cloth wiring

The OP didn't specify exactly what the customer's insurance company was looking for in writing.

I can guess that a real estate inspector made some kind of note about it, raising concerns, and now the insurance company is looking for some kind of reassurance that it's not a fire hazard.

I've seen that kind of request related to knob and tube
 
don_resqcapt19 said:
How would a plug in tester trip the GFCI? The plug in tester puts a small load between the hot and the EGC...no equipment grounding conductor no trip. Also, even though you are installing grounding type receptacles downstream of a GFCI on a circuit that does not have an EGC, the code prohibits running an equipment grounding conductor to those receptacles.

That being said there a lots of ground fault paths that people can come into contact with, and the GFCI provides the protection in those cases without an EGC..
Click to expand...
If it wouldn't trip, why would the NEC allow us to replace non-grounding type receptacles with grounding type receptacles only with a GFCI at the first outlet and a requirement to mark other receptacles "GFCI Protected Outlet" and "No Equipment Ground"? 406.4 (D)(2)(c) If it didn't provide GFCI protection, why is this a requirement? I've been able to trip them before after making such replacements. Maybe it was because the boxes were metal and there was a grounded source somewhere that allowed them to trip.
 
The GFCI will work fine.
Here is an excerpt from GB on their analyzer

"Caution: When testing GFCIs installed in 2- wire systems (no ground wire available), the tester may give a false indication that the GFCI is not functioning properly. If this occurs, recheck the operation of the GFCI using the test and reset buttons. The GFCI button test function will demonstrate proper operation."


All manufacturers have similar wording in their instructions.
 
Rick 0920 said:
If it wouldn't trip, why would the NEC allow us to replace non-grounding type receptacles with grounding type receptacles only with a GFCI at the first outlet and a requirement to mark other receptacles "GFCI Protected Outlet" and "No Equipment Ground"? 406.4 (D)(2)(c) If it didn't provide GFCI protection, why is this a requirement? I've been able to trip them before after making such replacements. Maybe it was because the boxes were metal and there was a grounded source somewhere that allowed them to trip.
Click to expand...
It provides GFCI protection, it just won't trip with a plug-in tester
 
scottakins7204 said:
I have a customer who is looking for something in writing for her insurance company about cloth wiring. We don't have any local ordinance about it and its not listed in the NEC. Maybe someone can point me in the right direction. I would appreciate that. Have a nice day everyone.
Click to expand...
In my experience, insurance companies don't know what they mean by "cloth wiring", or frankly "aluminum wiring".

You need to describe each layer starting at the core:
  • [Solid/Stranded] [Copper/Aluminum] wire
  • Gauge #____
  • First layer ___________
  • Second layer __________
  • Filler _________________ [might be paper]
  • Outer Sheathing

  • Ground wire gauge.


For example 6 ga stranded aluminum wire with a thermoplastic sheath, and an outer composition jacket.

Never say "cloth" unless you want trouble.
Say "composition". Which could be fiberglass/tar or who the hell knows or cares, unless it's in poor condition. Just avoid "cloth".
 
Rick 0920 said:
If it wouldn't trip, why would the NEC allow us to replace non-grounding type receptacles with grounding type receptacles only with a GFCI at the first outlet and a requirement to mark other receptacles "GFCI Protected Outlet" and "No Equipment Ground"? 406.4 (D)(2)(c) If it didn't provide GFCI protection, why is this a requirement? I've been able to trip them before after making such replacements. Maybe it was because the boxes were metal and there was a grounded source somewhere that allowed them to trip.
Click to expand...
It does provide GFCI protection, but you can't test it with a plug in tester unless the ground socket of the receptacle has a path to ground.
 
Rick 0920 said:
If it wouldn't trip, why would the NEC allow us to replace non-grounding type receptacles with grounding type receptacles only with a GFCI at the first outlet and a requirement to mark other receptacles "GFCI Protected Outlet" and "No Equipment Ground"? 406.4 (D)(2)(c) If it didn't provide GFCI protection, why is this a requirement? I've been able to trip them before after making such replacements. Maybe it was because the boxes were metal and there was a grounded source somewhere that allowed them to trip.
Click to expand...
James L said:
It provides GFCI protection, it just won't trip with a plug-in tester
Click to expand...
The CTs are looking at the difference of voltage between the "hot" lead and the Neutral, and then the assumption is the difference is going to ground "somehow" and protection to personnel. It won't trip with a plug in tester as the tester is sending the current to a non-existing conductor so there is no loss of current between the "hot" and neutral.
 
jim dungar said:
Wasn't the ground wire smaller in this old cables?
Click to expand...
Yes & No depending on year. My parents house was built think it was 1953 or 54 and all of the old cloth covered NM cable had a ground wire. A year later a different builder built several blocks of homes across from them with no ground wires. in the 1950 & 60's #14 NM cable had a #16 guage copper ground wire. My house was built in 1964 and had cloth covered NM cable ( ya Romex ) with reduced ground wire. I replaced most of it with NMB cable. When I started out doing electrical work while still attending Vo Tech high school around 1967 they offered plastic jacket 250' boxes of NM cable for believe it was 50¢ more then the cloth covered type. Was well worth the extra money especially during hot weather. Pulling hundreds of feet of cloth covered NM cable in hot weather covered your hands with tar like material. Nobody wore work gloves back then. Wish they allowed you to run #14 from all House switches to luminares on 20 amp circuits that are feed with #12 copper wire.
 
My grandparents' last house built around 1968 had NM that looked just like modern stuff except it had a reduced ground.

The reduced ground was covered in an irregular green insulation that kind of filled the space between the conductors.
 
Birken Vogt said:
My grandparents' last house built around 1968 had NM that looked just like modern stuff except it had a reduced ground.

The reduced ground was covered in an irregular green insulation that kind of filled the space between the conductors.
Click to expand...
Have came across the reduced ground wire like you mentioned The two supply house that me & my electrician dad purchased NM cable bac during that time period never sold it with that type of covering over the bare ground wire .
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top