AFCI Everthing!

Status
Not open for further replies.
jap said:
Have your customer call me and I'll go fix it.
Click to expand...

They may have agreed to pay for more surgery if I'd had the vulture instinct to push it. I'm not big on bleeding people. Yep, I'm sure you would charge them a fortune and maybe find it, maybe not. I guess you have a better vulture instinct. I'll save you some road kill.
 
jmellc said:
This makes as much sense as anything else you have said, as in zip, zilch and zero.

I have replaced huge numbers of switches and receptacles because they were damaged by back stabbing. I have replaced a lot that were aged out too, but they were usually not burned & charred like the back stabbed ones. They could no longer grip a plug or the switch was worn out inside. The back stabbed devices would not effectively hold wiring in long term. Yes, some do OK if lightly loaded and/or not subject to vibration. Most that carry any real load will give trouble.

The insulated ground wire is another issue altogether. Simply makes it easier to install devices, being that ground screws are often very close to live ones and the wire bends every which way when device is pushed into the box. Also, insulated grounds would be easier and safer to guide around in a live panel.
Click to expand...

What doesnt make Zip, Zilch,Zero sense to me is when you say you've replaced hundreds of switches and receptacles that were
burned and charged due to the Arcing Heat produced by the loose connection of the back stabbing, which could easily start a fire due to the intense heat,and then turn around and say
we are foolish for having to use an Arc Fault device to try to prevent exactly what your having to repair.

I dont get it.
 
peter d said:
Why does an AFCI not detect a glowing fault? I was led to believe that they do.
Click to expand...
Because that is not an arcing fault and an AFCI is not designed or required to detect a glowing or high resistance type of fault. The only chance of an AFCI detecting and clearing that type of fault is when the heat causes enough damage so that the fault progresses to a ground fault or a parallel arcing fault. That being said, at least one AFCI manufacturer has eliminated the ground fault detection part of thier AFCI.
 
peter d said:
Why does an AFCI not detect a glowing fault? I was led to believe that they do.
Click to expand...

don_resqcapt19 said:
Because that is not an arcing fault and an AFCI is not designed or required to detect a glowing or high resistance type of fault. The only chance of an AFCI detecting and clearing that type of fault is when the heat causes enough damage so that the fault progresses to a ground fault or a parallel arcing fault. That being said, at least one AFCI manufacturer has eliminated the ground fault detection part of thier AFCI.
Click to expand...

Here is a video of a guy testing an AFCI simulating a loose connection on a receptacle. As you will see, it doesn't trip the AFCI breaker.

 
Little Bill said:
Here is a video of a guy testing an AFCI simulating a loose connection on a receptacle. As you will see, it doesn't trip the AFCI breaker.

Click to expand...

I hope the CMP's look at displays like this and write these things out of the code. I'm convinced more than ever that arc faults are nothing but a money making scheme for manufacturers and lobbyists.
 
Little Bill said:
Here is a video of a guy testing an AFCI simulating a loose connection on a receptacle. As you will see, it doesn't trip the AFCI breaker.

Click to expand...

I was hoping to see someone simulate a glowing connection:( He could do that all day long and he has done about the same thing as if he sat there and flipped a switch on an off repeatedly as far as making arcs is concerned. That would be something we may not want to trip the device, where should the line drawn between a fault and normal operation?
 
Last edited:
jap said:
What doesnt make Zip, Zilch,Zero sense to me is when you say you've replaced hundreds of switches and receptacles that were
burned and charged due to the Arcing Heat produced by the loose connection of the back stabbing, which could easily start a fire due to the intense heat,and then turn around and say
we are foolish for having to use an Arc Fault device to try to prevent exactly what your having to repair.

I dont get it.
Click to expand...

That doesn't surprise me that you don't get it. Some of those devices I replaced were fed by arc fault breakers; so the arc fault didn't always do its job, did it? My major point in all this is that back stabbing should not be allowed when it promotes what arc faults supposedly solve. Code says, "we need arc faults to protect against arcing". Code also says "you are OK to back stab devices, even though they often burn up from the practice". Sometimes the arcing trips the breaker, more often it smolders the device.

I say that with proper wiring methods, arc faulting is unnecessary and that it often does not even kill power even when a circuit is obviously faulty.
 
ptonsparky said:
The planning that AFCI mfgs must have done to determine when an arc is artificially produced as the video shows vs under the rung of a rocking chair chair while Gramma tends to a sick baby. Just amazing.
Click to expand...

That says a lot, and CH is a good brand. Imagine GE.

The extra $ spend on AFCI's would be much better spent in labor to properly pigtail and connect to screw terminals. AFCI's are not worth the wrapper they are packaged in.
 
jmellc said:
That says a lot, and CH is a good brand. Imagine GE.

The extra $ spend on AFCI's would be much better spent in labor to properly pigtail and connect to screw terminals. AFCI's are not worth the wrapper they are packaged in.
Click to expand...

CH was the originator of the Arc Fault breaker, they were not selling, so you know the rest of the story......
 
A/A Fuel GTX said:
OK.....first of all, I've been in this trade for 30+ years. That clears that up. If we can't trust UL as the definitive source for quality, we might as well throw out the NEC also. Is it all about money and who pays who off to get this Chinese crap listed?
Click to expand...

Some items with a UL label are good quality but not the other way around. The UL label alone is no indicator of quality. I have seen too many devices, light fixtures and breakers that are junk but carry UL labels. Remember that Zinnsco and Federal Pacific carried UL labels. Does that tell you something?
I do not advocate throwing out the code but I have lost a lot of respect for it over the AFCI and back stabbing issues. Any reasonable person with any experience knows back stabbing is an inferior wiring method. It doesn't take much to figure it out once you've see a few charred devices.
 
Last edited:
jmellc said:
... Some of those devices I replaced were fed by arc fault breakers; so the arc fault didn't always do its job, did it? ...
Click to expand...
The poor connections at a wiring device or any other point of connection are very rarely "arcing" faults and the AFCI is not designed nor required to detect a poor connection type of fault.
 
don_resqcapt19 said:
The poor connections at a wiring device or any other point of connection are very rarely "arcing" faults and the AFCI is not designed nor required to detect a poor connection type of fault.
Click to expand...

If it is not an arcing fault, how does it burn up the device? Not normal heat from the load, or that would also burn up a properly connected device.

I am amazed at the defense I see here of AFCI's. If it is not designed nor required to detect such an obvious fault, what good is it?
 
don_resqcapt19 said:
Because that is not an arcing fault and an AFCI is not designed or required to detect a glowing or high resistance type of fault. The only chance of an AFCI detecting and clearing that type of fault is when the heat causes enough damage so that the fault progresses to a ground fault or a parallel arcing fault. That being said, at least one AFCI manufacturer has eliminated the ground fault detection part of thier AFCI.
Click to expand...

So other than finding wiring mistakes (primarily improper N-G) connections, they don't "find" one of the most common and dangerous types of faults. As the video posted shows, they don't seem to do a very good job at detecting series arcs either.
 
jmellc said:
That doesn't surprise me that you don't get it. Some of those devices I replaced were fed by arc fault breakers; so the arc fault didn't always do its job, did it? My major point in all this is that back stabbing should not be allowed when it promotes what arc faults supposedly solve. Code says, "we need arc faults to protect against arcing". Code also says "you are OK to back stab devices, even though they often burn up from the practice". Sometimes the arcing trips the breaker, more often it smolders the device.

I say that with proper wiring methods, arc faulting is unnecessary and that it often does not even kill power even when a circuit is obviously faulty.
Click to expand...

I agree with you 99%.
You should get an exemption from having to put them in with all of the facts that you have presented.
There's a lot of things that could be questioned in the NEC that dont make sense but until they change the requirements I guess the
rest of us will have to keep putting them in.
 
jmellc said:
If it is not an arcing fault, how does it burn up the device? Not normal heat from the load, or that would also burn up a properly connected device.
Click to expand...
The heat is from the I?R heat across the high resistance connection.

I am amazed at the defense I see here of AFCI's. If it is not designed nor required to detect such an obvious fault, what good is it?
Click to expand...
We have been mislead as to the functionality of these devices from day one by their supporters. I don't think an AFCI will ever be able to directly detect that type of fault. There have been proposals to require wiring devices with some type of thermal detection for this type of problem but those proposals have been rejected.
 
I'm paraphrasing something I read here a while back, but someone made the comment that it requires an enormous amount of complex signal processing equipment to reliably detect arcing signatures.

So somehow, the manufacturers managed to miniaturize all the processing equipment in a single pole breaker case, manufacture it in Mexico, and sell it for $39.95. Seems plausible, right? :roll:
 
peter d said:
I'm paraphrasing something I read here a while back, but someone made the comment that it requires an enormous amount of complex signal processing equipment to reliably detect arcing signatures.

So somehow, the manufacturers managed to miniaturize all the processing equipment in a single pole breaker case, manufacture it in Mexico, and sell it for $39.95. Seems plausible, right? :roll:
Click to expand...

If you consider the computing power that can fit into a pocket sized device - yes it is plausible. After all that is the heart of the AFCI - a small processor.

Will it detect and respond to series and parallel arcing? Yes. Will it detect and respond to all series and parallel arcing? That is too complicated to answer. For one thing, all arcing will include arcing would be considered normal operation of some loads.

I once read that part of the reason one brand of AFCI will respond differently to same load because they all basically need to have "arc signatures" to which they will respond to essentially programmed into them. That means if a particular signature is not in the data base, then it will ignore it. If a normal operation should contain a signature that is in the data base then it will have unwanted tripping. I have been told there is no actual data base, but this analogy still has some validity. I think for these devices to truly work, we need to be able to tell them a particular condition is an acceptable condition. Of course if that happens many will simply override every tripping condition instead of checking to see if there really is a problem, kind of like how for years when people replaced 15 and 20 amp plug fuses with 30's - they did not blow as often.

I don't know what the solution is. I think the concept of AFCI is a positive one, they are probably far from meeting the objectives though.

And yes a high resistance connection is not an arcing fault. It is just a heater located in a place where it doesn't belong. It may turn into an arcing fault, but damage will have been done first.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top