GFCI wiring

Status
Not open for further replies.
@whowadat One thing to think about that I neglected to mention is future maintenance. A GFCI breaker would prevent you from having to replace the GFCI outlets in the future, which will eventually go bad and require a new GFCI outlet.

Not sure it's worth it in your case because you already have the GFCI's... but just something to consider.
 
Jerramundi said:
Why would you wire line-load to protect the outdoor receptacle via the 2nd bathroom GFCI when there are already GFCI's in all three locations?
Just parallel pigtail off the circuit to each receptacle's line side. Then protection is local to each respective outlet.

With your suggestion, they could end up having to reset the 2nd bathroom GFCI to restore power to the outdoor receptacle. That's just goofy.
Click to expand...
I didn't realize he had one outside. But if it hasn't been used, I would remove the outside GFCI and wire it like I suggested. This way, if it trips, you will know it quicker. The outside receptacle may be for heat tape and if tripped, you wouldn't notice it until it was too late. If it is in the 2nd bath, you would see it and know to reset it.
 
Little Bill said:
I didn't realize he had one outside. But if it hasn't been used, I would remove the outside GFCI and wire it like I suggested. This way, if it trips, you will know it quicker.
Click to expand...
Fair enough. If he doesn't have GFCI's in all three locations, he's going to have to do some sort of line-load protection, which will be goofy logistically but provide the necessary protection... that or buy a GFCI breaker.

I would suggest a faceless GFCI near the panel to protect everything... but I don't think you can do that with bathrooms.

With GFCI's in all three locations, the most reasonable solution is just to parallel pigtail off the circuit to the line side of each device.
 
Jerramundi said:
If they are still reading 8-9 volts with the breaker off... either (1) your breaker is going bad... or (2) something is backfeeding the circuit.

Turn the breaker off and check the voltage between the breaker terminal screw where you would normally connect your hot wire and the system neutral. If you still get a reading, the breaker is bad.

If no reading at the breaker, but still at the outlets, you have a backfeed issue.
Click to expand...

I didn't read anything when the breaker was shut off....the 8-9 volts were measured at all 3 GFCIs when the breaker was turned on.....
 
Jerramundi said:
Why would you wire line-load to protect the outdoor receptacle via the 2nd bathroom GFCI when there are already GFCI's in all three locations?
Just parallel pigtail off the circuit to each receptacle's line side. Then protection is local to each respective outlet.

With your suggestion, they could end up having to reset the 2nd bathroom GFCI to restore power to the outdoor receptacle. That's just goofy.
Click to expand...


That's what I ended up doing, replaced the one bad GFCI at the beginning of the circuit, and pig tailed all three GFCIs in parallel...all three outlets tested good on a outlet tester....all GFCIs are now working, and no one will have to go on a wild goose chase next time power goes down.....

Thank you for everyone's input...I appreciate you guys being here!

Mike
 
Jerramundi said:
Correct. But this just provides the protection at the receptacle itself. No longer downstream.

No, not if you change the wiring as I have suggested. The first GFCI would no longer be protecting anything downstream, just the GFCI receptacle itself would be GFCI protected, which is all that is required unless you have an exhaust fan or light over the shower that requires GFCI protection.

No, not if you change the wiring as I have suggested. The GFCI in the second bathroom would now be providing the required protection at that particular location/receptacle. It is required. Not "just for looks"
Click to expand...

Right...I understood what you were talking about....my points were moot if I pigtailed them all....which is what I did. Thanks again
 
readydave8 said:
because of lights? or another reason?
Click to expand...
Well, the faceless GFCI near the panel would technically be a device outside of the bathroom that the bathroom circuit is connected to... and I think that may be a code violation.

I interpret the code regarding bathroom circuits as being EITEHR (1) a dedicated 20A circuit to the one bathroom handling everything in that bathroom... OR (2) a dedicated 20A circuit between multiple bathroom receptacles only.

I believe mounting a junction box by the panel with a faceless GFCI would be a code violation in terms of bathroom requirements even though it's a faceless device.
 
ptonsparky said:
No more than a GFCI breaker or gfci receptacle.
Click to expand...
Yes, but the breaker is technically before the point of origin of the branch circuit... and the receptacle is within the bathroom.
Not something really worth debating. It was just a thought... a potential third solution...
 
Jerramundi said:
Well, the faceless GFCI near the panel would technically be a device outside of the bathroom that the bathroom circuit is connected to... and I think that may be a code violation.

I interpret the code regarding bathroom circuits as being EITEHR (1) a dedicated 20A circuit to the one bathroom handling everything in that bathroom... OR (2) a dedicated 20A circuit between multiple bathroom receptacles only.

I believe mounting a junction box by the panel with a faceless GFCI would be a code violation in terms of bathroom requirements even though it's a faceless device.
Click to expand...
now I see what you're saying, thanks
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top