![]() |
Question on grounding rods
"Nick" wrote in message ... "Jim Lux" wrote in message ... wrote: John Doe wrote: Isn't concrete an insulator?? "The preferred ground in most jurisdictions is a concrete encased grounding electrode (aka a Ufer Ground, after the inventor's name Herb Ufer).. " What am I missing here? That while dry concrete is a pretty good insulator it is hard to find such just about anywhere other than Southern Arizona. And even there, the concrete is probably damper and a better conductor than the surrounding soil. Ufer's original work was developing grounding techniques for ammo bunkers in desert areas, since the ground rods didn't work. I, too, am amazed - I though concrete, whilst it would be damp on the outside underground bit, would be substantially dry after setting, and a good insulator, being essentially sand.. I guess its porous or microporous.. Nick Concrete never truly sets. The chemical reactions continue for centuries. Concrete structures put up 2000 years ago by the Romans are still perfectly useable today and under the surface remain chemically active. Many Roman structures such as the Colosseum and aquaducts would not have been possible without concrete. Some of the techniques developed then are still in use in building today such as making the higher levels of a structure using lighter, smaller aggregate. Embedding steel or copper rods in concrete will pretty much guarantee that the metalwork will remain in contact with moisture and conductive salts for as long as the structure holds together. The constant exposure to moisture and corrosive salts is the main reason for failure of modern ferro-concrete structures. Concrete will suck up whatever moisture is around, either from the air or the soil and is always damp inside, hence the steel rusting out unless protected by heavy galvanisation and sacrificial electrodes. Even in the worst environments, a couple of 8 foot copper rods embeded in concrete should give a DC or low frequency AC resistance/impedance of less than 200 ohms. Of course you could always use a dipole and balun. :-) Mike G0ULI |
Question on grounding rods
"Mike Kaliski" wrote in message ... "Nick" wrote in message ... "Jim Lux" wrote in message ... wrote: John Doe wrote: Isn't concrete an insulator?? "The preferred ground in most jurisdictions is a concrete encased grounding electrode (aka a Ufer Ground, after the inventor's name Herb Ufer).. " What am I missing here? That while dry concrete is a pretty good insulator it is hard to find such just about anywhere other than Southern Arizona. And even there, the concrete is probably damper and a better conductor than the surrounding soil. Ufer's original work was developing grounding techniques for ammo bunkers in desert areas, since the ground rods didn't work. I, too, am amazed - I though concrete, whilst it would be damp on the outside underground bit, would be substantially dry after setting, and a good insulator, being essentially sand.. I guess its porous or microporous.. Nick Concrete never truly sets. The chemical reactions continue for centuries. Concrete structures put up 2000 years ago by the Romans are still perfectly useable today and under the surface remain chemically active. Many Roman structures such as the Colosseum and aquaducts would not have been possible without concrete. Some of the techniques developed then are still in use in building today such as making the higher levels of a structure using lighter, smaller aggregate. Embedding steel or copper rods in concrete will pretty much guarantee that the metalwork will remain in contact with moisture and conductive salts for as long as the structure holds together. The constant exposure to moisture and corrosive salts is the main reason for failure of modern ferro-concrete structures. Concrete will suck up whatever moisture is around, either from the air or the soil and is always damp inside, hence the steel rusting out unless protected by heavy galvanisation and sacrificial electrodes. Even in the worst environments, a couple of 8 foot copper rods embeded in concrete should give a DC or low frequency AC resistance/impedance of less than 200 ohms. Of course you could always use a dipole and balun. :-) Mike G0ULI So then, what is the reason that they drive a separate ground rod in when they install a commercial tower whose legs are in concrete? Howard W3CQH |
Question on grounding rods
Concrete never truly sets. The chemical reactions continue for centuries. Concrete structures put up 2000 years ago by the Romans are still perfectly useable today and under the surface remain chemically active. Many Roman structures such as the Colosseum and aquaducts would not have been possible without concrete. Some of the techniques developed then are still in use in building today such as making the higher levels of a structure using lighter, smaller aggregate. Embedding steel or copper rods in concrete will pretty much guarantee that the metalwork will remain in contact with moisture and conductive salts for as long as the structure holds together. The constant exposure to moisture and corrosive salts is the main reason for failure of modern ferro-concrete structures. Concrete will suck up whatever moisture is around, either from the air or the soil and is always damp inside, hence the steel rusting out unless protected by heavy galvanisation and sacrificial electrodes. Even in the worst environments, a couple of 8 foot copper rods embeded in concrete should give a DC or low frequency AC resistance/impedance of less than 200 ohms. Of course you could always use a dipole and balun. :-) Mike G0ULI Then there is the matter of whether to extend the rebar into the soil or totally encapsulate in a concrete base for a tower... And the matter of applying a protective coating of paint to the rebar to minimize corrosion... I have a couple of clothes line poles that are in pretty good condition above and below the ground line but rusted completely through at the ground line! John Ferrell W8CCW "Life is easier if you learn to plow around the stumps" |
Question on grounding rods
Howard, W3CQH wrote:
"So then, what is the reason they drive a separate ground rod in when they install a commercial tower whose legs are in concrete?" Working with electricity you soon learn you need a rubber mat or rubber soled shoes to protect against electric shock from the mains when you are on bare concrete. It is often damp directly on the earth. When poured as a slab, concrete is placed on plastic as a vapor barrier to keep wood flooring from warping. A tower base after years is not completely set but still contains moisture and is still hardening. Tower bases are bypassed by ground cables outside the concrete block so that the moisture inside does not turn to steam during a lightning strike and blow the concrete asunder. Best regards, Richard Harrison, KB5WZI |
Question on grounding rods
John Doe wrote:
So then, what is the reason that they drive a separate ground rod in when they install a commercial tower whose legs are in concrete? Howard W3CQH Tradition? Maybe it's easier to just drive the rod and hook it up than to explain the subtleties of grounding to the inspector? The contractor owns stock in a ground rod manufacturing company? |
Question on grounding rods
John Ferrell wrote:
Concrete never truly sets. The chemical reactions continue for centuries. Concrete structures put up 2000 years ago by the Romans are still perfectly useable today and under the surface remain chemically active. Many Roman structures such as the Colosseum and aquaducts would not have been possible without concrete. Some of the techniques developed then are still in use in building today such as making the higher levels of a structure using lighter, smaller aggregate. Embedding steel or copper rods in concrete will pretty much guarantee that the metalwork will remain in contact with moisture and conductive salts for as long as the structure holds together. The constant exposure to moisture and corrosive salts is the main reason for failure of modern ferro-concrete structures. Concrete will suck up whatever moisture is around, either from the air or the soil and is always damp inside, hence the steel rusting out unless protected by heavy galvanisation and sacrificial electrodes. Even in the worst environments, a couple of 8 foot copper rods embeded in concrete should give a DC or low frequency AC resistance/impedance of less than 200 ohms. Of course you could always use a dipole and balun. :-) Mike G0ULI Then there is the matter of whether to extend the rebar into the soil or totally encapsulate in a concrete base for a tower... Never have the rebar extend into the soil.. The rebar should always be entirely contained within the concrete. If it's not, it provides a path for water to creep in between the rebar and concrete, leading to corrosion of the rebar, spalling, etc. |
Question on grounding rods
In article ,
"John Doe" wrote: So then, what is the reason that they drive a separate ground rod in when they install a commercial tower whose legs are in concrete? Howard W3CQH There is a GIANT difference between RF Grounding and Lightning Protection. Don't even think of confussing the two.... |
Question on grounding rods
You wrote:
There is a GIANT difference between RF Grounding and Lightning Protection. Don't even think of confussing the two.... And there's a third reason and set of requirements for grounding which is different from both of those -- AC safety ground. Its requirements are dictated by the NEC and local electrical codes, and it shouldn't be confused with either of the other two. Roy Lewallen, W7EL |
Question on grounding rods
"John Doe" wrote in message . .. "Mike Kaliski" wrote in message ... "Nick" wrote in message ... "Jim Lux" wrote in message ... wrote: John Doe wrote: Isn't concrete an insulator?? "The preferred ground in most jurisdictions is a concrete encased grounding electrode (aka a Ufer Ground, after the inventor's name Herb Ufer).. " What am I missing here? That while dry concrete is a pretty good insulator it is hard to find such just about anywhere other than Southern Arizona. And even there, the concrete is probably damper and a better conductor than the surrounding soil. Ufer's original work was developing grounding techniques for ammo bunkers in desert areas, since the ground rods didn't work. I, too, am amazed - I though concrete, whilst it would be damp on the outside underground bit, would be substantially dry after setting, and a good insulator, being essentially sand.. I guess its porous or microporous.. Nick Concrete never truly sets. The chemical reactions continue for centuries. Concrete structures put up 2000 years ago by the Romans are still perfectly useable today and under the surface remain chemically active. Many Roman structures such as the Colosseum and aquaducts would not have been possible without concrete. Some of the techniques developed then are still in use in building today such as making the higher levels of a structure using lighter, smaller aggregate. Embedding steel or copper rods in concrete will pretty much guarantee that the metalwork will remain in contact with moisture and conductive salts for as long as the structure holds together. The constant exposure to moisture and corrosive salts is the main reason for failure of modern ferro-concrete structures. Concrete will suck up whatever moisture is around, either from the air or the soil and is always damp inside, hence the steel rusting out unless protected by heavy galvanisation and sacrificial electrodes. Even in the worst environments, a couple of 8 foot copper rods embeded in concrete should give a DC or low frequency AC resistance/impedance of less than 200 ohms. Of course you could always use a dipole and balun. :-) Mike G0ULI So then, what is the reason that they drive a separate ground rod in when they install a commercial tower whose legs are in concrete? Howard W3CQH Howard It is necessary to provide a consistent earthing connection. The tower may develop galvanic resistance at joints due to corrosion, or sections of the tower may be insulated to prevent parasitic resonances at certain frequencies, or any one of a hundred other 'faults'. With a single earthing point, it is easier to monitor any deterioration in the system and achieve specific design criteria with a known resistance which is unlikely to change a great deal. Mike G0ULI |
Question on grounding rods
On Wed, 11 Jul 2007 11:35:11 -0700, Roy Lewallen wrote:
And there's a third reason and set of requirements for grounding which is different from both of those -- AC safety ground. Its requirements are dictated by the NEC and local electrical codes, and it shouldn't be confused with either of the other two. Is there such a thing as a ground that is good for both AC safety ground and lightning protection ... or, both of those plus RF ground? |
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:14 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com