Mike Holt News Letter, Baptismal Electrocution

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: Mike Holt News Letter, Baptismal Electrocution

Bob, (not addressing your whole question) I think to be responsible the NEC should have some wording in 406.3 that would point back to 250.114 for the specific items that are required to be grounded. (bonded back to source)

We know that the common belief is that a GFCI remedy's all un-EGC installations.

If this is the NEC's intent they need to reevaluate their stance.

Roger
 
Re: Mike Holt News Letter, Baptismal Electrocution

I was impressed that the writer actually got the function of the GFCI right. I'm used to reading articles where the writer claims that an electrical short will trip the GFCI.
 
Re: Mike Holt News Letter, Baptismal Electrocution

Roger I agree that would make a lot of sense.

What I really thought was odd is the aim of the article is the need for an equipment grounding of audio equipment. Then they basically say 'Forget about it, the GFCI will definitely save the day'.
 
Re: Mike Holt News Letter, Baptismal Electrocution

What a tragedy,I fowared it to my minister here in florida.We go to indian reservations each year and build a church in a week. I have done 4 myself and this is something I will make sure is done before I leave.I always make sure the work is A + and there has only been 1 electric baptistery the others have been LP but after reading this I will make sure that audio is done before I leave there and the lp is part of the ground loop.
 
Re: Mike Holt News Letter, Baptismal Electrocution

We have discussed this incident earlier and had heard that the electric water heater was at fault. The first thought was to blame the audio system which which was not the problem at all. At least we know the cause now and know to pay close attention to such an installation.

I would think that a GFCI plus an EGC to the heater would be sufficient, but to be extra safe, I would want an EGC tied to copper pipes connecting the heater and pool.
 
Re: Mike Holt News Letter, Baptismal Electrocution

Originally posted by iwire:I would like to know others opinions of the point made in the paragraph that starts at the bottom right of pdf page 2 and ends on the top left of pdf page 3.
Click to expand...
I think the statement is inappropriate, misleading, and potentially dangerous. It would have been better to say that a GFCI receptacle adds one level of protection that cannot otherwise be obtained in a circuit that does not include an EGC, but that it will not protect against all hazards.

But I think the article also is misleading in a far more subtle and dangerous way. Consider the following:</font>
  • <font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Problem: Driver's side headlight is burned out.</font>
  • <font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Solution: Rotate the tires.</font>
<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">OK. Rotating the tires is a good idea, and it enhances safety in its own right. But I don't think that is a reasonable solution to the stated problem.
Now consider the following:</font>
  • <font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Problem: Branch circuit serving a hard-wired heater has no EGC.</font>
  • <font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Solution: Replace ungrounded receptacle outlets with GFCI receptacle outlets.</font>
<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Anyone who takes this advice is going to overlook their own hard-wired heater for their own baptismal font.
 
Re: Mike Holt News Letter, Baptismal Electrocution

I sent an email to the author of that article. I informed him of the fact that we are discussion the article in this Forum, and invited him to join in the discussion. If I get a reply, I will let you all know.
 
Re: Mike Holt News Letter, Baptismal Electrocution

I received a reply from the editor of the magazine. He wanted to know if anyone would be interested in submitting an article for the magazine, on the topic of electrical safety. Without making any commitments, I said that the idea interested me.

Does the idea interest anyone else? You can reply here or send me a PM, if you prefer.
 
Re: Mike Holt News Letter, Baptismal Electrocution

Charlie, who is the intended audience? Pastors/Priests? Their congregations?

What kind of scope are you considering?
 
Re: Mike Holt News Letter, Baptismal Electrocution

Unfortunately we can say what should be done in these types of installations to make them safe but it's not going to make any difference as long as the work is done by unqualified people.

While everybody was blaming the sound system and phantom powered microphones I nailed it the minute I heard that these baptismals incorporated heaters and pumps. I have long been appalled with the practice many churches have of allowing and even encouraging congregants to install or maintain equipment that can pose a hazard to life and safety. I maintained that this had to be a major factor in this very tragic accident.

Indeed, in this case it appears an unqualified individual wired the heaters which also appear to have been jury rigged and not intended for the application to boot.

All the requirements in the world aren't going to help if whoever doing the work has no idea what they are doing. What needs to be focused on here is that churches need to follow the same rules as everybody else. Perhaps stricter, more frequent inspections, higher insurance rates and dropped policies would encourage it.

-Hal
 
Re: Mike Holt News Letter, Baptismal Electrocution

Originally posted by georgestolz: Charlie, who is the intended audience? Pastors/Priests? Their congregations?

What kind of scope are you considering?
Click to expand...
No idea. You could look at their web site, and read back issues. It's apparently a relatively new publication, and it seems to only be published on-line.

I'm not sure if I want to be involved with this. I have written a few training sessions, and electrical safety comes into all of them. I could massage some of what I have already written, and put it all into an article. But my problem is in not knowing the audience, and not knowing the publisher well enough to know whether I would want to support their work.
 
Re: Mike Holt News Letter, Baptismal Electrocution

I'd love to take a swing at it, but I'd have to research their publication as you suggested. Without knowing the intended audience it's a bit of a shot in the dark.

For example, Mike Holt's regular Q&A's and G v. B articles in EC&M are well placed and well written for 2nd year apprentices through master electricians. This would probably be read by non-electricians, so determining appropriate subject matter and writing accordingly is a bit trickier.

Edit to add: Is it odd to feel a bit self-conscious admitting an interest in writing something like that? :eek:

[ January 03, 2006, 08:01 PM: Message edited by: georgestolz ]
 
Re: Mike Holt News Letter, Baptismal Electrocution

Originally posted by georgestolz:
Edit to add: Is it odd to feel a bit self-conscious admitting an interest in writing something like that? :eek:
Click to expand...
I would say it's not weird to want to do that considering the company you keep. :p
 
Re: Mike Holt News Letter, Baptismal Electrocution

Originally posted by georgestolz:
Thanks for the support, Bob. :)

Er, I think. :D
Click to expand...
Don't worry George all I am saying is you are a serious code geek like many of us here. :D
 
Re: Mike Holt News Letter, Baptismal Electrocution

The problem with writing a piece like this is getting people to read it! The serious DIY'r might, but the typical homeowner would not.
 
Re: Mike Holt News Letter, Baptismal Electrocution

That particular publication appears to be targeted to the people who are responsible for the facilities used for religious services and religious education. It's publisher probably hopes that it would be read by administrators and by maintenance personnel, as well as by the clergy members. So an article on "electrical safety" would have to be targeted towards the same audience. It would have to be very much a non-technical presentation. It would have to provide enough understanding of the basics to let them know when something is unsafe. I know I can provide that. I just don't know what risks might arise from attempting to give safety information (and what may prove to be "not enough safety information") to that audience.

George, if you want to give it a go, send me a PM, and we can work out an outline.
 
Re: Mike Holt News Letter, Baptismal Electrocution

Originally posted by iwire:
Originally posted by georgestolz:
Edit to add: Is it odd to feel a bit self-conscious admitting an interest in writing something like that? :eek:
Click to expand...
I would say it's not weird to want to do that considering the company you keep. ;)
Click to expand...
 
Re: Mike Holt News Letter, Baptismal Electrocution

I started by reading just the paragraph Bob mentioned. I wondered if I read the right one because I didn't see an issue. Now I'm confused. It seems 250.114 would always be violated if you use the GFCI with no equipment ground, so when is that option even valid? And aside from 250.114, what is the danger? The equipment ground is to trip the CB if the frame is energized, for example. If no equipment ground, the frame is energized, but if anyone contacts it the GFCI would trip. The two things I see that make it less safe than the EGC are 1) GFCIs can fail, 2) The person still gets a mild shock, and certain people could still be killed. Are these the concerns or something else?

Bob, you said it is incorrect advice. What is the correct advice? Seems to me either the article is correct advice or 406.D(3) is a bad idea and should be removed from the code.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top