MisterCMK
Member
- Location
- Twin Cities, MN
Simple ground fault protection and fire sprinklers.
Fire sprinklers are great for property protection...
Simple ground fault protection and fire sprinklers.
Yes, they are. Some subdivision covenants require them in my area.Fire sprinklers are great for property protection...
Residential sprinklers may provide property protection, but their design goal is strictly life safety. They try to delay spread of fire long enough after an alarm to allow occupants to get out.Fire sprinklers are great for property protection...
How much was the tank you bought to drive to work? How much was the body armor you wear under your FR clothes? Is there Kevlar in the helmet you wear every day? Do you have a hard time with the five point harness in your rig with the HANS system interfering with your Wilson? Do you find it tiresome only driving between 1am and 5am to avoid other drivers?
The NEC is a minimum safety standard, not the prescription for bubble boy.
Saying I can't and won't put a price on life safety is an extreme exaggeration.Again, I don't think these extreme exaggerations offer anything to the conversation. I still have yet to hear a valid argument from anyone other than "I just don't like AFCIs".
Again, I don't think these extreme exaggerations offer anything to the conversation.
Saying I can't and won't put a price on life safety is an extreme exaggeration.
Saying I can't and won't put a price on life safety is an extreme exaggeration.
Facts about AFCIs.....
There's this from one of our members here,
m/showthread.php?t=170149&page=2&p=1659427#post1659427
And there has been tons of discussion here on the fact that AFCIs do nothing about glowing connections and 120V can't sustain an arc.
Here's what will change and what is already changing in regards to how things get wired:
-Permits and inspections are avoided, particularly for smaller jobs
-AFCI protection is completely omitted or simply installed and then removed after an inspection
-More wiring done by homeowners and handymen, or work deferred due to cost
Skirting the AFCI rules will become a strong motivation for contractors. So ultimately, these rules will have the opposite of their intended end which is ostensibly to increase safety (though the real motivation is profit, of course.) The CMP clearly does not have a grasp of what actually occurs in the real world.
Again, this boils down to values and morals. Not a valid technical argument. Also, the link is broken.
Here's what will change and what is already changing in regards to how things get wired:
-More wiring done by homeowners and handymen, or work deferred due to cost
Again, this boils down to values and morals. Not a valid technical argument. Also, the link is broken.
I still have yet to hear a valid argument from anyone other than "I just don't like AFCIs".
Permits and inspections have always and always will be avoided. Home owners will always attempt to do their own wiring. There is nothing that can be done about that except perhaps to make it a crime.
Furthermore, any electrical contractor would be absolutely insane and reckless to remove AFCIs after inspection.
If a house fire occurred as a result of lack of AFCI protection, the EC would be subject to a lawsuit and possible criminal charges.
I hope this is not your practice!
Any proponents of AFCIs on this board?
Again, this boils down to values and morals.
Since you brought morals and values into this, we can start with the gigantic lie that the manufacturers told about the AFCI in the very beginning. They claimed that they had a combination type AFCI available when that product was not introduced until years later. The entire AFCI has been built on deception from the very beginning. Why should I be a party to something that I know is a fraud and a deception at the point of a gun?
I support homeowners right to do their own work 100%. It should never be a crime.
It gets less insane and reckless when a contractor is faced with eating callback costs related to AFCI nuisance tripping and unhappy customers.
Of course. It's a calculated risk and in my observation, more and more are willing to take it. As far as an AFCI preventing a fire, I only see the GFPE portion of the AFCI in being effective at fire prevention. Otherwise, it's a paperweight.
Not mine, but I don't condemn or look down on anyone who removes or omits AFCI protection. I have stated on this forum that I will refuse to install AFCI protection for heating equipment once the 2017 rules come into force. If you think AFCI protection is added for every single circuit modification or receptacle replacement, you're not living in reality.
Saying I can't and won't put a price on life safety is an extreme exaggeration.
Facts about AFCIs.....
There's this from one of our members here,
m/showthread.php?t=170149&page=2&p=1659427#post1659427
And there has been tons of discussion here on the fact that AFCIs do nothing about glowing connections and 120V can't sustain an arc.
So basically your position is one of the following:
1. That the mandate of AFCIs is a mass conspiracy perpetuated by Eaton, Schneider Electric, Siemens, etc., in conjunction with the IAEI and other members of the CMP
2. That the mandate of AFCIs is a mass conspiracy by the manufacturers and the IAEI and CMP members are fools and/or are payed off by the manufacturers
Mass conspiracies are illogical and highly unlikely, but it seems that this is what you're implying. Correct me if I'm wrong.
I've been installing AFCIs since 2008 and I have yet to be called back for nuisance tripping.
IMO, an EC that charges for AFCIs and then removes them after inspection should be charged with fraud!