TR receptacles

Status
Not open for further replies.
Going back to my problem with testing from ground to neutral or using my "sniffer" on TR (DP:grin:) receptacles, I thought of a simple solution that I will toss into my tool bag:

larger-image.aspx


As for hardworkingstiff and all others who don't understand "DP," you are not dumb. In fact, this says good things about you...your minds are not in the gutter like some of ours are!

Let's just say...sort of rhymes with "bubble denigration!":grin:
 
Hendrix said:
Some inspectors are saying, just replace what you remove with the same.
Click to expand...

That's what we do here. That goes for service changes too. If replacing, the replacement can be the same as the original, if extending or adding new circuits, TR's and Arc Faults come into play.
 
Split Bolt said:
Going back to my problem with testing from ground to neutral or using my "sniffer" on TR (DP:grin:) receptacles, I thought of a simple solution that I will toss into my tool bag:

larger-image.aspx


As for hardworkingstiff and all others who don't understand "DP," you are not dumb. In fact, this says good things about you...your minds are not in the gutter like some of ours are!

Let's just say...sort of rhymes with "bubble denigration!":grin:
Click to expand...
OK, my mind is as far in the gutter as anyone on the planet, but I still don't get it :roll:
 
You ca make things safe ??

You ca make things safe ??

Two guys were discussing on "how to make this job area SAFER?" the supervisor pointed out we (the employee) could install some handrails and such, and many more unessesscarry 'improvements' that would make the average guy's daily life more difficult.... FINNALY the contractor said we could make this project safer. AND if we spend a lot of time and money we could make things " IDIOT-PROOF " BUT there is no way we can make things " DUMB-___-PROOF" We ended up adding a handrail.
 
Dennis Alwon said:
Unfortunately you will not find this written anywhere. It comes down to interpretation. You have a point about AFCI however it has been widely accepted that you do not need to involve AFCI if the circuit is not extended.

In terms of non grounded being replaced with non grounded receptacles-- that is explicitly allowed in art. 406.3(D)(3)(a)

No one has thought to define when AFCI and TR's should be used. IMO, the cost of a TR is insignificant esp. if you are replacing just a few. My suppliers don't even stock non TR recep. unless they are 20 amp.
Click to expand...

In NJ it is written.Replace like for like unless receptacle is required to be GFCI or installing new wiring to receptacles.
 
Since TR is required practically everywhere now in a house, why even keep anything else? Same with WR GFCI. Just keep only those. I had the instance of a helper putting a non WR GFI in an outside box and inspector making us change it.

I needed a few black TR receptacles the other day. Really needed black 20 amp but had to settle for 15 amp. No one here had black 20's. Also had to settle for standard size plates, as no one had black mid size.
 
All this debate will be over under the 11 code IIRC. Replace a receptacle that would require AFCI protection and it will need something that hasn't even hit the market yet. Yes, the elusive AFCI receptacle.
 
jimport said:
All this debate will be over under the 11 code IIRC. Replace a receptacle that would require AFCI protection and it will need something that hasn't even hit the market yet. Yes, the elusive AFCI receptacle.
Click to expand...
Here is the change. Article from iaei.org
ARTICLE 406 Receptacles, Cord Connectors, and Attachment Plugs (Caps)

New: 406.4(D)(4) Replacements ? Arc-Fault Circuit Interrupters
This proposal would require AFCI protection in existing locations where a replacement receptacle is installed in a location where AFCI protection would be required in new installations. The existing requirement in 406.3(D)(2) requires GFCI-protected receptacles where replacements are installed at receptacle outlets that are required to be so protected elsewhere in the NEC. The benefits of AFCI protection have been well substantiated over the last few NEC code cycles. There is no practical reason to limit the level of safety provided by an AFCI to new homes only. This proposal will provide AFCI protection for older homes by requiring the gradual replacement of non-AFCI-protected receptacles with new AFCI-protected ones.
These same receptacle replacement requirements have been proposed for tamper-resistant receptacles at 406.4(D)(5) and for weather-resistant receptacles at 406.4(D)(6).
Click to expand...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top