AFCI Headache

[Dennis Alwon]

I have heard of numerous problems with AFCI and treadmills specifically. It appears the treadmill companies need to get there act together.

Every year or so there is another product that causes problems either on AFCI or GFCI. We have gone down the road of vacuums, paddle fans,etc.

 

[al hildenbrand]

Same problem with a Landice treadmill and a Cutler Hammer CH120CAF (combination arc fault). Within 60 seconds of the treadmill starting the breaker will trip. A standard CH120 breaker and treadmill connected through a GFCI outlet will not trip the breaker or GFCI.

When the treadmill is plugged into a surge suppressor (Tripp Lite ISOBAR4ULTRA) the combination AFCI will no longer trip. . .

Welcome to the Forum, Mark.

Interesting post.

This is the Spec Sheet

UL1449 1998 Rev. (AC Suppression)
UL1283 (EMI Filter)
UL1363 (Power Tap)
cUL / CSA (Canada)
Approvals Exceeds IEEE 587 category A&B specifications

AC suppression joule rating................2200 joules
AC suppression response time.............NM = 0 ns. CM = <1 ns
Protection modes.............................Includes full normal mode (H-N) and common mode (N-G / H-G) line surge suppression
Clamping voltage (RMS).....................140V
AC suppression surge current rating.....85,000 amps (36,000 NM / 49,000 CM)
AC suppression components used........Metal oxide varistors, toroidal balanced chokes, ferrite rod-core inductors and VHF capacitors.
Safe thermal fusing...........................Prevents unsafe conditions during extreme extended over-voltages and catastrophic occurrences
UL1499 let through rating...................330V - UL Verified
IEEE587 Cat. A ringwave let through.....Less than 35 volts
EMI / RFI filtering..............................40-80 dB
Isolated filter banks...........................Unique isolated filter bank design offers additional filtering between each duplex pair of outlets on the strip to prevent electrical noise interference between connected loads. Includes 2 filter banks.
Immunity Conforms to IEE 587 / ANSI C62.41

 

[al hildenbrand]

I have heard . . .

Nice to "see" you this morning, Dennis!

 

[ELA]

Same problem with a Landice treadmill and a Cutler Hammer CH120CAF (combination arc fault). Within 60 seconds of the treadmill starting the breaker will trip. A standard CH120 breaker and treadmill connected through a GFCI outlet will not trip the breaker or GFCI.

When the treadmill is plugged into a surge suppressor (Tripp Lite ISOBAR4ULTRA) the combination AFCI will no longer trip.

YMMV. It's unclear what the Tripp Lite is preventing the AFCI from seeing, or just how much AFCI functionality is being negated by using a device like this which is built to suppress noise. It may also be filtering the waveforms the (C)AFCI uses to detect real arcing.

--
mark

Thank you maf,

I had suspected that an EMI filter may help these types of situations:
http://forums.mikeholt.com/showpost.php?p=1174564&postcount=14

 

[don_resqcapt19]

I have heard of numerous problems with AFCI and treadmills specifically. It appears the treadmill companies need to get there act together.

Every year or so there is another product that causes problems either on AFCI or GFCI. We have gone down the road of vacuums, paddle fans,etc.

I think it is the AFCI manufacturers that need to get their acts together, not the equipment manufacturers.

 

[One-eyed Jack]

I think it is the AFCI manufacturers that need to get their acts together, not the equipment manufacturers.

Ditto that!!!!!!!!!

 

[Riograndeelectric]

AFCI Issues

AFCI Issues

This was passed on to me via a Friend of mine. Not sure were he got this from.



Some interesting tidbits of info: firmware for us is basically thousands and thousands of lines of computer code that generate some type of mathematical 'signature' wave form - this is how we are able to program the breaker so quickly and easily and tell it how to identify good and bad arcs, for example; or replicate what
appliances are doing to the sine wave signature. But UL 1699 does not to my knowledge have in
its 150 or so required tests anything to address compatibility with appliances.....so we can only test to what we have standards for in UL 1699.
Also think about this: the CAFI breaker does something like 3.2 billion diagnostic checks of the circuit every year and determines if it should trip. That is a lot of diagnostic programming capability in one breaker!!!

I believe actually NEMA is one taking up the topic of addressing all of these issues with the appliance manufacturers. For instance I think most plasma screen t.v.'s violate FCC emissions standards for residential yet as you point out the breaker takes the blame because it tripped on something it was programmed to do or is outside the realm of FCC standards, UL, NEMA, etc We do our own research in our labs. basically if we can replicate something an appliance is creating then we have successfully addressed with changes to the firmware in the digital processor in the CAFI breaker. situations in our labs - and again, if we can measure it/replicate it - then we can address it with firmware changes.

we went into production on what we believe is the last firmware release we will ever have to do to the CAFI programming - and yes we basically loosened the programming as much as we could and still attain UL 1699 but we had to do it in order to

 

[Dennis Alwon]

I think it is the AFCI manufacturers that need to get their acts together, not the equipment manufacturers.

You may be right but It seems that the AFCI business will never be able to accommodate each and every unit built. Somehow they need to work together on this. New design, new problem, etc.

 

[Dennis Alwon]

Nice to "see" you this morning, Dennis!

Thanks Al-- It was a tough one hear.

 

[Riograndeelectric]

It is the appliance manufacturers who need to get there act together.
why is it in 10 years the Appliance manufacturers have been able to manufacturer low quality electrical/ electronic s.

we need to quit blaming the AFCI manufacturers and start blaming the Appliance manufacturers.
just like with GFCI devices tripping we tend to blame the GFCI when most of the time it is the appliance leaking current. so is this not the same thing as appliances inputting arcing signatures on to an AFCI circuit or .

UL and NEMA need to push appliance manufacturers into compliance with AFCI's

 

[hillbilly1]

The only issue I personally had with the arc faults, is the heat generation of the early models, breakers would overheat,and trip even with only 2-3 amp loads. That doesn't mean there are not problems, but all I have installed, have not given me any problems. I have not changed the way I wire houses, as some have said that you cannot run multiple circuits thru the same hole, or group the conductors together in panels, but I have and have not had any problems. Since it works with the drill, and does not trip the GFI, I would say it is an RF problem caused by the equipment that maybe the surge suppressor dampens or eliminates.

 

[ELA]

This was passed on to me via a Friend of mine. Not sure were he got this from.



Some interesting tidbits of info: firmware for us is basically thousands and thousands of lines of computer code that generate some type of mathematical 'signature' wave form - this is how we are able to program the breaker so quickly and easily and tell it how to identify good and bad arcs, for example; or replicate what
appliances are doing to the sine wave signature. But UL 1699 does not to my knowledge have in
its 150 or so required tests anything to address compatibility with appliances.....so we can only test to what we have standards for in UL 1699.
Also think about this: the CAFI breaker does something like 3.2 billion diagnostic checks of the circuit every year and determines if it should trip. That is a lot of diagnostic programming capability in one breaker!!!

I believe actually NEMA is one taking up the topic of addressing all of these issues with the appliance manufacturers. For instance I think most plasma screen t.v.'s violate FCC emissions standards for residential yet as you point out the breaker takes the blame because it tripped on something it was programmed to do or is outside the realm of FCC standards, UL, NEMA, etc We do our own research in our labs. basically if we can replicate something an appliance is creating then we have successfully addressed with changes to the firmware in the digital processor in the CAFI breaker. situations in our labs - and again, if we can measure it/replicate it - then we can address it with firmware changes.

we went into production on what we believe is the last firmware release we will ever have to do to the CAFI programming - and yes we basically loosened the programming as much as we could and still attain UL 1699 but we had to do it in order to

Sorry but this sounds like a lot of BS to me.
There are a many types of equipment that have been in place prior to the requirement of AFCIs. Some of them have what appears as an "arcing signature" as part of their normal operation. Examples being treadmills and vacuum cleaners.
If manufacturers of AFCI's are not able to discriminate between a "real and potentially dangerous arc" and normal and expected high frequency emissions then they never should have released their products prematurely.

Having to add EMI filters to equipment after the fact should not be the responsibility of electrician's stuck in the middle.

 

[don_resqcapt19]

You may be right but It seems that the AFCI business will never be able to accommodate each and every unit built. Somehow they need to work together on this. New design, new problem, etc.

I'm sorry, but if they can't make the AFCIs work with every piece of properly functioning equipment that is available, then they should remove the requirement to use AFCIs from the code. This should never be the end user's or equipment manufacturer's problem...it should only be the problem of the AFCI manufacturers.

 

[dstryr]

I'm sorry, but if they can't make the AFCIs work with every piece of properly functioning equipment that is available, then they should remove the requirement to use AFCIs from the code. This should never be the end user's or equipment manufacturer's problem...it should only be the problem of the AFCI manufacturers.

I agree with this. We are seeing virtually every and any type of load causing nuisance tripping. Expensive standard TVs, microwave ovens, flatscreen TVs, vacuums, and now even a high probability that cell tower RF is at issue in certain installations. RadioShack sells a clip-on RF limiter to put on power supply cords for appliances but that isn't a good solution.

On another note, I have just heard that CH has introduced an RFI filtering AFCI breaker. Any word or spec on it?

Thanks,
FS

 

[iwire]

Am close to cutting cord and hardwiring.Yes I know voids warranty.

That would not get you out of using an AFCI, the circuit would still have to be AFCI protected.

 

[iwire]

I'm sorry, but if they can't make the AFCIs work with every piece of properly functioning equipment that is available, then they should remove the requirement to use AFCIs from the code. This should never be the end user's or equipment manufacturer's problem...it should only be the problem of the AFCI manufacturers.

I do not understand this view in the least.

I expect manufactures to produce appliances that can work with the required premises wiring.

We certainly say we expect that with say refrigerators and GFCIs.

 

[jimport]

As has been reported on this website numerous times, vacuum cleaners commonly trip AFCI's.

I just heard a speaker from UL say that the arc signature of the vacuum was one of the types of arcs that the AFCI is supposed to ignore.

 

[K8MHZ]

I just heard a speaker from UL say that the arc signature of the vacuum was one of the types of arcs that the AFCI is supposed to ignore.

New or used?

How can anyone predict the arc sigs of an aging piece of equipment? They can't even do it for treadmills that are brand new.

They will figure it out eventually, but in the interim we need more than just 'do it or screw it' from the rule makers.

There should be an exemption for devices known to be prone to nuisance tripping.

 

[don_resqcapt19]

I do not understand this view in the least.

I expect manufactures to produce appliances that can work with the required premises wiring.

We certainly say we expect that with say refrigerators and GFCIs.

Because there is no standard on how the AFCIs detect the arc...there are only standards on what arcs to detect and when to trip the circuit.
I don't see this as even remotely close to the GFCI issue. There is no question on how they work and what they look at.
That is not the case with AFCIs. The algorithms used to detect arcs are proprietary. The equipment manufacturer's have no access to this information and and even if they did, why should they have to redesign their equipment to work with another device that is really based only on voodoo science?

 

[George Stolz]

What is a nuisance trip?

Last night, I was opening up a hole in a floor for a floor outlet with my trusty 4? rotozip from HF. The AFCI tripped, and I plugged the cord into the bath GFCI to get the job done.

Now, I know my old rotozip is nearing the end of it's life, but it still seems to work just fine - I would call that a nuisance trip. There is no danger to life or property from the thing as far as I can tell, and I have no way of diagnosing the problem.