# NEC 2014 AFCI and GFCI changes



## Meadow (Jan 14, 2011)

*Arc-Fault Circuit-Interrupter Protection – Dwelling Units 
Significance 
*Whole-house protection from the effects of electric arc faults has been the goal of many entities, including the Consumer Products Safety Commission (CPSC). With expanded arc-fault circuit-interrupter (AFCI) requirements in the 2014 _NEC_, we’re almost there. 
*Analysis 
*The requirement for AFCI protection for 120-volt, single phase, 15- and 20-ampere branch circuits supplying outlets or devices in dwelling units has been expanded to include all such circuits in kitchens and laundry areas. Many dishwasher fires have been reported, so the dishwasher circuit is a reasonable addition to the AFCI requirement. Kitchen appliance circuits, circuits for food waste disposers, lighting circuits, etc. are included in the expanded protection. The AFCI protection for the applicable laundry circuit(s) includes circuits that supply lighting and receptacle outlets in laundry rooms or laundry areas. The only 120-volt, 15- and 20-ampere branch circuits that are exempt from AFCI protection are those that supply outlets in bathrooms, garages, outdoors, and basements, except for basement rooms included in the list of rooms or areas in 210.12(A) requiring AFCI protection (e.g., laundry outlets in a basement require AFCI protection). Foyers are rooms or areas similar to hallways and should be wired to comply with the AFCI requirement. 
The 2014 _NEC _requires all AFCI devices to be installed in a _readily accessible _location. This will facilitate resetting and testing. Testing should be performed monthly. An AFCI receptacle installed beneath a kitchen sink cabinet to supply a food waste disposer does not meet the definition of _readily accessible_, "Capable of being reached quickly for operation, renewal, or inspections without requiring those to whom ready access is requisite to climb over or remove obstacles…." AFCI circuit breakers are readily accessible by compliance with existing 240.24(A), which requires overcurrent devices to be readily accessible. This provision for ready access applies to all subsections of 210.12, including new subsection (C), Dormitory Units. 
The 2014 _NEC _presents six options/methods for accomplishing AFCI protection. The methods can be viewed as a _systems _approach to compliance. The combinations of prescribed devices and wiring methods are deemed to provide AFCI protection equal to that of combination type AFCIs, detecting and mitigating both series and parallel arc faults. 
Outlet branch circuit (OBC) type AFCIs are becoming available. These receptacles along with combination type and branch/feeder type AFCI circuit breakers are the AFCI components used in the systems approach to AFCI protection of branch circuits. These three devices are pictured on the following page, emphasizing the marking of the AFCI type. 
Each of the six options for AFCI protection is described on subsequent pages. Following the description, the system is shown in pictorial form to assist in understanding the details of the requirements. 
Copyright 2013 by Patrick S. Ouillette, P.E. 18 2 10.12(A) Branch Circuits 2014 NEC 
Siemens Q115AFC 15-amp, Siemens Q115AF 15-amp, 1 pole, 
1 pole, 120-volt combination 120-volt branch/feeder AFCI 
type AFCI 
Leviton AFTR1 SmartlockPro®, 15-amp, 125-volt 
outlet branch circuit AFCI receptacle 
Copyright 2013 by Patrick S. Ouillette, P.E. 19 2 10.12(A) Branch Circuits 2014 NEC 
These are the options for providing AFCI protection: 
*(1) *A listed combination type AFCI installed to provide protection for the entire branch circuit. There are no additional requirements when this method is used. The system is pictured below. 
Standard receptacle outletsNM cable or other wiring method permitted by the NECCombination type AFCI breaker in panel 
*(2) *A listed branch/feeder type AFCI installed at the origin of the branch circuit in combination with a listed outlet branch circuit (OBC) type AFCI installed at the first outlet box on the circuit. The first outlet box in the circuit shall be marked to indicate that it is the first outlet of the circuit. The system is pictured below. 
Outlet branch- circuit type AFCI NM cable or other wiring method permitted by the NECBranch/feeder type AFCI breaker in panelStandard receptacle outletMarked to indicate it is the first outlet on the circuit 
*(3) *A listed supplemental arc protection circuit breaker installed at the origin of the branch circuit in combination with a listed outlet branch circuit (OBC) type AFCI installed at the first outlet box on the circuit, provided the following conditions are met: (a) the branch circuit wiring is continuous from the overcurrent device to the OBC type AFCI, (b) the maximum length of the branch circuit wiring from the overcurrent device to the AFCI device does not exceed 50 ft for a 14 AWG conductor or 70 ft for a 12 AWG conductor, and (c) the first outlet box in the circuit is marked to indicate that it is the first outlet of the circuit. The supplemental arc protection circuit breaker concept is being developed by the circuit breaker industry specifically for this application, based on selected requirements from UL 1699, _Standard for Arc-Fault Circuit-Interrupters_. 
The system is pictured below. 
Copyright 2013 by Patrick S. Ouillette, P.E. 20 2 10.12(A) Branch Circuits 2014 NEC 
Outlet branch- circuit type AFCI NM cable or other wiring method permitted by the NECStandard receptacle outletMarked to indicate it is the first outlet on the circuitContinuous wiring,70 ft max. for 12 AWG,50 ft max. for 14 AWG Supplemental arc protection circuit breaker 
*(4) *A listed branch circuit overcurrent protective device (e.g., a standard circuit breaker) installed at the origin of the branch circuit in combination with a listed outlet branch circuit (OBC) type AFCI installed at the first outlet box on the circuit, provided the following conditions are met: (a) the branch circuit wiring is continuous from the overcurrent device to the OBC type AFCI, (b) the maximum length of the branch circuit wiring from the overcurrent device to the AFCI device does not exceed 50 ft for a 14 AWG conductor or 70 ft for a 12 AWG conductor, (c) the first outlet box in the circuit is marked to indicate that it is the first outlet of the circuit, and (d) the combination of the branch circuit overcurrent device and the AFCI receptacle is identified as meeting the requirements for a "System Combination" type AFCI and is listed as such. This option introduces the concept of certifying a branch circuit overcurrent device and OBC type AFCI in specific system combinations that have been tested and certified to comply with UL 1699 using a new outline of investigation. After this outline is developed, it will be published as UL Subject 1699C.The system is pictured below. 
Outlet branch- circuit type AFCINM cable or other wiring method permitted by the NECStandard receptacle outletMarked to indicate it is the first outlet on the circuitContinuous wiring,70 ft max. for 12 AWG,50 ft max. for 14 AWG Standard circuit breakerThe combination of the circuit breaker and the AFCI receptacle must be identified as meeting the requirements for a "System Combination" type AFCI. 
Copyright 2013 by Patrick S. Ouillette, P.E. 21 2 10.12(A) Branch Circuits 2014 NEC 
*(5) *Where RMC, IMC, EMT, Type MC cable, or steel armored Type AC cables meeting the requirements of 250.118 for equipment grounding conductors, metal wireways, metal auxiliary gutters, and metal outlet and junction boxes are installed for the portion of the branch circuit between the overcurrent protective device and the first outlet, it shall be permitted to install a listed OBC type AFCI device at the first outlet to provide protection for the remaining portion of the branch circuit. Metal wireways or large junction boxes installed above panels are a convenient way to transition from horizontally run branch circuits to vertical raceways between the panels and the wireway or junction box located above the panel. As such, they become part of the raceway system for the branch circuits. The system is pictured below. 
MC cable from panelboard to AFCI receptacle or any of these methods RMC, IMC, EMT, MC cable, steel armored AC cable, metal wireways, and metal auxiliary gutters are permitted.Outlet branch- circuit type AFCI in metal boxNM cable or other wiring method permitted by the NECStandard receptacle outletStandard circuit breaker 
*(6) *Where a listed metal or nonmetallic conduit or tubing or Type MC cable is encased in not less than 2 in. of concrete for the portion of the branch circuit between the branch circuit overcurrent device and the first outlet, it shall be permitted to install a listed OBC type AFCI device at the first outlet to provide protection for the remaining portion of the branch circuit. The system is pictured below. 
Standard circuit breakerPVC encased in a minimum 2 in. of concrete. Any listed metal or nonmetallic conduit or tubing or Type MC cable suitable for encasement in concrete may be used.Outlet branch- circuit type AFCI in metal boxRMC, IMC, EMT, or continuous run of MC cable suitable for concrete encasement can be used for the portion of the circuit not encased in concrete.Standard receptacle outletOr other wiring method permitted by the NECOR


----------



## Meadow (Jan 14, 2011)

*Exception *Where an individual branch circuit for a fire alarm system installed in accordance with 760.41(B) or 760.121(B) is installed in RMC, IMC, EMT, or steel-sheathed Type AC or MC cable meeting the equipment grounding requirements in 250.118, with metal outlet and junction boxes, AFCI protection shall be permitted to be omitted. Sections 760.41(B) for non–power-limited fire alarm circuits and 760.121(B) for power-limited fire alarm circuits state that the fire alarm branch circuit shall not be supplied through AFCI or GFCI devices. Single- and multiple-station smoke alarms in dwellings powered by circuits that are protected by GFCI or AFCI devices shall have a secondary power source [see 29.6.3(5) of NFPA 72-2013, _National Fire Alarm and Signaling Code_]. 
*Fire Alarm Control PanelSupply overcurrent device located in Panel LP*Panel LPThe circuit disconnecting means shall have red identification .*FIRE ALARM CIRCUIT*MC cable or any of these methodsfrom panelboard to fire alarm control panelRMC, IMC, EMT, or steel- sheathed Type MC or AC cable *"FIRE ALARM CIRCUIT"*Exempt from AFCI protectionStandard circuit breaker 
*Summary 
*The requirement for AFCI protection for 120-volt, single phase, 15- and 20-ampere branch circuits in dwelling units has been expanded to include all such circuits in kitchens and laundry areas. The only branch circuits that are exempt from AFCI protection are those that supply outlets or devices in bathrooms, garages, outdoors, and basements, except for basement rooms included in the list of rooms or areas in 210.12(A) requiring AFCI protection (e.g., laundry outlets in a basement require AFCI protection). The 2014 _NEC _requires all AFCI devices to be installed in a _readily accessible _location to facilitate resetting and testing. The 2014 Code presents six options/methods for accomplishing AFCI protection. The methods can be viewed as a _systems _approach to compliance. The most common methods for providing AFCI protection for branch circuits will likely be by use of combination type AFCI circuit breakers, or by combining standard circuit breakers with outlet branch circuit type AFCIs (AFCI receptacles) as a systems approach to branch circuit AFCI protection. 
*Application Question: *When using a standard circuit breaker in combination with an OBC type AFCI to provide AFCI protection for a branch circuit installed in wood framing members, what wiring method(s) are permitted to be used between the overcurrent device and the first outlet? 
*Answer: *RMC, IMC, EMT, Type MC cable, or steel armored Type AC cable meeting the requirements of 250.118, metal wireways, metal auxiliary gutters, and metal outlet and junction boxes can be installed for the portion of the branch circuit between the overcurrent protective device and the first outlet to provide AFCI protection for the remainder of the branch circuit. 
Copyright 2013 by Patrick S. Ouillette, P.E. 23 2 10.12(B) Branch Circuits 2014 NEC 
*Arc-Fault Circuit-Interrupter Protection – Branch Circuit Extensions or 
Modifications — Dwelling Units 
Significance 
*A new exception has been added to this subsection that will help to clarify when AFCI requirements are applicable to circuit extensions or modifications to existing wiring. 
*Analysis 
*The new exception states that the AFCI requirement is not applicable for dwelling unit branch circuit extensions, where the circuit extension is not more than 6′ in length and no additional outlets or devices are added to the circuit. When an existing panel is replaced or upgraded, the branch circuit wiring is not always long enough to connect to the panel overcurrent devices. The exception will allow existing branch circuits to be spliced and extended up to 6′ in cable length without requiring AFCI protection for the branch circuits. This will accommodate panels being moved out of clothes closets and bathrooms, service panels (during service upgrades) being moved closer to where the service-entrance conductors penetrate the outside wall of a building, panels being moved to readily accessible locations, and other situations. 
The existing AFCI requirement remains the same. In any of the areas specified in 210.12(A), where branch-circuit wiring is extended, modified, or replaced, the branch circuit shall be protected by either 
• A listed combination-type AFCI located at the origin of the branch circuit, or 
• A listed outlet branch-circuit type AFCI device located at the first receptacle outlet of the existing branch circuit. 
This subsection applies also to kitchens and laundry rooms or areas, since these rooms have been added to the list in 210.12(A). The AFCI devices must meet the new requirement at the beginning of 210.12 for ready access. 
*Summary 
*AFCI requirements are not applicable to dwelling unit branch circuit extensions, where the circuit extension is not more than 6′ in length and no additional outlets or devices are added to the existing branch circuit. 
*Application Question 
*Statistics show that the majority of electrical fires occur in older homes. How does this exception promote enhanced safety of older circuits that would be better protected by AFCI devices? 
Copyright 2013 by Patrick S. Ouillette, P.E. 24 2 10.12(B) Branch Circuits 2014 NEC 
*Answer 
*It doesn’t. However, it does encourage other safety enhancements like moving panels to Code-compliant locations, upgrading from fuses to circuit breakers, or increasing the size of an overloaded service (all of which may require circuit extensions), without necessitating the extra cost of AFCI devices. For some, particularly in hard economic times, this extra cost could be a deterrent from making a service or panel upgrade, or from moving a panel. Note that the exception does not apply to circuit modifications or replacements—only short extensions of existing branch circuits, where no outlets or devices are added. 
*Technical Update 
*You may be wondering how an AFCI receptacle installed at the first receptacle outlet on an existing circuit compares with a combination-type AFCI circuit breaker in terms of protection of the entire branch circuit. Outlet branch-circuit (OBC) type AFCIs provide both upstream and downstream protection from series arc faults, but provide only downstream protection from parallel arc faults. So, how is the "home run" (that portion of a circuit from the overcurrent device to the first outlet) protected against parallel arcing faults? 
Studies have shown that the home run portion of a circuit is, on average, approximately 35% of the total branch circuit length. The magnetic trip (instantaneous) function of a conventional circuit breaker will usually clear a parallel arcing fault in the portion of the circuit from the circuit breaker to the AFCI receptacle. This is contingent on the available fault current at the panel being high enough (approximately 500 A), the instantaneous trip value of the circuit breaker being low enough (less than 200 A), and a low conductor impedance from the circuit breaker to the location of the fault. The conductor impedance depends on the conductor length, size, and material. These parameters were used in writing some of the options in 210.12(A). The home run of a circuit is generally less vulnerable to a fault, being enclosed by construction and not containing splices or cord extensions. The home run conductors are continuous from the circuit breaker to the AFCI device, except perhaps for a switch outlet in an existing branch circuit that could be between the circuit breaker and the AFCI receptacle. 
In existing NM cable installations, the AFCI receptacle option cannot be guaranteed to provide equivalent protection to that of a combination-type AFCI installed at the origin of the circuit. Only the options in 210.12(A) provide combination-type AFCI protection or its equivalent. Note that options (5) and (6) of 210.12(A) require more robust protection for the home run than Type NM cable affords. 
Copyright 2013 by Patrick S. Ouillette, P.E. 25 2 10.12(B) Branch Circuits 2014 NEC 
Install combination-type AFCI circuit breaker in panelboard or install outlet branch-circuit type AFCI here.RBranch-circuit extension120-V, 15- or 20-A existing branch circuit in dwelling unit panelboardAny room or area specified in 210.12(A), where branch-circuit wiring is modified, replaced, or extended *Section 210.12(B), general rule, 2011 and 2014 NEC 
*RExisting panelboardRelocated panelboard Circuit extension not more than 6′*No AFCI protection requiredSection 210.12(B), Exception, 2014 NEC*120-V, 15- or 20-A existing branch circuit in dwelling unit panelboardAny room or area specified in 210.12(A), where branch-circuit wiring is modified, replaced, or extended 
Copyright 2013 by Patrick S. Ouillette, P.E. 26 2 10.12(C) Branch Circuits 2014 NEC 
*Arc-Fault Circuit-Interrupter Protection – Dormitory Units 
Significance 
*A new subsection has been added to the requirement for AFCI protection of certain branch circuits. 
*Analysis 
*This new subsection addresses AFCI protection for certain branch circuits in dormitory units. 
All 120-volt, single phase, 15- and 20-ampere circuits installed to supply outlets in dormitory unit living rooms, bedrooms, hallways, closets, and similar rooms now require AFCI protection using any of the methods in (1) through (6) of 210.12(A). In a typical dormitory room, all branch circuits will require AFCI protection. 
Some living facilities for students at colleges and other institutions are apartments rather than dormitories. They qualify as dwelling units per the definition of _dwelling unit _and must be wired as such. As used in this subsection, dormitory unit does not envision a bathroom or cooking provisions within the dormitory unit (compartment). A portable microwave oven does not constitute permanent provisions for cooking. 
AFCI protection in dormitory units 
The AFCI protection requirement now includes dormitory units. 
*Summary 
*All 120-volt, single phase, 15- and 20-ampere circuits installed to supply outlets in dormitory unit living rooms, bedrooms, hallways, closets, and similar rooms require AFCI protection using any of the methods in (1) through (6) of 210.12(A). 
Copyright 2013 by Patrick S. Ouillette, P.E. 27 2 10.12(C) Branch Circuits 2014 NEC 
*Application Question 
*Does this new AFCI requirement apply to modification, extension, or replacement of branch circuit wiring in existing dormitory units? 
*Answer: *No. It applies only to newly installed branch circuits that require AFCI protection. 
*Code Refresher 
* Receptacle placement in dormitory units is permitted to accommodate permanent furniture layout, but the quantity of receptacles installed must be in accordance with 210.52(A) for dwelling units. At least two receptacle outlets shall be readily accessible. Where receptacles are installed behind a bed, the receptacle shall be located to prevent the bed from contacting any attachment plug that may be inserted or the receptacle shall be provided with a suitable guard. [210.60]


----------



## Meadow (Jan 14, 2011)

PDF link: http://www.novelengineering.com/Revisions%20for%20the%202014%20NEC,%20with%20cover,%20first%20printing.pdf


----------



## MTW (Aug 28, 2013)

This is getting completely out of hand.


----------



## Meadow (Jan 14, 2011)

MTW said:


> This is getting completely out of hand.


The AFCI part makes me want to never touch resi ever again


----------



## TOOL_5150 (Aug 27, 2007)

meadow said:


> The AFCI part makes me want to never touch resi ever again


The AFCI isnt really the big deal, Its the huge ass price increase for us on the breakers, that is cutting into profit.


----------



## woodchuck2 (Sep 18, 2009)

TOOL_5150 said:


> The AFCI isnt really the big deal, Its the huge ass price increase for us on the breakers, that is cutting into profit.


I pass the cost onto the customer but it sure does make them cringe. But when they see the inspector looking for it they know it is required and out of my hands. At this rate we might better just install AFCI breakers throughout the whole panel and GFCI protect every circuit. I am curious to just exactly how many people are actually injured or killed every yr from these types of injuries? The last time i even heard of anyone being harmed was a copper thief who was killed when he cut into a live service with a hacksaw.

Has anyone noticed an increase in GFCI trip calls for foreign made devices/appliances? I got several calls this past summer for folks using laptops on their decks and tripping GFCI receptacles and GFCI breakers. Just had a call yesterday for a new coffee maker tripping any and all the kitchen GFCI's. It worked fine on non GFCI circuits. I recommended she take it back and try another.


----------



## Meadow (Jan 14, 2011)

TOOL_5150 said:


> The AFCI isnt really the big deal, Its the huge ass price increase for us on the breakers, that is cutting into profit.



They really cut into profit, but the worst part is when they start tripping on treadmills or Flat screens. People dont like to hear your $1500 plasma cant work on the upstairs circuits. To the customer its you who looks like the screw up, not the AFCIs. :no:











woodchuck2 said:


> I pass the cost onto the customer but it sure does make them cringe. But when they see the inspector looking for it they know it is required and out of my hands. At this rate we might better just install AFCI breakers throughout the whole panel and GFCI protect every circuit. I am curious to just exactly how many people are actually injured or killed every yr from these types of injuries? The last time i even heard of anyone being harmed was a copper thief who was killed when he cut into a live service with a hacksaw.
> 
> Has anyone noticed an increase in GFCI trip calls for foreign made devices/appliances? I got several calls this past summer for folks using laptops on their decks and tripping GFCI receptacles and GFCI breakers. Just had a call yesterday for a new coffee maker tripping any and all the kitchen GFCI's. It worked fine on non GFCI circuits. I recommended she take it back and try another.



More often than not when the inspector leaves AFCI circuits that power trouble appliance end up being taken out. 


One place where I will gladly cheat AFCI requirements: fridges. Spoiled food and irate HOs, no way. 



I havent noticed foriegn appliances tripping GFIs unless your talking about china. Of note, GFI around the world are usually set to trip at 30ma instead of 5ma, so that might explain it, I think.


----------



## woodchuck2 (Sep 18, 2009)

I often tell the HO that if the AFCI's are a problem they can remove them themselves or hire someone else to do it, i myself do not want the liability of removing them after inspection. Even my inspector thinks the NEC is getting a little overzealous with their requirements.


----------



## Going_Commando (Oct 1, 2011)

TOOL_5150 said:


> The AFCI isnt really the big deal, Its the huge ass price increase for us on the breakers, that is cutting into profit.


How does afci equipment cut into profits? My markup is the same on regular breakers as afcis, so I actually end up with more money in my pocket, not less. Color me confused.

As far as afcis go, I don't even care anymore.


----------



## Meadow (Jan 14, 2011)

Going_Commando said:


> How does afci equipment cut into profits? My markup is the same on regular breakers as afcis, so I actually end up with more money in my pocket, not less. Color me confused.
> 
> As far as afcis go, I don't even care anymore.


You bid on an old house rewire with permit, $6500 at 3 per standard breaker. Factor in AFCIs its 7,500 at $40 plus mark up. HO doesn't care or know about the code, neither does the guy who he can hire to do it for 6,000 or even less. 

Who wins?


----------



## Shockdoc (Mar 4, 2010)

Going_Commando said:


> How does afci equipment cut into profits? My markup is the same on regular breakers as afcis, so I actually end up with more money in my pocket, not less. Color me confused.
> 
> As far as afcis go, I don't even care anymore.


I won't and don't use afci junk unless it's a new build or permit job. I did make use of the nec book. A few pages became toilet paper .


----------



## chicken steve (Mar 22, 2011)

The real issue isn't the technology or it's costs

It's the fact that _none_of it is going to mitigate the number one cause of electrical fires

Glowing connections.

~CS~


----------



## Shockdoc (Mar 4, 2010)

chicken steve said:


> The real issue isn't the technology or it's costs
> 
> It's the fact that noneof it is going to mitigate the number one cause of electrical fires
> 
> ...


There is a real fine print on every afci breaker and receptacle. It reads.......for entertainment purposes only...


----------



## macmikeman (Jan 23, 2007)

Still under 2008 electrical code


----------



## Meadow (Jan 14, 2011)

chicken steve said:


> The real issue isn't the technology or it's costs
> 
> It's the fact that _none_of it is going to mitigate the number one cause of electrical fires
> 
> ...


Exactly! Some of which are poor workmanship such as backstabbing. 








Shockdoc said:


> I won't and don't use afci junk unless it's a new build or permit job. I did make use of the nec book. *A few pages became toilet paper* .There is a real fine print on every afci breaker and receptacle. It reads.......*for entertainment purposes only*...



:laughing::thumbup: Now your lucid. If only everyone could see it like that the NEC wouldn't be an advertising plat form.


----------



## Going_Commando (Oct 1, 2011)

meadow said:


> You bid on an old house rewire with permit, $6500 at 3 per standard breaker. Factor in AFCIs its 7,500 at $40 plus mark up. HO doesn't care or know about the code, neither does the guy who he can hire to do it for 6,000 or even less.
> 
> Who wins?


Me, cuz I don't have to deal with a cheap son of a b*tch. :whistling2:


----------



## Shockdoc (Mar 4, 2010)

Going_Commando said:


> Me, cuz I don't have to deal with a cheap son of a b*tch. :whistling2:


I did a complete rewire last summer . Not one afci installed. House didn't explode in spontaneous combustion.


----------



## MTW (Aug 28, 2013)

chicken steve said:


> The real issue isn't the technology or it's costs
> 
> It's the fact that _none_of it is going to mitigate the number one cause of electrical fires
> 
> Glowing connections.


Exactly, this AFCI supposedly mitigates an electrical fault that is both rare and very unlikely to even occur in premises wiring. Yet we keep getting sold the bill of goods that it will help prevent electrical fires. 

As for the GFCI expansion, I'm starting to have mixed feelings about it now. I trust a solidly connected EGC than I do a GFCI. I don't see the need for it especially with hardwired equipment. Grounded equipment is safe equipment. No need for GFCI paranoia.


----------



## Shockdoc (Mar 4, 2010)

MTW said:


> Exactly, this AFCI supposedly mitigates an electrical fault that is both rare and very unlikely to even occur in premises wiring. Yet we keep getting sold the bill of goods that it will help prevent electrical fires.
> 
> As for the GFCI expansion, I'm starting to have mixed feelings about it now. I trust a solidly connected EGC than I do a GFCI. I don't see the need for it especially with hardwired equipment. Grounded equipment is safe equipment. No need for GFCI paranoia.


We are in the age of " buying everything they sell " us. No one questions, no one protest, no problem to them. This is a fine example of conformity , it's only going to get worse in time. They like to hide behind the word safety.


----------



## LGLS (Nov 10, 2007)

chicken steve said:


> The real issue isn't the technology or it's costs
> 
> It's the fact that _none_of it is going to mitigate the number one cause of electrical fires
> 
> ...


Coming Soon! The "*GLOW-Fault circuit interrupter!"*


----------



## Shockdoc (Mar 4, 2010)

IslandGuy said:


> Coming Soon! The "GLOW-Fault circuit interrupter!"


You'll find it in the 2017 nec book, they'll start manufacturing them at the same time.


----------



## Meadow (Jan 14, 2011)

MTW said:


> Exactly, this AFCI supposedly mitigates an electrical fault that is both rare and very unlikely to even occur in premises wiring. Yet we keep getting sold the bill of goods that it will help prevent electrical fires.
> 
> As for the GFCI expansion, I'm starting to have mixed feelings about it now. I trust a solidly connected EGC than I do a GFCI. I don't see the need for it especially with hardwired equipment. Grounded equipment is safe equipment. No need for GFCI paranoia.



Sustaining an arc at 120 volts is near impossible. That alone makes me thing wtf are they actually trying to solve.


----------



## Meadow (Jan 14, 2011)

Shockdoc said:


> You'll find it in the 2017 nec book, they'll start manufacturing them at the same time.



2017 will probably call for all 240 circuits as well then the next code will turn to commercial.

"Whole-house protection from the effects of electric arc faults has been the goal of many entities, including the Consumer Products Safety Commission (CPSC). With expanded arc-fault circuit-interrupter (AFCI) requirements in the 2014 _NEC_, *we’re almost there*."

They have it all planed in advance


----------



## macmikeman (Jan 23, 2007)

That ain't all they have planned in advance.........


----------



## Shockdoc (Mar 4, 2010)

meadow said:


> 2017 will probably call for all 240 circuits as well then the next code will turn to commercial.
> 
> "Whole-house protection from the effects of electric arc faults has been the goal of many entities, including the Consumer Products Safety Commission (CPSC). With expanded arc-fault circuit-interrupter (AFCI) requirements in the 2014 NEC, we&#146;re almost there."
> 
> They have it all planed in advance


I'm tryin to remember the last time I encountered a residential arc fault. ......I can't other than a couple times wires got nicked in a gem box and tripped a standard breaker. The cspc sounds extreme liberal, must be the same miserable group responsible for the redesigned gas can nozzles.


----------



## MTW (Aug 28, 2013)

meadow said:


> Sustaining an arc at 120 volts is near impossible. That alone makes me thing wtf are they actually trying to solve.


So an AFCI is pure garbage..utterly and totally worthless.


----------



## LGLS (Nov 10, 2007)

MTW said:


> So an AFCI is pure garbage..utterly and totally worthless.


I live on Long Island. I'm literally surrounded by tens of thousands of single family homes built mostly throughout the late 60's-early 80's. A house fire is rare. When it happens, it's almost always either a person who falls asleep smoking (despite the "fire safe cigarettes") or combustibles ignited while cooking, or an electric heater located too close to combustibles. "Electrical" is almost always an overloaded extention cord, and there are as many of those in the summer, involving an air conditioner, as there are in the winter, involving a heater. If the CPSD were serious, all cord caps in the us on all appliances and cords would include a quick-blow fuse, like Europe. Even selling a cord smaller than #14 should be outlawed, let alone one with 3 female sockets on it. With modern construction codes, smoke alarms, fireproof sheetrock, fireblocking, modern boilers and furnaces with every safety feature possible incorporated in them, flame ******ant furniture, drapes, carpet and rugs, I think we can safely say that the VALUE offered by an AFCI is greatly exaggerated. Time was when a house caught fire it was almost always a total loss and went up like a dry pile of hay. That's not what happens these days. I live on the North Shore and there are still a lot of pre-war residences and commercial buildings lacking all of those fire-conscious improvements and they're still standing too. Honestly, I don't believe high-impedience arching was ever really a problem.


----------



## Shockdoc (Mar 4, 2010)

IslandGuy said:


> I live on Long Island. I'm literally surrounded by tens of thousands of single family homes built mostly throughout the late 60's-early 80's. A house fire is rare. When it happens, it's almost always either a person who falls asleep smoking (despite the "fire safe cigarettes") or combustibles ignited while cooking, or an electric heater located too close to combustibles. "Electrical" is almost always an overloaded extention cord, and there are as many of those in the summer, involving an air conditioner, as there are in the winter, involving a heater. If the CPSD were serious, all cord caps in the us on all appliances and cords would include a quick-blow fuse, like Europe. Even selling a cord smaller than #14 should be outlawed, let alone one with 3 female sockets on it. With modern construction codes, smoke alarms, fireproof sheetrock, fireblocking, modern boilers and furnaces with every safety feature possible incorporated in them, flame ******ant furniture, drapes, carpet and rugs, I think we can safely say that the VALUE offered by an AFCI is greatly exaggerated. Time was when a house caught fire it was almost always a total loss and went up like a dry pile of hay. That's not what happens these days. I live on the North Shore and there are still a lot of pre-war residences and commercial buildings lacking all of those fire-conscious improvements and they're still standing too. Honestly, I don't believe high-impedience arching was ever really a problem.


I think us electricians should do the American thing and protest. The Boston tea party, Vietnam, etc. Nobody makes any noise anymore, it's a small wonder we get stuck confirming to the nonsense.


----------



## Meadow (Jan 14, 2011)

MTW said:


> So an AFCI is pure garbage..utterly and totally worthless.


Yup. But not worthless to CB makers who now make more for every new home constructed and with every plane change. 




IslandGuy said:


> I live on Long Island. I'm literally surrounded by tens of thousands of single family homes built mostly throughout the late 60's-early 80's. A house fire is rare. When it happens, it's almost always either a person who falls asleep smoking (despite the "fire safe cigarettes") or combustibles ignited while cooking, or an electric heater located too close to combustibles. "Electrical" is almost always an overloaded extention cord, and there are as many of those in the summer, involving an air conditioner, as there are in the winter, involving a heater. If the CPSD were serious, all cord caps in the us on all appliances and cords would include a quick-blow fuse, like Europe. Even selling a cord smaller than #14 should be outlawed, let alone one with 3 female sockets on it. With modern construction codes, smoke alarms, fireproof sheetrock, fireblocking, modern boilers and furnaces with every safety feature possible incorporated in them, flame ******ant furniture, drapes, carpet and rugs, I think we can safely say that the VALUE offered by an AFCI is greatly exaggerated. Time was when a house caught fire it was almost always a total loss and went up like a dry pile of hay. That's not what happens these days. I live on the North Shore and there are still a lot of pre-war residences and commercial buildings lacking all of those fire-conscious improvements and they're still standing too. Honestly, I don't believe high-impedience arching was ever really a problem.


I agree. Backstabbing more than anything should be outlawed, and 14 gauge extension cords are a good idea, the average user doesn't know or care until the AC burns the cord up.




Shockdoc said:


> I think us electricians should do the American thing and protest. The Boston tea party, Vietnam, etc. Nobody makes any noise anymore, it's a small wonder we get stuck confirming to the nonsense.


If every one made noise theses would no longer be in the code. But what do we know were the guys who just install, god forbid we thing outside the box.


----------



## Going_Commando (Oct 1, 2011)

Shockdoc said:


> We are in the age of " buying everything they sell " us. No one questions, no one protest, no problem to them. This is a fine example of conformity , it's only going to get worse in time. They like to hide behind the word safety.


The word I use is liability. I don't want to get my pecker slapped by a negligence charge because I didn't put in AFCIs. I know they are pointless, but fire Marshall's doing investigations probably think they are life savers. Lame and sheepish excuse, I know, but in this litigious age it's better to be safe than sorry.


----------



## WhitehouseRT (Aug 20, 2013)

....


----------



## Meadow (Jan 14, 2011)

WhitehouseRT said:


> ....



Looks like an HID fixture with a burn wire nut.

Is this in a resi?


----------



## chicken steve (Mar 22, 2011)

COMBINATION AFCIs: 
WHAT THEY WILL AND WILL NOT DO



~CS~


----------



## LGLS (Nov 10, 2007)

meadow said:


> I agree. Backstabbing more than anything should be outlawed, and 14 gauge extension cords are a good idea, the average user doesn't know or care until the AC burns the cord up.


 Then the makers of backstabbed devices have to admit they're the cause for their AFCI's.


----------



## chicken steve (Mar 22, 2011)

This has all slowly been evolving to a Euro system

so why not cut to the chase?


~CS~


----------



## Meadow (Jan 14, 2011)

IslandGuy said:


> Then the makers of backstabbed devices have to admit they're the cause for their AFCI's.




To a degree, but even AFCIs wont protect against back stabbing because not all back stabs fail with arcing involved. 




chicken steve said:


> This has all slowly been evolving to a Euro system
> 
> so why not cut to the chase?
> 
> ...


 The 30ma part yes, but we are still far from the IEC, but so far the IEC still isn't requiring AFCIs. Even if we do go euro which IMO certain concepts should I hope we never loose the stab and buss panels. DIN for relay logic is a win but for power...  
,


----------



## MTW (Aug 28, 2013)

Meadow, just so I'm clear, a glowing connection is not considered an arc, even though a small degree of arcing takes place. Hence why an AFCI is not able to detect them, correct?


----------



## TOOL_5150 (Aug 27, 2007)

MTW said:


> Meadow, just so I'm clear, a glowing connection is not considered an arc, even though a small degree of arcing takes place. Hence why an AFCI is not able to detect them, correct?


a glowing connection is definitely an arc, otherwise it wouldn't be getting hot. AFCI's are going to turn a panel swap from $1600 to $2000 or more. Its going to get to the point where customers just wont upgrade their FPE panels because they have to take out a second mortgage on their house to pay for it.


----------



## MTW (Aug 28, 2013)

TOOL_5150 said:


> a glowing connection is definitely an arc, otherwise it wouldn't be getting hot.


Not necessarily, a resistive heater gets hot and it's not because of arcing. It's simply because of a high resistance conductive path. :nerd::nerd:


----------



## Meadow (Jan 14, 2011)

MTW said:


> Meadow, just so I'm clear, a glowing connection is not considered an arc, even though a small degree of arcing takes place. Hence why an AFCI is not able to detect them, correct?


A genuine glowing connection has no arcing. Its like a light bulb running, pure resistance. Some glowing connections do loosen up and might latter turn in an arc fault. A glowing connection is nothing more than pure resistance, a large amount of current passing over a small surface area. Same concept as putting 100 amps on #14 instead of #2, less area more heat. 

An arc fault gets into paschen's law. Its literally when the air ionizes and current flows through the air. The ionized air acts as a conductor exactly the way an HID lamp will pass current through gas giving off heat and light. Hence why we see the blue light when you slowly pull out a high current draw appliance from an outlet. Arcs are also hot enough to ignite almost anything. However, unless exceptionally minute distances are involved sustaining an arc at 120 volts is very difficult.


----------



## chicken steve (Mar 22, 2011)

Ul's Glowing Connection study verified glowing connections as the main incendiary culprit of electrical fires in the late 70's



An afci does not mitigate a glowing connection


go here to view more



~CS~


----------



## Meadow (Jan 14, 2011)

chicken steve said:


> Ul's Glowing Connection study verified glowing connections as the main incendiary culprit of electrical fires in the late 70's
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 
UL doesn't lie. Nor are they ignorant. More than anyone they know what electrical safety really is, better than the cmp even. I know that first hand.


----------



## Meadow (Jan 14, 2011)

Excerpt:​ ​ "Glowing electrical connections may dissipate as much as 35 watts of power with a​ current of 15 amps in the circuit and as much as 5 watts with a current of 0.8 amp in the​ circuit. Temperatures over 750°F were measured on the "break-off tab" of receptacles. Metal​ outlet boxes housing glowing connections in an insulated wall test set-up representative of​ a common type of residential construction attained temperatures in excess of 450°F. In​ laboratory tests under repetitive, intermittent and periodic cycles, a connection on a​ steel wire-binding screw of a receptacle open to the air had sustained glow conditions maintained​ for over 100 hours. Glowing connections will not perceptibly affect the electrical​ performance function of lights, appliances or other electrical loads, and will not blow fuses, trip circuit breakers or operate ground fault circuit interrupters."​


----------



## Shockdoc (Mar 4, 2010)

meadow said:


> Excerpt:
> 
> "Glowing electrical connections may dissipate as much as 35 watts of power with a
> current of 15 amps in the circuit and as much as 5 watts with a current of 0.8 amp in the
> ...


So in light of the facts and what AFCI breakers do not protect, what do they actually protect? other than gfi protection.


----------



## MTW (Aug 28, 2013)

Shockdoc said:


> So in light of the facts and what AFCI breakers do not protect, what do they actually protect? other than gfi protection.


They probably do exactly what they say they do. The problem is that particular fault that they detect doesn't occur with 120 volt circuits.


----------



## Meadow (Jan 14, 2011)

Shockdoc said:


> So in light of the facts and what AFCI breakers do not protect, what do they actually protect? other than gfi protection.


Profits. Resi is slumping but business isn't. Even if another house doesn't get built the NEC now has the touch it upgrade it rule as a backup.


----------



## Shockdoc (Mar 4, 2010)

meadow said:


> Profits. Resi is slumping but business isn't. Even if another house doesn't get built the NEC now has the touch it upgrade it rule as a backup.


I was saying Afci's were a fraud from day one. It's sickening that the cmp is on the take to support such a fraud and expand it's use.
Have you seen the testimonials on there website? It doesn't get more fabricated than that.


----------



## Meadow (Jan 14, 2011)

Shockdoc said:


> I was saying Afci's were a fraud from day one. It's sickening that the cmp is on the take to support such a fraud and expand it's use.
> Have you seen the testimonials on there website? It doesn't get more fabricated than that.


Oh, they are not disputing that part. But Cutler Hammer knew the right push on the CMP would get them mandated. And thus breaker manufacturers would reap the benefits. 

Ive seen there testimonials, its fake. The video they push on the public show flames coming out of an iron played down on clothes, "experts" claiming the unknown electrical fire would've stopped from an arc fault. Biggest crock of BS, made for gullible people to be enforced by gullible people.

The good part about AFCIs have made me rethink glowing connections, plus they have been a litmus test of who really cares about electrical safety and who doesn't.


----------



## MTW (Aug 28, 2013)

Why isn't that study about arc sustainability (the one that Chicken Steve referred to) used as a means to get AFCI's overturned?


----------



## Shockdoc (Mar 4, 2010)

meadow said:


> Oh, they are not disputing that part. But Cutler Hammer knew the right push on the CMP would get them mandated.
> 
> Ive seen there testimonials, its fake. The video they push on the public show flames coming out of an iron played down on clothes, "experts" claiming the unknown electrical fire would've stopped from an arc fault. Biggest crock of BS, made for gullible people to be enforced by gullible people.
> 
> The good part about AFCIs they have made me rethink glowing connections, plus they have been a litmus test of who really cares about electrical safety and who doesn't.


Good practices such as pigtailing or looping devices downplays the possibility of glowing connections. Im gonna start doing the afci exchange for inspections.


----------



## Meadow (Jan 14, 2011)

Shockdoc said:


> Good practices such as pigtailing or looping devices downplays the possibility of glowing connections. Im gonna start doing the afci exchange for inspections.


:thumbup:Now you talking. Find the right inspectors too, makes or breaks the job.


----------



## Shockdoc (Mar 4, 2010)

meadow said:


> :thumbup:Now you talking. Find the right inspectors too, makes or breaks the job.


They aren't that hard on enforcing them junk breakers out here, they want to see a few in the panel. But as for how many should really be in there , they don't check or test. Another agency tried to tell me I needed to install them for homeruns in a basement that got stolen. So I changed the application to service equipment only. F them.


----------



## Shockdoc (Mar 4, 2010)

Shockdoc said:


> They aren't that hard on enforcing them junk breakers out here, they want to see a few in the panel. But as for how many should really be in there , they don't check or test. Another agency tried to tell me I needed to install them for homeruns in a basement that got stolen. So I changed the application to service equipment only. F them.


I also encourage anyone who encounters anyone who experiences an electrical fire w afci protection to sue the nfpa and eaton corporation.


----------



## svh19044 (Jul 1, 2008)

About the dishwasher...

So plug and cord connected under the sink is considered a disconnecting means, but a gfci under the sink is considered inaccessible? 

Not allowing the gfci under the sink seems ridiculous given the lack of afci/gfci breaker combos available at this moment.


----------



## LGLS (Nov 10, 2007)

What's really needed are a few "panel fires" reported that are "suspected to be _caused"_ by "_defective" _arc-fault breakers made cheaply in China.


----------



## 120/208 (Nov 18, 2012)

Installing arc faults where required is part of the code requirements. I'm not excited about the additional requirements in the 2014 NEC but, we do it and the cost gets passed onto the customer.


----------



## svh19044 (Jul 1, 2008)

120/208 said:


> Installing arc faults where required is part of the code requirements. I'm not excited about the additional requirements in the 2014 NEC but, we do it and the cost gets passed onto the customer.


Doing it isn't the problem. Being called back because the breaker keeps tripping because of a dimming load, their fancy vacuum, or any number other of electronics, is a problem. :whistling2: 

So we do the AFCI on the dw because they sometimes catch fire, even though the AFCI won't prevent that fire. But why the additional need for the GFCI now? :no: Is there anything that supports the promotion of gfci protection on the DW?


----------



## Meadow (Jan 14, 2011)

svh19044 said:


> Doing it isn't the problem. Being called back because the breaker keeps tripping because of a dimming load, their fancy vacuum, or any number other of electronics, is a problem. :whistling2:
> 
> So we do the AFCI on the dw because they sometimes catch fire, even though the AFCI won't prevent that fire. But why the additional need for the GFCI now? :no: Is there anything that supports the promotion of gfci protection on the DW?


I know of water getting into the motors when the pump seal goes, but a good egc will stop the shock hazard. Dishwasher fires were unheard of 20 years ago when everything was rugged and mechanical. When they went to electronic controls and cheap molded plug connectors being hit with condensation and humidity the fires started breaking out. The 2 major manufacturers Whirlpool and GE (surprise GE again) don't want to directly admit there machines are fire hazards even though so many complaints are out there documented against them. One of the guys who actually made the AFCI dishwasher proposal was a engineer at GE appliance's division who openly stated reports of fires resulting from internal connector failings. Again, 20 years ago it was not a problem because manufacturers actually built there machines in America with American made parts, not chinease crap made to last only till the warrantee. 


This is on of several websites:

http://kitchenaidfire.com/

http://www.nbcconnecticut.com/investigations/LWRD-Dishwasher-Fires-147100025.html


----------



## Shockdoc (Mar 4, 2010)

120/208 said:


> Installing arc faults where required is part of the code requirements. I'm not excited about the additional requirements in the 2014 NEC but, we do it and the cost gets passed onto the customer.


Think about it. If a gfci receptacle is allowed under the sink, how will the sale of combo afci/gfci breakers be guaranteed?


----------



## Shockdoc (Mar 4, 2010)

meadow said:


> I know of water getting into the motors when the pump seal goes, but a good egc will stop the shock hazard. Dishwasher fires were unheard of 20 years ago when everything was rugged and mechanical. When they went to electronic controls and cheap molded plug connectors being hit with condensation and humidity the fires started breaking out. The 2 major manufacturers Whirlpool and GE (surprise GE again) don't want to directly admit there machines are fire hazards even though so many complaints are out there documented against them. One of the guys who actually made the AFCI dishwasher proposal was a engineer at GE appliance's division who openly stated reports of fires resulting from internal connector failings. Again, 20 years ago it was not a problem because manufacturers actually built there machines in America with American made parts, not chinease crap made to last only till the warrantee.
> 
> This is on of several websites:
> 
> ...


They admit their products are the problem. Shouldn't their product then have integral protection to protect itself?
We really live in f'd up times.


----------



## Meadow (Jan 14, 2011)

Just to add above, most whirlpool made electronic dishwashers actually have a thermal fuse that clips on top of the electronic control. I never understood it until I started seeing circuit boards burn up, now I get it. 


Video shows exactly where the thermal fuse is. Yes, its only monitoring the circuit board right by the plastic power connectors, not the tub. I wonder why?









Fuse and board:

http://www.repairclinic.com/PartDetail/Main-Control-Board/8564543/1060953?modelNumber=KUDS01IJWH0

http://www.repairclinic.com/PartDetail/Thermal-Fuse/8193762/959376?modelNumber=KUDS01IJWH0


----------



## Shockdoc (Mar 4, 2010)

meadow said:


> Just to add above, most whirlpool made electronic dishwashers actually have a thermal fuse that clips on top of the electronic control. I never understood it until I started seeing circuit boards burn up, now I get it.
> 
> Video shows exactly where the thermal fuse is. Yes, its only monitoring the circuit board right by the plastic power connectors, not the tub. I wonder why?
> 
> ...


Give it about 6 more years, the nfpa will reach its climax of stupidity and require afci protection for hot water heaters and electric ranges.


----------



## Meadow (Jan 14, 2011)

Shockdoc said:


> Give it about 6 more years, the nfpa will reach its climax of stupidity and require afci protection for hot water heaters and electric ranges.


Only after manufacturers turn those appliances into tiki torches:laughing:


----------



## Shockdoc (Mar 4, 2010)

meadow said:


> Only after manufacturers turn those appliances into tiki torches:laughing:


Coming soon from the makers of afci breakers for plumbers, a $1000 main valve that will sense leaks and shut off....

I think I want to swap trades, seems like electricians are the only ones stuck mandated to installed scientific worthless junk these days.


----------



## Meadow (Jan 14, 2011)

Shockdoc said:


> Coming soon from the makers of afci breakers for plumbers, a $1000 main valve that will sense leaks and shut off....
> 
> I think I want to swap trades, seems like electricians are the only ones stuck mandated to installed scientific worthless junk these days.


Youll like plumbing. PEX with shark bites is the norm.


----------



## Shockdoc (Mar 4, 2010)

meadow said:


> Youll like plumbing. PEX with shark bites is the norm.


They get pex, we can't even get cuclad back. 

I do own a crimper for pex, I try not to use those costly sharkbites. 
Living in the Poconos made me take up plumbing for a while.


----------



## MTW (Aug 28, 2013)

Shockdoc said:


> I also encourage anyone who encounters anyone who experiences an electrical fire w afci protection to sue the nfpa and eaton corporation.


I'm sure they already have a million fine print details and exceptions to get out of liability should a fire actually occur and the AFCI fails to prevent it.


----------



## Deep Cover (Dec 8, 2012)

MTW said:


> I'm sure they already have a million fine print details and exceptions to get out of liability should a fire actually occur and the AFCI fails to prevent it.


Reminds me of the Tommy Boy scene where he is explaining car part warranties....


----------



## Shockdoc (Mar 4, 2010)

MTW said:


> I'm sure they already have a million fine print details and exceptions to get out of liability should a fire actually occur and the AFCI fails to prevent it.


Pretty sickening, of course then, all liability will be sought after from the ec. Im so tired of the way things are going in America today.


----------



## Going_Commando (Oct 1, 2011)

Shockdoc said:


> Pretty sickening, of course then, all liability will be sought after from the ec. Im so tired of the way things are going in America today.


Yup. It's a big sh*t sandwich out there and we all get to take a big ol' bite. I shoulda gone to engineering school instead. Just chalk that up on my list of poor choices.


----------

