Thread: any electrical code prevent GFI outlet wired to GFI breaker

Is there an electrical code that prevents a GFI outlet wired to a GFI breaker in the main panel.
Thanks.

Similar Threads:

• Do breaker shackles prevent breaker from tripping
• Interesting electrical problem related to circuit wired smoke detectors
• Electrical wall outlet - Odd - What is it?
• Single wired breaker?
• Double wired breaker

No rule against this, but it is unnecessary as the breaker is already supplying the gfi protection.

- - - Updated - - -

No rule against this, but it is unnecessary as the breaker is already supplying the gfi protection.

Originally Posted by Jim Port

No rule against this, but it is unnecessary as the breaker is already supplying the gfi protection.

Yes, there is a rule against it although I dunno why, but redundant GFCIs on the same circuit is not allowed.

Originally Posted by Lon Henderson

Yes, there is a rule against it although I dunno why, but redundant GFCIs on the same circuit is not allowed.

Would you mind pointing that rule out?

There is no rule prohibiting it, not that I know of, other than common sense and nuisance tripping of a GFCI which is not where you would be looking to reset it. But code does not cover common sense anyway.

Originally Posted by Jerry Peck

Would you mind pointing that rule out?

There is no rule prohibiting it, not that I know of, other than common sense and nuisance tripping of a GFCI which is not where you would be looking to reset it. But code does not cover common sense anyway.

I agree with Jerry, noting wrong with other than what he noted and I'll add it is a waste of money.

Originally Posted by Lon Henderson

Yes, there is a rule against it although I dunno why, but redundant GFCIs on the same circuit is not allowed.

Not according to the NEC. Please quote your source.

Originally Posted by Scott Patterson

I agree with Jerry, noting wrong with other than what he noted and I'll add it is a waste of money.

I sit corrected. Some years ago I saw an episode of Holmes on homes where he said you could not do this. Later an electrician confirmed that you couldn't have redundant GFCI's. And I just never looked into it any further.

It's a condition that I do not report on.

Originally Posted by Lon Henderson

I sit corrected. Some years ago I saw an episode of Holmes on homes where he said you could not do this. Later an electrician confirmed that you couldn't have redundant GFCI's. And I just never looked into it any further.

Holmes is in Canada. I liked watching the show, but they made some stupid recommendations on electrical installations.

The other day I was watching Holmes on Homes and Mike was grabbing at a bunch of K&T wiring in a basement, and said, "all this knob and tube has to go its aluminum"!

Originally Posted by Raymond Wand

The other day I was watching Holmes on Homes and Mike was grabbing at a bunch of K&T wiring in a basement, and said, "all this knob and tube has to go its aluminum"!

In the years since, I've learned a lot more about our man Holmes. I still like the guy, but he isn't the last word.

I'm going to start teaching Home Inspection at a local school here and this has reminded me that I should do some research into some of the things that I've been thinking and saying for years that I learned from "old timers".

Originally Posted by Lon Henderson

I'm going to start teaching Home Inspection at a local school here and this has reminded me that I should do some research into some of the things that I've been thinking and saying for years that I learned from "old timers".

Get yourself a copy of Code Check Complete. Everytime you think one of these truisms, review code check. It helps.

- - - Updated - - -

Originally Posted by Lon Henderson

I'm going to start teaching Home Inspection at a local school here and this has reminded me that I should do some research into some of the things that I've been thinking and saying for years that I learned from "old timers".

Get yourself a copy of Code Check Complete. Everytime you think one of these truisms, review code check. It helps.

Originally Posted by Bruce Ramsey

Get yourself a copy of Code Check Complete. Everytime you think one of these truisms, review code check. It helps.

I've got copies of Code Check, Code, Electrical books, and books on soil analysis, plumbing, construction and more out my arse. I don't have the time to go through everything I've been told. That one about GFCIs wasn't crazy enough to warrant investigation.

I always report redundant GFCIs. If you don't, you will probably get that phone call sometime down the road asking why a GFCI tripped but it won't reset. Best to explain it to your client at the time of the inspection then later when you have forgotten. Besides, redundant protection is almost always a sign that someone with insufficient experience has been doing some wiring in the home. Makes me look just a little bit closer at the rest of the home's wiring.

Originally Posted by Michael Bronner

I always report redundant GFCIs.

Define "report".

Besides, redundant protection is almost always a sign that someone with insufficient experience has been doing some wiring in the home.

I disagree.

I have found many in new construction, having been done by electricians.

I would agree if you had stated that it is an indication of someone who did not know, did not care, or was not paying attention ... to what they were doing (all three or which can apply to new construction at various times).

From what i recall, GFCI panel breakers trip at a much higher amperage than GFI receptacle breakers, which to me, makes the GFI receptacle much safer. 50 milliamps vs 6 milliamps I think. I shocked myself with a gfi once, so i can imagine that 8 times the milliamps would hurt much more.

Originally Posted by chris brown

From what i recall, GFCI panel breakers trip at a much higher amperage than GFI receptacle breakers, which to me, makes the GFI receptacle much safer. 50 milliamps vs 6 milliamps I think. I shocked myself with a gfi once, so i can imagine that 8 times the milliamps would hurt much more.

Correct me if wrong, but I suspect you are confusing GFI with GFP ?

Originally Posted by Mike Twitty

Holmes is in Canada. I liked watching the show, but they made some stupid recommendations on electrical installations.

He sometimes does work in US.. but vast majority in Toronto. But there is no code preventing it in Canada.

Originally Posted by chris brown

From what i recall, GFCI panel breakers trip at a much higher amperage than GFI receptacle breakers, which to me, makes the GFI receptacle much safer. 50 milliamps vs 6 milliamps I think. I shocked myself with a gfi once, so i can imagine that 8 times the milliamps would hurt much more.

Think you may be thinking of AFCI when quoting 50 ma. Breaker GFCI trip p at 5 to 6 ma.

Originally Posted by chris brown

From what i recall, GFCI panel breakers trip at a much higher amperage than GFI receptacle breakers, which to me, makes the GFI receptacle much safer. 50 milliamps vs 6 milliamps I think. I shocked myself with a gfi once, so i can imagine that 8 times the milliamps would hurt much more.

Originally Posted by bob smit

Correct me if wrong, but I suspect you are confusing GFI with GFP ?

I suspect the same thing.

The 50 ma ground-fault protection was for the equipment. The 5 ma ground-fault circuit interrupter protection is for personnel.

Completely different breakers and different uses.

There are two classes of gfi protection, Class A 5 MA and Class B 30 MA.

Originally Posted by Jerry Peck

I suspect the same thing.

The 50 ma ground-fault protection was for the equipment. The 5 ma ground-fault circuit interrupter protection is for personnel.

Completely different breakers and different uses.

Well 10 ma can kill you.

here is good article.. http://www.nema.org/Products/Documen...esentation.pdf

Originally Posted by Robin Wells

Well 10 ma will kill you.

Not if the GFCI trips at 5 ma +/- 1 ma first ... ...

(Whether GFCI breaker or GFCI receptacle.)

Originally Posted by Michael Bronner

I always report redundant GFCIs.

Reporting is one thing, calling it a fault is something else again.

I notice when I test the receptacle GFCI with a tester, often as not the GFCI breaker in the panel will trip first. So I don't think you can say one is better than the other.

From a practical standpoint one of the darn thing will always trip before the other and Murphy will guarantee the one that trips is not the one you tested. One of the corollaries to this is that the one that did trip is concealed somewhere and serves the game filled freezer. DAMHIKT!

- - - Updated - - -

From a practical standpoint one of the darn thing will always trip before the other and Murphy will guarantee the one that trips is not the one you tested. One of the corollaries to this is that the one that did trip is concealed somewhere and serves the game filled freezer. DAMHIKT!

Using the test button on the GFCI outlet will NOT trip any other GFCI on that circuit.
Using the built in test button is THE approved method for testing a GFCI.
Using a plugin tester on a GFCI outlet is pointless.

A plug in tester will tell you whether the outlet is grounded or not.

Originally Posted by Raymond Wand

A plug in tester will tell you whether the outlet is grounded or not.

True
I should have said, (and was thinking), using the test button of a plugin tester on a GFCI outlet is pointless.

Originally Posted by Jim Port

There are two classes of gfi protection, Class A 5 MA and Class B 30 MA.

Isn't a class b set to trip at 20 ma.

Originally Posted by Rick Cantrell

I should have said, (and was thinking), using the test button of a plugin tester on a GFCI outlet is pointless.

I disagree.

Using the GFCI test button on a GFCI tester in a remote receptacle outlet will tell you if that remote receptacle outlet is GFCI protected. (As will testing the remote receptacle, going back to the GFCI receptacle, pressing the test button, going back to the remote receptacle to see if it is now off, then going back yet again to the GFCI receptacle to press the reset button - seems to me that the GFCI tester test button is pretty useful.)

Using the GFCI tester test button when plugged into the GFCI receptacle, well, that is not "pointless", more like "redundant" ... not needed, but it works, however, the GFCI receptacle (or GFCI breaker) test button IS the approved test method.

Originally Posted by Jerry Peck

I disagree.

Surprise

Originally Posted by Jerry Peck

Using the GFCI test button on a GFCI tester in a remote receptacle outlet will tell you if that remote receptacle outlet is GFCI protected. (As will testing the remote receptacle, going back to the GFCI receptacle, pressing the test button, going back to the remote receptacle to see if it is now off, then going back yet again to the GFCI receptacle to press the reset button - seems to me that the GFCI tester test button is pretty useful.)

I am talking about GFCI outlets, only.
I think you know that.

Originally Posted by Jerry Peck

Using the GFCI tester test button when plugged into the GFCI receptacle, well, that is not "pointless", more like "redundant" ... not needed, but it works, however, the GFCI receptacle (or GFCI breaker) test button IS the approved test method.

You say "redundant" --"not or no longer needed or useful; superfluous."
I say "pointless" --- "having little or no sense, use, or purpose."

Lets see
So if using the test button of a plugin tester is redundant (not needed, not useful, or superfluous). How is it not pointless (having no use or purpose)?

If you use the plugin tester and it trips the GFCI do you, or do you not use the test button on the GFCI? Of course you use the built in test button of the GFCI outlet. That makes using the plugin in tester "pointless".

If you use the test button of a plugin tester and it does not trip, do you report the GFCI as defective? No. You use the builtin test button. Thus making the use of the plugin,,, POINTLESS.
Either way, the built in test button must be used to determine it the GFCI outlet is functioning or not. Therefore using a plugin tester to test the GFCI outlet is not redundant, it's pointless.

Originally Posted by Rick Cantrell

If you use the test button of a plugin tester and it does not trip, do you report the GFCI as defective? No. You use the builtin test button. Thus making the use of the plugin,,, POINTLESS.
Either way, the built in test button must be used to determine it the GFCI outlet is functioning or not. Therefore using a plugin tester to test the GFCI outlet is not redundant, it's pointless.

The plug in tester will or should work in all cases except where there is no ground present. The plug in tester will show quickly other problems such as reversal.. depending on tester you use perhaps other info as well. Having said that, some of the info is interesting but really beyond SOP. (and if not understood can be dangerous to know .. too much information! )

Personally I like the plug in tester.. I can see if the receptacle not only trips when testing, but also that everything is wired properly. If you use only the test button, the ground could be absent, and if it is a newer home, I really do want to know that.

While it will test and trip by the test button when the plug in tester fails, if the plug in tester works and trips properly then it really does go one step further. So while not necessarily 100% something you require, I do not feel it is pointless as it does give you additional information and takes no longer really.

But maybe that is because my background is electrical..

Originally Posted by Robin Wells

The plug in tester will or should work in all cases except where there is no ground present. The plug in tester will show quickly other problems such as reversal.. depending on tester you use perhaps other info as well. Having said that, some of the info is interesting but really beyond SOP. (and if not understood can be dangerous to know .. too much information! )

Personally I like the plug in tester.. I can see if the receptacle not only trips when testing, but also that everything is wired properly. If you use only the test button, the ground could be absent, and if it is a newer home, I really do want to know that.

While it will test and trip by the test button when the plug in tester fails, if the plug in tester works and trips properly then it really does go one step further. So while not necessarily 100% something you require, I do not feel it is pointless as it does give you additional information and takes no longer really.

But maybe that is because my background is electrical..

Again, I said; using the TEST BUTTON on the plugin tester is pointless on a GFCI outlet.
I did not say anything about the no ground, or reversed wiring.
For those, the plugin tester does give useful information.

Originally Posted by Rick Cantrell

Surprise

I am talking about GFCI outlets, only.
I think you know that.

You say "redundant" --"not or no longer needed or useful; superfluous."
I say "pointless" --- "having little or no sense, use, or purpose."

Lets see
So if using the test button of a plugin tester is redundant (not needed, not useful, or superfluous). How is it not pointless (having no use or purpose)?

If you use the plugin tester and it trips the GFCI do you, or do you not use the test button on the GFCI? Of course you use the built in test button of the GFCI outlet. That makes using the plugin in tester "pointless".

If you use the test button of a plugin tester and it does not trip, do you report the GFCI as defective? No. You use the builtin test button. Thus making the use of the plugin,,, POINTLESS.
Either way, the built in test button must be used to determine it the GFCI outlet is functioning or not. Therefore using a plugin tester to test the GFCI outlet is not redundant, it's pointless.

(bold is mine)
redundant
adjective re·dun·dant \ri-ˈdən-dənt\
: repeating something else and therefore unnecessary
—used to describe part of a machine, system, etc., that has the same function as another part and that exists so that the entire machine, system, etc., will not fail if the main part fails
: dismissed from a job because you are no longer needed


Full Definition of REDUNDANT


1 a : exceeding what is necessary or normal : superfluous
b : characterized by or containing an excess; specifically : using more words than necessary
c : characterized by similarity or repetition <a group of particularly redundant brick buildings>
d chiefly British : no longer needed for a job and hence laid off
2 : profuse, lavish
3 : serving as a duplicate for preventing failure of an entire system (as a spacecraft) upon failure of a single component

The GFCI tester test button is a redundant test to the GFCI device test button - EITHER will work, one is preferred and normal (the built-in test button)

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

pointless
adjective point·less \ˈpȯint-ləs\
: having no meaning, purpose, or effect


Full Definition of POINTLESS


1 : devoid of meaning : senseless <a pointless remark>
2 : devoid of effectiveness : flat <pointless attempts to be funny>

The GFCI tester's test button DOES serve a purpose and is therefore not "pointless", it is, in fact, "redundant".

Originally Posted by Rick Cantrell

True
I should have said, (and was thinking), using the test button of a plugin tester on a GFCI outlet is pointless.

Sorry, Rick. The test button on the plug-in tester gives us info the receptacle test button does not provide.

It tells us if the GFCI will trip if a faulty appliance is plugged into it. The built-in button don't do dat.
It tells us if a receptacle is protected by a GFCI somewhere else. The built-in button don't do dat.
It tells us if the outlet is still energized after tripping. The built-in button don't do dat.


You should always do both tests.

Originally Posted by John Kogel

Sorry, Rick. The test button on the plug-in tester gives us info the receptacle test button does not provide.

Originally Posted by John Kogel

It tells us if the GFCI will trip if a faulty appliance is plugged into it. The built-in button don't do dat.

Yes it does.That is exactly what the GFCI is for.

Originally Posted by John Kogel

It tells us if a receptacle is protected by a GFCI somewhere else. The built-in button don't do dat.

Only if the downstream GFCI trips first, and is wired in series.

Originally Posted by John Kogel

It tells us if the outlet is still energized after tripping. The built-in button don't do dat.

I think GFCI's do indicate power. I know mine do.

Originally Posted by John Kogel

You should always do both tests.

I'm not saying don't use the plugin tester. They have their uses. I'm saying, don't rely on the plugin test button to replace the builtin test button on a GFCI outlet.

There are new inspectors reading this thread that may think it's acceptable to use the plugin test button instead of using the builtin test button on the GFCI outlet.
All this talk just confuses the proper method.

The proper and approved method to test a GFCI is with the built in test feature.

Originally Posted by Rick Cantrell

Yes it does.That is exactly what the GFCI is for.

Only if the downstream GFCI trips first, and is wired in series.


I think GFCI's do indicate power. I know mine do.

Yes there are units that have a little light, but I find fairly often they are faulty or wired wrong, so the receptacle stays hot after tripping, while downstream receptacles are maybe protected.

I'm not saying don't use the plugin tester. They have their uses. I'm saying, don't rely on the plugin test button to replace the builtin test button on a GFCI outlet.

You said it was pointless, but you meant something else?

There are new inspectors reading this thread that may think it's acceptable to use the plugin test button instead of using the builtin test button on the GFCI outlet.
All this talk just confuses the proper method.

The proper and approved method to test a GFCI is with the built in test feature.

The manufacturer says use the button but they don't encounter and maybe don't care about the bad wiring. Works fine but it is installed wrong.
Just retract your confusing statement and it all comes clear.

Originally Posted by John Kogel

You said it was pointless, but you meant something else?

I did not say don't use a plugin tester at all for anything ever.
I said, using the TEST button of a plugin tester on a GFCI outlet is pointless.
For testing the GFCI feature of a GFCI outlet, using the test button of a plugin tester is pointless.

Is a GFCI receptacle ever defective if it trips with the tester test button?

Originally Posted by Lon Henderson

Is a GFCI receptacle ever defective if it trips with the tester test button?

Trick question right! Answer: Only if it doesn't reset. (and the smoke doesn't get out).

Originally Posted by Rick Cantrell

For testing the GFCI feature of a GFCI outlet, using the test button of a plugin tester is pointless.

Redundant, yes.

Pointless, no.

You can try to skew it any way you want ... but using the GFCI tester test button is "redundant" ... a "back up" test ...that basically the definition of "reduredundant".

Originally Posted by Jerry Peck

Redundant, yes.

Pointless, no.

You can try to skew it any way you want ... but using the GFCI tester test button is "redundant" ... a "back up" test ...that basically the definition of "reduredundant".

Having a discussion with you is pointless because you are so redundant.

Just kidding, but I couldn't resist the pun.

Originally Posted by Jerry Peck

Redundant, yes.

Pointless, no.

You can try to skew it any way you want ... but using the GFCI tester test button is "redundant" ... a "back up" test ...that basically the definition of "reduredundant".

Warning! Thread Drift

What about the upcoming requirements for "Self Testing" GFCI protection? I understand why they will be required, but I don't understand the mechanics of how they self test.

Would two self testing GFCI outlets affect each other somehow?

- - - Updated - - -

Originally Posted by Jerry Peck

Redundant, yes.

Pointless, no.

You can try to skew it any way you want ... but using the GFCI tester test button is "redundant" ... a "back up" test ...that basically the definition of "reduredundant".

Warning! Thread Drift

What about the upcoming requirements for "Self Testing" GFCI protection? I understand why they will be required, but I don't understand the mechanics of how they self test.

Would two self testing GFCI outlets affect each other somehow?

I got an email about this UL change this morning, that's why I was curious.

NEMA and UL Announce Revisions to UL 943 GFCI Standard | News content from Electrical Construction & Maintenance (EC&M) Magazine

Originally Posted by Lon Henderson

Is a GFCI receptacle ever defective if it trips with the tester test button?

Let me rephrase what I think your question is.

Could a GFCI be defective even if it tripped when tested using a plugin tester?
Not likely, but yes it could.

Conversely
Could a GFCI be functioning properly if it did not trip when tested with a plugin tested.
Again, not likely, but yes.

That is why I say not to use the test button of a plugin tester on a GFCI outlet.

Who really knows what is going on inside a plugin tester, or even a GFCI?
Was the plugin tester calibrated to the same standards.
Is the plugin tester still within the allowed standards?
We just do not know. We don't know if the GFCI is within the allowed standards either, but we do know that using the built in test button is always approved.

Originally Posted by Rick Cantrell

Let me rephrase what I think your question is.

Could a GFCI be defective even if it tripped when tested using a plugin tester?
Not likely, but yes it could.

Conversely
Could a GFCI be functioning properly if it did not trip when tested with a plugin tested.
Again, not likely, but yes.

That is why I say not to use the test button of a plugin tester on a GFCI outlet.

Who really knows what is going on inside a plugin tester, or even a GFCI?
Was the plugin tester calibrated to the same standards.
Is the plugin tester still within the allowed standards?
We just do not know. We don't know if the GFCI is within the allowed standards either, but we do know that using the built in test button is always approved.

Pushing the built in test button does not find: 1) worn out contacts; 2) loose connections; 3) multiple GFCI devices. Doesn't seem pointless to me.
If we only listen to the fox the hen house might not be so safe!

Originally Posted by Rick Cantrell

Let me rephrase what I think your question is.

Could a GFCI be defective even if it tripped when tested using a plugin tester?
Not likely, but yes it could.

I think extremely unlikely, and even more unlikely that any test that we can do would find whatever defect it has.

Originally Posted by Rick Cantrell

Conversely
Could a GFCI be functioning properly if it did not trip when tested with a plugin tested.
Again, not likely, but yes.

Agree assuming that the tester indicates a grounded plug, but even if it then trips when pressing the GFCI test button, I still write it up as not reacting to the tester's button. If the tester's button doesn't trigger the GFCI, then will a real ground fault through a person trip it?

Originally Posted by Rick Cantrell

That is why I say not to use the test button of a plugin tester on a GFCI outlet.

Who really knows what is going on inside a plugin tester, or even a GFCI?
Was the plugin tester calibrated to the same standards.
Is the plugin tester still within the allowed standards?
We just do not know. We don't know if the GFCI is within the allowed standards either, but we do know that using the built in test button is always approved.

Agree, but I don't agree that the tester is pointless when using it on a GFCI. It doesn't offer a definitive result, but then HIs don't do the type of testing that is definitive.

In general, the three blade tester is one of our most useful tools. A HI with 200 inspections under his/her belt, has or should have, used it on over 6000 receptacles. You often see tiny variances in the glows that indicate something is wrong like weak grounds, crossover current bleeding, and poor blade retention. Since the tester isn't designed to show these defects, I don't write up a diagnosis based on a flickering light, but rather call for an electrician to evaluate and correct.

Rick, stop pushing our buttons!

PS, 3-light testers don't need calibration. They simply short to ground. That is why they won't trip the GFCI if the grounding is poor or missing.
I had a standard outlet in a bathroom yesterday. Of course I needed to use my tester's test button, although I could have used a wire jumper or a paper clip.

Originally Posted by John Kogel

Rick, stop pushing our buttons!

Good one John

Originally Posted by John Kogel

PS, 3-light testers don't need calibration. They simply short to ground.

Not exactly. They have a resistor in them. If it was "They simple short to ground", what do you think would happen if you pressed the test button on an unprotected outlet.
The term "calibration", may not be the best word to use, but they are in some way calibrated for resistance to ground. BTW resistors do go bad.

Originally Posted by John Kogel

I had a standard outlet in a bathroom yesterday. Of course I needed to use my tester's test button, although I could have used a wire jumper or a paper clip.

If you use the paper clip I hope there is a working GFCI ahead of the outlet

Originally Posted by John Kogel

Rick, stop pushing our buttons!

PS, 3-light testers don't need calibration. They simply short to ground. That is why they won't trip the GFCI if the grounding is poor or missing.
I had a standard outlet in a bathroom yesterday. Of course I needed to use my tester's test button, although I could have used a wire jumper or a paper clip.

John,

Are you testing for GFCI protection tripping off, or for breakers tripping?

Originally Posted by Rick Cantrell

Could a GFCI be defective even if it tripped when tested using a plugin tester?
Not likely, but yes it could.

Agreed. Although this would not point out a poorly wired or missing ground or false ground.

Originally Posted by Rick Cantrell

Conversely
Could a GFCI be functioning properly if it did not trip when tested with a plugin tested.
Again, not likely, but yes.

Agreed again. Although this should lead you to being and wonder what is the reason, and very likely something worth making a note of. If it does not trip with a plug in tester but does trip with a test button.. worth noting I would suggest.

Say what you want, but I like to test as closely to real life scenario as possible, and simply pressing a test button does not meet that in my books.

- - - Updated - - -

Originally Posted by Rick Cantrell

Not exactly. They have a resistor in them. If it was "They simple short to ground", what do you think would happen if you pressed the test button on an unprotected outlet.

Agreed.. is a resister that lets 5 ma of current pass to ground. I did have one torn apart in shop. Think was a 20K (or somewhere thereabouts) 1/2 watt resistor.

Originally Posted by Robin Wells

Agreed.. is a resister that lets 5 ma of current pass to ground. I did have one torn apart in shop. Think was a 20K (or somewhere thereabouts) 1/2 watt resistor.

I calculated 22k for 5ma at 120v

Originally Posted by Jerry Peck

John,

Are you testing for GFCI protection tripping off, or for breakers tripping?

Just a bit of sarcasm. When nothing tripped, I went upstairs and tripped the GFCI then back down to test for power. Then wrote it up.

Originally Posted by Vern Heiler

Trick question right! Answer: Only if it doesn't reset. (and the smoke doesn't get out).

Something many people don't know is that a GFI receptacle may not immediately reset. If you wait 1/2 hour it may then reset.

I have had two cases where a homeowner/agent was upset that an outlet was disabled after the test. (threatened to charge me for the electrician who came to repair). Of course, we are required to test and it isn't our "fault".

- - - Updated - - -

Originally Posted by Vern Heiler

Trick question right! Answer: Only if it doesn't reset. (and the smoke doesn't get out).

Something many people don't know is that a GFI receptacle may not immediately reset. If you wait 1/2 hour it may then reset.

I have had two cases where a homeowner/agent was upset that an outlet was disabled after the test. (threatened to charge me for the electrician who came to repair). Of course, we are required to test and it isn't our "fault".

Originally Posted by Vern Heiler

Trick question right! Answer: Only if it doesn't reset. (and the smoke doesn't get out).

Something many people don't know is that a GFI receptacle may not immediately reset. If you wait 1/2 hour it may then reset.

I have had two cases where a homeowner/agent was upset that an outlet was disabled after the test. (threatened to charge me for the electrician who came to repair). Of course, we are required to test and it isn't our "fault".

Originally Posted by chris brown

Something many people don't know is that a GFI receptacle may not immediately reset. If you wait 1/2 hour it may then reset.

I have had two cases where a homeowner/agent was upset that an outlet was disabled after the test. (threatened to charge me for the electrician who came to repair). Of course, we are required to test and it isn't our "fault".

- - - Updated - - -



Something many people don't know is that a GFI receptacle may not immediately reset. If you wait 1/2 hour it may then reset.

I have had two cases where a homeowner/agent was upset that an outlet was disabled after the test. (threatened to charge me for the electrician who came to repair). Of course, we are required to test and it isn't our "fault".

If I have to wait more than 5 seconds, I'm writing it up as faulty!

Originally Posted by chris brown

Something many people don't know is that a GFI receptacle may not immediately reset. If you wait 1/2 hour it may then reset.

I have had two cases where a homeowner/agent was upset that an outlet was disabled after the test. (threatened to charge me for the electrician who came to repair). Of course, we are required to test and it isn't our "fault".

If the GFCI trips and isn't able to be immediately reset ...

... THERE MAY BE A PROBLEM WITH THE CIRCUIT ... or the GFCI. Quite possibly not the GFCI.

Originally Posted by Jerry Peck

If the GFCI trips and isn't able to be immediately reset ...

... THERE MAY BE A PROBLEM WITH THE CIRCUIT ... or the GFCI. Quite possibly not the GFCI.

If it didn't fail until I tested it, I'm going 9:1 GFCI. Either way it "requires further investigation by licensed electrician" .

Originally Posted by Vern Heiler

If it didn't fail until I tested it, I'm going 9:1 GFCI. Either way it "requires further investigation by licensed electrician" .

Ummm ... haven't you read the thread about "self testing GFCIs"?

I could very well be a ground-fault which was "trying to trip" the "stuck" (for lack of a better term) GFCI, but once tripped by the test button, the tripping action is now free to trip as it should ... didn't you read that thread about "self-testing" GFCIs?

That is why I say it could either be the GFCI ... OR ... the circuit, and not wanting "the circuit" to be bad and presume that the GFCI is the problem - *I* would check both.

It very well might be the GFCI is bad in and of itself, but ... what if both the GFCI AND the circuit were found to be bad (that is another possibility).

Electrician does not need to "evaluate" the circuit OR the GFCI ... ... the electricians just need to "test" the circuit with his/her equipment, and replace the GFCI (the best and easiest way to "test" a GFCI device is to replace it - if the replacement does the same thing, sure, there *could* be two bad GFCIs, but at that point I'd do more testing on the circuit).

Originally Posted by Jerry Peck

Electrician does not need to "evaluate" the circuit OR the GFCI ... ... the electricians just need to "test" the circuit with his/her equipment, and replace the GFCI (the best and easiest way to "test" a GFCI device is to replace it - if the replacement does the same thing, sure, there *could* be two bad GFCIs, but at that point I'd do more testing on the circuit).

Are you kidding me!

An electrician is evaluating the circuit or the GFCI when he/she tests with his/her equipment.

Your comment was like deja vu watching Bill Clinton parse "is".

But it was funny...

Ummm ... haven't you read the thread about "self testing GFCIs"?

I could very well be a ground-fault which was "trying to trip" the "stuck" (for lack of a better term) GFCI, but once tripped by the test button, the tripping action is now free to trip as it should ... didn't you read that thread about "self-testing" GFCIs? Didn't you notice? I was one of the malcontents!

That is why I say it could either be the GFCI ... OR ... the circuit, and not wanting "the circuit" to be bad and presume that the GFCI is the problem - *I* would check both. I did not know you were a licenced electrician.

It very well might be the GFCI is bad in and of itself, but ... what if both the GFCI AND the circuit were found to be bad (that is another possibility). ​I wonder what the definition of "evaluate" is?

Electrician does not need to "evaluate" the circuit OR the GFCI ... ... the electricians just need to "test" the circuit with his/her equipment, and replace the GFCI (the best and easiest way to "test" a GFCI device is to replace it - if the replacement does the same thing, sure, there *could* be two bad GFCIs, but at that point I'd do more testing on the circuit). Does your license give you the power to dictate how other licensed professionals perform their business?

Originally Posted by Lon Henderson

An electrician is evaluating the circuit or the GFCI when he/she tests with his/her equipment.

You (as in the HI) DID the "evaluation", NOW the electrician has to do his testing to DETERMINE what the problem is.

Your comment was like deja vu watching Bill Clinton parse "is".

But it was funny...

And your comment was like listening to Republicans say that they want SMALLER govmit ... the deciding that NEW LAWS must be made to make sure that everyone ELSE conforms to their thinking ... News flash! SMALLER govmit is LESS intrusion, not more intrusion. Those Republicans make Bill Clinton look like an angel.

I wonder how those Republicans define "is" ... when they cannot even agree on what to agree or disagree on. just could miss replying to your remark, yeah, it's like ... sorry 'bout that.

Originally Posted by Jerry Peck

You (as in the HI) DID the "evaluation", NOW the electrician has to do his testing to DETERMINE what the problem is.



And your comment was like listening to Republicans say that they want SMALLER govmit ... the deciding that NEW LAWS must be made to make sure that everyone ELSE conforms to their thinking ... News flash! SMALLER govmit is LESS intrusion, not more intrusion. Those Republicans make Bill Clinton look like an angel.

I wonder how those Republicans define "is" ... when they cannot even agree on what to agree or disagree on. just could miss replying to your remark, yeah, it's like ... sorry 'bout that.

No Jerry, I (as a HI) DETERMINED there was a problem (IT DON'T WORK RIGHT). It is the electricians job to EVALUATE the problem (FIGURE OUT WHAT'S WRONG)!

Originally Posted by Vern Heiler

No Jerry, I (as a HI) DETERMINED there was a problem (IT DON'T WORK RIGHT).

Correct ... YOU "evaluated it" sufficiently enough to DETERMINE that there was a problem.

It is the electricians job to EVALUATE the problem (FIGURE OUT WHAT'S WRONG)!

Now the electrician needs to TEST IT in order to determine WHERE the problem is ... the problem which you found during your "evaluation" of it.



YOU did as you were being paid to do - evaluate and report.

Or are you admitting that you are not doing the job you are being paid to do?

Originally Posted by Jerry Peck

Correct ... YOU "evaluated it" sufficiently enough to DETERMINE that there was a problem.



Now the electrician needs to TEST IT in order to determine WHERE the problem is ... the problem which you found during your "evaluation" of it.



YOU did as you were being paid to do - evaluate and report.

Or are you admitting that you are not doing the job you are being paid to do?

Where exactly is "Evaluate" in DDID?