If you were Registered and logged in, you could reply and use other advanced thread options
|
Posted by Bill on November 7, 2009, 11:28 am
"Nate Nagel" wrote in message
show/hide quoted text
> I understand that it would be far preferable that the circuit be grounded;
> I'm just not certain if that is even practical in all locations, at least
> not without pulling the baseboards and channeling the plaster. Hence my
> question - I don't want to do anything that doesn't at least meet code.
Well so far as electrical codes go, usually you are covered by "grandfather"
rules for older electrical work. Not technically required for old work to be
up to code. An electrical inspector is not going to come out and inspect
just the new wall plates you have installed. (So far as I know.)
Then there is the kid's playground thing. New playgrounds assure that no kid
will ever be hurt. Well you can't protect kids from everything!
Sort of the same with electrical things. There are plenty of metal wall
plates installed out there which are not grounded and there are no problems.
I grew up in a house without grounded wiring, no GFCI's, etc and am still
here.
Basically there is not safe, sort of safe, safe, more safe, and very safe.
(So far as electrical wiring goes.)
New code for new wiring installed would insist everything be in the "very
safe" category. And over time, electrocution accidents will be drastically
reduced. That is the idea. As electrical wiring is replaced/upgraded, it is
done so in a "very safe" manner.
So "very safe" would be plastic wall plates, or grounded, or circuit on
GFCI.
There are also GFCI breakers which can protect an entire circuit. This would
provide protection, yet be less expensive than running new wiring.
|
|
Posted by news.eternal-september.org on November 9, 2009, 11:41 am
show/hide quoted text
> Bill wrote:
>> "Nate Nagel" wrote in message
>>> can you use metal switch plates and receptacle covers on an
>>> ungrounded circuit protected by a GFCI, or ONLY on a grounded
>>> circuit?
>> New code for "new wiring" is that all metal associated with
>> electrical devices is grounded.
>> With that said, it is safer when using metal plates if the outlet or
>> switch is grounded. And it is safer if the circuit is on a GFCI if
>> it is not grounded.
>> What happens is sometimes wires can melt and come loose. Then touch
>> a metal object inside an electrical box. For the times when this may
>> occur, it is best that all metal parts be grounded or the circuit
>> protected by a GFCI. So yes people have in the past been shocked by
>> touching metal plates
>> when certain malfunctions occur. Thus the reason they want these to
>> be grounded - just in case!
> I understand that it would be far preferable that the circuit be
> grounded; I'm just not certain if that is even practical in all
> locations, at least not without pulling the baseboards and channeling
> the plaster. Hence my question - I don't want to do anything that
> doesn't at least meet code.
> nate
The final word is going to come from your local code enforcement office and
the inspector, regardless of what the NEC o r anyone here thinks. Give them
a call & see. You don't hav eto ID yourself just to ask a question.
HTH,
Twayne`
|
|
Posted by DerbyDad03 on November 9, 2009, 12:32 pm
show/hide quoted text
> "Nate Nagel" =A0wrote in message
> > can you use metal switch plates and receptacle covers on an ungrounded
> > circuit protected by a GFCI, or ONLY on a grounded circuit?
> New code for "new wiring" is that all metal associated with electrical
> devices is grounded.
> With that said, it is safer when using metal plates if the outlet or swit=
> is grounded. And it is safer if the circuit is on a GFCI if it is not
> grounded.
> What happens is sometimes wires can melt and come loose. Then touch a met=
> object inside an electrical box. For the times when this may occur, it is
> best that all metal parts be grounded or the circuit protected by a GFCI.
> So yes people have in the past been shocked by touching metal plates when
> certain malfunctions occur. Thus the reason they want these to be grounde=
d -
show/hide quoted text
> just in case!
re: "With that said, it is safer when using metal plates if the outlet
or switch is grounded. And it is safer if the circuit is on a GFCI if
it is not grounded. "
Please re-read what you wrote and notice how it could be taken the
wrong way - especially the second sentence:
"And it is safer if the circuit is on a GFCI if it is not grounded"
The first time I read that I did a double take.
It could be read as "It's safer to have an ungrounded GFCI than a
grounded GFCI."
I know that's not what you meant - I know you meant that a GFCI is
safer than an ungrounded circuit - but I think you can see that it
could be read in a slightly different way.
|
|
Posted by Josh on November 9, 2009, 1:23 pm
On Mon, 9 Nov 2009 09:32:10 -0800 (PST), DerbyDad03
show/hide quoted text
>> "Nate Nagel" wrote in message
>> > can you use metal switch plates and receptacle covers on an ungrounded
>> > circuit protected by a GFCI, or ONLY on a grounded circuit?
>> New code for "new wiring" is that all metal associated with electrical
>> devices is grounded.
>> With that said, it is safer when using metal plates if the outlet or switch
>> is grounded. And it is safer if the circuit is on a GFCI if it is not
>> grounded.
>> What happens is sometimes wires can melt and come loose. Then touch a metal
>> object inside an electrical box. For the times when this may occur, it is
>> best that all metal parts be grounded or the circuit protected by a GFCI.
>> So yes people have in the past been shocked by touching metal plates when
>> certain malfunctions occur. Thus the reason they want these to be grounded -
>> just in case!
>re: "With that said, it is safer when using metal plates if the outlet
>or switch is grounded. And it is safer if the circuit is on a GFCI if
>it is not grounded. "
>Please re-read what you wrote and notice how it could be taken the
>wrong way - especially the second sentence:
>"And it is safer if the circuit is on a GFCI if it is not grounded"
>The first time I read that I did a double take.
>It could be read as "It's safer to have an ungrounded GFCI than a
>grounded GFCI."
>I know that's not what you meant - I know you meant that a GFCI is
>safer than an ungrounded circuit - but I think you can see that it
>could be read in a slightly different way.
Actually, I he may have meant an ungrounded GFCI is safer than a
grounded non-GFCI circuit, which may me true for many (most?)
instances (kid fingers in outlet/lamp socket, toaster falling into the
sink, etc).
An internal wire breaking and touching the case may be a tossup --
with a grounded circuit it may short to ground and trip the circuit
breaker, or at least provide an *additonal* path to ground besides
your body (but depending on the resistance in the ground wire to the
real ground vs the path your body has, and the amount of current, you
could still get a fatal shock from the case). On the other hand, an
ungrounded GFCI won't trip until your body makes a circuit, but will
do so *very* quickly and at a very low current.
A grounded GFCI is the best of both, as even a small current flowing
through the case would trip it before you even touch it.
Josh
|
|
Posted by DerbyDad03 on November 9, 2009, 2:23 pm
show/hide quoted text
> On Mon, 9 Nov 2009 09:32:10 -0800 (PST), DerbyDad03
> >> "Nate Nagel" =A0wrote in message
> >> > can you use metal switch plates and receptacle covers on an unground=
> >> > circuit protected by a GFCI, or ONLY on a grounded circuit?
> >> New code for "new wiring" is that all metal associated with electrical
> >> devices is grounded.
> >> With that said, it is safer when using metal plates if the outlet or s=
witch
show/hide quoted text
> >> is grounded. And it is safer if the circuit is on a GFCI if it is not
> >> grounded.
> >> What happens is sometimes wires can melt and come loose. Then touch a =
metal
show/hide quoted text
> >> object inside an electrical box. For the times when this may occur, it=
is
show/hide quoted text
> >> best that all metal parts be grounded or the circuit protected by a GF=
CI.
show/hide quoted text
> >> So yes people have in the past been shocked by touching metal plates w=
hen
show/hide quoted text
> >> certain malfunctions occur. Thus the reason they want these to be grou=
nded -
show/hide quoted text
> >> just in case!
> >re: "With that said, it is safer when using metal plates if the outlet
> >or switch is grounded. And it is safer if the circuit is on a GFCI if
> >it is not grounded. "
> >Please re-read what you wrote and notice how it could be taken the
> >wrong way - especially the second sentence:
> >"And it is safer if the circuit is on a GFCI if it is not grounded"
> >The first time I read that I did a double take.
> >It could be read as "It's safer to have an ungrounded GFCI than a
> >grounded GFCI."
> >I know that's not what you meant - I know you meant that a GFCI is
> >safer than an ungrounded circuit - but I think you can see that it
> >could be read in a slightly different way.
> Actually, I he may have meant an ungrounded GFCI is safer than a
> grounded non-GFCI circuit, which may me true for many (most?)
> instances (kid fingers in outlet/lamp socket, toaster falling into the
> sink, etc).
> An internal wire breaking and touching the case may be a tossup --
> with a grounded circuit it may short to ground and trip the circuit
> breaker, or at least provide an *additonal* path to ground besides
> your body (but depending on the resistance in the ground wire to the
> real ground vs the path your body has, and the amount of current, you
> could still get a fatal shock from the case). =A0On the other hand, an
> ungrounded GFCI won't trip until your body makes a circuit, but will
> do so *very* quickly and at a very low current. =A0
> A grounded GFCI is the best of both, as even a small current flowing
> through the case would trip it before you even touch it.
> Josh- Hide quoted text -
> - Show quoted text -
re: "...he may have meant an ungrounded GFCI is safer than a grounded
non-GFCI circuit"
Sure, but either way, I'm sure he didn't mean what the sentence could
be construed to mean.
It's that pesky English language of ours!
|
Page 2 of 3 < 1 2 3 > last >>
| Similar Threads | Posted | | Electrical code question... | May 13, 2007, 9:52 pm |
| Electrical code question | September 1, 2007, 2:23 pm |
| Electrical code question | December 12, 2007, 11:44 am |
| electrical code question | December 10, 2008, 12:00 pm |
| electrical code question | June 8, 2009, 9:25 am |
| Electrical Code Question (Canada) | January 28, 2006, 4:49 pm |
| Electrical Code question:"accessibility" | August 14, 2008, 5:39 pm |
| Electrical Code Question - Buried wire | December 18, 2006, 8:26 pm |
| Electrical Code Question, RE: submersible well pump | August 5, 2009, 2:54 pm |
| electrical outlet placement under window code question | February 25, 2010, 11:36 pm |
|
|
Yahoo! 
Google 
Windows Live 
del.icio.us 
digg 
Netscape 
XML Sitemap
> I'm just not certain if that is even practical in all locations, at least
> not without pulling the baseboards and channeling the plaster. Hence my
> question - I don't want to do anything that doesn't at least meet code.