1981 Square D panel- found almost all the grounds under one lug. This is a first!
That termination is not listed for that grouping under its one screw, IMHO.
Would it be considered a defect
As always thanks for your help!
An NEC violation and it needs to be corrected.
Robert, this one is obviously a problem, especially since there is a larger solid conductor in there as well, that will prevent solid attachment. But I see this occasionally where they twist all the conductors together, and then attach under one lug. I typically dont call that out, but would that be acceptable?
No, there’s too much chance one of the wires will be loose.
Better, but still not listed, is a split bolt connector to connect a bundle of wires together like a large wire nut:
Not if they are all twisted together first, hence the question
Twisting alone won’t make a reliable connection for all the wires.
Twisting plus solder, sure. Knob & tube uses this in my area, works great.
Twisting plus a wire nut is fine. The nut is a spring, keeping thing together over time even as hot and cold cycles work to pull things apart.
Twisting plus a crimp. Sure. But why bother twisting?
Twisting alone… no.
Twisting plus a screw no.
Check NEC 250.148/110.14(B)'s history for the date that got explicit in the NEC. It was never a good idea, and if you pull at each individual wire in such a bundle you’ll see why on enough occasions to be of concern. The ground wire is only needed in case of the failure of something else. Just because it looks OK does not mean it can carry the needed current when the time comes.
End of discussion
Not code complaint but if they’re twisted tightly and inserted then there might not be a hazard either problem is you will never know if the connection is reliable. That’s similar to SEU cable where the neutral is made of multiple strands wrapped around the ungrounded conductors. That neutral is terminated by twisting all of the strands together and inserting it into the terminal. And although that is a similar type of connection for the neutral it is permitted, for multiple EGC’s it is not and should be called out for correction.
Same thing for a split bolt often you will see multiple EGC’s in the split bolt and the connection may be adequate to carry the fault current but since that split bolt has not been tested and listed for multiple conductors you cannot reliably predict if it will operate correctly under a fault.
What is the terminal rated for?
George, that lug is for one conductor. Are you really asking this with 48 years of experience?
Jim, it was a rhetorical question. I try to get these guys to understand that guessing is not an appropriate way to approach electrical system deficiencies. Relying on forums is not the best option either. While it is true that they are likely to get some correct answers, the odds are (in most HI forums), are against them. I see some amazingly bas answers to electrical questions all the time on forums. They need to understand that there are proper ways to make such determinations. Adequacy of design is outside the scope of most, if not all, SOPs, but if they are going to challenge adequacy of design, they need to understand where and how to get accurate information.
The irony, as I see it, is that so many inspectors are afraid of being sued. It is the little stuff that gets them in trouble. A junior lawyer could rip a home inspector apart in a deposition over stuff like that.I’ve been deposed many times and I know their tactics. Many of their questions are variations on “How do you know that”. Anything other than quoting a credible source, (the manufacturer’s specifications being the best option) isn’t going to be sufficient.
It was hard to tell whether the question was an actual question or meant to be thought provoking. While no one know everything I would certainly hope that simple stuff like this would be covered in the training and there would be little need for additional questions.
It might be, I cannot remember. Going through the training and retention of that information are two different things.
The issue with the Nachi electrical course is there’s a huge amount of clutter: absolutely irrelevant details. And not much follow-up on the important basics, including double or multi taps, lack of handle ties, GFCI bootleg grounds, loose worn out outlets, knob & tube handy andy repairs, etc
Sad commentary that the organization is sending so many into the field without a good foundation to build on. It certainly does nothing to enhance the reputation of the individual inspector or the industry.
I’m sorry you have such a low opinion oh mighty one. Why are you here?