ECN Electrical Forum - Discussion Forums for Electricians, Inspectors and Related Professionals
ECN Shout Chat
ShoutChat
Recent Posts
Increasing demand factors in residential
by gfretwell - 03/28/24 12:43 AM
Portable generator question
by Steve Miller - 03/19/24 08:50 PM
Do we need grounding?
by NORCAL - 03/19/24 05:11 PM
240V only in a home and NEC?
by dsk - 03/19/24 06:33 AM
Cordless Tools: The Obvious Question
by renosteinke - 03/14/24 08:05 PM
New in the Gallery:
This is a new one
This is a new one
by timmp, September 24
Few pics I found
Few pics I found
by timmp, August 15
Who's Online Now
0 members (), 255 guests, and 16 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Rate Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2
#24729 04/22/03 12:04 AM
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,429
L
LK Offline OP
Member
When replacing an existing outlet with a GFCI the rules are no ground then no ground downstream. when there is a full size ground then connect all grounds. What is the accepted practice when a reduced size 16ga bare ground is connected. Do you open the ground connection, continue the ground downstream; or connect the reduced ground on all devices

#24730 04/22/03 06:03 AM
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 198
Z
Member
I treat it like a full size ground, and attach to all devices.


Shoot first, apologize later.....maybe
#24731 04/22/03 09:57 AM
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 47
G
GEO Offline
Member
not sure of the question ? do you mean a/c (bx) cable , what type of boxes ? GEO

#24732 04/22/03 02:44 PM
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 4,116
Likes: 4
Member
LK,

Do you mean the smaller size ground wire that was in the older NM cables?


Bill
#24733 04/22/03 05:37 PM
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 7,381
Likes: 7
Member
LK:
In my opinion, a reduced size (wire guage) ground conductor is better than "no ground". The older NM cable had 16 gauge ground, and most of that cable was/is #14, for the hot and neutral conductors, and should be on a 15 amp OCP.

As an AHJ ion NJ, I would accept the undersized ground. For any arguments, I would fall back to "good old common sense", but as there is no NEC article for that, I would use the NJ "Rehab" Code out of the UCC (5:23 et al)

John


John
#24734 04/22/03 08:44 PM
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,429
L
LK Offline OP
Member
I find reduced grounds under cable clamps, twisted under sheet metal screws and pushed through holes in the box. None of these connections are good grounding practices.
When installing a GFCI I find it best to check all down stream ground connections.
It looks like everyone agrees reduced ground better then none at all.
LK

#24735 04/22/03 09:38 PM
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 308
S
Member
Then of course a reduced ground will show a ground with your average tester, but may increase the resistance enough in the event of a fault to not trip the OCPD. In which case it would be better to mark the GFCI as "no equipment ground" so no one is deceived about the actual grounding ability of the circuit.

#24736 04/22/03 11:19 PM
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,429
L
LK Offline OP
Member
Steve:
Good point this is why some type of marking should note the missing link. I have a problem finding a label NO EQUIPMENT GROUND the GFCI Mfg. should put them in the box. They have about 4 info sheets in there now.

LK

#24737 04/23/03 06:48 AM
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 2,056
R
Member
LK,

Most GFCI manufacturers now include both labels in the box. (GFCI protected outlet, No equipment ground).

#24738 04/23/03 10:09 AM
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 246
R
Member
In this situation, why is the existing (reduced) equipment grounding conductor better than none? The whole circuit is protected by a GFCI, which will trip faster than the breaker will, in the event of a ground fault. That is it's function. IMOI, I would think the reduced egc is equal to no egc. Don't use it.

If you are talking about a non-gfci protected circuit, then, yes the reduced egc is preferred to none.
_________________
Rick Miell

Page 1 of 2 1 2

Link Copied to Clipboard
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5