AFCI Question
- Thread starter sparky_magoo
- Start date
- Status
radiopet
Senior Member
- Location
- Spotsylvania, VA
WHAT.....lol......now celtic you know it is in my profile....
radiopet
Senior Member
- Location
- Spotsylvania, VA
OH lord....do I dare post it for fear of Playful Razzing......ok..ok....www.theelectricalguru.com
radiopet
Senior Member
- Location
- Spotsylvania, VA
yeah but don't you go over their unless you join my board as well....lol....
Actually here is a GREAT article on the AFCI .....ENJOY - http://www.iaei.org/subscriber/magazine/04_d/smittle.htm
Actually here is a GREAT article on the AFCI .....ENJOY - http://www.iaei.org/subscriber/magazine/04_d/smittle.htm
Last edited:
- Location
- Illinois
- Occupation
- retired electrician
Paul,
As far as manufacturers statements they have done irreversible damage to me...I will never blindly trust another statement from a manufacturer. There is nothing they can do to make be believe that they are not providing misleading information. They have made a perment skeptic of me.
Don
Its too late...I switched to all fuses in place of breakers:grin:
As far as manufacturers statements they have done irreversible damage to me...I will never blindly trust another statement from a manufacturer. There is nothing they can do to make be believe that they are not providing misleading information. They have made a perment skeptic of me.
Don
- Location
- Illinois
- Occupation
- retired electrician
Paul,
They strongly imply that most fires of electrical origin are caused by a parallel arcing fault. I don't believe that is the case. Most electrical fires occur at a point of connection. This type of fault produces heat with low current and no arcing and is not directly detected by an AFCI.
They cite a cost benefit by the CPSC but the homebuilders association cites a total different cost benefit.
They tell you that the branch circuit/feeder AFCI provides protection beyond the outlet, but fail to tell you that you must have at least 75 amps of fault current before the AFCI even looks at the arc. The end of many branch circuits, let alone the end of a 18-2 zip cord cannot supply 75 amps.
This whole thing is nothing more than a big snow job to pad the bottom line. If they don't make these things work as promised it may very well do the opposite. Once we have AFCI on all of the circuits and there are still fires of electrical origin, there should be a very large class action product liability suit that will remove the product from the market and punish the shareholders.
Don
Even some details in that article are very misleading when you dig deep. They completely gloss over the fact that a very small percentage of the fires of electrical origin occur in dwelling units under 20 years old. The do not tell you that there is no reliable fire cause and origin data for most dwelling unit fires in the US. The cause for a very large number of these fires is listed on the fire report by the first due in company officer, a person with mimimal training in fire cause and origin. There is no way to know what type of electrical fault caused the fire and in many cases, because of errors in the fire investigation textbooks, non electrical fires are classified as electrical fires. One example is a text that said "if you see small rounded balls of copper on the wire the fire was caused by an electrical fault". Well these same small round balls of copper are formed when the fire from some other cause melts the insulation and permits a short to occur. Yes you can tell the difference in a lab, but it would be a very rare home fire where a sample is sent to a lab.
They strongly imply that most fires of electrical origin are caused by a parallel arcing fault. I don't believe that is the case. Most electrical fires occur at a point of connection. This type of fault produces heat with low current and no arcing and is not directly detected by an AFCI.
They cite a cost benefit by the CPSC but the homebuilders association cites a total different cost benefit.
They tell you that the branch circuit/feeder AFCI provides protection beyond the outlet, but fail to tell you that you must have at least 75 amps of fault current before the AFCI even looks at the arc. The end of many branch circuits, let alone the end of a 18-2 zip cord cannot supply 75 amps.
This whole thing is nothing more than a big snow job to pad the bottom line. If they don't make these things work as promised it may very well do the opposite. Once we have AFCI on all of the circuits and there are still fires of electrical origin, there should be a very large class action product liability suit that will remove the product from the market and punish the shareholders.
Don
radiopet
Senior Member
- Location
- Spotsylvania, VA
don_resqcapt19 said:
lol....man you are bitter at em...thehehhee.....it's all good fella...
- Location
- Illinois
- Occupation
- retired electrician
Paul,
Don
Yes, I just don't like being lied to. They know exactly what they are doing. The details are all there when you dig deep enough, they just try to bury them deep enough so that you won't dig. Where ever I can, I will be advocating that the AHJs skip the 2008 NEC.
Don
- Location
- Chapel Hill, NC
- Occupation
- Retired Electrical Contractor
celtic said:
I believe you would. I think that was why they were going to allow the arc fault receptacles but they haven't materialized---yet
LawnGuyLandSparky
Senior Member
Don is onto something.
The house next door to a friend of mine burned to the ground in January. The owner had just stepped out to p/u some food. According to "fire officials" (unpaid volunteers) the fire was deemed electrical, and even pinpointed the source. A livingroom outlet, the last on a circuit under a 2-gang switch. (Switch was for the porch light and the hall light)
This outlet is one of 5 livingroom outlets on a circuit along with the diningroom light, a back porch light, the kitchen light and the oil burner room light. Nothing was connected to it and the proch & hall lights were off. By no means overloaded.
It seems that somehow, when no other cause can be determined, that all fires are declared electrical by default. So much so that you never hear "the cause of the fire was undetermined."
The house next door to a friend of mine burned to the ground in January. The owner had just stepped out to p/u some food. According to "fire officials" (unpaid volunteers) the fire was deemed electrical, and even pinpointed the source. A livingroom outlet, the last on a circuit under a 2-gang switch. (Switch was for the porch light and the hall light)
This outlet is one of 5 livingroom outlets on a circuit along with the diningroom light, a back porch light, the kitchen light and the oil burner room light. Nothing was connected to it and the proch & hall lights were off. By no means overloaded.
It seems that somehow, when no other cause can be determined, that all fires are declared electrical by default. So much so that you never hear "the cause of the fire was undetermined."
- Location
- Chapel Hill, NC
- Occupation
- Retired Electrical Contractor
A house down the road burned to the ground 3 weeks ago and they couldn't determine the cause. I will add that they thought squirrels chewing the wires in the attic may have been the cause.
I worked as a volunteer fireman for a few years and I had only seen one fire that was attributed to electrical. It was indeed of electrical origin.
It is interesting to me that if someone puts a paper bag filled with junk in front of a baseboard or space heater they will consider that an electrical fire. I consider it a fire caused by stupidity. I doubt they can write that in their reports.
I worked as a volunteer fireman for a few years and I had only seen one fire that was attributed to electrical. It was indeed of electrical origin.
It is interesting to me that if someone puts a paper bag filled with junk in front of a baseboard or space heater they will consider that an electrical fire. I consider it a fire caused by stupidity. I doubt they can write that in their reports.
winnie
Senior Member
- Location
- Springfield, MA, USA
- Occupation
- Electric motor research
My opinion: the money spent putting AFCIs in for _all_ 15 and 20A 120V circuits would be far better spent putting in sprinklers. It isn't simply about spending money to improve safety. It is about getting the most safety improvement for each dollar spent on safety.
The cost/benefit of sprinkler installation is still debated, so do your own research. But there have been numerous studies of costs, and in communities where there are mandated sprinkler requirements, there is enough information to say that lives were saved, that costs are reasonable, and (IMHO what is most telling), the benefits are significant enough that insurance companies are offering discounts.
The history of sprinkler systems is a good demonstration of how AFCIs should be implemented. Scottsdale, AZ is the example. They did not initially mandate sprinklers. What the did do was tell developers: if you install sprinklers, we will relax some of the other fire code requirements and so lower your costs; choose the approach that you prefer. _After_ they had statistics to demonstrate that the sprinklers were _sufficiently_ effective to be worth the costs, _then_ they mandated them all around.
-Jon
The cost/benefit of sprinkler installation is still debated, so do your own research. But there have been numerous studies of costs, and in communities where there are mandated sprinkler requirements, there is enough information to say that lives were saved, that costs are reasonable, and (IMHO what is most telling), the benefits are significant enough that insurance companies are offering discounts.
The history of sprinkler systems is a good demonstration of how AFCIs should be implemented. Scottsdale, AZ is the example. They did not initially mandate sprinklers. What the did do was tell developers: if you install sprinklers, we will relax some of the other fire code requirements and so lower your costs; choose the approach that you prefer. _After_ they had statistics to demonstrate that the sprinklers were _sufficiently_ effective to be worth the costs, _then_ they mandated them all around.
-Jon
Mathusalum
Member
- Location
- Montana
I don't understand it!
I don't understand it!
What I don't get about the AFCI's is that code requires them in just the bedrooms. Same thing pretty much applies to Smoke Detectors. If the real reason for the requirements are safety and a means to notify the resident of a hazard, then why aren't they required in other rooms of the house? If an electrical arc can start a fire in a bedroom, whats the difference if its started in the living room? Same thing for a fire.
As a homeowner, I think I'd want protection throughout the entire house, not just where I'm sleeping! Besides, there are many a nights I simply fall asleep in front of the Boob tube in the living room or den.
I don't understand it!
What I don't get about the AFCI's is that code requires them in just the bedrooms. Same thing pretty much applies to Smoke Detectors. If the real reason for the requirements are safety and a means to notify the resident of a hazard, then why aren't they required in other rooms of the house? If an electrical arc can start a fire in a bedroom, whats the difference if its started in the living room? Same thing for a fire.
As a homeowner, I think I'd want protection throughout the entire house, not just where I'm sleeping! Besides, there are many a nights I simply fall asleep in front of the Boob tube in the living room or den.
- Status