Quick Electrial Question

[Josepi]

Gosh, I'm just the type that likes to ask questions, while others here really have the answers. But thank you.

======

Boys and their toys!!!

[tiredofspam]

[Doug Miller]

One of two things, then: either you live in a jurisdiction that has adopted more stringent rules than those specified by the NEC, or your local inspector doesn't know or doesn't understand the NEC.

The NEC is only a model, a suggestion. In and of itself, it has no force at all; it acquires the force of law *only* when it is adopted as the governing regulation by state law or municipal ordinance -- and such jurisdictions are free to adopt it in toto, or in part, or with such exceptions or additions as they see fit. It's entirely possible that your jurisdiction has done exactly that. That's not unheard of, you know: the Chicago electrical code, as I understand it, is *based* on the NEC, but has numerous additions (e.g. all wiring must be run in conduit, no Romex allowed) that appear to stem as much from a desire to keep union electricians employed as from an understandably morbid fear of widespread fires.

[krw]

...or is making up his own rules as he goes along. BTDT.

[Robert Bonomi]

"Those of you who think you know it all, are very annoying those who do."

You know not that of which you speak.

There *is* energy in the magnetic field surrounding the inductor. Just _where_ do you think that energy came from?

When power was applied some electricity went _into+ the device that did _NOT_ come out as electricity *at*that*time*.

Similarly, when power is removed, some electricity comes out _after_ the switch is opened. Just _where_ do you think that energy comes from?

hint, it is *stored* in the electromagnetic field.

*snicker* Just where do you think the 'back emf' comes from when power is suddenly removed from an inductor?

'Male bovine excrement' applies. You even stated one situation you call 'impossible'. To wit: 'A changing voltage through an inductor, may create a phase-lagged current.' If you measure the *instantaneous* current _before_ and after the 'phase-shifting' device You *will* see different values. Draw a sine-wave, measure the instantaneous (not 'peak', or 'mean) amplitude at any given point during full cycle. Now measure the instantaneous amplitude at a slightly different phase of the waveform. Unless the two points you chose are symmetric around a maxima or minima of the waveform the

*INSTANTANEOUS* amplitude _will_ be different.

And a *transient* phase-shift within a device _can_ cause a sufficient 'instantaneous' current difference (measured on opposite sides of the phase-shift) to trip an old-style GFCI.

[Bill]

Eric, Doesn't it just warm your heart to see people take a thread and make it their own! Reminds me of a guy I knew who was outstanding in his field. ; )

[Swingman]

Of the two, Robert is the only one who should have warmed yours.

[Eric]

=============== Must have been a farmer!

[m II]

Yup! Here come's the old "I wasn't there but this is what really happened" and "I know more than your Inspector does"

Maybe Dougy has learned something about not telling **you** what happened

**to you** from the other side of the world.

Funniest yet... Dougy has professed to the world, repeatedly, he has filtered me and has his mouth gagged, for once. Stamping his feet as he bangs his head against the wall, pacing, trying not to burst a #14cu in his head.

Hook, line, and GFI.

[Bill]

Yes, I would like to make it clear that his was the only reply I was referring to (since it seemed like rant).

[Doug Miller]

Well, I was trying to be nice... but yeah, that can happen too. Still (IMHO) falls into the category of "doesn't know or doesn't understand the NEC", though.

[Doug Miller]

A farmer, huh?

[krw]

I had an inspector (not electrical) that knew the code, and even told me what the code was, "but I want you to do it this way...". I didn't want to piss off the inspector, so...

[Steve Barker]

And it was further explained to me by the local AHJ that if the outlet was a SINGLE outlet (and they are available) for the sump only, (NOT A DUPLEX OUTLET) that it would not have to be a gfci.

[Steve Barker]

this is the most likely option . And he needs to be challenged. There IS an appeals process and a committee.

[Doug Miller]

That's not what the NEC says.

[Robert Bonomi]

[ sneck ]

Chicago Electrical code bears only a vague resemblance to the NEC. Most jurisdictions cite a particular year of the NEC (or of the BOMA -- Building Owners and Managers Association -- code, which incorporates by reference the NFPA -- National Fire Prevention Association -- code, which incorporates the NEC by reference) as 'base', and then add any additional jurisdiction- specific rules.

The Chicago building code specifications for electric wiring does *NOT* do that. Everything is specified directly in the local code. And the code itself is a 'swamp'. I once had a 'difference of opinion' with a building inspector over an electrical issue, and we spent a good five minutes citing code 'exceptions' back and forth at each other. Chicago code does -not- say 'this section rules _unless_ the exception in xyz applies', it says "if this condition is met, then section xyx does not apply". Chasing the applicable exceptions to a given section is a challenge. And the section that contains an exception to the base-line rule, may itself be subject to an 'exception' in a far-removed section of the code. "lather, rinse, repeat" applies.

I eventually prevailed over the electrical inspector, having reverse- engineered the code one step further than the inspector had. And he 'went away unhappy', having _not_ collected a payoff over the purported 'code violation'.

Chicago electrical code allows some things that are forbidden by NEC, and forbids other things that are allowed by the NEC. There is a fair amount of 'coincidental' overlap on the basics, but a *lot* of difference in the 'details'.

[krw]

...and, of course, retaliation. He was eventually fired for incompetence (he failed the exam three times before that, though).

[Steve Barker]

Well, either way, i wasn't about to seek out the "single" outlet, so i installed the gfci, had the inspector do his re-check, then removed it and put in a standard outlet. I will NOT run a gfci on a sump pump period.

[Eric]

Well, either way, i wasn't about to seek out the "single" outlet, so i installed the gfci, had the inspector do his re-check, then removed it and put in a standard outlet. I will NOT run a gfci on a sump pump period.

================= Nothing like a "secret off switch" on a sump pump to flood your basement. Too bad these things don't come with audible alerts or otherwise remote indicators!