# AFCI Recepticals



## EMF240 (Jan 10, 2011)

It has been about 3 years since I first heard about this new receptical. And to my knowledge, it still doesn't exist. Here in New York State, we just now adopted the 2008 code..... I guess those folks have been real busy. The reason I mention the code is because I heard that there are some regs. governing the installation of these recepticals that don't yet exist. Any help would be appreciated.


----------



## 480sparky (Sep 20, 2007)

AFAIK, they are none on the market.

I have heard that P&S started to develop them years ago when AFCI requirements first hit the NEC. They actually made several for listing & testing purposes, then the Code changed from requiring AFCI protection for receptacles to circuits.

So they shelved the entire AFCI receptacle line. Whether that's true or now, I can't say. Nor can I say that, should they actually have existed, they still have them or now.


----------



## Wirenuting (Sep 12, 2010)

480sparky said:


> AFAIK, they are none on the market.
> 
> I have heard that P&S started to develop them years ago when AFCI requirements first hit the NEC. They actually made several for listing & testing purposes, then the Code changed from requiring AFCI protection for receptacles to circuits.
> 
> So they shelved the entire AFCI receptacle line. Whether that's true or now, I can't say. Nor can I say that, should they actually have existed, they still have them or now.


Same goes for Cooper / Arrow Hart. 
There then gone.


----------



## raider1 (Jan 22, 2007)

With the new requirements in the 2011 NEC specifically 210.12(B) and 406.4(D)(4) it won't be long and the manufacturers will have them on the market.

Why make a product that no one will use, get it into the code then mass produce the product.:thumbup:

Chris


----------



## Wirenuting (Sep 12, 2010)

raider1 said:


> With the new requirements in the 2011 NEC specifically 210.12(B) and 406.4(D)(4) it won't be long and the manufacturers will have them on the market.
> 
> Why make a product that no one will use, get it into the code then mass produce the product.:thumbup:
> 
> Chris


Didn't it all start with receptacles? That was the plan to protect the HO from old lamp cords crushed behind couches and beds. It just quickly grew to include old romex. So the receptacle idea went out and the AFCI breaker was born.


----------



## 480sparky (Sep 20, 2007)

Wirenuting said:


> Didn't it all start with receptacles? That was the plan to protect the HO from old lamp cords crushed behind couches and beds. It just quickly grew to include old romex. So the receptacle idea went out and the AFCI breaker was born.



In 1999, AFCIs were required for just receptacles in bedrooms. The language in the '99 stated the requirement would become effective Jan. 1, 2002. This was to give the manufacturers time to develop the AFCI receptacles.

But when the '02 came out, the change was made to require AFCI for ALL outlets in the bedrooms, not just the receptacles. So the manufacturers ditched the AFCI receps and concentrated on breakers.

The '05 then required the _entire circuit_ to be protected, basically dealing a death sentence to the AFCI receptacle.


----------



## BBQ (Nov 16, 2010)

Take it for what it is worth but there were rumors that the AFCIs at the time ..... the ones designed to protect cords ....... could not protect cords as the circuit impedance was too high to allow the current to rise above the threshold they would react to. 


But it was probably just a coincidence that the required protection was extended to the entire circuit. :whistling2:


All of the above is substantiated by internet forum chatter and gossip.


----------



## Dennis Alwon (May 9, 2009)

BBQ said:


> All of the above is substantiated by internet forum chatter and gossip.


Well then it must be true.... :laughing:


----------



## HARRY304E (Sep 15, 2010)

Dennis Alwon said:


> Well then it must be true.... :laughing:


 I don't see a reason not to believe it .:laughing::laughing:


----------



## 480sparky (Sep 20, 2007)

BBQ said:


> Take it for what it is worth but there were rumors that the AFCIs at the time ..... the ones designed to protect cords ....... could not protect cords as the circuit impedance was too high to allow the current to rise above the threshold they would react to...



That would only be true if the cord was 18-gauge, purchased at a Big Box store, plugged into a Leviton receptacle installed in a Carlon blue box fed by Essex NM secured by plain metal staples with no plastic on them, all protected by a Federal Pacific breaker.


----------



## HARRY304E (Sep 15, 2010)

480sparky said:


> That would only be true if the cord was 18-gauge, purchased at a Big Box store, plugged into a Leviton receptacle installed in a Carlon blue box fed by Essex NM secured by plain metal staples with no plastic on them, all protected by a Federal Pacific breaker.


Does Federal Pacific make AFCI breaker's:laughing:


----------



## 480sparky (Sep 20, 2007)

HARRY304E said:


> Does Federal Pacific make AFCI breaker's:laughing:


No, but you could put an AFCI receptacle on them... that's what Bob was referring to (I thnk).


----------



## don_resqcapt19 (Jul 18, 2010)

480sparky said:


> In 1999, AFCIs were required for just receptacles in bedrooms. The language in the '99 stated the requirement would become effective Jan. 1, 2002. This was to give the manufacturers time to develop the AFCI receptacles.
> 
> But when the '02 came out, the change was made to require AFCI for ALL outlets in the bedrooms, not just the receptacles. So the manufacturers ditched the AFCI receps and concentrated on breakers.
> 
> The '05 then required the _entire circuit_ to be protected, basically dealing a death sentence to the AFCI receptacle.


The original AFCI rule required the protection of the branch circuit that supplied the receptacles. 


> (b) All branch circuits that supply 125 volt, single phase, 15 and 20 ampere receptacle outlets installed in dwelling unit bedrooms shall be protected by arc-fault circuit interrupter(s). This requirement shall become effective January 1, 2002.


The only reason for the 3 year delay was because at the time of the adoption of the 1999 code there was only one manufacturer that had an AFCI ready to sell. The first time there was any wording in the code that would permit the use of an AFCI receptacle device was the Exception to 210.12(B) that was put into the 2005 code.


----------



## 480sparky (Sep 20, 2007)

don_resqcapt19 said:


> The original AFCI rule required the protection of the branch circuit that supplied the receptacles.
> 
> 
> > (b) All branch circuits that supply 125 volt, single phase, 15 and 20 ampere
> ...


----------

