|
Doug Miller wrote:
> In article <20070126215104.H05742.richw@whodunit.richw.org>, richw@richw.org
(Rich Wales) wrote:
>
>
>>Hmmm. I didn't realize a GFCI receptacle could legitimately be used
>>even without a ground. So, in that case, I suppose we could simply
>>ignore the fact that the electrical boxes aren't grounded and replace
>>every receptacle in the house with a GFCI receptacle -- and although
>>this would cost a couple hundred dollars, it would cost a lot less
>>than having an electrician come out and ground all the boxes for us.
>>Is that what you're suggesting as an alternative to having the boxes
>>grounded?
>
>
> It's not necessary to replace every receptacle in the house with a GFCI.
> Replacing the first receptacle (the one closest to the service panel) on each
> circuit will do -- GFCIs can be wired to protect all downstream outlets as
> well. There won't be an equipment ground on those outlets, of course, but they
> will be GFCI protected.
>
Ummmmmm. Well, that _presumes_ that the existing recepts
are "daisy-chained". If in fact his recpepts are daisy-chained,
each one will have 4 wires connected, as one means of maybe telling
if it's so.
I am going to make a very, very wild guess that his 50's house
is wired K&T and recepts are almost *never* daisy chained then.
(That's just a guess because I have not been there to inspect.)
I'd never attempt to put just one GFCI on a circuit
unless I knew for an absolute certainty that *all* recepts
would actually be protected.
Jim
|
|
Re: Grounding the receptacle boxes in an old house
