GFCI not recommended

[mbrooke]

Ground pin broken / missing from plug, internal hot to case fault.

User standing on wet floor touches appliance, completes the circuit, receives full voltage shock, GFCI senses the current imbalance, opens the circuit, the user stops getting a shock and lives to talk about it.

Of course, that is a very likely scenario with portable appliances hence why GFCIs have there place with them.

Your continual posts questioning the usefulness or need for GFCIs really changes my perspective of your mindset.

GFCIs have their place, but having them expand to places where the above scenario is unlikely with code proposals citing end of life appliances fires changes my opinion of the code's mind set.

 

[iwire]

That is true and very likely in small portable appliances both from plugging & un-plugging along with the cord becoming damaged, but such is not common for large appliances.

Untrue, large appliances in commercial kitchens are on wheels and get moved for cleaning all the time, large tools on construction sites get moved from location to location.

You do not help your case when you try to misled or try to deny what many of us see all the time.

 

[iwire]

GFCIs have their place, but having them expand to places where the above scenario is unlikely with code proposals citing end of life appliances fires changes my opinion of the code's mind set.

GFCIs should be required for virtually all 120 volt receptacles for the protection of personal from shock hazard.


I do agree they should not be required to protect us from fire due to the crappy design of appliances. Appliances should be required not to fail in a fire mode.

 

[mbrooke]

Untrue, large appliances in commercial kitchens are on wheels and get moved for cleaning all the time, large tools on construction sites get moved from location to location.

Correct, but me and Pete's concern are fixed in place items (ok a fridge technically isnt "fixed" in place but you get my point) that rarely get moved like Dishwashers, gas ranges, washing machines, ect.

Commercial equipment can get moved daily, sometimes several times in a day to facilitate sanitation. However in residential I cant imagine the dishwasher being pulled out at 9:00 so the cleaning crew can do their thing.

You do not help your case when you try to misled or try to deny what many of us see all the time.

So you frequently have seen dwellings where appliances are pulled out to clean behind them every 24 hours?

 

[mbrooke]

GFCIs should be required for virtually all 120 volt receptacles for the protection of personal from shock hazard.

So you do support foreign wiring practices after all

I do agree they should not be required to protect us from fire due to the crappy design of appliances. Appliances should be required not to fail in a fire mode.

And I personally think thats where AFCI and GFCI protection is coming from. Some of the code proposals even cite it, hence why Im questioning the requirements. We should not be paying for manufacturing screw ups.

 

[romex jockey]

We are installing and being inspected to the '14

AFCI branch , GFCI as required.

New appliances all have NRTL sticker, major American manufacturer

Appliances will not tolerate '14 requirements

Manufacturer 'tech support' openly advocating code violations

Can't close this job out .....Can't get paid.......Can't make everyone happy

Who's authority do i hail to?

~RJ~

 

[big john]

I have no problem with current GFCI requirements because I have a lot of faith in the maturity of the technology and believe nuissance tripping is very rare.

If an appliance is tripping a GFCI then that's exactly why it needs protection, because apparently it has a dangerous amount of leakage current. I would not be comfortable removing the GFCI.

Throw a toaster in the sink and see if the breaker trips, I'm betting not.

You might be surprised: I have put the energized plug of a GFCI protected extension cord in a cup of water and it didn't trip. I think the safety feature kickcs in because wet humans are more conductive than tap water.

 

[romex jockey]

Gas ignitors inherently going to ground have replaced 'standing flame' gas appliances

GFCI technology is not going to mature past it's toroidal coil parameters of detection

This is a new install, all on the up/up

A decision is required here , as well as for any similar future job bid or quoted

~RJ~

 

[mbrooke]

We are installing and being inspected to the '14

AFCI branch , GFCI as required.

New appliances all have NRTL sticker, major American manufacturer

Appliances will not tolerate '14 requirements

Manufacturer 'tech support' openly advocating code violations

Can't close this job out .....Can't get paid.......Can't make everyone happy

Who's authority do i hail to?

~RJ~

This is exact proof that laws are being made by people having no idea of real world scenarios or consequences.

 

[mbrooke]

I have no problem with current GFCI requirements because I have a lot of faith in the maturity of the technology and believe nuissance tripping is very rare.

If an appliance is tripping a GFCI then that's exactly why it needs protection, because apparently it has a dangerous amount of leakage current. I would not be comfortable removing the GFCI.You might be surprised: I have put the energized plug of a GFCI protected extension cord in a cup of water and it didn't trip. I think the safety feature kickcs in because wet humans are more conductive than tap water.

GFCIs look for imbalance, if none is flowing then it will not trip them.

 

[romex jockey]

Suggesting someone should break the law by removing a safety device mandated by the code is shameful and not something a true electrical professional would recommend or condone. Not liking a law or rule is no excuse to not comply with it. If you guys hate the electrical industry so much, perhaps you should go sell used cars where this type of behavior is tolerated.

Unbelievable...

The only un-compliant suggestion is the manufacturer

This manufacturer is NEMA sanctioned & American

How do you respond ?

~RJ~

 

[romex jockey]

This is exact proof that laws are being made by people have no idea of real world scenarios.

True

Nobody wants to make the call, and the EC takes the fall.....

~RJ~

 

[mbrooke]

True

Nobody wants to make the call, and the EC takes the fall.....

~RJ~

I cant see people putting up with this much longer.

Without a doubt either the manufacture, NRTLs, or CMP is at fault here. This appliance seems it produce high leakage current and the manufacture seems to be aware. The CMPs (I would think) deem it unacceptable so the question is what is it doing on the market in the first place? I see a conflict.

 

[mbrooke]

Mr. Jockey,

I have a request. Do you have the wiring diagram and model number to this range? I want to do some cross examination...

 

[big john]

GFCIs look for imbalance, if none is flowing then it will not trip them.

I guess I didn't mention the cord cap had an EGC so there was a path for ground current. My point simply was that tap water isn't as conductive as we might assume.

 

[mbrooke]

I guess I didn't mention the cord cap had an EGC so there was a path for ground current. My point simply was that tap water isn't as conductive as we might assume.

Ahhh, ok. My mistake for assuming :ashamed1:

You are correct though, tap water is a poor conductor compared to salt water or the human body.

 

[user 100]

In what way does an EGC increase the hazard?

Please see post #34 and use your imagination.

To elaborate further on the egc sometimes increasing risk-

An important thing to remember about an egc is that it is a path back to source, and the source is where current (including fault current) is always trying to return to.
And in an average kitchen, you have an awful lot of bonded metal ( grounded case of refrigerator, that gas range, countertop microwave, even a washer and dryer in some kitchens-all this thanks to the egc being intact) that sees regular contact with the consumer. All this stuff is also in close proximity to an area where the consumer would be in regular (washing dishes) or accidental (leaking pipe that has saturated the floor) contact with water, making the occupant that much more conductive. Now introduce leaking current(ex. from a damaged cord on the blender sitting on wet counter top and plugged into a non gfci rec, refrigerator with cord that was pinched during installation and cord now rests on the soaked tile) and its fairly easy to see someone completing a circuit and why gfci is more than necessary for these areas.

 

[mbrooke]

Please see post #34 and use your imagination.

I saw it already: http://forums.mikeholt.com/showthread.php?t=172126&page=4&p=1677924#post1677924

I dont think thats the reasoning behind deliberately leaving out an EGC. It still doesn't lower the body impedance or path to ground via the legs. Outside of the US mostly every single toaster in the last 40 years has had an EGC. In fact it was that which delayed kitchen socket RCD protection in the UK until the 90s and in Canada GFCIs are only required in Kitchens where the outlet is within X feet of a sink.

To elaborate further on the egc sometimes increasing risk-

An important thing to remember about an egc is that it is a path back to source, and the source is where current (including fault current) is always trying to return to.
And in an average kitchen, you have an awful lot of bonded metal ( grounded case of refrigerator, that gas range, countertop microwave, even a washer and dryer in some kitchens-all this thanks to the egc being intact) that sees regular contact with the consumer.

Thats true.

All this stuff is also in close proximity to an area where the consumer would be in regular (washing dishes) or accidental (leaking pipe that has saturated the floor) contact with water, making the occupant that much more conductive.

Thats true, hence why GFCIs took hold in wet areas first.

Now introduce leaking current(ex. from a damaged cord on the blender sitting on wet counter top and plugged into a non gfci rec, refrigerator with cord that was pinched during installation and cord now rests on the soaked tile) and its fairly easy to see someone completing a circuit and why gfci is more than necessary for these areas.

But how much current will go through a puddle? There are pictures with Mike Holt drinking through a water jug with a cord in it. Second if puddles were a concern, why does the NEC let you skip GFCIs with assured grounding in select parts of the code where power tools are being used outdoors?


I am not saying you are far off though. GFCIs protect mainly against two common scenarios:

1. No EGC or broken EGC with a fault inside an appliance. GFCI becomes an EGC so to speak.

2. Damaged cord with exposed copper on the hot. Person picks up cord, hand freezes and wraps around the cord. GFCI prevents this from becoming deadly.


The above is very likely with portable appliances. However for large appliances like a range, fridge or dishwasher I dont see that taking place. About the only real risk is installer error not hoking up the EGC which would be a code violation to begin with.

 

[mbrooke]

*Edit to this:

. In fact it was that which delayed kitchen socket RCD protection in the UK until the 90s and in Canada GFCIs are only required in Kitchens where the outlet is within X feet of a sink.

It should read "delayed whole home socket RCD protection in the UK until the 90s". I was thinking of US kitchens in the 90s. My mistake.

 

[user 100]

I saw it already: http://forums.mikeholt.com/showthread.php?t=172126&page=4&p=1677924#post1677924

I dont think thats the reasoning behind deliberately leaving out an EGC. It still doesn't lower the body impedance or path to ground via the legs. Outside of the US mostly every single toaster in the last 40 years has had an EGC.
But how much current will go through a puddle? There are pictures with Mike Holt drinking through a water jug with a cord in it. Second if puddles were a concern, why does the NEC let you skip GFCIs with assured grounding in select parts of the code where power tools are being used outdoors?

About that plugged in and bonded toaster-someone will have the metallic utensil in one hand while trying to hold down ( and touch the now bonded metal shell) the toaster with the other-thats the hazard and a good reason for not bonding that casing.

I think that the assured egc option on those outdoor job sites has more to do with risk- you will be wearing work boots and you generally wont be grounded that well- an egc will not protect you if you come into contact with current while you are grounded. Walking through a puddle of water on the ground outdoors that has a damaged cord draped thru it is a far cry from being standing bare foot in energized water or on conductive damp surface while touching a bonded frame (a direct connection back to the source) of an appliance.