AFCI satisfaction poll. Please take a moment to answer.

[romex jockey]

There have been multiple attempts over the last 2 decades to clarify afci's ....

The CSPC has been approached , NEMA afci task force members have forwarded whistleblowing information CMP-2 has seated perennial influences, UL instead of testing to a standard created an unprecedented one.

If you dig, you'll find the same names appearing in these bureaucracies too

You can write all the rop's you want , some of the most eloquent and well written have addressed 210.12, all have been summarily round filed with no more than grade school substantiation

Dig this poll up after the '17 , the rop to have ALL afci ,every 120V circuit .... stands unopposed so far....

How anyone thinks this is less than the collusion it appears is beyond me....

~RJ~

 

[kwired]

There have been multiple attempts over the last 2 decades to clarify afci's ....

The CSPC has been approached , NEMA afci task force members have forwarded whistleblowing information CMP-2 has seated perennial influences, UL instead of testing to a standard created an unprecedented one.

If you dig, you'll find the same names appearing in these bureaucracies too

You can write all the rop's you want , some of the most eloquent and well written have addressed 210.12, all have been summarily round filed with no more than grade school substantiation

Dig this poll up after the '17 , the rop to have ALL afci ,every 120V circuit .... stands unopposed so far....

How anyone thinks this is less than the collusion it appears is beyond me....

~RJ~

I think you were active in this other thread, but wanted to bring what Al H said in post 121 to this one, I think it is well said.

http://forums.mikeholt.com/showthread.php?t=171972&p=1698543#post1698543

 

[mbrooke]

There have been multiple attempts over the last 2 decades to clarify afci's ....

The CSPC has been approached , NEMA afci task force members have forwarded whistleblowing information CMP-2 has seated perennial influences, UL instead of testing to a standard created an unprecedented one.

If you dig, you'll find the same names appearing in these bureaucracies too

You can write all the rop's you want , some of the most eloquent and well written have addressed 210.12, all have been summarily round filed with no more than grade school substantiation

Dig this poll up after the '17 , the rop to have ALL afci ,every 120V circuit .... stands unopposed so far....

How anyone thinks this is less than the collusion it appears is beyond me....

~RJ~

I personally think they are so far in they can not and will not go back. To do so would admit failure. I think 10-15 years ago the CMPs were given an agenda (and its openly admitted to be the goal) to get all 120 volt circuits on AFCI, and I would not be surprised if that agenda also has AFCIs waiting for 240 volt and commercial circuits in the coming code cycles.

 

[mivey]

I personally think they are so far in they can not and will not go back. To do so would admit failure.

Quite pitiful actually. Such is human nature. Great minds have often noted this silly tendency in society and how it causes stumbling blocks that may or may not ever be noted at large.

Just reading a book by noted (and a down-to-earth practical) physicist Richard Feynman were he cites many examples of people doing those things: ignoring the physics/realities and plowing ahead on assumptions or consensus.

 

[mbrooke]

Quite pitiful actually. Such is human nature. Great minds have often noted this silly tendency in society and how it causes stumbling blocks that may or may not ever be noted at large.

Just reading a book by noted (and a down-to-earth practical) physicist Richard Feynman were he cites many examples of people doing those things: ignoring the physics/realities and plowing ahead on assumptions or consensus.

Yes & Yes

I think only now a few in the NFPA are seeing the fallout.

 

[norty25]

AFCI BREAKERS

AFCI BREAKERS

Completely dissatisfied, a pain to trouble shoot, expensive, and most homeowners don't want them.

 

[kwired]

Completely dissatisfied, a pain to trouble shoot, expensive, and most homeowners don't want them.

If they provided a useful function (which many disagree upon) then they may still be worth it though. Not liking them is one thing, if they actually will save significant number of lives and property is another.


Oh, welcome to the forum

 

[LWFLASH]

ARC Breakers

ARC Breakers

If this poll were two years ago, I would be saying nuke them out of the NEC. But I know they have improved false trip reliability a great deal in the last two years, Finally. It would be nice if the people who made bad ones fessed up in public , right on tv, about making electricians look bad to their customers because of all the useless tripping they did. I know that is not going to happen. But it is nice to dream.

1/7/2016 We install these in homes all the time and we get a lot of tripping calls. Recently we have found that if a customer has an old lamp and the post are not larger on one side as the newer modeled cords are, and the lamp is plugged in to the outlet backwards it trips the ARC Fault as it is suppose to. Wonderful technology. Cost us a small fortune to go out to customers homes and end up 80% of time explaining to the customer why it tripped. The stuff is junk, designed by a manufacture and NFPA to be installed as junk because of the amount of money these people get at the NFPA for support from the manufactures the reality of honest need is completely gone and greed sets in. Seriously ARC/GFCI Breakers! Knowing that they both serve different purposes it is really over kill. Exactly how many people have been injured or killed using the code going back to 1999 on wiring homes. Prior to 1999 how many were killed or injured from prior years wiring say knob and tube. The facts are distorted to represent the NFPA and the Manufactures in a light of "We protect the Public" . I am starting to believe they could care less about protecting the public but protecting their sources of income from the manufactures.

 

[kwired]

1/7/2016 We install these in homes all the time and we get a lot of tripping calls. Recently we have found that if a customer has an old lamp and the post are not larger on one side as the newer modeled cords are, and the lamp is plugged in to the outlet backwards it trips the ARC Fault as it is suppose to. Wonderful technology. Cost us a small fortune to go out to customers homes and end up 80% of time explaining to the customer why it tripped. The stuff is junk, designed by a manufacture and NFPA to be installed as junk because of the amount of money these people get at the NFPA for support from the manufactures the reality of honest need is completely gone and greed sets in. Seriously ARC/GFCI Breakers! Knowing that they both serve different purposes it is really over kill. Exactly how many people have been injured or killed using the code going back to 1999 on wiring homes. Prior to 1999 how many were killed or injured from prior years wiring say knob and tube. The facts are distorted to represent the NFPA and the Manufactures in a light of "We protect the Public" . I am starting to believe they could care less about protecting the public but protecting their sources of income from the manufactures.

I have had a lot of tripping calls over the years for GFCI's, but yet believe the GFCI is still worth the potential lives it may save compared to the "nuisance" trips that sometimes have to be endured. The cause of the nuisance trip can usually be determined as well.

AFCI, the concept behind it is potentially valid. The product that is on the market, maybe not good enough to meet the intent though, but it is forced on us to use them whether we agree or not, and it is possible there is conspiracy, on some level that gets them into the NEC or at least a lot of money spent on finding ways to convince CMP's of the need even if the CMP's were not directly involved in any conspiracy. I can dislike them all I want, maybe even give some good explanations of why I don't think they do what they need to do, but don't have the money to present that information to the CMP in a convincing enough way to change their minds.

 

[fmiplmmbr]

Building Official

Building Official

Nuisance trip complaints are a daily event. I do think when the industry gets them fine tuned they will be a great addition to keep fires from happening.

 

[mopowr steve]

Was told the other day by a GC I do work for, that a new home we did last year for a captain of volunteer fire dept. took all his afci's that I installed out.

Hows that grab you!

Well it's on him now.

 

[mbrooke]

Nuisance trip complaints are a daily event. I do think when the industry gets them fine tuned they will be a great addition to keep fires from happening.

Why do you think that?

 

[peter d]

Was told the other day by a GC I do work for, that a new home we did last year for a captain of volunteer fire dept. took all his afci's that I installed out.

Hows that grab you!

Well it's on him now.

Like I always say, once I leave, a homeowner is free to do whatever they want to their own home. I take no liability or responsibility for what occurs once I leave.

 

[romex jockey]

The opinion of the NFPA is that it is more transparent and easier to use. I disagree with both of those points.

I would agree the NFPA transparent in the sense that everything is public knowledge , but like many documents the details may take some time to find, and those details may come from other sources which are tangental to the NFPA


Case in point, UL ......UL has played a major role in the proliferation of arc fault technology

Consider 210.12(A)(3)(b)>

b. The maximum length of the branch-circuit wiring
from the branch-circuit overcurrent device to the
first outlet shall not exceed 15.2 m (50 ft) for a
14 AWG conductor or 21.3 m (70 ft) for a ]2 AWG
conductor

Few gave the lengths here much ado, yet they are not arbitrary and in fact have everything to do with arc fault technology, which based on this UL study has CMP-2 attention...

UL report

Since the release of that report, Code proposals have been developed within Code Panel 2 based on this mathematical relationship. These proposals have been hampered by uncertainty in an appropriate value

for Ipssc, the available current at the panelboard. In some applications of the formula, Ipssc is assumed to be arbitrarily large and therefore is neglected.

However, the effect of Ipssc can be significant until the available
current at the panelboard rises very high, to 5kA or higher. Though obtaining solid data on realistic values for Ipssc has been difficult, proposals within Code Panel 2 have put forth a minimum available current of
500A at the panelboard.

A UL investigation into the available current at receptacles conducted in 1993
tends to substantiate this value.6 Using 500A for Ipssc will tend to significantly shorten the allowable run
length if the magnetic trip level (Imag) is held at 300A. However, there is a desire to hold the maximum run length to 50 feet while assuming 500A available at the panelboard.

This forces either the wire gauge or the maximum allowable magnetic trip level to be adjusted to balance the equation: since it is preferable to
assume that 14 AWG will be used, the magnetic trip level of the circuit breaker must be lowered.

This work focuses on experimentally verifying the mathematical relationship when available panelboard current is adjusted while maintaining a 50-foot run length.

So, if you've read this far i invite you (et all) to discuss what CMP-2 obviously considers the chief operational component of arc fault technology

~RJ~

 

[cowboyjwc]

Since I got out of the trade long before they were required and I've never heard anything from the local contractors one way or the other, I voted no opinion.

Just a reminder and I have repeated this often, we had the same opinion about GFCI's back in the 70's and now there's not an electrician worth his salt that isn't trying to sell those every chance he gets.

 

[jusme123]

...how many actually voted because it effects their overall cost, which could have put more money in their pocket had it not been a requirement?

 

[peter d]

Since I got out of the trade long before they were required and I've never heard anything from the local contractors one way or the other, I voted no opinion.

Just a reminder and I have repeated this often, we had the same opinion about GFCI's back in the 70's and now there's not an electrician worth his salt that isn't trying to sell those every chance he gets.

There is literally a Grand Canyon's worth of difference between AFCI and GFCI technology. GFCI is simple, easily defined and understood, and proven, while AFCI technology remains mysterious, its very introduction was filled with misinformation and deception, and is still highly problematic well over a decade after its introduction. I, for one, am getting sick of the GFCI and AFCI comparison.

 

[readydave8]

I hated GFCI's in the 70's.

Many electricians in the generation before mine hated grounding receptacles.

The main thing I hate about AFCI's is trying to explain to customer that tripped breaker had nothing to do with overload or short. And may have tripped for no reason at all.

 

[chris1971]

They suck!!

 

[mbrooke]

I hated GFCI's in the 70's.

Many electricians in the generation before mine hated grounding receptacles.

The main thing I hate about AFCI's is trying to explain to customer that tripped breaker had nothing to do with overload or short. And may have tripped for no reason at all.

GFCI and grounded receptacles have a purpose. AFCIs, or at least the arc signature analysis, has no advantage.