2020 NEC AFCI

[romex jockey]

AFCI technology, at the very very least, needs to be taken back to the drawing board and all requirements to use them immediately suspended... at worst, it would not surprise me to see a multi-billion-dollar class action lawsuit against the makers of these devices. Give it another 20 or 30 years, AFCIs will probably be seen the same way as FPE Breakers and aluminum branch circuit wiring of the 70s.

I'm aware of a few law firms , as well as restore CSA who were approached on the idea .

One focused on 210.12(A)(3) specifically>>>"listed supplemental arc protection circuit breaker"

I'll wager most of you know what they are

I forget which code cycle introduced it, '11 ,maybe '08 , i don't have the rop's from that cycle anymore ,but with 210.12 taking up more rop time and space than most all other concernes combined all essentially roundfiled with a short rationale ,it became a venture in futility

IIRC, 7 manufacturers ,along with UL and the CSPC were involved , so when it became clear this was a deeper pockets issue confronting big $$$$'s those law firms lost interest fairly quick, so did a number of journalists

It became obvious social media was the only avenue left

so thx for reading....

~RJ~

 

[don_resqcapt19]

...I remember Don saying that residential codes actually mandate sprinklers, but its amended out at the local level. I still can not wrap my mind around that :blink:

The International Residential Code requires dwelling units to have fire sprinklers. The status of the adoption of that provision, according to the NFPA is shown below.

• States/regions requiring fire sprinklers in new, one- and two-family homes: CA, MD, Washington, D.C.
• States prohibiting statewide and new, local adoptions of fire sprinkler requirements in new, one- and two-family homes: AK, AL, AZ, CT, DE, GA, HI, ID, IN, KS, KY, LA, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, NH, NJ, NY, NC, ND, OH, PA, SC, SD, TX, UT, VA, WV, WI
• States allowing local adoptions of sprinkler requirements for new, one- and two-family homes: AR, CO, FL, IL, IA, ME, MT, NE, NV, NM, OK, OR, RI, TN, VT, WA, WY
  (*Note: In MA and NY, homes of a certain size must be sprinklered)

In Illinois, over 100 municipalities require dwelling unit fire sprinkers.

NFPA 5000, Building Construction and Safety Code®, also requires dwelling unit sprinkler systems. Not sure how widely adopted this code is.

 

[mbrooke]

The International Residential Code requires dwelling units to have fire sprinklers. The status of the adoption of that provision, according to the NFPA is shown below.
[/I]
[/LIST]
In Illinois, over 100 municipalities require dwelling unit fire sprinkers.

NFPA 5000, Building Construction and Safety Code®, also requires dwelling unit sprinkler systems. Not sure how widely adopted this code is.

Thank you! Great info was always. I aspire to be like you

 

[Dan L.]

Not saying you are wrong, but usually such evidence would be consumed in the fire and even be further disturbed by firefighters making it nearly impossible to determine such precision in the cause. They often will be able to say it started in a certain area with some confidence based on burn patterns, maybe even be able to say there was wiring in the vicinity that likely contributed, but often the board with the nail in it is consumed in the fire and so is the insulation on the conductor. Only chance of getting that one right is if there is arcing evidence on the conductors I guess.

I would tend to agree with you on that and I wonder what it was they found or saw that led to that official conclusion. Could be what was reported as an official conclusion was merely conjecture minus actual evidence based on the absence of any other probably cause.

 

[hbiss]

Could be what was reported as an official conclusion was merely conjecture minus actual evidence based on the absence of any other probably cause.

Most likely "nobody died and the cause can't be determined without spending $$$$$ if at all. So blame it on electrical, give the insurance company something feasible so they can pay the claim and call it a day".

-Hal

 

[mbrooke]

I would tend to agree with you on that and I wonder what it was they found or saw that led to that official conclusion. Could be what was reported as an official conclusion was merely conjecture minus actual evidence based on the absence of any other probably cause.

Even evidence is open to debate and misinterpretation. An over driven staple and a smoldering stud behind sheet-rock in real time could theorize arcing between the hot and ground charring the wood, while another that the staple was energized by the hot conductor for years (trickle current) leading pyrophoric carbonization. If the prior is assumed, and its likely given the dominant theory of arcing, then said theory is only strengthened with misinterpreted evidence. Next time a more consumed wall section is found, but localized, its tempting to also call that arcing even if high resistance connection at the outlet box caused it in reality. Theory and guessing has a way of gaining a life of its own, as we tend to become polarized seeking evidence in its favor and ignoring that to the contrary.

 

[GoldDigger]

Even evidence is open to debate and misinterpretation. An over driven staple and a smoldering stud behind sheet-rock in real time could theorize arcing between the hot and ground charring the wood, while another that the staple was energized by the hot conductor for years (trickle current) leading pyrophoric carbonization. If the prior is assumed, and its likely given the dominant theory of arcing, then said theory is only strengthened with misinterpreted evidence. Next time a more consumed wall section is found, but localized, its tempting to also call that arcing even if high resistance connection at the outlet box caused it in reality. Theory and guessing has a way of gaining a life of its own, as we tend to become polarized seeking evidence in its favor and ignoring that to the contrary.

:thumbsup:

 

[mbrooke]

:thumbsup:

Thanks

 

[peter d]

So what's the status on the AFCI expansion in the 2020? Any word yet?

 

[10fords]

In my area of California, Monterey county, sprinklers are required on all dwellings, but as I understand it they are not meant to put out fires, but to provide safe egress for the occupants. As a volunteer Firefighter I can verify that sprinklers don't put out fires, but they do make sure that anything the fire doesn't ruin gets taken care of by water damage! Still better than those @#&?! AFCI breakers though.

 

[Adamjamma]

I would imagine if you had about the same VA for loads you should only need around half the number of branch circuits if they are all 240 volts vs 120 volts, and that the breaker panels in European dwellings typically are smaller (number of circuits wise) than in the US.

Well, in the UK, they use a ring mains, actually two, which require more testing, due to the chance it could break, thus having more possible current on an outlet, but they also incorporate fuses in the plugs, so one can have a 13 amp outlet but have an item plugged into that outlet on its own 5 amp fuse.
Because of this, each ring main is considered to have an unlimited amount of outlets. But, each outlet may have only one Spur, with one outlet.
also, you may have two different classes of radial circuits, both of which have an unlimited number of outlets but only serve so many square feet of space. The difference between the two radials is the fuse required and the cable minimum size required.
This then means that you have a panel with two separate splits from the main cutoff, each split governed by an RCD, that RCD controlling up to five breakers.
Due to the testing requirements, the grounds and neutrals have to be on the same number on their bars that the breaker is on its bar, so you can test the circuit, not just when installed, but if you do any repairs, or in the case of rental property and commercial property, on a regular schedule, to check for insulation damage and correct polarity.
The codes here are a bit less on tables and more on math for some parts, as well. But, it is interesting to learn the British codes after all the years of doing basic repairs in the US and Caribbean.

 

[Adamjamma]

I don't think there is any allowance to skip AFCI's altogether, but I do believe there are some situations where they can go at the first outlet if the "home run" is in a metallic wiring method.

I believe it is actually that the first point be in a conduit, the type of conduit not specified? Same with GFCI, conduit type not specified but as long as conduit used to first outlet position, then the outlet gfci or AFCI can provide the protection for the rest of the circuit. Personally would prefer to have the breaker cover it, but, cannot see how one would wire a box like the UK where one breaker then allows the cheaper breakers to cover branch circuits. Main problem is US uses two phase wiring while UK uses single phase wiring. But I am sure a company like Seimans could figure it out if the public made enough noise over needing a bunch of expensive breakers compared to only needing a few.

 

[Adamjamma]

How was that determined though? I'm curious of the forensic process. While I doubt that fridge had flammable refrigerant, its possible that might have been the culprit as flammable refrigerants are common in some parts of the world.

Determination was by the testimony of apartment owner combined with video evidence from thermal cameras used by the fire department that responded to the blaze. I believe they tested a few fridges of same make and have found a fault with insulation in the wiring caused by the vibration and heat from the compressor, but am waiting on more information to come out in the hearings. So far the actual reason for the fire involving the fridge has not been released, only that it started behind the fridge.

 

[Adamjamma]

The theory started when someone pitched the idea that European circuit breakers were more likely to trip faster on shorted lamp cords and shorted NM.


And the biggest irony of all... AFCIs are now being pitched to the European IEC world as something new and orginal. Truth is its not- for 25 years UL and others were ARGESIVELLY trying to mimick European technolochy while trying to twist reality that 120 volts could sustain an arc the same way 230 volts can.

I believe the fuses in the lamp cords and other cords here do more for the protection, actually. Plus the requirement that you must verify the wire chosen will trip the breaker if a fault occurs, even if the recommended is 2.5 you must still double check, because the voltage drop and other conditions may require you to switch to a 4 mm wire instead.

 

[mbrooke]

In my area of California, Monterey county, sprinklers are required on all dwellings, but as I understand it they are not meant to put out fires, but to provide safe egress for the occupants. As a volunteer Firefighter I can verify that sprinklers don't put out fires, but they do make sure that anything the fire doesn't ruin gets taken care of by water damage! Still better than those @#&?! AFCI breakers though.

Well- I beg to differ- at least that they can contain a fire very, very well. I one day hope that fire sprinklers are implemented on a national if not international level. It will be one of the greatest advancements in life safety in the last 100 years.

 

[mbrooke]

Determination was by the testimony of apartment owner combined with video evidence from thermal cameras used by the fire department that responded to the blaze. I believe they tested a few fridges of same make and have found a fault with insulation in the wiring caused by the vibration and heat from the compressor, but am waiting on more information to come out in the hearings. So far the actual reason for the fire involving the fridge has not been released, only that it started behind the fridge.

What was the wiring like? RCDs in the consumer unit? Correct Earth loop impedance?

I believe the fuses in the lamp cords and other cords here do more for the protection, actually. Plus the requirement that you must verify the wire chosen will trip the breaker if a fault occurs, even if the recommended is 2.5 you must still double check, because the voltage drop and other conditions may require you to switch to a 4 mm wire instead.

Well, rest assured that I agree One of the driver behind AFCIs were frayed lamp cords and how they would not trip a standard breaker fast enough. The sparking would set nearby furnishing like rugs ablaze. Simple solution would have been to mandate a fuse in the cord cap- much like window AC units in the US now have a GFCI or LCDI on the cord cap. Simple fool proof solutions that actually address the problem.

 

[kwired]

I believe it is actually that the first point be in a conduit, the type of conduit not specified? Same with GFCI, conduit type not specified but as long as conduit used to first outlet position, then the outlet gfci or AFCI can provide the protection for the rest of the circuit. Personally would prefer to have the breaker cover it, but, cannot see how one would wire a box like the UK where one breaker then allows the cheaper breakers to cover branch circuits. Main problem is US uses two phase wiring while UK uses single phase wiring. But I am sure a company like Seimans could figure it out if the public made enough noise over needing a bunch of expensive breakers compared to only needing a few.

Two phase technically not the correct term as there is "two phase" systems out there that are not the same thing as single phase system with a center tap.

GFCI is not the same as AFCI, AFCI may incorporate some of the GFCI function but is on a GFPE protection level and not on class A GFCI level.

One problem is we got where we are through product developments over the years and it is a little hard to suddenly make a major change and tell consumers that their old equipment that is still working isn't compatible with the new standards - though AFCI certainly has created a lot of havoc in this regard.

Supplemental protection in the plug of things like lamp cords does seem to make more sense to me than AFCI

 

[macmikeman]

If AFCI mains would have the same track record as AFCI breakers, I wouldn't touch one with a one million mile pole.

Well for the first two years in service that would be the case, and then there would be so many returns to the factory that they secretly would just remove any internal afci or gfi circuitry installed in them and still package them as AFCI breakers for a much higher than normal cost, even though they are nothing more than a plain Jane old style circuit breaker with a test button built in to fool you. I believe a certain manufacturer is currently doing exactly this with their single pole 15 and 20 amp afci plug in breakers. All of a sudden , every single on works fine once installed and no "false trip'' events for the past three or four years now. Like magic the problems ended. Hmmmmmmmmmmm.

 

[Adamjamma]

What was the wiring like? RCDs in the consumer unit? Correct Earth loop impedance?




Well, rest assured that I agree One of the driver behind AFCIs were frayed lamp cords and how they would not trip a standard breaker fast enough. The sparking would set nearby furnishing like rugs ablaze. Simple solution would have been to mandate a fuse in the cord cap- much like window AC units in the US now have a GFCI or LCDI on the cord cap. Simple fool proof solutions that actually address the problem.

The wiring should have been decent since the building, being full of rental properties, was supposed to have the wiring in each apartment checked every three to four years for insulation, polarity, etc...

and as far as the AFCI debate goes, the last study I saw seems to say the same thing, if I read it right, that most of the incidents that happened from lightning or electrical surges even when wiring was compromised by hammer strikes, usuallput themselves out, unable to catch fire within the time of the AFCI breakers, as long as the wire and ground were both properly sized in the beginning.

 

[Adamjamma]

Two phase technically not the correct term as there is "two phase" systems out there that are not the same thing as single phase system with a center tap.

GFCI is not the same as AFCI, AFCI may incorporate some of the GFCI function but is on a GFPE protection level and not on class A GFCI level.

One problem is we got where we are through product developments over the years and it is a little hard to suddenly make a major change and tell consumers that their old equipment that is still working isn't compatible with the new standards - though AFCI certainly has created a lot of havoc in this regard.

Supplemental protection in the plug of things like lamp cords does seem to make more sense to me than AFCI

My own, although again, technically student level of understanding, is the USA uses a two phase system, the two phases actually 180 degrees out of phase of each other, and the uK and Europe use a three phase system, where the phases are 120 degrees different from each other, but wiring is still basically similar. When a business is wired with three phase here, it is five wires into the residence from the electrical supplier, three lines, a neutral and a ground, or it is simply three lines into a transformer, all three lines being live, and the ground and neutral starting at the transformer rather than the utility. Slightly different from the US as most all residences have their ground, neutral and live wire go to the nearest utility transformer.