Thread: CSST Line for Gas Fireplace

We've talked about this issue numerous times on here but I just wanted to try and clarify this for my own knowledge.

Is there ever any situation where routing flexible CSST gas lines through the knockouts on a gas fireplace is acceptable or allowed? This was a pic from a new construction house and the manufacturer installation manual was not there for me to refer to. Without having the manual in place and using past knowledge as my guide, I called the install as improper and that the line passing through the knockout should be iron pipe. I know local codes may apply and some fireplace installation manuals do not specify the type of gas line to be used. Some will say something to the affect of "gas supply line must be installed in accordance with local codes".

The builder of the property called me this morning and said his installer told him there's nothing wrong with this and that "everybody does it this way".

Similar Threads:

• Copper Gas Line -
• Exterior Installation of Gas Flex Line
• New overhead line securing technique
• CSST Class Action Settlements???
• Fireplace Had It's Own Air Handler Unit

NIck: I think there should be a grommet to protect the csst. See this thread:
http://www.inspectionnews.net/home_i...-location.html

Originally Posted by Nick Ostrowski

We've talked about this issue numerous times on here but I just wanted to try and clarify this for my own knowledge.

Is there ever any situation where routing flexible CSST gas lines through the knockouts on a gas fireplace is acceptable or allowed? This was a pic from a new construction house and the manufacturer installation manual was not there for me to refer to. Without having the manual in place and using past knowledge as my guide, I called the install as improper and that the line passing through the knockout should be iron pipe. I know local codes may apply and some fireplace installation manuals do not specify the type of gas line to be used. Some will say something to the affect of "gas supply line must be installed in accordance with local codes".

The builder of the property called me this morning and said his installer told him there's nothing wrong with this and that "everybody does it this way".

Nick: See:
http://www.gastite.com/include/langu...8_DI_Guide.pdf

Note that direct connection is allowed to non-movable appliances at 4.6.2 on page 55.

But, note that protection is required from sharp edges at 4.1(D) on page 44.

All CSST manufacturer design and installation manuals are required to conform with ANSI LC-1, so they all say the same thing.

Additionally, a sediment trap is required (and I don't see one in your photo) by IRC G2419.4.

And, Your picture appears to indicate that the CSST terminates at a shut-off valve which is connected to a flexible appliance connector. All of this is fine, except that the CSST must be properly supported at the shut-off valve.

Nick...

Based upon information from one CSST manufacturer (TracPipe), it is allowed.


From the TracPipe December 2007 FLEXIBLE GAS PIPING DESIGN GUIDE and INSTALLATION INSTRUCTIONS Section 4.6 C - Fireplace Installations #4 (pg 55):
When it is necessary to install TracPipe through sheet metal enclosures, such as those commonly used in decorative gas fireplaces, the manufacturer’s recommendation is to leave the protective yellow polyethylene jacket in place through the sheet metal penetration. The TracPipe should be clipped to the building structure at a suitable location outside the fireplace to limit the amount of motion after installation.
If additional protection is required, such as an installation with a source of
vibration (fan, etc.) which may cause abrasion, then a short piece of floppy
conduit or PVC pipe may be used between the jacket and the enclosure.

Dave

Originally Posted by Dave Hahn

Nick...

Based upon information from one CSST manufacturer (TracPipe), it is allowed.


From the TracPipe December 2007 FLEXIBLE GAS PIPING DESIGN GUIDE and INSTALLATION INSTRUCTIONS Section 4.6 C - Fireplace Installations #4 (pg 55):
When it is necessary to install TracPipe through sheet metal enclosures, such as those commonly used in decorative gas fireplaces, the manufacturer’s recommendation is to leave the protective yellow polyethylene jacket in place through the sheet metal penetration. The TracPipe should be clipped to the building structure at a suitable location outside the fireplace to limit the amount of motion after installation.
If additional protection is required, such as an installation with a source of
vibration (fan, etc.) which may cause abrasion, then a short piece of floppy
conduit or PVC pipe may be used between the jacket and the enclosure.

Dave

Dave: And if that quote is taken out of context one might be led to believe that the installation in the first post of this thread is correct. But, further reading reveals:

SECTION 4.4 — PROTECTION

The flexible gas piping must be adequately
protected from puncture, shear, crush or
other physical damage threats. The tubing
shall be protected at points of support and
when passing through structural members
such as studs, joists and plates in accordance
with this section. PROTECTION IS
REQUIRED WHENEVER THE TUBING IS
CONCEALED, RESTRAINED, AND WITHIN 3
INCHES OF A POTENTIAL THREAT. If the
tubing requires protection, the following
measures should be taken.

Section 4.4 contains the words "must" and "required".

Section 4.6(C) contains the words "recommendation" and "may".

I know which one I would pay the most attention to.

Nick,

Good call. See the information obtained from the GASTITE website:
http://www.gastite.com/include/langu.../TB2008_02.pdf

In this update the use of CSST is discussed. A concern is expressed about contact between the sheet metal cabinet and the CSST. Of course they also talk about bonding and grounding the CSST.

One of the best things I've done in the past year is to pay the $60/month fee for service to have wireless broadband internet service with me at all times on the job. When I run into a question like this, I use a Google search on the situation to find the installation instructions from either the fireplace maker or the gas tubing maker, or whatever source is most useful.

Another option for this type of info search would be to become a subscriber to ProSpex, the inspector support service operated by retired ASHI Member Kevin O'Hornett. Kevin takes calls from inspectors in the field and replies after he has done the info search. His annual fee is less than the cost of a year of wireless broadband service. You can see his website at Home Inspector Consulting Home Inspection Articles Home Inspection Training or call him at 303 517 1980. The type of question you raised is exactly what he is best at.

Best wishes. RH

Good info guys. Thanks for your help.

Originally Posted by Nick Ostrowski

Good info guys. Thanks for your help.

Nick:

Wardflex:

Where WARDFLEX penetrates the firebox of a factory built unit clearance shall be maintained around
the tubing and the tubing shall be protected against sharp edges with a grommet, caterpillar strip
(electrical supply stores), conduit bushing, or other methods. (Figure 4.29)

Parflex:

Parflex CSST routed through sheet metal enclosures should be protected from wear caused by vibration.
Tubing should be routed and supported to prevent contact with the metal enclosure. Protection
devices such as grommets, flexible steel conduit, conduit and rigid steel pipe can be used through
knock-out holes in the metal enclosure where appropriate. Materials used in fire-rated constructions
must meet applicable codes.

Diamondback:

The flexible gas piping must be adequately protected from puncture, shear, crush or other physical damage threats. The tubing shall be protected at points of support and when passing through structural members such as studs, joists and plates in accordance with this section. Protection is required whenever the tubing is concealed and constrained and within 3" of a potential threat. If the tubing requires protection, the following measures should be taken.

A.D., while I'm not a CSST expert or fuel gas code expert (and am unfamiliar with the provisions of ANSI LC-1), I respectfully disagree. I think you're the one taking statements out of context.

I see no reasonable concerns (Section 4.4) of "puncture, shear, crush or other physical damage threats" via passage through sheet metal enclosures, such as those commonly used in decorative gas fireplaces. Nor is it "passing through structural members such as studs, joists and plates." And as you recognize in one of your posts, we're talking about a "non-movable" appliance. So your "must" and "required" don't seem to apply here in my opinion.

As far as the protection "required from sharp edges," TracPipe, one of the most common manufacturer's in my area, states (again) "the manufacturer’s recommendation is to leave the protective yellow polyethylene jacket in place through the sheet metal penetration." DONE

That said, Gastite (your example) seems to address this further or differently, thus emphasizing variances in applicablilty by manufacturer.
On pg 59: "Where it is necessary to install Gastite through sheet metal enclosures (such as fireplaces) the tubing should be routed or supported to prevent physical contact with the enclosure. If direct contact cannot be avoided a rubber grommet may be used to prevent physical contact with the enclosure. Otherwise a Gastite angle stub or rigid pipe components must be used."

TracPipe shows the Stub-out as optional (Figure 4-24 on pg. 55).
Thus the broad stroke of "that's wrong" may vary from manufacturer to manufacturer.

Dave

Originally Posted by Dave Hahn

A.D., while I'm not a CSST expert or fuel gas code expert (and am unfamiliar with the provisions of ANSI LC-1), I respectfully disagree. I think you're the one taking statements out of context.

I see no reasonable concerns (Section 4.4) of "puncture, shear, crush or other physical damage threats" via passage through sheet metal enclosures, such as those commonly used in decorative gas fireplaces. Nor is it "passing through structural members such as studs, joists and plates." And as you recognize in one of your posts, we're talking about a "non-movable" appliance. So your "must" and "required" don't seem to apply here in my opinion.

As far as the protection "required from sharp edges," TracPipe, one of the most common manufacturer's in my area, states (again) "the manufacturer’s recommendation is to leave the protective yellow polyethylene jacket in place through the sheet metal penetration." DONE

That said, Gastite (your example) seems to address this further or differently, thus emphasizing variances in applicablilty by manufacturer.
On pg 59: "Where it is necessary to install Gastite through sheet metal enclosures (such as fireplaces) the tubing should be routed or supported to prevent physical contact with the enclosure. If direct contact cannot be avoided a rubber grommet may be used to prevent physical contact with the enclosure. Otherwise a Gastite angle stub or rigid pipe components must be used."

TracPipe shows the Stub-out as optional (Figure 4-24 on pg. 55).
Thus the broad stroke of "that's wrong" may vary from manufacturer to manufacturer.

Dave

Dave:

Omega Flex is the only one of the major manufacturers that did not hire a technical author quite up to the task of mirroring the intent of ANSI LC-1. All of the others are clear that the piping requires protections in these areas. Read my last post and illustrate to me on a manufacturer by manufacturer basis just how it is you justify stating that I am taking this out of context.

Dave, Aaron,

Running through the metal side of the appliance can best be equated to running through other metal objects, one which is similar in relation to running through the metal side of the appliance would be running through the metal side of a meta stud - same orientation of the penetration: metal surface in one plane and the CSST penetration is perpendicular through it.

Thus, if nothing is specifically stated about running through the metal sides of the appliance, applying what is stated about running through the side of metal studs (a basically similar penetration) should be applied.

In Section 4.3 - Routing, this is what it says about running through metal studs:

- 5. METAL STUDS
- - For installations involving horizontal runs through galvanized steel studs, the use of plastic grommets supplied by the stud manufacturer is recommended. The use of these grommets will reduce the likelihood of damage to the tubing non-metallic jacket.

While it does not say "shall" we have all had and been through the discussion of "recommend" in that if you do not do what the manufacturer recommends, you are putting yourself out on that liability tree limb all by your lonesome self ... which is not a good place to be.

Your call, but unless your pockets are deeper than the manufacturer's pockets, I would do whatever I could to not go out on that limb.

Originally Posted by Jerry Peck

Dave, Aaron,

Running through the metal side of the appliance can best be equated to running through other metal objects, one which is similar in relation to running through the metal side of the appliance would be running through the metal side of a meta stud - same orientation of the penetration: metal surface in one plane and the CSST penetration is perpendicular through it.

Thus, if nothing is specifically stated about running through the metal sides of the appliance, applying what is stated about running through the side of metal studs (a basically similar penetration) should be applied.

In Section 4.3 - Routing, this is what it says about running through metal studs:

- 5. METAL STUDS
- - For installations involving horizontal runs through galvanized steel studs, the use of plastic grommets supplied by the stud manufacturer is recommended. The use of these grommets will reduce the likelihood of damage to the tubing non-metallic jacket.

While it does not say "shall" we have all had and been through the discussion of "recommend" in that if you do not do what the manufacturer recommends, you are putting yourself out on that liability tree limb all by your lonesome self ... which is not a good place to be.

Your call, but unless your pockets are deeper than the manufacturer's pockets, I would do whatever I could to not go out on that limb.

JP: Agreed. It never ceases to amaze me how contractors, builders and even inspectors will often attempt to argue semantics when dealing with very real electrical, gas, and mechanical hazards. To err on the side of caution is my intent, and I believe, the intent of the manufacturers and code authors.

The buyer's realtor called me about this issue again this morning. The installer is apparently incredulous that I called for some type of repair/replacement to the gas line installation. I e-mailed to the realtor the link Roger posted in this thread as an example of what may be an acceptable install per the gas line manufacturer. The long and short is I advised the install needs to be completed per the fireplace and gas line manufacturer specifications. If the gas line is not Gastite brand, then they need to follow that manufacturer's specs. Either way, it appears at the very least that some type of protective grommet needs to be installed. At most, a new gas line altogether.

Originally Posted by Nick Ostrowski

The buyer's realtor called me about this issue again this morning. The installer is apparently incredulous that I called for some type of repair/replacement to the gas line installation. I e-mailed to the realtor the link Roger posted in this thread as an example of what may be an acceptable install per the gas line manufacturer. The long and short is I advised the install needs to be completed per the fireplace and gas line manufacturer specifications. If the gas line is not Gastite brand, then they need to follow that manufacturer's specs. Either way, it appears at the very least that some type of protective grommet needs to be installed. At most, a new gas line altogether.

Nick: Good call.

Write it as additional protection recommended for safety. If everybody else decides to jump off a cliff, make sure to check on that builder, and make sure he gets in line.

Several years ago, an attorney client of mine commented that "there is no reason anymore". What was meant is that people do not have common sense, or the ability to reason things out any more.

It was so correct.

Originally Posted by Randy Aldering

Write it as additional protection recommended for safety. If everybody else decides to jump off a cliff, make sure to check on that builder, and make sure he gets in line.

Several years ago, an attorney client of mine commented that "there is no reason anymore". What was meant is that people do not have common sense, or the ability to reason things out any more.

It was so correct.

Amen.

No one mentioned how the gas logs are vented. If through the roof there has to be an iron pipe stub-out past the opening to the fireplace. Whether vented or not, I would think protection from lightning arcing to the cabinet would be a stronger argument than vibration in a fireplace (with no fan) wearing through the CSST.

Originally Posted by Vern Heiler

No one mentioned how the gas logs are vented. If through the roof there has to be an iron pipe stub-out past the opening to the fireplace. Whether vented or not, I would think protection from lightning arcing to the cabinet would be a stronger argument than vibration in a fireplace (with no fan) wearing through the CSST.

Vern: If I am not mistaken, the requirement for threaded iron piping in the firebox is just that: for in the firebox. The gas appliance in question is supplied by piping under the firebox and not in it.

All of the appliances and vents in the house are required to be bonded, to include the CSST and the Type B vent for the fireplace unit.

Aaron, somewhere I read the requirement of hard or iron pipe if the appliance is vented through the roof with metal flue. Reasoning I think is lightning comming down the flue will jump to the CSST. I'll look and see if I can find the ref.

Originally Posted by A.D. Miller

Vern: If I am not mistaken, the requirement for threaded iron piping in the firebox is just that: for in the firebox. The gas appliance in question is supplied by piping under the firebox and not in it.

CSST is allowed to run into the gas appliance firebox to the decorative gas log set. The outer yellow covering is recommended to be removed from the CSST within the firebox but not required (even stated as not required in the installation instructions), but is cautioned that this is for the purpose of reducing fumes from it, etc.

Still, though, it is allowed by the manufacturer to go into the firebox and connect to the decorative gas log set.

Originally Posted by Jerry Peck

CSST is allowed to run into the gas appliance firebox to the decorative gas log set. The outer yellow covering is recommended to be removed from the CSST within the firebox but not required (even stated as not required in the installation instructions), but is cautioned that this is for the purpose of reducing fumes from it, etc.

Still, though, it is allowed by the manufacturer to go into the firebox and connect to the decorative gas log set.

Allowed or not, great place for lightning to jump to the now nicely bonded CSST.

Originally Posted by Vern Heiler

Allowed or not, great place for lightning to jump to the now nicely bonded CSST.

Whether it is "in" the firebox or "under" the firebox to the control valve, lightning is going to do the same thing, that difference in location is going to do nothing.

Replacing the CSST "in" the firebox with black iron pipe, having a lightning strike, with CSST attached to that black iron pipe ... it will make no difference to that lightning, regardless of any of the above, the CSST will be taking the lightning strike to ground along with everything.

Originally Posted by Jerry Peck

Whether it is "in" the firebox or "under" the firebox to the control valve, lightning is going to do the same thing, that difference in location is going to do nothing.

Replacing the CSST "in" the firebox with black iron pipe, having a lightning strike, with CSST attached to that black iron pipe ... it will make no difference to that lightning, regardless of any of the above, the CSST will be taking the lightning strike to ground along with everything.

Other than the arc gap form the cabinet to the CSST which will burn a hole in the thin wall CSST but not through the iron pipe.

Originally Posted by Vern Heiler

Other than the arc gap form the cabinet to the CSST which will burn a hole in the thin wall CSST but not through the iron pipe.

If you have ever seen lightning damage you will know that is only part of the arc, there will be arc all over, even traveling through wood to find a metal plate to arc to something else, that CSST which is connected to the iron pipe is going to be arcing off to other things all over the place. That CSST will be full of little arc burned holes, with gas leaking out all over the structure.

Here is the photo sequence which is attached:

1st photo: where lightning struck roof and blew the tiles off
2nd photo: where lightning hit and penetrated the roof
3rd photo: where lightning came down through wood truss
4th photo: where it jumped to metal strap supporting a/c duct work
5th photo: where it jumped out from the wood truss at the metal truss plate to ground in the NM cable laying nearby

From there the lightning went back to the panel, blowing the NM cable apart in many locations, blowing the NM cable apart at the clamp where it was clamped to the panel enclosure, to the dead front cover, then back to the enclosure at the bottom of the dead front panel.

Think of that CSST as that NM cable ...

This is an acceptable install in my area. However, where the pipe enters the knockout it should have some sort of wrap for protection against any sharp edges. One other thing, it is not permissable to have a union confined in a wall or cavity so it is in an acccessible area in case that fitting should fail and needs to be repaired.

Originally Posted by Todd Stettbacher

One other thing, it is not permissable to have a union confined in a wall or cavity so it is in an acccessible area in case that fitting should fail and needs to be repaired.

Todd,

Not following you, are you meaning (as you said) a "union", or a "threaded connection".

I ask because unless iron pipe is outlawed for gas piping you will have threaded joints in concealed spaces, and a CSST-to-iron pipe connection is no different than an iron pipe-to-iron pipe connection - there are all threaded joints.

Originally Posted by Jerry Peck

If you have ever seen lightning damage you will know that is only part of the arc, there will be arc all over, even traveling through wood to find a metal plate to arc to something else, that CSST which is connected to the iron pipe is going to be arcing off to other things all over the place. That CSST will be full of little arc burned holes, with gas leaking out all over the structure.

Here is the photo sequence which is attached:

1st photo: where lightning struck roof and blew the tiles off
2nd photo: where lightning hit and penetrated the roof
3rd photo: where lightning came down through wood truss
4th photo: where it jumped to metal strap supporting a/c duct work
5th photo: where it jumped out from the wood truss at the metal truss plate to ground in the NM cable laying nearby

From there the lightning went back to the panel, blowing the NM cable apart in many locations, blowing the NM cable apart at the clamp where it was clamped to the panel enclosure, to the dead front cover, then back to the enclosure at the bottom of the dead front panel.

Think of that CSST as that NM cable ...

Or you could think of the 3500 sq. ft. home that was bulit on top of one of the mountains here in NC. A near lightning strike burnt a hole in flex connector or CSST (I don't know which). Unfortunatley the LPG did not ignite or did not stay lit. The home owners were out of town at the time. Sometime latter, after the house was full of LP gas, it went up! Parts of the house were found on both sides of I-40.

There is no protection from a direct strike but you can reduce the risk of indirect or small feeder hits.

Originally Posted by Vern Heiler

There is no protection from a direct strike but you can reduce the risk of indirect or small feeder hits.

That's why I said:

Originally Posted by Jerry Peck

From there the lightning went back to the panel, blowing the NM cable apart in many locations, blowing the NM cable apart at the clamp where it was clamped to the panel enclosure, to the dead front cover, then back to the enclosure at the bottom of the dead front panel.

Think of that CSST as that NM cable ...

All those blown out holes in the CSST are like all those blown out areas in the NM cable, except that CSST leaks out gas, not electricity.

Once again I believe we have come to the end of a thread saying the same thing but not understanding eachother.

My contention is that a metal flue through the roof is like a lightning rod. Once the lightning is on the flue it is looking for ground and the flue is not normaly bonded. The first really good ground path is where the gas line enters the metal cabinet. Similar to your picture of the jump to the NM cable, this will be the most likely spot for the lighting to jump. Once on the CSST it is not as likely to jump to a higher resistance path (lighting does not seem to always follow the rules). A stub-out of heavy iron pipe can reduce the risk of burn through and is not an expensive precaution.

I don't write up non-vented or direct vent through the side wall but if I hear a good argument for it, I will start.

Originally Posted by Vern Heiler

Once again I believe we have come to the end of a thread saying the same thing but not understanding eachother.

Except that we are not saying the same thing.

Once on the CSST it is not as likely to jump to a higher resistance path (lighting does not seem to always follow the rules).

Actually, lightning does follow the rules, and the rules say that electricity, lightning included, will take all ... ALL ... available paths - not just the lowest resistance path.

A stub-out of heavy iron pipe can reduce the risk of burn through and is not an expensive precaution.

That will not reduce that risk by much.

Except that we are not saying the same thing.

Sorry, you seemed to waffel with the "That's why I said"

Actually, lightning does follow the rules, and the rules say that electricity, lightning included, will take all ... ALL ... available paths - not just the lowest resistance path.

I agree, but the path is not available until the dialectric is broken down. If the bonding to ground can carry enough of the current to prevent that voltage potential difference, it won't arc.

That will not reduce that risk by much.

I do not agree. If there were no benifit in distance seperation why would the Gastite Installation have the following:

4.3.9 Installation within Chaseways

Gastight tubing shall not be installed within a chase and/or enclosure that includes a metallic appliance vent and/or metallic chimney liner that protrudes through and/or past the roof unless:

• Permitted by local building code,
• An express separation distance as required by local code can be achieved along the entire length,
• The vent and/or liner is directly bonded to the grounding electrode system, AND

There is no physical contact between the metallic vent and/or liner and the Gastite tubing along the entire length of the vent.


The manufactue is not concerned with vibration rub through. I think they realize that the metal vet is like a lightning rod. Which they expand on with:

4.6.2 Direct Connection – Non Moveable Appliances

(a) When appliances such as water heaters, furnaces or fireplaces have metallic vents which extend beyond or protrude through the roof physical contact between the CSST and the appliance cabinet or vent is prohibited. Gastite recommends that all continuous metallic systems be bonded and grounded.


And then IMHO they waffel with the acceptability of a grommet. Not much better than air dialectric.

4.6.4 g) Gas Fireplaces

Where it is necessary to install Gastite through sheet metal enclosures (such as fireplaces) the tubing should be routed or supported to prevent physical contact with the enclosure. If direct contact cannot be avoided by routing and supporting, a rubber grommet may be used to prevent physical contact with the enclosure. Otherwise a Gastite angle stub or rigid pipe components must be used.


No physical contact with the metal appliance cabinet is allowed.

The whole line of thought by Gastight looks very much to be concerned with arcing and not rub through.

The whole lightning thing with CSST has been blown all out of proportion by the doomsdayers and media because it is an easy target. Sure, there have been some incidents and losses. When a house takes a hit from lightning, there WILL be significant damage regardless. The problem with arcs blowing out lines happens with soft copper tubing, too. Why don't you hear all the same hysteria about copper? Because its very hard to identify the mfr. of copper tubing, esp. post fire. Since CSST fittings are proprietary, it is quiet simple to identify the mfr. even when a house burns to the ground. Because you can identify a mfr. for sure, it is much easier to bring suit against them. BTW, you get houses destroyed by ruptured iron pipe gas leaks during earthquakes but you don't hear the hysteria for banning black iron, do you? No, you properly install and support it then install excess flow valves.

Part of the grommet thing is also because they don't want fuel lines energized with electricity.

I think you will see adoption of mandatory excess flow valves at the point of delivery solving the bulk of the lightning issues but not current bonding requirements, which are a joke. You may also see an eventual requirement for bonding fireplaces and chimneys to a dedicated EGC. One of the problems with attempting this with current stock is finding an attachment point with enough mass and strong enough base to attach a bonding wire that would survive a lightning hit, remain firmly attached and actually work. I use an aftermarket bonding clamp available from the electrical supply that bolts to the sidewall with two stove bolts. I would prefer something more substantial.

I also think you will begin to see those angled stub connections being required. If you attach it to the outer wrap with screws and caulk then a listed shutoff with a drain ( for an inlet pressure tap) then a coated flexible appliance connector, I think that should make everyone happy.

Todd, those gas lines as shown in the pict are acceptable under current codes with regards to access and turning wrenches. There isn't much room and you'll skin your knuckles but it can be done. Otherwise, they would not allow the valve to be placed there. Newer clean faced fireaplaces have even less room for wrenches. Unions are not allowed in "concealed" spaces. The space must be ventilated and have "access". You have to be able to replace a valve or connectors and inspect/ test them. You do Not have to provide "ready access".

In the meantime, I carry rubber tubing on my truck just for grommets.

The Chief Electrical Inspector of a large city here in North Carolina (hint hint) bought a house built in 2005 that contained CSST which was not bonded (allowable by code at the time).

He states that he has NO intention of bonding his gas line.
Hmmmmmmmmmm

Originally Posted by Bob Harper

The whole lightning thing with CSST has been blown all out of proportion by the doomsdayers and media because it is an easy target. Sure, there have been some incidents and losses. When a house takes a hit from lightning, there WILL be significant damage regardless. The problem with arcs blowing out lines happens with soft copper tubing, too. Why don't you hear all the same hysteria about copper? Because its very hard to identify the mfr. of copper tubing, esp. post fire. Since CSST fittings are proprietary, it is quiet simple to identify the mfr. even when a house burns to the ground. Because you can identify a mfr. for sure, it is much easier to bring suit against them. BTW, you get houses destroyed by ruptured iron pipe gas leaks during earthquakes but you don't hear the hysteria for banning black iron, do you? No, you properly install and support it then install excess flow valves.

Part of the grommet thing is also because they don't want fuel lines energized with electricity.

I think you will see adoption of mandatory excess flow valves at the point of delivery solving the bulk of the lightning issues but not current bonding requirements, which are a joke. You may also see an eventual requirement for bonding fireplaces and chimneys to a dedicated EGC. One of the problems with attempting this with current stock is finding an attachment point with enough mass and strong enough base to attach a bonding wire that would survive a lightning hit, remain firmly attached and actually work. I use an aftermarket bonding clamp available from the electrical supply that bolts to the sidewall with two stove bolts. I would prefer something more substantial.

Bob, I think you will find one of the originators of the CSST issue was the Frisco, TX fire chief. We are in a heavy lightening area with lots of two and three story McMansions with all the gas lines and equipment in the attic. According to what I have read, they traced back fire damage to the arced hole in the CSST and basically outlawed CSST in their jurisdiction. They have since come out with more stringent bonding and/or excess flow requirements and are allowing CSST. Their bonding requirments include all metal vents, pipes and equipment with heavy copper wire similar to pool equipment.

In the original photo, is there an issue with the csst not being in a fixed position and connected directly to the shut-off valve? I could not find anything in the Gastite manual.

Thanks,

Phil K.

Electricity does follow the rules. In this case, it's Kirchoff's Law if I remember correctly. The current that will flow in any branch of a circuit is inversely proportional to the resistance in that branch. Wood is clearly a lot more resistive than any metal, but we're talking about a lot of voltage to drive the current. It takes about 3E6 V/M for air to conduct. Since the separation between the clouds and the ground is hundreds to thousands of meters, there's a lot of juice there. Dry wood runs about 4.5-9E6 V/M, but there are a lot less meters between the top of the house and the ground than there are between the top of the house and the clouds. If there's enough voltage to jump out of the sky, there's plenty to travel through wood, metal, across air gaps, through people and anything else that gets in the way.

In short, in a lightening strike, the bulk of the current will take the least resistive path, but there is so much voltage and current available that there will be significant current in every path to ground.

As to the code official that's not bonding his CSST, I hope he has a pretty solid lightening rod setup on his house.

Something else to consider is the ground surge once the lightening hits the earth. Those electrons continue to travel through the earth until they are evenly spread. This happens fairly quickly, but if you're close to the strike and you have a continuous electrical path from one side of the house to the other, you can get some current there as well.