Why GFCIs were mandated- a personal perspective

Status
Not open for further replies.

mbrooke

Batteries Included
Location
United States
Occupation
Technician
In light of a few GFCI threads on Mike Holt's, I thought Id post this Email I wrote up a while back and sent to a friend. I am not here to bash anyone on this forum, but over time I have realized that few know the reasoning (in depth) behind why GFCIs were mandated.

..................................................................................................................................

Although to be fair most people-including many professionals- don't understand why GFCIs were mandated. GFCIs were not mandated because water somehow caused an explosive melt down- but rather between the 1900s through the 1950s people did not understand electrocution, or that 120 volts could kill you. I know of old text books which recommended electricians test for power by licking their fingers and then grabbing the wire in question; or openly saying anything under 150 volts- or even 250 volts could not kill you; or that an ungrounded delta was safe to work live. As a result metal cased tools/appliances were made without an EGC and codes/standards never bothered mandating it.

However after the 2nd world war with the rapid proliferation of urban electrification and electric appliances an increased number of deaths began being documented in areas where people were barefoot, wet, near metal, ect; like basements, garages, kitchens, outdoors, ect. Contrary to what we have been lead to believe, most of these users were not misusing their tools or appliances in any way (like using them in the rain, or swimming with them for example)- but rather being victim of an internal hot wire touching the metal case. Indoors on carpet/wood sub floor you could usually let go, but else where not so much.

The preferred solution would have been making sure every new appliance had a 3 prong plug and every home had 3 prong outlets, however this would not take care of the massive amount of existing appliances already in use, which back then lasted you a life time. As a result, the best solution to take care of both existing and new appliances- in addition to homes which would never see an EGC for 150 years but would see some new outlets- would be the creation of a 5ma current differential device in a receptacle form,(GFCI).

Code began mandating them in areas with the most electrocutions took place and going on from there in pecking order. Deaths began plummeting from faulty appliances and the occasional misuse.


Take in to perspective the UK. EGCs and 3 prong plugs were mandated in the UK since at least the 40s meaning post WWII everything with a metal case had an EGC- including outlets that would not take a plug missing its ground pin. This resulted in GFCIs (or RCDs) being delayed up until the late 90s. In fact RCDs were predominantly pushed not as much as to protect against electrocution at the time, but rather to protect against the increased fire hazard associated with 240 volts line to ground. IE, the UK got its AFCIs. :thumbsup:


That is however not to say GFCIs/RCDs do not have their place in the modern US and the modern UK, despite 3 prongs now found on nearly all none double insulated appliances. GFCIs and RCDs still protect against two less likely but still possible dangers:

1. The loss of the 3rd pin or EGC.


a. It happens. Ground pins breaker off, crap happens:

http://forums.mikeholt.com/showthread.php?t=172466

b. Unqualified personnel hooking up hot tubs and pool motors. Ground wire optional for none electricans :p

2. Damaged cords. This can happen regardless of working EGC. Cord plugged in, hot wire insualtion damaged and exposed. Person picks up damged section and becomes energized. A GFCI in this case will be a life saver.

In the UK this is known as a "direct contact"

http://image.slidesharecdn.com/unive...?cb=1282450904



So pushing aside everything you know about GFCIs, they were simply- and still are- another type of EGC. They were created and mandated soley to address the issues asociated with missing EGCs. Not water or mositure.

..............................................................................................................................................



This helps back the above:


http://www.necconnect.org/resources/gfcis/
 
In light of a few GFCI threads on Mike Holt's, I thought Id post this Email I wrote up a while back and sent to a friend. I am not here to bash anyone on this forum, but over time I have released that few know the reasoning (in depth) behind why GFCIs were mandated.

And you do?

Not trying to bash you either but how did you determine all the things you presented in that email?
 
And you do?

Not trying to bash you either but how did you determine all the things you presented in that email?

Years of research and code mandates over time that I don't think I can post here all at once. :thumbsup:


But think about it for a moment- in the 50,60s and 70s, how many tools lacked an EGC?
 
Years of research and code mandates over time that I don't think I can post here all at once. :thumbsup:


But think about it for a moment- in the 50,60s and 70s, how many tools lacked an EGC?

It seems you feel if EGC had been required from the start we we would not have GFCIs

I disagree with that.
 
There were no double-insulated tools in my day, let me show you Dad's late-50's era Sawzall if you need an example.
 
Take in to perspective the UK. EGCs and 3 prong plugs were mandated in the UK since at least the 40s meaning post WWII everything with a metal case had an EGC- including outlets that would not take a plug missing its ground pin. This resulted in GFCIs (or RCDs) being delayed up until the late 90s. In fact RCDs were predominantly pushed not as much as to protect against electrocution at the time, but rather to protect against the increased fire hazard associated with 240 volts line to ground. IE, the UK got its AFCIs. :thumbsup:
I don't know my history well enough, but there definitely was a lot of rebuilding necessary in Europe because of the war, easy to start with a new standard when a lot of what was made to the old standard has been destroyed.
 
GFCI not only protects us as we know it as a ground fault which we inadvertently encounter, it also makes "wire for fire" and "toss the blow dryer in the sink or tub with the abusive husband" not so simple any longer.

When I worked for the city I'd get the FFIR's every morning on my desk (Florida Fire Incident Report) for any structure fires in the city. I rolled up on one and got out of my car. This guy comes walking up to me saying over and over "I didn't wire that receptacle in the corner, I didn't do it, I didn't do it." A ten year old could have been more convincing with his fingers crossed.

Between GFCI, AFCI & smoke detectors, fire damage and fire injury/ death rates are going way down as population goes up.

Are we protecting ourselves or are we protecting our insurance companies? I'd say both. The insurance companies put great effort and expense into regulatory compliance. The "U" in UL means "Underwriters" as in "insurance companies".
 
Purely from a personal perspective and with no "official" documentation, the number of tools and, more over, extension cords I see with missing ground prongs have convinced me that GFCIs were one of the better safety devices ever introduced in the Code.
 
Purely from a personal perspective and with no "official" documentation, the number of tools and, more over, extension cords I see with missing ground prongs have convinced me that GFCIs were one of the better safety devices ever introduced in the Code.

I agree

I fully believe we would have GFCIs today even if we had EGCs from the days of Edison
 
I don't know my history well enough, but there definitely was a lot of rebuilding necessary in Europe because of the war, easy to start with a new standard when a lot of what was made to the old standard has been destroyed.

I've heard that before on here- but what proof is there? And what about other countries like AS and NZ?
 
Purely from a personal perspective and with no "official" documentation, the number of tools and, more over, extension cords I see with missing ground prongs have convinced me that GFCIs were one of the better safety devices ever introduced in the Code.

I agree

I fully believe we would have GFCIs today even if we had EGCs from the days of Edison

I never said that we would not. We still would for the reasons I mentioned- just perhaps at a latter date. Not sure why that is being thrown under the bus :huh:
 
I never said that we would not. We still would for the reasons I mentioned- just perhaps at a latter date.


And I still disagree with that.

In my own personal opinion branch circuit EGC requirements, or lack there of had absolutely nothing to do with the timing of when GFCIs where brought into the code.

As far as I know the first GFCI requirements were all for circuits that would also have an EGC.

1971 was the first time GFCIs where required, the requirements applied to pools and exterior. In 1971 both of those circuits were required to have an EGC as well.

Does anyone know when the NEC started allowing GFCIs to be used when no grounding means exists?
 
And I still disagree with that.

In my own personal opinion branch circuit EGC requirements, or lack there of had absolutely nothing to do with the timing of when GFCIs where brought into the code.

As far as I know the first GFCI requirements were all for circuits that would also have an EGC.


1971 was the first time GFCIs where required, the requirements applied to pools and exterior. In 1971 both of those circuits were required to have an EGC as well.

I agree that GFCIs were being mandated on EGC circuits and I am not disputing that; however that does not mean every appliance automatically became 3 wire.



Does anyone know when the NEC started allowing GFCIs to be used when no grounding means exists?

X2, I am wondering the same here. Though I am still willing to argue my opinion a bit...
 
I fully believe we would have GFCIs today even if we had EGCs from the days of Edison

I agree and I do not believe that the intro of gfci had much of anything to do w/ an egc being present- and actually, having an egc/bonded frame can actually increase the hazards in some situations.
 
Last edited:
I've heard that before on here- but what proof is there? And what about other countries like AS and NZ?
Have no idea of their history as it involves electricification, so I have no answer. But I can see European countries that got nearly destroyed rebuilding with newer standards.

Japan - IIRC has both 50 and 60 Hz systems - depends on who helped rebuild what after the war.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top