[TowerTalk] height of ground rod at tower base

[Clay Autery]

30" BGL for the rod top IIRC.  On inspection, the top foot or so of the 
rod would need to be exposed if and so the inspector could verify the 
compliance roll-stamping in the top end of all "approved" rods. Also to 
inspect/approve the bonding method.

The inspection well would likely (IIRC) ONLY be REQUIRED for a rod in a 
cathodic protection field where the rods are doped or some other method 
that would likely vastly accelerate the natural corrosion processes.
R56 did cover inspection wells though.

"Inspection" to me would more properly consist of a resistivity test as 
described in excruciating detail in R56.  If the system is functional to 
meet your "code" and or protection requirements, there is a drastically 
reduced need to visually inspect the tops of the rods (or anything 
else).  In fact, visual inspection absent some arbitrary code or 
procedure requirement is of dubious value.

As Always, my opinion is worth precisely what you paid for it! <big wink 
and a nod>

Y'all have a WONDERFUL day!!!

Clay Autery
KY5G

On 10/23/2017 11:16 PM, RCM wrote:
>> On Oct 23, 2017, at 23:23, Jeff <keepwalking188 at ac0c.com> wrote:
>>
>> They want to see ground rods.
>
> It might have been from R56. (As once being a Motorola field tech with now faded brain…All that RF.
>
> Redoing and new two-way sites, we would dig a foot or so, sink the rod down 4” below grade, then
>
> drop a 3” PVC pipe over the rod. End cap it below mower blades.
>
> The rod and clamp,  Cadweld,  could be inspected anytime, now and in the future.