AFCI's being tripped by 25 watt radio 400 feet away. Video of it happening.

Status
Not open for further replies.

K8MHZ

Senior Member
Location
Michigan. It's a beautiful peninsula, I've looked
Occupation
Electrician
After reading a thread on a ham radio site about Eaton AFCI's being tripped by a ham radio, I not only found a video of it actually happening, but found out that there has been so many complaints about their breakers they supposedly changed the design and product code. The new code has HAM at the end. For instance CHFCAF115HAM. The problem is, they didn't work. Well, they worked for some people, but not for all. I am waiting permission to use a pic of the HAM breaker (that didn't fix the problem). In the mean time, here is a video from another radio operator tripping Eaton AFCI's from hundreds of feet away.

Here is the vid. If you get bored, FF to 3:26 where the first trips occur. The power is reduced all the way down to 25 watts and is still tripping the breakers. Remember, the transmitter is across the street at a neighbor's house.


So far, the only AFCI devices I have read about tripping from a ham radio are Eaton breakers and Leviton receptacles. I have not heard about any Square D AFCI devices falsing from a radio.

Has anyone here had problems with radios tripping AFCI's? Or maybe have AFCI's that are very mysteriously tripping and everything on the property was ruled out?

Legal wise, if the radio operator is legally licensed to transmit on the offending band, the FCC protects the operator and puts the fault on both the owner and the manufacturer of the AFCI's. I have read on some sites to complain to the FCC, but they will just tell you to use a different brand of breakers. I don't think the FCC has even addressed, or cares to address, the fact that there are AFCI's that can't function properly in the presence of RFI, especially as weak of an RFI source shown in the video.

Most of the hams I know are nice folks and probably don't want to trip every Eaton AFCI breaker within 400 feet or so, leaving their neighbors without power.

I have recommended one ham with Eaton panels to put in a SqD sub for all the AFCI circuits, but did so with a caveat that I couldn't be sure it would work. I also think Eaton should have to foot the bill.

Has anyone here had problems with SqD AFCI breakers? Would switching over to them be any different than using Eaton's in the same environment?

The vid shows the offending bands to be 17 meters (about 18 MHz) and 20 meters (about 14 MHz).
 
Last edited:
Here are the replacement breakers that still tripped.

Here are the images of a "Ham" Eaton AFCI's (18 of them) that were installed in my house on May 2. You will note the package and one side of the device itself does not indicate anything regarding it being a "Ham" breaker. The back side of the device does indicate that it is a "Ham" device. Why wouldn't they put it on the package itself and also on the front side of the breaker?
 
Let's try this: Click on image to see full size.
That works much better.
I do not see any links at all in the quote itself. They may have been in the original post you quoted but not carried through the cut and paste?
UPDATE:
Interestingly enough, when I view the HTML page source I see the three image links, but, possibly because there is no text at all associated with them, my browser (FF 29.0.1) does not provide any clickable links on the rendered page.
 
Last edited:
What band/frequency was used for the test?
Do other freq's also trip the AFCI?
Omni or directional antenna?
Bonus points for calculated power at the AFCI, based on ERP, directionality, distance, etc :D

I don't doubt that they are tripping; I just want to understand the parameters.
 
Did you not watch the video?
I watched the video, so I will not ask most of the questions. But in the distant shot of the transmitter site I could not see whether that was a vertical or a horizontal beam antenna.
And I will add the question of whether the breakers only tripped on the keyed RF (since "George is a CW guy") or whether just a constant carrier was tripping them too. Possibly that experiment was not done.
 
I watched the video, so I will not ask most of the questions. But in the distant shot of the transmitter site I could not see whether that was a vertical or a horizontal beam antenna.
And I will add the question of whether the breakers only tripped on the keyed RF (since "George is a CW guy") or whether just a constant carrier was tripping them too. Possibly that experiment was not done.

It looks like the antenna is a vertical (behind a tree). I don't know what type of modulation was being used, that is a good question.

I am looking for additional info, that's why I asked if anyone else here had problems.
 
I did not. I seldom watch linked videos and that kind of info is more readily expressed in text.

It would be easier and more accurate to measure the field strength than to calculate it.

The antenna looks to be an omnidirectional vertical that's supposed to be about 400 feet from the panel. The transmitter was turned down to as low as 25 watts and was still tripping breakers.

The band is the 17 meter band, which means that the panel enclosure should be a Faraday cage. If so, it is likely that the wiring in the structure or maybe even the wiring to the structure is acting like an antenna.
 
I have a Ham operator next door and I never have had any issues. I don't know what power he is at or what freq. He has a dipole and a omni I think I should ask.
 
AFCIs are a farce. As I said before you cant detect complex arc phenomenon reliably with the technology AFCI breakers use. These were not ready to hit the market let alone be code required. :happyno:
 
...
The band is the 17 meter band, which means that the panel enclosure should be a Faraday cage. If so, it is likely that the wiring in the structure or maybe even the wiring to the structure is acting like an antenna.
Would it really be a Faraday cage with the front cover open? A lot of plastic surface on the face of the breakers for the RF to penetrate. Did they try the test with the cover closed? The talked about that, but it was not done in the video that was posted.
 
AFCIs are a farce. As I said before you cant detect complex arc phenomenon reliably with the technology AFCI breakers use. These were not ready to hit the market let alone be code required. :happyno:
They hit the market a long time ago, and they are still not ready for real world use...at least for any functional use.
 
Would it really be a Faraday cage with the front cover open? A lot of plastic surface on the face of the breakers for the RF to penetrate. Did they try the test with the cover closed? The talked about that, but it was not done in the video that was posted.

It wouldn't matter if the cover was open or not at 18 MHz. Even so, there are other people having the same issues and I am pretty sure they close the cover when not messing with the breakers.

The size openings that 'don't matter' in a Faraday cage are based upon the wavelength of the radio signal. In this case, it's about 55 1/2 feet. A 2 foot opening 'looks' the same as a solid plate to a 55 1/2 foot wave.
 
Our state didn't adopt the part of the NEC that requires AFCIs for years. Then they caved in.

The only thing I have heard good about them comes from people that are making money selling them.
I think that the ones that have GFP at least do more than the standard thermal magnetic breakers do, but have not been convinced that the arc fault detection part does anything worthwhile.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top