# Would you replace AFCI with Standard Breaker?



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

Under what circumstances would you replace an AFCI with a standard breaker, if any?

Some jurisdictions require AFCI's if a new SE or sub-panel is installed, in old wiring.

I've had the AFCI's tripping for no good reason and wonder what others are doing.


----------



## big2bird (Oct 1, 2012)

I have one in my home for a remodel. IF it ever starts giving me troubles, it's down the road. I wouldn't hesitate for a second. As for a client,..............dunno


----------



## Big John (May 23, 2010)

Semi-Ret Electrician said:


> ...I've had the AFCI's tripping for no good reason....


 What's the background there?


----------



## jefft110 (Jul 7, 2010)

My own house, yes. A customer's, no.


----------



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

Big John said:


> What's the background there?


It's at a Bed & Breakfast a couple AFCI's held OK for about 6 months but one now trips after a few minutes. The other when the garbage disposal is turned off ( >999 Meg ohms at 250V).


----------



## big2bird (Oct 1, 2012)

Semi-Ret Electrician said:


> It's at a Bed & Breakfast a couple AFCI's held OK for about 6 months but one now trips after a few minutes. The other when the garbage disposal is turned off ( >999 Meg ohms at 250V).


I tried one on my existing bedroom circuit for fun. It tripped when I turned on my surge protector for the computer. Needless to say, I removed it.


----------



## Big John (May 23, 2010)

big2bird said:


> I tried one on my existing bedroom circuit for fun. It tripped when I turned on my surge protector for the computer. Needless to say, I removed it.


 In your case I would look at a faulty surge protector that was tripping the GFP function of the AFCI: One of the MOVs between neutral and ground may have shorted closed. Plug it into a GFCI and see if that trips. 

In Semiretired's case, for a customer, I'd swap AFCIs. But I wouldn't remove them.


----------



## HARRY304E (Sep 15, 2010)

big2bird said:


> I tried one on my existing bedroom circuit for fun. It tripped when I turned on my surge protector for the computer. Needless to say, I removed it.


A friend of mine had a faulty surge protector strip his burnt down an AFCI may have saved his house.

Yes I wired the new one..:laughing:


----------



## big2bird (Oct 1, 2012)

Big John said:


> In your case I would look at a faulty surge protector that was tripping the GFP function of the AFCI: One of the MOVs between neutral and ground may have shorted closed. Plug it into a GFCI and see if that trips.


I'll try it, but it has lasted 60 years without it. I bet another 20 or so would work still fine.


----------



## big2bird (Oct 1, 2012)

HARRY304E said:


> A friend of mine had a faulty surge protector strip his burnt down an AFCI may have saved his house.


Funny you mention that. I have a buddy that is an insurence adjuster with FM. He says statistically, most electrical fires are attributed to multi strips.


----------



## Big John (May 23, 2010)

big2bird said:


> I'll try it, but it has lasted 60 years without it. I bet another 20 or so would work still fine.


 :blink: Eh? You've got a sixty year old surge suppressor?


----------



## big2bird (Oct 1, 2012)

Big John said:


> :blink: Eh? You've got a sixty year old surge suppressor?


Nope. But the house had 5 bulldog pushmatics, no main, when I moved in, in 1971.:laughing:


----------



## azgard (Nov 25, 2011)

HARRY304E said:


> A friend of mine had a *faulty surge protector strip his burnt down* an AFCI may have saved his house.
> 
> Yes I wired the new one..:laughing:


Wait what?:blink:


----------



## 480sparky (Sep 20, 2007)

Big John said:


> In your case I would look at a faulty surge protector that was tripping the GFP function of the AFCI: One of the MOVs between neutral and ground may have shorted closed. Plug it into a GFCI and see if that trips.
> 
> In Semiretired's case, for a customer, I'd swap AFCIs. But I wouldn't remove them.



Unofficially the 1,000,000th post per the Main Menu page. :whistling2:


----------



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

480sparky said:


> Unofficially the 1,000,000th post per the Main Menu page. :whistling2:


I demand a recount:laughing:


----------



## Big John (May 23, 2010)

480sparky said:


> Unofficially the 1,000,000th post per the Main Menu page. :whistling2:


 This makes me much prouder than it has any right to.


----------



## jefft110 (Jul 7, 2010)

See, I told you one of Cletis' aliases would hit the 1,000,000 post.:jester:


----------



## BBQ (Nov 16, 2010)

jefft110 said:


> See, I told you one of Cletis' aliases would hit the 1,000,000 post.:jester:


Ouch:laughing:


----------



## Big John (May 23, 2010)

jefft110 said:


> See, I told you one of Cletis' aliases would hit the 1,000,000 post.:jester:


  You and I: We's a-feuding.


----------



## drumnut08 (Sep 23, 2012)

Big John said:


> This makes me much prouder than it has any right to.


If this is true , can you at least pretend to be a slightly overweight older guy , who's often seen eating a donut looking over the shoulder of a young apprentice shaking your head uttering something like " this damn trade's going to hell in a hand basket " ! Sorry , that's how I pictured you , lol ! Congrats on the award ! What's the prize , free lifetime e membership to ET I hope !


----------



## jefft110 (Jul 7, 2010)

Big John said:


> You and I: We's a-feuding.


I love irony.:laughing:


----------



## Big John (May 23, 2010)

drumnut08 said:


> ...Can you at least pretend to be a slightly overweight older guy , who's often seen eating a donut looking over the shoulder of a young apprentice shaking your head uttering something like " this damn trade's going to hell in a hand basket "...


 Except for the "older guy" part, I can fill those shoes, don't worry. Where's the donuts?


----------



## drumnut08 (Sep 23, 2012)

Big John said:


> Except for the "older guy" part, I can fill those shoes, don't worry. Where's the donuts?


BBQ 's bringing them . Fresh ones from a bakery too , lol !


----------



## BBQ (Nov 16, 2010)

drumnut08 said:


> BBQ 's bringing them . Fresh ones from a bakery too , lol !


Johns into pink frosted with sprinkles. 

My idea of desert is another dinner.


----------



## Big John (May 23, 2010)

BBQ said:


> Johns into pink frosted with sprinkles....


 Remember this?











BBQ said:


> *If I could get a purple set for free it would be fun to show up for work in them*.


 Don't F with me, I take my donuts very seriously. :laughing:


----------



## chicken steve (Mar 22, 2011)

Semi-Ret Electrician said:


> Under what circumstances would you replace an AFCI with a standard breaker, if any?
> 
> Some jurisdictions require AFCI's if a new SE or sub-panel is installed, in old wiring.
> 
> I've had the AFCI's tripping for no good reason and wonder what others are doing.


This was a *huge* fight in Vermont 1 1/2 decades ago

afci's simply weren't engineered for old wiring, the shame of it all is that's exactly where they'd do the most good

~CS~


----------



## christrician (Aug 6, 2011)

Afci breakers and a decent amount of the codebook is about making money. We are stuck and have to play their wicked game.


----------



## backstay (Feb 3, 2011)

I have pulled some, but never code mandated. Only insurance mandated.


----------



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

christrician said:


> Afci breakers and a decent amount of the codebook is about making money. We are stuck and have to play their wicked game.


I tend to agree with you Chris. If we have to put them on long lengths of old wiring and they keep tripping we end up loosing with repeated call-backs and mad customers.

To make matters worse as CS showed in his video, they don't even seem to be working.


----------



## toolaholic (Aug 13, 2010)

*Afci's and low flush toilets, evil sisters ?*

Jan. 1st 1994 our Govt. required Us to start installing Low flush toilets on new
work. Problem was , The engineering was 1st. generation and ,Lacking. The actual results were more water use ! Solids either left skid marks or hung out
for a while ! Two flushes was the norm. Now We have toto with sana gloss non skid surface. and a 1.28 Gal fast and furious flush!Me thinks Toto should look
at it's Dumb Sister Mz. AFCI !


----------



## jefft110 (Jul 7, 2010)

Semi-Ret Electrician said:


> To make matters worse as CS showed in his video, they don't even seem to be working.


I missed it. What video?


----------



## Auselect (Dec 2, 2011)

toolaholic said:


> Jan. 1st 1994 our Govt. required Us to start installing Low flush toilets on new
> work. Problem was , The engineering was 1st. generation and ,Lacking. The actual results were more water use ! Solids either left skid marks or hung out
> for a while ! Two flushes was the norm. Now We have toto with sana gloss non skid surface. and a 1.28 Gal fast and furious flush!Me thinks Toto should look
> at it's Dumb Sister Mz. AFCI !


They have been using dual flush toilet in Australia for over two decades, I assume its the same as a low flush, just saying there is no problem with the engineering.
I get your comparison but I think AFCIs are not an engineering issue, same with the toilets, people are just not used to them and in a few years all these issues will be figured out.


----------



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

jefft110 said:


> I missed it. What video?


Still looking...where did you post it Steve?


----------



## Thunderbird811 (May 19, 2013)

If the electrical code in your area requires an AFCI, I wouldn't replace it with a standard breaker, especially at a client's building.


----------



## toolaholic (Aug 13, 2010)

Auselect said:


> They have been using dual flush toilet in Australia for over two decades, I assume its the same as a low flush, just saying there is no problem with the engineering.
> I get your comparison but I think AFCIs are not an engineering issue, same with the toilets, people are just not used to them and in a few years all these issues will be figured out.


I am also a plumber , so I 've lived with this situation. Our first Low flush toilets were a disaster ! Glad Yours were well engineered from the onset !
In time AFCI BREAKERS WILL WORK WELL WITH OLD WIRING .


----------



## Shockdoc (Mar 4, 2010)

I'm currently dealing with a house that's a perfect candidate for AFCIs, however I know there's no way to keep them on without tripping due to the crappy wiring there , there's also no way to squezze them into a 20 ckt 100 amp panel with about 40 ckts being pulled out of it. I'm fixing to give the customer a price on a complete rewire and service. Old cloth bx has polarity backwards and is fused at 20 amps all around.


----------



## Big John (May 23, 2010)

toolaholic said:


> ...In time AFCI BREAKERS WILL WORK WELL WITH OLD WIRING .


 I wonder if what you're seeing is a result of the ground-fault protection function that many of them have: Old wiring is more likely to be electrically-leaky and to have mixed neutrals or bootlegs, so the AFCIs trip. Not sure I'd fault the AFCIs for that.

What I would fault the AFCIs for is that 14 years after their introduction, when other technology has made fantastic leaps and bounds, AFCIs are still struggling with the basic proof-of-concept that they were designed for.

Even if AFCIs worked 100%, I am not convinced they would actually do much to prevent fires. And by all appearances, they're far from working correctly.


----------



## chicken steve (Mar 22, 2011)

Semi-Ret Electrician said:


> Still looking...where did you post it Steve?


one of a number out SRE...






~CS~


----------



## jefft110 (Jul 7, 2010)

chicken steve said:


> one of a number out SRE...
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Ive done the same test with the same results.


----------



## chicken steve (Mar 22, 2011)

Big John said:


> > I wonder if what you're seeing is a result of the ground-fault protection function that many of them have: Old wiring is more likely to be electrically-leaky and to have mixed neutrals or bootlegs, so the AFCIs trip. Not sure I'd fault the AFCIs for that.
> 
> 
> yes, in fact it's the only function it's_ really _got, not far of from the Euro differentials ....
> ...


----------



## chicken steve (Mar 22, 2011)

jefft110 said:


> Ive done the same test with the same results.


As did i Jeff

i didn't want to believe it at the time.....

~CS~


----------



## micromind (Aug 11, 2007)

Big John said:


> I wonder if what you're seeing is a result of the ground-fault protection function that many of them have: Old wiring is more likely to be electrically-leaky and to have mixed neutrals or bootlegs, so the AFCIs trip. Not sure I'd fault the AFCIs for that.
> 
> What I would fault the AFCIs for is that 14 years after their introduction, when other technology has made fantastic leaps and bounds, AFCIs are still struggling with the basic proof-of-concept that they were designed for.
> 
> Even if AFCIs worked 100%, I am not convinced they would actually do much to prevent fires. And by all appearances, they're far from working correctly.


The manufacturers have already millions invested in purchasing the legislation; they've accomplished their goal, why would they invest any more into making the product actually work?


----------



## chicken steve (Mar 22, 2011)

Best afci Q yet Micro :thumbsup:

two possible event horizons

one is being confronted by their own founders of the technology as to it's efficacy

the other is being confronted @ the patent office

~CS~


----------



## 220/221 (Sep 25, 2007)

Semi-Ret Electrician said:


> Under what circumstances would you replace an AFCI with a standard breaker?


If I wanted to.


----------



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

Big John said:


> *I wonder if what you're seeing is a result of the ground-fault protection function that many of them have: Old wiring is more likely to be electrically-leaky and to have mixed neutrals or bootlegs, so the AFCIs trip. Not sure I'd fault the AFCIs for that.*
> 
> What I would fault the AFCIs for is that 14 years after their introduction, when other technology has made fantastic leaps and bounds, AFCIs are still struggling with the basic proof-of-concept that they were designed for.
> 
> Even if AFCIs worked 100%, I am not convinced they would actually do much to prevent fires. And by all appearances, they're far from working correctly.


I believe you nailed it John, the CH-N's were tripping on 5 flashes
which meant a 30 MA ground fault. Since it just started the wet weather was probably the culprit (outside floods).

Many manufacturers are removing GFP from their AFCI's maybe our problems will slack off a bit.


----------



## micromind (Aug 11, 2007)

Semi-Ret Electrician said:


> Many manufacturers are removing GFP from their AFCI's maybe our problems will slack off a bit.


Isn't that interesting......remove the most expensive part to cut back on nuisance tripping. 

So what we're left with is a basic breaker with a 75 amp instantaneous trip unit instead of a 120 or 150. 

I guess anything over 75 amps now defines the 'signature of an electrical arc'. 

Just imagine the profit margins of these 'new' arc-fault breakers........

The next thing will be 'smart arc-fault breakers'. They won't have that pesky neutral pigtail, and they can be used on multiwire branch circuits. 

Corporate greed at its finest!


----------



## frenchelectrican (Mar 15, 2007)

chicken steve said:


> This was a *huge* fight in Vermont 1 1/2 decades ago
> 
> afci's simply weren't engineered for old wiring, the shame of it all is that's exactly where they'd do the most good
> 
> ~CS~


Bonjour Poulet Steve I know you mention about our European system so just hang on for the ride I will fill more details in lower comment part.



Semi-Ret Electrician said:


> I tend to agree with you Chris. If we have to put them on long lengths of old wiring and they keep tripping we end up loosing with repeated call-backs and mad customers.
> 
> To make matters worse as CS showed in his video, they don't even seem to be working.


Bonjour SRE., I have look at PS's video and some reason the sensor is not working or calberated properly at all. But I know once the voltage surge go thru it will fry the AFCI sensor pretty fast.



Big John said:


> I wonder if what you're seeing is a result of the ground-fault protection function that many of them have: Old wiring is more likely to be electrically-leaky and to have mixed neutrals or bootlegs, so the AFCIs trip. Not sure I'd fault the AFCIs for that.
> 
> What I would fault the AFCIs for is that 14 years after their introduction, when other technology has made fantastic leaps and bounds, AFCIs are still struggling with the basic proof-of-concept that they were designed for.
> 
> Even if AFCIs worked 100%, I am not convinced they would actually do much to prevent fires. And by all appearances, they're far from working correctly.


Bonjour Big John.,

The major issue on both side of pond is old wiring there will be a cross connected netural and bad earthing or sans earthing protection at all.

A simple megger test will show it right away where the issue will show up.

Now for the Americianie AFCI device really IMO they are much worst than our European RCD's are.

I never figure out why the breaker manufacters are holding it back for so long unless they did tie something up with this kind of mess.

I did got one of the AFCI breakers one of my freind send to moi and I did ran couple test and it really don't frazze me much it only work about 50% of the time.

But the biggest question is did the UL came up with reverised testing producures related to the AFCI 's ?

Merci,
Marc


----------



## macmikeman (Jan 23, 2007)

This ain't fair. I would have been the one millionth poster on the forum, but I was out surfing at the time. Damn it Jim! I'm a doctor, not a


----------



## chicken steve (Mar 22, 2011)

frenchelectrican said:


> > Bonjour Poulet Steve I know you mention about our European system so just hang on for the ride I will fill more details in lower comment part.
> 
> 
> Merci beaucoup monsieur FrenchOne.
> ...


----------



## Shockdoc (Mar 4, 2010)

They (NEC) need to put something in it to sell their now worthless books, so why not profit from the manufacturers too while doing so.


----------



## BBQ (Nov 16, 2010)

micromind said:


> Isn't that interesting......remove the most expensive part to cut back on nuisance tripping.
> 
> So what we're left with is a basic breaker with a 75 amp instantaneous trip unit instead of a 120 or 150.
> 
> I guess anything over 75 amps now defines the 'signature of an electrical arc'.


That is not true at all, the AFCI part, the part that is supposed to be able to see an arc will still be in place. Only the ground fault part is being removed.


----------



## chicken steve (Mar 22, 2011)

Once the GF _listing_ is removed it's essentially worthless BBQ

~CS~


----------



## Shockdoc (Mar 4, 2010)

I noticed that they still have the neutral tail but the breakers will still work if the load neutral is directly attached to the bar. The only thing I like is GE now incorporates the SqD red trip eye to their AFCI breakers.


----------



## toolaholic (Aug 13, 2010)

*Why not*

A LEMMON LAW FOR AFCI BREAKERS ! If Manuf. start eating these ,change will come fast.


----------



## Big John (May 23, 2010)

We should seriously start collecting substantiation to get these things removed. That would be the only way it would ever happen. "Here's a case where they didn't work. Here's a case where they caused nuisance tripping. Here are the statistics on glowing connection fires." Prove the technology is not up to par.


----------



## sbrn33 (Mar 15, 2007)

Do you guys really have that much trouble with these? In Nebraska we have been installing these from the very beginning and rarely do I seem to have any trouble. When I have it has normally been a neutral wiring problem or something like that, that should be fixed anyway.


----------



## Thunderbird811 (May 19, 2013)

Before everybody starts blaming the AFCI, you have to prove that there isn't a bad connection someplace in the circuit.


----------



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

The CH website has three good articles on their AFCI's (by John Shea and Engel,Clarey and Doring)

Shea concludes "two modes of overheating have been identified-glowing connections and over surface char". He seems to have isolated the problem pretty well but doesn't say exactly how the CH AFCI will trip.

He and all the others speak of fire causing waveforms stored away in their chips looking for correlation with the measured waveforms. And therein lies the problem UL 1699 has left the fix up to the manufacturers and we have no way to test for it, other than pushing their "test" button.

We can perform megger tests but a long run will always test worse than a short run and will be perfectly fine. A new spool of 12 or 14 Romex will always test lousy, not to mention the hidden shorts and opens mention lately in ET.

I wonder if the CPSC or the NEMA Molded case Task Force have revised data that shows a significant reduction in electrical fires due to AFCI implementation, as they predicted.

Other than statistics, how can one prove a device prevented something from happening? And, we all know what statisticians are famous for. 

It seems every fire is an electrical fire these days.


----------



## frenchelectrican (Mar 15, 2007)

chicken steve said:


> frenchelectrican said:
> 
> 
> > Merci beaucoup monsieur FrenchOne.
> ...


----------



## frenchelectrican (Mar 15, 2007)

Semi-Ret Electrician said:


> The CH website has three good articles on their AFCI's (by John Shea and Engel,Clarey and Doring)
> 
> Shea concludes "two modes of overheating have been identified-glowing connections and over surface char". He seems to have isolated the problem pretty well but doesn't say exactly how the CH AFCI will trip.
> 
> ...


My reply in Bleu.

As the last statement you mention that about true almost every where no matter where ya at.

The hard part is try to compare the RCD system which we are using in the European vs what the AFCI are try to do in USA side but who win at what cost?

And I do not know if the AFCI manufacters did study the European system and try to improve their AFCI's

That something I will like to see how they can slove the AFCI plage.

Merci,
Marc


----------



## chicken steve (Mar 22, 2011)

frenchelectrican said:


> chicken steve said:
> 
> 
> > My reply in bleu and you did bring up couple good points but the key question is the manufacters are paying attetion to this ? that part I do not know if they will reply or not but if they do I will be zut'ed.
> ...


----------



## robnj772 (Jan 15, 2008)

sbrn33 said:


> Do you guys really have that much trouble with these? In Nebraska we have been installing these from the very beginning and rarely do I seem to have any trouble. When I have it has normally been a neutral wiring problem or something like that, that should be fixed anyway.


Yes. I can't believe they are still crying about the breakers.


----------



## chicken steve (Mar 22, 2011)

robnj772 said:


> Yes. I can't believe they are still crying about the breakers.


You'd be cryin' if someone sold you a product that _did not do_ what it claimed Rob

~CS~


----------



## chicken steve (Mar 22, 2011)

Big John said:


> We should seriously start collecting substantiation to get these things removed. That would be the only way it would ever happen. "Here's a case where they didn't work. Here's a case where they caused nuisance tripping. Here are the statistics on glowing connection fires." Prove the technology is not up to par.





SRE; said:


> I wonder if the CPSC or the NEMA Molded case Task Force have revised data that shows a significant reduction in electrical fires due to AFCI implementation, as they predicted.


Within the last decade, 210.12 has assumed the most detailed rop's in cmp-2's history fellas. The substantiation for series arc mitigation to be validated , or to focus on glowing connections has been repetitive

Our electrical forensics , however, have never been exact. Anyone who knows or has been a FF can usually attest to this. Last time i delved into the issue, it was another unfunded fed org , which receives back maybe 1/2 of the queries it issues nationally

Bottom line, being dependent on FD electrical forensics in America , in either the promotion , investigation , or future validation of afci technology is a moot point

~CS~


----------



## chicken steve (Mar 22, 2011)

robnj772 said:


> Yes. I can't believe they are still crying about the breakers.



I'm going to wire _your _ 2nd home in Vermont

My state code dictates approx 30 out of 40 circuits in your panel will be afci's

I'm going to charge you approx $1500 for the afci's _alone_ 

When you _cry _about this, i'm going to inform you that afci technology offers a level of electrical protection required by the _'powers that be'_

Unfortunately for you, this product will not perform to the marketing intent it projects

You'll probably _never_ realize this, but lets say for purposes of debate that the FD has determined the source of your house fire was _electrical_

My Q to you is, _who's_ liable?

~CS~


----------



## Big John (May 23, 2010)

robnj772 said:


> Yes. I can't believe they are still crying about the breakers.


 I'll cry until I become convinced they work. 

I almost never touch AFCIs but it still bugs the hell out of me that it appears they were railroaded into code.


----------



## gold (Feb 15, 2008)

jefft110 said:


> Ive done the same test with the same results.


I don't know why I quoted you but regarding the video CS posted it looks to me as if its wired with both neutrals going to the neutral bar. 


Check 1:22 in the Video


----------



## robnj772 (Jan 15, 2008)

Big John said:


> I'll cry until I become convinced they work.
> 
> I almost never touch AFCIs but it still bugs the hell out of me that it appears they were railroaded into code.


So you don't put them in and just jumped on the bandwagon?

I have put in hundreds of them and the only time I ever had a problem it was a legit problem.

Neutrals mixed, etc etc etc.


----------



## robnj772 (Jan 15, 2008)

chicken steve said:


> I'm going to wire your 2nd home in Vermont
> 
> My state code dictates approx 30 out of 40 circuits in your panel will be afci's
> 
> ...


The Code is the code, oh boo hooo you have to pay extra for something required by code. 

It's not coming out of your pocket, the customer pays for it.

The breaker is designed to REDUCE the risk of fire, not make the structure fireproof.

Some guys are putting them in and making money and other guys are online all day crying and posting obscure articles about what MIGHT happen.

WHAAAAAA whaaaaaaaaaa go to work and quit crying.


----------



## Big John (May 23, 2010)

robnj772 said:


> So you don't put them in and just jumped on the bandwagon...?


 Nothing to do with a bandwagon: With the exception of one manufacturer demonstration, I've never seen anything to suggest AFCIs provide any level of protection greater than would be provided by a regular old GFCI breaker.


> ...I have put in hundreds of them and the only time I ever had a problem it was a legit problem....


 I'll keep that in mind, just like I keep it in mind when other folks say they have had problems.


----------



## aftershockews (Dec 22, 2012)

robnj772 said:


> The Code is the code, oh boo hooo you have to pay extra for something required by code.
> 
> It's not coming out of your pocket, the customer pays for it.
> 
> ...


Designed for an actually performing for are 2 different paths.

I have put in many AFCI breakers and have not had an issue, BUT, I have had issues where the AFCI tripped because of another circuit which share the same leg of the panel. Moving either circuit's breaker to an opposite leg resolved the issue.

Explain why I would have to do this?


----------



## micromind (Aug 11, 2007)

BBQ said:


> That is not true at all, the AFCI part, the part that is supposed to be able to see an arc will still be in place. Only the ground fault part is being removed.


I could easily be missing something here; I don't install very many AFCIs, and the only one I tested was several years ago. I doubt if your basic AFCI has a magic electronic device that can detect an actual electrical arc in progress. 

My understanding of AFCIs is that they are a basic breaker with an instantaneous trip unit set at around 75 amps instead of 120 - 150, plus they have a 30 ma differential type ground fault trip unit. Nothing else.

Now maybe I shouldn't have stated a 'magic' arc detector, because they do indeed exist. The Schwietzer 321 line protection relay comes to mind. It can detect an actual electrical arc, and not only trip a breaker, but also give the approximate distance from the relay to the arc. 

This relay is 19" wide, about 6" high, and about 10" deep. It costs around $5,000, and is used in medium and high voltage transmission and distribution systems. 

While the 321 does more than just detect arcs, I seriously doubt if the arc detection circuitry would fit in a standard 20 amp circuit breaker. And even if it did, it'd cost way more than a typical AFCI. 

But again, the above is my opinion, and may not necessarily be fact. AFCIs might have come a long way from the one I tested a few years ago. 

BTW, the AFCI that I tested absolutely failed to detect an actual electrical arc.


----------



## chicken steve (Mar 22, 2011)

The afci breaker manufacturers original pitch was that the technology was already utilized in the HV industry Micro

Although i haven't heard that reference in quite some time, thanks to your post, we now know what they were refering to

~CS~


----------



## chicken steve (Mar 22, 2011)

Goldagain said:


> I don't know why I quoted you but regarding the video CS posted it looks to me as if its wired with both neutrals going to the neutral bar.
> 
> 
> Check 1:22 in the Video



perhaps a note from the afci's inventor George Spencer would be helpful

do note MH's response....

~CS~


----------



## toolaholic (Aug 13, 2010)

*This post brings to mind*

" Unsafe at any speed " Us old timers will remember this !


----------



## chicken steve (Mar 22, 2011)

robnj772 said:


> The Code is the code, oh boo hooo you have to pay extra for something required by code.
> 
> It's not coming out of your pocket, the customer pays for it.
> 
> ...


Nice dodge Rob

Yanno, it's been a long time since i was a FF, best i can do @ my age is cheer them on in scanner land

But you want to know the worst part of that biz?

It's when the chief hands over the remains to the owners

Most of the time the chief would walk along with them

And there was always this look on their face(s) , as they viewed their belongings, their whole life in little charred bits & pieces

I've seen my share along with any other FF that's done his/her time, right on up to a burnt orphanage just before xmas

Lotta _heartache _in that biz Rob, you want something to _cry_ about? go sign up

Me, i don't like the idea of selling anyone a proverbial empty fire extinguisher , and telling them they're safe with it

In fact, i really think there should be  fast lane to Dante's lowest level for sorts that do 

~CS~


----------



## chicken steve (Mar 22, 2011)

toolaholic said:


> " Unsafe at any speed " Us old timers will remember this !










~CS~


----------



## gold (Feb 15, 2008)

Big John said:


> Nothing to do with a bandwagon: With the exception of one manufacturer demonstration, I've never seen anything to suggest AFCIs provide any level of protection greater than would be provided by a regular old GFCI breaker. I'll keep that in mind, just like I keep it in mind when other folks say they have had problems.


I disagree I've installed a few in older homes that have tripped as soon as i installed them and everytime there has been either some damage or a crossed neutral. They obviously provide some level of protection.



chicken steve said:


> perhaps a note from the afci's inventor George Spencer would be helpful
> 
> do note MH's response....
> 
> ~CS~


No that doesn't help at all. 

Stop being so philosophical the video you posted that shows the afci not tripping in response to an arc fault the afci breaker wasn't wired according to specs. The results are moot.

Both the Neutral conductor from the breaker and the neutral from the branch ckt were landed on the neutral bar.

Look at the Video 1:22


----------



## frenchelectrican (Mar 15, 2007)

chicken steve said:


> perhaps a note from the afci's inventor George Spencer would be helpful
> 
> do note MH's response....
> 
> ~CS~


Poulet Steve.,

I did read that link and it was pretty instering comment on that related to the AFCI breakers

Merci,
Marc


----------



## Big John (May 23, 2010)

Goldagain said:


> I disagree I've installed a few in older homes that have tripped as soon as i installed them and everytime there has been either some damage or a crossed neutral. They obviously provide some level of protection....


 I've troubleshot a number of those, too, and it was always an issue related to the ground-fault protection most of them provide. That's what I meant by comparing them to GFCIs.


----------



## BBQ (Nov 16, 2010)

micromind said:


> I could easily be missing something here; I don't install very many AFCIs, and the only one I tested was several years ago. Nut I doubt if your basic AFCI has a magic electronic device that can detect an actual electrical arc in progress.
> 
> My understanding of AFCIs is that they are a basic breaker with an instantaneous trip unit set at around 75 amps instead of 120 - 150, plus they have a 30 ma differential type ground fault trip unit. Nothing else.
> 
> .


Let me start off by saying that I do not know if AFCI technology works, I sure have my doubts and I have never installed one. 

That aside, your understanding of them comes up a bit short. They do in fact have electronics that are supposed to be able to pick up the signature of an arc. 

Those electronics are the AFCI part of an AFCI, there is no change to the instanious trip setting. They did have to make the electronics work at lower current ratings and I am sure that was what you heard and mistook for the instanious setting. 

Again I make no claims they work, my only point was they are not 'removing the expensive part of the breaker to eliminate nuisance tripping'. Take away all the GFCI part and you will still have a breaker full of electronics. 

Also we are generalizing as all the makers are doing things differently and keeping their methods proprietory.


----------



## BBQ (Nov 16, 2010)

Big John said:


> I'll cry until I become convinced they work.
> 
> I almost never touch AFCIs but it still bugs the hell out of me that it appears they were railroaded into code.


Crying does nothing, there are people at this forum (not you John) who act like their forum crying is a noble thing on par with the Boston Tea Party. 


Then you have CS who claims he leaves them out until the inspector forces him to put them in. His reason being is he does not want to be liable for installing AFCIs that may not work as promised. That is some silly crap and I am not sure I believe him about it. 


I too think they were railroaded into the code and that does bug me but oh well. I have bigger issues in my life to worry about and I am not going to beat my head agaist a wall over something I cannot possibly have any influence over. When I do a job that requires them I will install them.


----------



## chicken steve (Mar 22, 2011)

well BBQ

one would think, that in a trade such as ours, who's top dogs take every electrical issue to the _nth _degree, that the specific workings of afci technology would have been hashed out as well.

and so the saga has resulting in two camps, those who continue to do _exactly_ what they've done since their apprenticeship, investigate, ask, delve into whatever specifics are available, and share them with our peers 

and those who just do what they're told _regardless_ of controversy

I see no reason why one faction should get down on the other, but if you're fishin' for one, allow me to tell you the story of _'the good germans' _sometime

I think you'll find the perspective enlightening

~CS~


----------



## jppelec (Oct 13, 2011)

Before you do something STUPID and remove the AFCI breaker and replace it with a regular breaker go to Seimens website and learn how to trouble shoot AFCI protected circuits,they also make a tester for trouble shooting you can buy it on Home Depots web site. Mike Holt also has info, problems with them tripping is 99.999999999999% either the wiring or a sloppy electrician . Learn how it works and you can trouble shoot it.


----------



## robnj772 (Jan 15, 2008)

chicken steve said:


> Nice dodge Rob
> 
> Yanno, it's been a long time since i was a FF, best i can do @ my age is cheer them on in scanner land
> 
> ...


Since I stayed away from the brown acid can someone translate this for me?


----------



## Focker (Dec 8, 2012)

quote=robnj772;1005644]Since I stayed away from the brown acid can someone translate this for me?[/quote]




[


----------



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

When I worked in R&D, Argone National Lab developed a Corrolation Flowmeter , for us, which recorded the acoustical noise signature developed by fluid flow upstream and looked for it again at a fixed distance downstream. When it saw the signature again it looked at the elapsed time and told us the flowrate.

Why not record hundreds of waveforms which are known to signal a fire (or glowing connection) is about to occur and trip the breaker?

Since the device was Federally funded the technology is available to anyone for $1.


----------



## big2bird (Oct 1, 2012)

Semi-Ret Electrician said:


> When I worked in R&D, Argone National Lab developed a Corrolation Flowmeter , for us, which recorded the acoustical noise signature developed by fluid flow upstream and looked for it again at a fixed distance downstream. When it saw the signature again it looked at the elapsed time and told us the flowrate.
> 
> Why not record hundreds of waveforms which are known to signal a fire (or glowing connection) is about to occur and trip the breaker?
> 
> Since the device was Federally funded the technology is available to anyone for $1.


No one wants $40,000 SE panels on their house.


----------



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

big2bird said:


> No one wants $40,000 SE panels on their house.


What has been the cost of AFCI's to date?

Do they perform as advertised?

Only the first one should be expensive.


----------



## gold (Feb 15, 2008)

robnj772 said:


> Since I stayed away from the brown acid can someone translate this for me?


No :no:

Typically tho his responses have little to do with the topic anyway.


----------



## chicken steve (Mar 22, 2011)

Semi-Ret Electrician said:


> > When I worked in R&D, Argone National Lab developed a Corrolation Flowmeter , for us, which recorded the acoustical noise signature developed by fluid flow upstream and looked for it again at a fixed distance downstream. When it saw the signature again it looked at the elapsed time and told us the flowrate.
> 
> 
> I'm not getting much on this Corrolation Flowmeter that's electrical SER
> ...


----------



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

Steve, 
They used ultrasonic transmitters and receivers. Each pipe had imperfect internals which created _unique_ waveforms, at each instant in time. 

Much like tossing a ball in a flowing stream and seeing how long it takes to get downstream. The corrolation program is the only thing we would need, since we're not interested in anything else.


It would be really simple to record voltage and current waveforms (or use existing data) of known "fire starters". Store them in the AFCI breakers and if they recognize similar waveforms, then trip the breaker. 


I'll bet they would not cost any more than todays AFCI's or be any larger.


Maybe I'll just slap one together this weekend if you think there might be a market:laughing:


----------



## acadianaelectric (Jul 17, 2012)

*Archfaults*

As per code they are required. As for me I HATE them. If you install a new panel in an old house, They will never work. You have to re- wire the intire house to make them work corrcectly. You Can not share a neutral with an archfault breaker.


----------



## acadianaelectric (Jul 17, 2012)

Is this site for knowlege are B.S. Must be union hands.


----------



## robnj772 (Jan 15, 2008)

acadianaelectric said:


> Is this site for knowlege are B.S. Must be union hands.


:lol:


----------



## PFNELKAK (Apr 16, 2013)

I very seldom get the time to
read any of the topics(threads)
that are ongoing. This one,to me,
is very important,especially the
claims that the powers to be can
say its a do all breaker. Nothing
is ever close to being perfect.
I very much enjoy the back &
forth on a subject, for the more
info. one brings to the round
table, the more informed you
are in handling the problem
the next time. Ones personal
experiences are just as important
as the next guys.
A few ideas that might help,
which I' ve done, are; making
sure you use a combo. afci. ;
take out the curl in the factory
neutral; the breaker, see cs's
pic., has a coil in it which can
also pick up other strong magnetic
fields, such as placing all your
afci breakers together. Other
nucence trippers are ground wires
touching neutrals at outlet devices,
on romex jobs- nailing a staple
too hard has cost me time fishing
wires up or down finished walls.
Just a few more ideas to put on
the table.


----------



## Focker (Dec 8, 2012)

PFNELKAK said:


> I very seldom get the time to
> read any of the topics(threads)
> that are ongoing. This one,to me,
> is very important,especially the
> ...


 
Why do you type your sentences so narrow ?


----------



## PFNELKAK (Apr 16, 2013)

iphone-they have a tendency to drop the last few words onto the
next line just before you go the next line.


----------



## PFNELKAK (Apr 16, 2013)

habit- now


----------



## chicken steve (Mar 22, 2011)

Semi-Ret Electrician said:


> Steve,
> They used ultrasonic transmitters and receivers. Each pipe had imperfect internals which created _unique_ waveforms, at each instant in time.
> 
> Much like tossing a ball in a flowing stream and seeing how long it takes to get downstream. The corrolation program is the only thing we would need, since we're not interested in anything else.
> ...



_welp_, more power to you if you can pull it off SRE....:thumbsup:

~CS~


----------



## chicken steve (Mar 22, 2011)

PFNELKAK said:


> A few ideas that might help,
> which I' ve done, are; making
> sure you use a combo. afci. ;
> take out the curl in the factory
> ...


We don't uncurl many gfci pigtails, in fact i can't recall any one time in the last 3 decades where there were any manufacturers , inspectors, or collective tradesmen insisting on it....

You make my point PFN , inasmuch as i'm not trying to pick on you here, snake oil marketing spawns fairytale fixes like these.....~CS~


----------



## chicken steve (Mar 22, 2011)

acadianaelectric said:


> You Can not share a neutral with an archfault breaker.


 because it just won't fit in yer shoe? :jester:








~CS~


----------



## CraigV (May 12, 2011)

Semi-Ret Electrician said:


> When I worked in R&D, Argone National Lab developed a Corrolation Flowmeter , for us, which recorded the acoustical noise signature developed by fluid flow upstream and looked for it again at a fixed distance downstream. When it saw the signature again it looked at the elapsed time and told us the flowrate.
> 
> *Why not record hundreds of waveforms which are known to signal a fire (or glowing connection) is about to occur and trip the breaker?*
> 
> Since the device was Federally funded the technology is available to anyone for $1.


What you wrote in bold was my understanding of how the electronics work. Unless I was dreaming it I recall several weeks ago someone posting (maybe it was on Mike Holt's) about how if a specific device was causing an afci to nuisance trip, reporting it to the afci manufacturer would give them the opportunity to add that device's signature to the afci's internal database of waveforms. 

However, a glowing connection doesn't have a waveform, or does it?


----------



## terry6314 (Oct 24, 2011)

if there is an afci in there LEAVE IT if it is tripping there is a reason for it tripping. 
find out the problem. 
we have found bad terminations in j boxes. 
receptacles that have been stabbed in the back. 
the afci is smarter than we are when it comes to arcs & shorts. 
THEY WORK 
if any circuit is being extended or added it needs the afci. check the NEC 
they will save lives.


----------



## chicken steve (Mar 22, 2011)

CraigV said:


> What you wrote in bold was my understanding of how the electronics work. Unless I was dreaming it I recall several weeks ago someone posting (maybe it was on Mike Holt's) about how if a specific device was causing an afci to nuisance trip, reporting it to the afci manufacturer would give them the opportunity to add that device's signature to the afci's internal database of waveforms.
> 
> However, a glowing connection doesn't have a waveform, or does it?


sounds like _somebody's_ dreaming.... ~CS~


----------



## Big John (May 23, 2010)

CraigV said:


> ...However, a glowing connection doesn't have a waveform, or does it?


 No, it's no different than current passing through a space heater. The AFCI people argue that glowing connections eventually progress to an arcing fault, and should trip. Nevermind that these things don't seem to trip on series arc faults, it also seems completely possible to me that glowing connections result in fires before even getting to that stage.


----------



## Jlarson (Jun 28, 2009)

Big John said:


> No, it's no different than current passing through a space heater. The AFCI people argue that glowing connections eventually progress to an arcing fault, and should trip. Nevermind that these things don't seem to trip on series arc faults, it also seems completely possible to me that glowing connections result in fires before even getting to that stage.


I think you have better chances of a glowing/melting connection going out on ground fault then hoping it will start arcing.


----------

