AFCI Breakers

[mbrooke]

So you do not have first hand experiance with these units you are pushing?

Seems odd.

No, but I do have first hand experience with GFCI breakers which I will tell you do not nuisance trip unless the run is over 200 feet long. I think anyone reading my posts knows I am referring to GFP in general.

They are not prohibited by any code, only prohibited by intelligent design. A single ground fault in a branch circuit should not dump an entire panel. That would be 'big bummer'.

But that would be a design issue, not a safety issue. Design is not the scope of the NEC. If that were the case then the NEC would require selective coordination between all OCPDs, not just those on emergency circuits. I could have a fault in my stove blow the 50amp breaker as well as the 100amp main dumping my entire panel. Unsafe? Possibly, but not the scope of the code.

 

[mbrooke]

My understanding is the RCDs are used in the main supply so that a trip takes out all the power not just a branch circuit. I find that unexceptable as I think most customers would.

I will let Tony explain it, but my understanding (and I could be wrong), that new consumer units have at least 2 sub main RCDs:




http://community.neur.io/uploads/default/488/34b43accdb0a6739.jpg


http://www.peclights.com/content/im...rcd-consumer-unit-fully-loaded-[3]-2784-p.jpg


During installation the upstairs lighting circuit (separate from the socket circuits) is placed on one RCD also having the down stairs socket circuit; while the second RCD protects the down stairs lighting circuit and the upstairs socket circuit. That way, if one RCD trips either the lighting circuit or the socket circuit in any room stays live providing some light. Notice how each room in the home as at least 2 circuits from a different RCD:

 

[ActionDave]

I will let Tony explain it, but my understanding (and I could be wrong), that new consumer units have at least 2 sub main RCDs:



During installation the upstairs lighting circuit (separate from the socket circuits) is placed on one RCD also having the down stairs socket circuit; while the second RCD protects the down stairs lighting circuit and the upstairs socket circuit. That way, if one RCD trips either the lighting circuit or the socket circuit in any room stays live providing some light. Notice how each room in the home as at least 2 circuits from a different RCD:

I would call that good practice but if it were to make into the NEC it would be one more over step into design.

 

[mbrooke]

I would call that good practice but if it were to make into the NEC it would be one more over step into design.

I agree with you, but Iwire was worried that a main breaker would trip the whole home. This is one solution around that.


But in any case allowing a single AFCI/GFP to protect several circuits is cheaper than placing one on each circuit, an option that should be available to home builders and electricians in North America. A sub main load center wouldn't require much effort from manufacturers either:

http://www.homedepot.com/catalog/productImages/400/5f/5f7e455b-cb7f-49a3-b67c-30a75a12408e_400.jpg


http://g-ecx.images-amazon.com/imag...ens/siemens-indoorgenreadyloadctr-main-lg.jpg

 

[iwire]

No, but I do have first hand experience with GFCI breakers which I will tell you do not nuisance trip unless the run is over 200 feet long.

That is just one of the reasons they may nuisance trip, another is cumulative leakage current when supplying multiple pieces of utilization equipment as would be the case with a main GFCI breaker.

*I think anyone reading my posts knows I am referring to GFP in general.

I did not and I don't see how we can treat them the same. The concept is the sane but the trip levels are often 100s of amps apart from each other. GFCI 4-6 mA. GFP mains often 200-800 amps.

Let's not mix the two, the NEC does not so for clerity let's keep GFCI (People protection) seperate from GFP (equipment protection)

But that would be a design issue, not a safety issue.

I disagree, knocking out a main over a blip on a branch circuit can certainly be a safety issue.

Design is not the scope of the NEC. If that were the case then the NEC would require selective coordination between all OCPDs, not just those on emergency circuits.

I am sure we will get to full coordination at some point but regardless of that there is no good reason to make electrical systems more likely to open a main.

I could have a fault in my stove blow the 50amp breaker as well as the 100amp main dumping my entire panel. Unsafe? Possibly, but not the scope of the code.

Safety is in the scope of the code.

 

[iwire]

I will let Tony explain it, but my understanding (and I could be wrong), that new consumer units have at least 2 sub main RCDs:




http://community.neur.io/uploads/default/488/34b43accdb0a6739.jpg


http://www.peclights.com/content/im...rcd-consumer-unit-fully-loaded-[3]-2784-p.jpg


During installation the upstairs lighting circuit (separate from the socket circuits) is placed on one RCD also having the down stairs socket circuit; while the second RCD protects the down stairs lighting circuit and the upstairs socket circuit. That way, if one RCD trips either the lighting circuit or the socket circuit in any room stays live providing some light. Notice how each room in the home as at least 2 circuits from a different RCD:

It seems far easier and safer to provide the protection at the branch circuit level and avoid the issue all together.

Remember, I agreed with you a few posts back that GFCI protection would be much better than this AFCI nonsense of course I mean branch circuit GFCI not main GFCI.

 

[iwire]

http://www.fluke.com/fluke/uses/com...ticlecategories/grounding/chasing-ghost-trips

 

[MasterTheNEC]

Strange, you are one of the very few that claims anyone but manufacturers like AFCIs.

Well I guess that is cool, the other 99.99% of those in the trade that do not like AFCIs can mail you all the AFCIs that they remove.

Of course I am also sure you have no association with IAEI and the thousands of electrical inspectors around the country...and I am also quite sure you did not serve as a representative for an association that went to many of these events, hearings, code adoption meetings and so on....very few of these individuals complained.....and they knew who to complain too.

Seems your small world of online and pulling wire...makes you an expert on what the MAJORITY want.....now who is Pinocchio.

 

[iwire]

Of course I am also sure you have no association with IAEI and the thousands of electrical inspectors around the country...and I am also quite sure you did not serve as a representative for an association that went to many of these events, hearings, code adoption meetings and so on....very few of these individuals complained.....and they knew who to complain too.

Seems your small world of online and pulling wire...makes you an expert on what the MAJORITY want.....now who is Pinocchio.

So you are saying the same people that forced AFCIs on us ..... support AFCIs ..... shocking. I say.

 

[MasterTheNEC]

So you are saying the same people that forced AFCIs on us ..... support AFCIs ..... shocking. I say.

I say you mislead the numbers......The fact is there are way more people out in the REAL world that support AFCI's than you lead on......that all of the "Select" group of individuals lead on. Rather than get involved and help make a good product better....you are no different than the Home Builders who cry about AFCI's only to stick it to the consumer for that $5,000 granite counter upgrade.

Fact is......they have proven to work...read the CPSC reports on them...but I guess they are swayed by the Manufacturers also...right..... Are AFCI's perfect....nope....are GFCI's perfect...nope......but they can detect what they are designed to detect...not what they are not designed to detect.

Seems to me I purchased a 55 inch TV 2 years ago...only to end up buying a 65 inch TV a year later.....and then a 70 inch just this year......why because technology evolves and the next best thing is always around the corner. Again are AFCI's prefect...nope...never said they were but in terms of improper use of cords and shotty wiring....it is simply one line of added defense in the game.....again we can agree to disagree but don't use your position to take pot shots at others opinions by saying they are lying.......other opinions that differ from yours are welcome I last checked.

 

[don_resqcapt19]

I say you mislead the numbers......The fact is there are way more people out in the REAL world that support AFCI's than you lead on......that all of the "Select" group of individuals lead on. ....

How many of those people have dug into the fine print information...the information that is out there, but not easy to find? From day one, if you dug into the available information, even the information from the manufacturers, you found a different story from the one that was put out to the CMP and the public. If you just look at the information they want you to see, any reasonable person would support the AFCI rules. However when you start digging, it just doesn't appear that they really can do what they want us to believe that can do.

The biggest issue for me, and the reason I don't trust any of the AFCI information from any of the manufacturers or groups like NEMA, is the fact that the original proposals were not even close to being factual. The original proposals told us that the AFCI device at that time would do what they now tell us the combination AFCI device will do...the only problem those original proposals were some 12 to 13 years prior to the existing of the combination type AFCI. Based on that, I have zero trust in any AFCI information from any manufacturer, and have a strong mistrust of manufactured supplied information.

 

[mbrooke]

That is just one of the reasons they may nuisance trip, another is cumulative leakage current when supplying multiple pieces of utilization equipment as would be the case with a main GFCI breaker.

But if 30 or 50ma was used instead, and calculations were done (ie no more than 250ft of NM per 10ma of trip current) nuisance tripping would not be an issue while still providing arc protection.

I did not and I don't see how we can treat them the same. The concept is the sane but the trip levels are often 100s of amps apart from each other. GFCI 4-6 mA. GFP mains often 200-800 amps.

Nope, a Euro RCD is often designed to trip at 30ma, some 50 and some older ones at 100 to 500ma.

Nothing can stop us from using a 50ma sub-main built to our standards.

Let's not mix the two, the NEC does not so for clerity let's keep GFCI (People protection) seperate from GFP (equipment protection)

Ok, you have a good point here, but GFP is a good substitute for an AFCI, and in any case could be done submain.

I disagree, knocking out a main over a blip on a branch circuit can certainly be a safety issue.

Then why doesn't the NEC require selective coordination on anything other than an emergency circuits? Why can lights and outlets be one the same circuit?

Bottom line it doesn't matter.

I am sure we will get to full coordination at some point but regardless of that there is no good reason to make electrical systems more likely to open a main.



Safety is in the scope of the code.

Again, we aren't opening a single main under British standards, and second if we are its a design issue. We do not have selective coordination yet, and there are a million ways the NEC can inadvertently cut power creating a safety hazard but until the NEC specifically address those the point is not valid. Even then Id still argue code shouldn't dictate design. Yes, safety is the scope, but its a minimum standard. Losing lights in a home is not considered a life safety hazard, if it were then homes would be required to have a generator with a 10 second transfer.

 

[mbrooke]

It seems far easier and safer to provide the protection at the branch circuit level and avoid the issue all together.

Remember, I agreed with you a few posts back that GFCI protection would be much better than this AFCI nonsense of course I mean branch circuit GFCI not main GFCI.

But not cheaper, if something can reduce cost by 80% why not do that? I know tons who would take that no worries. A submain 50ma GFP or AFCI is the answer to that.

Technically, the way the NEC is written right now I could actually apply a submain system for GFCI and AFCI (assuming they made a 2 pole 60amp AFCI). Nothing explicitly requires each circuit to have its own GFCI or AFCI breaker.

 

[growler]

Welcome to AFCI haters non-anonamous!

Only folks that appear to love'em are the mfgs ?

Thats a Lie (Possibly Sarcasm I would Bet)........I know plenty of Electricians, Electrical Inspectors, Fire Marshals and Home Owners who love them as well.:angel:

I'll bet you don't know many homeowners that love them after having to spend hundreds of dollars to have earlier versions replaced because they are defective.

I get paid to deal with electrical problems so I make money from AFCIs but I haven't installed any for my home.

People often say one thing with their mouth and another with their wallet. Ask those electrical inspectors and fire marshals if they have installed AFCI protection in their own homes.

I have never had a customer call up and ask me to come over and install a thousand dollars worth of AFCI breakers because they had herd good things about them and they would like the added fire protection.

Do insurance companies offer any sort of discount for homes with AFCI protection?

 

[growler]

Again, we aren't opening a single main under British standards.

Technically, the way the NEC is written right now I could actually apply a submain system for GFCI and AFCI (assuming they made a 2 pole 60amp AFCI).

A 60 Amp sub main is plenty big enough in Britten because they use 230V but a 60 Amp sub main may be a bit small when used on a 120V system.

We need to make the manufacturers do what they promised in the first place and that is to perfect the technology and get the price of an indivdual unit ( breaker) down to a reasonable price ($18-$20). I think everyone could live with that.

 

[mbrooke]

A 60 Amp sub main is plenty big enough in Britten because they use 230V but a 60 Amp sub main may be a bit small when used on a 120V system.

And we use 240 volts They already make a 50amp hot tub GFCI that spits out both 120 and 240.

http://www.homedepot.com/p/GE-50-Amp-2-1-4-in-Double-Pole-GFCI-Circuit-Breaker-THQL2150GFP/202307131

We need to make the manufacturers do what they promised in the first place and that is to perfect the technology and get the price of an indivdual unit ( breaker) down to a reasonable price ($18-$20). I think everyone could live with that

Even at $40 it still comes out cheaper. I am willing to do that.

 

[MasterTheNEC]

How many of those people have dug into the fine print information...the information that is out there, but not easy to find? From day one, if you dug into the available information, even the information from the manufacturers, you found a different story from the one that was put out to the CMP and the public. If you just look at the information they want you to see, any reasonable person would support the AFCI rules. However when you start digging, it just doesn't appear that they really can do what they want us to believe that can do.

The biggest issue for me, and the reason I don't trust any of the AFCI information from any of the manufacturers or groups like NEMA, is the fact that the original proposals were not even close to being factual. The original proposals told us that the AFCI device at that time would do what they now tell us the combination AFCI device will do...the only problem those original proposals were some 12 to 13 years prior to the existing of the combination type AFCI. Based on that, I have zero trust in any AFCI information from any manufacturer, and have a strong mistrust of manufactured supplied information.

Everyone makes mistakes Don......People are not perfect but they tend to have good intentions.

 

[MasterTheNEC]

Do insurance companies offer any sort of discount for homes with AFCI protection?

In fact, at a Virginia IAEI meeting one of the individuals in attendance did state that his All State Agent did offer an equivalent discount as being within a specific distance to a fire hydrant for installing AFCI's...you just don't know unless you ask them....

 

[don_resqcapt19]

Everyone makes mistakes Don......People are not perfect but they tend to have good intentions.

Maybe it is time for CMP2 to own up to this mistake and remove AFCIs from the code.

 

[MasterTheNEC]

Maybe it is time for CMP2 to own up to this mistake and remove AFCIs from the code.

Maybe it's time for you to ask to give a presentation to CMP-2 explaining all your documented findings....I am sure they would like to hear it.

In fact- we both probably have friends on that panel...I have quite a few.....you come up with the presentation and I will see they know about it.........