GFCI Requirements for Non-Dwellings

Status
Not open for further replies.

sw_ross

Senior Member
Location
NoDak
With the challenge of getting a 3-phase GFCI breaker 100 amp and below is there a product like a "dead-front" gfci that you could get, sized appropriately for the circuit size that you could put in a readily accessible location to protect the circuit?

That way you could use your typical 3-phase breaker that fits your panel without paying an arm and a leg for a fancy hard to find breaker.

Somebody like Leviton could make it in various sizes, 20, 30, 50, 70, etc.
It could come in an enclosure like a Midwest box.

Maybe they already have something similar?
 
There are a couple of manufacturers that have 3 phase GFCI breakers but I think they stop at 60 amps.
For other brands or circuits greater than 60 meeting the new requirement is going to be a challenge. There are a lot of GFCI monitors on the market but I don't know of any I'd describe as "small" or "simple".
With the new ('17) Code requirements I would expect to see the manufacturers address the issue especially since some of them are represented on that CodeMakingPanel.

The issue I see is when you have 3 phase and circuits that large, AIC might be an issue and for series ratings you are going to be in a bind if the service panel (or feeder panel)manufacturer does not make 3 phase GF breakers.
 
I recently priced a 3-phase GFCI breaker for a qo panel... It was $610... internet price. Don't know about a hundred amp, hopefully it's price does not scale proportionately to a 30 amp...
 
I recently priced a 3-phase GFCI breaker for a qo panel... It was $610... internet price. Don't know about a hundred amp, hopefully it's price does not scale proportionately to a 30 amp...

Wow! I think I would have to have a conversation with my AHJ before bidding on a job that required several of those!

That's what made me think about a product that could perform this function separate from the panel type. It could be a product that is "universal" (independent of panel manufacturer).
Maybe even standardized so that it would perform the GFCI function regardless of the circuit size, since your breaker would serve as the OCPD.

My brain must be bored this weekend to spend time dreaming/thinking about stuff like this...
 
Why do you want 3 phase gfci. 210.8(B) says single phase circuit up to 100 amps
all that hard work this week put a strain on your brain :)
You usually catch me.. '17 in 210.8(B) added 3 phase receptacles rated 150vtg or less and 100 amp or less
 
all that hard work this week put a strain on your brain :)
You usually catch me.. '17 in 210.8(B) added 3 phase receptacles rated 150vtg or less and 100 amp or less

So no GFCI receptacle for high leg Delta or 277 systems? It seems to me if one wanted to get around the requirement, stepping up the voltage to 277 and using higher voltage equipment maybe cheaper than putting ground fault breakers in... then again, maybe not... A lot of commercial grade kitchen equipment runs into a five-figure range... a $600 breaker, give or take, is a lot cheaper and buying an espresso machine wired to 480.

And Ross, that was just one breaker that I looked at on the Internet, you may be able to do substantially better with your distributor, or with another brand.
 
Maybe even standardized so that it would perform the GFCI function regardless of the circuit size, since your breaker would serve as the OCPD.
It seems a typical GFCI's circuit-conductors-through-a-ring electronics could be packaged as a stand-alone accessory and be used to trigger a standard shunt-trip breaker. They could even use a split-core CT to encircle existing circuit conductors.
 
Side note

Side note

On a similar side note concerning the GFCI requirements for single phase, non-dwelling (example- commercial kitchen or garage bay),
What's to keep you from having a 2-pole 30 amp breaker (non-GFCI) and your #10's heading toward the 30 amp receptacle but somewhere between points A and B you have a hot tub GFCI disconnect?

The circuit OCPD is properly sized, the conductors are properly sized, the receptacle is GFCI protected.
 
On a similar side note concerning the GFCI requirements for single phase, non-dwelling (example- commercial kitchen or garage bay),
What's to keep you from having a 2-pole 30 amp breaker (non-GFCI) and your #10's heading toward the 30 amp receptacle but somewhere between points A and B you have a hot tub GFCI disconnect?

The circuit OCPD is properly sized, the conductors are properly sized, the receptacle is GFCI protected.

No problem with either a single phase or 3 phase being done that way. The problem is the cost and availability of the 3 phase breakers. Your method does address the availability as you can select from manufacturer although series-rating might still be a problem. (unless I miss your point)
 
$1702 for one I found.

What breaker was that? I found that Square D does not make any 3 Pole / 3 phase GFCI Breakers above 50 amps in either the home line or qo series.

Looks like one would have to jump to a more commercial / Industrial size panel or switch gear to get a hundred amp 3-phase GFCI breaker, with a commensurate jump in pricing.

I'm sure there is a really obvious reason why this won't work that is eluding me at the moment, however why couldn't one use some sort of ground fault detection on either the EGC or conduit to detect any leakage?

Also, while hundred amp 3-phase Breakers in something like the qo series are not only available and cheap, how did this requirement in the 2017 NEC get passed when the breakers are not really readily available? I thought afci breakers were bad enough, one might have to spend several thousands of dollars just to provide ground fault protection for one piece of equipment via a larger breaker and larger frame panel or switch gear.
 
What breaker was that? I found that Square D does not make any 3 Pole / 3 phase GFCI Breakers above 50 amps in either the home line or qo series.

Looks like one would have to jump to a more commercial / Industrial size panel or switch gear to get a hundred amp 3-phase GFCI breaker, with a commensurate jump in pricing.

I'm sure there is a really obvious reason why this won't work that is eluding me at the moment, however why couldn't one use some sort of ground fault detection on either the EGC or conduit to detect any leakage?

Also, while hundred amp 3-phase Breakers in something like the qo series are not only available and cheap, how did this requirement in the 2017 NEC get passed when the breakers are not really readily available? I thought afci breakers were bad enough, one might have to spend several thousands of dollars just to provide ground fault protection for one piece of equipment via a larger breaker and larger frame panel or switch gear.

https://www.bender.org/documents/LifeGuard_datasheet_NAE1082321.pdf
 
What breaker was that? I found that Square D does not make any 3 Pole / 3 phase GFCI Breakers above 50 amps in either the home line or qo series.

Looks like one would have to jump to a more commercial / Industrial size panel or switch gear to get a hundred amp 3-phase GFCI breaker, with a commensurate jump in pricing.

I'm sure there is a really obvious reason why this won't work that is eluding me at the moment, however why couldn't one use some sort of ground fault detection on either the EGC or conduit to detect any leakage?

Also, while hundred amp 3-phase Breakers in something like the qo series are not only available and cheap, how did this requirement in the 2017 NEC get passed when the breakers are not really readily available? I thought afci breakers were bad enough, one might have to spend several thousands of dollars just to provide ground fault protection for one piece of equipment via a larger breaker and larger frame panel or switch gear.
Homeline doesn't have three pole of anything - period. They developed that line to be competitive with other lines primarily for residential applications. Eaton took over an existing BR line that already had three phase equipment in the line, had they developed their own line maybe would have only been single phase as well.

Detecting current on the EGC doesn't work so well. A fault can "leak" to most anywhere outside the intended circuit and is not limited to the EGC for that particular circuit. You could also pick up current from "circuit B" on the EGC , but interrupting circuit A doesn't do much in that situation.

Mostly same manufacturers that pushed to get AFCI into code are going to be those that make these GFCI's - I think it is about sales more then actual need for the items. I have nothing against GFCI in general, but don't see any statistical data that says there is that much need in the areas it has expanded to this last time around, as well as some of the past areas of expansion. I think 120 volt 15/20 amp receptacle outlets do need GFCI in many applications - mostly because of how common it is to see compromised EGC's on cordsets. If one could assure good EGC I don't think GFCI is quite so important to have on all the places it is required.
 
According to the IAEI Analysis, from 2003-2009 there were 801 fatal workplace accidents caused by contact with electrical current. (This does not include construction related fatalities)
The hope is increases in GF requirements will reduce the number of incidents.
 
According to the IAEI Analysis, from 2003-2009 there were 801 fatal workplace accidents caused by contact with electrical current. (This does not include construction related fatalities)
The hope is increases in GF requirements will reduce the number of incidents.

Good idea if the Equipment is even somewhat commonly available. Right now it isn’t for Hi leg Delta and higher current levels.
 
According to the IAEI Analysis, from 2003-2009 there were 801 fatal workplace accidents caused by contact with electrical current. (This does not include construction related fatalities)
The hope is increases in GF requirements will reduce the number of incidents.

How many of those involved the situations they decided to add to the GFCI requirement list?

How many involved not following safe electrical work practices? Of those how many were doing tasks they weren't "qualified" to do?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top