Hendrix
Senior Member
- Location
- New England
To me it makes perfect sence, if replacing a 3 wire receptacle, to replace it with a TR receptacle. What do you guys think?
TR receptacles
- Thread starter Hendrix
- Start date
- Status
- Location
- Chapel Hill, NC
- Occupation
- Retired Electrical Contractor
I think you are suppose toreplace with TR as of 2008 NEC. I don't even stock non TR recep.
I pretty much agree but it shouldn't be enforced as code unless it is adopted as an amendment.
Roger
Split Bolt
Senior Member
- Location
- Northern Virginia
As I live and work in Virginia, (still 2005 here) I haven't purchased any TR receptacles yet. I was playing with the display at my supply house the other day and have some questions for you guys that work in states that have governments that can act quickly. When troubleshooting a dead circuit, a quick continuity check between the neutral and ground with my Vol-Con at a dead receptacle can tell me if it is likely a tripped GFI. (since the neutral will be disconnected from the ground) How do you do this with TR receptacles? Also, I will stick the tip of my "sniffer" into the "hot" slot to see if there is power there. I can also leave it in there and listen for the tone to stop while I am flipping breakers. Very handy, but I'm afraid that won't be possible with the TRs.
kspifldorf
Senior Member
- Location
- My Old Kentucky Home
I guess it's time to make up a small extension cord to put in your tool bag.
- Location
- Chapel Hill, NC
- Occupation
- Retired Electrical Contractor
Or simply pull the plate off.
Split Bolt
Senior Member
- Location
- Northern Virginia
Yeah, I suppose I'll have to do something! I did come up with a new name for the TR receptacles though. (I'll try to keep it G-rated so it doesn't get deleted) I now call them "DP receptacles!":grin:
I did come up with a new name for the TR receptacles though. (I'll try to keep it G-rated so it doesn't get deleted) I now call them "DP receptacles!":grin:
electricmanscott
Senior Member
- Location
- Boston, MA
Yeah, I suppose I'll have to do something!
Took me a second but that's pretty funny.
electricmanscott
Senior Member
- Location
- Boston, MA
hardworkingstiff
Senior Member
- Location
- Wilmington, NC
Yeah, I suppose I'll have to do something!
Took me a second but that's pretty funny.
Well.............. been more than a few seconds and I hate to admit it but, still trying to figure it out. I guess I'm a dummy.
Hendrix
Senior Member
- Location
- New England
Some inspectors are saying, just replace what you remove with the same.OK, what happened.
electricmanscott
Senior Member
- Location
- Boston, MA
There is a legitimate argument in their favor. It's been argued in this forum.
I only keep TR (DP
) on the truck so it doesn't really matter to me.That would be correct. It should come down to what was code when the permit was issued.
Roger
- Location
- Massachusetts
Volta
Senior Member
- Location
- Columbus, Ohio
I would say the receptacle is new and should meet current code.
I would say that it should be interpreted as AFCI is.
- Location
- Chapel Hill, NC
- Occupation
- Retired Electrical Contractor
I would say that it should be interpreted as AFCI is.
AFCI may be different since you can change a recep and not have to add AFCI to the circuit. But I believe if you replace a recep. in a bathroom that was not GFCI protected previously that you have to use a GFCI as a replacement. Same for TR as I stated in Post #2
Dennis, where can we find the requirement for this?
If we don't have to replace a standard breaker with an AFCI why would we have to replace a non TR receptacle with a TR? Personally I would if I had one at my disposal but I wouldn't make a special trip to get one.
Heck, I would even replace a two prong receptacle with a two prong receptacle. :grin:
Roger
- Location
- Chapel Hill, NC
- Occupation
- Retired Electrical Contractor
Unfortunately you will not find this written anywhere. It comes down to interpretation. You have a point about AFCI however it has been widely accepted that you do not need to involve AFCI if the circuit is not extended.
In terms of non grounded being replaced with non grounded receptacles-- that is explicitly allowed in art. 406.3(D)(3)(a)
No one has thought to define when AFCI and TR's should be used. IMO, the cost of a TR is insignificant esp. if you are replacing just a few. My suppliers don't even stock non TR recep. unless they are 20 amp.
In terms of non grounded being replaced with non grounded receptacles-- that is explicitly allowed in art. 406.3(D)(3)(a)
No one has thought to define when AFCI and TR's should be used. IMO, the cost of a TR is insignificant esp. if you are replacing just a few. My suppliers don't even stock non TR recep. unless they are 20 amp.
Volta
Senior Member
- Location
- Columbus, Ohio
My point is that for the simple replacement of any circuit component, except in 210.8 locations, the NEC has never required newer versions.
As far as I know, 406(D)(2) is the only replacement requirement in the NEC.
If a replacement receptacle is to be interpreted to be required to be a newer version, than the same logic is needed when replacing a breaker feeding an AFCI area, assuring modern 110.26 compliance when an old fuse is to be replaced, or requiring a new circuit when the Living Room receptacle outlet is found to be on the same circuit as the Dining Roo.
Slippery slope here, and no NEC text to back it up that I know of.
- Location
- Chapel Hill, NC
- Occupation
- Retired Electrical Contractor
I agree and I thought I explained all that above.
- Status