# Smokes on Arc Fault



## B4T (Feb 10, 2009)

Inspector is right..


----------



## NolaTigaBait (Oct 19, 2008)

Yeah, any outlets in those areas that need afi should be on afi's


----------



## Voltech (Nov 30, 2009)

Black4Truck said:


> Inspector is right..


On the 1st inspection or the 2nd?:whistling2:


----------



## Rudeboy (Oct 6, 2009)

Voltech said:


> On the 1st inspection or the 2nd?:whistling2:


Did he inspect arc faults during the rough? Usually arc faults get checked during the final. At least on most of my finals. Some inspectors ask me what's going to be arc-fault during a rough inspection, but at that time they're not usually checking panels.


----------



## B4T (Feb 10, 2009)

Voltech said:


> On the 1st inspection or the 2nd?:whistling2:


A rough inspection is just what is says.. you got nailed on the finish when the devices are checked for the right circuits

The inspector can't tell what is wired where on the rough


----------



## electricmanscott (Feb 11, 2010)

Just do it right and you won't have to worry about the inspections. :laughing:


----------



## Rudeboy (Oct 6, 2009)

Ehh, it happens. Just make sure you get those smokes on an AFCI in the future. Put em on a bedroom lighting ckt and you're golden.


----------



## 480sparky (Sep 20, 2007)

Smokes in the bedrooms were first required to be AFCI'd in the 2002 NEC. All of them in 2008.


----------



## Rudeboy (Oct 6, 2009)

480sparky said:


> Smokes in the bedrooms were first required to be AFCI'd in the 2002 NEC. All of them in 2008.


i meant in _his_ future. That is if you were talking to me. :thumbup:

In a house, one arc fault smoke usually means all arc fault smoke.


----------



## RIVETER (Sep 26, 2009)

Voltech said:


> Busted for not having an acr fault on the smokes. We make our panels up on rough. The same guy passed it then. First time we every put smokes on an arc fault
> 
> 
> Anyone?


Doesn't the code say all outlets...with a few exceptions?


----------



## william1978 (Sep 21, 2008)

Voltech said:


> On the 1st inspection or the 2nd?:whistling2:


Both. The inspector doesn't check for continuity and proper AFCI and GFCI till the final, and on the first inspection he is looking at the rough.


----------



## Rudeboy (Oct 6, 2009)

RIVETER said:


> Doesn't the code say all outlets...with a few exceptions?


2008... if MS is on 2005 it's just the bedroom outlets.


----------



## william1978 (Sep 21, 2008)

Rudeboy said:


> 2008... if MS is on 2005 it's just the bedroom outlets.


 You are countint the smoke as a outlet right?


----------



## 480sparky (Sep 20, 2007)

RIVETER said:


> Doesn't the code say all outlets...with a few exceptions?


 
Yep.



> *210.12(B) Dwelling Units.* All 120-volt, single phase, 15- and 20-ampere branch circuits supplying outlets installed in dwelling unit family rooms, dining rooms, living rooms, parlors, libraries, dens, bedrooms, sunrooms, recreation rooms, closets, hallways, or similar rooms or areas shall be protected by a listed arc-fault circuit interrupter, combination-type, installed to provide protection of the branch circuit.


The only exceptions are where and how to place the AFCI protection, not whether certain outlets are exempt from the requirement.


----------



## 480sparky (Sep 20, 2007)

Rudeboy said:


> 2008... if MS is on 2005 it's just the bedroom outlets.


 
Which would include the smoke.


----------



## Rudeboy (Oct 6, 2009)

william1978 said:


> You are countint the smoke as a outlet right?


yeah, and the switch and the lights and the receptacles... outlets, all though it might be nice to just call them openings. edit, that might make more confusion.
:whistling2:


----------



## 480sparky (Sep 20, 2007)

Rudeboy said:


> i meant in _his_ future. That is if you were talking to me. ........


 
If I were responding to you, I'd include a quote thingamabob.


----------



## kbsparky (Sep 20, 2007)

Half the houses we wire do not have AFCI protection on smoke alarms. 

The other half are required to have such protection.

It's a jurisdictional thing .... :blink:


----------



## william1978 (Sep 21, 2008)

Rudeboy said:


> yeah, and the switch and the lights and the receptacles... outlets, all though it might be nice to just call them openings. edit, that might make more confusion.
> :whistling2:


 Ok we are on the same page.:thumbsup:


----------



## Rudeboy (Oct 6, 2009)

480sparky said:


> If I were responding to you, I'd include a quote thingamabob.


Yeah, I thought so.
:drink:


----------



## B4T (Feb 10, 2009)

What is meant by "combination type AFCI".. I have only seen (1) type :blink:


----------



## william1978 (Sep 21, 2008)

kbsparky said:


> Half the houses we wire do not have AFCI protection on smoke alarms.
> 
> The other half are required to have such protection.
> 
> It's a jurisdictional thing .... :blink:


 Do you not wire them in tandam?


----------



## 480sparky (Sep 20, 2007)

Black4Truck said:


> What is meant by "combination type AFCI".. I have only seen (1) type :blink:


 
One that detects both parallel and series arcs.


----------



## william1978 (Sep 21, 2008)

Black4Truck said:


> What is meant by "combination type AFCI".. I have only seen (1) type :blink:


That change took place on 1/1/08 I believe. That date is in the 2005.


----------



## mikeg_05 (Jan 1, 2009)

kbsparky said:


> Half the houses we wire do not have AFCI protection on smoke alarms.
> 
> The other half are required to have such protection.
> 
> It's a jurisdictional thing .... :blink:


Same here, we used to power the smokies up with an arc fault circuit, but then local AHJ and the fire department decided to take them off the arc fault circuit.


----------



## kbsparky (Sep 20, 2007)

william1978 said:


> Do you not wire them in tandam?


Nope. Never seen a piggy-back smoke alarm ... :blink:

We do interconnect them however, for simultaneous operation. :whistling2:


----------



## 480sparky (Sep 20, 2007)

kbsparky said:


> Nope. Never seen a piggy-back smoke alarm ... :blink:
> 
> We do interconnect them however, for simultaneous operation. :whistling2:


 
OK, I'm dumb. What is a piggy-back (tandem) smoke alarm?


----------



## RIVETER (Sep 26, 2009)

mikeg_05 said:


> Same here, we used to power the smokies up with an arc fault circuit, but then local AHJ and the fire department decided to take them off the arc fault circuit.


 Did they give you their reasoning for not requiring them? We all probably know that answer, but what did THEY say?


----------



## william1978 (Sep 21, 2008)

kbsparky said:


> Nope. Never seen a piggy-back smoke alarm ... :blink:
> 
> We do interconnect them however, for simultaneous operation. :whistling2:


 I have always heard it called wiring the in tandam, but that also means interconnect atleast around here.:thumbsup:


----------



## mikeg_05 (Jan 1, 2009)

RIVETER said:


> Did they give you their reasoning for not requiring them? We all probably know that answer, but what did THEY say?


apparently they had problems with the smokies on the arc faults. I am not sure if its an actual violation to put the smokies on an arc fault here in washington, but there not required to be on arc circuit. We also only have to arc fault the bedrooms for now.


----------



## 480sparky (Sep 20, 2007)

mikeg_05 said:


> apparently they had problems with the smokies on the arc faults. I am not sure if its an actual violation to put the smokies on an arc fault here in washington, but there not required to be on arc circuit. We also only have to arc fault the bedrooms for now.


So you don't put smokes in bedrooms there? :001_huh:


----------



## RIVETER (Sep 26, 2009)

mikeg_05 said:


> apparently they had problems with the smokies on the arc faults. I am not sure if its an actual violation to put the smokies on an arc fault here in washington, but there not required to be on arc circuit. We also only have to arc fault the bedrooms for now.


Maybe there are some inspectors that have had an occurrence of AFCIs not being suitable for smoke detectors. What do you say? I know that a heavy duty battery charger would show up on a waveform capture. It would seem to me that if a detector caused a problem it would have been tested and approved...or dissaproved for the purpose.


----------



## mikeg_05 (Jan 1, 2009)

480sparky said:


> So you don't put smokes in bedrooms there? :001_huh:


No we need smokies in the bedrooms, one outside of the bedroom, and one on each level of the house, sorry if I did not make it clear


----------



## mikeg_05 (Jan 1, 2009)

RIVETER said:


> Maybe there are some inspectors that have had an occurrence of AFCIs not being suitable for smoke detectors. What do you say? .


I think that happened, I honestly cannot remember the exact reason. I took a code update class about a year ago and the instructor, who is also the chief electrical inspector for our area, said that smoke detectors are no longer required to be AFCI'd.


----------



## Voltech (Nov 30, 2009)

760.41 Power Sources for PLFA Circuits
The power source for a power-limited fire alarm circuit shall be as specified in 760.41(A), (B), or (C). These circuits shall be supplied through ground-fault circuit interrupters or arc-fault circuit interrupters.


This is from 2005, we are under 2005 still. We run out Smokes on its own circuit. I dont know much code in residential, I still could be wrong, but thats why im here..


----------



## Bob Badger (Apr 19, 2009)

Nothing in Article 760 applies to home smoke alarms.


----------



## miller_elex (Jan 25, 2008)

Haven't done a house to the 2008, but,

Why not put the smokies on AFCI? Then at the furthest smoke from the panel, pull power off and you've got a GP circuit for that 500sqft. You'd label it "smokes/down bed" or similar.


----------



## RIVETER (Sep 26, 2009)

mikeg_05 said:


> I think that happened, I honestly cannot remember the exact reason. I took a code update class about a year ago and the instructor, who is also the chief electrical inspector for our area, said that smoke detectors are no longer required to be AFCI'd.


I thought that the smoke detectors were supposed to be on a lighting outlet ahead of the switch, and THAT lighting outlet would be AFCI protected. If a AHJ tells you to not do that and if something happens, is it in writing somewhere so you are not left holding the bag?


----------



## mikeg_05 (Jan 1, 2009)

RIVETER said:


> I thought that the smoke detectors were supposed to be on a lighting outlet ahead of the switch, and THAT lighting outlet would be AFCI protected. If a AHJ tells you to not do that and if something happens, is it in writing somewhere so you are not left holding the bag?


(4) NEC 210.12(B) is amended to require AFCI protection only for dwelling unit bedroom spaces. 
(a) Dwelling Unit Bedroom spaces include spaces that: 
(i) Are used as the bedroom; 
(ii) Are accessed only through the bedroom; 
(iii) Are ancillary to the bedroom's function (e.g. closets, sitting areas, etc.); 
(iv) Contain branch circuits that supply 125-volt, 15- and 20-ampere, outlets; and 
(v) Are not bathrooms. 
(b) If a new circuit(s) is added in an existing dwelling unit bedroom, an existing outlet(s) that is not connected 
to the new circuit(s) does not require arc-fault circuit interrupter protection if the outlet(s) was installed 
before December 1, 2005. 
(c) If an existing circuit, installed before December 1, 2005, is extended, arc-fault circuit interrupter 
protection is not required. 
*(d) Arc-fault circuit interrupter protection is not required to be used for smoke or fire alarm outlets.* 

That is from the WAC book ( washington administrated code ). I think that is what it means


----------



## danickstr (Mar 21, 2010)

It makes more sense to me to have it like we do in WA. If a smoke is on an arc fault, the loss of the circuit due to nuisance tripping (inevitable on the CAFCI current tech, or lack of it) could make the smoke fail, rendering its life-saving features useless. Sort of like the fire pump running til it dies instead of throwing a breaker theory.


----------



## Jim Port (Oct 1, 2007)

danickstr said:


> It makes more sense to me to have it like we do in WA. If a smoke is on an arc fault, the loss of the circuit due to nuisance tripping (inevitable on the CAFCI current tech, or lack of it) could make the smoke fail, rendering its life-saving features useless. Sort of like the fire pump running til it dies instead of throwing a breaker theory.


This ignores the battery backup aspect of the current smoke alarm requirements.

Why is nuisance tripping inevitable?


----------



## danickstr (Mar 21, 2010)

Batteries are about half the time not in the smokes in the houses where I work.

And if that means they "chirp" until they get one, they are usually on the tabletop somewhere in the room.

CAFCI's are nuisance tripping due to appliances. Do a search for CAFCI nuisance tripping thread if you need more info.

Just a greater likelihood of annoying the HO with nuisance chirping due to nuisance tripping and getting the smoke pulled down.

Then if there actually is a fire, well, that smoke is useless on that tabletop.


----------



## Bob Badger (Apr 19, 2009)

danickstr said:


> Batteries are about half the time not in the smokes in the houses where I work.
> 
> And if that means they "chirp" until they get one, they are usually on the tabletop somewhere in the room.
> 
> ...


That sure is a lot of 'Ifs' and we will never be able to protect idiots from themselves.

For some reason when my Smokes chirp we put new batteries in them. 

I would rather the fire did not start in the first place.


----------



## danickstr (Mar 21, 2010)

two ifs is not really a lot. And one is about a fire, that is the big if that kills.


----------



## nitro71 (Sep 17, 2009)

danickstr said:


> Batteries are about half the time not in the smokes in the houses where I work
> 
> Then if there actually is a fire, well, that smoke is useless on that tabletop. .


 
That's just natural selection at work. Nothing to be concerned about. Origin of the Species explains it all.


----------

