AFCI Breakers

[mbrooke]

As a comparison, we now apparently have spontaneously combusting domestic DB’s. I’ve never seen one in 40 years. I tried to set fire to a redundant DB with a gas torch, it went a strange brown colour, no flames.

The IET have issued and edict that as of 01/01/16 all new domestic DB’s should be of metal construction. Only the UK has had this thrust on them. The IET chose to totally ignore the CE standard for plastic enclosures DIN IEC 60695-2-1015 (960 degree C glow wire flammability test).

This only applies to domestic properties, commercial and industrial units are exempt.



You’re allowed one guess who were major contributors to the recommendation committees findings.



I’ll give a clue to help you £$

Didn't they test Wylex, Crabtree and other consumer units and all but Square D passed the flammability test? Personally if the plastic is flame retardant then I believe an exception ought to be made.

 

[don_resqcapt19]

As a comparison, we now apparently have spontaneously combusting domestic DB’s. I’ve never seen one in 40 years. I tried to set fire to a redundant DB with a gas torch, it went a strange brown colour, no flames.
...

What is a "DB".

 

[bphgravity]

Does anyone have the specific procedure from UL's cotton test?

~RJ~

What exactly do you want to know?

 

[romex jockey]

What is a "DB".

Distribution Board ....~RJ~

 

[romex jockey]

What exactly do you want to know?

Every detail

~RJ~

 

[bphgravity]

Every detail

~RJ~

I certainly can't provide you or the Forum a copy of UL 1699. I can, however, explain exactly what the "Carbonized Path Arc Ignition Test" is and how the test is performed. Just keep in mind this is only one of four arc fault detection tests that are performed on AFCI devices. There are roughly 50 different performance tests that are performed on AFCI devices, per the standard.

 

[mbrooke]

I certainly can't provide you or the Forum a copy of UL 1699. I can, however, explain exactly what the "Carbonized Path Arc Ignition Test" is and how the test is performed. Just keep in mind this is only one of four arc fault detection tests that are performed on AFCI devices. There are roughly 50 different performance tests that are performed on AFCI devices, per the standard.

Why? Even a private copy? :blink:

Im really curious how this is done.

 

[romex jockey]

I certainly can't provide you or the Forum a copy of UL 1699. I can, however, explain exactly what the "Carbonized Path Arc Ignition Test" is and how the test is performed. Just keep in mind this is only one of four arc fault detection tests that are performed on AFCI devices. There are roughly 50 different performance tests that are performed on AFCI devices, per the standard.

I would be most interested in the specific test, and/or testing procedure that UL used to pass AFCI's as mitigating a series arc

thx

~RJ~

 

[peter d]

I just finished reading the report that Joe Engel (formerly of Westinghouse--> CH--> Eaton) authored on the AFCI. It's very eye opening and I encourage everyone to read it if you have not done so already.

 

[mbrooke]

I just finished reading the report that Joe Engel (formerly of Westinghouse--> CH--> Eaton) authored on the AFCI. It's very eye opening and I encourage everyone to read it if you have not done so already.

I do to. Believe me, its just the tip of the iceberg.

 

[mivey]

I just finished reading the report that Joe Engel (formerly of Westinghouse--> CH--> Eaton) authored on the AFCI. It's very eye opening and I encourage everyone to read it if you have not done so already.

It might be okay to claim ignorance at one point but to continue in the same manner once this is brought to light is dishonest. That is why it is hard to believe the whole CMP is being honest. Perhaps some are that thick-headed but others are keeping the home fires lit.

 

[romex jockey]

for the record...

for the record...

Every one of our trade rags has turned down publication , and/or even mention of Joe Engel's paper


>>>>>


http://www.combinationafci.com/resources/doc_ieee_combination_afci.pdf



~RJ~

 

[don_resqcapt19]

Every one of our trade rags has turned down publication , and/or even mention of Joe Engel's paper
....
~RJ~

That is because most of their articles are written by the manufacturers that also advertise in the magazines.

The last good trade magazine was EC&M when it was run by Joe McPartland and you had to pay for a subscription.

 

[GoldDigger]

I think they are also afraid of lawsuits.

 

[iwire]

They are never going to bite the hand that feeds them. Not going to happen.

 

[romex jockey]

I certainly can't provide you or the Forum a copy of UL 1699. I can, however, explain exactly what the "Carbonized Path Arc Ignition Test" is and how the test is performed. Just keep in mind this is only one of four arc fault detection tests that are performed on AFCI devices. There are roughly 50 different performance tests that are performed on AFCI devices, per the standard.

One would imagine my request a no brainer for a NFPA, IAEI, ICC, BOAF, and LPI member Bryan.

But it doesn't exist, only alluded to in canned studies paid for by biased sources.

Eventually,like many of us, you'll stumble on the cotton test, but you'll also find it'll have little to do with residential voltages anywhere on this rock. That and a path, any path,, is parallel NOT a series event

This is a pivotal point, as GFP functions for parallel , the rops which would held any salvation for the technology being summarily dismissed by cmp-2 with little ado essentially reduce it to series arc functionality

making them panel cha cha at best....

<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>




Which brings me to a particular experience i had as a FF. A number of ski bums rented a chalet , which caught fire.

The four of them were caught on the 2nd flr. Three opted over the balcony (multiple broken bones occurring) , one decided to pick up an old fire extinguisher and head down to battle the flames.

He was found dead, with the empty extinguisher near by his remains

<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>

The analogy fits afci technology well , jmho, anyone supporting it is advocating the empty fire extinguisher



~RJ~

 

[romex jockey]

They are never going to bite the hand that feeds them. Not going to happen.

Nope

But hey, they start the wood stove real nice.....

~RJ~

 

[Sierrasparky]

I just finished reading the report that Joe Engel (formerly of Westinghouse--> CH--> Eaton) authored on the AFCI. It's very eye opening and I encourage everyone to read it if you have not done so already.

I do to. Believe me, its just the tip of the iceberg.

It might be okay to claim ignorance at one point but to continue in the same manner once this is brought to light is dishonest. That is why it is hard to believe the whole CMP is being honest. Perhaps some are that thick-headed but others are keeping the home fires lit.

Every one of our trade rags has turned down publication , and/or even mention of Joe Engel's paper


>>>>>


http://www.combinationafci.com/resources/doc_ieee_combination_afci.pdf



~RJ~

Enlightening, I was floored as well when I read through it.

 

[peter d]

After reading the paper, it seems that Joe Engel and CH/Eaton did actually attempt to put a functional, usable AFCI on the market in the form of the branch circuit AFCI, incorporating 30 mA GFPE. I give them credit for this. But as he points out in his paper, the branch circuit AFCI was shelved in favor of the combo AFCI and despite his and Eaton's attempts to incorporate 30 mA GFPE in the combo version, it was shot down.

 

[don_resqcapt19]

After reading the paper, it seems that Joe Engel and CH/Eaton did actually attempt to put a functional, usable AFCI on the market in the form of the branch circuit AFCI, incorporating 30 mA GFPE. I give them credit for this. But as he points out in his paper, the branch circuit AFCI was shelved in favor of the combo AFCI and despite his and Eaton's attempts to incorporate 30 mA GFPE in the combo version, it was shot down.

It was on the market. The original branch circuit/feeder type were the first AFCIs. I have no idea why they were called branch circuit/feeder as they only make them with 15 or 20 amp ratings.

The original AFCI rule was in the 1999 code with a 2002 effective date. The combination type was in the 2005 code with an effective date of 2008.

All of the combos when they first hit the market had the GFP circuit. As far as I know only GE has removed it from all of their AFCIs, Eaton has removed it from some of theirs. I believe the rest still have GFP.