Code enforcement

[K8MHZ]

from a testing perspective, UL says to use the GFI button because they know that the only way to test is to bypass small amps around the GFI coil sensor. you cannot do this with a 5-P unless the EGC is present.
you OP have ran into one of those snafu areas in electrical.

Why not?

 

[FionaZuppa]

Why not?

really?

pls explain how you get amps to bypass the GFI recept coil sensor with a 5-P tester if no EGC is present, you gonna "short" around the GFI sensor how ??

 

[K8MHZ]

really?

pls explain how you get amps to bypass the GFI recept coil sensor with a 5-P tester if no EGC is present, you gonna "short" around the GFI sensor how ??

By '5-P tester' if you mean an external plug in tester I have done it by using a three prong cheater and running a wire from the screw tab of the adapter to a known and tested ground.

I don't recommend this, or using any external tester on receptacles unless you know for sure where all the GFCI receptacles are. If you stick a plug in tester in a receptacle downstream from a GFCI receptacle, and you hit the button on the tester and the power to the receptacle goes off, you probably tripped the upstream receptacle.

What if you can't find it?

If you only use the buttons on the GFCI, you won't have that problem.

 

[FionaZuppa]

By '5-P tester' if you mean an external plug in tester I have done it by using a three prong cheater and running a wire from the screw tab of the adapter to a known and tested ground.

I don't recommend this, or using any external tester on receptacles unless you know for sure where all the GFCI receptacles are. If you stick a plug in tester in a receptacle downstream from a GFCI receptacle, and you hit the button on the tester and the power to the receptacle goes off, you probably tripped the upstream receptacle.

What if you can't find it?

If you only use the buttons on the GFCI, you won't have that problem.

wouldnt you need to know all of the downstream recepts in order to verify that the power is dead when you press test button on upstream GFI. so your argument of "cant find it" it moot. allowing amps from one GFI'd ckt to the EGC of another GFI'd ckt will not trip the other GFI as the amps are on EGC and not passing through the other GFI.

AHJ's use 5- plugin testers, and the use of cheater is not in their book, etc. NEMA embraces use of "testers". is AHJ required to test downstream recepts via their 5- holes (downstream 1- cant be tested at the outlet using a "tester") ?? how do you verify a downstream recept doesnt have its EGC shorted to the N wire, would a plugin 5- have its little EGC 0.8mA light turn on if EGC was shorted to N, yet using plugin test button would not trip GFI, but pressing test button on upstream GFI would kill downstream power.

so to verify that 1- downstreams are protected by the upstream GFI, AHJ would need to attach a load to the 1- (light, fan, whatever) and then use test button of GFI. NEMA suggests using test button with a load attached.

the issue falls within GFCI's being 5- items, which imho should require EGC to be attached. downstream can be whatever, but if 5- downstream then EGC should be there, if not then it must be a 1-.

so, if the GFCI box included two small plastic barbed pins to block out EGC on faceplate, this would be better if the GFCI only had a 2-wire feed. hence, maker need not produce 1- faceplates, you can essentially convert a 5- into a 1- GFCI recept, etc. you can also put on your fav "no EGC" sticker, but not required at that point, its now a 1-, etc.

 

[iwire]

wouldnt you need to know all of the downstream recepts in order to verify that the power is dead when you press test button on upstream GFI. so your argument of "cant find it" it moot. allowing amps from one GFI'd ckt to the EGC of another GFI'd ckt will not trip the other GFI as the amps are on EGC and not passing through the other GFI.

AHJ's use 5- plugin testers, and the use of cheater is not in their book, etc. NEMA embraces use of "testers". is AHJ required to test downstream recepts via their 5- holes (downstream 1- cant be tested at the outlet using a "tester") ?? how do you verify a downstream recept doesnt have its EGC shorted to the N wire, would a plugin 5- have its little EGC 0.8mA light turn on if EGC was shorted to N, yet using plugin test button would not trip GFI, but pressing test button on upstream GFI would kill downstream power.

so to verify that 1- downstreams are protected by the upstream GFI, AHJ would need to attach a load to the 1- (light, fan, whatever) and then use test button of GFI. NEMA suggests using test button with a load attached.

the issue falls within GFCI's being 5- items, which imho should require EGC to be attached. downstream can be whatever, but if 5- downstream then EGC should be there, if not then it must be a 1-.

so, if the GFCI box included two small plastic barbed pins to block out EGC on faceplate, this would be better if the GFCI only had a 2-wire feed. hence, maker need not produce 1- faceplates, you can essentially convert a 5- into a 1- GFCI recept, etc. you can also put on your fav "no EGC" sticker, but not required at that point, its now a 1-, etc.

Wow

Once again, the only correct way to test GFCIs is by following the directions and those directions do not tell us or anyone to use an external tester.

 

[ggunn]

And people who have a 3 prong plug will then do one of 2 things to circumvent this hypothetical 2 wire gfci-

1) Use a cheater plug- (can't begin to tell you how many of these have been found plugged into 2 wire outlets in order to accommodate the fridge in pre '60s kitchens) thereby rendering the 2 wire gfci idea pointless.

2) Remove the ground pin totally so the plug will fit (yes, people are idiots and actually do this:happyyes- not a huge "immediate" deal because the equipment will be fed from your 2 wire gfci but now you also definitely have a potential future shock hazard lurking if this altered equipment is ever moved and plugged into a non gfci receptacle- an example here of the law of unintended consequences.

Riddle me this:
Will a "cheater" on the extension cord going to my outdoor Christmas lights stop them from tripping the GFI/GFCI every time it rains? Would that make them less "safe"? The lights themselves have no ground pin.

 

[iwire]

Riddle me this:
Will a "cheater" on the extension cord going to my outdoor Christmas lights stop them from tripping the GFI/GFCI every time it rains? Would that make them less "safe"? The lights themselves have no ground pin.

They need to start making Christmas lights with 3 wires ........

 

[FionaZuppa]

Wow

Once again, the only correct way to test GFCIs is by following the directions and those directions do not tell us or anyone to use an external tester.

Hmmm, i guess NEMA is just a group of fools, and UL not that far behind ??

how exactly do you test at the downstream outlet to make sure that, at that outlet, a fault will trip the upstream GFI? there is no button there, and a button would be useless on a 1-.
goof wad installs a 5- downstream where downstream is all 2-wire, but s/he connects the downstream egc to N. how do you test at the downstream outlet, as AHJ's do? from your view, AHJ's should never fault test beyond the test button of the GFCI. with auto testing GFCI's does an AHJ even have to test anything, button or otherwise?? doesnt the AHJ want some sort of confirmation that every outlet (recept) behind GFI will actually trip GFI under a fault?

 

[FionaZuppa]

They need to start making Christmas lights with 3 wires ........

wouldnt his example mean his xmas lights are a 5- , and his cord was a 1- ??
if the cord was a 5- and lights a 1-, then you would not need a cheater.

 

[ggunn]

wouldnt his example mean his xmas lights are a 5- , and his cord was a 1- ??
if the cord was a 5- and lights a 1-, then you would not need a cheater.

I don't know what you mean; 5- and 1- what? I have a three wire extension cord going out to a tree in the yard and a three prong three way splitter out there with several strings of two wire lights plugged into it. When it rains the GFCI circuit they are plugged into shuts down.

 

[iwire]

Hmmm, i guess NEMA is just a group of fools, and UL not that far behind ??

I see nothing foolish in using the test button to test the device.

how exactly do you test at the downstream outlet to make sure that, at that outlet, a fault will trip the upstream GFI? there is no button there,

You plug a load into the down stream outlets and push the test button on the device. If the load goes dead it is GFCI protected.

and a button would be useless on a 1-.
goof wad installs a 5- downstream where downstream is all 2-wire, but s/he connects the downstream egc to N. how do you test at the downstream outlet, as AHJ's do? from your view, AHJ's should never fault test beyond the test button of the GFCI. with auto testing GFCI's does an AHJ even have to test anything, button or otherwise?? doesnt the AHJ want some sort of confirmation that every outlet (recept) behind GFI will actually trip GFI under a fault?

:huh::huh:

 

[K8MHZ]

I don't know what you mean; 5- and 1- what?

NEMA 1 - 2 prong 15A receptacle

NEMA 5 - 3 prong 15A - 30A receptacle.

It took me some decoding, too, but I am pretty sure that's the reference used.

 

[FionaZuppa]

NEMA 1 - 2 prong 15A receptacle

NEMA 5 - 3 prong 15A - 30A receptacle.

It took me some decoding, too, but I am pretty sure that's the reference used.

yeah, srry, took the NEMA shorthand for "2 prong" and "3 prong", etc.

you can also save some keystrokes by skipping that Shift key, only use it when needed.

 

[FionaZuppa]

I don't know what you mean; 5- and 1- what? I have a three wire extension cord going out to a tree in the yard and a three prong three way splitter out there with several strings of two wire lights plugged into it. When it rains the GFCI circuit they are plugged into shuts down.

so you would take 1-P xmas lights and insert that into a 5-R to 1-P cheater, and then the 1-P side of cheater into the 5-R side of your extension cord? thats a logical 1- to 1- (physical 5-R to polarized 1-P "cheater") connection. so i guess i missed what the question you had was, srry.

 

[kwired]

I'm pretty sure that the human body is more conductive than fresh water, and is why there are so many fresh water electrocutions around docks.

dkidd brings up another good point, as water tends towards insulator it acts more like a piece of plastic where you can have spots of varying charge, and if the body bridges two spots you get amps.

Yes human body is more conductive then fresh water. But draw out the circuit path here - assuming a (two wire corded) hair dryer dropped in an insulated tub of water with a person sitting in the tub.

Where is the voltage source introduced into the water - two points within the appliance. What is resistance of the water between the ungrounded conductor in the appliance and the person sitting in the tub? For current to flow through that person we need to complete a circuit back to the appliance and to the grounded conductor within the appliance. The distance of that path is also through water and approximately same length.

Now what is the distance through water directly between ungrounded and grounded conductor, probably much shorter then the path to and from the person in the tub regardless of what their body resistance is - therefore virtually all the current passes directly from ungrounded conductor to the grounded conductor and not out to the person through their body and then back to the appliance. Introduce a grounded object to the mix and then that person is possibly in serious shock risk as they then can cross voltage gradients within the water.

The biggest risk is not knowing what may become a second point of potential. [Strike that I should have said a third point of potential away from the appliance] Someone outside the tub reaching in to help could introduce that risk. That second person is better off pulling the plug instead of trying to do anything else in such a situation.

 

[FionaZuppa]

Yes human body is more conductive then fresh water. But draw out the circuit path here - assuming a (two wire corded) hair dryer dropped in an insulated tub of water with a person sitting in the tub.

Where is the voltage source introduced into the water - two points within the appliance. What is resistance of the water between the ungrounded conductor in the appliance and the person sitting in the tub? For current to flow through that person we need to complete a circuit back to the appliance and to the grounded conductor within the appliance. The distance of that path is also through water and approximately same length.

Now what is the distance through water directly between ungrounded and grounded conductor, probably much shorter then the path to and from the person in the tub regardless of what their body resistance is - therefore virtually all the current passes directly from ungrounded conductor to the grounded conductor and not out to the person through their body and then back to the appliance. Introduce a grounded object to the mix and then that person is possibly in serious shock risk as they then can cross voltage gradients within the water.

The biggest risk is not knowing what may become a second point of potential. [Strike that I should have said a third point of potential away from the appliance] Someone outside the tub reaching in to help could introduce that risk. That second person is better off pulling the plug instead of trying to do anything else in such a situation.

sure, some amps go via the "1-inch" path between the cord terminations in the device, you also energize the water which can allow amps to flow, basically an "infinite" amount of "resistors" in parallel to the 1" path, thus some amps may flow through you. whatever it is, all amps are accounted for by GFI, and, as long as the amps are low enough OCPD will not trip.

 

[kwired]

sure, some amps go via the "1-inch" path between the cord terminations in the device, you also energize the water which can allow amps to flow, basically an "infinite" amount of "resistors" in parallel to the 1" path, thus some amps may flow through you. whatever it is, all amps are accounted for by GFI, and, as long as the amps are low enough OCPD will not trip.

I agree, but you are saying that a bird on a high voltage line will also have current flowing up one leg, through the bird, then back down the other leg, which is probably true, but the line has so much lower resistance the current flowing through the bird is so low it doesn't even feel it.

I won't say there is no risk at all to the person in the tub, but they still have a pretty high chance of not even feeling anything, the resistance of the path between the two points of applied voltage is going to be much lower then the path out to the potential victim and then back to nearly the same point.

Similar paths exist between equipment grounding conductors and earth, but only when there is significant voltage drop on the service neutral do we start to be subject to enough voltage to notice any problems. Swimming pools are a higher risk because users are immersed in the water, which is why we have much stricter bonding and grounding rules with swimming pools then most general applications.

Maybe you should experiment with a plastic bucket, tub, etc filled with water and insert a live cut off cord end into it and (being careful) take some voltage measurements between different points in the water, readings to remote objects don't count, we are simulating a person sitting in an electrically isolated tub and assuming they don't touch anything outside the tub. But once you do establish a current path to a remote object you will trip the GFCI as long as more then 4-6 mA flows and that object is not connected to the load side of the current transformer of the GFCI. Even if you contact the other ungrounded conductor of the supply system you throw the CT current off and it trips - no EGC needed - just imbalance in the CT.

 

[iwire]

Here is what I am going to do

I am closing this thread unless the OP comes back.

Fiona if you want to continue this start your own thread to do so

I reminded everyone to stay on the opening topic. That feel on deaf ears so closed it is.