When installing GFCI outlets on ungrounded circuits today, the
electrician fitted each with a jumper between ground and neutral. I
told him I'd thought I'd read that this was a bad thing but he insisted
that it was the correct way to wire an ungrounded GFCI, that he does
this all the time, and that if I doubted him, to ask the city
inspector.

He did not label the GFCI outlets as "no equipment ground", which also
seems like a no-no.

Am I right that this is bad? Is it bad only in the case of a miswired
circuit? I can find one or two web sites that say it is bad but
"someone said so on a web page" does not make a persuasive argument,
and if it is unsafe, I'd rather have it fixed than wait and raise it
with the inspector. Can anyone point to an authoritative description
of why this is bad? I can see it is a problem for a miswired circuit
with hot and neutral swapped. Are there other scenarios where it is
dangerous or might increase reliance on the GFCI tripping correctly?

Based on my limited understanding of GFCI operation, with the jumper,
if an appliance case were to become energized, current would
immediately flow through the ground terminal, through the jumper to the
neutral return, bypassing the GFCI transformer and tripping the GFCI.
Without the jumper, energizing the case wouldn't produce a current
until (say) my body creates an alternate path to ground. The first
scenario actually seems marginally better?

-- Dave

It's improper to do, but the only ill affect I can see would be if any of
the outlets "actually" became grounded.


wrote in message
ups.com...
When installing GFCI outlets on ungrounded circuits today, the
electrician fitted each with a jumper between ground and neutral. I
told him I'd thought I'd read that this was a bad thing but he insisted
that it was the correct way to wire an ungrounded GFCI, that he does
this all the time, and that if I doubted him, to ask the city
inspector.

He did not label the GFCI outlets as "no equipment ground", which also
seems like a no-no.

Am I right that this is bad? Is it bad only in the case of a miswired
circuit? I can find one or two web sites that say it is bad but
"someone said so on a web page" does not make a persuasive argument,
and if it is unsafe, I'd rather have it fixed than wait and raise it
with the inspector. Can anyone point to an authoritative description
of why this is bad? I can see it is a problem for a miswired circuit
with hot and neutral swapped. Are there other scenarios where it is
dangerous or might increase reliance on the GFCI tripping correctly?

Based on my limited understanding of GFCI operation, with the jumper,
if an appliance case were to become energized, current would
immediately flow through the ground terminal, through the jumper to the
neutral return, bypassing the GFCI transformer and tripping the GFCI.
Without the jumper, energizing the case wouldn't produce a current
until (say) my body creates an alternate path to ground. The first
scenario actually seems marginally better?

-- Dave

wrote:
When installing GFCI outlets on ungrounded circuits today, the
electrician fitted each with a jumper between ground and neutral. I
told him I'd thought I'd read that this was a bad thing but he
insisted that it was the correct way to wire an ungrounded GFCI, that
he does this all the time, and that if I doubted him, to ask the city
inspector.

He did not label the GFCI outlets as "no equipment ground", which also
seems like a no-no.

Am I right that this is bad? Is it bad only in the case of a miswired
circuit? I can find one or two web sites that say it is bad but
"someone said so on a web page" does not make a persuasive argument,
and if it is unsafe, I'd rather have it fixed than wait and raise it
with the inspector. Can anyone point to an authoritative description
of why this is bad? I can see it is a problem for a miswired circuit
with hot and neutral swapped. Are there other scenarios where it is
dangerous or might increase reliance on the GFCI tripping correctly?

Based on my limited understanding of GFCI operation, with the jumper,
if an appliance case were to become energized, current would
immediately flow through the ground terminal, through the jumper to
the neutral return, bypassing the GFCI transformer and tripping the
GFCI. Without the jumper, energizing the case wouldn't produce a
current until (say) my body creates an alternate path to ground. The
first scenario actually seems marginally better?

-- Dave

You know more than that supposed electrician does. If you'd like
definitive, certain information you can take to the bank, give your local
code enforcement office a call and ask them about it. You don't hvae to
identify yourself, but it doesn't hurt to, either. If it were me, I've even
be brave enough to say things like "Mr. x told me ... and I don't think ...
what's the code say?" type stuff.
That way you have local code information to confront your "electrician"
with. I'm assuming this is either a kid, or an old guy who's new to GFCIs
and AFIs.

GFCI operation is simpler than you stated, too. All it does is monitor the
current in the hot and the neutral conductors. If they are not the same, it
opens the ckt because that current had to go somewhere, as in places it
shouldn't, like someone's body or whatever, OR, into the ground ckt wires if
there is one. It's really that simple.

Neutral and Ground are NEVER to meet except back at the breaker panel! I'd
also have to report him to the BBB if it happened to me, and possibly the
licensing board if he got snotty about it. In particular, the inspector
should be alerted to the situation when he comes. You WILL be getting an
inspection, right? From the sound of it, it might be important for you to
have one in case you were trying to skip out of it.

Pop`

Pop` wrote:

Neutral and Ground are NEVER to meet except back at the breaker panel! I'd
also have to report him to the BBB if it happened to me, and possibly the
licensing board if he got snotty about it. In particular, the inspector
should be alerted to the situation when he comes. You WILL be getting an
inspection, right? From the sound of it, it might be important for you to
have one in case you were trying to skip out of it.

I understand that in a grounded system, having multiple links between
ground and neutral is a big no-no. But in this ungrounded scenario the
right thing is less obvious to me. We do intend to get the inspection.
But calling the city first sounds like a good idea.

-- Dave

wrote:
Pop` wrote:

Neutral and Ground are NEVER to meet except back at the breaker panel! I'd
also have to report him to the BBB if it happened to me, and possibly the
licensing board if he got snotty about it. In particular, the inspector
should be alerted to the situation when he comes. You WILL be getting an
inspection, right? From the sound of it, it might be important for you to
have one in case you were trying to skip out of it.


I understand that in a grounded system, having multiple links between
ground and neutral is a big no-no. But in this ungrounded scenario the
right thing is less obvious to me. We do intend to get the inspection.
But calling the city first sounds like a good idea.

-- Dave



Assuming the GFCI's never "wear out" and cease performing as they
should, I can't think of a scenario in which connecting the ground to
neutral would vreate a hazard.

But it could create bothersome tripping of the GFCI because modern ones
will sense nuetral to ground leakage. So, say you have a three wire
corded device plugged into one of those outlets with the metal case of
the device connected to the ground pin of the plug. If a leakage is
created between that device's case and ground, the GFCI will trip, which
wouldn't happen if the guy hadn't wired the ground to neutral.

The only hazard I can envision is if the GFCI were to become inoperative
and also the neutral wire feeding the GFCI were to open. Then, the case
of a three wire corded device could rise to line voltage through the
resistance of whatever load is inside the device, admittedly a long
shot, but overall, I still think your guy shouldn't have connected the
ground to neutral, and installed those "ungrounded" labels.

I can't recall seeing a GFCI receptical without ground pin holes, but
maybe they are made for installations such as yours, so there's no
misleading "ground" pin hole on the receptical.

Please keep us updated as events with "the law" unfold.

Jeff

--
Jeffry Wisnia
(W1BSV + Brass Rat '57 EE)
The speed of light is 1.98*10^14 fathoms per fortnight.

Assuming the GFCI's never "wear out" and cease performing as they
should, I can't think of a scenario in which connecting the ground to
neutral would vreate a hazard.

But it could create bothersome tripping of the GFCI because modern ones
will sense nuetral to ground leakage. So, say you have a three wire
corded device plugged into one of those outlets with the metal case of
the device connected to the ground pin of the plug. If a leakage is
created between that device's case and ground, the GFCI will trip, which
wouldn't happen if the guy hadn't wired the ground to neutral.

I suspect that the electrician wired the neutral on the LINE side to the
grounding screw. It would not trip because the LOAD side neutral would not
have a path to ground.

I suspect the electrician got burned by an inspected when he put in a GFCI
on an un-grounded outlet. (Lots of folks don't understand how this can be
OK.) The the LINE side neutral tied to the ground screw the outlet would
"Look" like a normally grounded GFCI circuit for most purposes. Any
reasonable electrical tests would not be able to distinuish this ungrounded
circuit from a properly grounded circuit.



The only hazard I can envision is if the GFCI were to become inoperative
and also the neutral wire feeding the GFCI were to open. Then, the case
of a three wire corded device could rise to line voltage through the
resistance of whatever load is inside the device, admittedly a long
shot, but overall, I still think your guy shouldn't have connected the
ground to neutral, and installed those "ungrounded" labels.

Well, just lifting the LINE side neutral while the power is off can create a
very dangerous situation when the power comes back on. And you are right
that with this arrangement a lifted neutral would be bad news.

A lifted neutral presents a much bigger safety risk than a lifted ground.


I can't recall seeing a GFCI receptical without ground pin holes, but
maybe they are made for installations such as yours, so there's no
misleading "ground" pin hole on the receptical.

If you read the directions when you use them on ungrounded circuits you are
supposed to apply a lable that says "ungrounded."

I'm not an expert on electrical wiring, but it seems to me that the
dangerous part is having a gfci where there is no ground - you would
assume it';s safer than it is. You wouldn't want an ungrounded outlet
there, would you? - the gfci will work the same way, for all intents
and purposes.

shelly

wrote:
I'm not an expert on electrical wiring, but it seems to me that the
dangerous part is having a gfci where there is no ground - you would
assume it';s safer than it is. You wouldn't want an ungrounded outlet
there, would you? - the gfci will work the same way, for all intents
and purposes.

shelly

Basically true. But, they are still lifesavers anyway you look at it. If
you should drop an applicance into your bathtub, hopefully it'd kill the
power before the power killed you, but I've seen some long discussions on
that one.
A reversed plug on say a fridge and a correct one on say the toaster,
with a GFCI protected line, you could still get a zap by touching them
simultaneously, but it would be shortlived and might save your life if the
protector worked right. Regardless of where it goes, if the current isn't
identical between hot and neutral, the protector opens the ckt within a
designed timeframe. So ground, you to the dirt, whatever; the GFCI would
know it happened. Or should, anyway g.
Pop
--
Children are the future;
unless we stop them now.
- Homer Simpson

wrote:
I'm not an expert on electrical wiring, but it seems to me that the
dangerous part is having a gfci where there is no ground - you would
assume it';s safer than it is. You wouldn't want an ungrounded outlet
there, would you? - the gfci will work the same way, for all intents
and purposes.

shelly

I believe code allows an ungrounded outlet to be replaced with a gfci.
The last gfci I bought came with "no equipment ground" stickers. I
assume these stickers are placed on an ungrounded gfci to alert the
user that there is no ground.

Grounded or not, it seems a gfci will trip anytime there is an
interruption to current flow.

-Felder

wrote:

Pop` wrote:

Neutral and Ground are NEVER to meet except back at the breaker panel! I'd
also have to report him to the BBB if it happened to me, and possibly the
licensing board if he got snotty about it. In particular, the inspector
should be alerted to the situation when he comes. You WILL be getting an
inspection, right? From the sound of it, it might be important for you to
have one in case you were trying to skip out of it.


I understand that in a grounded system, having multiple links between
ground and neutral is a big no-no. But in this ungrounded scenario the
right thing is less obvious to me. We do intend to get the inspection.
But calling the city first sounds like a good idea.

For "old" GFCIs over 3 yrs(?) old I believe that if the neutral opens
the GFCI no longer protects, with the receptacle connected to the line.
It is then like a normal receptacle, and If you use a 3 prong grounded
metal case drill, turning it on will connect the case to hot through the
drill motor - plenty of current to electrocute.

UL changed the standard, and for "new" GFCIs I believe that if the
neutral is open the receptacle is disconnected from the line.

Anyone tested either?

--
bud--

wrote:

wrote:

I'm not an expert on electrical wiring, but it seems to me that the
dangerous part is having a gfci where there is no ground - you would
assume it';s safer than it is. You wouldn't want an ungrounded outlet
there, would you? - the gfci will work the same way, for all intents
and purposes.
It will still detect current going through your body to ground. With a
ground wire the current _may_ go through the ground wire instead.



I believe code allows an ungrounded outlet to be replaced with a gfci.
Correct

The last gfci I bought came with "no equipment ground" stickers. I
assume these stickers are placed on an ungrounded gfci to alert the
user that there is no ground.
Also correct.


Grounded or not, it seems a gfci will trip anytime there is an
interruption to current flow.
A GFCI will trip when the current in the hot and neutral are different
by 5mA (0.005A). If the current is different it is going somewhere -
possibly through your body to ground.

--
bud--

John Gilmer wrote:
Assuming the GFCI's never "wear out" and cease performing as they
should, I can't think of a scenario in which connecting the ground to
neutral would vreate a hazard.

But it could create bothersome tripping of the GFCI because modern ones
will sense nuetral to ground leakage. So, say you have a three wire
corded device plugged into one of those outlets with the metal case of
the device connected to the ground pin of the plug. If a leakage is
created between that device's case and ground, the GFCI will trip, which
wouldn't happen if the guy hadn't wired the ground to neutral.


I suspect that the electrician wired the neutral on the LINE side to the
grounding screw. It would not trip because the LOAD side neutral would not
have a path to ground.

You got me there, John. I was focused on the "load side" and didn't
think about it being wired to the "line side".


I suspect the electrician got burned by an inspected when he put in a GFCI
on an un-grounded outlet. (Lots of folks don't understand how this can be
OK.) The the LINE side neutral tied to the ground screw the outlet would
"Look" like a normally grounded GFCI circuit for most purposes. Any
reasonable electrical tests would not be able to distinuish this ungrounded
circuit from a properly grounded circuit.



The only hazard I can envision is if the GFCI were to become inoperative
and also the neutral wire feeding the GFCI were to open. Then, the case
of a three wire corded device could rise to line voltage through the
resistance of whatever load is inside the device, admittedly a long
shot, but overall, I still think your guy shouldn't have connected the
ground to neutral, and installed those "ungrounded" labels.


Well, just lifting the LINE side neutral while the power is off can create a
very dangerous situation when the power comes back on. And you are right
that with this arrangement a lifted neutral would be bad news.

A lifted neutral presents a much bigger safety risk than a lifted ground.


I can't recall seeing a GFCI receptical without ground pin holes, but
maybe they are made for installations such as yours, so there's no
misleading "ground" pin hole on the receptical.


If you read the directions when you use them on ungrounded circuits you are
supposed to apply a lable that says "ungrounded."


That I know, but those labels can't be guaranteed to to get left stuck
in place forever. But, now that I think about it while I'm keying this
in, a "two pin" receptical might encourage someone to use a "2 to 3"
adaptor and connect its ground lead to the cover plate retaining screw,
with the mistaken assumption that it would provide the ground. Sometimes
you just can't idiot proof stuff enough, huh?

Jeff

--
Jeffry Wisnia
(W1BSV + Brass Rat '57 EE)
The speed of light is 1.8*10^12 furlongs per fortnight.

That I know, but those labels can't be guaranteed to to get left stuck
in place forever. But, now that I think about it while I'm keying this
in, a "two pin" receptical might encourage someone to use a "2 to 3"
adaptor and connect its ground lead to the cover plate retaining screw,
with the mistaken assumption that it would provide the ground. Sometimes
you just can't idiot proof stuff enough, huh?

Will, the GFCI gives protection regardless of whether the frame of the
appliance is grounded.

IOW: even if you "think" the frame is grounded but it isn't the GFCI will
still protect you.

The label is to let you know what's going on if something doesn't "look
right." Say, for example, you plug in one of those "testers" and it says
"MISSING GROUND." If you have lost the label you might be concerned and do
some checking. If you see the label you say, "I knew that!"

Likewise with downstream GFCI outlets: if the label is missing and you
trip the GFCI you might make an unnecessary trip to the CB box rather than
checking for a tripped GFCI in the same or nearby room.

These labels don't warn of a Hazard but only tell you that what's really
there isn't quite like you think it is.

UL changed the standard, and for "new" GFCIs I believe that if the
neutral is open the receptacle is disconnected from the line.

Nope!

The GFCI needs power to operator it's sensing circuitry. Without a neutral
it doesn't have any power and it will not trip.


Anyone tested either?

Yes, I have.

I have a cord set salvaged from an old lamp or some such. I put female
"spade" connectors on the wire end. If you take a little solid wire and
put it the back of the "line" side of the GFCI, you can run all kinds of
experiments in RELATIVE safety. Don't get me wrong, you will have bare HOT
terminals so you might consider powering your experiment from a GFCI
protected circuit. AND BE CAREFUL. (I have been doing stupid stuff like
this since I was about 7 years old butt I certainly would not permit my kid
to do it.)

Basically, if you reset the GFCI with power on, turn power off, disconnect
neutral from GFCI, and put power back on you can draw all the power you want
between GFCI load side HOT and GROUND or another neutral. There just will
not be any power going into the sensing circuit of the GFCI.

And that's why, children, losing a neutral is as dangerous or MORE dangrous
than losing a GROUND.





--
bud--

A GFCI will trip when the current in the hot and neutral are different
by 5mA (0.005A). If the current is different it is going somewhere -
possibly through your body to ground.

It can only trip if its internal electronics is powered up. If you lose
neutral when the power is off, the electronics will not be powered with the
power comes back on. Then you could draw AMPS from the HOT wire to ground
and the GFCI will not react.


--
bud--

On 2006-12-16, John Gilmer wrote:

I suspect that the electrician wired the neutral on the LINE side to
the grounding screw. It would not trip because the LOAD side
neutral would not have a path to ground.

I'm sorry, isn't this backwards? I assume the terminology is LINE
side = incoming power and LOAD side = receptacle.

If the receptacle's ground plug is connected to the LINE side neutral,
then the GFCI will trip with a ground fault: the current goes through
the LOAD hot but not through the LOAD neutral, returning instead
through the LINE neutral via the EGC. This current imbalance will
trip the GFCI.

If the receptacle's ground plug is connected to the LOAD side neutral,
then the GFCI will not trip with a ground fault, as the current does
return via the LOAD side neutral.

Cheers, Wayne

"Wayne Whitney" wrote in message
...
On 2006-12-16, John Gilmer wrote:

I suspect that the electrician wired the neutral on the LINE side to
the grounding screw. It would not trip because the LOAD side
neutral would not have a path to ground.

I'm sorry, isn't this backwards? I assume the terminology is LINE
side = incoming power and LOAD side = receptacle.

I will try again.

The GFCI is connected as usual: the HOT wire from the power source goes to
the LINE side "HOT". the NEUTRAL wire from the power sources goes to the
LINE side "NEUTRAL."

What the electrician did was "fake" a ground by connecting the "LINE" side
neutral to the ground screw. Had he connected the "LOAD" side neutral to
the ground screw the GFCI may well have tripped when the appliance chassis
came into contact with a "Real Ground." Also, a 120 volt GFCI opens both
conductors so that you would lose even your "fake ground" once the GFCI
tripped.

The "LOAD" side terminals either weren't connected or went to a downstream
two wire (no ground) outlet.



If the receptacle's ground plug is connected to the LINE side neutral,
then the GFCI will trip with a ground fault: the current goes through
the LOAD hot but not through the LOAD neutral, returning instead
through the LINE neutral via the EGC. This current imbalance will
trip the GFCI.

If the receptacle's ground plug is connected to the LOAD side neutral,
then the GFCI will not trip with a ground fault, as the current does
return via the LOAD side neutral.

Cheers, Wayne

In article , "John Gilmer" wrote:

The GFCI is connected as usual: the HOT wire from the power source goes to
the LINE side "HOT". the NEUTRAL wire from the power sources goes to the
LINE side "NEUTRAL."

What the electrician did was "fake" a ground by connecting the "LINE" side
neutral to the ground screw.

Code violation, right there.

--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)

It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.

John Gilmer wrote:
UL changed the standard, and for "new" GFCIs I believe that if the
neutral is open the receptacle is disconnected from the line.


Nope!

The GFCI needs power to operator it's sensing circuitry. Without a neutral
it doesn't have any power and it will not trip.


Anyone tested either?


Yes, I have.

You threatened to test this in a previous thread. Thanks for posting.

I have a cord set salvaged from an old lamp or some such. I put female
"spade" connectors on the wire end. If you take a little solid wire and
put it the back of the "line" side of the GFCI, you can run all kinds of
experiments in RELATIVE safety. Don't get me wrong, you will have bare HOT
terminals so you might consider powering your experiment from a GFCI
protected circuit. AND BE CAREFUL. (I have been doing stupid stuff like
this since I was about 7 years old butt I certainly would not permit my kid
to do it.)

(I have a cord set with insulated aligator clips at the end and am
fairly paranoid when using it.)


Basically, if you reset the GFCI with power on, turn power off, disconnect
neutral from GFCI, and put power back on you can draw all the power you want
between GFCI load side HOT and GROUND or another neutral. There just will
not be any power going into the sensing circuit of the GFCI.

Was this a "new" UL standard GFCI or an "old" one?

When reverse powered to the "load" teminals (GFCI not initally tripped),
the receptacle will be live for an "old" one (not required, but that is
how they were made) and dead for a "new" one.

My guess is that the "old" GFCIs use a mechanically held, electrically
tripped relay that operates as you describe.

My guess is that a "new" GFCI has normally open relay contacts that
connect "line", "load" and receptacle together only when powered. If
that is true, a "new" GFCI would not connect "line" to the receptacle
with no neutral.

One change in the "new" UL standard is that reverse line-load wiring
will not power the receptacle or "line" terminals. I believe that
requires a relay that does not close unless powered from the "line" side.

Another change in the "new" UL standard is that the GFCI be more likely
to fail safe. "Old" GFCIs had a habit of failing with the "line"
connected to the receptacle and "load", and not tripping anymore. That
is one reason I think "old" GFCIs have mechanically held contacts. And
my guess is that "new" GFCIs require the relay to be powered to energize
either the receptacle or "load" terminals.

------
Has anyone who has investigated a GFCI with a hammer looked at how the
"old" or "new" relays work?

--
bud--

On 2006-12-19, John Gilmer wrote:

The GFCI is connected as usual: the HOT wire from the power source
goes to the LINE side "HOT". the NEUTRAL wire from the power
sources goes to the LINE side "NEUTRAL."

What the electrician did was "fake" a ground by connecting the
"LINE" side neutral to the ground screw. Had he connected the
"LOAD" side neutral to the ground screw the GFCI may well have
tripped when the appliance chassis came into contact with a "Real
Ground." Also, a 120 volt GFCI opens both conductors so that you
would lose even your "fake ground" once the GFCI tripped.

Perhaps we are talking about different conditions when we refer to the
GFCI tripping. Here is my understanding; if I am mistaken, please let
me know where.

Receptacle ground wired to LINE neutral: Normal downstream
Neutral-Ground detection will still work; the GFCI will not trip on
power up unless there is in fact a Neutral-Ground interconnection
downstream of it. In the event of a device fault between the Hot and
the EGC, the GFCI will trip, as the return current bypasses the GFCI.
In the event of a fault between the Hot and some external ground, the
GFCI will likewise trip.

Receptacle ground wired to LOAD neutral: This obvious downstream
Neutral-Ground connection will not be detected and the GFCI will not
trip on power up, because there is no upstream Ground to complete a
circuit. In the event of a device fault between the Hot and the EGC,
the GFCI will not trip, as the return current still does go through
the GFCI. In the event of a fault between Hot and an external ground,
the GFCI will still trip.

So if an appliance has a Hot to grounded chassis fault, then the GFCI
will trip in the first case and not trip in the second case. Of
course, the circuit breaker may trip in the second case; if not, then
the GFCI should trip when a person touches the chassis and provides an
alternate path to ground.

Note that I'm not a proponent of either of these wiring schemes, I
just want to be sure I understand what would happen.

Cheers, Wayne

What the electrician did was "fake" a ground by connecting the "LINE"
side
neutral to the ground screw.

Code violation, right there.

DUH!

We all knew that. We were speculating as to why someone who "knows better"
would do that rather than no connect the outlet grounds to anything.


--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)

It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.

Perhaps we are talking about different conditions when we refer to the
GFCI tripping. Here is my understanding; if I am mistaken, please let
me know where.

Receptacle ground wired to LINE neutral: Normal downstream
Neutral-Ground detection will still work; the GFCI will not trip on
power up unless there is in fact a Neutral-Ground interconnection
downstream of it. In the event of a device fault between the Hot and
the EGC, the GFCI will trip, as the return current bypasses the GFCI.
In the event of a fault between the Hot and some external ground, the
GFCI will likewise trip.

OK. Don't see any problem with your analysis so far.


Receptacle ground wired to LOAD neutral: This obvious downstream
Neutral-Ground connection will not be detected and the GFCI will not
trip on power up, because there is no upstream Ground to complete a
circuit.

OK.

In the event of a device fault between the Hot and the EGC,
the GFCI will not trip, as the return current still does go through
the GFCI. In the event of a fault between Hot and an external ground,
the GFCI will still trip.

Yep!


So if an appliance has a Hot to grounded chassis fault, then the GFCI
will trip in the first case and not trip in the second case.

Yep!

Of
course, the circuit breaker may trip in the second case; if not, then
the GFCI should trip when a person touches the chassis and provides an
alternate path to ground.

Yep, again.

Note that I'm not a proponent of either of these wiring schemes, I
just want to be sure I understand what would happen.

Good.

The truth shall set you free.

(I have a cord set with insulated alligator clips at the end and am
fairly paranoid when using it.)

Paranoids have enemies too!

I would not be comfortable with a alligator clip (the long NOSE) but there
is
another type of "clip" is pretty safe when properly insulated. It has an
1/4" wide gripping surface and it grips evenly across that surface.


Basically, if you reset the GFCI with power on, turn power off,
disconnect
neutral from GFCI, and put power back on you can draw all the power you
want
between GFCI load side HOT and GROUND or another neutral. There just
will
not be any power going into the sensing circuit of the GFCI.

Was this a "new" UL standard GFCI or an "old" one?

That's just how they work. New or "old" doesn't make any difference. It
takes a electro-magnetic to "trip" the device.



When reverse powered to the "load" terminals (GFCI not initially tripped),
the receptacle will be live for an "old" one (not required, but that is
how they were made) and dead for a "new" one.

I didn't test that but I do understand that "new" devices detect some types
of improper wiring. But I was under the impression that it would not reset
when reverse wired. But that's something to test.



My guess is that the "old" GFCIs use a mechanically held, electrically
tripped relay that operates as you describe.

My guess is that a "new" GFCI has normally open relay contacts that
connect "line", "load" and receptacle together only when powered. If
that is true, a "new" GFCI would not connect "line" to the receptacle
with no neutral.

Nope!

A GFCI would not last very long if it has to "switch" it's load every time
there is a power glitch.



One change in the "new" UL standard is that reverse line-load wiring
will not power the receptacle or "line" terminals. I believe that
requires a relay that does not close unless powered from the "line" side.

Another change in the "new" UL standard is that the GFCI be more likely
to fail safe. "Old" GFCIs had a habit of failing with the "line"
connected to the receptacle and "load", and not tripping anymore. That
is one reason I think "old" GFCIs have mechanically held contacts. And
my guess is that "new" GFCIs require the relay to be powered to energize
either the receptacle or "load" terminals.

------
Has anyone who has investigated a GFCI with a hammer looked at how the
"old" or "new" relays work?

You don't need a hammer. They are held together with screws. I suspect
"they" used screws rather than rivets because occasionally a device needed
rework after final inspection.

Once you get yourself set up with plenty of room, dry floor, etc, you can
test these things with reasonable safety. Just do one step at a time.

If you want to change the load while the GFCI is "on" then use an extension
cord so that you don't shake loose your other connections. Only touch one
part of your "test bench" at a time.



--
bud--

In article , "John Gilmer" wrote:



What the electrician did was "fake" a ground by connecting the "LINE"
side
neutral to the ground screw.

Code violation, right there.

DUH!

We all knew that. We were speculating as to why someone who "knows better"
would do that rather than no connect the outlet grounds to anything.

I'd take it as evidence that he in fact does *not* know better...

--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)

It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.

John Gilmer wrote:

(I have a cord set with insulated alligator clips at the end and am
fairly paranoid when using it.)


Paranoids have enemies too!
Yeah, I know. Everyone's against me.



Was this a "new" UL standard GFCI or an "old" one?

That's just how they work. New or "old" doesn't make any difference. It
takes a electro-magnetic to "trip" the device.


When reverse powered to the "load" terminals (GFCI not initially tripped),
the receptacle will be live for an "old" one (not required, but that is
how they were made) and dead for a "new" one.

I didn't test that but I do understand that "new" devices detect some types
of improper wiring. But I was under the impression that it would not reset
when reverse wired. But that's something to test.

Looking at the box of a GFCI a year or 2 old, the reverse wiring
protection is that if tripped it cannot be set. And thats the way it
worked. If installed set, and reverse line-load, the downstream is
powered. The UL standard may just require the GFCIs to be shipped
tripped instead of set.


Has anyone who has investigated a GFCI with a hammer looked at how the
"old" or "new" relays work?


You don't need a hammer. They are held together with screws. I suspect
"they" used screws rather than rivets because occasionally a device needed
rework after final inspection.

You're right. I am real surprised when anything comes apart anymore.

------------
Snooping around the UL site I found a GFCI change:
"Effective July 28, 2006, new requirements go into effect in the
Standard for Safety for Ground Fault Circuit Interrupters, UL 943. These
requirements are to address new requirements for an end of life test and
for a revised miswiring test.

"The new UL 943 requirements define a GFCI receptacle’s end of life as
occurring when it is incapable of passing its internal test function,
and require that, when the internal test function is performed, a
ground-fault circuit-interrupter receptacle that has reached its end of
life shall either: a. indicate by visual means, audible means, or both,
that the device must be replaced, or b. render itself incapable of
delivering power.

"The reverse line–load miswire requirements now require GFCI receptacles
to de-energize the face of a miswired GFCI in addition to the downstream
receptacles, which has been required since January 2003. Receptacle-type
ground-fault circuit interrupters shall interrupt the electric circuit
to the receptacle face and line terminals when a supply circuit is wired
to the load terminals of the device.

"Effective July 28, 2006, all manufacturers will be required to
construct all production in accordance with the new requirements. Listed
GFCIs manufactured prior to that date may still appear in the
marketplace until their stock is depleted."


A UL description of the previous change, effective 1993, is "a reverse
line-load miswire test that requires the GFCI to deny power to
feed-through receptacles when reverse wired."

Apparently the 1993 standard permitted the load terminals to be
connected to the receptacle, so the reverse wiring protection only
applied to downstream. And that is how the GFCI I tested worked. If
tripped and reverse line-load connected, the downstream was dead and the
receptacle is live. My GFCI is 1993 standard. Does the 2006 device
reverse wiring protection still only prevent the GFCI from setting, or
will it trip a set device?

Regarding the 2006 "end of life", if the GFCI power supply dies and you
push the test button does the GFCI trip? Seems to be required (or maybe
a "dead device" light).



The "new" standard I heard about was apparently the 7-2006 version
although I heard about it 2005 as in effect. Anyone tested a 2006 UL
standard GFCI?

--
bud--

This has definitely been a FUN thread!

Best to all of you who participated.

So, just to follow up, I talked to the city electrical inspector.

She confirmed that connecting the neutral and ground pins of a GFCI was
not code compliant (as expected). But she said that it should not
create a safety issue, and since retrofitting GFCI outlets doesn't
require a permit and code check, she didn't see any reason to do
anything about it.

-- Dave


wrote:
Pop` wrote:

Neutral and Ground are NEVER to meet except back at the breaker panel! I'd
also have to report him to the BBB if it happened to me, and possibly the
licensing board if he got snotty about it. In particular, the inspector
should be alerted to the situation when he comes. You WILL be getting an
inspection, right? From the sound of it, it might be important for you to
have one in case you were trying to skip out of it.

I understand that in a grounded system, having multiple links between
ground and neutral is a big no-no. But in this ungrounded scenario the
right thing is less obvious to me. We do intend to get the inspection.
But calling the city first sounds like a good idea.

-- Dave

wrote in message
oups.com...
So, just to follow up, I talked to the city electrical inspector.

She confirmed that connecting the neutral and ground pins of a GFCI was
not code compliant (as expected). But she said that it should not
create a safety issue, and since retrofitting GFCI outlets doesn't
require a permit and code check, she didn't see any reason to do
anything about it.

-- Dave


Without a separate ground the GFCI will NOT function properly and so it IS a
safety hazard. You have a lousy inspector.


wrote:
Pop` wrote:

Neutral and Ground are NEVER to meet except back at the breaker panel!
I'd
also have to report him to the BBB if it happened to me, and possibly
the
licensing board if he got snotty about it. In particular, the
inspector
should be alerted to the situation when he comes. You WILL be getting
an
inspection, right? From the sound of it, it might be important for you
to
have one in case you were trying to skip out of it.

I understand that in a grounded system, having multiple links between
ground and neutral is a big no-no. But in this ungrounded scenario the
right thing is less obvious to me. We do intend to get the inspection.
But calling the city first sounds like a good idea.

-- Dave

She confirmed that connecting the neutral and ground pins of a GFCI was
not code compliant (as expected). But she said that it should not
create a safety issue, and since retrofitting GFCI outlets doesn't
require a permit and code check, she didn't see any reason to do
anything about it.

-- Dave


Without a separate ground the GFCI will NOT function properly and so it IS a
safety hazard. You have a lousy inspector.

GFCI's will work with no ground. I'm not sure what happens in that
wiring arrangement if the nuetral fails between the GFCI and the
service panel, though, while you have a grounded appliance plugged in.

Mike Dobony wrote:

wrote in message
oups.com...

So, just to follow up, I talked to the city electrical inspector.

She confirmed that connecting the neutral and ground pins of a GFCI was
not code compliant (as expected). But she said that it should not
create a safety issue, and since retrofitting GFCI outlets doesn't
require a permit and code check, she didn't see any reason to do
anything about it.

-- Dave



Without a separate ground the GFCI will NOT function properly and so it IS a
safety hazard. You have a lousy inspector.


Without a ground a GFCI WILL function. They work fine on wiring without
a ground and are permitted by the NEC as replacements for ungrounded
outlets (with a "No equipment ground" label).

As John Gilmer has pointed out a couple times, if the supply neutral
opens the wiring is a hazard. Example, you plug in a metal case drill
that is equipped with a "ground" wire. The supply neutral to the GFCI
opens. You pull the trigger in the drill. The hot connects through the
drill motor to the neutral. The neutral is open so it is now at 120V to
earth (everywhere downstream from the neutral break). The "ground" is
connected to the neutral at the receptacle so the receptacle "ground"
and the metal case of the drill are at 120V to earth. The GFCI is not
powered so it doesn't work. Sounds like a "safety issue" to me.

If there is an open neutral, turning on a light on one miswired outlet
will make the "grounds" hot on all the other miswired outlets downstream
from the neutral break.

You have a lousy inspector.

--
bud--

I think it was Bud-- who stated:

Mike Dobony wrote:

wrote in message
oups.com...

So, just to follow up, I talked to the city electrical inspector.

She confirmed that connecting the neutral and ground pins of a GFCI was
not code compliant (as expected). But she said that it should not
create a safety issue, and since retrofitting GFCI outlets doesn't
require a permit and code check, she didn't see any reason to do
anything about it.

-- Dave



Without a separate ground the GFCI will NOT function properly and so it IS a
safety hazard. You have a lousy inspector.


Without a ground a GFCI WILL function. They work fine on wiring without
a ground and are permitted by the NEC as replacements for ungrounded
outlets (with a "No equipment ground" label).

I think a lot of folks got this bit of nonsense about GFCIs not
working without a ground from the TV show CSI. On an early episode,
the plot revolved around someone removing the ground pin from a
portable GFCI so that a worker was electrocuted when he thought he was
protected. I remember yelling "BO-O-O-GUS" at the TV when I saw that,
and I've only watched CSI a few times since. (My wife is a fan, so I
watch it with her sometimes, keeping my comments to myself.)

--
Change is inevitable, except from a vending machine

Don Fearn wrote:
I think it was Bud-- who stated:

Mike Dobony wrote:

wrote in message
oups.com...

So, just to follow up, I talked to the city electrical inspector.

She confirmed that connecting the neutral and ground pins of a GFCI was
not code compliant (as expected). But she said that it should not
create a safety issue, and since retrofitting GFCI outlets doesn't
require a permit and code check, she didn't see any reason to do
anything about it.

-- Dave


Without a separate ground the GFCI will NOT function properly and so it IS a
safety hazard. You have a lousy inspector.

Without a ground a GFCI WILL function. They work fine on wiring without
a ground and are permitted by the NEC as replacements for ungrounded
outlets (with a "No equipment ground" label).

I think a lot of folks got this bit of nonsense about GFCIs not
working without a ground from the TV show CSI. On an early episode,
the plot revolved around someone removing the ground pin from a
portable GFCI so that a worker was electrocuted when he thought he was
protected. I remember yelling "BO-O-O-GUS" at the TV when I saw that,
and I've only watched CSI a few times since. (My wife is a fan, so I
watch it with her sometimes, keeping my comments to myself.)



I think that was an episode of "Monk", unless they are stealing each
other's bad ideas.

Bob

I think a lot of folks got this bit of nonsense about GFCIs not
working without a ground from the TV show CSI. On an early episode,
the plot revolved around someone removing the ground pin from a
portable GFCI so that a worker was electrocuted when he thought he was
protected. I remember yelling "BO-O-O-GUS" at the TV when I saw that,
and I've only watched CSI a few times since. (My wife is a fan, so I
watch it with her sometimes, keeping my comments to myself.)

I rather suspect that television shows put a moderate amount
of effort into not putting nifty new workable murder plots
on the air for the people with the play-at-home game to use...