Questions & answers about how to inspect AFCIs and GFCIs:
This article series discusses safety procedures for the electrical inspector, home inspector, or other professionals while examining GFCIs and AFCIs. Safe electrical inspection procedures and safe use of volt meters, DMMs, multimeters, and similar electrical test equipment is discussed at the end of the article.
InspectAPedia tolerates no conflicts of interest. We have no relationship with advertisers, products, or services discussed at this website.
- Daniel Friedman, Publisher/Editor/Author - See WHO ARE WE?
These questions & answers about how to test a ground fault circuit interrupter or arc fault circuit interruptor were posted originally
at AFCI GFCI WIRING, TESTING & SAFETY - be sure to review that article.
Watch out: touching or testing many electrical devices can cause fire, injury, or death if not conducted properly by a trained expert.
On 2018-09-30 by (mod) - Can I test the gfci with no load connected to it?
John
Any short to ground or neutral downstream from the device itself should trip a gfci, but keep in mind that if the wiring, devices, equipment were not properly installed or if you're not familiar with proper and safe electrical practices you could
- set the building on fire
- get shocked
- get killed
On 2018-09-30 by John
I hooked up electrical wiring for a hot tub,tub has not arrived yet . Can I test the gfci with no load connected to it?
On 2018-07-27 by (mod) - How often are CGFIs to be inspected on a commercial site?
Craig,
In residential properties there is no direct statutory requirement for GFCI testing, though the manufacturer's instructions should be followed, such as "test monthly".
In the workplace OSHA has commented on GFCI test protocols as follows:
Section 1926.404(b)(1) does not require GFCIs to be tested.
However, 1926.20(b)(2) does require the frequent and regular inspections of equipment. The instructions included with the devices indicate that they should be tested monthly.
If an employer can demonstrate, for example, by means of logs or procedures, that he or she tests GFCIs monthly and promptly replaces those found defective, then a serious citation may not be appropriate for defective GFCIs found upon inspection, provided the faulty devices are replaced promptly.
Read details at https://inspectapedia.com/electric/GFCI-Test-Procedures-OSHA.pdf
or at the original source https://www.osha.gov/laws-regs/standardinterpretations/1992-02-10
Watch out: as we explain in this article series, using the integral TEST button on a GFCI is not a complete nor completely-reliable test and will not address all GFCI installations & conditions. Generally the TEST button causes an internal short to ground that should force the device to trip.
But installed on a two-wire electrical circuit that has no ground the test will not cause anything to happen.
Nevertheless, an actual short between a device plugged into the GFCI and an external ground should still cause the device to trip off. So some protection is still afforded. (I am not addressing here the error of installing an apparently-grounded device on a circuit where there is no ground such as a GFCI whose receptacle includes the third opening for a wall plug ground prong. Generally that's prohibited by code).
On 2018-07-26 by craig
How often are CGFIs to be inspected on a commercial site? Is documentation mandatory?
On 2017-04-16 by (mod) -
Thank you for the nice comment, Smith. We work hard to provide researched unbiased information and so are especially grateful when a reader finds it useful. We also welcome questions, content contributions, criticism.
Daniel
On 2017-04-16 by Smithf896
Some really quality blog posts on this internet site , saved to fav. gbbdbkcbceeeddea
On 2017-02-25 by (mod) -
Have you tried calling the city building departments to ask for help and advice?
On 2017-02-25 by Marie C. Y. Chester. 119 Kickapoo Dr East Peoria Illinois
City of East Peoria Illinois has all elec homes in the 70s.
Most converted to gas with me as one exception. The neighbor next door at 123 converted gas and had their transformer removed and put into mine and then my unit was removed and both were put directly into new city wiring. My transformer is 6ft from my house as the house 2 doors down is 6 ft from their house.
I feel shocked every day and have an iliostomy for 20 yrs. I think 123 Kickapoo Dr is wired directly into my house. Is there any inspector that you can send to this city. At sometime something blew a large hole in an area on Farmdale Rd that looks like a little lake.
A gravel pit had been 3miles down the road could not be responsible. An engineer Core was sent in and they hauled 100 trucks of dirt per hr as my husband and I watched. Since then they moved the gravel pit close to the hole that looks like a lake. We think the city is covering up. It sounded as rockets or something similar were taking off. Citizens noted that
On 2016-08-14 by (mod) - you cannot properly or completely test a GFCI on an un-grounded receptacle
NHFB,
It is correct that you cannot properly or completely test a GFCI on an un-grounded receptacle, as we described at AFCI GFCI WIRING, TESTING & SAFETY.
Here's the key text:
There are two "answers":
No: the GFCI test device or internal GFCI test exercised by the test button depends on being able to produce a small internal current leak to ground. Since there is no electrical ground wire present, the test feature won't work on all GFCI devices.
Yes, sort-of: you could rig your own test of a GFCI device on a knob and tube or other un-grounded circuit by making a connection from the hot lead of the receptacle to a known ground such as a water pipe or radiator. We've demonstrated this procedure using a test instrument as well as a bare wire.
DO NOT DO THIS unless you are specially trained and equipped to do so. It is dangerous for various reasons including the chance that you or a bystander will be killed by electric shock.
Your warning that someone touching the center faceplate screw on the receptacle cover or (if possible by chance) other metal parts connected to the receptacle during this test procedure could get a small current shock is apt and worth noting.
We're left with a device that MIGHT work properly in the event of a current short to ground or short to neutral defect on the circuit, but we don't really know if it will work for sure since we can't complete the test that you and I both described.
On 2016-08-14 by NHFireBear - ungrounded GFCIs can still be tested - sort-of
Also worth noting that pressing the "test" button on the external GFCI testing device would not only fail to trip the GFCI on an ungrounded receptacle, but would also temporarily ENERGIZE any metallic parts connected to the grounding pin of the tester, e.g., the faceplate of the receptacle, possibly allowing a small current to shock the unsuspecting.
The section called "Testing GFCIs on Un-Grounded Knob and Tube Electrical Circuits" seems to imply that you cannot test a GFCI that lacks a grounding conductor simply by pressing the "test" button on the device.
The grounding conductor is not a factor for the internal test. A GFCI needs not grounding conductor to function properly.
The internal test involves a small "leakage current" that bypasses the circuit design to make sure the same amount of current is going "both ways" in hot and neutral wires. The "leakage" is between the hot and neutral, not "ground".
Some external testers, however, often "test" the GFCI by providing leakage to "ground", which (obviously) does not exist on a two-wire knob-and-tube branch.
Also, as a general rule, an inspector should have an indicating device of some kind plugged into the GFCI outlet (or down-stream outlet) under test (even if just a simple night-light) -- to verify that the indicating device goes out when the TEST button is pressed on the outlet and goes back on when the RESET is pressed. Some GFCI outlets have a built-in indicator lamp, but they may be designed to indicate either that the GFCI has tripped (typically red) or that the GFCI has been reset (typically green).
On 2015-12-21 by (mod) - All the 3-prong outlets tested with an open ground.
Dan I agree completely.
It is a fundamental error and it is unsafe to install 3-prong receptacles that accept a ground onto an electrical circuit that has no ground wire.
It is true that adding a GFCI improves the safety of the system even on an ungrounded circuit, but the right place to add that protection - to avoid the fake ground problem - is in the electrical panel not at the receptacles.
When GFCIs are installed on an ungrounded circuit you can't test the trip mechanism completely as there is no ground wire. That's why your GFCI's won't trip in the case you describe. The internal trip mechanism simply shorts to ground - but as there is no ground there is no short and the device does not trip. It might still trip properly on a hot to neutral short or on a hot or netural short to some external path (you standing on a wet floor)
It's not quite correct that an ungrounded person can be electrocuted in that electricity has to flow through the person - e.g. from your finger out through your foot to a wet floor.
BUT it is correct that a current can flow through a person but not to earth - just picture grabbing a hot wire in one hand and the neutral in the other. Current flows up one arm, through the chest, down the other arm - which is likely to be fatal.
So a person being shocked either has current flowing from some body part touching a live electrical component down to earth, OR has current flowing between two body parts, one touching the current source and the other not earth but a ground or neutral path.
I saw this happen when a homeowner - arguing that the electrically live metal jacket on his BX wiring was perfectly safe - licked his knuckles, then touched one knuckle to the live BX wire and his pinky knuckle to a nearby metal water pipe. He got the hell shocked out of his hand.
I have a final suggestion, Dan, as many of us have run into an irate, defensive plumber or electrician (often they know more than we do but not always).
Simply and politely say to the electrician:
"Sure, I will ALWAYS yield to the opinion of the professional, such as a licensed electrician, who disagrees with me. ALL I ask is that you put your opinion in writing. Write a letter, on your letterhead, and with your personal signature, to the homeowner (copy me), stating that you absolutely certify that the electrical work you did in the home I inspected is
- in compliance with the national electrical code
- safe
... You, Dan, after all, put your opinions and observations in writing in a written inspection report. It's fair to ask the electrician to do the same. Either the electrician is a fool and will certify his bad work, or he's smart enough to refuse to do so - which will be the end of that story.
On 2015-12-21 by Dan
AUTHOR:Dan (no email)
COMMENT:I recently completed an inspection on a property in which an electrician had just completed a partial re-wire and changeout of old two prong, or non-grounded outlets to the newer 15 amp grounded outlets. All outlets tested with an open ground. The following are my concerns:
1. The changeout of the old outlets to the new grounded style outlets creates a "false ground" situation
2. GFCI outlets were installed in the necessary locations and were marked with "non-grounded" labels
3. When tested, the GFCI outlets also tested with an open ground
4. When I attempted to trip the GFCI outlet with my GFCI tester, the GFCI outlet would not trip.
I wrote up all of the open ground conditions. I also wrote up the fact that the GFCI outlets would not trip when tested. Additionally, I added that the lack of the ground would not allow the outlet to function as designed. I based the latter on the fact that, in order for the GFCI to trip, the person or appliance would have to in fact be grounded, otherwise, it is my understanding that a non-grounded person could still become electrocuted, if the actual circuit breaker did not trip.
Could you help to shed some light on this for me please? I received a call from the electrician that did the work who told me that I was completely wrong and that the outlets were still GFCI protected, even though they would not trip with my tester. Thanks
...
Continue reading at AFCIs ARC FAULT CIRCUIT INTERRUPTERS or select a topic from the closely-related articles below, or see the complete ARTICLE INDEX.
Or see this
AFCI GFCI TESTING & SAFETY FAQs at InspectApedia.com - online encyclopedia of building & environmental inspection, testing, diagnosis, repair, & problem prevention advice.
Or see this
Or use the SEARCH BOX found below to Ask a Question or Search InspectApedia
Try the search box just below, or if you prefer, post a question or comment in the Comments box below and we will respond promptly.
Search the InspectApedia website
Note: appearance of your Comment below may be delayed: if your comment contains an image, photograph, web link, or text that looks to the software as if it might be a web link, your posting will appear after it has been approved by a moderator. Apologies for the delay.
Only one image can be added per comment but you can post as many comments, and therefore images, as you like.
You will not receive a notification when a response to your question has been posted.
Please bookmark this page to make it easy for you to check back for our response.
Our Comment Box is provided by Countable Web Productions countable.ca
In addition to any citations in the article above, a full list is available on request.
High-tension current generally causes the most serious injuries, although fatal electrocutions may occur with household current (e.g., 110 V in the United States and Canada and 220 V in Europe, Australia, and Asia). Contact with alternating current at 60 cycles per second (the frequency used in most US household and commercial sources of electricity) may cause tetanic skeletal muscle contractions, preventing self-release from the source of the electricity and thereby leading to prolonged exposure. The repetitive frequency of alternating current also increases the likelihood of current flow through the heart during the relative refractory period (the "vulnerable period") of the cardiac cycle. This exposure can precipitate ventricular fibrillation (VF), which is analogous to the R-on-T phenomenon.-- circ.ahajournals.org - September 2008