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 (), 260 guests, and 20 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Rate Thread
Page 2 of 3 1 2 3
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 9,923
Likes: 32
G
Member
Mike, those exceptions are all gone in 2008


Greg Fretwell
Stay up to Code with the Latest NEC:


>> 2023 NEC & Related Reference & Exam Prep
2023 NEC & Related Reference & Study Guides

Pass Your Exam the FIRST TIME with the Latest NEC & Exam Prep

>> 2020 NEC & Related Reference & Study Guides
 

Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 613
M
Member
North of 49 we are getting more and more GFCI protection requirements but thankfully no where near as many as you NEC guys do. Pretty much outdoor receptacles for dwelling units within 2.5 meters of grade, Outlets within 1.5 meters of any sink and within 3 meters of a pool. Hot tubs and some pool equipment. heat tracing but only GF protection is required, never mind that most use GFCI protection. I'll fail a job that wires a sump pump through a GFCI but not a gfi. For any that don't know a gfci trips at 6 ma of leakage and a gfi allows up to 30 ma. Neither of these are the same as ground fault protection for large services.
Are the citizens of the US really that much at risk? I have been to lots of places where there are hardly any trained electricians and no codes but I haven't seen bodies dead in the street yet?
I think we are going insane trying to protect from every possible hazard. Life is fatal and no risk, isn't living. Heck you can die from sitting too much. Really how does a 2 million dollar scanner actually make flying safe? Maybe teaching our border guards how to behaviour profile and recognize that currently Swedes are not high on the list of terror countries might make security focused. Sorry I am off on a tangent.

Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 5
L
New Member
That is really dumb!Hopefully it will be deleted at the next code change

Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 9,923
Likes: 32
G
Member
I guess you guys don't remember the story about the kid that got killed on the energized garage door.
Granted there were a couple of problems that contributed to this but a GFCI would have tripped before he died.


Greg Fretwell
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 5,445
Likes: 2
Cat Servant
Member
Nope, I missed that story.

I've posted a fair number of pictures here over the years, and I try to choose each picture so as to focus on but one code issue.

Alas, it has proven nearly impossible to take a picture with but one flaw in it. Instead, when a hack is at work, there seems to be an urge to break as many rules as possible.

It's not that I rejoice when someone gets hurt, it's just that I nearly always find that there were so many things going wrong it's amazing it took so long for the accident to happen. Did I say accident? Some of these jobs look like a deliberate effort was made to cause injury.

There is also, dare I say it, some value to the doctrines behind cost/benefit analysis. To prevent cuts, we could outfit kitchens with rubber knives; just don't expect much cooking to get done! (Lest you think I'm being silly, have you seen the 'knives' some warehouses expect their folks to use? Ask the guy at Graybar to show you his!)

I think Alan (The OP) has a point: the ever-expanding quest to make things perfect has no place in code; it's a design issue.

We have other threads going right now that address other aspects of this quest to make things 'accident proof.' One thread references one man's campaign to do away with GFCI devices, and place the protection at the panel. Another thread details the difficulty of finding a problem that is 'somewhere' in the house wiring.

We can't just 'put in a GFCI' and expect stupidity to go away. Nor can we expect life to be completely without risk. It's too easy to say 'what if' ... but at some point it's wrong to inflict a burden on all in an attempt to shelter the one.

We also cannot ignore the other agenda of those claiming there's a 'safety crisis' to be addressed. We regularily see all manner of campaigns receive their 3 months of prominence, then disappear when somebody gets what they want - while the original issue remains forgotten.

Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 2,148
R
Member
Originally Posted by harold endean
All I can say is look who sits on the code making panels. The manufactures of equipment that is "Required" to be in the new codes.

To be fair, no single group, like manufacturers, are permitted to have more than 1/3 the seats on any code panel. It takes a 2/3s majority to approve a change.

That being said, it does seem that the manufacturers have an undo influence on adopting rules that help their bottom line.


Don(resqcapt19)
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 984
Likes: 1
G
Member
I have to agree with Don.

I read the ROP for the 2011NEC (all seemingly zillion pages of it) and there were many instances where a single product, technology or manufacturer was proposed to be added as a requirement and pretty much every one of them was rejected.

If it's a product or idea that is grounded in substantial justification, it gets much further through the process, but just trying to get your unique widget adopted as a requirement rarely flies with the CMP.

And even if it does gets recommended by the CMP, it has to go through the public comment phase and enough comments against the CMP recommendation can still get it blocked.


Ghost307
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 399
A
Member
How about someone making a gizmo that detects when the GFI trips with a noise and flashing LED to let the occupant know that it has tripped. Even with a couple of AAA batteries it shouldn't be much bigger than a cell phone and could plug into any receptacle that is protected.
It could even be built so the appliance plugs into it and then into the receptacle. Wouldn't have to since it is detecting loss of power on the line side, but it would be convenient.
Alan


Alan--
If it was easy, anyone could do it.
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 984
Likes: 1
G
Member
Alan, I think you have a moneymaking idea.
You should be able to sell tons of them to folks worried about losing power and not knowing about it until it's too late.
You could make it 'chirp' like the battery powered smoke alarms so the battery would last longer when sounding the alarm. Once every minute or so would be noticeable but not annoying.
Just remember to include a switch to shut it up in case the whole neighborhood is out to keep from driving everyone in the house nuts.


Ghost307
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 8,443
Likes: 3
Member
Ghost,
We have a similar thing over here for our DIN Rail mounted breakers, in the form of a device that clips onto the rail next to any given breaker, it has a pin that inserts into the side of the breaker and connects with a part that moves when the breaker trips.
Effectively all it is, is a NO contact that you hook up to a piezo unit (also mounted on the DIN Rail) and power it from the panel.

Page 2 of 3 1 2 3

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