Top or Bottom?

Status
Not open for further replies.
ptonsparky

ptonsparky

Tom
Location
NE (9.06 miles @5.9 Degrees from Winged Horses)
Occupation
EC - retired
We will be installing a recept at the top of a 120' grain leg. Mainly used for a radio repeater. Where would you want the GFCI protective device, top or bottom?


As SOP we install GFCI protected recepts in almost every location outside of a building. Required or not.

Might even be talked into a single for the repeater and a GFCI duplex for gp use.
 
Timely post :D
I believe under the '11 Code the GFCI is required to be "readily accessible" primarily, as I understand, to facilitate the monthly test that EVERYONE performs.
There is already controversy concerning this requirement in regard to RTUs where a ladder is required to reach the roof.
In your case, on the ground would be readily accessible for testing and a pain for the guy who has to climb down and reset it.
 
ptonsparky said:
Might even be talked into a single for the repeater and a GFCI duplex for gp use.
Click to expand...

Not sure you can do that.

210.8 Ground-Fault Circuit-Interrupter Protection for
Personnel. Ground-fault circuit-interruption for personnel
shall be provided as required in 210.8(A) through (C). The
ground-fault circuit-interrupter shall be installed in a
readily accessible location.

(B) Other Than Dwelling Units. All 125-volt, singlephase,
15- and 20-ampere receptacles installed in the locations
specified in 210.8(B)(1) through (8) shall have
ground-fault circuit-interrupter protection for personnel.

(4) Outdoors

Exception No. 2 to (4): In industrial establishments only,
where the conditions of maintenance and supervision ensure
that only qualified personnel are involved, an assured
equipment grounding conductor program as specified in
590.6(B)(2) shall be permitted for only those receptacle
outlets used to supply equipment that would create a
greater hazard if power is interrupted or having a design
that is not compatible with GFCI protection.
Click to expand...

IMO you must provide GFCI protection.

And with the 2011 the GFCI shall be installed in a
readily accessible location.

Not sure how this plays out, if the receptacle is at the top of the tower for use by workers up there. it seems that the GFCI should be with them. But not so much for the repeater.

So .......

Maybe a GFCI breaker to supply a dedicated single receptacle for the repeater and a separate normal circuit to supply a standard duplex GFCI for worker use.
 
The question is does the top of the grain leg meet the definition of readily accessible or not, if not then your options are more limited.
 
It wasn't long ago when the 2011 poked its ugly head out that inspectors were questioning whether a gfci receptacle was allowed on a rooftop near the a/c units when ladders were needed to access the roof. IMO, in that case the gfci control should be on the roof however if it were a control for something that is permanently plugged in then it would need access from below.
 
I would not want to put a radio repeater on a GFCI receptacle on top of a Grain Elevator. I think the GFCI might frequently trip during thunderstorms.

I would install a simplex receptacle for the repeater inside the NEMA 4 box that houses the repeater. In my opinion, since its inside a NEMA 4 enclosure, and it only serves equipment inside the same enclosure, its not an "outdoor" receptacle. Therefore, GFCI would not be required. Others may feel differently (including your inspector).

I would add a GFCI receptacle inside the same enclosure for service use. Again, this is just my opinion, but any time the receptacle will be used, it will be readily accessible for testing before someone plugs in their equipment.

I thought the new GFCI's do self testing??? And automatically shut off if they are defective? Wouldn't that also negate the need to have it readily accessible??

Steve
 
steve66 said:
I would install a simplex receptacle for the repeater inside the NEMA 4 box that houses the repeater. In my opinion, since its inside a NEMA 4 enclosure, and it only serves equipment inside the same enclosure, its not an "outdoor" receptacle. Therefore, GFCI would not be required. Others may feel differently (including your inspector).
Click to expand...

I would say that unless you can stand inside the NEMA 4 enclosure while using the receptacle it is an outdoor receptacle. (Certainly a personal opinion, not a code fact :))
 
Art 100:

Accessible, Readily (Readily Accessible). Capable of being reached quickly for operation, renewal, or inspections without requiring those to whom ready access is requisite to climb over or remove obstacles or to resort to portable ladders, and so forth
Click to expand...


120 foot grain elevator has permanent ladder attached to it. People that operate these need to be able to get to top easily (easy meaning they don't have to wait for a crane, manlift, etc. it is still a little of a task to get there. But no different than using the stairs on a high rise building - some of them even have stairs instead of ladders.

If this were the roof top of a high rise building with a permanent stairway to the roof no one would question it being readily accessible, this install is not really that much different. I would suspect more nuisance tripping with 120+ feet of conductor on the load side of GFCI if it were at the bottom.

Another thought is if I were the owner/provider of the service the repeater is associated with - I would not want it cord and plug connected in the first place - unless it were within some enclosure up there protecting it from the elements and also not requiring GFCI protection.

The elevator owner wants a receptacle at top of these legs in most cases for service work on the leg - from my experiences.
 
In my opinion, the receptacle would meet the definition "readily accessible" at either location and I know few folks perform the monthly "test", but if one cares to meet that requirement, the GFCI at the bottom would sure be more convenient. :D
 
The solution is simple. You just need a 3 way GFI. Put one at the top and bottom. That way you can just reset it from top or bottom. I can't believe all you smart guys don't know this.:lol:
 
If the only intent of having GFCI's in readily accessible locations is to "perform the monthly test" we need to publicly execute those responsible for the change.

Why would this make people perform the "monthly test". As an electrician I may press the test button more than most people - but usually on someone elses GFCI's that I am working on. I certainly do not do this on the GFCI's in my home on any regular basis. I may just out of the blue press the test button occasionally.

Smoke alarms should also be moved from the ceiling (where they are more effective) to readily accessible locations so they can be tested montly like the instructions call for.:sick:
 
kwired said:
If the only intent of having GFCI's in readily accessible locations is to "perform the monthly test" we need to publicly execute those responsible for the change.

Why would this make people perform the "monthly test". As an electrician I may press the test button more than most people - but usually on someone elses GFCI's that I am working on. I certainly do not do this on the GFCI's in my home on any regular basis. I may just out of the blue press the test button occasionally.

Smoke alarms should also be moved from the ceiling (where they are more effective) to readily accessible locations so they can be tested monthly like the instructions call for.:sick:
Click to expand...

yea my GFCIs get tested every time I plug in something in the bottom opening and my finger hits the test button:lol:

The problem I have is the definition of accessible (readily)

Accessible (as applied to equipment). Admitting close
approach; not guarded by locked doors, elevation, or other
effective means.


Accessible, Readily (Readily Accessible). Capable of being
reached quickly for operation, renewal, or inspections
without requiring those to whom ready access is requisite
to climb over or remove obstacles or to resort to portable
ladders, and so forth.
Click to expand...

It seems in both accessible and readily accessible, a GFCI in a locked and screwed shut control cabinet or a breaker panel with a lock on it or in a locked power room would be a violation???

In all the control cabinets I have installed for lift stations we always have a GFCI receptacle in them and it would seem to be a violation? how many schools have locked panels with GFCI breakers, or industrial sites with locked control rooms???

I think there needs to be some exceptions to it or a clarification on what is considered accessible (readily)
 
hurk27 said:
It seems in both accessible and readily accessible, a GFCI in a locked and screwed shut control cabinet or a breaker panel with a lock on it or in a locked power room would be a violation???
Click to expand...

I think you are exaggerating the issue, the rules are the same for OCPDs and they are often behind locked doors or behind the doors of control panels.
 
iwire said:
I think you are exaggerating the issue, the rules are the same for OCPDs and they are often behind locked doors or behind the doors of control panels.
Click to expand...

Maybe exaggeration, maybe not.

Many have decided this readily accessible requirement now means that a GFCI receptacle for a whirlpool tub can no longer be under the tub/within the pump compartment because it is not readily accessible. I agree with that if to access the GFCI you must climb a ladder and gain access from a space in the ceiling from the level below the tub. If all you need to do is open an access door from same level as the tub is installed at - why is that any different than having to go through locked doors or removing a padlock from a cover to gain access to an overcurrent device that also needs to be readily accessible? Some have said in other threads "if you need a tool to gain access it is not readily accessible". Wouldn't a key be a tool to open a locked door? So is a big hammer or crowbar:happyyes:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top