at a time to ground before reconnecting any back. I separated the neutrals from the two circuits. To fix the flaw in our old method we now check in this order on main distribution panel, check bonding jumper, strip all romex sheaths while labeling conductors, connect all grounding conductors, connect neutral conductors to the same bar as grounding conductors while checking for continuity to grounding conductors one at a time before putting neutral conductor under terminal, once they all checked to be open connect ungrounded conductors to breakers. Finally my question is. Which is a better way of checking? and Do you think this is good practice for inspector to take conductors loose? I do not know of another way in which you would have found this issue.(In this case the wires from all this were almost cut into at the terminals from all the tightening and loosening. Which by the way we cut all the ends off and fixed after the inspector disconnected for the 3rd time.) Sorry for the long post hope someone has the patience to read and reply. Thanks. |
| KSsparky | Unless two circuits from different phases are sharing a neutral, they shouldn't be tied together. The neutral is intended to carry the imbalance from it's intended circuit(s). Connecting different neutrals together will alter this process and, in effect, create one larger, paralleled conductor. This is a violation of the NEC. |
| JimmyDee | First of all, I would like to welcome you to a great forum for learning. It is good to have you here. I can see the point the inspector was making and it should have been corrected. Its too bad that, when a contractor makes a mistake, the inspector has to be a jerk. He could have easily tagged the wire for you since he had it off anyway. I guess we learn from our mistakes. I'll bet you don't have this happen again. I too have never heard the term he used and I think he could have been a little clearer. Bed side maner is important and maybe a word to his boss is in order. For him to have tagged the violation was in order and would have saved both of you a lot of strife. Jim |
| cs409 | hope you come back because it sounds like you have a lot to share with the rest of our forum friends....u will find it easy going and i think i can speak for most, no jerks on this site! as for your problem, am with jimmy, the inspector was a jerk, instead of being a team player,teacher, etc...... your problem could have been solved with a red dot as u notice in the end! but a note going along with the mark would have helped alllll..... i bet this insepctor didnt even go inside to see if something was plugged in? as for 2 different circuits in a box,,,,keep the netrals seperate....best to u. |
| Electricrulez247 | Thanks for the replies. I did edit my post. I wanted to get across the problem with what I had done as well as question the inspector disconnecting all these neutrals and reconnecting. I question the damage done to the condutor. Not to mention messing up my neat panel. By the way this is a 7000+ sqft house you can imagine the number of neutral connections. Thanks again |
| Ryan_J | quote: Hey...did you forget about me? 
|
| bigvic | Was this a rough inspection or a final inspection? All my inspectors require panels to be made up complete with breakers at the rough |
| cs409 | oh yell, #1 Ryan, but we forgive him, he drinks beer LOL.... |
| Ship Shock | You shoreside electros with your neutral lines scare the bejeezus outta me. Note to selves: If you ever get a contract to work on a ship, we do NOT, by USCG rule, use "floating neutrals"...we ground everything. Granted, it's not too tough on a steel box floating in salt water. Aboard ship, there are no "hot" legs and "switch" legs. We break 'em both. I'm sure y'all must have a zillion stories about getting zapped the "back way" by a neutral wire. Cheers; |
| JimmyDee | quote: I thought all your conductors were "floating".  Jim |
| cs409 | ship shock, i did 8 yrs marine and then 4 yrs offshore gas production platform,,,,,,,, its been a lot of yrs between ships/drilling rigs but it was an experience......welcome to the forum.... |