AFCI receptacle

[s.c.myoung]

On Feb. 17, a member posted a question asking if there is any receptacle AFCI product available on the market and there was a reply presuming that there is no receptacle AFCI in current market.
I would like to let you know that receptacle AFCI products will be available on the market soon.

I am working for an AFCI company developing and manufacturing AFCI products. We already have UL listed AFCI receptacle products.
Our company name is “Human Eltech Inc.” and is located in South Korea. Our UL certified AFCI products are as below.

UL listed Products (Receptacle) – listed on Feb 6, 2003
- Combination type AFCI (File number : E234344)
- Outlet Branch Circuit type AFCI (File number : E232754)
- Outlet Circuit type AFCI (File number : E231863)

UL Classified Products (Circuit Breaker)
- Combination type AFCI (File number : E212671)
- Branch/Feeder type AFCI (File number : E212671)

I’d like to exchange many views and information on receptacle AFCI.

 

[Len_B]

Re: AFCI receptacle

s.c.myoung,

Does your receptacle AFCI device also have GFCI protection?
Can you provide the suggested retail prices for these products?

Len

 

[curt swartz]

Re: AFCI receptacle

The problem with a receptacle type AFCI is that it could not be used to provide the protection required by 210.12(B) which requires protection of the entire branch circuit.

 

[Len_B]

Re: AFCI receptacle

Yeah, but it could provide arc fault protection and possibly prevent the 65% - 75%(or even higher%) of fires that occur in the recepts, plugs, ext cords, utilization equipment, and fixed wiring after this first AFCI device.
AND if the price is fair(in line with the risk factors) there is a huge market for feed through AFCI recept. devices in existing homes.
210.12 only applies to new construction, and only where the local government adopted NEC with 210.12 intact. Several states have/are adopting 2002 without AFCI requirements, and I think you will see some drop 210.12 and ammend to require AFCI's but allow the device/recept type.

Len

 

[s.c.myoung]

Re: AFCI receptacle

Len_B

For information on the retail prices, contact to this e-mail address "humaneltech@yahoo.co.kr".

The retail prices will be generally known when the products are available in retail market.

 

[s.c.myoung]

Re: AFCI receptacle

Though NEC 120.12(B)requires protection of entire branch circuit, the Branch/Feeder type AFCI products available in current market are for protection of the branch circuit wiring, feeder wiring, or both, against unwanted effects of arcing.

So, AFCI receptacle is required to protect extention wiring such as cord set and power supply cord against unwanted arc faults.
Furthermore, Combination type AFCI receptacle can protect downstream branch circuit wiring, cord sets, and power-supply cords against the unwanted effects of arcing.

 

[ronaldrc]

Re: AFCI receptacle

Maybe thats whats wrong with our economy, everyone afraid to speak up?

Could you possibly manufacture these in the USA and put some of our friends back to work.

Most of us would pay quite a bit more for a life saving item.

I know you will sell millions at $5.00 a piece and half that many at $25.00 a piece, but business is business right?

Ronald:

 

[curt swartz]

Re: AFCI receptacle

Len

We can provide that protection now by using AFCI breakers. Are you installing AFCI breakers for all of your branch circuits? Where are you getting this data that AFCI devices will prevent 65% - 75% of fires? I would like to read it so would Don and many other members here including Mike Holt. I'm not totally against AFCI's I just feel we need more honest data about them. I also think that the NEC should allow feed-thru AFCI receptacles to be installed to meet the requirement since AFCI circuit breakers are not available for many older panels.

 

[don_resqcapt19]

Re: AFCI receptacle

Len,
Can you cite a source for the 65% plus effectiveness of AFCI's? Even the published statements by AFCI manufactures in the last 2 code cycles indicated an effectiveness of about 40%.
Don

 

[Len_B]

Re: AFCI receptacle

edit: Don, I cannot. I was simply basing this on the greatest possible good effect they could have.

Where are you getting this data that AFCI devices will prevent 65% - 75% of fires?

Curt,
The NFPA claims that fixed wiring accounts for only approx 1/3 of residential electrical fires.
http://www.nfpa.org/Research/NFPAFactSheets/Electrical/electrical.asp

I can only conclude that the rest are caused by devices, cords, and ground faulted or short circuited utilization equipment, etc. On review, I should have worded my post differently, such as, "might prevent up to 65%... in the areas served by these devices..."
Sorry, I did not mean to make false claims, bad composing on my part. The problem is that even NFPA will give you two or three different answers to the same question and manipulate the statistics to make a particular point. The CPSC will have another, different set of data. To be honest, I don't think we will ever know how effective AFCI's can be because the benchmark data is not very good.

The point I was trying to make in the post is that if an economical AFCI product can be brought to the marketplace, it can be incorporated into existing structures more easily and cost effectively. The breakers are rather expensive and do not provide a level of protection commensurate with their price. However, I feel this is technology well worth pursuing and I am afraid it is going to "shoot itself in the foot" by going the breaker only route. Competition for a bigger market by device manufacturers would lower the price of this technology. The requirement for new dwellings is statistically not very significant as older homes are the ones most in need of this technology.

I have some very stong opinions on this subject, and have spoken my mind in the old forum, go to 2nd post by Len Bonosevich at:
http://www.mikeholt.com/forum/Forum1/HTML/005799.html

Sorry for any mis-information,

Len

[ February 22, 2003, 01:22 PM: Message edited by: Len_B ]

 

[s.c.myoung]

Re: AFCI receptacle

lEN

I've found some information on CPSC's research from NASFM's website.
According to the information, 82% of Electrical fires in one-and two family dwellings were caused by arcing. It says also that the CPSC technical staff, after concluding a great deal of independent research on AFCI's, estimates that 50-75% of residential electrical fires can be prevented by employing AFCI technology.

Here are the website
http://www.firemarshals.org/issues/home/home_pdf/electrical_pdf/sections_1_thru_4.pdf

http://www.firemarshals.org/issues/home/home_pdf/electrical_pdf/appendix_c1.pdf
http://www.firemarshals.org/issues/home/home_pdf/electrical_pdf/appendix_c2.pdf

S.C. Myoung

 

[Ed MacLaren]

Re: AFCI receptacle

s.c.myoung,

So, AFCI receptacle is required to protect extention wiring such as cord set and power supply cord against unwanted arc faults.

Are you saying that you believe an AFCI breaker will not protect against extension cord faults?

Ed

 

[s.c.myoung]

Re: AFCI receptacle

MacLaren,

In the AFCI product categoty of UL, there are two types of AFCI breaker, Branch/Feeder type AFCI and Combination type AFCI.
According to UL's definition, "B/F type AFCI breaker" is intented to protect branch circuit wiring,feeder wiring, or both against arc faults.
On the other hand, the "Combination AFCI" is defined to comply with the requirements for both branch/feeder and outlet circuit AFCIs.
So, "Combination type AFCI breaker" can protect extention wiring against arc faults.

 

[russellroberts]

Re: AFCI receptacle

The question I have is, do afci breakers protect against an arc due to a poor/corroded splice?

 

[mikeackley]

Re: AFCI receptacle

Here are two very informative (and easy reading) links I found on UL's website which summarize the type of arc fault protection that each AFCI product category is listed to provide.
http://www.ul.com/auth/tca/fall02/Print/Print3.pdf
http://www.ul.com/regulators/afci/Dini2.pdf

Note there are a total of six AFCI product categories defined by UL, not to be confused with what is commercially available today.

P.S. You'll need Adobe Acrobat Reader to read these UL summaries.

[ February 28, 2003, 11:22 PM: Message edited by: mikeackley ]

 

[roger]

Re: AFCI receptacle

S.C.Myoung, I have a real problem with salesmen( or marketing on this board) who can only say you will pay what we decide you will pay. (E-Mail address)

Now, the problem in my mind with the whole AFCI issue is, as you keep refering to, "arcing" as in parallel arcing. This is the only function of these devices.

Since this device came on the market I have wondered if parallel arcing causes as many situations as series arcing.

Now, back to the salesman end of your post, put up or shut up.

Roger

[ March 01, 2003, 07:49 AM: Message edited by: roger ]

 

[russellroberts]

Re: AFCI receptacle

IMHO, nfpa says on their website that afci breakers will protect against "arcing caused by loose connections" I find no UL statement to back this up.Am I overlooking something?

 

[mikeackley]

Re: AFCI receptacle

Russell:

I think you will find the answer to your question if you go to the UL links on AFCI protection I provided a few posts back on this thread.

The "poor/corroded splice" or "arcing caused by loose connections" you refer to could result in "Series Arcing" as defined by UL.

The Branch/Feeder type of AFCI protection is listed to detect Parallel Arcing on Branch Circuit Wiring. And they are listed to detect Series Arching on Branch Circuit Wiring WITH Ground. They are not listed to detect Series Arcing on Branch Circuits without ground. As far as cord sets and power supply cords are concerned, these Branch/Feeder type AFCI's are listed to detect Parallel Arcing but NOT Series Arcing.

Series Arcing detection on cord set and power supply cords is provided by the Combination type and Outlet Circuit type of AFCI's.

My data source can be found on UL's website:
http://www.ul.com/auth/tca/fall02/Print/Print3.pdf
http://www.ul.com/regulators/afci/Dini2.pdf

[ March 01, 2003, 12:36 AM: Message edited by: mikeackley ]

 

[russellroberts]

Re: AFCI receptacle

Thanks Mike.

 

[s.c.myoung]

Re: AFCI receptacle

Rodger,

In my last post, I just wanted to let the board participants know that there is a manufacturer who has AFCI products that have the features that AFCI are basically required to have and that are required by UL requirement.
And also I wanted to express my view on the differences among several AFCI types and the necessity of them.
Please understand the salesman end of my intention contained partially in my post.

We also think that the issue you pointed out is a very important one.
Electrical arcs can be classified into hazardous arcs which cause electrical fire and indispensible arcs that occur inevitably in the course of operation of electrical devices like dimmer.
The UL standard(UL 1699) requires Unwanted tripping test as AFCI devices must not trip against indispensible arcs.
Normally, arc faults which can cause electrical fires are classified into two kinds. One is such an arc fault that is caused by damages by outside physical objects or forces like spikes, studs, hammering on wire or cords or squeezing them between doors and door frames, etc. Point Contact Arc Test in the UL standard is for testing for the external effects.
The other one is such an arc fault that is caused by carbonized insulation of wire and cord. They are generally caused by break-down of insulation from natural aging of wire and cord and from degradation of plastic insulation by continuous high temperature by overload, long exposure to heat sources like sunlight, heat vents etc. Several arc tests with test pieces of the wire with carbonized path in the UL standard are for those arc faults.
The UL category includes 6 types of AFCI device. Except Branch/Feeder type AFCI, all the other AFCI devices are required to be tested by carbonized path arc clearing time test (UL 1699, 56.4). For this test, test pieces of the wire with carbonized path made artificially by cutting the insulation of SPT-2 wire has to be used. It is for creating series arcs at various low level current. The AFCI to be tested must trip within the time described in the UL standard.

According to our study, it is thought that frequency of the arc faults caused by carbonized path of wire and cord is much higher than that of the arc faults caused by damages by outside physical objects or forces, and that it is the reason why UL requires more testing on Carbonized Path Arc Test than Point Contact Arc Test which is for testing for external effects.
The arc faults by carbonized path are developed slowly, gradually and stealthily and are more problematic than arc faults by external effects.

In any case, all AFCI devices should be able to detect serious arc faults not to mention parallel arc faults.
And also they should be able to tell the end-users the exact cause of interruption whether it is by arc fault or ground fault so that they can easily trace and find the problematic point.

Thanks for reading.