AFCI

jim dungar said:
No. They are not designed to require replacement.
GFCI have been working for more than 50 years. As others have pointed out the GF issues have almost all been caused by changes in the loads. Why don't the appliance manufacturers need to change their products to work with our infrastructure?
Click to expand...
They keep adding more places that require GFCI protection, some involving things that never had to meet such strict leakage standards in the past making them not compatible with GFCI's.
 
kwired said:
The manufacturers have essentially bought the code making panels. They spend a lot of $$ with papers, demonstrations, etc. that are tailored to show things that favor using their product. You can bet they never show or talk about any product shortcomings, downsides, etc. even if they are aware of them when making any kind of presentation for the CMP's to see.
Click to expand...
They didn't just buy the code making panels. The Code seminar I just took a week ago had a Square D, Siemens and Eaton reps for speakers. All three of those reps are on code making panels
 
suemarkp said:
He's probably trying to be practical. I had an AFCI on a kitchen circuit that worked fine until I got a new refrigerator (I think it has a VFD type compressor). The AFCI would trip every few months. I since replaced it with a non AFCI. It is still GFCI protected which seems to be OK with the new fridge, but not AFCI. I could buy a new AFCI, but at $70 a pop I hate to replace it only to find it trips again in a few months.

The code doesn't support this, so sucks to be a new homeowner these days with the code getting ahead of what actually works.
Click to expand...
if we're going to follow the NEC, we must follow it's very first code article, article 90 - PRACTICAL SAFEGUARDING.
 
jim dungar said:
My problem is with the people that refer to AFCIs and GFCIs as being equals and RCDs as something special. The reality is it is AFCIs that are the special animals that don't live up to their promise.
Click to expand...
Yes, there is that problem. There is confusion about what each technology does. This is compounded by some AFCI breakers having ground fault protection included and further compounded by not everyone knowing that GFCI protection is restricted to 5mA threshold.

If AFCIs could be removed, GFCIs kept in kitchens, bathrooms, and outdoors and GFPE/RCD protection expanded instead, we would be in a better place in the electrical world of North America. Who has to be killed or paid off to get this to happen?
 
Eddie702 said:
They didn't just buy the code making panels. The Code seminar I just took a week ago had a Square D, Siemens and Eaton reps for speakers. All three of those reps are on code making panels
Click to expand...
Yes, there are manufacturers reps on all of the code making panels, but the IBEW, NECA, IEC, IEAI, and UL also have members on all of the panels. No interest group, such as manufacturers, can have more than 1/3 of the total membership on a CMP, and it takes a 2/3s majority to make any change.
 
Conflict of interest IMHO.
The MFGs are paying these people obviously and they gladly pay them to get on a CMP where they can promote products their employer sells.

Its like insider stock trading.

So maybe they don't get paid directly for the time spent on the cmp and maybe they do it because they like the industry but what stops the MFg from handing out a nice big bonus at Christmas time or a promotion.?
 
don_resqcapt19 said:
My understanding from at least one manufacturer who is very close to bringing their GFCI-HF to the market is that there will be no increase in cost.
Click to expand...
Is this GFCI breakers, receptacles, both? About has to include breakers for some the items that require GFCI protection that commonly include HF producing loads.

Are they basically going to discontinue what they had before and all new GFCI's will be HF compatible?

Can't believe they can stop the HF line losses that are the problem which means the device somehow will have to be able to differentiate whether the loss is due to HF or not or they actually increase the trip threshold beyond the 4-6 mA that it currently is by listing standards - which I doubt they can do that without changing current listing standards for a class A GFCI.
 
Eddie702 said:
Conflict of interest IMHO.
The MFGs are paying these people obviously and they gladly pay them to get on a CMP where they can promote products their employer sells.

Its like insider stock trading.

So maybe they don't get paid directly for the time spent on the cmp and maybe they do it because they like the industry but what stops the MFg from handing out a nice big bonus at Christmas time or a promotion.?
Click to expand...
Who here recently said that the manufacturers put what amounts to sales people on the CMPs and pay them huge commissions if they can get their product mandated by code?

-Hal
 
kwired said:
Is this GFCI breakers, receptacles, both? About has to include breakers for some the items that require GFCI protection that commonly include HF producing loads.

Are they basically going to discontinue what they had before and all new GFCI's will be HF compatible?

Can't believe they can stop the HF line losses that are the problem which means the device somehow will have to be able to differentiate whether the loss is due to HF or not or they actually increase the trip threshold beyond the 4-6 mA that it currently is by listing standards - which I doubt they can do that without changing current listing standards for a class A GFCI.
Click to expand...
UL 943 has been changed and specifies the trip points for high frequency leakage current. As the current goes up the trip point also goes. They can do this because as the frequency goes up, it takes more current to cause harm to the human body.
The standard applies to both breakers and receptacles, so I assume both will be available at some point.
UL 943 does not require that all GFCIs be of the HF type so the manufacturers can continue to make and sell the standard ones. The 943 committee was split on requiring all GFCIs to be of the HF type, and it is not required. I think over half of us on the committee voted for all to be HF, but just like a code change, it takes a 2/3s majority to make a change in a product standard.
 
don_resqcapt19 said:
UL 943 has been changed and specifies the trip points for high frequency leakage current. As the current goes up the trip point also goes. They can do this because as the frequency goes up, it takes more current to cause harm to the human body.
The standard applies to both breakers and receptacles, so I assume both will be available at some point.
UL 943 does not require that all GFCIs be of the HF type so the manufacturers can continue to make and sell the standard ones. The 943 committee was split on requiring all GFCIs to be of the HF type, and it is not required. I think over half of us on the committee voted for all to be HF, but just like a code change, it takes a 2/3s majority to make a change in a product standard.
Click to expand...
So they apparently will know when HF load is being supplied and when it is not. How about when there is mix of HF and non HF load? Or maybe it is only looking at frequency of any differential current on the protected conductors when it comes to how should it respond?
 
don_resqcapt19 said:
UL 943 has been changed and specifies the trip points for high frequency leakage current. As the current goes up the trip point also goes. They can do this because as the frequency goes up, it takes more current to cause harm to the human body.
Click to expand...
That makes absolutely no sense. The 60Hz leakage is what causes harm to the body and the 60Hz line voltage doesn't change. The high frequency noise from the inverter just rides on the 60Hz and has no effect on the body. It just interferes with the electronics of the GFCI.

Are they trying to make us believe that the line frequency changes all over the place if there is an inverter somewhere on the circuit? :rolleyes:

-Hal
 
hbiss said:
The high frequency noise from the inverter just rides on the 60Hz and has no effect on the body.
Click to expand...
I always believed fluorescent ballast high frequency & start voltage cooks flesh from the inside out, like a microwave oven.

Never wanted to test that theory myself, but perhaps you did, and can correct me if I’m wrong.
 
ramsy said:
I always believed fluorescent ballast high frequency & start voltage cooks flesh from the inside out, like a microwave oven.

Never wanted to test that theory myself, but perhaps you did, and can correct me if I’m wrong.
Click to expand...
Well, microwave ovens do not cook “from the inside out.” Most of the heating occurs in the outer 1 CM of a homogeneous mass.
 
hbiss said:
That makes absolutely no sense. The 60Hz leakage is what causes harm to the body and the 60Hz line voltage doesn't change. The high frequency noise from the inverter just rides on the 60Hz and has no effect on the body. It just interferes with the electronics of the GFCI.
Click to expand...
If the CT sees say a 4 kHz leakage current, there's no way to know that the leakage is through the EGC and not through a person. So the trip level is set according to the current at 4 kHz that would harm a person. I guess if a person were poking around inside the inverter and touched the wrong part of the circuit, the 4 kHz leakage could be through a person.

Cheers, Wayne
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top