Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > sci.electronics.design > #451642

Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility

Path csiph.com!feeder.erje.net!1.eu.feeder.erje.net!news.unit0.net!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com>
Newsgroups sci.electronics.design
Subject Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility
Date Mon, 13 Mar 2017 11:19:39 -0700
Lines 173
Message-ID <eio65pF11dfU1@mid.individual.net> (permalink)
References <eij2slFirdU1@mid.individual.net> <oa1ld8$ism$1@dont-email.me> <eij5a9F10r1U2@mid.individual.net> <oa1p57$nb2$1@dont-email.me> <eijhbpF3douU1@mid.individual.net> <oa247j$tqu$1@dont-email.me> <eil31iFccf2U1@mid.individual.net> <oa3nj6$7fm$1@dont-email.me> <eil739Fd6aqU1@mid.individual.net> <oa46l3$t1b$1@dont-email.me>
Mime-Version 1.0
Content-Type text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding 7bit
X-Trace individual.net ieyS4oX3VivjoLeSCgewzwV2iJ6BTPHhNqEAZlaBLfr3y+o0s7
Cancel-Lock sha1:7d0wUv2RFg9U7RECOanqZkkFejE=
User-Agent Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.8.1.6) Gecko/20070728 Thunderbird/2.0.0.6 Mnenhy/0.7.6.666
In-Reply-To <oa46l3$t1b$1@dont-email.me>
Xref csiph.com sci.electronics.design:451642

Show key headers only | View raw

On 2017-03-12 12:16, Don Y wrote:
> On 3/12/2017 8:16 AM, Joerg wrote:


[...]

>>>> Square, round, who cares?
>>>
>>> When the other outlets nearby are one style, it's tacky to have a
>>> *different* style nearby.  Also, covers for "in use" protection
>>> suit one or the other style.  And, you tend to have a larger range
>>> of "quality" available in the "round" style (at a more affordable
>>> price).  Finally, you aren't at the whim of the EXISTING WIRING
>>> in determining where to site the GFCI outlet which MUST be at the
>>> furthest upstream outlet on the branch circuit being protected
>>> (annoying if you're forced to locate the "master outlet" in a
>>> spot that is less accessible than you'd want; or, that is
>>> glaringly different, cosmetically, than the outlets 24 inches
>>> away on each side.)
>>
>> In Germany they sometimes had a GFI at the entrance of a room, usually
>> above
>> the door. That was really practical. I like protection devices to be
>> local and
>> accessible right where the action is, just like it is on aircraft.
>
> AFAICT, you're not living in Germany, now (?).
>

No but I have lived there and in other countries. I makes sense to learn 
from others and adopt methods that work as long as legal in the new 
jurisdiction.


>>>> Aside from an order of
>>>> magnitude lower cost while affording the same protection the GFCI
>>>> outlet is
>>>> where the action is and not at the end of some dark hallway. So if
>>>> someone
>>>> plugs in a device and it goes click .. lights out .. they know what
>>>> happened.
>>>> They can reset it right there.
>>>
>>> In 20 years, the only time we've tripped a GFCI has been when the
>>> receptacle
>>> end of an extension cord plugged into an outdoor outlet was lying in a
>>> puddle of water adjacent to the outlet.  Took multiple attempts to
>>> determine this
>>> to be the cause (because ANOTHER cord was plugged into another outlet
>>> on that same branch circuit with the same condition some 40 feet
>>> distant!)
>>> It was nice to know I wouldn't have my feet in that water as I
>>> "reset" the
>>> circuit!
>>>
>>> If the GFCI trips, I *know* where it is located (in the load center).  I
>>> don't have to wander into the *other* bathroom to reset a fault in THIS
>>> bathroom.
>>
>> One shall not protect a bathroom with a device in another room. That's
>> bad layout.
>
> Most homes of this vintage have a single circuit feeding two or more
> bathrooms (because the lighting circuit there isn't GFCI).  Especially
> true when multiple bathrooms tend to share a wet wall -- the electric
> outlets in each bathroom will tend to be as closely sited as the water
> closets!
>

Not a good design and luckily not done that way in our 1970 house.


> And, demand for power from a receptacle in a bathroom is sporadic and
> typically not excessive.  E.g., a 20A circuit can handle the two hair
> dryers
> that *might* be in use simultaneously.
>

Unless you have teenage daughters :-)


>>>  Or, wander around the exterior of the house looking to see which
>>> of the outdoor outlets has the GFCI installed, therein (ditto for the
>>> garage:
>>> "Is it behind THIS pile of stuff?  or the NEXT pile?").  It's easier for
>>> SWMBO
>>> to KNOW that a "blown circuit" (for whatever reason, whatever
>>> circuit) is
>>> handled in the load center instead of forcing her to remember which
>>> circuits
>>> are protected by GFCI's (IN SERIES WITH CIRCUIT BREAKERS) and which are
>>> protected by *just* circuit breakers.
>>
>> That all becomes a pain when, like happened to me, you have a
>> thunderstorm and
>> ... THWOCK ... lights out. Now where is a flashlight in this building?
>> Where
>> could the breaker panel be? Basement? Which room in the basement? Or
>> is there a
>> subpanel on another floor? Maybe on this floor?
>
> And the GFCI is vulnerable to thunderstorms?  Can you reset it when the
> power has *failed*?
>

Yes on both.


> We have (tiny) flashlights by each bedside and work area.  Along with
> "nightlights" in the public spaces that we leave on when entertaining
> overnight guests -- acknowledging they probably won't be familiar
> with the house layout to navigate it in the dark.
>

So do we but there's other lights along the way which stay on because 
GFCI is only local.


>>> If you enjoy the convenience of having the ability to reset a blown
>>> breaker
>>> AT the receptacle, why not put a GFCI on EACH branch circuit?  ("Gee,
>>> which
>>> bedroom has the GFCI for *this* bedroom's outlets?")
>>
>> One per room suffices. Normally you even hear the click. Ah, over there!
>
> Most (older) homes spread branch circuits over multiple rooms.  E.g., a
> lighting circuit may cover three or four rooms.  Ditto for outlets.
> Multiple GFCI's on a single branch circuit tend to be problematic.
>

Then the builders have cut corners.

[...]


>>>>> We opted for GFCI breakers instead of relying on the outlets with
>>>>> daisy-chained
>>>>> (often shitty back-stabbed connections!) support for downstream
>>>>> outlets.
>>>>> Having friends in the business made them much more affordable (when
>>>>> they
>>>>> are
>>>>> buying thousands of devices each year, it behooves their suppliers to
>>>>> cut
>>>>> them a good deal!)
>>>>>
>>>>> Bathrooms, garage, outdoors, kitchen, etc.
>>>>
>>>> Some folks don't have "friends in the business" and $50 a pop is
>>>> outrageous. I
>>>> don't mind paying for good quality merchandise but I do mind when a
>>>> company
>>>> tried to rip me off.
>>>
>>> Find a more reputable company!
>>
>> Once you have a particular panel you no longer have that choice. Must
>> buy at
>> the company store.
>
> And, once you settle on a particular GFCI style, you no longer have that
> choice.
>
> Until you settle on a *different* GFCI style!  :>


Luckily my wife is oblivious to that sort of technical stuff.

-- 
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

Back to sci.electronics.design | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com> - 2017-03-11 11:53 -0800
  Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility Jim Thompson <To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@On-My-Web-Site.com> - 2017-03-11 13:03 -0700
    Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com> - 2017-03-11 12:31 -0800
      Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility tabbypurr@gmail.com - 2017-03-11 18:36 -0800
        Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com> - 2017-03-12 07:10 -0700
  Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2017-03-11 13:09 -0700
    Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com> - 2017-03-11 12:34 -0800
      Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2017-03-11 14:13 -0700
        Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com> - 2017-03-11 16:00 -0800
          Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2017-03-11 17:22 -0700
            Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility krw@notreal.com - 2017-03-11 21:40 -0500
            Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com> - 2017-03-12 07:07 -0700
              Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2017-03-12 07:59 -0700
                Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com> - 2017-03-12 08:16 -0700
                Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2017-03-12 12:16 -0700
                Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com> - 2017-03-13 11:19 -0700
                Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2017-03-15 12:52 -0700
                Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com> - 2017-03-16 08:01 -0700
                Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility tabbypurr@gmail.com - 2017-03-16 10:19 -0700
                Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com> - 2017-03-16 10:37 -0700
                Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility tabbypurr@gmail.com - 2017-03-16 16:12 -0700
                Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com> - 2017-03-16 16:33 -0700
                Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility tabbypurr@gmail.com - 2017-03-16 20:15 -0700
                Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility krw@notreal.com - 2017-03-12 20:43 -0400
                Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility tabbypurr@gmail.com - 2017-03-13 02:05 -0700
                Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility krw@notreal.com - 2017-03-13 21:33 -0400
                Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility tabbypurr@gmail.com - 2017-03-14 06:38 -0700
                Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility krw@notreal.com - 2017-03-14 12:47 -0400
                Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com> - 2017-03-14 12:00 -0700
                Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility krw@notreal.com - 2017-03-14 20:44 -0400
                Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility tabbypurr@gmail.com - 2017-03-15 05:53 -0700
                Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility krw@notreal.com - 2017-03-15 12:53 -0400
                Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility kevin93 <kevin@whitedigs.com> - 2017-03-15 15:11 -0700
                Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility tabbypurr@gmail.com - 2017-03-15 16:34 -0700
                Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility krw@notreal.com - 2017-03-15 20:38 -0400
                Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com> - 2017-03-16 08:03 -0700
                Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility krw@notreal.com - 2017-03-16 20:36 -0400
                Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com> - 2017-03-17 16:54 -0700
                Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility krw@notreal.com - 2017-03-17 22:35 -0400
                Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com> - 2017-03-18 07:42 -0700
                Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility krw@notreal.com - 2017-03-18 10:47 -0400
                Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility Jasen Betts <jasen@xnet.co.nz> - 2017-03-14 05:12 +0000
                Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility krw@notreal.com - 2017-03-14 12:48 -0400
                Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com> - 2017-03-13 11:20 -0700
                Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility krw@notreal.com - 2017-03-12 20:39 -0400
                Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility whit3rd <whit3rd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-13 16:53 -0700
                Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2017-03-13 17:13 -0700
                Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com> - 2017-03-14 08:06 -0700
              Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility krw@notreal.com - 2017-03-12 20:36 -0400
                Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com> - 2017-03-13 11:54 -0700
      Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility Lasse Langwadt Christensen <langwadt@fonz.dk> - 2017-03-11 13:27 -0800
        Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com> - 2017-03-11 16:02 -0800
          Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility Lasse Langwadt Christensen <langwadt@fonz.dk> - 2017-03-11 16:33 -0800
            Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com> - 2017-03-12 07:14 -0700
              Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility tabbypurr@gmail.com - 2017-03-12 11:38 -0700
                Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com> - 2017-03-13 15:49 -0700
                Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility tabbypurr@gmail.com - 2017-03-14 06:40 -0700
                Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com> - 2017-03-14 07:59 -0700
                Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility krw@notreal.com - 2017-03-14 12:51 -0400
                Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com> - 2017-03-14 11:57 -0700
                Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility Lasse Langwadt Christensen <langwadt@fonz.dk> - 2017-03-14 14:01 -0700
                Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com> - 2017-03-14 14:21 -0700
                Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility tabbypurr@gmail.com - 2017-03-14 16:59 -0700
                Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility Chris Jones <lugnut808@spam.yahoo.com> - 2017-03-16 00:50 +1100
                Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility tabbypurr@gmail.com - 2017-03-15 07:26 -0700
                Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility Lasse Langwadt Christensen <langwadt@fonz.dk> - 2017-03-15 11:17 -0700
                Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility tabbypurr@gmail.com - 2017-03-15 16:31 -0700
                Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility Lasse Langwadt Christensen <langwadt@fonz.dk> - 2017-03-15 16:59 -0700
                Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility tabbypurr@gmail.com - 2017-03-15 19:06 -0700
                Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility Chris Jones <lugnut808@spam.yahoo.com> - 2017-03-16 23:26 +1100
                Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility tabbypurr@gmail.com - 2017-03-16 10:12 -0700
                Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility krw@notreal.com - 2017-03-14 20:47 -0400
                Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility krw@notreal.com - 2017-03-14 20:47 -0400
                Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com> - 2017-03-16 08:06 -0700
                Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility "Michael A. Terrell" <mike.terrell@earthlink.net> - 2017-03-17 16:29 -0400
                Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility krw@notreal.com - 2017-03-17 22:39 -0400
                Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility tabbypurr@gmail.com - 2017-03-18 01:52 -0700
                Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility krw@notreal.com - 2017-03-18 09:45 -0400
                Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility tabbypurr@gmail.com - 2017-03-18 07:37 -0700
                Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility krw@notreal.com - 2017-03-18 10:48 -0400
                Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility tabbypurr@gmail.com - 2017-03-18 09:18 -0700
                Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility krw@notreal.com - 2017-03-18 14:13 -0400
                Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility tabbypurr@gmail.com - 2017-03-18 13:20 -0700
                Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility krw@notreal.com - 2017-03-18 20:00 -0400
                Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility tabbypurr@gmail.com - 2017-03-18 18:40 -0700
                Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility krw@notreal.com - 2017-03-18 22:17 -0400
                Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility "Michael A. Terrell" <mike.terrell@earthlink.net> - 2017-03-19 12:14 -0400
    ) Spehro Pefhany <speffSNIP@interlogDOTyou.knowwhat> - 2017-03-12 01:12 -0500
      Re: ) tabbypurr@gmail.com - 2017-03-12 03:51 -0700
  Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility Tim Wescott <tim@seemywebsite.really> - 2017-03-11 14:27 -0600
    Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com> - 2017-03-11 12:38 -0800
      Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility Chris Jones <lugnut808@spam.yahoo.com> - 2017-03-12 23:57 +1100
        Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com> - 2017-03-12 07:17 -0700
  Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility Jon Elson <elson@pico-systems.com> - 2017-03-11 20:14 -0600

csiph-web