AFCI for FCU?

[kwired]

First of all the code says oulet , the CMP removed the word receptacle outlet.
Not all outlets have receptacles , however all receptacles are outlets.

That being said. Why only outlets in a dwelling within the conditioned space seem to need either afci , GFCI or both but outlets in an attc do not. I suppose a arc will not occur at a attic outlet.
See what we did not know is that ARC's and resulting fires are smart and know never to occur in a attic or crawlspace. :rant:

I don't have my 1999 and 2002 codes handy, but I am pretty sure when AFCI was introduced it never specifically said "receptacle outlets" and the AFCI rules applied to all outlets in the areas where protction was required. I remember the biggest confusion at the time was the smoke detectors are considered outlets and people were missing this fact and failing inspections because the smoke detectors were often on a different non-AFCI protected circuit.

AFCI's are going to be expanded. They started out in just bedrooms. Not only is there controversy over whether or not they do what the manufacturers claim, they were first just introduced for bedrooms, then somewhat eased their way into more requirements.

You can be assured the manufacturers will fully support their use on pretty much any branch circuit, and will continue to push for expanded application requirements.

If they do what they say they will do, it probably is a good idea. The jury is still debating that one though, and the consumer is the real testing lab.

 

[kwired]

won't let me see next page - trying to see if posting fixes it


worked, don't know why it does this sometimes.

 

[Dennis Alwon]

won't let me see next page - trying to see if posting fixes it


worked, don't know why it does this sometimes.

Don't know either but it happens to all of us.

 

[al hildenbrand]

I would say the lamp is the utilization equipment.

Utilization Equipment. Equipment that utilizes electric
energy for electronic, electromechanical, chemical, heating,
lighting, or similar purposes


The fixture does not use energy, IMO.

Take a look at the definition of Premises Wiring (System) in Article 100 Definitions. The last sentence lists things that have internal wiring that are not part of the Premises Wiring (System) and specifically includes "luminaires" in this list.

The current "taken" by the Utilization Equipment has to leave the Premises Wiring (System) in order to enter the wiring of the Luminaire, and that current does the leaving at the Outlet.

 

[S'mise]

I agree, Its a "lighting outlet"

I predict the code will soon say AFCI everything.

 

[wirebender]

Take a look at the definition of Premises Wiring (System) in Article 100 Definitions. The last sentence lists things that have internal wiring that are not part of the Premises Wiring (System) and specifically includes "luminaires" in this list.

The current "taken" by the Utilization Equipment has to leave the Premises Wiring (System) in order to enter the wiring of the Luminaire, and that current does the leaving at the Outlet.

okay, thanks.

 

[kwired]

Take a look at the definition of Premises Wiring (System) in Article 100 Definitions. The last sentence lists things that have internal wiring that are not part of the Premises Wiring (System) and specifically includes "luminaires" in this list.

The current "taken" by the Utilization Equipment has to leave the Premises Wiring (System) in order to enter the wiring of the Luminaire, and that current does the leaving at the Outlet.

So does that make the outlet for a typical recessed luminaire outside of the room served by the luminaire?

If that is so then AFCI protection should not be required for these particular outlets, because the outlet is not in any of the rooms listed in 210.12. If there are other outlets on same circuit, which is often the case, you may need AFCI protection anyway depending on their location.

I do agree with your description of where the outlet is located.

 

[al hildenbrand]

So does that make the outlet for a typical recessed luminaire outside of the room served by the luminaire?

The question is an interesting dalliance worthy of extensive break verbal sparring.

The "outlet" at the recessed luminaire, applying the last sentence of the Article 100 Definition of Premises Wiring (System) is inside the recessed luminaire junction box, a junction box that is completely behind the ceiling (or wall) surface.

Is the exposed ceiling surface the "NEC defined" boundary of the "room or area"?

For those inclined to argue so, and to, in the hypothetical, talk about a branch circuit comprised of a switch and only lighting outlets, all of which are recessed luminaires with j-boxes above (outside) the room, I'm going to shift the discussion to the luminaire controller.

You see, "a switch, used as a controller" by the same Article 100 Definition of Premises Wiring (System) has internal wiring that is not allowed to be part of the Premises Wiring (System). When the controller is ON, and the recessed luminaires (utilization equipment) are "taking" current, the current taken passes through the wiring internal to the switch used as a controller, and is outside the Premises Wiring (System). The "point" at with the current taken by the utilization equipment leaves the Premises Wiring (System) to pass through the wiring internal to the switch is, IMO, an Outlet.

So, since an outlet occurs in a switch used as a controller, and the switch is inside the room or area, even though the recessed luminaires lighting outlets are in j-boxes that one might technically argue are outside of the room or area, the branch circuit must, if in 210.12s listed areas, be AFCI protected.

 

[don_resqcapt19]

....
So, since an outlet occurs in a switch used as a controller...

An outlet does not occur at a switch or controller.

 

[al hildenbrand]

An outlet does not occur at a switch or controller.

Depends upon how you look at it. . . kinda like a the lighting outlet at a recessed luminare not being in the room that the luminaire illuminates.

Like I say. . . break talk.

 

[don_resqcapt19]

Depends upon how you look at it. . . kinda like a the lighting outlet at a recessed luminare not being in the room that the luminaire illuminates.

Like I say. . . break talk.

I think the second point is very subject to debate, but I don't think there is any question that a swich or controller is not an outlet.

 

[al hildenbrand]

You see, "a switch, used as a controller" by the same Article 100 Definition of Premises Wiring (System) has internal wiring that is not allowed to be part of the Premises Wiring (System). When the controller is ON, and the recessed luminaires (utilization equipment) are "taking" current, the current taken passes through the wiring internal to the switch used as a controller, and is outside the Premises Wiring (System). The "point" at with the current taken by the utilization equipment leaves the Premises Wiring (System) to pass through the wiring internal to the switch is, IMO, an Outlet.

An outlet does not occur at a switch or controller.

I offered my opinion, and you've given your opinion.

I'll raise you four NEC citations:

1. Article 100 Definitions: Controller
2. Article 100 Definitions: Outlet
3. Article 100 Definitions: Premises Wiring (System)
4. Article 404 Section 14: Rating and Use of Snap Switches

 

[don_resqcapt19]

I offered my opinion, and you've given your opinion.

I'll raise you four NEC citations:

1. Article 100 Definitions: Controller
2. Article 100 Definitions: Outlet
3. Article 100 Definitions: Premises Wiring (System)
4. Article 404 Section 14: Rating and Use of Snap Switches

Yes, the very ones that say that a switch is not outlet.

 

[Dennis Alwon]

I agree with Don a switch is not an outlet as you cannot take power from it. It brings power to another point. You coud have a switch in a bedroom that controls outdoor floods and it would not require AFCI.

 

[al hildenbrand]

Yes, the very ones that say that a switch is not outlet.

I rest my case. . . we are showing that it is debatable.

 

[al hildenbrand]

I agree with Don a switch is not an outlet as you cannot take power from it. It brings power to another point.

Nothing in the definitions says that there can only be ONE outlet from the Premises Wiring (System), and nothing in the definitions says that the outlet has to be only at the connection between the Premises Wiring (System) and the wiring internal to the utilization equipment.

You coud have a switch in a bedroom that controls outdoor floods and it would not require AFCI.

If one believes the interpretation of the language in the definitions shows there is an outlet at the connection of the Premises Wiring (System) to the wiring internal to the switch used as a controller, then the outdoor flood branch circuit requires an AFCI.

 

[don_resqcapt19]

Nothing in the definitions says that there can only be ONE outlet from the Premises Wiring (System), and nothing in the definitions says that the outlet has to be only at the connection between the Premises Wiring (System) and the wiring internal to the utilization equipment. If one believes the interpretation of the language in the definitions shows there is an outlet at the connection of the Premises Wiring (System) to the wiring internal to the switch used as a controller, then the outdoor flood branch circuit requires an AFCI.

The issue is the fact that a switch is not installed an an outlet. The switch is not equipment that uses power.

 

[kwired]

The switch is not equipment that uses power.

Though I agree with that, it has potentially been complicated with timer, occupancy sensor switches, and the like. Then they added the need for a grounded circuit conductor at many switch locations recently...

A simple dry contact switch is not an outlet, all others???

 

[al hildenbrand]

The switch is not equipment that uses power.

"Power" is not in the definition of Outlet -- ONLY current. Whether a switch consumes power or not and how much power is consumed is a canard, a red herring, a meaningless distraction from the actual Article 100 Definition of Outlet.

The issue is the fact that a switch is not installed as an outlet.

The issue is that the CURRENT taken by the utilization equipment -- taken at a point where the Premises Wiring (System) stops and the wiring internal to "appliances, luminaires, motors, controllers, motor control centers, and similar equipment" STARTS -- wiring that is NOT Premises Wiring (System) -- " a point on the wiring system at which current is taken to supply utilization equipment" can't be distinguished from the point at a receptacle outlet, from "the point" at a lighting outlet, and from the point at a simple snap switch used as a controller where the current (taken by downstream utilization equipment) has to leave the Premises Wiring (System) in order for the current (taken by downstream utilization equipment) to travel through the wiring internal to the controller (snap switch).

 

[don_resqcapt19]

We will have to agree to disagree. To me there is nothing in the code that even suggests that a switch is installed at an outlet.