• We will be performing upgrades on the forums and server over the weekend. The forums may be unavailable multiple times for up to an hour each. Thank you for your patience and understanding as we work to make the forums even better.

Range Tripping GFCI (210.8, 555.53)

brycenesbitt

Senior Member
Location
United States
Their "solution" is that the GFCI breaker gets removed after the final inspection.
I've tried making a NEMA "NUISANCE TRIPPING REPORT" and speaking to the people there:
it was completely useless. All I got was an AFCI sales pitch, nobody was interested in tracking anything down.


Some people mess with brands of AFCI to reduce problems:
 

brycenesbitt

Senior Member
Location
United States
See
For opportunity to comment on the 2026 NEC in this regard.
 

LarryFine

Master Electrician Electric Contractor Richmond VA
Location
Henrico County, VA
Occupation
Electrical Contractor
Some people mess with brands of AFCI to reduce problems:
If blank-face AFCIs work on the same circuits and loads that trip AFCI breakers, then the problem must be within the breakers, and not with the wiring or loads.

So, hasn't this video proved the latter, and Siemens (in this case) should be responsible for providing AFCI breakers that work as well as the blank-face units do?

I.e., AFCI breakers that work, that can be used for their intended purpose.
 

brycenesbitt

Senior Member
Location
United States
If blank-face AFCIs work on the same circuits and loads that trip AFCI breakers, then the problem must be within the breakers, and not with the wiring or loads.
Sometimes it's matching load equipment A to to breaker type B. In other words maybe it's not that the Siemens are "worse" just "different", so by having both a breaker and a blank-face available you have to shots at getting a reliable circuit.
 

LarryFine

Master Electrician Electric Contractor Richmond VA
Location
Henrico County, VA
Occupation
Electrical Contractor
It just doesn't seem right that they're allowed to knowingly sell devices that might work sometimes.

It's not like you can simply take the panel and breakers back to the store and try another brand if you have compatibility issues after you've moved in, nor should you have to.
 

LarryFine

Master Electrician Electric Contractor Richmond VA
Location
Henrico County, VA
Occupation
Electrical Contractor
Sometimes it's matching load equipment A to to breaker type B. In other words maybe it's not that the Siemens are "worse" just "different", so by having both a breaker and a blank-face available you have to shots at getting a reliable circuit.
And who should foot the bill for the time and materials for these experiments?
 

mtnelect

HVAC & Electrical Contractor
Location
Southern California
Occupation
Contractor, C10 & C20 - Semi Retired
Why would they deny TIA 1748 and not TIA 1653 ?
 

Attachments

  • Proposed_TIA_1748_NFPA_70.pdf
    1.4 MB · Views: 4
  • TIA Log No. 1748, Appeal Denied, 11-30-2023.pdf
    190.5 KB · Views: 5
  • TIA Log No. 1653, HVAC GFCI, 05-27-2022.pdf
    652.6 KB · Views: 7

mtnelect

HVAC & Electrical Contractor
Location
Southern California
Occupation
Contractor, C10 & C20 - Semi Retired
The obvious difference is that the former proposed exemption was 2 years longer and included refrigerators in addition to HVAC equipment.

Cheers, Wayne

What is obvious to me, is that GFCI'/AFCI were put on the market and not ready for "Prime Time". They didn't predict the interference of energy saving devices would have. So, back to the drawing board.
 

jim dungar

Moderator
Staff member
Location
Wisconsin
Occupation
PE (Retired) - Power Systems
What is obvious to me, is that GFCI'/AFCI were put on the market and not ready for "Prime Time". They didn't predict the interference of energy saving devices would have. So, back to the drawing board.
GFCI technology has been around for almost 50 years, so isn't it the 'new' energy saving devices that need the redesign?
 

tortuga

Code Historian
Location
Oregon
Occupation
Electrical Design
Eaton has a nice pdf explaining their 30ma RCD breakers they use everywhere besides here and Canada,
I am no expert on it but I bet the most economical solution to providing ground fault protection to equipment would be to do what everyone else does and use a 30ma trip time .
From the Eaton document page 4:
1724272714558.png
From the pdf:
Figure 7 shows the conventional zones of alternating currents
(15-100 Hz); the current path from the left hand to feet depen-
ding on the contact time and the corresponding limit trip times
of RCDs with a sensitivity of 30 mA.
Marking AC1 to AC4 expresses zones of action of alternating
current (AC - Alternating Current). Curves a, b and c express the
limits for various effects of current:
• curve a is the threshold of perception (current of 0.5 mA
causes tingling);
• curve b is the drop threshold, when an exposed person can
no longer drop the object under current;
• curve c1 is the so-called safety threshold. There may be
pathophysiological effects such as cardiac arrest, breath
arrest, burns or other damage on cellular level. The likelihood
of chamber fibrillations rises with current intensity and duration.
Note:
It might appear that the higher the sensitivity the better.
Highly sensitive RCD are very likely to frequent tripping due to
leaking currents and their contribution to safety is not high. In
case of a human being’s contact with a live part, current will pass
through the body, being only limited by the body’s impedance, and
the residual current device will only react after certain time (10 -
- 30 milliseconds). At the moment of contact with a live part, the
person will be hit by a full electric surge and it makes virtually no
difference if a residual current device with a sensitivity of 10 or
30 mA is applied.
 

mtnelect

HVAC & Electrical Contractor
Location
Southern California
Occupation
Contractor, C10 & C20 - Semi Retired
Eaton has a nice pdf explaining their 30ma RCD breakers they use everywhere besides here and Canada,
I am no expert on it but I bet the most economical solution to providing ground fault protection to equipment would be to do what everyone else does and use a 30ma trip time .
From the Eaton document page 4:
View attachment 2573078
From the pdf:

One big obstacle to overcome, it's the 5ma that will stop your heart.
 

letgomywago

Senior Member
Location
Washington state and Oregon coast
Occupation
residential electrician
I can't imagine any inspection authority taking on the civil liability that a written permission to eliminate a safety requirement of the NEC would result in. I know that in general that employees of a unit of government cannot be sued, but the unit of government can be, and maybe even the employee as I can see the courts saying this is well beyond simple negligence that sovereign immunity provides protection from.
Oregon kind of did. I was surprised to find that out.
 

tortuga

Code Historian
Location
Oregon
Occupation
Electrical Design
One big obstacle to overcome, it's the 5ma that will stop your heart.
To paraphrase Eaton;
In case of a human being’s contact with a live part, current will pass through the body, being only limited by the body’s impedance, and the Ground Fault protection will only react after certain time.
At the moment of contact with a live part, the person will be hit by a full electric surge and it makes virtually no difference if a residual current device with a sensitivity of 5, 10 , 20 or 30 mA is applied.

to quote don in another old thread on GFCI
The requirement from UL 943 says:
"The maximum permitted time to trip in seconds is equal to the quantity (20/fault current in milliamps) raised to the 1.43 power. The application of this formula would permit a 7 second trip time for a 5 mA ground fault."
For HVAC, hard wired EVSE, Ranges all fixed equipment where they want a 5ma GFCI, a I bet 30ma GFPE breaker would provide all the protection needed to protect persons from shock, and, based on their papers, I think the MFR's think so too Eaton, Siemens and ABB alredy make RCD's and GFPE breakers.
 
Top