2005 anf afci`s

  • Thread starter a.wayne3@verizon.net
  • Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
A

a.wayne3@verizon.net

Guest
Haven`t gotten a 2005 NEC yet and we probably wont adopt it till mid to late 2005.From what I have read so far it seems that it will be required to have hr from panel to 1st point of an afci circuit in conduit or metallic raceway.Is this correct?
 
Re: 2005 anf afci`s

2005 NEC
210.12 Arc-Fault Circuit-Interrupter Protection.
(B) Dwelling Unit Bedrooms. All 120-volt, single phase, 15- and 20-ampere branch circuits supplying outlets installed in dwelling unit bedrooms shall be protected by a listed arc-fault circuit interrupter, combination type installed to provide protection of the branch circuit.

Branch/feeder AFCIs shall be permitted to be used to meet the requirements of 210.12(B) until January 1, 2008.

FPN: For information on types of arc-fault circuit interrupters, see UL 1699-1999, Standard for Arc-Fault Circuit Interrupters.

Exception: The location of the arc-fault circuit interrupter shall be permitted to be at other than the origination of the branch circuit in compliance with (a) and (b):

(a) The arc-fault circuit interrupter installed within 1.8 m (6 ft) of the branch circuit overcurrent device as measured along the branch circuit conductors.
(b) The circuit conductors between the branch circuit overcurrent device and the arc-fault circuit interrupter shall be installed in a metal raceway or a cable with a metallic sheath.
Click to expand...
 
Re: 2005 anf afci`s

Ok so if i am getting this right.From and afci breaker to first outlet in a bedroom nm is ok but if we use what is soon to come afci devices then they need to be in conduit or mc.Correct?
 
Re: 2005 anf afci`s

Forgot to ask what is going to be after 1/1/2008?
 
Re: 2005 anf afci`s

Am i to understand that they are implying that nm is not safe ? from panel to afci receptacle in mc or emt is safe but not romex.Seems that maybe NM is part of the promlem and not just devices :confused:
 
Re: 2005 anf afci`s

NM cable is never as safe as a metallic wiring method because of the grounding potential that encircles the other conductors.

Furthmore, this will permit leaving the panelboard with a metallic protected circuit to an AFCI receptacle and then going to the bedrooms. Considering the cost differential between GFCI circuit breakers and GFCI receptacles, I would assume that there would be that type of savings for an AFCI receptacle. If that is the case, I would also assume there could be two or three AFCI receptacles together in a ganged box just below or next to the distribution panelboard for all of the bedroom circuits (it would be really easy to drop a 1/2" EMT straight down and pull in some THHN for the receptacles). :D
 
Re: 2005 anf afci`s

Forgot to ask what is going to be after 1/1/2008?
Click to expand...
That is when the combination type AFCI devices are required to be used on the bedroom circuits. These devices will actually do the job of protecting the circuits against series arcs. :D
 
Re: 2005 anf afci`s

Maybe it's time to outlaw NM for safer MC.I have for years been asking why NM is safe enough in my house but not in commercial.Some counties forbid romex in any type of commercial building
 
Re: 2005 anf afci`s

I wonder if a city like Chicago can provide statistical data which shows a decrease in home electrical fires directly related to the banning of NM use there. I doubt it.

I questioned the 2005 requirements as well a few weeks ago. However, I now realize that an AFCI outlet device will not protect ahead of its location, so thats why you have a 6' metallic limitation.

However, where in the code does it say that if you use a metallic cable or raceway method in your home, AFCI's don't have to be used? As long as there are extension cords, plug strips, and those multi-receptacle adaptors out there, Arc-faults aren't going to go away no matter what the wiring method is.
 
Re: 2005 anf afci`s

As long as there are extension cords, plug strips, and those multi-receptacle adaptors out there, Arc-faults aren't going to go away no matter what the wiring method is.
Click to expand...
That is why combination type AFCIs will be required as of Jan. 1, 2008. The branch circuit/feeder AFCI that is now available does not do a very good job beyond the fixed wiring.
Don
 
Re: 2005 anf afci`s

Up until now I have thought that afci was to protect occupants of a dwelling from frayed extension cords or lamp cords.From this thread it seems that the wiring method is in question.Or am I missing something?
 
Re: 2005 anf afci`s

The AFCIs were verbally misrepresented to the Code Making Panels when they first hit the scene. We were told that nearly everything would be protected, including cords. After the rule was in the book, we found that the AFCI didn't protect against series arcs or protect cords.

The combination AFCIs will protect cords as well as the circuit against series arcs. My objection has been in using the Code to sell a new product. It has seemed to me that the rules were made before the product was perfected and it still is not in production. The rules are now in place to use AFCI receptacles so competition will finally drive the prices down.

It is my opinion that type NM cable is a very good wiring method and will last forever if it is installed correctly and not abused by Joe Homeowner. Personally, I don't see a problem with using type NM cable in frame construction regardless of the use with, of course, a few restrictions. I have never felt like the NM cable needed AFCI protection, the argument has been the use of extension cords in the bedroom with lots of flammable cloth in the room.

As time passes, as with the GFCIs, the rules will be expanded to require the combination type AFCIs to be used on all 125 volt, 15- and 20-ampere circuits.
 
Re: 2005 anf afci`s

my problem with this is that if an nm istallation is complete. and no extension cords are present at the inspection the the ahj would be expecting them to be added.An inspection can only deal with what is there not what might be.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top