• Welcome to The Building Code Forum

    Your premier resource for building code knowledge.

    This forum remains free to the public thanks to the generous support of our Sawhorse Members and Corporate Sponsors. Their contributions help keep this community thriving and accessible.

    Want enhanced access to expert discussions and exclusive features? Learn more about the benefits here.

    Ready to upgrade? Log in and upgrade now.

Ufer required in Helix Steel foundation IRC?

BN4537

BN4537

SAWHORSE
Joined
Sep 10, 2020
Messages
910
Location
Kansas
ICC - ES Helix Steel

The ICC - ES report above recommends that building departments approve the use of this concrete reinforcing product https://www.helixsteel.com/products-services/ under certain reasonable limitation for IRC houses that are not in major seismic areas.

Given:

NEC 250.50. - All grounding electrodes as described in 250.52(A)(1) through (A)(7) that are present at each building or structure served shall be bonded together to form the grounding electrode system. Where none of these grounding electrodes exist, one or more of the grounding electrodes specified in 250.52(A)(4) through (A)(8) shall be installed and used.
Exception: Concrete-encased electrodes of existing buildings or structures shall not be required to be part of the grounding electrode system where the steel reinforcing bars or rods are not accessible for use without disturbing the concrete.

The argument has been that if there is rebar in a foundation, you are required to bond to it because of 250.50. Are they required to provide a concrete encased electrode at a house that uses only Helix Steel reinforcement in the foundation?
 
Beniah Naylor said:
ICC - ES Helix Steel

The ICC - ES report above recommends that building departments approve the use of this concrete reinforcing product https://www.helixsteel.com/products-services/ under certain reasonable limitation for IRC houses that are not in major seismic areas.

Given:

NEC 250.50. - All grounding electrodes as described in 250.52(A)(1) through (A)(7) that are present at each building or structure served shall be bonded together to form the grounding electrode system. Where none of these grounding electrodes exist, one or more of the grounding electrodes specified in 250.52(A)(4) through (A)(8) shall be installed and used.
Exception: Concrete-encased electrodes of existing buildings or structures shall not be required to be part of the grounding electrode system where the steel reinforcing bars or rods are not accessible for use without disturbing the concrete.

The argument has been that if there is rebar in a foundation, you are required to bond to it because of 250.50. Are they required to provide a concrete encased electrode at a house that uses only Helix Steel reinforcement in the foundation?
Click to expand...
250.50 Grounding Electrode System.
All grounding electrodes as described in 250.52(A)(1) through (A)(7) that are present at each building or structure served shall be bonded together to form the grounding electrode system. If none of these grounding electrodes exist, one or more of the grounding electrodes specified in 250.52(A)(4) through (A)⁠(8) shall be instal⁠led and used.
Exception:
Concrete-encased electrodes of existing buildings or structures shall not be required to be part of the grounding electrode system if the rebar is not accessible for use without disturbing the concrete.

If there is no rebar available then you still have 4 methods to use to comply. Helix does not qualify as a CCE.
 
Sounds like building steel to me, but also sounds like "isolated sections" which I believe there is a gimmie for.....Because no one makes you bond your lally columns..
 
If there is the potential to install a ufer then the ufer is required.
 
So, a house with plastic plumbing, on a slab with no rebar, non-metallic wiring methods, wood framed... Do you make them throw in an $8 piece of rebar for a Ufer or just drive two ground rods?
 
Beniah Naylor said:
So, a house with plastic plumbing, on a slab with no rebar, non-metallic wiring methods, wood framed... Do you make them throw in an $8 piece of rebar for a Ufer or just drive two ground rods?
Click to expand...
If they work includes a new footing…then yes a CEE is required. The CEE can be steel or copper.
 
Last edited:
ICE said:
If they work includes a new footing…then yes a CCE is required. The CCE can be steel or copper.
Click to expand...
While that sound like a good idea, it's not required by the NEC. The NEC tells you what configurations constitute a CEE (250.52(A)(3)) and that if that configuration is present, you must use it for a grounding electrode (250.50), but it doesn't require you to create that configuration.

Cheers, Wayne
 
wwhitney said:
While that sound like a good idea, it's not required by the NEC. The NEC tells you what configurations constitute a CEE (250.52(A)(3)) and that if that configuration is present, you must use it for a grounding electrode (250.50), but it doesn't require you to create that configuration.

Cheers, Wayne
Click to expand...
No argument here. It has always been the position that if a new service and a new footing are being installed then a ufer is required. It has always been part of the job card checklist. Now if there is just a bunch of tiny pieces of steel that can't create a 20' length ... well the copper alternate would be required. So your contention that a ufer is not required until it is installed makes perfect sense. It just won't fly here. I suppose the reason is the relative efficacy compared to the other electrodes.

So I stand corrected. A ufer is up to you and your particular situation.
 
ICE said:
Now if there is just a bunch of tiny pieces of steel that can't create a 20' length ... well the copper alternate would be required.
Click to expand...
If the structural design creates a CEE, then certainly you need to connect to it.

Does your jurisdiction have a local amendment requiring the copper alternate when the structural design doesn't create a CEE? How about when the design precludes creating one, e.g. there's a vapor barrier encapsulating the footings, so there's no concrete/earth contact.

Cheers, Wayne
 
I am not aware of an amendment. There’s more than a few quirks afoot in LA County.

The only occurrence of the footing not in contact with soil that I am aware of is when there is a methane barrier.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top