# 2014 AFCI Code Requirements



## theloop82 (Aug 18, 2011)

http://www.necconnect.org/player/?Id=1000003&Asset=8338eaf6-93df-4518-b3f3-6204df18b263

This is my first post on here, so Hi! I've been looking at the NEC code since I was in college (community) as far back as 2002. I studied it at apprenticeship, and dealt with it with inspectors as a Journeyman. Have any of you noticed how the code since about 2005 has mostly been clarification (which is good) but the actual changes have all benefitted wire and equipment manufacturers. They also are voting members of the NEC.

My question is, how come for example it has been Ok since the days of Nikolai Tesla to share a neutral in a multiwire branch circut, or to use a good ol' non-arc faut breaker in your house. 

Were houses bursting into flames? Towering infernos from office buildings? 

All I see are parts that cost way more. 50 dollar breakers where 5 dollar breakers used to be and have worked fine for years. Twice as many wires in the same lighting conduit. For what? 

Sorry for the rant. Maybe i'm wrong or the only one who thinks it.


----------



## BBQ (Nov 16, 2010)

For what it is worth manafacturers have always been on the code making panels. 

I would also be willing to bet that when GFCIs were first added to the code in the early 1970s the guys in the feild felt it was a rip off at the time.


----------



## chicken steve (Mar 22, 2011)

there are few statistics to back up rop substantiations , because there are few detailed stats being collected

therefor the NEC is run much like the open market, much of which is purposely engineered for the neck down , _fear, greed, false security, enlightened self interest_s, all that would be normally eschewed by any methodical scientifically subscribing folks

~CS~


----------



## Shockdoc (Mar 4, 2010)

The NEC is like an invention revenue booster, I get to install a $30 skimmer ground in a pool this week which cost $5 to manufacture.
Have an idea for something tacky and want to make some money off of it ? Lobby the NFPA with some cash and a paid retreat at a luxury hotel in Hawai and it will become code.


----------



## raider1 (Jan 22, 2007)

theloop82 said:


> http://www.necconnect.org/player/?Id=1000003&Asset=8338eaf6-93df-4518-b3f3-6204df18b263
> 
> This is my first post on here, so Hi! I've been looking at the NEC code since I was in college (community) as far back as 2002. I studied it at apprenticeship, and dealt with it with inspectors as a Journeyman. Have any of you noticed how the code since about 2005 has mostly been clarification (which is good) but the actual changes have all benefitted wire and equipment manufacturers. They also are voting members of the NEC.
> 
> ...


Keep in mind that technology changes every day.

Would you be OK with knob and tube connected to an FPE Breaker protecting you home?

AFCI breakers provide enhanced protection over standard inverse time breakers.

And yes manufactures are represented on the code making panels. So also are Inspectors, Electricians and Electrical engineers.

Chris


----------



## raider1 (Jan 22, 2007)

Shockdoc said:


> Lobby the NFPA with some cash and a paid retreat at a luxury hotel in Hawai and it will become code.


NFPA does not select what goes into the code. NFPA publishes the code but the proposals are voted on by the members of each code making panel. The proposal are submitted by anybody that wants to submit a proposal. After they are voted on the proposals that pass both the proposal and comment stages will be incorporated into the new code. Each CMP is made up of representative from different organizations that have a direct relationship with the code such as IAEI, IBEW, IEC, NEMA, IEEE and so on. 

Lets take for example CMP 10. Here is a list of representatives on that panel.

*Julian R. Burns
**Independent Electrical Contractors, Inc.*
*Alternate: Steve A. Struble

**Dennis M. Darling
**Institute of Electrical & Electronics Engineers, Inc.*
*Alternate: Steven E. Townsend*

*Carl Fredericks
**American Chemistry Council*
*Alternate: Roy K. Sparks, III

**Robert J. Kauer
**International Association of Electrical Inspectors*
*Alternate: Christopher M. Jensen

**Robert W. Mount, Jr.
**Air-Conditioning, Heating, & Refrigeration Institute

**Richard Sobel
**National Electrical Contractors Association

**Scott A. Blizard
**InterNational Electrical Testing Association*
*Alternate: Bruce M. Rockwell

**James T. Dollard, Jr.
**International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers*
*Alternate: Richard E. Lofton, II

**Jeffrey H. Hidaka
**Underwriters Laboratories Inc.*
*Alternate: Frank G. Ladonne

**Alan Manche
**National Electrical Manufacturers Association*
*Alternate: Kevin J. Lippert

**George J. Ockuly
**Alternate: Vincent J. Saporita

**John F. Vartanian
**Electric Light & Power Group/EEI

*Notice that there is a very diverse group represented on this panel.

Chris


----------



## don_resqcapt19 (Jul 18, 2010)

I have not been convinced that there is any real cost benefit to the use of AFCI protection.


----------



## raider1 (Jan 22, 2007)

don_resqcapt19 said:


> I have not been convinced that there is any real cost benefit to the use of AFCI protection.


That could be.

Chris


----------



## Michigan Master (Feb 25, 2013)

don_resqcapt19 said:


> I have not been convinced that there is any real cost benefit to the use of AFCI protection.


That's only because you're the installer, not the manufacturer; I'm sure they see a cost benefit. :laughing:

What is the safety benefit? Apparently we'll find out in 20 yrs...
http://www.afcisafety.org/qa.html#price


----------



## don_resqcapt19 (Jul 18, 2010)

Michigan Master said:


> That's only because you're the installer, not the manufacturer; I'm sure they see a cost benefit. :laughing:
> 
> What is the safety benefit? Apparently we'll find out in 20 yrs...
> http://www.afcisafety.org/qa.html#price


Given the failure rate of small electronic devices like the AFCI and the fact that the device is not fail safe (when the electronics fail,they become a standard thermal magnetic breaker), do you really expect them to be still working in 20 years? Yes, if the owner did the monthly test, they would know that the electronics have failed, but few do that, and even if the test fails, I don't think that they "lock out" like the newer GFCIs do after a failed test.

Also how would anyone know if a reduction of dwelling unit fires of electrical origin was a result of the AFCI or just the normal improvement of electrical installations? The original fire cause data for dwelling units showed that ~85% of the dwelling unit fires that are said to be of electrical origin were in units at least 20 years old.


----------



## manchestersparky (Mar 25, 2007)

theloop82 said:


> http://www.necconnect.org/player/?Id=1000003&Asset=8338eaf6-93df-4518-b3f3-6204df18b263
> 
> This is my first post on here, so Hi! I've been looking at the NEC code since I was in college (community) as far back as 2002. I studied it at apprenticeship, and dealt with it with inspectors as a Journeyman. Have any of you noticed how the code since about 2005 has mostly been clarification (which is good) but the actual changes have all benefitted wire and equipment manufacturers. They also are voting members of the NEC.
> 
> ...


You may also want to investigate who submitted those code changes? There are thousands of proposals submitted from anyone and everyone. 
Everyone automatically assumes it the manufactures of electrical equipment that drive the NEC, but in reality it is the people who take the time to submit proposals and write in during the comment stage to push their proposals. The IBEW, NECA,NEMA,UL IAEI ( just to name a few) are all major submitters - none of which are manufacturers.


----------



## BBQ (Nov 16, 2010)

manchestersparky said:


> You may also want to investigate who submitted those code changes? There are thousands of proposals submitted from anyone and everyone.
> Everyone automatically assumes it the manufactures of electrical equipment that drive the NEC, but in reality it is the people who take the time to submit proposals and write in during the comment stage to push their proposals. The IBEW, NECA,NEMA,UL IAEI ( just to name a few) are all major submitters - none of which are manufacturers.


NEMA? The National Electrical Manufacturers Association?

They may not be a manufacturer but they are entirely funded by manufacturers.:laughing:


----------



## manchestersparky (Mar 25, 2007)

BBQ said:


> NEMA? The National Electrical Manufacturers Association?
> 
> They may not be a manufacturer but they are entirely funded by manufacturers.:laughing:


OK you got me on that one - I guess I got going and let that one slip in


----------



## don_resqcapt19 (Jul 18, 2010)

Now go back and look at the proposals that required the use of a new product and who submitted those proposals.


----------



## theloop82 (Aug 18, 2011)

I just am a bit skeptical of the motives of the organization that let Alcoa talk the code making panel into allowing aluminum building wiring having safety at the forefront of all their decision making. I understand that this is capitalism and all but you would think at some point the NFPA should basically say All the sections that have existed for a long time are case closed, and focus more on nailing down new technology like EV charging, solar arrays etc.

AFCI's don't effect me much in daily life because my house is a bit older and I do Commercial/Industrial work. Everyone I know with a newer house is frustrated by repeated tripping of their AFCI's under normal use so I don't really think they can be compared to GFCI technology which has a demonstrable safety record. I just wonder if one day they will say that you cant sell thermal mag breakers at all anymore at home depot and now ill be stuck buying the 50$ breaker.

The seperate neutral or breaker tie rule effects me more. I really cant see the issue with a properly installed and maintained shared neutral branch circuit that has worked flawlessly for a hundred years suddenly being a safety hazard. If maintenance guys cant wrap their head around how it works and how to work it safely then they have no business messing with it. All I see as the reasoning is to sell more copper, which is a limited resource and only going up in price. 

If the NFPA really wants to improve safety they should broaden their scope to include pieces of listed equipment. I see my share of questionable wire sizing and workmanship inside pieces of UL listed equipment. But that is too much to hope for.


----------



## erics37 (May 7, 2009)

theloop82 said:


> I just am a bit skeptical of the motives of the organization that let Alcoa talk the code making panel into allowing aluminum building wiring having safety at the forefront of all their decision making. I understand that this is capitalism and all but you would think at some point the NFPA should basically say All the sections that have existed for a long time are case closed, and focus more on nailing down new technology like EV charging, solar arrays etc.


What's wrong with aluminum building wiring?



> AFCI's don't effect me much in daily life because my house is a bit older and I do Commercial/Industrial work. Everyone I know with a newer house is frustrated by repeated tripping of their AFCI's under normal use so I don't really think they can be compared to GFCI technology which has a demonstrable safety record. I just wonder if one day they will say that you cant sell thermal mag breakers at all anymore at home depot and now ill be stuck buying the 50$ breaker.


Maybe in 20 years AFCIs will have a demonstrable safety record as well.



> The seperate neutral or breaker tie rule effects me more. I really cant see the issue with a properly installed and maintained shared neutral branch circuit that has worked flawlessly for a hundred years suddenly being a safety hazard. If maintenance guys cant wrap their head around how it works and how to work it safely then they have no business messing with it. All I see as the reasoning is to sell more copper, which is a limited resource and only going up in price.


I kinda agree with you on this one. However I wouldn't want to be the guy that shuts off one circuit and then opens the neutral for the remaining two still energized.



> If the NFPA really wants to improve safety they should broaden their scope to include pieces of listed equipment. I see my share of questionable wire sizing and workmanship inside pieces of UL listed equipment. But that is too much to hope for.


NFPA has a lot more publications than #70 alone. The NEC doesn't and shouldn't get into internal equipment wiring, in my opinion.


----------



## theloop82 (Aug 18, 2011)

erics37 said:


> What's wrong with aluminum building wiring?


Maybe I used the wrong term, I meant that old Alcoa romex in pre-74 houses that had a tendancy to turn your rumpus room into a tinderbox. Mains are all good as long as terminated per spec.



erics37 said:


> Maybe in 20 years AFCIs will have a demonstrable safety record as well.


That could be a tough thing to prove since a prevented fire isnt recorded. I dont really recall hearing alot of new houses spontaneously combusting in between 1980 and 2005 other than freak accidents, shoddy work, and customer-ization. I'd be more concerned with electronics in the AFCI's getting old and not doing their job. Magtrip breakers tend to trip more easily with loading and age, but what will their electronic counterparts do?



erics37 said:


> I kinda agree with you on this one. However I wouldn't want to be the guy that shuts off one circuit and then opens the neutral for the remaining two still energized.


So don't be that guy. It was good enough for Nicky Tesla.



erics37 said:


> NFPA has a lot more publications than #70 alone. The NEC doesn't and shouldn't get into internal equipment wiring, in my opinion.



You want to hear a real rant we can talk about the cluster**** that is 70E


----------



## erics37 (May 7, 2009)

theloop82 said:


> Maybe I used the wrong term, I meant that old Alcoa romex in pre-74 houses that had a tendancy to turn your rumpus room into a tinderbox. Mains are all good as long as terminated per spec.


Gotcha. Well in a technical capacity they've drastically improved the alloy since then. I don't think there would be any issue with switching to aluminum wiring other than the transition period.



> That could be a tough thing to prove since a prevented fire isnt recorded. I dont really recall hearing alot of new houses spontaneously combusting in between 1980 and 2005 other than freak accidents, shoddy work, and customer-ization. I'd be more concerned with electronics in the AFCI's getting old and not doing their job. Magtrip breakers tend to trip more easily with loading and age, but what will their electronic counterparts do?


Prevented electric shocks aren't recorded either, but GFCIs are still ubiquitous. They've just been around longer and are more accepted.

I suppose the concerns about electronics are legit, especially when we stack a bunch of them together in a panel that hasn't been redesigned to accommodate the heat buildup. But that's beyond my expertise.

Anyway your claim of houses between 1980 and 2005 spontaneously combusting is bogus and misleading. House fires are always caused by SOMETHING. Shoddy electrical work is a common cause and is a prime reason why AFCI requirements are now adopted in code. So really, us electricians are partially to blame. All these spec houses everywhere wired cheap and code minimum; one receptacle per wall in bedrooms, backstabbed, no time taken to determine potential furniture layouts. All it takes is someone plugging their alarm clock, phone charger, reading lamp, and dildo into the one outlet directly in the middle of the wall and then jamming their bed frame up against it.



> So don't be that guy. It was good enough for Nicky Tesla.
> 
> You want to hear a real rant we can talk about the cluster**** that is 70E


I'm sure Tesla of all people would be fine with technological innovation. What he wouldn't approve of is the bad science often employed to push or market those innovations.


----------



## Semi-Ret Electrician (Nov 10, 2011)

theloop82 said:


> *Maybe I used the wrong term, I meant that old Alcoa romex in pre-74 houses that had a tendancy to turn your rumpus room into a tinderbox.*


LOL I could see that one coming:laughing:

Welcome to the Forum!


----------



## theloop82 (Aug 18, 2011)

erics37 said:


> Anyway your claim of houses between 1980 and 2005 spontaneously combusting is bogus and misleading. House fires are always caused by SOMETHING. Shoddy electrical work is a common cause and is a prime reason why AFCI requirements are now adopted in code. So really, us electricians are partially to blame. All these spec houses everywhere wired cheap and code minimum; one receptacle per wall in bedrooms, backstabbed, no time taken to determine potential furniture layouts. All it takes is someone plugging their alarm clock, phone charger, reading lamp, and dildo into the one outlet directly in the middle of the wall and then jamming their bed frame up against it.


Im with you here. I think a GREAT code addition would be getting rid of 15A branch circuits in houses and going to 20A/#12. I don't know how many times you see an air conditioner plugged into a cheapo 16/3 extension cord trailing out of a room. That is a fire hazard, and with all the electronics people use today it seems like a cheap and easy upgrade that would actually benefit the end user AND electricians through having less different wire to stock to rope a spec house.

Someone submit that!


----------



## Ultrafault (Dec 16, 2012)

theloop82 said:


> Im with you here. I think a GREAT code addition would be getting rid of 15A branch circuits in houses and going to 20A/#12. I don't know how many times you see an air conditioner plugged into a cheapo 16/3 extension cord trailing out of a room. That is a fire hazard, and with all the electronics people use today it seems like a cheap and easy upgrade that would actually benefit the end user AND electricians through having less different wire to stock to rope a spec house.
> 
> Someone submit that!


What is wrong with 14 awg wire?


----------



## rexowner (Apr 12, 2008)

raider1 said:


> NFPA does not select what goes into the code. NFPA publishes the code but the proposals are voted on by the members of each code making panel. The proposal are submitted by anybody that wants to submit a proposal. After they are voted on the proposals that pass both the proposal and comment stages will be incorporated into the new code. Each CMP is made up of representative from different organizations that have a direct relationship with the code such as IAEI, IBEW, IEC, NEMA, IEEE and so on.
> 
> Lets take for example CMP 10. Here is a list of representatives on that panel.
> ...
> ...


With all due respect, IMO your post might be considered incomplete.
The employers of everyone listed are on the CMP information
page below, but you didn't include the employer info.

Employees of Schneider (Square D), Eaton, Cooper Bussman and
many other manufacturers (e.g. Dow Chemical) with interest in various
products are on the panel.

I am sure all these folks are extremely competent and professional, 
but their salaries are paid by manufacturers.

http://nfpastageweb.gvpi.net/codes-...information-pages?mode=members&code=70&id=173


----------



## theloop82 (Aug 18, 2011)

Ultrafault said:


> What is wrong with 14 awg wire?


Nothing inherently, but why use it for receptacle circuits? For a few bucks more a house you could up everything to #12 on 20A and you would be able to run a vacuum at the same time as a small space heater. Or an AC unit and a computer and a big plasma. Everyone I know in the trades that has built their own house has wired it with #12 for all the receptacle circuits and it is an easy change that wouldn't cost alot and actually improve electrical installations functionality to the homeowner. Receptacle circuits in commercial/industrial are all 20A, so why not in houses?


----------



## raider1 (Jan 22, 2007)

rexowner said:


> With all due respect, IMO your post might be considered incomplete.
> The employers of everyone listed are on the CMP information
> page below, but you didn't include the employer info.
> 
> ...


I never intended to mislead anyone. I know that manufactures are represented on the different code panels. I was trying to point out that there are diverse perspectives on each CMP. There are also inspectors and electricians on each CMP.


Chris


----------



## rexowner (Apr 12, 2008)

raider1 said:


> I never intended to mislead anyone. I know that manufactures are represented on the different code panels. I was trying to point out that there are diverse perspectives on each CMP. There are also inspectors and electricians on each CMP.
> 
> 
> Chris


You are right. You pointed out in Post #5 that manufacturers are 
represented.

However, this is an imperfect political process, and it is not unreasonable
to believe that manufacturers can have an out-of-proportion
influence on the process. 

The manufacturers are by and large the folks with money to spend and 
at stake in the process. Of course, they are going to act on those
facts.

It can be as simple as taking people out to dinner and party at a fantastic
place at one of these meetings. Could be more. Happened to me, happens all
the time.

IMO, the folks who feel that the requirements are outstripping
the technology, and it benefits manufacturers greatly have a 
good point.

It is not a perfect, altruistic, pristine process where only the "right thing"
gets done.

Anyway, that's my opinion. Worth what you paid for it.


----------



## raider1 (Jan 22, 2007)

rexowner said:


> You are right. You pointed out in Post #5 that manufacturers are
> represented.
> 
> However, this is an imperfect political process, and it is not unreasonable
> ...


There is always the possibility of corruption in these situations.

I do have some first hand knowledge of the operations of a CMP. You may recognize the alternate to Robert Kauer.

From my limited perspective and participation I have not seen any undue influence from the manufactures in the code making process.

Chris


----------



## chicken steve (Mar 22, 2011)

.....and fat babies don't fart....:whistling2: ~CS~


----------



## BBQ (Nov 16, 2010)

chicken steve said:


> .....and fat babies don't fart....:whistling2: ~CS~


Lets have some more proof then the word of a guy who has never been there. :whistling2:


----------



## chicken steve (Mar 22, 2011)

I've never been to the White House either , but i could probably make a few similar statements BBQ

~CS~


----------



## BBQ (Nov 16, 2010)

chicken steve said:


> I've never been to the White House either , but i could probably make a few similar statements BBQ
> 
> ~CS~


You can make any damn statement you want. You can say the world is flat, you can say Cletis is the best damned electrician in the world. You can say I have the body of an athlete. 

But without a shred, not even the smallest shred of proof it is meaningless.

Now with the White house there is plenty of proof, sadly not hard to find at all.

Show me one bit of proof of corruption in the CMPs.


----------



## chicken steve (Mar 22, 2011)

BBQ said:


> You can make any damn statement you want. You can say the world is flat, you can say Cletis is the best damned electrician in the world. You can say I have the body of an athlete.
> 
> But without a shred, not even the smallest shred of proof it is meaningless.
> 
> ...


The analogy stands , as corruption, much like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder BBQ

fwiw, i've talked to plenty of cmp & nfpa members, as well as trade mag writers

there's often a stark disparity in what they say 'off record', and what they say publicly 

not that this is _'evidence'_ to any of the jackbooted code nazi's who'd jump off the nearest bridge should they codify it....:whistling2:

i await your next ad hominem , _( just as effin' useless btw....)_

~CS~


----------



## BBQ (Nov 16, 2010)

chicken steve said:


> The analogy stands , as corruption, much like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder BBQ
> 
> fwiw, i've talked to plenty of cmp & nfpa members, as well as trade mag writers
> 
> ...


So as long as we are clear.

You have no proof at all that any corruption exists in the CMPs.


We now return to our regular programing of baseless accusations from the backwoods of Vermont.


----------



## chicken steve (Mar 22, 2011)

BBQ said:


> So as long as we are clear.
> 
> You have no proof at all that any corruption exists in the CMPs.
> 
> ...


So long as we're clear

You have no proof corruption and collusion does *NOT* exist in the CMP's

We now return you to our regular programming of two dimensional responses from posters hanging by their prehensile tails @ ET

~CS~


----------



## electricmanscott (Feb 11, 2010)

theloop82 said:


> Im with you here. I think a GREAT code addition would be getting rid of 15A branch circuits in houses and going to 20A/#12.
> 
> Someone submit that!


What you think and reality are two different things! :laughing:

Why don't you go ahead and submit it. Let us know how it works out. :thumbsup:


----------



## electricmanscott (Feb 11, 2010)

Not sure if there's corruption on CMPs or not (wouldn't be even slightly surprised to find out there is). Also, my babies were not fat so I don't know if fat babies do or do not fart. I have been to the Whitehouse though (not inside) and I'm fairly certain I could get over the fence, across the lawn and be ringing the doorbell before anyone knew what was going on. :thumbup:

Anyway, I do think it's in the best interest of the NFPA and the entire "system", that's really what it's become, for these new products to make it into the NEC.


----------



## Roger123 (Sep 23, 2007)

raider1;
[B said:


> Alternate: Christopher M. Jensen


:thumbsup: High class person!!


----------



## BBQ (Nov 16, 2010)

Roger123 said:


> :thumbsup: High class person!!


Yes, and one that is not corrupt.


----------



## raider1 (Jan 22, 2007)

Thanks Bob and Roger.

Chris


----------



## macmikeman (Jan 23, 2007)

Bilderberg is meeting in London this very week. I bet they are hammering out what is really going to become the next NEC code intrusion........


----------



## Shockdoc (Mar 4, 2010)

theloop82 said:


> Nothing inherently, but why use it for receptacle circuits? For a few bucks more a house you could up everything to #12 on 20A and you would be able to run a vacuum at the same time as a small space heater. Or an AC unit and a computer and a big plasma. Everyone I know in the trades that has built their own house has wired it with #12 for all the receptacle circuits and it is an easy change that wouldn't cost alot and actually improve electrical installations functionality to the homeowner. Receptacle circuits in commercial/industrial are all 20A, so why not in houses?


That's just plain stupid, most general purpose15 amp bedroom and LR ckts have no more than several amps loaded on it between table lamps , TVs and clocks. Might as well run 12/3 thru each receptacle in the bedrooms, you never know where one might want to place a compressor or drill press. I use #12 for W/Hs in my own home.


----------



## macmikeman (Jan 23, 2007)

theloop82 said:


> Nothing inherently, but why use it for receptacle circuits? For a few bucks more a house you could up everything to #12 on 20A and you would be able to run a vacuum at the same time as a small space heater. Or an AC unit and a computer and a big plasma. Everyone I know in the trades that has built their own house has wired it with #12 for all the receptacle circuits and it is an easy change that wouldn't cost alot and actually improve electrical installations functionality to the homeowner. Receptacle circuits in commercial/industrial are all 20A, so why not in houses?



Got a code reference for that?


----------



## erics37 (May 7, 2009)

chicken steve said:


> So long as we're clear
> 
> You have no proof corruption and collusion does *NOT* exist in the CMP's
> 
> ...


You're the one making accusations, therefore burden of proof is on you.


----------



## BBQ (Nov 16, 2010)

erics37 said:


> You're the one making accusations, therefore burden of proof is on you.


You would think so.

Of course the mainstream news gave up on that long ago I guess Steve did too.


----------



## chicken steve (Mar 22, 2011)

erics37 said:


> You're the one making accusations, therefore burden of proof is on you.


I've accused no _one _individual Eric

I've only confronted the concept of altruism, and those who believe the nfpa qualifies as such an entity

as you can see, even our resident cmp reserve member agrees with me

that said, i have just today posted a rather controversial pdf on what could easily be seen as how the system works, warts and all

it's somewhat old news, and not the only one out there btw

the point is, we're not squeaky clean, the worlds not black & white

and one would be rather naive to insist it is, simply due to _'lack of evidence'_, or evidence they refuse to accept

~CS~


----------



## nrp3 (Jan 24, 2009)

That might make for a great reality show. Who can make it across the White House lawn without being caught?


----------



## mertabird (Nov 14, 2013)

theloop82 said:


> Nothing inherently, but why use it for receptacle circuits? For a few bucks more a house you could up everything to #12 on 20A and you would be able to run a vacuum at the same time as a small space heater. Or an AC unit and a computer and a big plasma. Everyone I know in the trades that has built their own house has wired it with #12 for all the receptacle circuits and it is an easy change that wouldn't cost alot and actually improve electrical installations functionality to the homeowner. Receptacle circuits in commercial/industrial are all 20A, so why not in houses?



Yep. Any electrician I've met whose wired his own house has gone with number 12 for the all purpose branch circuits. Why not? Also... with these afci breakers, it might even be a cost savings, considering less circuits will be necessary.

I might additionally oversize all of my fixed appliance circuits....why not? A few more dollars for the wire... but watts are saved everyday off the load. 

However, it can be hard to sell a customer on these ideas. Most of the time they are trying to save their pennies and don't know enough about voltage drop to care.


----------



## Joe Tedesco (Mar 25, 2007)

theloop82 said:


> http://www.necconnect.org/player/?Id=1000003&Asset=8338eaf6-93df-4518-b3f3-6204df18b263
> 
> This is my first post on here, so Hi! I've been looking at the NEC code since I was in college (community) as far back as 2002. I studied it at apprenticeship, and dealt with it with inspectors as a Journeyman. Have any of you noticed how the code since about 2005 has mostly been clarification (which is good) but the actual changes have all benefitted wire and equipment manufacturers. They also are voting members of the NEC.
> 
> ...


UL Information on AFCI's


----------



## electricmanscott (Feb 11, 2010)

mertabird said:


> Yep. Any electrician I've met whose wired his own house has gone with number 12 for the all purpose branch circuits. Why not? Also... with these afci breakers, it might even be a cost savings, considering less circuits will be necessary.
> 
> I might additionally oversize all of my fixed appliance circuits....why not? A few more dollars for the wire... but watts are saved everyday off the load.
> 
> However, it can be hard to sell a customer on these ideas. Most of the time they are trying to save their pennies and don't know enough about voltage drop to care.


Classic :laughing:


----------



## chicken steve (Mar 22, 2011)

> Arcing" is defined as a luminous discharge of electricity across an insulating medium. The electrical discharge of an arc can involve temperatures of several thousand degrees Celsius.


Paschen's law defines this as possible @ about 347 volts




> In general, arcing can be divided into two categories: (1) non-contact arcing and (2) contact arcing.


In either case, they'd most likely be a glowing connection first

~CS~


----------



## Mshow1323 (Jun 9, 2012)

theloop82 said:


> If maintenance guys cant wrap their head around how it works and how to work it safely then they have no business messing with it.


This quote I have seen a million times, and it has always drove me nuts as being a terribly weak argument. I have no idea how an internal combustion engine works, does that mean I can't fumble my way through changing my own oil? The point being is that safety regulations are not there to hamper the professionals. They are there to protect everybody who happens to open up a receptacle and try to change it. I am specifically referring to all the Tim Taylor's out there that try to fix an easy outlet, break a neutral and ruin every appliance on the same loop while, simultaneously lighting themselves up. This is precisely the reason for the safety measures. Our rules are in place because every home owner "knows how to" do our job. Gripe all you want, but all these regulations are also what keep my prices high.


----------



## Shockdoc (Mar 4, 2010)

Is there a way to form a class action lawsuit against Eaton and those cashing off this useless fraudulent item?


----------



## BababooeyHTJ (May 31, 2013)

theloop82 said:


> Im with you here. I think a GREAT code addition would be getting rid of 15A branch circuits in houses and going to 20A/#12. I don't know how many times you see an air conditioner plugged into a cheapo 16/3 extension cord trailing out of a room. That is a fire hazard, and with all the electronics people use today it seems like a cheap and easy upgrade that would actually benefit the end user AND electricians through having less different wire to stock to rope a spec house.
> 
> Someone submit that!


All of the electronics? Everything is becoming more and more efficient these days. Televisions, computers, and most loads that would typically be plugged into a 15a branch circuit are becoming more and more energy efficient. 

If anything energy consumption is going way down these days. 

Then there are newer requirements with insulation. 

Who is using window A/C units and space heaters in a new home or addition these days?


----------



## Elephante (Nov 16, 2011)

Shockdoc said:


> Is there a way to form a class action lawsuit against Eaton and those cashing off this useless fraudulent item?


No....just take it like a champ...


----------



## Joe Tedesco (Mar 25, 2007)

*AFCI Inspection Checklist*

Enforcing AFCI installations to the 2014 NEC - Guide for Inspectors and Contractors AFCI Inspection Checklist

Better files are located here:

http://www.joetedesco.org/JoeTedesco


----------



## MTW (Aug 28, 2013)

Shockdoc said:


> Is there a way to form a class action lawsuit against Eaton and those cashing off this useless fraudulent item?


I support anything that would overturn their usage.


----------



## chicken steve (Mar 22, 2011)

Shockdoc said:


> Is there a way to form a class action lawsuit against Eaton and those cashing off this useless fraudulent item?



Yes, but that takes enough complainers out there to have some legal beagle take note of it , and as it stands the proverbial _'empty fire extinguisher'_ isn't relevant to enough to do so Doc.... ~CS~


----------



## Deep Cover (Dec 8, 2012)

mertabird said:


> I might additionally oversize all of my fixed appliance circuits....why not? A few more dollars for the wire... but watts are saved everyday off the load.


:blink: Say whaaaa?


----------



## RIVETER (Sep 26, 2009)

theloop82 said:


> http://www.necconnect.org/player/?Id=1000003&Asset=8338eaf6-93df-4518-b3f3-6204df18b263
> 
> This is my first post on here, so Hi! I've been looking at the NEC code since I was in college (community) as far back as 2002. I studied it at apprenticeship, and dealt with it with inspectors as a Journeyman. Have any of you noticed how the code since about 2005 has mostly been clarification (which is good) but the actual changes have all benefitted wire and equipment manufacturers. They also are voting members of the NEC.
> 
> ...


Prices of parts keeps going up and that sucks. However, in the case of arc fault breakers and the like, new technology proves to save the day. Previously, and even today sometimes when a light flickers because of a loose joint we are lucky if it is at a joint ...in a box...and not near combustible material. The electrical energy that is trying to "jump" a bad connection dissipates heat at the loose joint. That heat can cause some materials to catch fire. The AF equipment distinguishes an erratic waveform that is much different than a fairly normal sine wave.


----------



## MTW (Aug 28, 2013)

RIVETER said:


> The AF equipment distinguishes an erratic waveform that is much different than a fairly normal sine wave.


False.


----------



## chicken steve (Mar 22, 2011)

I would caution any EC not to make such claims

~CS~


----------



## Dennis Alwon (May 9, 2009)

MTW said:


> False.


There is some truth to that. The afci looks at the sine wave and has to distinguish between a good wave and a bad wave


----------



## MTW (Aug 28, 2013)

Dennis Alwon said:


> There is some truth to that. The afci looks at the sine wave and has to distinguish between a good wave and a bad wave


But it's only partially true, therefore it is false.


----------



## Dennis Alwon (May 9, 2009)

MTW said:


> But it's only partially true, therefore it is false.


We can argue that all day. He never stated that it was the only thing an afci did so imo his statement is true.


----------



## MTW (Aug 28, 2013)

Dennis Alwon said:


> We can argue that all day. He never stated that it was the only thing an afci did so imo his statement is true.


An AFCI does not detect the most dangerous and common type of fault - a series arc aka glowing connection. Furthermore, a lab study showed that an AFCI was not even effective at detecting a series arc because the arc was not sustained long enough for the AFCI to detect it. 

I'm more convinced than ever that they are worthless junk.


----------



## Chris1971 (Dec 27, 2010)

Joe Tedesco said:


> Enforcing AFCI installations to the 2014 NEC - Guide for Inspectors and Contractors AFCI Inspection Checklist


Joe,

Do you have a larger version of the arc fault requirement image you posted? If so, could you PM it to me. Thank you.


----------



## Shockdoc (Mar 4, 2010)

What kinds of incentives are being sent out to buy more rights for these useless breakers?


----------



## chicken steve (Mar 22, 2011)

cmp-2 are in charge of_ incentives _Doc

they, like just about every post i'm reading here, depend on the same non scientific religious _'global warming' _belief system

now i know there's some that'll take me to task on this

so here's my answer to it

which particular code has had the MOST ROP ACTION in recent cycles

go ahead, make my day.....

~CS~


----------



## Shockdoc (Mar 4, 2010)

chicken steve said:


> cmp-2 are in charge of_ incentives _Doc
> 
> they, like just about every post i'm reading here, depend on the same non scientific religious _'global warming' _belief system
> 
> ...


I stopped buying their book in 05'. They are on my Boycott list.


----------



## Joe Tedesco (Mar 25, 2007)

*http://www.joetedesco.org/JoeTedesco*



Chris1971 said:


> Joe,
> 
> Do you have a larger version of the arc fault requirement image you posted? If so, could you PM it to me. Thank you.


It's here in this folder with more of my stuff:

http://www.joetedesco.org/JoeTedesco

Fix it up if you want and re post it for all to see.


----------



## Elephante (Nov 16, 2011)

They should just make the main Gfci and afci all in one device...


----------



## Mshow1323 (Jun 9, 2012)

Elephante said:


> They should just make the main Gfci and afci all in one device...


Have fun trying to troubleshoot the fault in that circuit!


----------



## Elephante (Nov 16, 2011)

Mshow1323 said:


> Have fun trying to troubleshoot the fault in that circuit!


 this type of breaker would tell you what part of the bus bar has an arc...like a code...


----------



## Mshow1323 (Jun 9, 2012)

Elephante said:


> this type of breaker would tell you what part of the bus bar has an arc...like a code...


On the surface, maybe that would work, however add a few sub panels and it wouldn't.


----------



## chicken steve (Mar 22, 2011)

Elephante said:


> They should just make the main Gfci and afci all in one device...


they tried & failed

~CS~


----------



## Chris1971 (Dec 27, 2010)

Joe Tedesco said:


> It's here in this folder with more of my stuff:
> 
> http://www.joetedesco.org/JoeTedesco
> 
> Fix it up if you want and re post it for all to see.


Thanks Joe. I appreciate it.


----------



## Chris1971 (Dec 27, 2010)

chicken steve said:


> they tried & failed
> 
> ~CS~


I've never heard of them trying and failing to make a main arc fault circuit breaker. Do you have documentation on this?:001_huh:


----------



## Deep Cover (Dec 8, 2012)

He wasn't talking about mains specifically. The "early" AFCI's had GFP also built in...I think it was something like 30mA...but I could be talking out my @$$.


----------



## mertabird (Nov 14, 2013)

*One big sign wave*



Elephante said:


> this type of breaker would tell you what part of the bus bar has an arc...like a code...


That's interesting....but the device would have to be able to distinguish which part of the electrical signal was being fed into each finger or breaker on the bus. Don't know that you can break a sine wave down like that?


----------



## Dennis Alwon (May 9, 2009)

Deep Cover said:


> He wasn't talking about mains specifically. The "early" AFCI's had GFP also built in...I think it was something like 30mA...but I could be talking out my @$$.


 All afci have gfci built in except for GE and you are correct it is about 30 ma which means it is not compliant for protection for people.


----------



## chicken steve (Mar 22, 2011)

As was posted in a thread here, the tiered euro system incorporates a 300ma main, down to 30ma submains . 

I'll go out on a limb and claim 300ma is rather different than our 240000000 ma mains in terms of mortality,morbidity & electrical fire incidents.

~CS~


----------



## chicken steve (Mar 22, 2011)

Chris1971 said:


> I've never heard of them trying and failing to make a main arc fault circuit breaker. Do you have documentation on this?:001_huh:


I mean past rop's Chris

~CS~


----------



## don_resqcapt19 (Jul 18, 2010)

It is my opinion that the GFP part of the AFCI is the part that really does almost all of the work. I have not been convinced that arcing faults are even possible on a 120 volt circuit.


----------



## pete87 (Oct 22, 2012)

don_resqcapt19 said:


> It is my opinion that the GFP part of the AFCI is the part that really does almost all of the work. I have not been convinced that arcing faults are even possible on a 120 volt circuit.




You get a bit of protection with that GFP feature so your cash is not totally wasted .

The AFCI requirement is a waste of cash , the replacement day will come and
you have more cash to waste . I wonder how the home owners and land lords 
will take to a constant waste of cash .

Better quality receptacles would add a greater degree of safety for all .

Just Sayin

Pete


----------



## Dennis Alwon (May 9, 2009)

don_resqcapt19 said:


> It is my opinion that the GFP part of the AFCI is the part that really does almost all of the work. I have not been convinced that arcing faults are even possible on a 120 volt circuit.


Well how do you explain that certain vacuums, ceiling fans and electronics often cause afci to trip-- definitely not gfp


----------



## Dennis Alwon (May 9, 2009)

Remember the GE afci does not have gfp and they will trip without a short.


----------



## macmikeman (Jan 23, 2007)

Dennis Alwon said:


> Remember the GE afci does not have gfp and they will trip without a short.


Yes, I've noticed them. They are apparently designed to trip whenever electrical current is detected flowing on the conductors . 


Or is it the old random number generator chip trick being employed Dennis? 


General Electric would never do anything deceiving now would they?.....


----------



## don_resqcapt19 (Jul 18, 2010)

Dennis Alwon said:


> Well how do you explain that certain vacuums, ceiling fans and electronics often cause afci to trip-- definitely not gfp


That doesn't have anything to do with the question as to if sustained arc is possible in the wiring system that the AFCIs are said to protect. If sustained damaging arcs were possible at 120 volts, how come we don't require GFP protection for over 1,000 amps on 208/120Y systems like we do for 480/277Y systems?


----------



## don_resqcapt19 (Jul 18, 2010)

Dennis Alwon said:


> Remember the GE afci does not have gfp and they will trip without a short.


And in my opinion that device is next to worthless. Even the application engineers at Eaton have told me that over 80% of the trips of an AFCI device is from the GFP part of the device and not the fancy arc signature recognition software.
Dr. Engle, one of the original AFCI designers even submitted proposals to require the GFP protection in AFCI devices, but they were rejected.


----------



## chicken steve (Mar 22, 2011)

don_resqcapt19 said:


> That doesn't have anything to do with the question as to if sustained arc is possible in the wiring system that the AFCIs are said to protect. If sustained damaging arcs were possible at 120 volts, how come we don't require GFP protection for over 1,000 amps on 208/120Y systems like we do for 480/277Y systems?


Because of Paschen's law

~CS~


----------



## Ultrafault (Dec 16, 2012)

Dennis Alwon said:


> Well how do you explain that certain vacuums, ceiling fans and electronics often cause afci to trip-- definitely not gfp


There is a difference between an arc caused by a opening connection, such as a dc brush, and an arc forming across air gap, which cs is always reminding us is impossible at 120 volts rms. Any arc at 120 volts requires mechanical movement to open and close the connection.


----------



## Joe Tedesco (Mar 25, 2007)

chicken steve said:


> Because of Paschen's law
> 
> ~CS~


All about AFCI's here's an early video!


http://youtu.be/OWJQqWjlQyo


----------



## Dennis Alwon (May 9, 2009)

macmikeman said:


> Yes, I've noticed them. They are apparently designed to trip whenever electrical current is detected flowing on the conductors .
> 
> 
> Or is it the old random number generator chip trick being employed Dennis?
> ...


Mac I have used afci made by Ge since they came out. In the beginning they had gfci and I had less trouble with them then when they took the gfp out of them. I have not had many issues with their product but have had quite a few problems with defective CH breakers.

Don you may be right about the afci not doing its job but I beg to differ with the engineers about the gfp causing most of the trips. 

A contractor I know had a major issue with a certain lv recessed can causing havoc on the afci-- they ended up sending some type of device (filter???) to be installed in each can so the afci did not trip-- I doubt that was from gfp but I admit I am no expert on this. 

My point was not that afci's work but that they do trip on afci signature wave more often than gfp-- imo and in my experience


----------



## chicken steve (Mar 22, 2011)

Joe Tedesco said:


> All about AFCI's here's an early video!
> 
> 
> http://youtu.be/OWJQqWjlQyo


The folks marketing this could_ care less_ how many people burn up in an electrical fire Joe

They've never had any valid substantiation for_ series _arc mitigation , and even if they _did_ UL themselves in '77 informs us that a Glowing Connection is by far and large the chief incendiary culprit it won't do a blessed thing for

~CS~


----------



## don_resqcapt19 (Jul 18, 2010)

Dennis Alwon said:


> ...
> 
> My point was not that afci's work but that they do trip on afci signature wave more often than gfp-- imo and in my experience


I have never installed one so I have no real world knowledge of why they trip. 

My reading of published information and talking with some of the engineers are the basis for my statement that most of the trips are GFP. 

As far as tripping from some interference, that should never be the problem of the installer or home owner. That should be the problem of the manufacturer, but I know it isn't in the real world, and won't be until some contractor with deep pockets forces the issue in court.


----------



## Joe Tedesco (Mar 25, 2007)

chicken steve said:


> The folks marketing this could_ care less_ how many people burn up in an electrical fire Joe
> 
> They've never had any valid substantiation for_ series _arc mitigation , and even if they _did_ UL themselves in '77 informs us that a Glowing Connection is by far and large the chief incendiary culprit it won't do a blessed thing for
> 
> ~CS~


Steve: I would support you as a Special Expert to serve on a NEC Committee (CMP 2) and others here who want to make changes.

Here are the NFPA rules look for the application.
http://www.nfpa.org/~/media/Files/C...ectory and forms/regsgovcommprojects_2013.pdf


----------



## chicken steve (Mar 22, 2011)

Joe Tedesco said:


> Steve: I would support you as a Special Expert to serve on a NEC Committee (CMP 2) and others here who want to make changes.
> 
> Here are the NFPA rules look for the application.
> http://www.nfpa.org/~/media/Files/C...ectory and forms/regsgovcommprojects_2013.pdf


Joe, inasmuch as i consider that high praise from an individual of your stature and standing , I must say that It's already been done, and by NEC engineer level participants

You should know there's a patent war on, one in which the very same people who made the video you've posted would , and nearly have,_ killed _to gain 

I know these people, so i can honestly attest to that

I would do great harm to the prestigious position of CMP participans, were i to be let off my leash.....

~CS~


----------



## Pete m. (Nov 19, 2011)

chicken steve said:


> I would do great harm to the prestigious position of CMP participans, were i to be let off my leash.....
> 
> ~CS~


I sincerely wish someone would un-leash you.

Pete


----------



## mgawat (Mar 3, 2012)

*Standard overcurrent breakers compatible with OBS AFCI*

As everyone here knows, the newest 210.21 (4) REQUIRES THAT THE OBS AFCI receptacles be installed with comparible standard overcurrent devices listed as a system combination AFCI> Does anyone know which of the standard overcurrent breakers out there currently are compatible with the OBS AFCI's?

I guess not!!!
In a nutshell this means that we list the OBC AFCI Receptacle/standard breaker combination with UL. A listing will then be available that says you use Leviton’s OBC AFC receptacle to meet code requirements when using the following breakers: xxxxx, xxxxx, xxxxxxx

Trick is…right now UL has yet to issue a standard that contains testing requirements to meet this code so therefore we cannot submit for a listing. As soon as the new standard is developed we’ll proceed with the listing.



Emanuel Ramondino
Applications Engineer

T: 631-812-6705
F: 800-832-9538
[email protected]

Leviton Manufacturing Co., Inc.
201 North Service Road
Melville, NY 11747
www.leviton.com



So, I guess the good news is that we don't have to wait for the overcurrent device manufacturers to decide to play ball and let in some competition...now, IF UL would just decide to get on the bandwagon........


----------



## mgawat (Mar 3, 2012)

http://www.joetedesco.org/JoeTedesco/Presentation1.pdf


Square D seems to have other ideas

after alot of extensive reading, it seems the whole contraversy comes down to available fault current(300a vs 500a)..The accepted fault current available for single family dwellings has widely and historically been accepted at 300A.
Now we have another study, sponsered by overdurrent device manufacturers, that claim the actual fault current available is 500A. This is the number the overcurrent manufactuers are using to sway Code making panel into demanding a listed system combination AFCI.

It seems that The UL rep did not buy that argument in the code making panel stating that once the 300a fault current is reproven for single family dwellings (worse case scenario), the rest of the data in the manufactuer's report would be faulty and the established magnetic trip ability of standard overcurrent devices with an additional ABS AFCI would be more than adequate to mitigate any arc fault problems likely to be encountered.

UL’s representative on the Code Panel voted affirmation on this action with the following comment:
“While we support the panel action, continued support is dependent upon review of additional
data that would confirm the availability of sufficient short circuit current capability at the panel of a
typical installation.
“The arc fault protection of the branch circuit will be provided by a system that includes an outlet
branch circuit AFCI, a circuit breaker having a known instantaneous trip current and a branch
circuit of a limited length and resistance to ensure that the fault current is sufficient to trip the
breaker during a parallel arcing fault at the installation point of the outlet branch circuit AFCI. The
latest UL Research Report4 takes into consideration the impact of the available current at the
panel on the acceptable length of the branch circuit home run to the first outlet. Calculation shows
that as the available current at the origin of the branch circuit varies, so does the allowable length
of the home run.
“Additional study is needed to provide data regarding the current available at the origin of the
branch circuit in a typical installation. From this data, the panel will be able to determine if
modification of the panel action should be considered at the ROC.”


----------



## chicken steve (Mar 22, 2011)

> UL Research Report4


can't seem to ring this up......

~CS~


----------



## Meadow (Jan 14, 2011)

mgawat said:


> http://www.joetedesco.org/JoeTedesco/Presentation1.pdf
> 
> 
> Square D seems to have other ideas
> ...



One question, why would they go through the trouble of having a system AFCI rather then just regular arc fault breakers? I keep seeing magnetic trip coming up for a period spanning 15 years in regard to AFCIs.


----------



## chicken steve (Mar 22, 2011)

Because the NEC was confronted by it's trip levels . 

The American OCPD's being rather higher than our Euro counterparts

WHY this is relevant involves a trip down theory avenue....

~CS~


----------



## Meadow (Jan 14, 2011)

chicken steve said:


> Because the NEC was confronted by it's trip levels .
> 
> The American OCPD's being rather higher than our Euro counterparts
> 
> ...



Id guess perhaps Europe being 230 volts might have something to do with it. However in my book that warrants further investigation being that arcing would be more of a concern at 230 volts yet no AFCIs.


----------



## chicken steve (Mar 22, 2011)

They use the term magnitude _vs._ ampacity Meadow. 

Viewed @ TRMS, the probability of a sustained '_arc'_ at their peak sine wave voltages becomes a far more viable technological leap

That said, on either turf, an arc , arcing , or electrical items than assume an arc other than that of mechanical means is the_ least_ of incendiary woes needing address

~CS~


----------



## Meadow (Jan 14, 2011)

chicken steve said:


> They use the term magnitude _vs._ ampacity Meadow.
> 
> Viewed @ TRMS, the probability of a sustained '_arc'_ at their peak sine wave voltages becomes a far more viable technological leap
> 
> ...



I think the lower mag trip values do more then just provide protection against shock during faults...


----------



## chicken steve (Mar 22, 2011)

meadow said:


> I think the lower mag trip values do more then just provide protection against shock during faults...


Obviously a lot of '_electrical bad news_' that could occur would Meadow

But for the sake of debate, lets say the OCPD manufactures had a change of heart overnight, deciding to produce those lower levels

Who ,or what, would not take it so well would be the Q.....

~CS~


----------



## Meadow (Jan 14, 2011)

chicken steve said:


> Obviously a lot of '_electrical bad news_' that could occur would Meadow
> 
> But for the sake of debate, lets say the OCPD manufactures had a change of heart overnight, deciding to produce those lower levels
> 
> ...



Unsure...


----------



## chicken steve (Mar 22, 2011)

I'm thinking all those cheap electrical appliances in big box stores Meadow

~CS~


----------



## Meadow (Jan 14, 2011)

chicken steve said:


> I'm thinking all those cheap electrical appliances in big box stores Meadow
> 
> ~CS~



Representatives from appliance manufactures have actually written proposals to the CMP for GFCI and AFCI requirements for household appliances.


Those proposals are actually a solution to this:

http://kitchenaidfire.com/


----------



## chicken steve (Mar 22, 2011)

> Have you had a fire, flood or injury with a toaster oven, coffee maker, clothes washer, clothes dryer, refrigerator, freezer, dehumidifier, range hood, food processor, mixer, grill, slow cooker, cooktop, trash compactor, stove, disposer, microwave, oven, air conditioner, water heater, made by Whirlpool, KitchenAid, Kenmore, Maytag, Jenn-air, Amana?


So the rationale is, if it's gfci/afci protected , any overheating will cease....~CS~:no:


----------



## Meadow (Jan 14, 2011)

chicken steve said:


> So the rationale is, if it's gfci/afci protected , any overheating will cease....~CS~:no:


At poor connections. A glowing connection good luck, the hope is that something will melt and short to ground. Reminds me of this attempt:


----------



## don_resqcapt19 (Jul 18, 2010)

I am not sure that the lower instantaneous trip would really help that much. There was some testing done by the manufacturer of a fault current testing device that showed that often you had less than 75 amps of available fault current at the receptacle outlet in a dwelling unit. His point being that the original branch circuit/feeder type AFCIs did not look for an arcing fault unless the current exceeded 75 amps.


----------



## Meadow (Jan 14, 2011)

don_resqcapt19 said:


> I am not sure that the lower instantaneous trip would really help that much. There was some testing done by the manufacturer of a fault current testing device that showed that often you had less than 75 amps of available fault current at the receptacle outlet in a dwelling unit. His point being that the original branch circuit/feeder type AFCIs did not look for an arcing fault unless the current exceeded 75 amps.



UL determined that fault current 125% of a breaker's magnetic trip value can successfully mitigate an arc fault. 

The problem is that we do not have disconnect time requirements or earth fault loop impedance testing so the only option was coming up with a magnetic trip based on a worst possible case scenario which was 75amps.

Part of the issue was knowing the lowest available fault current that might be at a dwelling's service which lead to 75amps.

The issue with 75amps over 150 is nuisance tripping, so the only way to get a working product that doesn't nuisance trip (ironically) was to look for both arcing and current rather then current alone.


----------



## Shockdoc (Mar 4, 2010)

it would be nice if several blazes and a few fatalities occurred from these appliances now under AFCI protection. 

it would only prove how ineffective AFCI breakers are and invite them into the full public eye of a lawsuit involving the hoax they offer.

Sent from my SM-G360P using Tapatalk


----------



## 480sparky (Sep 20, 2007)

Shockdoc said:


> it would be nice if several blazes and a few fatalities occurred from these appliances now under AFCI protection....
> 
> Sent from my SM-G360P using Tapatalk


You gonna volunteer?

Sent from MyOuthouse using ToiletPaper


----------



## Shockdoc (Mar 4, 2010)

480sparky said:


> You gonna volunteer?
> 
> Sent from MyOuthouse using ToiletPaper


no I figured you would.

Sent from my SM-G360P using Tapatalk


----------



## RIVETER (Sep 26, 2009)

I really don't understand why many people resist the code. It is the law. Don't second guess it. If you are concerned that an AFCI may cause problems,write a disclaimer in your bid. If you are afraid of losing a bid...don't bid. It's the law...AND electricians are making millions installing them..


----------



## Meadow (Jan 14, 2011)

RIVETER said:


> I really don't understand why many people resist the code. It is the law. Don't second guess it. If you are concerned that an AFCI may cause problems,write a disclaimer in your bid. If you are afraid of losing a bid...don't bid. It's the law...AND electricians are making millions installing them..



AFCIs are a complete scam, they dont do as claimed. To not question the law is to be ok with fraud.


----------



## MDShunk (Jan 7, 2007)

First they came for the So******ts, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a So******t.

Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out— 
Because I was not a Trade Unionist.

Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out— 
Because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for me—
and there was no one left to speak for me.


----------



## Meadow (Jan 14, 2011)

MDShunk said:


> First they came for the So******ts, and I did not speak out—
> Because I was not a So******t.
> 
> Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out—
> ...



That, and the fact the NEC will continue to mandate more gimmicks each code cycle.


----------



## chicken steve (Mar 22, 2011)

meadow said:


> UL determined that fault current 125% of a breaker's magnetic trip value can successfully mitigate an arc fault.
> 
> The problem is that we do not have disconnect time requirements or earth fault loop impedance testing so the only option was coming up with a magnetic trip based on a worst possible case scenario which was 75amps.
> 
> ...



So if the only _viable_ function of the AFCI is mimicking the RCD and IEC mag trip values, why can't i design 50-60A 2 pole AFCI's into split buss panels?

~CS~


----------



## Meadow (Jan 14, 2011)

chicken steve said:


> So if the only _viable_ function of the AFCI is mimicking the RCD and IEC mag trip values, why can't i design 50-60A 2 pole AFCI's into split buss panels?
> 
> ~CS~



The only viable function is the GFP (RCD), and thats it. The low mag trip is accomplished via electronics, and since that technology is far to primitive; actually reducing the incident energy at a short circuit is hit or miss. Certainly not worth nuisance tripping.

The irony is manufacturers have already addressed short circuits. In the 90s mag trip levels on single pole 15 and 20amp breakers went from 25x to around 10x, with QO and Homeline breakers at 5 to 7x. So in that regard all new breakers are pseudo arc faults breakers.

The split buss idea is not offered, however if it was offered it would reduce cost.


----------

