Laundry Dryer requires AFCI GFCI protection?

[Scheffler Energy]

Does a 30 amp dryer outlet require AFCI / GFCI protection? I cannot find a duel function breaker for a double pole square d homeline 30 amp breaker only finding GFCI ones. Solution?

 

[ramsy]

Does a 30 amp dryer outlet require AFCI / GFCI protection? I cannot find a duel function breaker for a double pole square d homeline 30 amp breaker only finding GFCI ones. Solution?

AFCI follows NFPA-70 210.12(A) for all adopted code cycles. Don't let em touch your electrical if missing this standard.

GFCI depends if your AHJ adopts 2020 210.8(A) code cycle, since earlier cycles don't address 240v.

Qualified persons familiar with outlets and receptacles typically install 240v wiring methods exempt from GFCI's.

If you have to ask how that's legal, no one should tell you, since you are not a qualified person.

 

[Little Bill]

Dryers, or 30A receptacles, or outlets, do not require AFCI.

 

[kwired]

So far only AFCI requirements have been for 15 and 20 amp 120 volt circuits.

2020 and 2023 NEC have expanded the GFCI requirements and the dryer is most likely required to have GFCI if supplied via a receptacle though.

 

[Scheffler Energy]

Awesome thanks for the heads up! GFCI for the dryer !

 

[ModbusMan]

2020 and 2023 NEC have expanded the GFCI requirements and the dryer is most likely required to have GFCI if supplied via a receptacle though.

I can see this working really well (hah) if someone has a 6-30 outlet and gets their panel swapped/upgraded.

 

[texie]

AFCI follows NFPA-70 210.12(A) for all adopted code cycles. Don't let em touch your electrical if missing this standard.

GFCI depends if your AHJ adopts 2020 210.8(A) code cycle, since earlier cycles don't address 240v.

Qualified persons familiar with outlets and receptacles typically install 240v wiring methods exempt from GFCI's.

If you have to ask how that's legal, no one should tell you, since you are not a qualified person.

Huh? What in the world are you talking about? It is totally incoherent.

 

[tom baker]

AFCI follows NFPA-70 210.12(A) for all adopted code cycles. Don't let em touch your electrical if missing this standard.

GFCI depends if your AHJ adopts 2020 210.8(A) code cycle, since earlier cycles don't address 240v.

Qualified persons familiar with outlets and receptacles typically install 240v wiring methods exempt from GFCI's.

If you have to ask how that's legal, no one should tell you, since you are not a qualified person.

The OP is a master electrician. Like me he may be from an industrial background and not familiar with dwelling units. And this post is confusing

 

[kwired]

AFCI follows NFPA-70 210.12(A) for all adopted code cycles. Don't let em touch your electrical if missing this standard.

GFCI depends if your AHJ adopts 2020 210.8(A) code cycle, since earlier cycles don't address 240v.

Qualified persons familiar with outlets and receptacles typically install 240v wiring methods exempt from GFCI's.

If you have to ask how that's legal, no one should tell you, since you are not a qualified person.

Eliminating the receptacle (direct wire) is about the only way to exempt it from GFCI.

The rules in 210.8(A) apply to receptacle outlets.

The other way but usually not too practical in a dwelling is to supply with a circuit of over 150 volts to ground.

I see that 2023 NEC has included clothes dryers in the list that was moved from 422.5, and this would require GFCI for dryers regardless if in dwelling or non dwelling (150 volts to ground or less and 60 amps or less).

Going to be fun when we change the adopted code here as we are still officially on 2017 and when it gets updated (if any time soon) will likely skip 2020 and go to 2023. Because I hang out on this site I am somewhat familiar with some changes but still find things I wasn't aware of like this one.

 

[ramsy]

Huh? What in the world are you talking about? It is totally incoherent.

It made sense when I wrote it.

 

[ramsy]

And this post is confusing

That what happens when combining all AF/GF codes in 1 sentence.

 

[ramsy]

The National Association of Home Buildings publishes GFCI / AFCI State adoptions

All states require some of these safety devices, and nuisance trips are encountered with specific loads & conditions.

It makes perfect sense people don't like being cited the code location, without more explanation, but anyone who can explain the differences in how these devices work, or resolve most nuisance issues should publish that book for a profit.

 

[kwired]

The National Association of Home Buildings publishes GFCI / AFCI State adoptions

All states require some of these safety devices, and nuisance trips are encountered with specific loads & conditions.

It makes perfect sense people don't like being cited the code location, without more explanation, but anyone who can explain the differences in how these devices work, or resolve most nuisance issues should publish that book for a profit.

My question is has there been electrocutions involving laundry equipment to justify GFCI protection or is the manufacturers providing the CMP's a bunch of BS study findings and stating this is a safety thing that needs addressed (so they can sell even more devices)?

I might buy the 15/20 amp 120 volt receptacle needing GFCI if it is in a location that otherwise required GFCI protection in past codes, say in a basement area or a garage area or if there is a sink within 6 feet. But something tells me there is no significant data that shows there is much for electrocutions involving laundry receptacles as a general rule.

There was a time when they would add items to the GFCI requirement list but had real world statistics to help justify it not being a bad idea. Anymore new additions to these requirements kind of end up being "because we can" more so than actually being justified with real world statistics.

 

[ramsy]

But something tells me there is no significant data that shows there is much for electrocutions involving laundry receptacles as a general rule.

Sound about right.

Death or injury cause by electrocution
RK Wright. Clin Lab Med. 1982 Jun.
Abstract
Proper investigation of injury and death from electrocution requires a high level of suspicion, as examination of the victim will often prove negative. Careful photographic documentation of the scene must be done in every case. In low voltage cases, the equipment that may have been involved should be photographed, x-rayed, and examined electrically. Autopsy examination of the victim in cases of electrocution due to high voltage alternating or direct current usually reveals burns and the nonspecific findings of asphyxia. Victims of low voltage alternating current often have no electrical burns and the absence of findings characteristic of ventricular fibrillation. Low voltage direct current rarely produces death.

If death from a good 120v electrical shock can take several hours, there is time to leave the area. Not sure its possible to differentiate between a heart attack from natural causes, defibrillation by electric shock, CO poisoning, or suffocation (all are asphyxia), unless the body was still energized at some offending appliance. Coroner autopsy may also be unusual for heart attack victims, if natural causes is possible.

Data exists for hazardous occupations, and natural causes of death, but unless it occurs while doing electrical work electrocution is not easy to prove.

 

[ramsy]

or is the manufacturers providing the CMP's a bunch of BS study findings and stating this is a safety thing that needs addressed (so they can sell even more devices)?

Captains of industry are known to influence lawmakers at every opportunity, but what took them so long. 2-Pole GFCI's have been around for hot tubs since the 1970's, why wait 30 years to satisfy corrupt manufacture wishes to put them on every other 2-pole appliance possible?

Maybe an over-abundance of code-panel proposals from forum members wanting to get their name in the code. Has anyone checked to see if the accepted proposal came from someone on this forum?

 

[ramsy]

requirements kind of end up being "because we can" more so than actually being justified with real world statistics.

70% of my service business volume has been outlets & power failures, which compel some kind of 1-pole AFCI / GFCI to abate an existing wiring hazard, or construction defect, and guarantee compliance with insurance requirements.

2-pole requirements will compel more of this, without the option of using outlet devices. So more disconnect enclosures, or panel upgrades will be compelled to accommodate 2-pole devices, where only tandems could fit before.

 

[kwired]

Captains of industry are known to influence lawmakers at every opportunity, but what took them so long. 2-Pole GFCI's have been around for hot tubs since the 1970's, why wait 30 years to satisfy corrupt manufacture wishes to put them on every other 2-pole appliance possible?

Maybe an over-abundance of code-panel proposals from forum members wanting to get their name in the code. Has anyone checked to see if the accepted proposal came from someone on this forum?

I remember looking at ROP's (or whatever they are called now) looking for information on why they began requiring GFCI protection on 2 and 3 pole circuits with receptacle outlets that never used to be included as the general rule and about the only justification that was written went something like "we have the ability to do that now". I could buy into the requirement if there were some data to show that there is increased electrocutions in specific areas or with specific kinds of applications, but the general rule they threw in there for as wide of applications it applies to is just not justified IMO.

A big justification for 15/20 amp 120 volt receptacles is the fact that it is pretty common to see missing grounding pins on plugs. I can't ever recall seeing a missing grounding pin on any other plug. Maybe 6-15 and 6-20 plugs that are almost the same thing as 5-15 and 5-20's but even those are almost never missing.

 

[ruxton.stanislaw]

The other way but usually not too practical in a dwelling is to supply with a circuit of over 150 volts to ground.

415/240, anyone?

 

[LarryFine]

The National Association of Home Buildings publishes GFCI / AFCI State adoptions

That appears to be old.

 

[Mr.Y]

Looked for an answer online and found that topic, so the correct answer seems to be: in dwelling units dryer receptacle should be GFCI protected
NEC 2020
210.8(A) Dwelling Units.
All 125-volt through 250-volt receptacles installed in the locations specified in 210.8(A)(1) through (A)⁠(11) and supplied by single-phase branch circuits rated 150 volts or less to ground shall have ground-fault circuit-interrupter protection for personnel.