AFCI data on home fires 10 yrs later. Any real evidence they work’?

Status
Not open for further replies.
hbiss said:
Given that, we could go a long way without resorting to extraordinary means such as AFCIs, by tightening up workmanship standards and materials. Outlaw backstabbing and requiring that insulated staples be used with Romex are a couple of changes that could be made. Grounds touching neutrals cause false tripping and not necessarily a hazard but maybe we need to change Romex construction to have an insulated green ground.

-Hal
Click to expand...
That is all stuff that should have been addressed long before they introduced AFCI's. Note most of what you mentioned is a non issue with raceway wiring methods, and we already had GFCI's that will detect neutrals touching grounds.

That leaves us with remaining hazards mostly being what gets plugged into the premises wiring.
 
macmikeman said:
One should think, after all this time has passed, that one of the prominent testing labs, would have, tested, afci's in a lab setting where all sorts of typical arcing fault setups would be employed. We long have read posts that detail exactly what to look for in troubleshooting afci's such as grounds touching neutrals, overdriven staples and on and on. Take those situations and build a testing lab out of possible things that could start up arcing faults. Shoot a few nails in someplace close to wiring. Install a few outlets with the terminal screws loose. Don't tighten some wire nuts. All these should have been attempted in a lab and the facts and data published. That it hasn't been attempted yet is sure fire proof that the devices are phony and they well know so.
Click to expand...
Some of the potential problems are hard to duplicate - you ever tried to intentionally create a loose connection in order to develop a "glowing connection"? About impossible to intentionally do, or it takes a lot of time before the glowing connection eventually develops- which is why you mostly only see them in a house that is already 20+ years old I would guess. And after 20+ years is there any promises that an AFCI will still function? Let alone the fact they don't really detect glowing connections anyway.
 
hbiss said:
Given that, we could go a long way without resorting to extraordinary means such as AFCIs, by tightening up workmanship standards and materials. Outlaw backstabbing and requiring that insulated staples be used with Romex are a couple of changes that could be made. Grounds touching neutrals cause false tripping and not necessarily a hazard but maybe we need to change Romex construction to have an insulated green ground.

-Hal
Click to expand...

I would be behind insulated Staples. and I just started a thread last week about Romex with an insulated ground. I found some in a trailer built in 1969. if I knew how to copy and paste links from my phone I would link it.

Kwired, the few times I have seen glowing connections was with heavily corroded plugs and receptacles having a high resistance.
 
JFletcher said:
I would be behind insulated Staples. and I just started a thread last week about Romex with an insulated ground. I found some in a trailer built in 1969. if I knew how to copy and paste links from my phone I would link it.

Kwired, the few times I have seen glowing connections was with heavily corroded plugs and receptacles having a high resistance.
Click to expand...
You probably seen them more then you realize - just after they had stopped glowing. I have rarely caught any while glowing- maybe never on a receptacle connection. They are already "burned out" when I find them.

Have caught a 100 amp breaker lug and a 200 amp terminal bar in a splice box in the act of "glowing" before.
 
When you study the fire cause and origin stats, you will soon realize it will be decades before there could possibly be any change in the dwelling fire stats as a result of AFCIs. The rate of fires of electrical origin in newly constructed dwelling units is very low. If you built one million new homes and if AFCIs could prevent 100% (something not even the manufactures claim) of the fires said to be of electrical origin, you would expect to prevent less than 60 fires in the first year. There are 40 to 60 thousand dwelling unit fires that are said to be of electrical origin each year. There is no way that there will be any statistically valid reduction in dwelling unit electrical fires for decades, and even then, given an general downward trend in this fires, that started in the early 80s, you still may not be able to show a reduction because of AFCIs.
 
My blood pressure has risen just from reading this thread.

AFCI's are probably a billion dollar industry. The code changes requiring them were driven by the manufacturers. Fires that are caused by faulty electrical wiring are a hundred times more likely to happen with OLD WIRING, the place AFCI's are not required!

Several code cycles back (1999??), when AFCI's were first introduced, they were required for all panel changes. This lasted about 6 months and the requirement was removed because they would not hold on the old wiring (might have been a Massachusetts thing). Here we are 15+ years later and we are still struggling with nuisance tripping/major headaches and often times AFCI's being removed after inspection.
 
Leespark57 said:
My blood pressure has risen just from reading this thread.

AFCI's are probably a billion dollar industry. The code changes requiring them were driven by the manufacturers. Fires that are caused by faulty electrical wiring are a hundred times more likely to happen with OLD WIRING, the place AFCI's are not required!

Several code cycles back (1999??), when AFCI's were first introduced, they were required for all panel changes. This lasted about 6 months and the requirement was removed because they would not hold on the old wiring (might have been a Massachusetts thing). Here we are 15+ years later and we are still struggling with nuisance tripping/major headaches and often times AFCI's being removed after inspection.
Click to expand...
I don't think they were required for panel changes as much as it wasn't clear when they were required if you weren't running a new circuit or extending an existing circuit, therefore some AHJ's required them for panel changes.
 
Electrical fire

Electrical fire

In order to track AFCI performance you would need a good report on fires. A lot of “electrical “ fires are..over wattage lamp..30 amp fuse on 14 gauge wire..lamps with blankets on them. My take is just a gimmick to sell over priced breakers. Why not make an AFCI panel and use as sub panel from non AFCI service panel then your only buying one main AFCI breaker
 
keith gigabyte said:
In order to track AFCI performance you would need a good report on fires. A lot of “electrical “ fires are..over wattage lamp..30 amp fuse on 14 gauge wire..lamps with blankets on them. My take is just a gimmick to sell over priced breakers. Why not make an AFCI panel and use as sub panel from non AFCI service panel then your only buying one main AFCI breaker
Click to expand...
You want cumulative effects on multiple circuits that may otherwise hold on individual AFCI's to end up tripping a feeder AFCI?

Plus you lose power to the entire feeder instead of just whatever portion has the issue.
 
hbiss said:
Oh yeah. I recollect hearing about it or seeing a YouTube a few years ago with the guy all bandaged up testifying or making a statement before some judicial body. Could be I saw it here, posted in one of the AFCI threads.

The lawyers are jumping on this arguing that the technology is there and their clients could have been saved. I've heard that they will even go after the owners and electricians even if their jurisdiction doesn't require AFCIs because they should have known better and installed them anyway.

The only way to stop this madness is for an independent investigation to officially debunk AFCIs effectiveness and finally put it to rest.

-Hal
Click to expand...
I predicted early on that this is the reason AFCIs will never go away. I didn't know that a case had hit the courts.
 
JFletcher said:
Virginia is such a jurisdiction. Afci Breakers are only required on circuits that serve bedroom Outlets
Click to expand...
Only in residential applications covered under the VSBC. However, dwelling units of multi-family dwellings covered by the IBC would have all dwelling units meet 210.12.

The reason states limit it for single family dwelling units (regardless of if they work or not by some opinions) is because of the successful tactics of the Home Builders Association....and in VA that is 100% the case and has nothing to do with their effectiveness.

Its 100% politics and I know this for a fact....I fought them for over 2 years while at NEMA.
 
MasterTheNEC said:
Not from my view.....i happen to believe in them and the original mandate by the CPSC.

However, i am very aware my opinion on this is not popular here. I can live with that....:roll:
Click to expand...

Thanks for the information regarding afci Breakers in Virginia. As far as being unpopular, or having the minority opinion , there's nothing wrong with that.

I would like to see a video of an afci working like it's supposed to. I have seen several showing glowing connections and intentional arcing that do not trip afci Breakers, as well as radio interference causing them to trip.

A billion people can believe in something and it still false, however I do not think the majority of electricians who have negative opinions of afci Breakers are incorrect or mislead.
 
JFletcher said:
Thanks for the information regarding afci Breakers in Virginia. As far as being unpopular, or having the minority opinion , there's nothing wrong with that.

I would like to see a video of an afci working like it's supposed to. I have seen several showing glowing connections and intentional arcing that do not trip afci Breakers, as well as radio interference causing them to trip.

A billion people can believe in something and it still false, however I do not think the majority of electricians who have negative opinions of afci Breakers are incorrect or mislead.
Click to expand...

Everyone is most certainly entitled to their opinions for sure. Me personally i gave up the mission trying explain them to people as Im just a code guy so I teach ya how to apply them and let others make it their mission to change the NEC.

Guess those folks who believe they dont function and attempt to expose weaknesses in technology will continue to attempt change one local AHJ at a time but I can promise you one thing however. They are in the NEC to stay so....I find it easier to just teach them and move on these days....
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top