Does anyone place recessed shower lights on GFCI protection, ie., faceless GFCI's in the bathroom or is this overkill?
Thanks in advance,
Andy
Sometimes I am required to... Not code, but with lower cielings, I have a few Inspectors request it. I do it... Although I can easily say no.
I did it a few times. Not code but simply because the switch was in the same box as the GFI recep. Since it was a dedicated circuit, it was easier to do it this way then run a separate light feed and it made no sense to have the option there and not use it. Never had any nuisence tripping.
When I wired my house I placed the shower recessed on the GFI. Just because I thought it to be a good idea. Just don't forget this when you think the bulb is blown. Might just be a tripped GFI. (Been There Done That)
(edited for spelling)
[This message has been edited by luckyshadow (edited 06-27-2005).]
sometimes...if it is more convenient. We always do when it is a fan/light combination unit as they usually require gfi protection
on fan/lights the manufacturers instructions usually say they are rated to be used above the shower if they are GFI protected. I've seen this in both the Nutone and the Panasonic fan/lights
HLC the original question was about light fixtures (not fans) and I was just curious as to why people gfci them in this situation. I susupect the answer would be something like "it seems like a good idea".
I looked at luminaires in or near bathtubs
and read three progressively safer installations starting @ 410.4d 550.14d 551.53b
now my quesion is why is a perminet building shower or tub different then a portable one.
why not just gfi and gasketed type encloser everthing.
I also looked at spa & hot tub in 680 installations and it calls for gfi and encloser under 7.6
code book is in the truck, but I thought it was required if any metal present on can trim, and if trim ring is plastic, no GFI required. We always did it to allow more versatility of trim and avoid inspector hassels because some liked it and we were too busy to argue.
you should get your code book out of your trunk
"we were too busy to argue."
Sorry, not a valid answer.
I am never too busy to argue.
Speedy, "we ARE too busy to argue." It's something I have gotten very used to... The Inspector is the AHJ, and all is subject to thier interpretation, or on occassion, whim. I only aurgue if it will cost company or customer an exorbanant amount of money. $15 for a GFI planned into the scope, is a pittance for the time and arguement, re-inspection or having the inspector dis-allow lighting in certain areas of showers and tubs. Calling 410.4D, it makes no mention of reccessed lighting... But, if less that 8', many of our Inspector will make the request for one, and on occasion bend the rules of that if on a GFI, as it make no mention of scones over a tub either. As one put it, "Some moron is going to try to change a bulb in that bare foot, put it on a GFI." OK! Customer gets charged a few bucks. Card is signed, and owner moves in, I get to see the happy inspector on the job across the street.
Hows Electure put it sometimes, 'it not code, its design'?