4 wire dryer outlet or 3 wire?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Your method of thinking could get some one killed.
Click to expand...

Doubtful. The homeowner is going to plug in that washer regardless. When you tell them you recommend running a new wire to the outlet which involves cutting the walls open they will usually say not thanks, I'll buy a .59 cheater. Now they have no ground and no GFI protection. This is probably why the NEC permits replacing a two prong with a three prong GFI. Besides I still think homeowner activities are beyond the NEC.
 
electrofelon said:
Jim W wrote:

I read the back of my microwave that i drag from job site to jobsite.It says must be pluged into a GROUNDED receptacle.
Click to expand...

Yeah, its got a grounded conductor :lol:
Click to expand...
They all have a grounded conductor,mine also has a grounding conductor.Perhaps whats needed is a permanent filler plug and not a label.Labels will either never get put on or fall off soon after.We can not help homeowners that mis use things,but we dont need to load the gun for them.If we filled that hole it would make them buy that adapter.Sad part is the guy at hardware store will tell them it works.
 
mario said:
mario said:
I thought that the 4 prong plug was made mandatory because of the fact that, as previously stated, the neutral and ground were being put together in the dryer, which in essence is bonding them together a second time ... not good ...
Click to expand...

:?: ... I was really hoping to get some comments on this ... anybody ?? ...
Click to expand...
The NEC would prefer to seperate the EGCs and neutrals at the service, and have a seperate system for each.

If there are no EGC's in the old house, then in the case of a three-prong dryer, you wouldn't be "bonding them together a second time" because there wasn't a first time. Since there is no EGC, then there is no possibility of neutral current flowing on it.

Therefore, if faced with the situation of leaving the frame of the appliance "floating" (no ground-fault current path) versus bonded to the neutral, the NEC will accept the lesser of two evils and take the neutral.

I imagine these appliances are shipped with the bonding jumper installed to limit the possibility of Joe Homeowner accidentally "floating" the exposed metallic part of the appliance.
 
iwire said:
electrofelon said:
I don't agree that it is against code to plug a three prong plug into a three prong GFI protected ungrounded receptacle.
Click to expand...

There is nothing that relives us from complying with 250.114 which basically requires that equipment with a grounding plug be connected to a grounded outlet.

It may not make sense but that is how it is.
Click to expand...
Do you ever feel that this is unintentional?

I wonder if anyone has ever submitted a proposal to 'correct' the 406.3(D) vs. 250.114 problem, and been rejected (as in, "250.114 takes precedence, the panel wants an EGC installled, yada yada...")?

I can't help but think that we are being a little more literal than they intended sometimes. Not that we would do that... :D
 
georgestolz said:
Do you ever feel that this is unintentional?
Click to expand...

No. :)

I did when Don first pointed out 250.114 to me, I had felt like you do.

Than I put some thought into it and decided I was looking at it wrong.

I do not believe the NEC wants users of electricity to receive a shock even for a short duration.

You do realize that even a GFCI protected circuit will provide a full circuit voltage shock to the victim and may provide the victim with more than 5 ma of current.

Your getting a shock, the current rises above the trip threshold, the sensor 'tells' the relay to open, in the mean time the victim is doing a jig.

Many people are injured from falls or hitting objects when they recoil away from what is giving them a shock. A GFCI does not prevent these type of injuries.

The trip level on a GFCI is designed around health adults. Picture a baby crawling on the floor touching a 'hot' refrigerator, do we want to count on a GFCI to trip or should the unit be grounded?

What I think is a joke is the allowance to use 3 wire outlets on two wire circuits as long as we GFCI and 'tag' it. :roll:

The folks that gave us that option are not the same folks that write 250.
 
georgestolz said:
I can't help but think that we are being a little more literal than they intended sometimes. Not that we would do that... :D
Click to expand...

I am not sure what you mean.

If the code is silent we get to do what we want.

If the code tells us to do something in one article as it does in 250.114 we have to follow it unless directed otherwise.

As an example of this take a look at 250.148

As you know 250.148 requires EGCs to be bonded to the enclosure, however there is an exception to ignore that for isolated grounds.

If it where not for the exception we would have an issue with IG circuits.

There is no exception for 250.114 so we are stuck with it.

You could certainly put in a proposal for one, I am interested in what they would say.
 
Any non grounded system can be fixed or partially fixed by simply replacing the wire with one that has a grounding wire.There is no need for a ground rod but i do suggest driving one.Everything comes down to money.Only a few appliances need that ground prong.Most frigs,microwaves,washers,computers do need them.
 
iwire said:
You could certainly put in a proposal for one, I am interested in what they would say.
Click to expand...
Too late, someone ;) beat us to the punch on the 2005 ROP...
18-14 Log #1923 NEC-P18
(406-3(D)(3), FPN (New) )
Final Action: Reject
TCC Action:
It was the action of the Technical Correlating Committee that this proposal be sent to Code-Making Panel 5 for
possible action as outlined in the Code-Making Panel 18 panel statement. This action will be considered by
Code-Making Panel 5 as a public comment.
Submitter: Donald A. Ganiere Ottawa, IL
Recommendation:
Add a new Fine Print Note after 406.3(D)(3)(c)
FPN: See 250.114 for a list of equipment that requires an equipment grounding conductor.
Substantiation:
There is no exception in 250.114 permitting equipment listed there to be connected to a GFCI protected circuit without an equipment
grounding conductor. This is often over looked and GFCI protected receptacles without an equipment grounding conductor are often
installed in locations where the equipment listed in 250.114 would be used. If the code intent is that the GFCI provides suitable
protection for these circuits, then there should be an exception to 250.114. If there is not an exception intended, then the FPN is needed
to call attention to this fact.
Panel Meeting Action: Reject
Panel Statement:
The panel acknowledges the principle that the submitter is communicating. It believes that the appropriate action would be an
exception in 250.114 and refers the proposal to CMP 5 for consideration. The panel believes that including the fine print note as
proposed without an exception in 250-114 would further confuse the issue. The panel refers this proposal to CMP-5 for possible action.
Number Eligible to Vote: 10
Affirmative: 10
Click to expand...
So, wonder what became of it after it was sent to CMP-5? I don't see it.
 
Someone. :wink: 8)

So it looks like the receptacle people feel no grounding is needed.

I doubt highly the grounding people will feel that way. :p
 
They are missing the point.If someone sees a grounding prong they assume they have a ground available.The sticker will not last forever or in many cases simply not be understood.A gfci receptacle could be made without the grounding slot.Sooner or later someone will get killed because of this.Any item that has a 3 prong plug is intended to have a ground,if it didn't need one they would have saved the money.A gfci does not solve everything.
 
It should have shown up as a comment in the 2004 ROC, but even if it had, Panel 5 would not have been able to take action on it, as the rules do not permit the panel to act on new proposals at the comment stage. It should appear as a proposal for the 2008 code.
Don
 
georgestolz wrote:
I can't help but think that we are being a little more literal than they intended sometimes. Not that we would do that...
Click to expand...
Well that says it all, very nice comment. It basically summarizes a great portion of the code interpretation conflicts we deal with on a daily basis. Inspectors, electricians, want-to-be electricians... taking the code too literally, reading too much into the code to see the true intent. JMHO :?

P.S On the dryer subject there is a problem with the cord connection grounding jumper removal or non-removal. Home owners, handymen, appliance delivery people... do not notice the thin jumper and hardly ever take it off. On the other side someone moving into a different dwelling may revert back to the three conductor cord with out putting the jumper back on, it happens all the time. Electricians are not normally hired to install dryer cords.
 
gmreynol said:
georgestolz wrote:
I can't help but think that we are being a little more literal than they intended sometimes. Not that we would do that...
Click to expand...
Well that says it all, very nice comment. It basically summarizes a great portion of the code interpretation conflicts we deal with on a daily basis. Inspectors, electricians, want-to-be electricians... taking the code too literally, reading too much into the code to see the true intent. JMHO :?

P.S On the dryer subject there is a problem with the cord connection grounding jumper removal or non-removal. Home owners, handymen, appliance delivery people... do not notice the thin jumper and hardly ever take it off. On the other side someone moving into a different dwelling may revert back to the three conductor cord with out putting the jumper back on, it happens all the time. Electricians are not normally hired to install dryer cords.
Click to expand...

We cant save stupid people,a few stupid ones need to die anyways.
 
Jim, that was a little over the top. How is the death of a homeowner due to a lack of understanding of bonding a "the dummies had it coming" event?

We see electricians roll through here now and then without an understanding of bonding. Mike Holt is on tour most of the year teaching the difference to professionals. When I arrived here the difference wasn't crystal clear.

So how are homeowners supposed to aquire that information? Osmosis?
As far as they know, that odd green wire doesn't do jack.
That's what I was told when I first started! "Nothing, just do it."

Show some heart, for Pete's sake!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top