AFCI Breakers

J

Jimmy7

Senior Member
Location
Boston, MA
Occupation
Electrician
We do a lot of residential service work. Sometimes the panels are such a mess that it is hard to find the neutral of the circuit you’re looking for. I have always wondered will a new Afci breaker work if you mistakenly attach the wrong neutral?
 
Only if both the two.mixed circuits are not pulling a load which in most cases NOT over 99% of the time so it would not work. Believe all of the AFCI circuit breakers made in the last 8 or 10 years have built in GFCI protection that if it picks up one side of the circuit is drawing more then 4 to 6 milliamps would trip. Years ago I had a button flasher inside of a lamp holder with a 100 to 150 watt lamp. Would go inside of the panel and measure the current on grounded conductors one at a time and look for the one with a varying load of around one amp.Never got around to making a tester with a timer that would cycle a 4 or 5 amp load every three seconds or so. Wonder if a AFCI breaker would be damaged if the grounded conductors were switched but on opposite energized circuits. I'm old school and do not like to call the two energized wires in what we were taught was called an Edison 120/240 volt three wire single phase system phases. Its all one single phase or least think that way.
 
garbo said:
Only if both the two.mixed circuits are not pulling a load which in most cases NOT over 99% of the time so it would not work. Believe all of the AFCI circuit breakers made in the last 8 or 10 years have built in GFCI protection that if it picks up one side of the circuit is drawing more then 4 to 6 milliamps would trip. Years ago I had a button flasher inside of a lamp holder with a 100 to 150 watt lamp. Would go inside of the panel and measure the current on grounded conductors one at a time and look for the one with a varying load of around one amp.Never got around to making a tester with a timer that would cycle a 4 or 5 amp load every three seconds or so. Wonder if a AFCI breaker would be damaged if the grounded conductors were switched but on opposite energized circuits. I'm old school and do not like to call the two energized wires in what we were taught was called an Edison 120/240 volt three wire single phase system phases. Its all one single phase or least think that way.
Click to expand...
All of the original branch circuit/feeder type AFCIs had GFP. I think at the beginning all of the combination type did too. At least 3 brands no longer have GFP as part of their AFCIs...GE was the first to remove it about 10 years ago.
 
Siemens doesn't even have a place to land the neutral. My SH switched to Siemens and I put in a 100A MB panel. On the rough, I kept the neutrals separate, not landing on the neutral bar, like I always do for AFCI, so I would know it went on the breaker. When I bought the breakers and started to install them, I found out they didn't have the neutral terminal and I kept the neutral separate for no reason!
 
Little Bill said:
Siemens doesn't even have a place to land the neutral. My SH switched to Siemens and I put in a 100A MB panel. On the rough, I kept the neutrals separate, not landing on the neutral bar, like I always do for AFCI, so I would know it went on the breaker. When I bought the breakers and started to install them, I found out they didn't have the neutral terminal and I kept the neutral separate for no reason!
Click to expand...
It looks nice!
 
don_resqcapt19 said:
All of the original branch circuit/feeder type AFCIs had GFP. I think at the beginning all of the combination type did too. At least 3 brands no longer have GFP as part of their AFCIs...GE was the first to remove it about 10 years ago.
Click to expand...
Retired but attempting to keep up with things. Thanks. Does not make sense not to offer built In GFP for all AFCI circuit breakers used in residential, apartments, hotel & motel rooms , Do admit it is more confident to reset a tripped GFCI receptacle rather then going to a basement or worst yet an outdoor panel. At several IAEI classes 10 to 12 years ago they mentioned that most AFCI at least 15 to 30 amp single phase types had built in GFCI but some were set higher then the 5 milliamp trip point. Are residential style AFCI have marking to identify weather they do or do not have GFP ?
 
garbo said:
Retired but attempting to keep up with things. Thanks. Does not make sense not to offer built In GFP for all AFCI circuit breakers used in residential, apartments, hotel & motel rooms , Do admit it is more confident to reset a tripped GFCI receptacle rather then going to a basement or worst yet an outdoor panel. At several IAEI classes 10 to 12 years ago they mentioned that most AFCI at least 15 to 30 amp single phase types had built in GFCI but some were set higher then the 5 milliamp trip point. Are residential style AFCI have marking to identify weather they do or do not have GFP ?
Click to expand...
The GFP component is usually 30 mA AFAIK for the ones that have or used to have a GFP component.

A "dual function" breaker does have Class A 4-6mA GFCI protection in all cases.
 
garbo said:
At several IAEI classes 10 to 12 years ago they mentioned that most AFCI at least 15 to 30 amp single phase types had built in GFCI but some were set higher then the 5 milliamp trip point.
Click to expand...
My understanding is it was 30ma probably the same internals as the 30ma GFPE breaker all the major manufacturers offer.
garbo said:
Are residential style AFCI have marking to identify weather they do or do not have GFP ?
Click to expand...
No not that I am aware of, the GFPE was never part of the AFCI spec.
 
tortuga said:
No not that I am aware of, the GFPE was never part of the AFCI spec.
Click to expand...
AFAIK from past reading, it was the only way they could pass the listing requirements initially. Was not a requirement otherwise to have GFP. Whatever changes were made that no longer required GFP to meet listing requirements is unknown, probably by most people, The AFCI manufacturers seem to have higher security on how AFCI's actually work than what the federal government has for nuclear weapons launch codes and such.
 
garbo said:
. Are residential style AFCI have marking to identify weather they do or do not have GFP ?
Click to expand...
Good question. How do we know which ones have or don't have a GFP? I know that some, example siemens, don't take a neutral connection so I guess we can just assume from that. But there are some that do have a neutral connection that are said to not have GFP, where is all this information coming from?
 
I have a hypothesis as to why that 30ma GFP was in there, having researched old meeting minutes and ROP's from back in the 90's when AFCI's were being proposed in the code many of the CMP members commented that a RCD may be a better way to go.
In one ROP a CMP member quoted a study showing a RCD was 1000 times more effective in preventing arc faults than a AFCI, some claim they still are and thats why AFCI's never took off in Europe as they went the RCD route.
And there was quite some question back then as to if AFCI's even were necessary which still stands today almost 30 years later.

Since there was ongoing debate as to which technology to go with the manufacturers 'hedged' by developing a breaker that really did both, and thus some AFCI's are also RCD's.
 
Here is one of the comments on RCD's from
1998 NFPA-70 A98 ROP, Page 112
Log #1820
Comment by CMP member Nichols in part:
Test results with a residual current detector (RCD) were
provided. An RCD ts 1000 times more sensitive to arc faults and
only one device is required per dwelling. Since it is a mandatory
product m Europe, it would be a more cost-effective alternative
and it can be retrofitted into existing housing Panel 2 needs to
consider it as an alternative (see below)
Click to expand...
This is the response of a CMP member that had access to all kinds of test reports and UL fact finding papers, though he was a bit off with the one device per dwelling part, perhaps back then split buss panels were still common and he was thinking a RCD could be a sub main.
Manufacturers reps present at this meeting would take that back up to corportate and they would say 'oh ok also make our new AFCI breaker work like a RCD just in case the wind blows in that direction'
 
tortuga said:
Here is one of the comments on RCD's from
1998 NFPA-70 A98 ROP, Page 112
Log #1820
Comment by CMP member Nichols in part:

This is the response of a CMP member that had access to all kinds of test reports and UL fact finding papers, though he was a bit off with the one device per dwelling part, perhaps back then split buss panels were still common and he was thinking a RCD could be a sub main.
Manufacturers reps present at this meeting would take that back up to corportate and they would say 'oh ok also make our new AFCI breaker work like a RCD just in case the wind blows in that direction'
Click to expand...
I thought only one RCD was needed as it would be the main? In Europe anyway.
 
tortuga said:
I have a hypothesis as to why that 30ma GFP was in there, having researched old meeting minutes and ROP's from back in the 90's when AFCI's were being proposed in the code many of the CMP members commented that a RCD may be a better way to go.
In one ROP a CMP member quoted a study showing a RCD was 1000 times more effective in preventing arc faults than a AFCI, some claim they still are and thats why AFCI's never took off in Europe as they went the RCD route.
And there was quite some question back then as to if AFCI's even were necessary which still stands today almost 30 years later.

Since there was ongoing debate as to which technology to go with the manufacturers 'hedged' by developing a breaker that really did both, and thus some AFCI's are also RCD's.
Click to expand...
I will never understand why we didn't go with RCDs. It's immoral that we resist them now. Sad to say but the only hope is that some well connected person or relative of that person dies as a result of an AFCI failure or nuisance trip to expose the money grab that the manufacturers made and the NEC facilitated.
 
ActionDave said:
I will never understand why we didn't go with RCDs. It's immoral that we resist them now. Sad to say but the only hope is that some well connected person or relative of that person dies as a result of an AFCI failure or nuisance trip to expose the money grab that the manufacturers made and the NEC facilitated.
Click to expand...
One of the most satisfying things i can imagine is if the states (and local jurisdictions as applicable) all woke up and amended AFCI's out of their codes. Having the manufacturers stuck with whatever inventory they have and all the tooling and production investments at the factories would be priceless.
 
ActionDave said:
will never understand why we didn't go with RCDs.
Click to expand...
After several State's amended out AFCI, the 2020 NEC industry reps clawed back their economy of scale by expanding the 2-Pole GFCI mandate, with no need to develop 120v RCD.

IMHO NEC industry reps have learned laborers wont be regulated, forced into apprenticeships, trained to pull wire without arcing, or pass LED-lighting certifications, much less forced on the phone with product tech support, without Chambers of Commerce lobbying State's to amend out the complicated boondoggle.

Expanding 2-Pole GFCI gives politically connected developers & their laborers a wide birth, since it forces occupants to troubleshoot the incompatible UL standards for energy-efficient appliances, with leakage current that trips GFCI's.

Ignorance is bliss for occupants, rarely accustomed to lobby their government.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top